Apple's Cheap MacBook: What to Expect in 2026

[Piggie]

Question (not to upset anyone)
As we all know the entire world basically runs on PC's of some form or another.

EG: Every Apple Mac vanished, there would be a few temporary issues in a few niche areas.
Every PR Vanished and the whole world would grind to a halt and world chaos would happen instantly.

Do you feel it's right to teach children and get them used to using Mac's in schools, when the vast vast majority of them will enter the working world and be expected to use PC's as part of the real working world expects?

Should be not teach children to use the devices they are more likely to be expected to use in the vast majority of cases?

 

[chucker23n1]

Question (not to upset anyone)
As we all know the entire world basically runs on PC's of some form or another.

EG: Every Apple Mac vanished, there would be a few temporary issues in a few niche areas.
Every PR Vanished and the whole world would grind to a halt and world chaos would happen instantly.

Do you feel it's right to teach children and get them used to using Mac's in schools, when the vast vast majority of them will enter the working world and be expected to use PC's as part of the real working world expects?

Should be not teach children to use the devices they are more likely to be expected to use in the vast majority of cases?

Is this question from 1998?

 

[t0rqx]

This product will only exist for two generations until stock materials dry up and they gonna kill this product again.

 

[Piggie]

Is this question from 1998?

Nope

Perhaps it's different in the US?

In the UK we're still looking at 3/4 of companies still using PC's

Most companies will just buy the cheapest they can to "get the job done"
Not fancy "graphics/video editing type jobs" the most day to day, keeping things running type jobs.

=====

Seems I overestimated the Mac amount a bit:

"The Mac now has 14.8% of the U.S. PC market and 17.1% of the global PC market"


So I feel my question is still valid

Should not children in schools be taught to use computers that are used in approx 85% of real life use, as opposed to being taught on a device only approx 15% use?

Or to put it another way:

Let's say Apple Macs were used by 85% of people in the real world, then would we wish them being given and taught how to use PC's in schools, when only 15% of people use them in reality?
I think not.

Should we not be teaching and preparing children for what the vast majority will REALLY have to use after leaving education?

 

[theluggage]

I call ******** on this. When has Apple ever competed in a race to the bottom pricing competition with Microsoft and Google?

At the rumoured price it will still cost twice as much as an entry-level PC laptop or Chromebook. I'm not saying it won't be worth the premium in terms of power, quality and Mac-ness, but I don't think you have to worry about a 'race to the bottom'.

 

[Bug-Creator]

Should not children in schools be taught to use computers that are used in approx 85% of real life use, as opposed to being taught on a device only approx 15% use?

Neither, obviously.

They should be taught to understand how a computer works what it can do what risks it brings etc.
They should for sure not be indoctrinated to cement the monopoly of questionable Trillion $ companies.

 

[chucker23n1]

Nope

Perhaps it's different in the US?

In the UK we're still looking at 3/4 of companies still using PC's

I’m not in the US.

Most web browsing takes place on smartphones. Windows has had zero foothold on that for over a decade.

Most enterprise apps are web apps. Whether you run them on Windows, a Mac, or your fridge’s touch screen doesn’t matter.

Windows-specific software exists, but nowhere near to the extent that it did in the 1990s.

Most companies will just buy the cheapest they can to "get the job done"

Well, that would be a Chromebook, then.

Should we not be teaching and preparing children for what the vast majority will REALLY have to use after leaving education?

We don’t teach children concrete products. We teach them abstract concepts, and how to learn and adapt.

 

[theluggage]

Do you feel it's right to teach children and get them used to using Mac's in schools, when the vast vast majority of them will enter the working world and be expected to use PC's as part of the real working world expects?

If it matters whether school kids learn their computing skills on PC, Mac or Linux then they're not being taught useful computing skills. That was true in the 80s (when whatever system they used in school would have changed beyond recognition by the time they left) and it's just as true now (where the industry is increasingly moving to web/cloud technologies & applications run in a browser on any platform).

If you're talking about "coding" and technical skills then the Unix environment on a Mac is just as relevant as Windows today. They're probably not going to be learning any platform-specific coding anyway, just cross-platform stuff in Python or Javascript or - more likely - some teaching environment like Scratch.

For "productivity" stuff, the world is still mostly using MS Office and - again - if it takes you more than a day or two to get used to the difference between Office on Mac and Windows you don't really have any IT skills. Alternatives, like Google Docs or LibreOpenOffice are (a) crossplatform and (b) designed with MS Office users in mind anyhow.

For wordprocessing, the important skills are things like typography, document layout, using styles etc. For spreadsheets - well, mathematics, basically (and the absence of the sort of discrete mathematics used in spreadsheets and computing from the mathematics curriculum is the problem there). Anything else - even on a single platform the odds are you'll have to learn a different App when you leave school - but there are basic concepts behind everything from graphics to video editing that will give you a head start on any app.

 

[NativeMac]

I’m trying to understand aren’t they A series chips just less powerful versions of the M series but basically the same architecture? So won’t they be able to run Mac apps because they are in essence baby M-series chips? I’m lost by this processor and its whole purpose I guess.

 

[psingh01]

I have a very hard time believing the touchscreen rumors, even Apple knows it’s a dumb idea. So I just have to assume if they do something like that it’s gonna be for a specific feature that we just don’t know about yet. It won’t be as simple as just “now you can tap on the screen just like you do with a mouse pointer”, there’s just no way.

And the iPad has been on “stellar hardware” for over a decade, so that’s nothing new. Just because Apple named the first Mac chip M1 doesn’t mean it’s not the A14X. People keep thinking Apple put a Mac chip into the iPad when it’s the other way around, Apple put the iPad chip in the Mac and just renamed it for branding purposes. But I agree, I would love to see the iPad take more advantage of it’s capabilities, but honestly the iPad is a specific product for specific use cases, and it’s not meant to “replace a computer” in every single way.

I didn’t believe it, but when Tahoe came out someone pointed out how the changes to the UI would make sense for a touch interface.

 

[chucker23n1]

I’m trying to understand aren’t they A series chips just less powerful versions of the M series but basically the same architecture?

Yes. They have the same chips, just fewer cores and at a lower clock (and with a few features such as Thunderbolt removed).

So won’t they be able to run Mac apps because they are in essence baby M-series chips?

Yes.

I’m lost by this processor and its whole purpose I guess.

It’s cheaper.

 

[Sensamic]

Getting more customers on Apple ecosystem: win-win to bring more money to Apple services also (and then maybe they’ll want to buy an iPhone and iPad too).

Great business decision, but very late. Should have happened years ago.

 

[Moonjumper]

I’m trying to understand aren’t they A series chips just less powerful versions of the M series but basically the same architecture? So won’t they be able to run Mac apps because they are in essence baby M-series chips? I’m lost by this processor and its whole purpose I guess.

Yes, the A series is a less powerful M series, but is now powerful enough to give a good macOS experience for many. Both the Air and Pro MacBooks are powerful and highly specced. There is room for something cheaper that is still a great computer.

 

[captchasverybadman]

Apple is going to release a low-cost MacBook in 2026, with the device set to be more affordable than the $999 MacBook Air. With the affordable notebook, Apple is aiming to better compete with cheap Chromebooks and Windows PCs.

If you're thinking about picking up a computer for lightweight tasks like document editing, web browsing, watching videos, and doing homework, you might want to wait to see what Apple has in store before making a purchase. Below, we highlight what we know about the new Mac so far.

Size

Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo believes the low-cost MacBook will have a display that's around 13 inches in size. The MacBook Air has a 13.6-inch display, so the more affordable MacBook could be slightly smaller. It's sounding like it won't be too far off from the 13-inch MacBook Air, though.

There are no details on how thick it might be, but Apple probably won't prioritize a thin design for a machine optimized for a low price. Since the MacBook Air can run fine with an M-series chip and no fan in an enclosure that's 0.44 inches thick, there's no reason for the MacBook to be any thicker than that.

Design and Display

The low-cost MacBook will have a standard LCD display with no mini-LED technology or ProMotion refresh rate. It could come in bright colors like the iMac, with Kuo suggesting Apple will offer it in silver, blue, pink, and yellow.

A-Series Chip

Apple is planning to use its A18 Pro chip in the MacBook. We first saw the A18 Pro in the iPhone 16 Pro models. The chip is built on Apple's second-generation 3-nanometer process, featuring 8GB RAM and support for Apple Intelligence.

It's fast and efficient, and more than capable of handling day-to-day tasks. In Geekbench 6 benchmarks, the A18 Pro offers single-core CPU performance scores at the level of the M3 Ultra, and multi-core performance scores higher than the M1 chip that Apple used in the first Apple silicon MacBook Air. Metal scores that measure GPU performance are also similar to the M1 chip Metal scores.

The A18 Pro will be equivalent to the M1 for some tasks, and faster for other tasks. Apple no longer sells the M1 MacBook Air from its own store, but it has offered the machine through Walmart at a $599 price point.

Capabilities

With the A18 Pro chip, the low-cost MacBook would be able to do anything that can be done on an iPhone 16 Pro. It would be a suitable replacement for the low-cost iPad paired with a keyboard, and it would also support Apple Intelligence features.

Right now, an iPad is essentially the only option for a low-cost portable device that can serve as a computer, but the low-cost MacBook will add a solution that runs macOS instead of iPadOS.

Tasks like browsing the web, watching videos, creating documents, editing photos, and even light video editing would be no problem. A low-cost MacBook with A18 Pro chip could play all of Apple's iPad and iPhone games, including Apple Arcade titles, but it would not work well with high-end system intensive games.

It would also run apps like Final Cut Pro, but speeds for things like exporting video would not be as quick as with a more powerful Mac.

Apple probably won't go all out on ports, and the MacBook is likely to get just a single USB-C port, though two like the MacBook Air is also possible.

The A18 Pro chip is efficient, and there's a lot of space inside a 13-inch enclosure for a battery, so we could be looking at MacBook Air-level battery life or better. The MacBook Air's battery lasts for up to 18 hours when watching videos, or 15 hours when browsing the web.

Price

There are no specific details on price as of yet, but Bloomberg claims it will cost "well under $1,000." The MacBook Air is priced starting at $999, so it would need to come in under that.

Apple has a 13-inch iPad Air that has a display in the same range rumored for the low-cost MacBook, and it's priced at $799. The iPad Air has a higher-end M-series processor though, so the low-cost MacBook could be less than the iPad Air.

The closest iPad approximation for the chip is the iPad mini, which has an A17 Pro. The iPad mini is priced starting at $499. A price somewhere between $499 and $799 could make sense looking at Apple's existing product lineup. The older M1 MacBook that sells for $599 at Walmart also gives us a hint at what Apple might charge.

Launch Timing

Apple could launch the low-cost MacBook in the first half of 2026. Updates are planned for the MacBook Air in early 2026, so the low-cost model could launch sometime in that same timeframe.

Read More

For more information on Apple's budget MacBook, we have a dedicated guide.

Article Link: Apple's Cheap MacBook: What to Expect in 2026

in my experience, Apple is worst value for budget- poor people are better off elsewhere. Apple still excels at high end devices though you pay an iOS/macOS premium for them.

 

[yticolev]

Easy to say, nearly impossible to do in reality.

Look at the bezel of MacBook Air and Pro.

It would be impossible to keep the 12-inch chassis and fit in a 13-inch display.

I have a 12" laptop and a 13" diagonal screen will not fit with zero bezels and square corners. Actual tape measure, not speculation.

 

[yticolev]

Apple's not going to make a 12.5-inch or "around 13-inches" when MacBook Air is 13.6-inch. The difference is too small.

Of course 12-inch screen size was the issue. Why do you think there are no 12-inch notebooks today? All the PC manufacturers in the world are stupid and haven't capitalized on this huge "opportunity"? This is just like the iPhone mini folks who refused to believe small displays weren't popular.

Except that the iPhone Mini had a larger display than the budget iPhone. Belief has nothing to do with this.

 

[chucker23n1]

Except that the iPhone Mini had a larger display than the budget iPhone. Belief has nothing to do with this.

The iPhone 12 mini had a 5.4-inch display. The iPhone 16E, which is the current budget iPhone, has a 6.1-inch display.

 

[yticolev]

The iPhone 12 mini had a 5.4-inch display. The iPhone 16E, which is the current budget iPhone, has a 6.1-inch display.

The iPhone SE (2nd Gen) was the competing budget iPhone when the Mini was released with a screen size of 14.7". The Mini screen size was significantly larger with a smaller form factor.

It was more likely a marketing error that resulted in reduced sales. If they had called it the iPhone Air 12 it may have sold like hotcakes. Zero downside versus the much heavier, slower, physically bigger SE other than higher MRSP.

 

[yticolev]

Personally, I hope Apple goes "big" on a small screen laptop. I'd pay $1,500 without hesitation for a sub 2 pound laptop that doesn't cut corners. I would also pay the $300 for a nano-texture screen upgrade. Yup, I know that won't be an option but a guy can dream, right?

 

[Tagbert]

It will never be A18 or A19 because the confusion it will generate to the general user. Mark my words

Like the confusion when the iPads switched from A-series chips to M-series chips? 🙃

 

[delsoul]

I’d really love to see a polycarbonate MacBook just like we had the white and black ones years ago. Let’s see some colors like the iPhone 5c!

 

[Tagbert]

I’m like…why? What’s the point? Why not sell a cheaper M1 if you want?

Or make a dock for your phone in a clamshell thing…or make iOS proper.

Who needs this chip? Only because you made the M too powerful and need people to need shorter time between upgrades…

The A18 is already faster than the M1 in single core processing and about the same in multi core. The M1 was built on an old chip process that Apple and TSMC would like to retire. They are likely producing few of them any more.

Apple isn't selling the M1 Air. They do sell some through 3rd party sales chains but that is a lower margin channel. This new MacBook is a way for Apple to reclaim those sales and get a better margin when they do.

Making it a dock for your phone would be a completely different product for which there is no current hardware or software support. They would have to put a lot of effort into that and it would confuse their product lines. The hardware would also probably cost about the same as the chip is not the most expensive part of a computer.

 

[CharlesShaw]

I guess they will re-use the chassis from the MacBook Air m1, kind of the same approach as the iPhone 16e that uses the iPhone 14-frame. The m1 air came with different colors and is 13 inches. Makes sense to me at least.

Many people adore that chassis, so with a chip that would receive years updates and an impulse buy price we'd be reading posts like "picked up the MacBook this weekend to use in the bedroom, so I can leave my 2T M4 Pro docked in the study. Fun little machine and wife likes it too."

 

[ikramerica]

Question (not to upset anyone)
As we all know the entire world basically runs on PC's of some form or another.

EG: Every Apple Mac vanished, there would be a few temporary issues in a few niche areas.
Every PR Vanished and the whole world would grind to a halt and world chaos would happen instantly.

Do you feel it's right to teach children and get them used to using Mac's in schools, when the vast vast majority of them will enter the working world and be expected to use PC's as part of the real working world expects?

Should be not teach children to use the devices they are more likely to be expected to use in the vast majority of cases?

You don’t have kids.

They are not learning to use a computer system. They are using the computer as a learning tool, using the craptacular Google Classroom which is platform agnostic, and other poorly written educational apps that are agnostic.

At home we open the apps on iPad, Win 11 and a chromebook. They all work the same, as in, poorly.

They are not learning anything about operating a computer at the OS level because that is locked down by the schools…

 

[chucker23n1]

It was more likely a marketing error that resulted in reduced sales.

The marketing error was the belief that people might buy small phones.