May 21, 2013 - 04:00 PM EDT — AAPL: 439.66 (-3.27, -0.74%) | NASDAQ: 3498.965 (+33.722, +0.97%)

Apple to move Mac mini production line to U.S., sources say

Wednesday, December 26, 2012 · 11:02 pm · 43 Comments

“Apple is reportedly set to move its Mac mini production lines back to the US with Foxconn Electronics (Hon Hai Precision Industry) to be responsible of handling establishment, according to sources from the upstream supply chain,” Aaron Lee and Joseph Tsai report for DigiTimes.

“Mac mini shipments are expected to reach 1.4 million units in 2012, up more than 40% on year, and with the specification upgrade in October 2012, shipments are expected to rise another 30% on year to 1.8 million units in 2013, according to the latest figures from Digitimes Research,” Lee and Tsai report.

Read more in the full article here.

Categories: News

Tags: Apple Inc., Foxconn, Hon Hai, mac, Mac mini, Macintosh, U.S. manufacturing

Thank You for supporting MacDailyNews!

 Apple 13.3" MacBook Air dual-core Intel Core i7 2.0GHz, 8GB RAM, 512GB Flash Storage, Intel HD Graphics 4000, Mac OS X Lion (Z0ND-20GHZ8GB512) only $2,159.99
 Secret Sale Exclusive for MacMall Valued Customers Only
 Apple 15.4" MacBook Pro (with Retina display) quad-core Intel Core i7 2.3GHz/16GB RAM/256GB FS/IntelHD Graphics4000/OS X Lion (Z0MK-15-2.3-16-256RT) only $2,333.99
 Apple Blowouts: Up to $649 OFF on Last Gen Macs. Prices start at $1,999.99 w/ Free Upgrade to OS X Mountain Lion & Free FedEx Overnight ends 02/08 6:15PM PST.
 Apple 13.3" MacBook Pro dual-core Intel Core i7 2.9GHz, 8GB RAM, 750GB 5400-rpm hard drive, Intel HD Graphics 4000, Ships with Mountain Lion (MD102LL/A) only $1,419.97

Comment Feed

43 Comments

ken1w

Wednesday, December 26, 2012 - 11:19 pm · Reply

This makes sense. It makes sense for the Made In America Mac to be one that does not have a built-in LCD display. The NEW Mac Pro too…
- vanfruniken
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:07 am · Reply
  
  It could even make more sense if the US Government would offer a tax break for returning money to the country, PROVIDED it is used to finance new domestic production facilities.
  - 3l3c7ro
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:18 am · Reply
    
    Who would want to work in these new domestic production facilities? No US citizen would want to do that work or work for a few dollars per day. Are you planning to let Mexicans into the US to work there? Would you want Apple to pay auto worker wages to US assemblers and then pay double for any Apple products?
    - sixvodkas
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 8:00 am · Reply
      
      Hmmm, let’s see? I just lost my job (merry Christmas!), my wife’s goes away in January and my brother has been unemployed for two years.
      
      Yeah, I’ve got three candidates.
      - 3l3c7ro
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:50 pm · Reply
        
        Sorry to hear that you are in difficulty. If you got a job assembling computers, could you still buy the six vodkas and support a family on $10 a day?
      - Steev
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:00 pm · Reply
        
        Sorry to hear that. Too bad all that stimulus money went to cronies and unions instead of those “Shovel Ready Jobs”.
        
        bjr001
        
        Friday, December 28, 2012 - 10:17 am · Reply
        
        ” Too bad all that stimulus money went to cronies and unions instead of those “Shovel Ready Jobs”.”
        
        Yea, like teachers , police officers, firefighters and the like but only to a point. The republican governors elected to use some of the money to plug holes in their state budgets instead of creating jobs. Congress allocates money but it is the states that create the projects such as upgrading/repairing roads, bridges and other projects.
    - Snoop dogg
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 10:16 am · Reply
      
      And how do you know some people will not work in such a manufacturing place, the way you talk it’s as if there is no manufacturing work done in the USA at all.
      - 3l3c7ro
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:52 pm · Reply
        
        The wages will be only $10 per day to compete with the Chinese or the products will not sell because they cost 4 times as much.
        
        Really
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 8:23 pm · Reply
        
        Factor in automation and you greatly underestimate American productivity.
        
        3l3c7ro
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 9:34 pm · Reply
        
        So, you are saying that you would like a job doing . . . what? There are a few jobs maintaining and setting up automation and a one time construction boom and then only a few jobs. The capital cost of an automated plant in the US when compared to the labour cost in China is huge and I suggest that the US still cannot compete. Most of the jobs that assembly plants bring will be taken up by Mexican Americans and not be very high paid.
      - Steev
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 2:57 pm · Reply
        
        If the wages are < then unemployment compensation then folks will stay on unemployment rather then work.
        
        bjr001
        
        Friday, December 28, 2012 - 10:34 am · Reply
        
        Another Rush Limbaugh graduate of the dumbing down of humanity. Unemployment benefits in most states is about $250.00-$275.00 per week, before taxes. This is about equal to minimum wages of about $7.00 an hour, hardly enough to pay for rent/mortgage, utilities, phone, credit card bills, transportation and food.
  - Agent Provocateur
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 11:28 am · Reply
    
    Pray tell why should a debt ridden government offer a tax cut to a company rolling in cash? Enough Corporate welfare.
    - emmayche
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:05 pm · Reply
      
      Pray tell why should the most valuable company on Earth put up with paying more than it has to to the elected idiots in Washington who can’t even balance the government checkbook? The tax laws in this country are a clear message to business: “Invest your overseas money overseas, and don’t bring it home to create jobs, or we’ll punish you for it.” If you call that “corporate welfare,” I call you “an idiot.”
- vanfruniken
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:17 am · Reply
  
  Besides, it is a good idea for industry to re-evaluate the feasibility of domestic production in view of the rising living standards and wages in countries where offshore production is currently located. The choice will be between migrating production facilities to yet other emerging economies, or to consider bringing them back home. This is a cyclic problem that arises every 10-15 years.
- radtech5000
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:50 pm · Reply
  
  This only sweetens the deal to grab an iPad-Mini next year with retina display!
xil

Wednesday, December 26, 2012 - 11:37 pm · Reply

Since Apple decided that we cannot VESA mount new iMacs, I plan to get a couple mini’s in 2013 and maybe a Pro in 2014 if it makes since. Maybe, Apple to come to it’s senses about VESA and the iMac by then too so I have some options.

Bringing production back to US sounds great, I just hopes it creates some U.S. jobs!
- peterblood71
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 6:54 am · Reply
  
  Actually I believe there will be a VESA mounting solution coming soon for the new iMacs from what I’ve heard.
macaholic

Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:06 am · Reply

Digitimes? With their track record on ‘predictions’ I wouldn’t hold my breath on anything they say.
MM

Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:15 am · Reply

Now that it’s 6+ years into the glossy-only era at Apple — with even the Retina and new iMac screens being like dark mirrors where you can clearly see the reflected image of what is behind you — and now that the Mac Mini’s are slowly getting to the level where it’s fast enough for most needs — I regret that my next Mac desktop will have to be the Mac Mini plus an Eizo matte screen.
- 3l3c7ro
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:24 am · Reply
  
  I am tired of hearing about this issue from people who don’t know how to evaluate a monitor for the clearest possible image. Mat finishes leave every pixel distorted and fuzzy. Reflections are not limited to just what is there but reflect many very fuzzy images and distort the whole colour palette shown. If you don’t like reflections, control the source of those reflections.
  - Agent Provocateur
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 11:36 am · Reply
    
    30 years in the Video, Photography and Medical Imaging business tells me you are blowing smoke.
    
    The monitors used by Radiologists to interpret exams are matte (not mat) and are never glossy. Glossy monitors were an import from the PeeCee world where they should have stayed.
    
    A non gloss surface does not have to be distorted.
    - 3l3c7ro
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:55 pm · Reply
      
      Thanks for the correction on my spelling. Just because many people use something doesn’t make it the better solution. Think PC vs Mac.
      - the joker
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 4:16 pm · Reply
        
        You clearly have no experience or any clue about how good matte screens are. You are just another glossy screened bigot. Apple lost a sales for certain when they left matte behind. I personally put off buying a mac for several years until they offered a matte screen for laptops. I will never, EVER buy a glossy screened computer. I’d sooner go linux than buy glossy.
        
        3l3c7ro
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 4:29 pm · Reply
        
        From what you said, I believe that you likely won’t buy a Macbook Pro because it doesn’t have an optical drive or a floppy drive or a VGA output or a . . .
        
        My take away from your reply is that Apple has no clue about ‘the best’ technology and that they need you to tell them how to produce the best possible consumer products. I wonder who is the ‘bigot’ here?
- LLIBSETAG
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 5:44 am · Reply
  
  New iMacs with laminated screen to glass 2013 reduce reflections by 75%.
  - Agent Provocateur
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 11:37 am · Reply
    
    And they still suck. I’m staring at this page on a Mac LED Cinema Display- it will be my last glossy display.
macaholic

Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 12:25 am · Reply

Still with the bitching about glossy screens?!?!
- The Other Steve
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 1:10 am · Reply
  
  To be fare, problems don’t just go away by ignoring them. Especially problems that stare at you in the face e-v-e-r-y s-i-n-g-l-e d-a-y!
  - sixvodkas
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 8:03 am · Reply
    
    I agree. Good thing there are glossy screens, or I’d have to work with a muddy, muddled matte monitor!
- kingmel
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 8:41 am · Reply
  
  I used to mostly discount the complaints about glossy displays because I seldom encountered any significant problems with reflections. In office settings where you have some control over your lighting conditions, glossy displays are not much of a problem. But, when you go outdoors or visit another indoor setting that limits your ability to control position/lighting, reflections can be problematic.
  
  That said, there are third party films to reduce display reflectivity. It is not clear to me that It is worth Apple’s effort to offer BTO display options for matte/glossy.
Grrrilla

Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 8:44 am · Reply

It’s poor business decisions like this that hurt Apple’s stock.

Isn’t there some other third world country whose cheap labor we can exploit first?

Maybe they’re expecting the suffering US labor force to finally be cost effective enough to be able to provide cheap labor to export goods to the newly affluent China.
- kayan
  
  Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 10:00 am · Reply
  
  There’s only one world. Talking about countries in another world sounds delusional.
  - Grrrilla
    
    Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 11:45 am · Reply
    
    Talking like you don’t understand the common phrase and its usage sounds ignorant. Tit for tat.
    - montex
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 1:11 pm · Reply
      
      I like pie.
    - kayan
      
      Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 1:20 pm · Reply
      
      Beyond “third world” making no sense on the face of it, the full meaning and implications of this far too common phrase are enormously ignorant. It’s based on the idea that certain nations are inherently superior to all other nations, and that poverty and slavery of certain types of people don’t harm you – as if these problems occur in a completely different world. It’s a patently false notion, given how increasingly interconnected the world is. It’s a pernicious lie based on a racist ideology that has no connection with how world economics actually works. Therefore, I don’t abide to this phrase being casually passed around.
      - Grrrilla
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 1:57 pm · Reply
        
        Explaining your position is acceptable, regardless of whether the reader agrees with you. Name-calling without such justification (and probably even with it), is less-so.
        
        I don’t quite agree with some of your assumptions, but since my original comments were snarkily tongue-in-cheek (and not intentionally insensitive to the plight of all mankind) and since this is an ill-suited place for a discussion of the human condition (and since I have to hit the road), I’ll have to leave it at that.
      - Hg Wells
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:11 pm · Reply
        
        I agree with Grrilla on this, Kayan. I understand your objections, but the phrase is not based on racism. It is generally based on economics and oft difficult standards of living. The phrase is not “being casually passed around.” It is a common race-neutral phrase used to identify certain nations sharing similar economic and living challenges. It is common usage and should be understood as such though you are certainly free to use different words in its place.
      - Steev
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 3:15 pm · Reply
        
        It’s the accepted term. And it’s used more often to indicate economic status vs. political superiority (only a person with an axe to grind would make a racial connection).
        
        So, don’t waste our time sniping at a poster for using “third world” in it’s presently accepted definition. Go author a website or petition the UN to find some other PC phrase/term that will eventually be seen as racist by another person such as yourself.
        
        kayan
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 4:48 pm · Reply
        
        Granted, but I still don’t see any value in calling countries “third world.” It’s a gross generalization that encourages a lazy world outlook. And even when it’s not intended to be insulting, the negative connotation is still there. Keep saying it if you want, but I think it’s an outdated phrase and everyone is better off leaving it behind.
        
        Steev
        
        Thursday, December 27, 2012 - 7:11 pm · Reply
        
        Opinion Noted.
        
        What do you suggest we replace it with?
        Economically Depressed
        Economically Underdeveloped
        Financially challenged
        Monetarily Malfeasant (This would describe the US)
        Oh I got one-
        Wage Retarded
        
        Haha- Wage Retarded.
Pronounced "Dumas" not "dumb a**"

Friday, December 28, 2012 - 12:17 pm · Reply

Prepare for the Mac Mini’s official positioning as the US market’s home entertainment centre, and the ‘made in america’ flag-waving ads, with resulting spike in cable-dumpers. I’d love to see that (not the ads though).