Well, it's going from a laptop based dual core CPU, to a desktop based quadcore CPU. Not a great reason to increase the price dramatically, but it is a big difference in terms of performance.

The other thing I think people are failing to realize, is who is the Mac Mini for? It used to be for Windows switchers who wanted to plug in a small box to their existing mouse/keyboard/monitor situation. It was an introduction to the world of OS X. Nowadays, who uses the Mac Mini? Developers who need to compile in Xcode, and probably some creatives. The device serves a much different purpose nowadays, since most of your casual Apple users can get away with an iPad or a MB/MBA.

Personally, the new Mac Mini really appeals to me, regardless of price. I've been using a 2012 era mac mini machine, and the current bottle neck is the CPU. If I can spend $700 today, and have a capable macOS device for another 6-7 years, with some RAM upgrades, I think that's well worth it.

I use one from 2006 or so. Was planning to get a 'new' 2012 one sometime soon. :-) Now, not sure which to get! I just like them. (You sure picked me - its my first Mac, am a programmer/'creative')

It's worth more because people are voluntarily paying more. If it wasn't worth $300 more, then people would by paying less for the alternative, but there isn't one. The amount of hours I've wasted on Windows and lost productivity makes me not even think about price when buying something from Apple.

Yeah, I've had Windows 10 uninstall my GPU drivers and replace them with 6-month old ones that don't work. I know they're supporting a bizarre variety of different hardware, but regardless of the reasons the software reliability isn't there.

Granted there's some tradeoff with repairs, if your Mac dies you probably can't go on Newegg, get a replacement part, and have it fixed yourself in 2 days. But that tradeoff has worked out well for me so far.

The $499 Mac Mini came with 4GB of RAM, a 5400 rpm hard drive and had a 1.4Ghz CPU.

A usable Mac Mini was at least $699.

Bought a couple of the old base level minis for a DTP shop back then (more RAM / IO bound than CPU). They allowed for installing 16GB of cheap commodity RAM and 2x 2.5” drives which netted you a decent 1.5 TB Fusion Drive. Good days. Today, with improved vendor lock-in for essential components, you’re looking at 2k+ for an equivalent spec. No thanks :)

The RAM is user upgradeable, and an external SSD drive connected to TB3 is not going to exactly be slow.

If you are so inclined you can use an eGPU something you couldn’t do on any previous Mac Mini.

That was 4 years ago, so that was probably as reasonable an amount of memory as 8 GB is today. And the Macbook Airs start at a 1.6 GHz dual core, so Apple isn't above using slower processors in new products. It'll work fine for some people.

The SSD is non-negotiable today though, I'll give you that one.

4Gb is good for a media server and not much else.

Between memory compression and very fast SSDs, I bet you could do it. Especially if you aren’t running a bunch of Chrome/Electron stuff like developers tend to.

Of course a lot of the target market for Macs like that would be better served by iPads now.

The 4GB Macs in question were using slow 5400 rpm hard drives.

But, until two months ago, I was using a circa 2009 Core 2 Duo 2.66Ghz laptop with 4GB of RAM with an external USB drive running Windows 10 as a Plex Server. It could do one or two streams depending on the bit rate. It could not do a 4K stream.