Gurman: Apple Planning M2 Pro Mac Mini, New Apple TV With A14 Chip, Revamped HomePod With S8 Chip, and More

[Allen_Wentz]

Its weird tant Apple had the luxury to plan their chip naming scheme and chose such confusing and overlapping names like Pro, Max, Ultra, Extreme. From a customer perspective, these name are not particularly great to know which one is appropriate to their needs. Arguably, people in the market for an M2 Ultra or M2 Extreme chip will probably already know what they need, but still, I think Apple could have chosen something more simple and coherent

But other than this minor detail, I’m very curious to se the capabilities of this M2 Extreme chip, even if I’m far from needing one

 

[name99]

No idea what is wrong with the A12 Bionic chip. It’s not like TVOS needs anything more powerful. But if it won’t cost that much more apple can add a faster chip.

*In principle* aTV could do a lot to make a lower quality stream look better -- better upscaling, better temporal interpolation, detecting and correcting movies that have fscked up interlacing or 3:2 pullup or whatever.
(Yeah yeah, things like interlacing and correcting for bad frame rates SHOULD have been fixed in the studio before the thing even got on the air. And yet, here we are, with plenty of content being broadcast that's just broken...)

But Apple seem to be very unambitious in terms of this sort of improvement. I really don't get it. The iPhone team is populate by obsessives who will sweat blood for a .1% increase in things like image quality, while the aTV team is completely populated by slacker losers who couldn't be bothered with 20% low-lying improvements.

 

[ttyRazor]

If Apple can release M2 Pro/Max in Q4 of this year, that means they plan to update base M, Pro, Max every year. An annual update cadence would be incredible.

The reason M2 was late had nothing to do with the chip design being late. It had to do with waiting for the Macbook Air redesign to launch.

People say M2's performance improvement over the M1 was small (~18% CPU, 35% GPU, 40% Neural Engine). But if you're getting this improvement every year, it will leave Intel and AMD in the dust.

The iPhone pays for Mac chips. Mac chips are simply using whatever CPU, GPU, NE cores were in the last iPhone. This strategy makes it extremely cost effective for Apple to update Mac chips annually.

I think it also had to do with getting the M1 Ultra shipped and at least a little distance between M1 and M2 generations. Hopefully the refresh cycle of the higher end chips will be shorter than the initial rollout, especially if there aren’t many new enclosures to put them in.

 

[name99]

Waiting for AppleTV sized MacMicro.

Some of us are more interested in the large MacMacro!

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I strongly disagree. Apple's M-series chip naming is far easier to comprehend than nomenclature from either Intel or AMD, by a lot.

 

[Karma*Police]

The only surprising rumor is a new HomePod. If they were working on an upgrade, why discontinue the older model??

 

[Warped9]

I think the iMac will be 24” (23.5”) and always be M2 etc., and the iMac Pro will be 27” and feature M2 Pro and Max, etc.

Yes, the M2 will be the 24in. iMac. No, I seriously doubt there will be a 27in. M2 Pro or Max iMac Pro. I really think that ship has sailed.

If you want bigger than 24 then they’re pointing you to the Mac Studio and Studio Display…and spending big bucks for the privilege.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I can’t see much need for an update to the tv until Apple goes all-in in making a full home entertainment system. It’s nearly there with the HomePod, but there still isn’t a proper surround sound system. Add a sound bar and subwoofer and the sales for HomePods/HomePod minis would go up significantly

Currently Apple effectively has no sound system, because the sound from HomePod Minis is terrible and the superb-sounding HomePods were discontinued. New (real) HomePods would be a big plus; without them no decent surround sound is feasible.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

The jump from 1080p to 4K is clearly visible. The jump from 4K to 8k much less so. And in the end an AppleTV needs to be connected to an 8k-capable display (a.k.a. TV). When Apple launched the aTV 4K, 4K TV’s were widely available and affordable. I don’t see a similar situation for 8k TV’s, not even in 3-4 years from now.

So unless Apple would ponder to enter the TV market with an 8k model, an 8k aTV makes no sense simply due to lack of (affordable) 8k TV availability. And if Apple would indeed ponder to release an 8k TV, it’d make no sense to attach a separate aTV box to it, as they could instead integrate the functionality from the very beginning.

My bet is on their headset instead. No more lugging around heavy and bulky flat screens, optically dominating the living room. Just put on the iGlasses (or whatever they’ll name ‘em) and enjoy a virtual 4K/8K screen wherever you want.

When tube monitors and TV’s became too unwieldy, a new technology stepped in (flat screens) and allowed for much better devices with a greater diagonal at a fraction of the weight/bulk. Flat screen tech is now approaching a similar junction imho.

Again, same stuff ahead of 4K and 1080p launches. When Apple launched 4K AppleTV, there was still a good mix of 1080p and 4K TVs for sale. Right now, that's more a good mix of 8K and 4K TVs for sale. But "we" slung that back then to pooh-pooh the idea of a 4K AppleTV too. Go back to before the 1080p AppleTV and it was the same then too: "everybody has only 720p or 1080i" sets. There are hardly any 1080p sets right now." And yet, there actually was. Apple was about LAST of the set-top boxes to go 1080p. I had that kind of TV for YEARS before Apple TV could display native res to it. I had piled up 1080p video I shot myself for years before I had an easy way to push it to my 1080p TV.

Same with the "affordable" adjective. 8K TV is generally not as "affordable" as 4K TVs, mirroring 4K vs. 1080p when the former was the new kid on the block. However, we're the Apple crowd... known to pay WAYYYYYYYY up for RAM, SSD, etc so it would seem plausible that if anyone is going to pay WAYYYYYY up for a higher resolution "monitor" vs. cheaper alternatives on the market, it would seem likely to be us.

And again, as far as "clearly visible" but "much less so", that too was slung against 4K before there was one and 1080p before there was one. I couldn't even count how many times people were slinging "eyes can't see the difference" applied to arguments against a 4K Apple TV and 1080p AppleTV before that too. So we'll do it again for 8K and again for 16K after that... UNTIL... Apple actually rolls out such a device and then all that evaporates... as if we never had any fault with higher resolution boxes.

What rumor is in play right now that seems plausible: it seems towards a lock that perhaps the next iPhone will shoot video is 8K. How does one display that 8K to their 8K TV if they have one? They'll have to directly connect it or a Mac to that TV... UNLESS an AppleTV 8K is rolled out to be the middleman tech. Would Apple want someone to spend about $30 for a cable or buy a new AppleTV for $150-$300?

What marketing line keeps getting slung about Silicon video power by Apple: "PRORES engines capable of handling multiple streams of 8K video." If one is working with 8K video and then render it as 8K- as Apple themselves are promoting now- how would someone play that content on an 8K TV? Again, hook that Mac to the TV? Or slip in an 8K AppleTV as middleman? Would Apple want someone to buy a cable or buy a new AppleTV?

Just as it was with 4K before this... and 1080p before that... Apple is already turning the page... already pushing 8K in the lead products and as a point of demonstrating the great power of Silicon. What good is either in practice unless there is an easy way to display it?

All that offered: the pattern of the past is that iPhone can shoot in a higher resolution for up to about a year... various iPads get the same capability in their upgrades and then soon after iPads go, an AppleTV able to push that quality to a TV follows pretty quickly. So I doubt we get an 8K AppleTV this year but if the Fall phones can shoot in it, the Spring-Fall iPads next year will probably shoot in it and an AppleTV 8K probably hits in the Fall of next year.

If iPhone doesn't go 8K this year, then I'll guess it all rolls out another year.

 

[Delorean2006]

Do you think the M2 iMac will be a new 27inch variant instead of just an update to the existing "new" 24inch iMac?

I personally think the M2 iMac will stay at the 24 inch size and they'll leave the Mac Studio as the "27 inch" offering for this year because of the studio display. Then with the M3, I think they'll bring back the 27 inch.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

Actually, apple was ridiculed by fans of the competitors in the marketplace because they were so slow to adopt 4K in its AppleTV.

Offering an 8k version means sourcing some new or different components that reduce the margin for exactly no reason aside from just because. That’s probably years of profit they’d be leaving on the table by the time an 8k atv really makes any sense.

That’s not the Tim Cook (Apple) way

Apple could roll out an AppleTV "Pro"... "now with the incredible, magical power of 8K playback" for only $299 or $349 or $499 to preserve that which is most important to Apple... leaving the existing 4K model in the store at $169-$199 for those that see it as "good enough"... just as one can still get the prior generation in the Apple Store for $149 That IS the Tim Cook (Apple) way.

As consumers, we shouldn't have to be overly concerned with maximizing Apple's profits. They have that fully mastered without our help. Our part is to either find exactly what we want in what they- or others- happen to be selling or wish for things not yet available. In all of the other Apple lines, we are quick to cast our wishes... we WISH for the next gen guts... we wish for the better camera, new colors, more RAM, etc. We can't wait for the next phone or the M2 Air. Etc. Look at the non-AppleTV comments in this thread: iMac Mx PRO, Mac Mini Pro, etc.

But, for some reason, with THIS one thing, we seem to generally think the other way: what it is now is perfectly fine for everyone... no one should wish for more. If anyone does express any wish for something more here, we'll give them plenty of reasons they should not feel how they feel... like Apple desperately needs our help to maximize the sales of what is available right now (which- of course- they do not).

I don't even have an 8K TV myself but I would "think different" whole-heartedly WELCOME an 8K AppleTV option. Why? Because that means more than just 8K playback guts get upgraded, making the whole better than the 4K AppleTVs I have now: faster UI, more capabilities, better gaming, smoother operation, etc. Perhaps I don't buy an 8K TV for a few more years, so what's the point? An 8K AppleTV will easily feed a downscaled 8K video (shot on new iPhone) or (rumored) 48K images as good as those can be displayed... AND even more easily sling 4K or 1080p rentals from the store (just as the current one can sling 4K, 1080p, 720p or even SD now)... while being ready for any time that I might buy a new television.

 

[SuperCachetes]

Actually, I find Apple's naming scheme, although far from perfect, way easier to understand than the naming schemes from the competition.

Don't let this go to your head, but you don't come off as the average consumer.

Numbers are pretty easy and have been a branding standard forever. Take Intel for example. Granted, the Core nomenclature has been around far longer than Apple's M_, but even "average consumers" can look at two Dells and quickly (and safely) assume that an i5-1235U is less powerful than an i7-1265U.

If a consumer is so far in the weeds that they care what the numbers mean - i.e. are building their own system etc. - Intel even has handy codebreaking tools. You could argue that they have entirely too many SKUs to begin with, but certainly Intel have far more masters to please than Apple does.

Yes, around the forums, we'll all quickly decode Apple's superlatives aka naming conventions like we always do - but I disagree than a random laptop shopper with $2,000 burning a hole in their pocket is going to immediately understand that "Max" > "Pro" without some additional coaching. Slotting more words into the expanding product lines as is mentioned in this article won't help matters.

 

[TightLines]

A broken clock is right at least 2x a day… we’ve been hearing about a new Mac Mini for nearly a year now… and it still hasn’t been forthcoming.

I have postponed my purchasing plans for any new Apple products indefinitely until they get some things sorted out, like what appears to be a defect in the new Mac Studio and the screaming fan noise… or what appears to be indecision on the configurations of all their desktop models… and I will be damned if I will be forced into a “base model” or be required to pay a huge premium and endure excessive wait time for something that is more to my desired configuration… surely Apple has internal sales metrics to see many people are taking the same approach as me… and that’s why we are seeing so many sales on the “base” configurations that Apple crammed into their retail outlets.

 

[skitidetdu]

Good! I was on the fence buying an ATV but skipped because of the chip not getting an update for the latest model. Maybe not it is time!

 

[jimmirehman]

AppleTV and HomePod “in development”? We need them NOW, not 2023!

 

[Neodym]

But here’s the underlying problem with both 4K and 8K, it’s the content. Unless Apple wants to create their own content in both formats then it really is slim pickings. I am not aware of any TV broadcasters here in the US or abroad who are transmitting their signal in 4K.

Most of the 4K stuff comes from Netflix and Apple to a smaller extent but it’s still not the norm. It is why I still use my 4th gen Apple TV I purchased in 2015. I bought a couple of 4K Chromecast‘s and pretty much everything is either 1080P or 4:3.

I intentionally left out content, as linear TV is growing out of fashion. More and more people spend an increasing amount of time with streaming services, so 4K (leave alone 8k) will not necessarily be driven by traditional broadcasters anymore.

 

[EugW]

Don't let this go to your head, but you don't come off as the average consumer.

Numbers are pretty easy and have been a branding standard forever. Take Intel for example. Granted, the Core nomenclature has been around far longer than Apple's M_, but even "average consumers" can look at two Dells and quickly (and safely) assume that an i5-1235U is less powerful than an i7-1265U.

Note the U there. Therein lies the problem. What does U, K, HK, T etc. mean? What about if there is no letter after it at all? I actually personally find this confusing, and it's even worse for non-techie consumers.

Right now, that's more a good mix of 8K and 4K TVs for sale.

No there isn't. 8K TVs are far, far less common now than 4K TVs were when Apple TV 4K came out. And furthermore 8K support in general is very half-assed. Apple loses nothing by waiting a few years before jumping into 8K.

 

[HobeSoundDarryl]

No there isn't. 8K TVs are far, far less common now than 4K TVs were when Apple TV 4K came out. And furthermore 8K support in general is very half-assed. Apple loses nothing by waiting a few years before jumping into 8K.

Have you been shopping? I have. 8K TVs are in stock. Yes, not as numerous as 4K but that's how this always works. Go shopping. See for yourself. Else, go virtual shopping: Amazon has a 8K box you can tick to see PAGES of 8K TVs for sale (not all cost a fortune... several big screen 8Ks cost LESS THAN a certain 27" Monitor recently released). Best Buy has an 8K ticker too. Many 8K TVs are prominently displayed at Best Buy. Etc.

By the time AppleTV 8K comes out- which we BOTH seem to be guessing is next year to late next year at the earliest, that will be post ANOTHER CES with another round of 8K models announced and releasing throughout the year.

But to that last part, I agree: Apple loses nothing by waiting... except the cash from those who would buy updated AppleTVs if they were rolled out before "next few years." With no 8K TV in my home today, I'd buy an 8K AppleTV if it was released today. Why if I have no 8K TV yet? Faster processing, smoother operations, updated tech, etc.

Would I buy a 4K AppleTV today? No, I already have that level of tech in hand.

 

[EugW]

Have you been shopping? I have. 8K TVs are in stock. Yes, generally not as numerous as 4K but that's how this always works. Go shopping. See for yourself.

By the time AppleTV 8K comes out- which we BOTH seem to be guessing is next year to late next year at the earliest, that will be post ANOTHER CES with another round of 8K models announced and releasing throughout the year.

But to that last part, I agree: Apple loses nothing by waiting... except the cash for those who would buy updated AppleTVs if they were rolled out before "next few years." With no 8K TV in my home today, I'd buy an 8K AppleTV if it was released today.

4K TVs were available and in stock in something like 2012. Apple TV 4K came out in 2017.

 

[Tyler O'Bannon]

Yes, the M2 will be the 24in. iMac. No, I seriously doubt there will be a 27in. M2 Pro or Max iMac Pro. I really think that ship has sailed.

If you want bigger than 24 then they’re pointing you to the Mac Studio and Studio Display…and spending big bucks for the privilege.

Very possibly so.

The only thing going for an iMac Pro is that the all-in-one form factor is very popular and loved.

To your point, if they do release it, the price will reflect it for sure. I’m betting it will cost what a studio display plus an M2 Pro Mac Mini costs. MAYBE you will save a little bit (or get a keyboard and mouse or trackpad as a consolation prize).

And, again, to your point, that’s IF it ever does exist.

 

[Lefteous]

They are doing too many stuff that is too similar. Instead of an up-to-date product portfolio they release devices like the 13 inch MacBook Pro with a TouchBar that has been removed in all other devices.
How can a 12 inch MacBook significantly differ from a 13 inch MacBook Air that has exactly the same chip?

 

[fbr$]

What 'most people' want is a Xbox S (512GB of storage!) for $300 and a basic $100 Apple TV A12 just for streaming.

I don't see the point in a premium Apple TV Pro M1 for $300. For what, to play 'half-A' Arcade games?

Just drop the A12 model to $100 and release a new A14 model for $130.

And please send the old A8 HD model to the museum, it's past time.

 

[im_to_hyper]

I've been holding off replacing my 2012 mini on the hope they stick the m2 chip in the basic mini. My 2012 will stop getting security updates for Catalina this fall so I guess I'll wait and see what happens. Hate to buy a 2 year old design since I hang onto my gear as long as possible.

I’m running Big Sur on my 2012 with an i7 thanks to the unofficial installation community - runs fine with Metal GPU acceleration for the internal graphics as well as forcing an external R9 290X 8GB via Thunderbolt 3->2 adapter using the Thunderbolt 1 interface.

Supports a 4K 60Hz monitor ++ a 1440p 2K 240Hz display. Even plays Steam games just fine as well as gaming on Windows under Parallels.

If you put in a little extra effort you can keep using your hardware a bit longer.

My 16GB RAM is my biggest limitation rn when it comes to multiple lightweight (CPU-wise) VMs and emulators but with heavy RAM usage.

 

[im_to_hyper]

What 'most people' want is a Xbox S (512GB of storage!) for $300 and a basic $100 Apple TV A12 just for streaming.

I don't see the point in a premium Apple TV Pro M1 for $300. For what, to play 'half-A' Arcade games?

Just drop the A12 model to $100 and release a new A14 model for $130.

And please send the old A8 HD model to the museum, it's past time.

All A8 devices should have been able to get iOS and iPad OS 16. Yea they are older, but still capable with 15. Optimizations and tweaks with 16 would have made it a great “send off” OS.

 

[im_to_hyper]

Its weird tant Apple had the luxury to plan their chip naming scheme and chose such confusing and overlapping names like Pro, Max, Ultra, Extreme. From a customer perspective, these name are not particularly great to know which one is appropriate to their needs. Arguably, people in the market for an M2 Ultra or M2 Extreme chip will probably already know what they need, but still, I think Apple could have chosen something more simple and coherent

But other than this minor detail, I’m very curious to se the capabilities of this M2 Extreme chip, even if I’m far from needing one

I mean they could have gone with “Pro 3, Pro 5, Pro 7, Pro 9” but that schtick has been used for a long freaking time.