But, my point is that the downgrade of the Mini line had to be on the direct orders of Sales. Nobody in engineering would have said, "Lets bring out the next versions with less capability than what they are replacing."
In in other words, I suspect that a meeting had someone highly placed who said, "Lets not give our customers a reason to buy a cheaper Mini rather than an iMac." Or words to that effect.
The bottom line is...business is all about money. As the 2012 Mac-Mini's go...I see atb least two possibilities:
1. Someone (or someone's) SERIOUSLY screwed up.
- They convinced a bunch of executives that...
"If we offer a quad-core Mac-Mini...we will sell a ton of them!" And they didn't.
- Or they did sell a bunch of quad-core Mac-Mini's...and this cannibilized other more profitable Macintosh lines such as lower end iMac's (which did have quad-cores)...and maybe lower end MBP's and MBA's (which both lines don't have a quad-core option).
So by offering a quad-core Mac-Mini...the delicate balance of price/perfomance was seriously upset.
2. Apple deviated too far from the Mac-Mini's roots. Which was:
- A low cost computer originally designed as an affordable model for folks buying thier first-ever computer to be able to afford an Apple computer.
- A lower-cost computer to encourage Windows users to give it a try (bring your own display. keyboard, and mouse).
- Or a lower cost model for existing Apple customers to purchase (bring your existing display, keyboard, mouse).
By offering a quad-core Mac-Mini (at least in terms of CPU performance) Apple was offering a terrific bargain. Of course these 2012 Mac-Mini's still weren't the greatest when it comes to graphics.
- Nick