Can't wait for the EU apologists to say all the EU is doing is what the laws require. The EU, as this articles states, has nothing to contribute to any computer systems or software, except the worthless Spotify that should be brought to court for all of its illegalities. Apple is the manufacturer and software creator of its various systems, the EU contributes nothing to it. EU-based programmers write software for Apple devices but they're a minor part of the Apple ecosystem. As far as I'm concerned, Apple should stop selling to any EU country at least until the EU stops trying to dictate how Apple's ecosystem operates. 

Anti-competition... The iPhone market is still less than the android market. Does Germany even try and make and sell mobile devices? I believe they do but the market simply doesn't want them in any quantity. Germany suing Apple doesn't help Germany make their own devices, it simply makes them money off the back of other companies. The EU cartel is the same thing. If you can't make something people want you sue the company that people like. This isn't an antitrust lawsuit, it's simply a money grab because Germany no longer makes products people want to buy and use. --Look at what's happening with its automobile market, it's tanking. Will Germany sue other car companies because they no longer can keep up with technology and the desires of consumers? 

discountopinion said:

M3Ultra instead of M4Ultra is likely due to Apple being hard at work during 2024 to make that happen and would have had to start over if skipping directly to M4Ultra.

Hopefully any lessons learned with M3Ultra can help accelerate M4Ultra.

The M4Max doesn't have the same interface to put two together to get an Ultra like the M3Max has. That's the reason there isn't going to be an M4 Ultra. The M5 hopefully will have a different design that would allow more cores, etc., while also being able to be connected like the Ultra. If that isn't the plan then Apple designers are hard at work trying to figure out a different way to combine SoCs into some kind of package that would be usable in the Studio and Mac Pro. Maybe something like plug-in M5Max (new name?) on a PCIe 7 (512 GB/s) backplane. Using this in a Mac might mean storage and possibly memory slots. I feel this would/might be the best way to enhance the computational capabilities of a Mac instead of trying to build a huge SoC, which will be expensive because of production errors. I could see it producing a lot of binned SoCs because of all of its components. Supercomputers use a ton of individual computers instead of creating huge CPUs. Maybe it's time for Apple to Think Differently, again.

verne arase said:

rob53 said:

I agree but there's no M4 Pro iMac of any size and I doubt Apple will make one. Apple seems to be pushing laptops and iPads, not desktops, so the only way we're going to get a 27" or more 5K iMac is if we buy a Mac mini M4 Pro or the Mac Studio combining it with as good of a display as we can find. 

We're looking at $4600 for a fully blown Mac mini M4 Pro. 14/20/16, 64GB/8TB, +$100 for 10G ethernet if desired.

Same specs on the Mac Studio would cost $5099, 14/40/16, 64GB/8TB. Had to go with better SoC to get 64GB memory.
--So these configurations cost about the same but the Studio has a lot more headroom for better specs. Are the M4 Pro mini specs enough for most of you/us? They totally destroy anything Apple made with the Intel chip, including my fully blown 2019 iMac.

The 2020 iMac 5K with core-i9 (10c, 20t) and AMD Radeon 5700/XT with 16 GB VRAM and 10g ethernet - my currently daily driver - was the most powerful intel machine Apple made; heck, I bought it after the M1 was announced to tide me over while Apple smoothed over the Apple Silicon transition.

The Mac Studio with the unbinned M4 Max has over three times the CPU power and over six times the graphics power (and supports ray tracing and Apple Intelligence); combine that with a Studio Display and you have a capable replacement for the 2020 iMac 5K with some granularity - you can replace the Mac Studio without having to rebuy the display - though I can't really see my workload overpowering the M4 Max, except maybe for stuff like Topaz Video AI which will probably always eat as much resources as available.

My 2019 iMac is a 3.6GHz, 8-core i9-9900K, 72GB DDR4 RAM (I added OWC RAM), 2TB SSD, Radeon Pro Vega 48-8c. I don't believe they had 10G ethernet at that time. 
Geekbench 6 scores: CPU 1564/7339, Compute (Metal) 79206. Apple would give me around $350 trade-in credit for a Mac that cost me in the mid $5Ks. 
Compare this to the original M1 iMac's scores: CPU 2347/8369, Compute (Metal) 32395. I'd need at least an M2 Pro Mac mini to beat the compute score. The M4 Pro mini has a compute score of 110108, which costs almost nothing compared to what I paid.

gwmac said:

9secondkox2 said:

gwmac said:

This is what I and a lot of other 27 inch iMac owners have been waiting on.  My only remaining decision is what monitor to buy. I want to get at least a 32 inch so was considering the

Dell UltraSharp 32 4K Thunderbolt Hub Monitor - U3225QE

Does this seem like a good monitor to pair with my new studio? I get a $200 Dell credit every 6 months with my Amex Business Platinum card so that will knock it down to $749. 

Nah. We've been waiting on a new 32" iMac.

That would be my preference but the chances of that are slim to none at this point. I would have been happy with a M4 iMac 27" but that also doesn't seem to be in the cards. My advice is just get a new studio like the rest of us. 

I agree but there's no M4 Pro iMac of any size and I doubt Apple will make one. Apple seems to be pushing laptops and iPads, not desktops, so the only way we're going to get a 27" or more 5K iMac is if we buy a Mac mini M4 Pro or the Mac Studio combining it with as good of a display as we can find. 

We're looking at $4600 for a fully blown Mac mini M4 Pro. 14/20/16, 64GB/8TB, +$100 for 10G ethernet if desired.