Forget the MacBook, I want an iMac Ultra

Apparently, 2026 will be the year Apple introduces the “Ultra” brand for the iPhone and MacBook. Which sounds interesting and leads to pedantic arguments about what constitutes an Ultra product. But it’s Apple, it can define “Ultra” however it wants.

Which brings me to the gaping hole in the Ultra lineup on offer: a desktop Mac. (Settle down, iPad fans; behind-the-scenes CEO John Ternus has been working on what looks like an iPad Ultra, although its status is uncertain.) It seems that if Apple is going down this Ultra route, it has to have a Mac Ultra. After all, of all Apple’s products, the desktop Mac is best suited to pull out all the stops and truly champion the “Ultra” brand.

The Mac Pro has had its day

The Mac Pro seemed like the most appropriate computer to be rebranded as the Mac Ultra. The tower form factor allows Apple to go wild with its components, equipping it with an Ultra M-series chip, installing a ton of RAM, installing the fastest SSD, and using the latest specs with Thunderbolt, USB, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth, and more. Apple could redesign the tower so it doesn’t have as many expansion slots.

Thiago Trevisan

There is, however, a reason why Apple discontinued the Mac Pro. Apple simply doesn’t sell enough towers to make it worth it, and even a smaller, redesigned tower probably wouldn’t sell in the quantities Apple wants.

As much as I would love to see Apple create a “hot rod” Mac, it doesn’t fit Apple’s product methodology. The Mac Pro – actually, the Mac tower, to be more precise – is no longer a supported Apple form factor.

iMac Ultra: the iMac Pro is reborn

Of all the desktop Macs, the iMac is the most likely candidate for an Ultra version. Could this be the fastest and most powerful Mac available? No, but Apple doesn’t necessarily define “Ultra” that way. “Ultra” applies to the product in a particular line that goes beyond a typical feature set, such as an iPhone that folds or a MacBook with an OLED touchscreen.

An iMac Ultra could meet the demand for an all-in-one with a larger screen. As someone who has reviewed the M1, M3, and M4 iMacs, I get a lot of comments from readers that the 24-inch screen isn’t big enough, with some saying that if it’s not at least 30 inches, it’s not worth their time. After all, the iMac Pro was 27 inches, and that was 10 years ago, so an Ultra iMac should be bigger than that.

An iMac Ultra could have a 32-inch screen, which will surely satisfy these users. It could also be a 6K display. Basically, Apple could take over the panel from the old Pro Display XDR. (I know the execution isn’t that simple, but it’s the right size and the design would be perfect.)

Foundry

As for the chip, Apple could opt for a Pro or Max chip to differentiate it from the standard model and preserve the Mac Studio’s status as a high-end Mac. But a Pro or Mac chip is a significant upgrade over the base chip in the current iMac.

The larger screen would be the key element of the iMac Ultra. Most other features could mirror those of the current iMac: Thunderbolt ports (upgraded to Thunderbolt 5 for the iMac Ultra), Ethernet via power adapter, etc. And of course, Apple can make it in Space Black as an ode to the old iMac Pro and include the black Magic Mouse or the black Magic Trackpad.

Would it sell?

Certainly, an iMac Ultra would address an even smaller niche than the current iMac. But it looks like it would be bigger than the Mac Pro, and I wouldn’t be surprised if demand exceeds that of the next iPhone Ultra.

Price would be the key factor in its ability to sell. The iMac with four Thunderbolt ports costs $1,499, the MacBook Pro M4 Pro starts at $2,199, and the Pro Display XDR costs $4,999. That $4,999 XDR price hasn’t changed from its original release in 2019, though, so it stands to reason that a panel like the one he used is now much more affordable. So maybe the iMac Ultra would start in the $2,799 range. I think a lot of people would buy it at that price. I know I would.