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.
What to Expect From Apple's 'Exciting Week of Announcements'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'm stepping up from a 2.4 GHz 8-Core Intel Core i9 MBP.
ANYTHING is a thrilling improvement.
Imma be ecstatic if I can finagle a M4 Max model.
I think a potential surprise is Apple unveiling the next-generation Apple TV box. It'll be slightly bigger to accommodate a larger SoC and more local storage options, since it may be aimed as much as gaming machine as a streaming box. Whether it will use the A18 or a "binned" A17 Pro SoC is still unknown.
People are acting like Macs with 8 gigs of RAM are gonna suddenly shrivel and die. Apple Intelligence needs about 4 gigs of RAM to run. That still leaves room for the OS and some open apps. Now does that mean some stuff might get offloaded to the SSD temporarily? Sure. But all Apple Silicon Macs have fast SSDs so that really shouldn’t be an issue.
We’ll see, I’ve got an 8 gigs M2 Air, an M1 Max Studio, and an M4 iPad Pro. I fully plan on testing out various intelligence features on all of them and I expect as with most things the Air will probably perform nearly as fast as the Studio if I don’t have tons of apps open.
8 gigs of RAM on Apple Silicon has been perfectly fine for the last several years for every day use. If ran creative/pro apps on the Air I’d have beefed it out but as of right now the money I saved seems to have been well saved as it never feels notably slower than my Mac Studio for tasks like web browsing, email, word processing etc.
We’ll see, I’ve got an 8 gigs M2 Air, an M1 Max Studio, and an M4 iPad Pro. I fully plan on testing out various intelligence features on all of them and I expect as with most things the Air will probably perform nearly as fast as the Studio if I don’t have tons of apps open.
8 gigs of RAM on Apple Silicon has been perfectly fine for the last several years for every day use. If ran creative/pro apps on the Air I’d have beefed it out but as of right now the money I saved seems to have been well saved as it never feels notably slower than my Mac Studio for tasks like web browsing, email, word processing etc.
I don't think they normally do, but if the base spec is increased, it may make more sense for older refurbs to be offered cheaper.
On the other hand, that's not going to happen. A base M1 iMac is just CAD$140 cheaper than a base M3 iMac. I'm not sure who would consider that a worthwhile savings for a machine that's significantly slower and will lose support several years earlier. I think Apple just applies a standard discount without giving it much thought.
It's not just the GPU power you would lose. Unless you're sure the software you want to run on that GPU actually supports the Mac, it may be a moot point. Hope you're not talking about games.
The gripe will be from folks like you, who will blame the "gripers" for any price increase. "Look what you made Apple do! Are you happy now?"
Baffled as to how this is "folks like me", but go on, I'm curious how else I'll behave.
Minecraft runs on basically anything, so my gaming is covered. Davinci Resolve is also on Mac. Affinity Photo too. I'll be fine on the software side of things.
Probably yes, Apple will have a Mini with an M4 Pro chip. Buyers' challenge who don't want to lose too much GPU power gets to also evaluating how much RAM they will need. Available RAM has always been an essential component of computing, and 2025 computing will be no different.
We only wish that "there's always Mac Studio." I bought an MBP when I wanted a Studio but M2 Studios were delayed. Then Apple totally skipped Studios with M3, and it looks like M4 Studios will again be delayed like M2 were.
Sure at some point 16 GB will be base RAM, but be very aware that RAM needs are always increasing. Always, since the first Mac. So at some future point, probably well within the life cycle of a new box, 16 GB will be limiting similar to the way 8 GB is today.
Why does anyone want redesign of the Mac Mini? The Mini choices seem functionally elegant already, with bump up to Studio [when/if available] there for those who need more. Please advise.
If you cannot finance the M4 a less expensive M2 also was a thrilling improvement for me.
I'm lucky enough to not have urgent need of a new desktop. Hopefully we aren't waiting too long for a Studio though - looks like a great little machine!
I'm only excited to see a redesign because everything coming out of Apple of late has been the same old thing with just a new paint job. And I don't mean just change for change sake. Obviously there would have to be objectively better design in terms of performance and functionality. Looks are subjective but a smaller footprint could be cool.
I don't think of the M4 Studio as delayed. We get the base chip, the Pro/Max, then the Ultra. The base chip came early in the iPads. We're expecting the Pro and Max within a week. The Studio needs to wait for the Ultra to be available, which should be next summer. I'm not sure why Apple can't release just Studio Max, then Studio Ultra later, but they don't do that.
If the majority of Studios sold are Ultras, then they likely see no reason to change. If the majority are Maxes, it would be nice if they could stagger the releases. They likely want both available in the hope that some that are on the fence between the two options will opt for the higher-end option, whereas if they were staggered, there's a chance they would just buy the Max since it was available.
If the majority of Studios sold are Ultras, then they likely see no reason to change. If the majority are Maxes, it would be nice if they could stagger the releases. They likely want both available in the hope that some that are on the fence between the two options will opt for the higher-end option, whereas if they were staggered, there's a chance they would just buy the Max since it was available.
I think you are correct about it not being a delay. Ultra takes longer to develop, that’s not a delay, it’s more like a reality. The packaging is an order-of-magnitude more complex, there are hundreds if not thousands of additional steps. But @bgillander is probably also correct — it would be catastrophic for the Studio if they staggered the releases and then the Ultra were to be delayed or to fail.
So marketing is between a rock and a hard place. Apple doesn’t announce products until they are finished, if not ready to ship. The Max is ready to ship before the Ultra is finished.
Last edited:
My guess is that with Apple (unlike with Osborne Computer, where lack of proper cash flow was a primary cause of its failure rather than simply the Osborne Effect) the issue of chip yields is of overriding relevance. And that is something that we remain fully ignorant about. Apple may also consider the product line relationship between Studios and Mac Pros to be relevant, which may tie in to chip yields, yada yada.
The only thing clear about Apple's Mac high end is that it is hella complex and that no one talking seems to have any real clue as to what the plans are. One has to give Apple very high marks for its Mac product info security. My guess is that what "leaks" we do hear have been Apple-planned, and that real info leakage is about zero.
Last edited:
Very cool if you can wait, like I can now that the M2 MBP easily fills my desktop needs (just not in ideal desktop form factor). IMO the Mac desktop product line evolution Mini-Studio-Ultra-Mac Pro finally should become more apparent as M4 devices start to fall into place. I really look forward to seeing the entire modern lineup.
Edit: Note that the Studio Ultra could even cease to exist, with all flavors stronger than M4 Max being fulfilled by some future lowest end of the Mac Pro. Or we could have Studio, Studio Ultra, Studio Ultra Max, whatever. Similarly the M4 Minis could expand in a lower-end direction and/or expand in a higher end direction to push Studios up higher. We just do not know, but it will be entertaining to observe the evolution.
Last edited:
To me the existing Mac Mini being such an inherently good design means that we should be careful about wishing for things like "a smaller footprint could be cool," because smaller means less capable heat removal and also suggests Apple functionally expanding the Mac Mini lineup to better serve the lowest end of Macs rather than making it stronger; i.e. keeping the Mini line constrained to least competence, RAM in particular. Currently building a 32 GB RAM Mac Mini pushes one to where a Studio becomes a better choice for most.
And anyone with any sense knows that Mac RAM demands will continually increase like they have since 1984. For many of us 32 GB RAM has been an inflection point of sorts, and Apple knows that very well. When M2 Studios were late the reason I bought a MBP instead of a Mini was the Mini's 32 GB RAM limitation. Many folks dealing with images/graphics are in a similar place.
My guess is Apple will address the lower end by making lowest end Minis stronger with M4 but without raising entry level pricing by using the lamest/cheapest M4 chips. If I was the Mini product manager I would be trying to functionally lower the price of the cheapest Mini with each new generation. Perhaps the smaller footprint you suggest might help do that.
I think the lack of an actual event makes sense.
If the rumours are true that M4 will finally be the time we get base RAM and storage spec bumps, Apple will want to play this down as a "minor" update - they know they have been under-speccing for several years now, so won't want to make too much of it.
Actually, the M-series chip performance is perfectly fine anyway, and more RAM and storage is what we really need, so it could be the most exciting/meaningful update since the start of the M-series era if true.
If the rumours are true that M4 will finally be the time we get base RAM and storage spec bumps, Apple will want to play this down as a "minor" update - they know they have been under-speccing for several years now, so won't want to make too much of it.
Actually, the M-series chip performance is perfectly fine anyway, and more RAM and storage is what we really need, so it could be the most exciting/meaningful update since the start of the M-series era if true.