mfryd

An easier implementation would be to put the M4 iPad on Apple's Magic Keyboard.  That gets you a keyboard and trackpad.   That's basically the same hardware as a MacBook Air, but with the addition of the touchscreen.

The trick is to jailbreak the iPad, or to get Apple to allow us to run Mac OSX on it.   OS-X already supports running iPad apps.  A lot of people would really love the option of running OS-X on a suitably configured iPad.

opinion said:

Apple makes an OS adapted to each hardware platform, it’s brilliant. To mash it together would be a disaster.

It's the other way around.  Apple markets their hardware platforms based on the OS they allow it to run.

Rogue01 said:

"The A-series have fewer CPU and GPU cores, and are not really built for the same heavy workload as a Mac."

"That would immediately mean that the low-cost Mac would not be suitable for power users, which then implies it would be much more of a casual or consumer device."

Apple can re-work the A18 Pro.  They have done it before, just like they have binned M chips with less cores.  And they lowered the performance of the M chip in the iPad Air.  So they could easily change the cores in the A18 Pro and still call it an A18 Pro.  The performance of the A18 Pro is already between the M2 and M3.  If Apple wanted to make a lower cost Mac, just use an M1 or M2 and lower the cost.  When Apple introduced the 15" Air, they called it 'new', but it had the year and a half old M2 chip.   The Mac mini dev kit had an A12Z, and the M chip is based off the A chip.  All this would do is confuse consumers.

Funny second quote.  The iPad is a casual or consumer device with the limitations of iPadOS, yet Apple puts overpowered M chips in it to jack up the price.  iPads should be using A chips and Macs should stick with M chips.  That is what the M is for. That is what they said at 2020 WWDC, we developed a desktop chip for Macs, the M1.

If this is true, maybe an A-based Mac will be as awful as that 12" MacBook that was painfully slow, and slower than an iPad.

The names of chips is mostly a marketing issue.  There is no Apple could use an A18 Pro and simply name it "M4 lite" when it's in a Mac.   The naming of the chips is marketing, not technology.

Fewer cores does not necessarily rule out a chip for use in a low end Mac.  In fact, fewer cores helps differentiate the low end make from more expensive models.

CheeseFreeze said:

I don’t find this very plausible. 

They could perhaps create a better “iPad + keyboard” combo that offers an attractive package.  But Apple already sells three kinds of laptops and three kinds of iPads. Why confuse the consumer with another one that overlaps both classes?

The difference is that it would be a Mac.  At this point the defining attribute that differentiates a Mac from an iPad is that the Mac runs Mac OSX.

Mac OSX allows a greater flexibility in available software.  With additional software, OSX can even run Windows in a virtual machine.

There is a large, untapped, market for a low cost, entry level Mac.   As others have mentioned, this includes elementary students and many senior citizens.   There's a lot of people who are not power users.  They want to surf the web, send/receive email, watch videos, listen to music, look at their photos, and not much else.

Many families would like to have everyone in the house on the same platform.  That makes things easier.  Macs are known for security and ease of use, which appeals to parents and seniors.  Built-in parental controls are also a plus.

With cloud storage, you don't even need a lot of onboard storage.  Today's school kids use Google Drive, or similar for their schoolwork.

An A series processor is likely more than enough for this market.  If Apple can keep the price low enough, they will have a real winner on their hands.

Of course, I am jaded.  My first Mac had a full 512K of RAM and I added a 10MB hard drive.  I am amused when I hear claims that 8GB isn't enough for a basic, bare bones computer.