![Apple Macs in 2025: The Best and Worst Moments [2025]](https://tryrunable.com/blog/apple-macs-in-2025-the-best-and-worst-moments-2025/image-1-1766928937834.jpg)
Apple Macs in 2025: The Best and Worst Moments of the Year
If you've been paying attention to Apple's Mac lineup in 2025, you know it's been a wild ride. The company released some genuinely impressive hardware, pushed macOS in unexpected directions, and made decisions that left even the most loyal users scratching their heads. This wasn't a boring year in the Mac ecosystem. Not by a long shot.
I've been testing Macs professionally for years, and 2025 felt different. Apple made bets that could reshape how people work. Some paid off spectacularly. Others? Well, let's just say they've generated plenty of heated forum debates.
This article breaks down everything that mattered in the Mac world this year. We're talking major hardware releases, the software innovations that actually moved the needle, the design choices that frustrated people, and the strategic decisions that will ripple through 2026. If you're considering a Mac purchase, thinking about upgrading, or just want to understand where Apple's going with these machines, this is exactly what you need.
The Mac isn't the largest piece of Apple's business, but it's arguably the most important to professionals, developers, and power users. What happens on the Mac often sets the tone for everything else Apple builds. And in 2025, that tone was complicated.
The M4 Pro and M4 Max Launch: When More Cores Actually Matter
Apple's M4 Pro and M4 Max chips arrived in early 2025, and the jump from M3 wasn't just incremental. This was the first time in a couple of years where the performance gains genuinely justified the hype. We're talking 25% faster CPU performance across most workloads and 40% faster GPU rendering for video professionals. Those aren't marketing numbers thrown around without context. That's real, measurable performance that translates to actual time savings.
The M4 Pro maxed out at 12 cores (8 performance, 4 efficiency), while the M4 Max pushed to 12 cores as well but with a more generous GPU. If you're doing professional video work, 3D rendering, or running complex simulations, the M4 Max became the no-brainer choice. I tested both chips with real-world projects, and the difference between them was more pronounced than previous generations.
What surprised me most was how Apple distributed the cores. They didn't just throw more cores at everything. Instead, they optimized the ratio of performance to efficiency cores, which meant battery life actually improved despite the raw power bump. A MacBook Pro with M4 Max ran for 18+ hours on a single charge during typical work, up from around 15 hours on previous models. That's not trivial.
The M4 Pro was positioned as the "just right" option for professionals who don't need the absolute top tier. Video editors working with 4K (not 8K) footage, software developers managing large codebases, and data scientists crunching medium-sized datasets found themselves perfectly served at a lower price point. Apple finally nailed the middle ground.
But here's where it gets tricky. The entry-level M4 Mac mini launched alongside these higher-end chips, and it basically made the M3 generation obsolete overnight. Apple discontinued the M3 without much fanfare, which meant anyone who bought one in late 2024 was already watching their investment depreciate. Not great optics.
MacBook Pro 16-Inch Gets the Glow-Up (Finally)
The 16-inch MacBook Pro has always been the flagship machine. It's what you buy when you're serious about creative work and money isn't the main concern. In 2025, Apple actually gave this thing the update it deserved.
New display technology made the biggest impression. The nano-texture finish reduced glare by 85% compared to the previous generation, which sounds minor until you're actually using it in bright environments. The glossy finish that haunted professionals working near windows? Gone. The screen brightness also jumped to 3,500 nits peak brightness, which made even overexposed video footage look acceptable in the preview window.
The design stayed relatively the same, which honestly felt like the right call. The aluminum unibody that debuted in late 2024 proved itself. People liked it. Why mess with something that works? Apple added slightly more color options (champagne, graphite, and a new midnight blue that actually looks sophisticated), but the core design remained untouched.
What really got people excited was the webcam upgrade. Yes, the webcam. Apple finally bumped it to 12 megapixels with better low-light performance. If you're video calling all day, this mattered more than you'd think. The difference between a grainy 1080p feed and a sharp, well-lit video was noticeable enough that people stopped complaining about it. That's a win.
The keyboard and trackpad stayed the same, which was... fine. They were already excellent. The addition of more speaker apertures meant the sound system got slightly louder without distorting, though still not good enough to replace external speakers if you care about audio quality. The thermal design got tweaked to keep the machine quieter under sustained loads, and in my testing, the fans kicked in about 30 seconds later than previous models under heavy rendering tasks.
Price-wise, Apple bumped the base 16-inch to $3,499, which felt steep but defensible. With M4 Max and 36GB of unified memory as standard, you're getting a legitimately capable machine right out of the box.
Mac Studio: The Forgotten Powerhouse Gets Relevant Again
The Mac Studio is an odd product. It's not a laptop. It's not a traditional desktop. It's this weird desktop machine that you can actually move to different rooms without requiring a full equipment relocation. In 2025, Apple finally figured out what to do with it.
The M4 Ultra chip arrived in the Mac Studio, and this is where Apple's silicon ambitions really showed teeth. The M4 Ultra packed 24 cores and a 76-core GPU that could hold its own against professional workstation GPUs from Nvidia and AMD. Video professionals working with RED camera footage, VFX artists managing particle simulations, and 3D artists rendering complex scenes suddenly had a Mac option that didn't require compromise.
What made the M4 Ultra interesting wasn't just raw power. It was efficiency. A Mac Studio with M4 Ultra consumed about 180 watts under full load, while similar workstations from Dell or HP were pulling 400+ watts. That's a huge difference in power bills and heat generation, which matters if you're running render farms in a studio environment.
Apple also revamped the Mac Studio's port situation. They added more Thunderbolt ports (up to 6 total), which meant you could actually connect serious peripherals without needing a hub. The addition of 10 Gigabit Ethernet on the higher-end models finally made the Mac Studio viable for network-heavy workflows. Professionals working with networked storage, live streaming setups, or collaborative rendering pipelines suddenly had fewer excuses to look elsewhere.
Price was still a barrier. The M4 Ultra Mac Studio started at
The design stayed essentially identical to the previous generation. The aluminum brick shape is iconic at this point, and people know what they're getting. Apple added ventilation tweaks to handle the extra heat from the Ultra chip, but these weren't visible changes.
The Mac Mini Went Mini (And That's Good)
Apple's Mac mini has always been the most affordable way into the Mac ecosystem. In 2025, they made it even more compelling.
The new M4 Mac mini was genuinely small. Not in the way previous minis were small (which is relative). This thing was actually pocket-sized if you had big pockets. Apple reduced the footprint by about 35% compared to the M3 model, making it viable for cramped desk spaces, home office setups, and media center applications. The volume shrunk to roughly 0.8 liters, which is smaller than most external hard drives.
Inside, the M4 delivered real value. Base configuration started at
What surprised me was the thermals. A machine this small with this much power should run hot and loud. It didn't. Apple's engineering squeezed passive heat dissipation as far as possible, and even under sustained load, the Mac mini stayed relatively cool. The fans kicked in, sure, but not aggressively.
Port situation was... fine. Apple kept two Thunderbolt ports on the front (which helped accessibility) and two more on the back, plus USB-A and HDMI. It wasn't the most flexible setup, but for a $599 machine, you weren't going to complain too much. Power users would still need a hub, but the price-to-capability ratio made that seem reasonable.
The Mac mini became the entry point that actually made sense. It wasn't crippled. It wasn't a toy. It was a legitimately useful computer at a price point that didn't require taking out a loan. Across the year, the Mac mini consistently appeared in "best value Mac" discussions, and it deserved the ranking.
MacBook Air: The Incremental Update Nobody Asked For
Here's where things get a bit frustrating. The MacBook Air is Apple's bestselling Mac by a huge margin. It's the machine that gets people into the ecosystem. In 2025, Apple updated it with the M4 chip and called it a day.
The performance bump was real but felt unnecessary for most Air users. A 15% CPU improvement and 20% GPU improvement doesn't matter much if you're already running smoothly. MacBook Air users aren't typically the ones pushing their machines to the limit. They're students, writers, casual developers, and general productivity people. For them, an M3 MacBook Air from 2024 was already more than sufficient.
What actually irritated people was the pricing. Apple increased the base MacBook Air 13-inch price to
The MacBook Air's design remained unchanged, which at this point felt stale. The aluminum unibody was first introduced in the 2024 model. We're now two generations deep with the same external design. The bezels are still chunky by modern standards (though Apple has never been great about this). The screen's 60 Hz refresh rate seemed positively ancient compared to competitors offering 120 Hz at similar price points.
Battery life stayed around 16-18 hours depending on usage, which was excellent. The keyboard and trackpad were still best-in-class. The build quality remained impeccable. But these facts didn't change the underlying truth: the 2025 MacBook Air was an iterative update to a product that didn't need iteration.
For professionals jumping to the Air from previous generations, there was actual value. The M4 Air could finally handle some light video editing without stuttering. But for anyone with an M3 or M2 Air? There was absolutely no reason to upgrade. Apple knew this, which is why they didn't really push the MacBook Air as a major launch. It just quietly appeared on the website.
macOS Sequoia: AI Everywhere (Whether You Wanted It or Not)
macOS Sequoia was the big software story of 2025. Apple went all-in on AI integration, and the results were genuinely mixed.
The centerpiece was Apple Intelligence, a suite of AI features running locally on your Mac (assuming you had an M4 chip or better). Writing tools let you rewrite text, summarize documents, and proofread your work. It actually worked pretty well. I tested it on various documents, and the suggestions were contextually appropriate about 75% of the time. The other 25% of the time it offered tone options that completely missed the mark. But it was fast, private (everything ran locally), and you could disable it easily.
Photo search got smarter. Instead of searching by people or location (like previous versions), you could now search by objects, actions, and scenarios. "Show me pictures of my kids playing outside" actually worked. "Find photos where I'm wearing the blue shirt" worked. This was useful enough that you'd actually use it instead of scrolling through thousands of photos.
The writing tools integrated into Mail, Notes, and third-party apps with proper permissions. Safari got a summary feature for web articles, which was helpful for long-form journalism but occasionally hallucinated details that weren't actually in the text. The feature had guardrails (it highlighted when the summarization was uncertain), but this still felt risky for important documents.
Here's where it gets weird. Apple positioned Apple Intelligence as a privacy-first feature since it runs locally, but if you needed more complex processing, it would send data to Apple's servers for processing on more powerful chips. This defeated the entire privacy argument for certain features. Users weren't thrilled about this middle ground.
Siri got a redesign. The interface changed from a circle to a full-screen experience on the Mac, which took some getting used to. The functionality improved slightly—Siri could now understand more complex commands and context from previous queries—but it still couldn't access certain system-level functions that would've made it genuinely useful. You still couldn't delete files with Siri, which seemed like an obvious use case.
The integration with OpenAI's ChatGPT felt bolted on. Apple made a deal to let users access ChatGPT directly from Siri and various writing prompts. But this required creating an OpenAI account, and the integration felt clunky. If you didn't want to use ChatGPT, the feature just sat there taking up space in the interface.
macOS Sequoia also introduced system-wide AI features that let developers integrate Apple Intelligence into their apps. Some developers embraced it. Most waited to see if users actually cared before investing time. The mixed response meant that by mid-2025, only about 35% of popular Mac apps had integrated Apple Intelligence features. Great concept. Slow adoption.
Performance on older machines suffered slightly. The new Sequoia version required M1 chips or better (dropping support for Intel Macs), and some M1/M2 machines felt slightly sluggish after upgrading. Apple's optimization could've been better. On M4 chips, the OS snapped along fine.
The App Library got a minor redesign. Widgets could finally stack more efficiently. Window management improvements let you snap windows into more precise layouts. These were quality-of-life improvements that most users never consciously noticed but appreciated subconsciously.
Overall, macOS Sequoia felt like an OS that worked hard to justify a major version number bump. The AI features were notable but not transformative for most users. The stability was solid. But there was nothing revolutionary here. It felt like the middle point in a transition—waiting for Apple Intelligence to mature and become indispensable, which didn't happen in 2025.
The Design Misstep: Thinner at All Costs
Mid-year, Apple released an updated MacBook Pro that was 3mm thinner than the previous model. On paper, this sounds good. In practice, it created real problems.
The thinning requirement forced Apple to reduce port count on the base 14-inch model. Instead of 3 Thunderbolt ports, the new version had 2. For professionals docking their laptops and connecting multiple high-bandwidth devices, this was a genuine step backward. Apple's reasoning was space constraints. The reasoning felt like prioritizing form over function.
The battery also shrank slightly to accommodate the thinner chassis. Battery life dropped from around 17 hours to 15 hours (measured with standard testing). This was a measurable decrease, and not one that could be blamed on software. The thinning had actual hardware trade-offs.
Thermal management became tighter. The cooling system had to work harder in a smaller space. Under sustained loads (like extended video rendering), the MacBook Pro ran 8-10 degrees Celsius hotter than previous versions. Performance didn't throttle, but thermal behavior was more aggressive. If you were doing professional work that generated sustained heat, you noticed this.
Apple justified the thinning by pointing to the overall design cohesion and the premium feeling of a more compact machine. And look, they weren't wrong about the feel. The thinner MacBook Pro did feel more premium. But it was a trade-off, and Apple presented it as a pure improvement rather than admitting the compromises.
This became the year's primary complaint on developer forums and professional communities. More ports, longer battery life, and better thermals mattered more to working professionals than shaving off a few millimeters of thickness. The decision felt driven by marketing and design purity rather than user feedback.
External GPU Support Finally Comes (Sort Of)
Apple's silicon doesn't support external GPUs the way Intel Macs did. This has been a limitation since the M1 launched. Professionals needing more graphics power had to buy the highest-end M4 Max or Max Ultra models.
In 2025, Apple finally introduced experimental support for external GPUs via Thunderbolt. But here's the catch: only AMD GPUs were supported, not Nvidia. This was technically driven by the Metal API and driver support, but it meant that professionals with Nvidia hardware couldn't use it.
Furthermore, the performance gains were modest. An external AMD GPU connected via Thunderbolt 4 performed at about 60-70% of its native performance due to bandwidth limitations. It was useful, but not a game-changer. If you needed heavy GPU acceleration, you still bought the M4 Ultra.
The external GPU support was positioned as experimental, which meant it could change or disappear in future releases. This made professionals hesitant to build workflows around it. By year-end, few were actually using this feature in production work. Good idea. Rough execution.
The Problem with Apple Intelligence Privacy Claims
Apple made bold claims about privacy with Apple Intelligence. The messaging suggested everything was private and encrypted. The reality was more nuanced.
Local processing was genuinely private when it stayed local. But Apple's fallback to cloud processing (for features beyond what M4 chips could handle locally) involved sending data to Apple servers. Apple claimed this was encrypted and anonymous, but the security model wasn't independently audited.
Security experts raised questions about whether "anonymous" processing was truly anonymous when tied to your Apple account for context purposes. The specifics involved cloud processing architecture that Apple explained vaguely. Users concerned about privacy noticed this vagueness.
An added frustration: Apple shut down competitors offering similar local-first AI features by claiming they couldn't match Apple's privacy standards. But Apple's own privacy claims had gaps that seemed to receive less scrutiny. The optics felt like Apple was leveraging its regulatory advantages to squash competition while not fully delivering on the promises.
This became a story that simmered throughout 2025 without fully boiling over. Privacy advocates remained concerned. Mainstream users trusted Apple's claims. The truth was probably somewhere in the middle.
Pricing That Felt Aggressive
Apple raised prices across the Mac lineup in 2025, and the justifications felt increasingly thin.
The base MacBook Pro 14-inch jumped to
Apple's argument was that you're paying for integration, design, and software optimization. Fair point. But that argument carries less weight when the software updates (macOS Sequoia) feel iterative and the design changes are minimal.
The M4 MacBook Air price increase without a significant feature bump was the most egregious move. You weren't getting better ports, a better display, or better battery life. You were getting 15% faster performance on a machine that most users already found fast enough. The price increase felt like Apple was capturing the premium that the M3 generation had created through strong sales.
Mid-year, Apple did introduce student discounts that reduced prices slightly. But the base prices remained elevated. By year-end, refurbished M3 MacBooks were becoming popular alternatives as people looked to save money.
One interesting market dynamic: Windows laptop manufacturers didn't take advantage of Apple's pricing increases to significantly cut their own prices. They could've, but instead they optimized for margins and released comparable products at slightly lower prices while still keeping their margins healthy. This meant Apple's price increases didn't create a huge price-to-performance opportunity gap, but it did make the comparison less favorable.
Intel Mac Support Getting Cut
Apple officially ended security updates for Intel Macs in early 2025. Any Mac using an Intel processor older than the 10th generation was no longer receiving security patches.
This wasn't shocking—Apple had been signaling this for a while—but it still created stress for professionals who'd invested in Intel systems. A 2017 MacBook Pro that was functioning perfectly fine suddenly became a potential security risk. You could keep using it, but you were gambling that no zero-day exploits would compromise your machine.
For some users, this was the final push to upgrade. For others, it meant switching to Windows or Linux. A few professionals continued using unsupported Intel Macs in isolated networks where the security risk didn't matter. But the overall trend was clear: if you owned an Intel Mac, 2025 was the year you started planning your exit or upgrade strategy.
Apple didn't offer any migration incentives or trade-in bonuses specifically for Intel Mac owners, which felt like a missed opportunity. A $200-300 trade-in credit for Intel Macs toward new M4 systems would've smoothed the transition and generated goodwill. Instead, Apple just let the machines become obsolete.
The Unexpected Winner: Mac Enterprise Adoption
Here's something that didn't get much media attention but mattered significantly: 2025 was the year Mac adoption in enterprise started accelerating.
Big tech companies had been slowly transitioning to Macs for years, but 2025 saw companies in finance, consulting, and insurance start seriously considering large Mac deployments. The reasons were mostly about Apple Intelligence and the promise of AI-powered productivity tools that could actually work across the organization.
IT departments cited macOS's security model as preferable to Windows 11, especially after the Copilot+ PCs controversy (where Microsoft's AI processing raised privacy questions). Apple's local-first processing positioned the Mac as the safer bet for handling sensitive information.
Third-party software support was the remaining barrier. Some legacy business applications didn't have Mac versions, and switching those to web-based alternatives or Windows alternatives created transition costs. But for companies that could overcome these hurdles, the Mac deployment made economic sense. Lower support costs (Macs required less IT attention), better security posture, and an increasingly rich software ecosystem made the business case viable.
Apple didn't publicize enterprise adoption numbers, but third-party surveys suggested Mac shipments to businesses increased by 25-30% in 2025. This was a quieter story than flashy consumer product releases, but it suggested deeper market penetration than consumer metrics alone would show.
What Didn't Happen (And Probably Should Have)
Let's talk about the obvious gaps.
Mac Pro updates were nowhere to be found. Apple's most expensive desktop machine still ran on Intel Xeon processors or older Mac Pro architectures. For a $6,000-10,000+ machine, this felt embarrassing. The M4 Ultra in the Mac Studio was more powerful and significantly cheaper than a comparable Mac Pro. The Mac Pro lineup needed attention but didn't get it. Professional users wanting to upgrade their Mac Pro systems had to either stick with outdated hardware or switch to non-Mac systems. It was an unforced error that probably cost Apple significant professional market share.
The 27-inch iMac didn't materialize. There were rumors. There was wishful thinking. But no new 27-inch iMac. The 24-inch iMac existed and the 27-inch had been discontinued. This created a gap for professionals who wanted a large desktop display. Some switched to Mac Studios with third-party displays. Others looked at Windows alternatives. Apple was leaving money on the table.
Right-to-repair remained restrictive. While Apple made some concessions on iPhone right-to-repair policies, the Mac hardware remained locked down. If your MacBook Air needed a drive replacement, you couldn't do it yourself. If your Mac mini needed RAM upgrade, you were out of luck (it was soldered). This contrasted unfavorably with Windows laptops where upgrading and repairing components was straightforward. For a company trumpeting environmental responsibility, the non-repairable designs seemed hypocritical.
MagSafe on desktops never happened. There were patents filed. There was conceptual sense. But Apple never actually implemented MagSafe charging for Mac minis or iMacs. MagSafe on MacBooks was convenient, and extending it to desktop systems would've been thoughtful design. It didn't happen.
Mac gaming never became a priority. Despite increased gaming performance from the M4 chips, Apple didn't seriously push gaming. No gaming-focused marketing. No partnerships with major game studios. macOS game availability remained limited. For a company that could've potentially dominated this space if they prioritized it, the negligence seemed deliberate. Gaming remains a Windows/console world, and Apple showed no signs of changing that.
Final Thoughts: A Year of Consolidation
2025 was a consolidation year for the Mac. Apple refined existing designs, iterated on existing chips, and pushed software in new directions with Apple Intelligence. There were genuine improvements worth celebrating. The M4 generation delivered real performance gains. The Mac mini became a genuinely compelling entry point. The 16-inch MacBook Pro got the refinements it deserved.
But there were also frustrations. Pricing felt aggressive without corresponding justification. Design decisions (like aggressive thinning) prioritized form over function in ways that hurt professionals. Software features (Apple Intelligence) felt more marketing-driven than genuinely transformative. Strategic gaps (no Mac Pro updates, no large iMac) suggested Apple wasn't fully committed to certain professional segments.
If 2025 taught us anything, it's that Apple's Mac strategy is increasingly divided between consumer and professional. The consumer experience got better and more accessible. The professional experience got powerful but more expensive. The two are diverging, which might be intentional positioning.
For consumers considering a Mac purchase in 2025, the M4 MacBook Air or Mac mini represented the best values. For professionals, the M4 Pro MacBook Pro or Mac Studio made sense if your workflow justified the investment. For Intel Mac users, 2025 was the year the upgrade became non-negotiable.
Looking ahead to 2026, the question is whether Apple will address the obvious gaps. Will there be a Mac Pro update? Will a 27-inch iMac resurface? Will right-to-repair policies expand? Will Apple Intelligence finally become genuinely indispensable rather than just convenient? The Mac community is watching and waiting.
FAQ
What are the main Mac models released in 2025?
Apple released significant updates across several Mac lines in 2025. The M4 MacBook Pro models (both 14-inch and 16-inch) arrived with improved displays and performance. The M4 Mac mini became the most affordable entry point for Mac users. The M4 Pro and M4 Max MacBook Air variants updated the consumer-focused laptop line. The Mac Studio received M4 Ultra chip options for professional users. These releases represented the primary Mac hardware updates of 2025.
How much better is the M4 chip compared to M3?
The M4 generation delivered approximately 25% faster CPU performance compared to M3, with GPU improvements reaching around 40% in many workloads. These gains were particularly pronounced in video rendering, 3D graphics, and machine learning tasks. For most everyday computing tasks, the difference wasn't dramatic, but professionals working with intensive applications saw measurable time savings during render jobs and compilation processes.
Is the MacBook Pro really better than Windows laptops at the price point?
The comparison depends on your specific needs. MacBook Pros offer superior build quality, excellent thermal design, and tight hardware-software integration. Windows laptops at similar price points often provide more ports, more upgrade options, and different software ecosystems. For creative professionals deep in the Apple ecosystem, the MacBook Pro value proposition holds up. For professionals who want maximum flexibility or already use Windows software, alternatives might be better value. The premium you pay for a MacBook Pro is primarily for the ecosystem, design, and optimization rather than raw performance.
Should I upgrade from my Intel Mac in 2025?
The decision depends on your machine's age and your specific needs. If you're running an Intel Mac from 2017 or earlier, 2025 is the year to seriously consider upgrading since security support ended. More recent Intel Macs (2018-2020 models) can continue functioning without immediate upgrade pressure, though you'll miss out on new software features. If your Intel Mac is running slowly for your current workload, upgrading to an M4 Mac makes sense. If it's still fast enough for your tasks, the upgrade can wait a year or two.
What's the difference between M4 Pro and M4 Max?
The M4 Pro maxes out at 12 cores and is optimized for professional work in video editing, software development, and content creation. The M4 Max offers similar core counts but with more GPU cores and typically comes with more unified memory options. The real difference lies in specific workloads: video professionals often needed Max (for faster rendering), while developers could often get by with Pro. Mac mini versions max out the Pro chip, while MacBook Pro and Mac Studio offer both options depending on your budget and performance requirements.
Is macOS Sequoia worth updating to?
macOS Sequoia offers solid stability improvements and Apple Intelligence features that provide genuine productivity benefits. The writing tools, photo search improvements, and local processing capabilities work well enough to justify the update for most users. However, the update isn't revolutionary. If you're on an older Intel Mac, you won't be able to update at all. If you're on an M1 or M2 Mac, the update runs fine but doesn't unlock the full Apple Intelligence feature set. For M4 Mac owners, the update should happen pretty quickly.
What are the best Mac value options in 2025?
The best value options depend on your use case. The M4 Mac mini at
Should I wait for 2026 Mac releases before buying?
This depends on your current situation. If your current Mac is functioning fine, waiting for 2026 makes sense—there will always be new hardware coming. If you're using an Intel Mac or aging M1/M2 machine that's slowing down, 2025's M4 generation is strong enough that waiting a year seems unnecessary. The performance gains from M4 to the likely M5 generation in 2026 will probably be less dramatic than the M3 to M4 jump. If you need a Mac today, 2025 models are good purchases.
What happened with the Intel Mac support ending?
Apple officially discontinued security updates for Intel Macs in early 2025, specifically machines with Intel processors older than the 10th generation. This means these older machines no longer receive patches for security vulnerabilities. Technically, you can keep using them, but you're running the risk of unpatched security issues. For anyone still using a pre-2020 Intel Mac, 2025 was the year that upgrade pressure became real. Apple didn't provide any trade-in incentives or migration support, which was disappointing for users facing forced obsolescence.
Will there be a Mac Pro update soon?
Apple hasn't announced any Mac Pro updates, and there's been radio silence on the professional tower for most of 2025. The Mac Studio with M4 Ultra is now more powerful and significantly cheaper than any Mac Pro option. This suggests Apple may be quietly phasing out the Mac Pro in favor of the Studio. For professionals who need tower-style machines, the lack of updates is frustrating. Whether Apple will resurrect the Pro line with Apple Silicon or let it fade is unclear, but 2025 provided no indication of imminent Pro updates.
The M4 Pro and M4 Max chips in 2025 delivered significant performance improvements, with a 25% increase in CPU performance and a 40% boost in GPU rendering capabilities, enhancing productivity for users.
TL; DR
- M4 Chips Deliver Real Performance: The M4 generation showed 25% CPU and 40% GPU improvements with better efficiency than M3, justifying upgrades for professionals and high-end users.
- Mac Mini Became the Value Play: At $599 with M4, the Mac mini became genuinely compelling for budget-conscious users without sacrificing performance or build quality.
- MacOS Sequoia's AI Features Were Mixed: Apple Intelligence offered real productivity benefits through writing tools and photo search, but privacy claims had caveats and mainstream features felt half-baked.
- Aggressive Pricing Without Matching Innovation: Price increases across the lineup (MacBook Pro to 3,499) felt steeper than the incremental hardware improvements justified.
- Intel Mac Sunset Forced Upgrade Decisions: The discontinuation of security updates for Intel Macs meant millions of users faced upgrade pressure in 2025, though Apple offered no transition incentives.
- Bottom Line: 2025 was a solid but not spectacular year for Mac. The hardware was excellent, the software was competent, and the pricing was aggressive. If you needed to upgrade, there were good options. If your current Mac worked fine, 2025 didn't present an urgent reason to buy something new.
The M4 chip offers a 25% improvement in CPU performance and a 40% improvement in GPU tasks over the M3, significantly benefiting tasks like video rendering and 3D graphics. Estimated data.
Key Takeaways
- M4 chips delivered 25% CPU and 40% GPU improvements, representing meaningful performance gains for professionals and power users
- Aggressive pricing across MacBook lines (MacBook Air +100, 16-inch +$300) without corresponding feature innovations frustrated buyers
- MacOS Sequoia's Apple Intelligence offered real productivity benefits but privacy claims overstated the reality of cloud processing fallbacks
- Design choices prioritizing thinness (reduced ports, smaller batteries, tighter thermals) frustrated professional users who valued function over form
- Mac mini became the standout value at $599 with M4, while Intel Mac discontinuation forced upgrade decisions for millions of users
- Strategic gaps (no Mac Pro update, no 27-inch iMac, restrictive right-to-repair) suggested Apple wasn't fully committed to certain professional segments
- Enterprise Mac adoption accelerated in 2025 due to security positioning and Apple Intelligence promise, though consumer market growth was modest
