These New Macs Are Coming in 2024

[cocoua]

I just think

I expect the Mac Studio to skip M3. The Studio's niche is 'pro and demanding home user,' but Apple doesn't seem to want to update it yearly. When they put out a new version, they may want that to last 2 years (hopefully not 3).

Which makes timing right now interesting. Thunderbolt 5 and Wifi 7 are out there, but not common yet. Both will probably be current for years. A Mac supposed to be top tier (aside from the extremely expensive Mac Pro) for the next 2 years ought to have those. But are they ready?

Another question is how long most Studio owners will keep their system. I hope to move to Apple Silicon in the next year or two, but as a home user not making money off my system, I want it to last many years (e.g.: 6+). A Studio with TB4 and Wifi 6e has less appeal.

The value proposition is interesting. When I spec out a Studio vs. 14" MacBook Pro, looks like with the latter it's around $1,000 (IIRC) premium to get M3Max over M2Max, 36 vs. 32-meg RAM, built-in display and portability, vs. hopefully the Studio having more internal space for air flow and maybe better chances at longer life? But the MacBook Pro offers the option for 'lesser' M3 processors, and the Studio just offers Max and Ultra.

People who want high power on a tight budget and don't value portability may want a Studio, but I wish Apple would give us a 2nd internal SSD slot easily filled DIY with a 3rd party SSD.

I just think Apple Intelligence messed the Mac release cycles.

The recent media and hence, inverstors, AI pressure over Apple forced them to tweak short term plans.

Apple is in a moment where competition vs x86 is more or less tied, Apple Silicon has shown its strength for 4 years in a row, and they can afford this kit-kat moment for the less making-money-machine they sell in order to update all the line for Apple Intelligence.

But I think a new Mac Studio should be released yearly in order to keep up with PC x86 and the upcoming ARM system

 

[tenthousandthings]

I expect the Mac Studio to skip M3. The Studio's niche is 'pro and demanding home user,' but Apple doesn't seem to want to update it yearly. When they put out a new version, they may want that to last 2 years (hopefully not 3).

Which makes timing right now interesting. Thunderbolt 5 and Wifi 7 are out there, but not common yet. Both will probably be current for years. A Mac supposed to be top tier (aside from the extremely expensive Mac Pro) for the next 2 years ought to have those. But are they ready?

Another question is how long most Studio owners will keep their system. I hope to move to Apple Silicon in the next year or two, but as a home user not making money off my system, I want it to last many years (e.g.: 6+). A Studio with TB4 and Wifi 6e has less appeal.

The value proposition is interesting. When I spec out a Studio vs. 14" MacBook Pro, looks like with the latter it's around $1,000 (IIRC) premium to get M3Max over M2Max, 36 vs. 32-meg RAM, built-in display and portability, vs. hopefully the Studio having more internal space for air flow and maybe better chances at longer life? But the MacBook Pro offers the option for 'lesser' M3 processors, and the Studio just offers Max and Ultra.

People who want high power on a tight budget and don't value portability may want a Studio, but I wish Apple would give us a 2nd internal SSD slot easily filled DIY with a 3rd party SSD.

This will not happen, but there is no particular reason why the M4 Max Mac Studio couldn't be released alongside the M4 Max MacBook Pro.

The M4 Ultra Mac Studio could be announced, with availability in "early 2025" or some such. Or they could just let the interconnect foundation at the bottom of the M4 Max speak for itself. I think if Apple were making major changes to UltraFusion, we would have heard something solid about it by now.

It may be a pipe dream, but I've come to believe that the lack of an M3 Ultra was not Apple's preference. It was just a reality of being the pathfinder, of being the first high-volume customer on most TSMC process nodes. So I believe 2x Max = Ultra in every M generation is possible. Certainly for M4 and M5. But it seems likely the Ultra will always lag behind, by necessity. Artificially delaying the Max Mac Studio every generation just to wait until the Ultra is ready is not, in my humble option, the best approach.

 

[drrich2]

Apple is in a moment where competition vs x86 is more or less tied, Apple Silicon has shown its strength for 4 years in a row, and they can afford this kit-kat moment for the less making-money-machine they sell in order to update all the line for Apple Intelligence.

When Apple went to ARM silicon, it was clear the entire Apple ecosystem did so. People buying new systems could buy Apple silicone Macs with confidence.

On the Windows PC side, Snapdragon notebooks came out recently with similar benefits, but run emulation and I suspect Intel will continue to dominate the desktop market for a long time (perhaps into perpetuity), and plans to offer a mobile processor that may be competitive with the Snapdragon systems (perhaps without requiring emulation?), so there's a bit of division and confusion. The impression I got from a little cursory review browsing regarding gate Snapdragon notebooks was 'Great, but are you sure you want to get one?'

That said, the powerful battery life advantage Apple's enjoyed in recent years may be coming to an end.

Artificially delaying the Max Mac Studio every generation just to wait until the Ultra is ready is not, in my humble option, the best approach.

Agreed. I think the Studio should always be on par with or beat any other system (other than a Mac Pro). The top versions (Max and Ultra) should always come across as 'a beast' in reviews.

 

[ric22]

When Apple went to ARM silicon, it was clear the entire Apple ecosystem did so. People buying new systems could buy Apple silicone Macs with confidence.

On the Windows PC side, Snapdragon notebooks came out recently with similar benefits, but run emulation and I suspect Intel will continue to dominate the desktop market for a long time (perhaps into perpetuity), and plans to offer a mobile processor that may be competitive with the Snapdragon systems (perhaps without requiring emulation?), so there's a bit of division and confusion. The impression I got from a little cursory review browsing regarding gate Snapdragon notebooks was 'Great, but are you sure you want to get one?'

That said, the powerful battery life advantage Apple's enjoyed in recent years may be coming to an end.

Agreed. I think the Studio should always be on par with or beat any other system (other than a Mac Pro). The top versions (Max and Ultra) should always come across as 'a beast' in reviews.

With the battery gains from the Snapdragon chips, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with a larger mobile share than Intel in only a couple of years...

 

[Chuckeee]

With the battery gains from the Snapdragon chips, I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with a larger mobile share than Intel in only a couple of years...

I think that will strongly be driven by software. X86 emulation only gets one so far, there will need to be native ARM versions of software. Windows for ARM needs significant improvements, it is still not nearly refined as Windows on X86.

 

[ric22]

I think that will strongly be driven by software. X86 emulation only gets one so far, there will need to be native ARM versions of software. Windows for ARM needs significant improvements, it is still not nearly refined as Windows on X86.

Personally, I think they'll make the effort with the software now they see the the potential of ARM chips running Windows.

 

[cocoua]

When Apple went to ARM silicon, it was clear the entire Apple ecosystem did so. People buying new systems could buy Apple silicone Macs with confidence.

On the Windows PC side, Snapdragon notebooks came out recently with similar benefits, but run emulation and I suspect Intel will continue to dominate the desktop market for a long time (perhaps into perpetuity), and plans to offer a mobile processor that may be competitive with the Snapdragon systems (perhaps without requiring emulation?), so there's a bit of division and confusion. The impression I got from a little cursory review browsing regarding gate Snapdragon notebooks was 'Great, but are you sure you want to get one?'

That said, the powerful battery life advantage Apple's enjoyed in recent years may be coming to an end.

Agreed. I think the Studio should always be on par with or beat any other system (other than a Mac Pro). The top versions (Max and Ultra) should always come across as 'a beast' in reviews.

but consumer PC market would eventually switch to ARM, Microsoft is pushing it as everyone wants to create their custom chips as Apple did for so long.

most users would benefit from ARM, not only laptops, low heat, cheaper and smaller desktop devices also would be super welcome, gamers would be x86 dependant until who knows, but ARM is coming mainstream to PC no matter what as soon as Msoft and Qualcomm get ready.

x86 is slowly dying, even servers are switching to ARM

 

[drrich2]

x86 is slowly dying, even servers are switching to ARM

Good luck convincing Intel! Which raises a question. Let's say Intel at some point agrees with you and moves to ARM chips. Will they be directly compatible with software made for the Snapdragon ARM chips? Rather like the Intel/AMD duopoly now? Speaking of which, AMD has a stake in this, too.

Statistica.com has a May 2024 article stating:

"Zooming out, 39 percent of all survey respondents said their household has at least one desktop PC, while 68 percent of participants' households were equipped with a laptop."

That's not just Windows PCs; Macs are included. I'm a bit surprised at the preponderance of notebooks. That said, desktop PCs are often true desktops (e.g.: internal drive bays, slots for graphics cards and RAM module addition), unlike most Mac desktops (internally non-upgradable).

but consumer PC market would eventually switch to ARM, Microsoft is pushing it as everyone wants to create their custom chips as Apple did for so long.

That will be a game changer, if so. At what point will x86 become niche enough to lack broad software support?

most users would benefit from ARM, not only laptops, low heat, cheaper and smaller desktop devices also would be super welcome

If the Windows ARM systems share the limitations of Apples System-On-A-Chip design, they won't have upgradable RAM and users will be stuck with integrated graphics. For people who don't play graphics-intensive games that may be fine, but it'll be interesting to see whether the Windows user base is willing to make that tradeoff (since they, unlike us, get a choice via x86 competitors).

As the Windows PC market evolves it creates 'natural selection' pressures impacting how Apple evolves the Mac. Speaking of which, with the move to Apple silicon we lost the option to run Windows under Bootcamp. Any word on whether Windows for ARM can run on a Mac natively (e.g.: no emulation/virtual machine/Parallels), or how much effort it'd take to port it?

If that worked, someone would eventually wonder how hard it'd be to port Mac OS onto a Windows ARM system to make an ARM Hackintosh. May never happen.

 

[DavidSchaub]

If the Windows ARM systems share the limitations of Apples System-On-A-Chip design, they won't have upgradable RAM and users will be stuck with integrated graphics. For people who don't play graphics-intensive games that may be fine, but it'll be interesting to see whether the Windows user base is willing to make that tradeoff (since they, unlike us, get a choice via x86 competitors).

On package RAM and iGPU-only-architecture have nothing really to do with ARM (except that ARM chip use correlates with embedded and lower powered systems historically). Nothing is stopping WoA machines from having upgradable RAM (probably not SO-DIMMs mind you) or discrete GPUs.

As the Windows PC market evolves it creates 'natural selection' pressures impacting how Apple evolves the Mac. Speaking of which, with the move to Apple silicon we lost the option to run Windows under Bootcamp. Any word on whether Windows for ARM can run on a Mac natively (e.g.: no emulation/virtual machine/Parallels), or how much effort it'd take to port it?

Apple has said that they're not going to help that work, but they're also not going to stop other OS' from running on ARM Macs. People are working on Linux for ARM Macs. Currently MS is in an exclusive ARM chip agreement with Qualcomm, and I think that is the biggest stumbling block at the moment.

If that worked, someone would eventually wonder how hard it'd be to port Mac OS onto a Windows ARM system to make an ARM Hackintosh. May never happen.

Nope, Nope, Nope

 

[Sptzz]

Some good points. Could you elaborate on the audio skipping issue, please? I rarely listen to music on my work MacBook Pro, or watch YouTube, but I've not noticed any issues when I have done.

Sure! So this is widely reported:

https://www.reddit.com/r/macbook/comments/tje6za

https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/18xi43g

It's kind of like this video, in this video it's scratching / popping, in my case the audio basically skips, and has nothing to do with volume, it's got to do with CPU load spikes.

Basically, if you're watching Youtube either background or PiP, or Spotify for example and you're doing light tasks, such as opening tabs, ctrl + tabbing between various tabs, and it triggers a full page load etc, it skips the audio for like a millisecond, it's very noticeable and very much not acceptable in this day and age and for the price this costs.

My mate with a M1 14" also has the same issue. This has never been resolved, Apple just doesn't care because 0 youtubers mention this, 0 reviewers mention this and most people don't notice it for some reason. I instantly noticed it as soon as over 18 years I've only seen this once on a garbage MSI gaming laptop that had insane DPC latency (instantly returned it, even on a clean windows install), but since then I've owned countless laptops, custom built PCs, never ever experienced this. This happens daily multiple times a day.

 

[Sptzz]

When Apple went to ARM silicon, it was clear the entire Apple ecosystem did so. People buying new systems could buy Apple silicone Macs with confidence.

On the Windows PC side, Snapdragon notebooks came out recently with similar benefits, but run emulation and I suspect Intel will continue to dominate the desktop market for a long time (perhaps into perpetuity), and plans to offer a mobile processor that may be competitive with the Snapdragon systems (perhaps without requiring emulation?), so there's a bit of division and confusion. The impression I got from a little cursory review browsing regarding gate Snapdragon notebooks was 'Great, but are you sure you want to get one?'

That said, the powerful battery life advantage Apple's enjoyed in recent years may be coming to an end.

Agreed. I think the Studio should always be on par with or beat any other system (other than a Mac Pro). The top versions (Max and Ultra) should always come across as 'a beast' in reviews.

Agreed with everything except it's AMD that's been dominating the desktop PCs for years now. Mainly now that Intel is dying, shipping oxidising CPUs etc

 

[ric22]

Sure! So this is widely reported:

https://www.reddit.com/r/macbook/comments/tje6za

https://www.reddit.com/r/macbookpro/comments/18xi43g

It's kind of like this video, in this video it's scratching / popping, in my case the audio basically skips, and has nothing to do with volume, it's got to do with CPU load spikes.

Basically, if you're watching Youtube either background or PiP, or Spotify for example and you're doing light tasks, such as opening tabs, ctrl + tabbing between various tabs, and it triggers a full page load etc, it skips the audio for like a millisecond, it's very noticeable and very much not acceptable in this day and age and for the price this costs.

My mate with a M1 14" also has the same issue. This has never been resolved, Apple just doesn't care because 0 youtubers mention this, 0 reviewers mention this and most people don't notice it for some reason. I instantly noticed it as soon as over 18 years I've only seen this once on a garbage MSI gaming laptop that had insane DPC latency (instantly returned it, even on a clean windows install), but since then I've owned countless laptops, custom built PCs, never ever experienced this. This happens daily multiple times a day.

The first gaming computer I bought for myself was in 1999, and I was shocked that music played from CD skipped when the CPU spiked. The computers I grew up with didn't do that, but they had dedicated sound cards- I bought a sound card thinking that would fix it. It didn't. I still remember having to buy a different CD drive that could be connected directly to the sound card to fix it! My next computer in 2004, AMD powered rather than Intel this time, had the same error again, and now CD drives with audio out seemed harder to find, so I had to re-use the old one. By now drive space had increased so I was able to start saving all my CDs onto it, which also avoided the problem.

I've never had a MacBook that had the skipping issue you describe with with the music, but Apple Music likes to do the brief skip between 12-14 seconds in on most songs on my HomePods (and sometimes my iPhones). I'm very sensitive to skips so I can see why it annoys you too! I wonder how prevalent it is these days? What percentage of Macs have the issue and if anyone knows the component that causes that. I'd be on here moaning if it impacted my device!!

 

[Sptzz]

What percentage of Macs have the issue and if anyone knows the component that causes that. I'd be on here moaning if it impacted my device!!

Hard to know but that's what I've been doing. There's even giant threads on Apple's own forums. Obviously, I've done a full format a couple of times and the issue persists. Granted, this is completely random, sometimes it's once or twice a day, sometimes barely, sometimes 10 times or more. It depends on what I'm doing really.

 

[Sptzz]

Hard to know but that's what I've been doing. There's even giant threads on Apple's own forums. Obviously, I've done a full format a couple of times and the issue persists. Granted, this is completely random, sometimes it's once or twice a day, sometimes barely, sometimes 10 times or more. It depends on what I'm doing really.

Here's it happening

 

[ric22]

Here's it happening

Which MBP models does it impact? What makes it happen on those rather than all Macs? Regardless, they should resolve it.

 

[teh_hunterer]

Maybe Apple will finally drop the pretense that the Mini needs a power cable because it is a desktop.

It needs a power cable because the power supply is inside the device. Simple as that.

It’s a psychological ploy to cater to old beliefs. The mini has the exact same chip as a MacBook, at the same clock speed, so can be powered the same as MacBook, with a battery/UPS.

It has the same chip as an iPad as well. The chip doesn't determine what kind of power cable is required. The device itself does. Apple already gives each device the power delivery they want it to have, regardless of the chip.

I might as well say the iPad has the same chip as an iMac so it should have a standard power cable.

Powered from USB C charger, or charged from the display over one thunderbolt cable, is far far superior 120V internal power supply, that adds more heat to the mini.

Why is it "far far superior"? Makes no sense at all. The mini is perfectly capable of dealing with the heat of having an internal power supply.

 

[DavidSchaub]

Why is it "far far superior"? Makes no sense at all. The mini is perfectly capable of dealing with the heat of having an internal power supply.

I definitely still see value in removing the internal power supply:

- Apple loves to reduce cable count;
- The mini can deal with the heat, but less heat is always good;
- Having one fewer part that can break in the computer could make easier repairs/replacements;
- USB-PD has solved this, so why not use it?

 

[teh_hunterer]

I definitely still see value in removing the internal power supply:

- Apple loves to reduce cable count;

You'd end up with a huge brick plugged in on the wall side just like a MacBook does, although in this case it would be at least as big as the 140w one used for MacBooks. Far uglier and less elegant because you're moving the power supply externally where the user can see it.

- The mini can deal with the heat, but less heat is always good;
- Having one fewer part that can break in the computer could make easier repairs/replacements;

These points are complete non-issues. The Mini PSU doesn't cause enough issues to warrant moving it, nor does it cause enough heat to warrant moving it.

- USB-PD has solved this, so why not use it?

Has solved what?

 

[DavidSchaub]

You'd end up with a huge brick plugged in on the wall side just like a MacBook does, although in this case it would be at least as big as the 140w one used for MacBooks. Far uglier and less elegant because you're moving the power supply externally where the user can see it.

Or in the best case: zero power supply because I can run the M* model off a monitor's USB-C port.

I don't tend to spend my time looking at power bars, so I don't care what's there?

Has solved what?

USB-C is the new DC power bar for all lowish-power electronics

 

[teh_hunterer]

Or in the best case: zero power supply because I can run the M* model off a monitor's USB-C port.

The Mac Mini power supply is 180w. You're not getting that from a monitor.

I don't tend to spend my time looking at power bars, so I don't care what's there?

You don't spend your time looking at the inside of the Mac Mini so why do you care if there's a power supply in there or not?

You also said Apple wants to reduce cables, but this would add a big power brick to the cable equation.

The one cable elegance of the Mac Mini is something users appreciate, over heaps of other Windows mini PCs that initially look the same size but then come with these huge horrible 250w bricks. People don't want that.

USB-C is the new DC power bar for all lowish-power electronics

What did it solve? You said it solved something. It doesn't solve the need for a power supply - you'd just be moving the power supply outside of the unit but it still exists.

 

[DavidSchaub]

The Mac Mini power supply is 180w. You're not getting that from a monitor.

But that isn't the Mac mini's internal power draw, it is to supply sufficient power on the TB ports.

This is why I think we need more of a Mac nano that doesn't need to output lots of external USB-PD power.

That and USB-PD will continue to increase in power over time.

What did it solve? You said it solved something. It doesn't solve the need for a power supply - you'd just be moving the power supply outside of the unit but it still exists.

It's fine that you don't rate these as important as I:
- reduced heat
- easier replacement
- fewer cables
- etc...

This is why I want a Mac mini and a Mac nano so we can both be happy

 

[teh_hunterer]

But that isn't the Mac mini's internal power draw, it is to supply sufficient power on the TB ports.

Which is still required for the device.

This is why I think we need more of a Mac nano that doesn't need to output lots of external USB-PD power.

A pocket sized device you could plug into a Thunderbolt/usb-c cable and expand to a desktop experience would be very cool. I don't think Apple will do it, unfortunately. Even a recent iPhone Pro would be physically capable of this, if Apple chose to.

It's fine that you don't rate these as important as I:
- reduced heat

Complete non issue.

- easier replacement

Complete non issue, power supplies are not failing enough for this to be a consideration.

- fewer cables
- etc...

How is it fewer cables? Most people would rather not have to accommodate a giant power brick in their setup. Have you ever tried to use a gaming laptop? Those power bricks are a pain, and the total opposite of elegance.

 

[Chuckeee]

The Mac Mini power supply is 180w. You're not getting that from a monitor.

Just FYI

Rev 3.1 of the USB-C power spec includes an EPR in addition to PD that add upto 48VDC capability and the ability to provide up to 240W! Although I doubt the Mac mini would use that or that any display provides it [yet].

https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/USB%20PG%20USB%20PD%203.1%20DevUpdate%20Announcement_FINAL.pdf

 

[teh_hunterer]

Just FYI

Rev 3.1 of the USB-C power spec includes an EPR in addition to PD that add upto 48VDC capability and the ability to provide up to 240W! Although I doubt the Mac mini would use that or that any display provides it [yet].

https://www.usb.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/USB%20PG%20USB%20PD%203.1%20DevUpdate%20Announcement_FINAL.pdf

Yeah and I think it'll take a very long time before monitors regularly come with that kind of power distribution, if ever. I just don't see it happening.

It's less the capability of the usb-c spec, and more the reality of how massive a power brick would need to be, and the total lack of incentive for a monitor to ever provide that amount of power.

 

[Chuckeee]

Yeah and I think it'll take a very long time before monitors regularly come with that kind of power distribution, if ever. I just don't see it happening.

It's less the capability of the usb-c spec, and more the reality of how massive a power brick would need to be, and the total lack of incentive for a monitor to ever provide that amount of power.

I agree, I don’t see monitors casually delivering those power levels. Just wanted to clarify the misconception that USB-C is limited to 100 watts. I would envision that 200+watts would most likely be provided be a dedicated USB-C power adapter/brick.