M5 MacBook Pro No Longer Coming in 2025

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Speculation and Rumor Fatigue

  • Some commenters object to “completely uninformed” guesses about Apple’s plans; others defend clearly-labeled speculation as normal and even useful.
  • There’s meta-discussion about misinformation, reputation risk, and whether communities should police how people “are allowed” to talk about rumors.

Release Cadence and Sustainability

  • Several people welcome a slower 2–3 year MacBook Pro cycle and argue hardware is “good enough” for most, similar wishes expressed for macOS.
  • Others say yearly releases are fine because no one is forced to upgrade and it smooths production and purchasing over time.
  • A few note that sustainability depends more on support length and repairability than on cadence.

Upgrade Behavior and M-Series Maturity

  • Many report M1/M2 machines still feel fast; upgrades to M4 often feel incremental unless you care about displays, RAM, or niche workloads.
  • Some expect to keep current machines 5+ years; a few only consider upgrading for more RAM, storage, or better local AI performance.
  • Used/refurb M1 Max systems are described as an excellent value given modest generational gains.

Academic and Student Buying Cycles

  • One thread argues that pushing M5 to 2026 may cost Apple some academic sales, since faculty and students often buy “the latest” at the start of the academic year and can’t wait months.
  • Others counter that most academics don’t need local LLM performance, often use older Macs, and that education revenue skews more to students than professors.

Performance, AI, and Unified Memory

  • Some see Apple’s unified memory and high VRAM capacity as a strong niche for local LLMs, and are disappointed by delays that slow memory/bandwidth progress.
  • Others note that AI-heavy users may still prefer NVIDIA laptops or clusters, and that most academics and buyers don’t care about running big models locally.

Windows/x86 vs Mac Laptops

  • Several point out that x86 gaming/workstation laptops offer better raw GPU performance and price/performance (at the cost of weight, noise, and battery life).
  • Many argue most of the world still buys x86 due to legacy software, corporate standardization, and lower prices, despite ARM’s efficiency advantages.

Displays, Ports, and Docks

  • A long sub-thread criticizes Apple’s lack of DisplayPort MST, limited external monitor counts on lower-end M-series, few ports, and reliance on expensive Thunderbolt docks.
  • Others reply that high-end docks and Thunderbolt/KVM monitors work well and that MacBooks compensate with build quality and battery life.
  • There’s debate over dock costs, monitor pricing (USB‑C/DP vs Thunderbolt), and even power-outage scenarios affecting docked external SSDs.

OS Preferences, Linux, and Right to Repair

  • Some enjoy macOS but dislike “kid-like” UX decisions, opaque error messages, and missing settings (e.g., mixed scroll directions).
  • Several avoid Macs over soldered storage, expensive RAM/SSD upgrades, poor repairability, or desire for easy Linux installation and open source tooling.
  • Asahi Linux support is praised but seen as partial and always playing catch-up on newer chips.

Workstations and Mac Pro

  • Commenters note that M‑series Mac Pro supports only a subset of PCIe cards; many high-end GPU, audio, and networking options remain unavailable.
  • For fully composable desktop workstations, some conclude that only Windows/Linux/BSD PCs now truly fit that role.