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

Gurman: No New Mac Studio and Mac Pro Until Mid-2025

It makes complete sense for the Studio to be updated this WWDC. Rumors in January stated that Apple was working on a N3E version of the M3 Ultra to ship in the new Studios. What Apple did is simply rename chips with this new N3E process to M4, which now allows them to ship these most powerful machines first, and correct this abnormality in their release schedule that has the Pro machines being lapped by less-expensive consumer machines so soon after release.

There was never going to be an N3B version of the Ultra, but there was going to be an N3E version, called the M4. And they can have it ready by now because they have been working on it for as long as they would have been working on the M3 Ultra.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ric22
EugW said:
No it doesn't. It says "by 2025" not "before 2025". The newsletter also specifically references its own previous newsletter from April, suggesting the same prediction from April still stands.
Click to expand...
"By 2025" to me means during 2024. I would term a 2025 release as "during 2025", or "by the end of 2025", not "by 2025".

However the dictionary states that "by" can either mean "before" or "no later than" so it is unclear what he meant. Although you are probably correct as he does reference his older article in the link.

Thing is, he said the same thing last year about the Studios and was wrong, so why would people take his word for it this time?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: picpicmac
I really hope Gurman turns out to be decreasingly reliable (though mostly because I want a significantly-upgraded AirPods Max).
 
Defender Stargate said:
"By 2025" to me means during 2024. I would term a 2025 release as "during 2025", or "by the end of 2025", not "by 2025".

However the dictionary states that "by" can either mean "before" or "no later than" so it is unclear what he meant. Although you are probably correct as he does reference his older article in the link.
Click to expand...
In common parlance "by" means "no later than". However, if you say "complete this paper by 5 o'clock" it often implies "before" because it's unlikely you'll finish at exactly 5 o'clock. The difference between 5:00 and 5:01 is meaningless in this context. However, if you say, "complete this project by 2025", usually it means anytime "in the year 2025 or before", since a year is a very long time.

Thing is, he said the same thing last year about the Studios and was wrong, so why would people take his word for it this time?
Click to expand...
I don't know what he said last year, but I'm not going by that prediction anyway. It's just my own personal belief. I've said before that I believe the laptops will be updated every 12-18 months, but that the desktops may take 18-24 months. That means for the desktops, they may skip some generations. 18 months for the Mac Pro and Mac Studio would be late 2024. 24 months would be mid 2025.

I don't expect to see a new MacBook Air (after the M3) this year at all. We may see new MacBook Pros this year, but if so, I'd guess late in the year.

So, while I would really like to see new Macs at WWDC, I'm just not expecting it.

Note that the Mac mini is the oldest. If it got updated at WWDC, that would be close to 18 months. But given that Apple loves to let the Mac mini fester for long period of time sometimes, I'm not counting on a Mac mini release at WWDC either. I'm actually guessing 2025 for the Mac mini.

I would love to be proven wrong, but I think those who are convinced WWDC will be a big Mac hardware release event may be disappointed.

P.S. If I type "big Mac", macOS autocorrects it to "Big Mac". :p Interesting.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
Joshuaorange said:
It’s not uniform or linear though. You shouldn’t have your most advanced processor in one of your lowest tier devices while still shilling people on your highest end model with oldest processor.
Click to expand...
Most folks buying computers want to know if they can edit pictures and surf the internet with it. If they can, they don’t care if the most advanced processor is in a thing that they don’t want. Someone’s going to walk out of an Apple Store tomorrow with an iMac because they like how it looks and it has more performance than they’ll ever need. That there’s something else that has even MORE performance they’ll never need? Not even a concern.

With Intel, the Air might have had an i3, a severely underperforming processor considering what the MacBook Pro was capable of. These days, even the lowest performing M1 is more performant than the lowest performing currently shipping i3. Apple’s simplified and leveled that whole mess such that, for the entire MacBook line, you’re going to get the same base level performance, but are you good with one USB-C? OR would you like more than that? Maybe a bigger screen? It’s all about “what it can do and how it does it”.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: EugW
Unregistered 4U said:
Most folks buying computers want to know if they can edit pictures and surf the internet with it. If they can, they don’t care if the most advanced processor is in a thing that they don’t want. Someone’s going to walk out of an Apple Store tomorrow with an iMac because they like how it looks and it has more performance than they’ll ever need. That there’s something else that has even MORE performance they’ll never need? Not even a concern.

With Intel, the Air might have had an i3, a severely underperforming processor considering what the MacBook Pro was capable of. These days, even the lowest performing M1 is more performant than the lowest performing currently shipping i3. Apple’s simplified and leveled that whole mess such that, for the entire MacBook line, you’re going to get the same base level performance, but are you good with one USB-C? OR would you like more than that? Maybe a bigger screen? It’s all about “what it can do and how it does it”.
Click to expand...
I think you made a typo about i3 performance. Anyhow, I agree.

I had considered getting a used 2020 i3 MacBook Air for the wife a few years back but in the end I just got a 2017 i5-5350U MB Air instead for half the price and roughly the same CPU performance.

Fast forward to 2024, and recently I've been looking at used M1 machines to replace that Air, but may wait for M4 next year, to get 12 GB RAM. 8 GB is fine for her, but 12 GB would last her a very long time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Unregistered 4U
Unregistered 4U said:
Most folks buying computers want to know if they can edit pictures and surf the internet with it. If they can, they don’t care if the most advanced processor is in a thing that they don’t want. Someone’s going to walk out of an Apple Store tomorrow with an iMac because they like how it looks and it has more performance than they’ll ever need. That there’s something else that has even MORE performance they’ll never need? Not even a concern.

With Intel, the Air might have had an i3, a severely underperforming processor considering what the MacBook Pro was capable of. These days, even the lowest performing M1 is more performant than the lowest performing currently shipping i3. Apple’s simplified and leveled that whole mess such that, for the entire MacBook line, you’re going to get the same base level performance, but are you good with one USB-C? OR would you like more than that? Maybe a bigger screen? It’s all about “what it can do and how it does it”.
Click to expand...
You’re not understanding. For those of us who do buy a device based on its ability to do this or that, it doesn’t make sense. You have the most powerful single core available in the least capable device. Whereas the most professional device is simply deficient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thebryceman, SaxPlayer and ric22
Joshuaorange said:
You’re not understanding. For those of us who do buy a device based on its ability to do this or that, it doesn’t make sense. You have the most powerful single core available in the least capable device. Whereas the most professional device is simply deficient.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but it is deficient in no way that practically matters, because the less capable machine with the newer SoC is MORE deficient.

I just don't get this expensive computer owner FOMO. The pros have their pro machines, and hopefully they keep working sufficiently fast until they need to buy something new. The non-pros can have whatever Apple wants to ship in volume. Given that Pros aren't going to get the non-pro machines (because they're MORE deficient at pro work), Apple can ship anything at all in them, as it doesn't matter to any Professional user.

Professionals should be spending their time doing good work on their fine computers, not worrying about how green their neighbours' grass is.

Apple doesn't care about anyones FOMO feelings.

If people just think their expensive machines aren't special enough, then stop buying expensive machines, or stop worrying about it.

It's not like Apple is doing things this way because it rolled some dice. Apple has very good reasons for how they engineer and develop things; and if they "don't make sense" to some people, that just means we don't have all the context that Apple does.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: B.A.T and thebryceman
Joshuaorange said:
You’re not understanding. For those of us who do buy a device based on its ability to do this or that, it doesn’t make sense. You have the most powerful single core available in the least capable device. Whereas the most professional device is simply deficient.
Click to expand...
Deficient in what way. Single threaded performance? If someone’s workflow is largely single threaded and they bought a Mac Studio or Mac Pro… I’m not going to say they bought the WRONG system, but they could have saved some serious money.

I understand how folks having a fear of missing out may feel like they’re missing something, and there’s nothing anyone can say that will alleviate their anxiety.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
Reactions: Joshuaorange, thebryceman and Chuckeee
I don't know how many people noticed this. Right below this exact MacRumor post, there are links to a bunch of older posts related to Mac Studio and Mac Pro. One of them is Gurman saying (in 2023) that there will be no new Mac Pro in 2023 WWDC and new Mac Studio will skip M2.

Now we all know that Apple announced both the M2 Mac Studio and M2 Mac Pro in WWDC 2023.


Screenshot 2024-05-21 at 1.31.28 PM.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: Defender Stargate, picpicmac, Chuckeee and 3 others
woolypants said:
I doubt they sell enough Mac Studios to make updating more frequently worthwhile. I suspect they've probably yet to reach triple figures with the Mac Pro.
Click to expand...
Do you have any idea how many Macs Apple move every quarter? Sure, a smaller number is Mac Studios, but nevertheless your assumption would appear to be clueless. A smaller part of a couple of trillions is actually quite a lot.
 
MikB said:
Do you have any idea how many Macs Apple move every quarter? Sure, a smaller number is Mac Studios, but nevertheless your assumption would appear to be clueless. A smaller part of a couple of trillions is actually quite a lot.
Click to expand...
He mentioned the Pros, not the Studios... Apple sell far fewer Pros than Studios.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
ric22 said:
He mentioned the Pros, not the Studios... Apple sell far fewer Pros than Studios.
Click to expand...
And Apple previously said (mea culpa daringfireball) that Mac Pro’s sales were a single percentage of all sales. Even with that, it’s likely way closer to 1% than 9%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chuckeee
whwang said:
I don't know how many people noticed this. Right below this exact MacRumor post, there are links to a bunch of older posts related to Mac Studio and Mac Pro. One of them is Gurman saying (in 2023) that there will be no new Mac Pro in 2023 WWDC and new Mac Studio will skip M2.

Now we all know that Apple announced both the M2 Mac Studio and M2 Mac Pro in WWDC 2023.
Click to expand...
Shhh we're only supposed to pay attention to the times he's right.
 
  • Haha
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: picpicmac, Chuckeee and Unregistered 4U
Elusi said:
Curious to hear how CAD/3D professionals who prefer (or used to prefer) Mac think about this. Does it matter that the RT-accelerated desktop Macs are getting this kind of huge release delay from the laptops?
Click to expand...
On one hand it seems pretty typical of Apple to neglect their top of the line after more than a decade of doing so. On the other, it doesn’t matter, bc Solidworks & Inventor aren’t getting rewritten for ARM, and without them, these machines are little more than expensive high speed email & web browsers.
 
ikir said:
I think he is wrong this time. MacBook Air chip will keep 1 previous generation chip and it makes sense. Direct jump to M4 is perfect for differentiate pro lineup. iMac and MacBook Air stay on M3 for now, Pro machines gets M4 Pro and Max. Mac mini could offer a entry level with M3 and mid level with M4. Maybe pro chip are not ready yet ok but I don’t think we will see Air with 4 while Max Studio stays on M2 Max/Ultra
Click to expand...
Agree. The jump from M2 to M4 skipping the M3 is a telltale sign that M3 was not going to cut it for the Pro/Studio line, nor anything further since all the rumors of the M4 and need for AI has been all over. Jumping straight to M4 then rolling out the product line before announcing the M5 seems much more plausible than leaving studio at M2 while the iPad out performs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ikir, RobertoDLV and thebryceman
Unregistered 4U said:
And Apple previously said (mea culpa daringfireball) that Mac Pro’s sales were a single percentage of all sales. Even with that, it’s likely way closer to 1% than 9%.
Click to expand...
I'd be shocked if the MacPro made up even 1% of Mac sales... maybe just during the month it launched? I'd have guessed under 0.1% 😅
 
  • Like
Reactions: DavidSchaub
ric22 said:
I'd be shocked if the MacPro made up even 1% of Mac sales... maybe just during the month it launched? I'd have guessed under 0.1% 😅
Click to expand...
I guess it depends upon whether you're talking about unit sales vs revenue. However Mac Pro sales are not insignificant.

appleinsider.com

MacBook Pro and MacBook Air overwhelmingly drive Apple Mac sales

New research claims to have details on exactly how dominant MacBook Pro and MacBook Air sales are, versus desktop contemporaries.
appleinsider.com appleinsider.com
 
DavidSchaub said:
Yeah, but it is deficient in no way that practically matters, because the less capable machine with the newer SoC is MORE deficient.

I just don't get this expensive computer owner FOMO. The pros have their pro machines, and hopefully they keep working sufficiently fast until they need to buy something new. The non-pros can have whatever Apple wants to ship in volume. Given that Pros aren't going to get the non-pro machines (because they're MORE deficient at pro work), Apple can ship anything at all in them, as it doesn't matter to any Professional user.

Professionals should be spending their time doing good work on their fine computers, not worrying about how green their neighbours' grass is.

Apple doesn't care about anyones FOMO feelings.

If people just think their expensive machines aren't special enough, then stop buying expensive machines, or stop worrying about it.

It's not like Apple is doing things this way because it rolled some dice. Apple has very good reasons for how they engineer and develop things; and if they "don't make sense" to some people, that just means we don't have all the context that Apple does.
Click to expand...
Dude, Apple has a mouse that you have to flip over to charge and you’re going to try to say everything they do makes sense? 🤣🤣🤣
 
  • Like
  • Love
  • Haha
Reactions: HoxtonBridge, turbineseaplane, krell100 and 4 others
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