Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Complete 'Apple Studio' Package With Highest-End Mac Studio, Studio Display, and Accessories Costs Nearly $11,000

bradman83 said:
The iMac was a great value but I think there's something to be said about the economy of being able to keep a display across multiple generations of computer. With an iMac you have to get a new display every time you upgrade. With a Studio setup you could theoretically keep a Studio display for 2-3-4 generations of computer it's connected to. It's a higher upfront cost now but it could be lower in the long run. Or you can select a cheaper display you want based on your needs. I don't need P3 color, so my primary monitor is a Dell 27" 4K screen with USB-C connectivity which cost $370 but still has reasonable color accuracy for my photography needs. Does it have an Apple logo or its industrial design? No. But it suits my needs and will likely outlast the 14" M1 Pro MPB I connect to it (and it will definitely outlast the work-issued HP laptop I also use it for).
Click to expand...

Did you notice on Apple’s site for all builds of the Mac Studio only has 12 months of Apple Care+ ?
 

Attachments

  • C3CAC143-22EF-43B8-820D-891F06737BF7.png
    C3CAC143-22EF-43B8-820D-891F06737BF7.png
    859.4 KB · Views: 78
reyesmac said:
Here is why people complain about price. Because we know it can be cheaper. I don't think many people would complain if Apple kept the same ports and case of the old Mac mini and just gave us the option to put an m1max or pro chip in there. See the problem with that? It would allow one to have access to the power without jumping through the paywall apple sets up. Now it is clear that Apple will not give you m1Max speed below $2000. Thats what stinks. Because we know that if it was put into an old mini or an old iMac it would come in below $2,000. So yes, its expensive if you always purchase computers around $1,000. Its not expensive if you already have the monitors, peripherals and such and you are used to spending $2,000 for a computer.
Click to expand...
Putting an M1 Max/Ultra in an old Mac Mini isn't an option - they had to rework it to put in a whole bunch of cooling, and then they made a point of saying, "most of the time you can't hear it very much", which means the cooling system is actually doing quite a bit of work.
 
reyesmac said:
Because we know that if it was put into an old mini or an old iMac it would come in below $2,000.
Click to expand...

Oh, you KNOW this do you?

You realise the hardware to drive the ports (i.e., the expensive bit) is built into the SOC - so you'd basically be having an SOC that isn't wired up to a few sub $2 ports on the board or milled into the enclosure.

To re-iterate: the expensive part of the ports is a sunk cost as soon as you go to M1 Pro/Max/Ultra.
 
Boris Bronson said:
Apple doesn’t want working class people using their computers.
Click to expand...

For non-professionals. there is the MacBook Air, Mac mini and iPad.

You want/need high end hardware (or large, high speed flash memory), it costs.

Yes apple are making a profit margin. This is how they are able to develop new chips independently of intel/AMD and develop their own operating systems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: George Dawes
Steve would have been proud of Apples latest moves. They are simplifying their lineup by reducing the number of models available. They are building high end CPU's that can be used in lower spec devices when they end up less than 100% (called binning).
This is product range and supply chain optimisation at its best and will ensure a long life for Apple. As I said, Steve would have been proud as using this same methodology he saved Apple when he came back.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: George Dawes and CarlJ
To me the Mac Studio is the return of the Mac Pro Tube, but done right.

A non-expandable (internally) desktop powerhouse. A separate screen.

Unlike in 2013, however, it will be sold alongside the (at least for now) expandable Mac Pro.

That was the blunder that Apple committed in back then.

I loved the line in the keynote: "...but that is for another day".

Made me go "YES" with excitement and anticipation.

Well done, Apple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DeepIn2U, throAU and George Dawes
Darth Tulhu said:
To me the Mac Studio is the return of the Mac Pro Tube, but done right.

A non-expandable (internally) desktop powerhouse. A separate screen.

Unlike in 2013, however, it will be sold alongside the (at least for now) expandable Mac Pro.

That was the blunder that Apple committed in back then.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that’s right. They’ve realized they can’t get away with having no Mac at all with internal expansion, but also that almost nobody needs it. Almost.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Darth Tulhu
kfscoll said:
All I wanted was an update to my 2013 Mac Pro (12-core Xeon/D700/1TB SSD/64GB RAM) and that's exactly what I got.

Mac Studio (M1 Ultra/64-core GPU/1TB SSD/64GB RAM) on its way!

Now, who says the 2013 Mac Pro was a failure? ;)
Click to expand...
Only in that Apple REPLACED the cheese-grater Mac Pro with it (and then let it LANGUISH for almost a decade).

They learned their lesson.
 
theluggage said:
Maybe the people complaining are the ones that are looking for a replacement for their ~$2000-$3000 27" iMacs and finding that the nearest equivalent is now $3600?
Click to expand...
Those people are underestimating the value and power that the Mac mini + new Studio Display bring to the table.

Now you don't have to throw away the screen (or computer) once things go south for one or the other.

Which is what (at least in my case) I've wanted since forever.

Even in base form the M1 Mini is formidable. Perhaps this WWDC or fall we'll get Pro and Max options for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IAlberta and throAU
Isn’t this the Headless iMac people always wanted, but most said they would never make?
Not much to complain about
 
yoak said:
Isn’t this the Headless iMac people always wanted, but most said they would never make?
Not much to complain about
Click to expand...
It’s an excellent machine. It’s not quite the Xmac that lots of people hypothesized over the years, that would be bigger than a Mac Mini, smaller that a Mac Pro, and expandable - some sort of internal slots for drives, RAM, whatever. I think that ship has sailed, though, with the Silicon chips, the RAM is of necessity on board. And it seems like their SSDs are faster than you could easily do with slotted ones (though I’m not really up on that). But it is a lovely machine, and the lack of an attached monitor makes it also the more attractive.
 
yoak said:
Isn’t this the Headless iMac people always wanted, but most said they would never make?
Not much to complain about
Click to expand...

An early treatise on the xMac.

Crucially, the Studio has fixed RAM and flash, and no PCIe slots. In that sense, it’s really more of a high-end mini.

But yes, I think this is as close as we’ll get. Those who need internal expansion (which is fewer and fewer people) will have to get the Mac Pro.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CarlJ
At first I thought the Studio Display was a bit overpriced at 1779 €. Then I searched and found that the 5K LG display on the 5K iMac was about 1300 €. Now I don't see it that bad.
But I have a question: Would it be possible to use a 5k iMac as an external monitor for the Mac Studio?
Or even using the iMac as an external monitor for an M1 Mac mini?
Maybe it depends on the rear connections of the iMac or the manufacturing year, I don't know.
Can you help me with this doubt?
 
Allyance said:
As I posted on another thread:

I can not believe those who are complaining about the price of the Studio. $6,000 for all that performance is a bargain.

Back in 1988 when I started doing serious CAD work on military hospitals, I bought the first 486 computer released. It was a 486-25mhz, with a Rendition hi res graphics card, special hard drive and controller, and a 20" Monitor. It cost me $10,000, which adjusted for inflation is $23,765 in todays dollars. Intel released the 50mhz version of the 486, so I upgraded to that for $500. I needed every ounce of performance to handle the big composite floor plans I produced. I was self employed at the time, worked a part of Communication Consultants trio.

When you are in business, you buy the machinery necessary to do the job most efficiently.
Click to expand...
That’s a very simplistic and slightly cliched sounding answer.
If you can’t afford it, you can’t afford it. But not every business, even big ones do things that way.
There are a whole host of reasons that you or any business might not buy the machinery you speak of people or services you speak of, even if they can ‘afford’ it in absolute terms.
Adjusted for inflation is always a little bit of a vague term.
If the computer itself costs that much that’s fine but what if the resource required to ‘service’ it has gone up?
Then what you need to do the complete picture now looks a bit different.
 
chucker23n1 said:
Recent ones, no.



Some old ones support it. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204592
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info.

Reading the Apple article I understand that newer macs with M1 (using Big Sur or later) doesn't support any older iMac as an external display. Neither a 2014 or earlier iMac with High Sierra. And even such an older iMac doesn't have 5k display, but lower screen resolutions.

That means you have to buy a display to use a with your new Mac Studio and no 5k iMac can be used as a monitor.

Too bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back