Forget the MacBook, I want an iMac Ultra

Apparently, 2026 is going to be the year when Apple introduces the “Ultra” branding for the iPhone and MacBook. Which sounds interesting and leads to pedantic arguments over what constitutes an Ultra product. But it’s Apple, it can define “Ultra” however it sees fit.

Which leads me to the gaping hole in the proposed Ultra lineup: a desktop Mac. (Settle down, iPad fans; CEO-in-the-wings John Ternus has been working on what sounds like an iPad Ultra, though it has an uncertain status.) It just seems like if Apple is going down this Ultra road, it has to have a Mac Ultra. After all, of all of Apple’s products, the desktop Mac is the one best suited to go all out and truly hold up the “Ultra” branding.

The Mac Pro had its day

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

There’s a reason why Apple discontinued the Mac Pro, however. Apple just doesn’t sell enough towers to make it worthwhile, and even a redesigned, smaller tower probably wouldn’t sell in the numbers Apple would like.

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

iMac Ultra: iMac Pro reborn

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

An iMac Ultra could fill a demand for an all-in-one with a larger display. As someone who has reviewed the M1, M3, and M4 iMacs, I get a lot of reader feedback stating that the 24-inch display 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 would need to be bigger than that.

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

Foundry

As for the chip, Apple could go with a Pro or Max chip to set it apart from the standard model and preserve the Mac Studio’s status as the top-end Mac. But a Pro or Mac chip is a significant upgrade from the base chip in the current iMac.

The larger display would be the key component of the iMac Ultra. Much of the other features could mirror those of the current iMac: Thunderbolt ports (upgraded to Thunderbolt 5 for the iMac Ultra), Ethernet through the 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 black Magic Trackpad.

Would it sell?

Admittedly, an iMac Ultra would address a niche that’s even smaller than the current iMac’s. But it seems like it would be bigger than that of the Mac Pro, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the demand exceeded that of the upcoming iPhone Ultra.

Price would be the key factor in its ability to sell. The iMac with four Thunderbolt ports is $1,499, the M4 Pro MacBook Pro starts at $2,199, and the Pro Display XDR was $4,999. That $4,999 XDR price, however, did not change from its original release in 2019, so it stands to reason that a panel like the one it used is much more affordable now. So perhaps 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.