No worries, mate. Go with a PC and find happiness. Easy.
For the majority of Apple customers 8 GB will be just fine. Need more memory? Simply pay for it. Also easy.
The good news is you have choices. Pick what's right for you.
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 Likely Planning to Skip M3 Mac Mini for M4 Refresh in Late 2024
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No worries, mate. Go with a PC and find happiness. Easy.
For the majority of Apple customers 8 GB will be just fine. Need more memory? Simply pay for it. Also easy.
The good news is you have choices. Pick what's right for you.
I'm still wondering if we will get a m3 Max Mac Studio or would that be towards the end of the year also? Especially since it's been said the more powerful M4 Chips for desktops would be released in mid-2025
Last edited:
A possible interpretation of these rumours is:
None of these machines are getting M3 models:
- Mac mini with M*
- Mac mini with M* Pro
- Mac Studio
- Mac Pro
Time will tell.
If for some reason Apple does release M3 Mac desktops in the near future, it would be entirely reasonable to assume it would be at least an additional year until M4 desktops would be released. Although it would be likely M4 laptops would be released much sooner. The desktop market isn’t that big, is continuing to shrink and isn’t that important to Apple.
Yeah, that I don't get. How long before the M4 can be produced in sufficient volume to satisfy MBA sales? Seems like it takes at least several months. So I don't see how the mini gets the M4 chips in 2024. Though maybe Apple does something weird like putting the M4 in MBP and mini at the same time. Mini sales will be a small percentage of the MBP sales.
Last year I had a feeling (and the specs backed me up) that the M2 Pro mini was a special machine. And it continues to prove out. I'm very happy that I got it when it came out instead of trying to stretch my 2018 mini another year.
"Need". Computers for the most part are discretionary spending. Discretionary spending is a difficult concept for many to understand and it is why they find themselves in financial difficulties.
I agree and that makes me consider [a disquieting] possibility. That the M2Pro Mini is just a one-off. That there will be no more MxPro minis. That the step up from a Mx mini or an iMac would be a low level Mac Studio or a MBP.
I really don’t like the idea but I can see the bean counters and MBA’s that run Apple nowadays grabbing onto that concept.
A good point - I don't see Apple allowing a scenario where the Mini has a processor option that looks superior to the Studio (e.g.: M4Pro vs. M3Max).
That introduces a couple of other possible factors, speculative though they be. Two standards have recently been finalized, from what I understand; Thunderbolt 5 and Wifi 7.
I've read Thunderbolt 5 may target higher end setups rather than become as mainstream as TB3 and 4 have been, and Wifi 7, while nice and likely to dominate for years going forward, isn't yet a clear big value proposition currently for most people (or so I think).
Waiting a bit later would allow more time to get a TB5 and Wifi 7 Studio ready, which could then have an M4Max chip, as those 3 features could then discriminate it from the Mini line (which could be M4/M4Pro, TB4 and Wifi 6E).
Remember the threads comparing the value proposition of a MacMini with an MxPro and 32 gig RAM vs. the base Studio configuration? Such a move would create a strong delineation between the product lines.
I'm just trying to guess rationally; it'll be interesting to see how this plays out.
I hope not. But I do agree that the M2 Pro really does handle quite a bit and at a very reasonable price compared to the Studio. And the Studio is basically filling in for the Mac Pro until Apple figures out a way to make a compelling Mac Pro using their own silicon (which they clearly haven't yet done so). So Apple really does want to get back to selling $2,000 plus desktops in some volume.
I think though, what has been done is the M3 Pro chip is not quite as powerful a leap from the M3. And I think that creates a bigger gap between it and M3 Max. So while I think there will be an M4 Pro mini, I think it will be more like the difference between the M3 and M3 Pro chip where the pro chip is not all that more powerful. Instead it will have continued focus on efficiency cores for a laptop meaning it is mainly a chip designed for the MBP laptop.
I will add that one neat thing about the M2 Pro probably can't be duplicated: it has a fan but also basically runs silently in daily operation. I fear that the M4 Pro chip might produce so much heat that the mini will actually need to use its fan. I like the power of my M2 Pro chip and that I get silent operation like it was a MBA.
He actually might open it up a bit. I know there are people who are interested in the Mini, but have been waiting for the M3 mini with the idea that it could come out any day now. Now if it looks more like a late 2024 at the earliest, I could see folks that could wait a month or two for the M3 mini, making a purchase now because they can't wait until late 2024 (and possibly later than that if there are any issues making the M4 chip at scale).
Damnit apple, just give me a 3nm mac studio or Mac mini already. My 2012 27” imac is on its literal last leg with screen flickering, blue tooth randomly cutting out, safari not able to support most of the websites (have to use chrome where I can still get latest version) and photos app taking forever even after moving to an external ssd, not to mention the fan spinning max nonstop where in the past 10 years it never made any noise.
been waiting for 3 years now for a 3nm chip to come to one of the desktop machines, and now we are so close they decide to skip the m3 for desktop machines, arggg. Hope pray my imac can hold on for another 6 months! It’s my main desktop, I refuse to get a m2 when waited so long already for a 3nm!
been waiting for 3 years now for a 3nm chip to come to one of the desktop machines, and now we are so close they decide to skip the m3 for desktop machines, arggg. Hope pray my imac can hold on for another 6 months! It’s my main desktop, I refuse to get a m2 when waited so long already for a 3nm!
What Mark Gurman writes doesn't always happen. He just made a lot of predictions, and everything time he repeats them week after week doesn't make them any more factual. Only Apple management knows what is planned for this year, not him.
I know I have a choice. Do you think that's a good strategy for Apple? Admitting that most users don't need a new computer and there's nothing new they can provide?
I mean, that kind of user is perfectly fine with an M1 if Apple doesn't mess with software.
Fine, I have a choice, Apple has one too. And I hope it's not to stop upgrading.
There isn't anyone that is outside of Apple that knows what is going on inside Apple.
Last edited:
It becomes a need when you use it for work and it pays your bills.
You are wright. I had the first IBM PC back in 1982. 256KB of RAM. And ı upgraded ıt to 640KB wıth puttıng a ton of 8KB chıps onto the motherboard. The success of personal computers was expandibility from the beginning. Apple killed that feature even on desktop computers.
I am now on my third M1 machine because of ordering low SSD sizes. My last MBP Pro had 1TB. I put an SD card with another 1TB and doubled the memory, extarnal SSD drives are not a solution for me personaly. So far so good. But after a couple of weeks i lost the SD card and i was in big trouble. So now i am on my third machine with 8TB. I went for M1 Max on discount, the MAX is overkilled for me, there is no PRO with a larger SSD
Suggesting 'the majority of Apple customers 8Gb will be just fine' does not make it true and with the best will in the world, I don't believe Apple can be considered independent arbiters of that, as there's a massive beneficial interest involved.
Many of the software packages now for Apple silicon already exceed 8Gb recommended RAM, and if Apple are serious about Gaming then 8Gb will prove to be a major bottleneck, and even Apple's assertion about video editing and basic tasks, it is likely to involve swapping.
If they too now downplay it from the original 8Gb equivalence, to suggesting on basic tasks, it demonstrates they are walking back that ridiculous original comment, and where I note Apple never provided ANY factual evidence or tests on 8Gb performance degradation with increased swapping.
Independent tests show a large drop in performance for 8Gb over 16Gb on many occasions, let alone the swapping overhead on the SSD.
Likewise, if its just basic tasks, then to sell 8Gb on a device you've named the MacBook Pro seems mis selling.
16Gb base would benefit all users, because whilst some suggest that basic tasks can be adequately performed with 8Gb, that doesn't account for future proofing at all, and Macs usually have a good longevity, but that's of no use if the base RAM then doesn't allow that longevity to be usable.
We have updated OS's, increased RAM requirements from an increasing number of software, some already suggesting base 16Gb.
The argument that base users who can survive 8Gb, is flawed, because in all likelihood a good number of these people may not be sufficiently skilled in Mac OS, leaving multiple tabs, multiple applications as my daughter does and inevitably even on the base 8Gb it relies on swapping.
Apple instead of seemingly being so grossly greedy, could steal a march on their opponents, and make more sales. By cutting out the 8Gb range it not only saves from removing that configuration it will increase the 16Gb run significantly, reducing costs of a much bigger run, and ensure usable longevity, and if Apple are to be believed over being serious in gaming, that 16Gb could mean the difference between a usable computer or an obsolete one that doesn't do the job.
Yes, Apple could increase the price of increasing the base from 8Gb to 16Gb, but it could be an insignificant amount, because of the production savings. Quite possible to do that with just a $20 increase, but raising the base from 8Gb to 16Gb which would benefit all users, including those who believe they are CURRENTLY ok with 8Gb.
Steve Jobs wanted products that were eminently usable and brought back Apple from the brink, currently I believe Apple are pitching themselves AGAINST their customers which is diametrically opposite to what Steve's intentions were. Having a reputation that Apple had, of producing the best computers you could buy, with the best operating system, its sad to see that reputation tarnished by abject greed.
Last edited:
I was waiting for the M3 Mac Mini to launch but since it was taking them so long, and my personal laptop decided to die on me while recovering from a surgery, I had the opportunity to just buy an M3 Air instead and what the ****, as soon as you've got everything set up... it doesn't throttle even if you've got VMs running on it
I'm in for a M4 Pro or Max as a replacement for my MacPro 2008 (OCLP'd to Ventura).
But... it probably will be very expensive to get it with 16GB RAM and 1-2TB internal storage.
But... it probably will be very expensive to get it with 16GB RAM and 1-2TB internal storage.
Apple is an outsider in their approach to silicon releases. Every other company releases their high end/highest margin products first, then trickles down. Apple releases A series first and Ultra last…
Wonder if they’ll ever change that or change the chips from their present setup (they kinda started by making the M3Pro much different than the M3Max).
Now, re-release the 12” MB form factor with an A series chip and you’ve probably got a customer here…
Wonder if they’ll ever change that or change the chips from their present setup (they kinda started by making the M3Pro much different than the M3Max).
Now, re-release the 12” MB form factor with an A series chip and you’ve probably got a customer here…
It's possible the Mini will come out with M3, and the Studio with M4. That would help differentiate them..
But I now think both will go straight to M4. I think Apple sees on-device LLM processing as a big differentiator between them and just about every other company, that conventional wisdom says are ahead in AI. M4 is Apple's chance to regain some ground, fix some of the Siri problems, and it also gives them a privacy talking point.
So I expect they are going to get their entire lineup onto M4 ASAP.
This WWDC may be too soon to expect it, but we can surely look forward to demos of LLM features integrated with Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, and maybe Garageband.
(Edit: I feel compelled to add that I strongly believe LLMs are overhyped and being used in dangerous ways. But if you are going to use them, respect privacy and ownership rights, use as little power as possible, and don't leave it unattended for anything risky.)
But I now think both will go straight to M4. I think Apple sees on-device LLM processing as a big differentiator between them and just about every other company, that conventional wisdom says are ahead in AI. M4 is Apple's chance to regain some ground, fix some of the Siri problems, and it also gives them a privacy talking point.
So I expect they are going to get their entire lineup onto M4 ASAP.
This WWDC may be too soon to expect it, but we can surely look forward to demos of LLM features integrated with Pages, Numbers, Keynote, Final Cut Pro, and maybe Garageband.
(Edit: I feel compelled to add that I strongly believe LLMs are overhyped and being used in dangerous ways. But if you are going to use them, respect privacy and ownership rights, use as little power as possible, and don't leave it unattended for anything risky.)
Last edited: