Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
These New Macs Are Coming in 2024
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
man...I'd love to make the jump to apple silicon with a 27 or 30 inch iMac....been waiting...
Hope your willing to wait
Don’t underestimate Apple desire to optimize profits [AKA Greed], is manifest with lost leader entry configuration that begs buying a higher tier level to get a desired configuration.
After you buy a gazillion Mac desktops you slowly realize all you need is a MacBook Pro with a monitor. Happens to us all at different stages.
I don't buy a new Mac until there is at least a 27" iMac for a fair price. Ridiculous that there are so many iMac 27" users still using 10+ year old computers because they need a larger screen in an all in one.
Timmy may have juiced the stock price but he has screwed those that made Apple.
Timmy may have juiced the stock price but he has screwed those that made Apple.
Don't think I'll be replacing my old M1 MacBook Pro until a decent 16gb is the base RAM.
So, likely not for another 5-10 years, if ever 🤣 and I'm OK with that.
So, likely not for another 5-10 years, if ever 🤣 and I'm OK with that.
Can't wait for the gimped Mac mini with no ports just because. No one cares how big a desktop computer is. It's not an iPhone or an iPad, there is no benefit to it being smaller.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
The "wrong" is called Apple wants to be richer than their "richest company in the world" title they often hold already... and fattening the margin greatly helps with that. FYI: traditional "high" Apple margin was about 38%-40% for many years vs. current margin throughout the "inflation/supply chain/covid" period evolving towards 50% and will probably be there in the next year or two.
Android product makers don't necessarily seek so much margin. Apple gets away with it because "we" seem willing to just pay towards anything and then rationalize all contributing variables (like undersized RAM in 2024 to each other). Android probably couldn't get away with "just pay anything" pricing because Android buyers either WOULDN'T "just pay" and/or has many competing Android offerings to pressure price & margin DOWN. One way they can woo more buyers is up their specs and sharpen their pencil on margin... which means more of the money buying that device is going towards the device instead of scalped away to the cash vaults.
This setup works just fine for AAPL. We Apple consumers enable such things by opting to "buy anyway" and "pay anything" to do so. They get heavily rewarded in many ways for opting for "too little base RAM in 2024" and similar. If consumers as a group would vote "NO" on 8GB base (by NOT buying 8GB Macs), Apple would very quickly up the RAM. But instead, we gripe/moan/complain and then buy anyway. They earn their bonuses. Wall Street applauds "another record quarter...". Media refers to them as genius business people. Etc.
Last edited:
A desktop small enough to attach to the back of a monitor is not a bad idea. Back in 2010 work assigned me a Dell that clipped into the bracket on the back of a monitor. The current mini is already small enough to do that though.
The lack of ports is a bigger problem given than USB 3 and above hubs ruin Bluetooth reception. And the four total ports in the base mini render it unusable for anywhere but the stereo cabinet, and even there I have to use one for the remote.
It's ridiculous that we're more than halfway through 2024, and Mac accessories are still stuck with Lightning connectors. Hopefully, the USB-C versions will arrive with the next Mac mini, but realistically, we'll probably have to wait until the 2025 Mac Studio refresh
M1 Max is still sufficient for me, waiting until at least M5 Max to upgrade.
What I really want is to finally get USB-C Mac peripherals with these updates.
What I really want is to finally get USB-C Mac peripherals with these updates.
It isn't the 'M chips' that are the primary issue. It is more largely software. If Apple had worked harder at enabling some 3rd party AI/ML compute accelerator cards the outlook wouldn't be so dim. The Mac Pro would be riding the outer edge AI bubble.
Apple wants developers to use their APIs. OpenXX or vendor nuetral stuff is 'out'.
That Sonnet Tech makes the xMac enclosure.
xMac Studio - SONNETTECH
3U enclosure to install and secure one Mac Studio with optional PCIe card expansion in a standard 19-inch rack.
www.sonnettech.com
is indicative as to why it likely won't become extinct. The world doesn't totally revolve around just high end GPU (video output) oriented cards. That is a large faction, but not the total market. the Mac Pro's entry price went up 100% ( 2013 -> 2019. ). The base configuration (and price) went up a bit more with the 2023 model. It pragmatically has a 'low volume' tax on it to offset lower sales volume.
There is a substantive set of workloads that have substative requirements for more than one, and only one, internal drive. Apple's single internal drive is going to have capacity limits because a single drive can has physical sie limits. ( more NAND chips gets you more capacity. )
Is the Mac Pro going to see 12 months updates. No. But that has been true for well over a decade now. M-series isn't bringing any substantive change there.
Some folks will hand wave at Thunderbolt 5 will unork the Studios bandwidth limits. There are even faster SSDs coming. TBv5 isn't going to stay out in front.
If the volume goes down what might happen is the 'tower' version goes away. ( having two chassis is a stretch if volume gets too low). Tip the rack sideways and put it on support (with less than $400 ) wheels and it is a 'good enough' tower.
I can't wait for the M4 Studio Ultra or even better, Extreme.
I have little problem if they replace the USB-A ports with Thunderbolt.
Different people have different needs. For me, A Studio Ultra with four monitors is the minimum I can get by with for work. While traveling, I am currently using A Macbook Pro Max with two external screens and a Linux box on the side and it has me very limited in what I can do.
From what I understand, the Extreme chip will only be availible in the Mac Pro, not the Studio. That would be enough to get me to go for the big tower. Don't get me wrong, PCI-E storage is fantastic, but I can get by with most of my storage being NAS, with only the fast stuff being in the box.It isn't the 'M chips' that are the primary issue. It is more largely software. If Apple had worked harder at enabling some 3rd party AI/ML compute accelerator cards the outlook wouldn't be so dim. The Mac Pro would be riding the outer edge AI bubble.
Apple wants developers to use their APIs. OpenXX or vendor nuetral stuff is 'out'.
That Sonnet Tech makes the xMac enclosure.
xMac Studio - SONNETTECH
3U enclosure to install and secure one Mac Studio with optional PCIe card expansion in a standard 19-inch rack.
is indicative as to why it likely won't become extinct. The world doesn't totally revolve around just high end GPU (video output) oriented cards. That is a large faction, but not the total market. the Mac Pro's entry price went up 100% ( 2013 -> 2019. ). The base configuration (and price) went up a bit more with the 2023 model. It pragmatically has a 'low volume' tax on it to offset lower sales volume.
There is a substantive set of workloads that have substative requirements for more than one, and only one, internal drive. Apple's single internal drive is going to have capacity limits because a single drive can has physical sie limits. ( more NAND chips gets you more capacity. )
Is the Mac Pro going to see 12 months updates. No. But that has been true for well over a decade now. M-series isn't bringing any substantive change there.
Some folks will hand wave at Thunderbolt 5 will unork the Studios bandwidth limits. There are even faster SSDs coming. TBv5 isn't going to stay out in front.
If the volume goes down what might happen is the 'tower' version goes away. ( having two chassis is a stretch if volume gets too low). Tip the rack sideways and put it on support (with less than $400 ) wheels and it is a 'good enough' tower.
RE: AI, most people working in the field rent massive GPUs that could never be put into a local box. They need to go into a center with special power, special cooling and cost more than your house. The day of doing serious AI development or research on a local GPU is far gone.
In the past, I was something of a fan of the iMac. I think that day is over. You can get a nice iMac, with a great screen and it will be fantastic for a few years, then throw out the screen with the computer. The other option is, get a fantastic screen, a Studio or even a Mini. When the computer is no longer able to keep up, you replace the Mac and keep the perfectly good screen.
That only make sense if Apple is stuck on "there can only be two enclosures". The Pro SoC package needs more distribution paths than just the higher end laptops. To exclude it from the desktop line up has what advantage? None. It just gets less M4 Pro sold. An expensive chip to produce and goal is to sell less of them?
the trivial fix is to just stuff the pro SoC into the current ( paid for design) Mini chassis. Conceptually, Apple could dump it into the Studio chassis. It is still being sold but the price is likely going up (bill of material costs up). But if the Mini redesign is substantive driven by the classic Mini being 'too big' for the plain Mn SoC , then just jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire. Mn Pro will be in the same situation. Lots of 'empty' space inside of a bigger (more expensive) aluminum chassis. ( Mn Pro rack density goes significantly down. So driving away some of those customers. )
If Apple kneecaps the Mini with just 3 ports and a cheaper (much smaller, so less cost) chassis. ( taller AppleTV box) then could adjust the pricing gaps between an even lower Mini , the adjusted Mini Pro , and Mac Studio (remaining the same). That could boost the volume for the Mini Pro. But if the volume is low enough and Apple blew the design budget on even smaller base Mini , then reusing the Studio would be the only option.
I have a feeling the base Mac Mini with the Pro chip is going to do very well if we have to wait until the summer of next year for an M4 Mac Studio. I think I am getting the base Mini Pro and selling it in the Summer to get a Max Studio.
Last edited:
I don't have a lot of faith they will.
If they are going to get the thing down to the size of an ATV I'm betting 2xTB/USBC, HDMI, Ethernet, headphone and keep the internal power supply. I'll be happily surprised if they come anywhere close to the existing mini.
I saw the M2 Max MacBooks with 32GB RAM 1 TB HD on Amazon in the $2,500 range. I skipped the M2 series because I don't think they had a reason to exist, and at $2,500 that is still a hard pass. No one should consider an M2 especially right now, just wait for the M4.
An 'Extreme' chip could be a dual edge sword. It is just a s likely to slow down Mac Pro revolutionary iterations as it will sell incrementally more towers. If the extreme costs double the amount of a Ultra the units run rate isn't going to go up much .
But yes, if Apple made a 'bigger than an Ultra" SoC the Studio chassis would fall out of the mix. It is just large enough for the Ultra.
And some other folks can't get by with just 10GbE NAS. That the point of the Mac Pro is that could adapt to a number of configurations outside of what Apple sells directly. Not as high the number of permutations as Intel era but higher than the Mac Studio can provision ( leaning very hard on Thunderbolt and Single Ethernet port (and single internal drive). [ The stuff Apple covered when admitted the Mac Pro 2013 limitations. ]
AI has gone through various fads over the last several decades. The 'piled higher and deeper" bubble currently on is only the latest one. Substantive problems can get solves besides building the latest 'even bigger' language model.
