A 24” iMac companion monitor in matching colors at $799-899 would be a huge hit I think. Would also get Mac mini buyers to buy an Apple monitor rather than a cheaper competitor if they aren’t willing to spring for a Studio Display.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Focusing on These Eight New Low-Cost Devices in 2025
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I hope this is satirical but I'm not thinking it is.
But who wouldn't like up around the block for the return of the camcorder!
Just so you know, this is already a thing.
Introduced in tvOS 17 last year, you can use your iPhone or iPads camera to do FaceTime on the Apple TV.
$249 at that time was the equivalent of a Mini's price today.
And the "might as well get a mini" argument would be valid. It's smaller and more capable. I forget what it was called, but Macs used to have a sort of pre-Apple TV interface that worked with the Apple remote for playing media. It was half assed but.... they should considering bringing that back but for housing streaming and gaming apps to let the Mini double down as a streaming box with storage for people who want that and don't want to navigate to web apps or ipad apps (the few there are) for streaming services.
They wont but should.
The original OG Apple TV was also a media server that I think got one update to add Netflix (back when it was brand new with the streaming) in addition to the only other option which was iTunes movie rentals.
Storing video was niche then, more so now.
I completely agree, but even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'm not fooled; his remarks are merely an attack on Apple as a competitor and not out of any form of altruism.
Agree completely.
Re: "More stable than MS-Windows" - To be clear, I did say Windows was more stable that macOS in my use-case.
I do clean installs of macOS and Windows whenever I get a new machine. Windows is definitely more work to setup than macOS, but it runs incredibly well for me once I'm done configuring it.
The reason I say Windows is more reliable and stable is because macOS (especially Sequoia) has these weird visual bugs where things sometimes don't align or appear correctly on the screen. There's also some odd behaviour with things like the firewall, or when I try to connect to my iPhone (as a hotspot) it connects but then disconnects and the phone no longer appears in the list of available networks even though it's in the same room as the MacBook. Things like virtual machines crash way more often on macOS (UTM) than Windows (Hyper-V).
I'm not sure why it is this way, I just find that if I need a reliable machine to do work that is important, I will pick my Windows laptop first.
Linux I love and prefer. I would run Debian or Fedora full-time if I didn't need a few specific applications that were not available on those platforms. IMO, nothing actually trumps Linux for reliability.
While I get what you’re saying, fundamentally, I think these days a Mac being hooked up to a TV makes very little sense.
Unless all of your content is stored completely locally, an Apple TV is always just going to be easier to use.
There are third-party apps that add remote support for the modern remote, but they aren’t great.
Plus the majority of streaming services have dedicated third-party apps on the Apple TV, while on the Mac for most of them you’re left with clunky websites.
Even the built-in Apple TV app is significantly less useful on the Mac than it is the Apple TV, because the Apple TV has all of those third-party application integrations right into the TV app while the Mac just does not.
Even for local storage, you’re probably better off buying both and just using the “Computers” app to access your local content on the ATV itself, simply just for the better interface.
Unless you are someone who just uses no streaming services whatsoever, it really makes no sense to try to use a Mac as a streaming box.
Also, while the Mac mini is definitely more affordable than it used to be, and is one of the most affordable computers Apple has made in years, it is not anywhere close to an Apple TV in pricing.
$129 and $599 is a big difference.
Apple TV is the worse streaming box out there. It's just a bunch of Apple tiles ala the first iPhone. Besides, its the interface in the App you open that really matters.
Smart TV's suck, but Google TV kicks ATV's butt. You still have the app tiles, but unlike Apple, it's content recomendations are top notch. It knows what streamers you have accounts signed in to and recommends content from those streamers, it connects to your live TV provider and recommends things there - doesn't berate you with Ads like Amazon either. It's connection to YouTube also servies up great recommended content.
Similiar expereinces are had with Roku and Fire devices. Google and Amazon have voice assistants that actually work - and do a lot more than find shows and work like their stand alone counterparts. Smarthome intergration is also in those platforms.
ATV's selling points were always for people really invested in the Apple echosystem. Now it's casual gaming (that has never taken off in a big way), Fitness+, and photos if you are someone that wants to look at your photo library on a TV. Airplay is standard on even budget TV's these days, AppleTV+ is on every platform. Even Apple Music is not available on other platofrms. Which leaves privacy.
While I may sound hard on ATV, I gave up on it ever becoming better. It's languished and not much different since it first became a dedicated steaming device and keeps falling futher behind.
It sounds like you haven’t used an Apple TV in years because almost all of those things you listed have existed on the Apple TV for years.
It's just a bunch of Apple tiles ala the first iPhone.
Hasn’t been for years, the home screen has a big full screen preview that autoplays by default, and most apps can show content if you put them in the top shelf.
It knows what streamers you have accounts signed in to and recommends content from those streamers, it connects to your live TV provider and recommends things there
You are literally describing the Apple TV app, which has allowed you to sign into your live TV providers for the last nine years, integrates with pretty much every streaming service outside of Netflix and is literally basically the main ATV location.
The one area you listed where I have no doubt Apple is far behind is a voice assistant. However the television is about the most useless place for a voice assistant, given, if I’m not watching something with my television, I’m looking for something to watch with my television, and i’m not going to ask a voice assistant to help me find stuff when i’m going to have to watch trailers and read descriptions anyway.
And for the simple tasks like “ rewind 30 seconds” or “ start this movie from the beginning” Siri on the ATV gets the job done.
Without Ive, everything is incrementally boring. At least the polycarbonate iPhones were different.
No. Regulation needs to solve nothing here. Nobody is "locked in" to anything.
You always have a choice.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm thinking you missed what that reply was about. That concept started in response to other people wishing for a M-series AppleTV, presumably for more powerful gaming than what they can get from an A-series AppleTV.
I shared how I doubt Apple would build an M-series AppleTV because they'd price it so high, it would be too close to Mac mini and the very same "market" would then get clogged up with "might as well buy a Mac Mini." I agree with them because a Mac Mini is much more functional than a locked-down AppleTV.
However, the OTHER key to this idea is reviving a modern version of what Apple called the Front Row app. In effect this would put the AppleTV functionality onto Macs... just as the original Front Row app did. In effect, Macs would then be M-series AppleTV, and that would address all of the concerns about running other apps, integration with the TV app, etc.
Else, what is the answer for that want? I see no path to a Mbase or Mpro AppleTV that isn't priced pretty close to Mac Mini pricing. For example, I don't see current AppleTV pricing with M-series, nor maybe $50, $100, or even $200 more. If that seems logical, beyond $200 is very close to base Mac Mini.
Do I expect Apple to do this? No. But I offered it as the seemingly easiest path to scratching the M-series AppleTV want because that would only take running tvOS on Mac hardware. Since it already runs on what is basically iDevice hardware, the jump is relatively small. Apple could do it if they want.
Why should Apple be at least interested if they think there is a market for M-series AppleTV? Because they can then sell such people an "AppleTV" for at least $500 instead of maxing out at about $150.
Again, I don't expect them to this... but I even more strongly don't expect them to put an M-series chip in an AppleTV "pro." So this concept seems the easier way to perhaps scratch this popular consumer want.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I do know. Since it is a thing, why insert a camera in a new AppleTV remote.
And the only answer is for FaceTiming that way when maybe the Continuity Camera iPhones/iPads are out of the home. But I suspect the BETTER "general purpose" answer would be the other ideas shared in the prior post.
Having Choice of some form does not mean no regulation is needed
The entire EU situation is because they’ve determined things are too cumbersome on their population so despite them having Choice technically there is too much friction there and it is not in the interest of the consumers to have it be that way.
Thus … regulation steps in to help correct
Regulation is great.
That is how consumers with very little power get improvements in their relationship with large powerful entities.
Just “having choice” is often insufficient
Uh yes, Google TV knows A LOT about you, and that’s exactly the point: I don’t trust Google on anything.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand exactly what “Front Row” was.
“Front Row” was nothing more than a very pretty interface for your iTunes library. Nifty, but mostly just an alternate iTunes interface. Bringing that back would not solve any of the problems with the TV app on the Mac or the lack of third-party streaming apps.
The only true way the Mac could ever become a true Apple TV replacement is if all the streaming services decided to start making native macOS apps.
So far that has not happened, meanwhile tvOS has pretty much all of them and 95% of them integrate directly into the TV app, at least here in the US. Two things even a Front Row revival wouldn’t fix.
As for an “M” based Apple TV, I think you mistake internet theories and speculation with actual desire. People might like the idea in concept and talk about it here, but would they actually buy one? A gaming Apple TV?
Apples entire history in the gaming market says no.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I completely understand what original Front Row was. The idea was not to revive exactly it or something as limited as only it... but to make a Front Row 2 basically app-itized tvOS. Then tvOS in full would run on Mac hardware and all of the tvOS apps would too. Mac can install and run ARM Windows on the hardware as VM. I'm confident it can handle a much closer platform called tvOS. It should be farrrrrrrrr easier to get tvOS already running fine on A-series chip to run on M-series chips. Unlike virtualized Windows, so much of the code would largely be the same.
So no, "the only true way"... "native apps for Mac" is NOT correct... just as running ARM Windows apps on Mac doesn't require native Mac versions of those Windows apps. Substantially foreign (code) Windows apps running on M-series hardware should easily prove that much more similar tvOS code running on M-series hardware is relatively trivial by comparison.
As to the "M"-based AppleTV theories & speculation, you are absolutely right about that. However, the same can be said about anything theorized and speculated to be coming. We don't know the market for anything in the future until we see if the market will buy it. And the one foolproof way to gauge it is to release a product that can be purchased. Yes, research can be done to increase our confidence in guesses whether people will buy or won't buy... but you only really know by seeing how they vote... with their dollars. There is no iPhone "Slim" today but Apple seems to be working on bringing it to market to see if anyone will buy. There is no "command center" today, but Apple seems to be working on bringing it to market to see if anyone will buy. An AppleTV "pro" doesn't seem like a big stretch. They"ve rolled out "pro" versions of much Apple tech... including iDevices for which AppleTV is a practical clone in guts, then limited to a very narrow range of functionality.
I like my AppleTVs just fine. One is attached to every TV in my home. I'm probably an immediate buyer for at least one of these rumored slightly more powerful AppleTVs underpinning this thread conversation. Why? Not so much gaming but a bit more power makes a smoother UI and- conceptually- reduced stutters during video playback.
Would I- an AppleTV enthusiast- buy a M-based AppleTV at what it would probably be priced (my guess is at least $399 and more likely $499). No. If I want to spend that much, might as well buy a Mac Mini and get a "whole computer." However, would I be interested in a Front Row 2 that would basically be the entirety of tvOS "as an app" or similar to a VM running on Mac hardware? I'd have tremendous interest in that myself (far more than iPhone Slim or Command Center or even any of the next iPhones). Then I could optionally buy that Mini to mostly act as AppleTV "Pro" but sometimes do some computer things on it too... OR- more likely- when I replace the current desktop with an updated one- it becomes a mostly dedicated, albeit overpowered AppleTV Pro. So there's ONE tangible buyer. I suspect there would be more than only me but that's more theories & speculation until Apple puts it to the one test that proves or disproves market desires better than all others.
So no, "the only true way"... "native apps for Mac" is NOT correct... just as running ARM Windows apps on Mac doesn't require native Mac versions of those Windows apps. Substantially foreign (code) Windows apps running on M-series hardware should easily prove that much more similar tvOS code running on M-series hardware is relatively trivial by comparison.
As to the "M"-based AppleTV theories & speculation, you are absolutely right about that. However, the same can be said about anything theorized and speculated to be coming. We don't know the market for anything in the future until we see if the market will buy it. And the one foolproof way to gauge it is to release a product that can be purchased. Yes, research can be done to increase our confidence in guesses whether people will buy or won't buy... but you only really know by seeing how they vote... with their dollars. There is no iPhone "Slim" today but Apple seems to be working on bringing it to market to see if anyone will buy. There is no "command center" today, but Apple seems to be working on bringing it to market to see if anyone will buy. An AppleTV "pro" doesn't seem like a big stretch. They"ve rolled out "pro" versions of much Apple tech... including iDevices for which AppleTV is a practical clone in guts, then limited to a very narrow range of functionality.
I like my AppleTVs just fine. One is attached to every TV in my home. I'm probably an immediate buyer for at least one of these rumored slightly more powerful AppleTVs underpinning this thread conversation. Why? Not so much gaming but a bit more power makes a smoother UI and- conceptually- reduced stutters during video playback.
Would I- an AppleTV enthusiast- buy a M-based AppleTV at what it would probably be priced (my guess is at least $399 and more likely $499). No. If I want to spend that much, might as well buy a Mac Mini and get a "whole computer." However, would I be interested in a Front Row 2 that would basically be the entirety of tvOS "as an app" or similar to a VM running on Mac hardware? I'd have tremendous interest in that myself (far more than iPhone Slim or Command Center or even any of the next iPhones). Then I could optionally buy that Mini to mostly act as AppleTV "Pro" but sometimes do some computer things on it too... OR- more likely- when I replace the current desktop with an updated one- it becomes a mostly dedicated, albeit overpowered AppleTV Pro. So there's ONE tangible buyer. I suspect there would be more than only me but that's more theories & speculation until Apple puts it to the one test that proves or disproves market desires better than all others.
Last edited:
Fair enough, I got the base Mac mini 2 pro last year, my first move into the Apple world, can't me changing the machine to be honest, unless it goes belly up. Laptops I don't like, never have to be honest. I used to have an Acer one a few years ago, but never replaced it when it went belly up
I don't think I would pay the money for a Mac laptop.
So, following the latest announcement from Gurman: Apple might release a revamped MacBook Air, iPad and AirTag in the March-April timeframe.
MacBook Air (chip swap)
iPad (chip swap)
AirTag (chip swap)
Timmy is firing on all cilinders!
What an exciting release this will be. Embarrassing 🤬
MacBook Air (chip swap)
iPad (chip swap)
AirTag (chip swap)
Timmy is firing on all cilinders!
What an exciting release this will be. Embarrassing 🤬
Every single post is a bash to Apple. You found even necessary to specify in your signature you are not an hater. That raises many questions…
Not every post. I complimented Apple for the release of the macmini M4. Said it was value for money 😊.
If a multibillion company is getting lazy and only releases minimal incremental upgrades year after year and starting to neglect its hard- and software business it’s hard to start cheering. For me it’s hard to believe people still defend Apple on their offerings and practices. As a customer that raises questions to me 😊