The time for the Mac X is finally coming.
It's the rumored "smaller Mac Pro", which will be considerably cheaper without Intel Tax and the need for hyper-cooling their steampunk Xeons.
I wouldn’t be so optimistic.
This year’s Mac offerings have shown that while the M1 chips may be cheaper to produce, Apple intends to pocket the difference. It’s not unreasonable for them to do so. These chips will not have been cheap to design, and from a consumer perspective, the M1 Macs are faster and sport longer battery life than their predecessors, so I am getting more value for my money, vis-a-vis.
If by Mac X, you mean a mid-tier headless Mac tower (ala the guts of an imac without the display), I doubt Apple will ever release one. In my opinion, the imac remains the quintessential Mac in Apple’s eyes. An integrated solution that just works out of the box.
So my guess is that the Mac lineup will remain largely unchanged. The Mac mini for budget-conscious Mac desktop users, the imac which suffices for the general consumer and most professionals especially with the M1x chip resolving the issue of thermal throttling), and the Mac Pro for power users with workflows so powerful / specialised that they cannot be met even with a souped-up imac or iMac Pro.
One concern I would like to see Apple address is the issue of expansion with the imac and iMac Pro. From all accounts, the M1 chip is as fast as it is because everything is integrated onto it. This means, amongst other things, that the ram and storage cannot be upgraded separately. You are stuck with whatever you bought at the point of configuration.
What does this mean for pro Mac users who need 64, 128, even 1 tb of ram? Will Apple throw them a bone by making ram upgrades cheaper, or force them to buy their ridiculous markups?
Personally, I bought my 5k imac mainly for the display. The fusion drive is showing its age, and in hindsight, I should have paid extra for flash storage. If and when Apple updates their iMac next year, I probably will not be able to resist.