What Today's 27" Intel iMac Refresh Tells Us About the Apple Silicon Mac Release Order

[Waragainstsleep]

My point is that if Apple didn't need more time on a proper Apple Silicon-based successor to the Intel 27" iMac, they wouldn't have updated it. They didn't update the Intel 21.5" iMac (when they just as easily could have) which only further lends credibility to the rumors that an Apple Silicon 24" iMac is imminently ready to replace it.

I suspect the new entry level AS iMac is indeed ready to go and that's why the 21.5" got left alone, Apple probably wants to launch this model in time for xmas if at all possible.
I think they launched the 27" because it was probably in production (or close enough that they had the parts lining up in the factories) so it made no sense not to release it. They would have likely been developing Intel and AS macs in parallel waiting until the AS was ready to hit the launch button.

I read a very interesting article talking about Apple shifting focus from hardware to services. Their services revenue has grown very strongly in recent years and is now a very significant proportion of their revenue. The author attributed this shift to the reason Apple launched the iPhone SE at such a surprisingly low price point, they are looking to get users onto their services and are willing to sacrifice hardware margins in order to do this. Apparently there is also a rumour of a $569 iPhone 12 which again, is substantially cheaper than most would have predicted.
He goes on to point out that Apple is manoeuvring to branch into enterprise services with the acquisition of companies like Fleetsmith. If this guy is right, we might see that $800 MacBook after all.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

I ordered a 21.5" iMac for a customer today. Apple has no stock of these. I find that odd. I initially thought maybe they recalled the current models in the channel with spinning disks so they could re-tool them to match the updated configurations but surely they could have done this before the update? Seems strange...

 

[Jorbanead]

The author attributed this shift to the reason Apple launched the iPhone SE at such a surprisingly low price point

Apple is also looking to expand their global market share, and India and China are two huge markets that Apple could do better in. Their problem has always been price. Now that Apple has many solidified services, they can afford to lower their prices in an effort to gain more market share which in return profits them more long-term.

I ordered a 21.5" iMac for a customer today. Apple has no stock of these. I find that odd.

This is typically what happens a month or two before new products come out. There were rumors of a redesigned 4K iMac back in May, so it’s more than likely Apple is gearing up for a fall Apple Silicon iMac release.

The 4K iMac is a great place to start with Apple silicon. It’s a machine that can pack some power to show off what Apple silicon macs can do in a desktop, but it’s also low enough on the Mac totem pole that it leaves plenty of room for higher-end products to shine later on. You want to come out with a bang, but also not play all your cards at once. Id also expect to see an apple silicon MacBook Air announced at the same event.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

Apple is also looking to expand their global market share

This was essentially my point. If Apple is moving their profit focus to services, then market share is what they need now. When you're Apple you do that by offering something substantially better than the competition and then by reducing the price. AS Macs could be exactly this double whammy.

This is typically what happens a month or two before new products come out. There were rumors of a redesigned 4K iMac back in May, so it’s more than likely Apple is gearing up for a fall Apple Silicon iMac release.

Again, you're cutting through my subtlety with a chainsaw

I do still think it would be odd to update one iMac to the redesign and not the other but if the 27" moves to 30" then it would be less odd. Some have suggested the new 30" would be relabelled as the iMac Pro , though this seems like the sort of move Apple would rule out as confusing if it weren't equivalent to the old iMac Pro. Which I don't believe it would or should be.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I ordered a 21.5" iMac for a customer today. Apple has no stock of these. I find that odd. I initially thought maybe they recalled the current models in the channel with spinning disks so they could re-tool them to match the updated configurations but surely they could have done this before the update? Seems strange...

That is odd, especially since Apple's only changes were to the stock models (which are the models that often get sold by third party resellers.

I do still think it would be odd to update one iMac to the redesign and not the other but if the 27" moves to 30" then it would be less odd. Some have suggested the new 30" would be relabelled as the iMac Pro , though this seems like the sort of move Apple would rule out as confusing if it weren't equivalent to the old iMac Pro. Which I don't believe it would or should be.

I think it all depends on the targeted market audience. Apple may very well be trying to position the 24" iMac as being the iMac for not just the current 21.5" target market audience, but probably the lower-end of the current 27" target market audience as well. This would then position their Apple Silicon 30" iMac as being a suitable replacement to both the iMac Pro and the Intel 27" iMac for higher-end customers. Part of that shift may be due to people who only went for the 27" iMac because the 21.5" was too small for them, but I'm sure that having the 24" iMac come out a bit before the 30" iMac will naturally cause some of the users not buying one of the recently updated Intel 27" iMacs in favor of waiting for Apple Silicon to get impatient and/or be fine with the 24" model (especially since, at that point, we still won't know how much more powerful the would-be 30" model would be).

Relabeling the larger iMac Pro might make sense if they can comfortably best both the 10th Gen 10-core i9 in the higher-end of the newly launched Intel 27" iMacs as well as the Xeon W chips from 2017 that were put in the iMac Pro back then. I think given the age of the latter, that ought to not be a problem. That way they can market it as being x times faster than the 27" iMac and y times faster than the iMac Pro. Boom! New Apple Silicon "iMac Pro" at 30", standard iMac at 24". Super-simplified. They don't need four distinct desktops anymore either given that Mac desktop sales are barely a fourth of Mac sales overall.

 

[Boil]

Apple needs to simplify things for the first gen ASi rollout...

A return to the 2x2 product matrix:

14" MacBook
Mac mini

16" MacBook Pro
Mac Pro Cube

Apple also needs Apple-branded monitors:

24" / 27" / 30"

And the Mac mini can "slot into" the back of any of these Apple-branded monitors, instant iMac...!

 

[Yebubbleman]

Apple needs to simplify things for the first gen ASi rollout...

A return to the 2x2 product matrix:

14" MacBook
Mac mini

16" MacBook Pro
Mac Pro Cube

Apple also needs Apple-branded monitors:

24" / 27" / 30"

And the Mac mini can "slot into" the back of any of these Apple-branded monitors, instant iMac...!

I certainly wouldn't hate that lineup; though, for practicality, the Mac Pro can't be a cube. Slots (and potentially drive bay expansion) are critical. Similarly, I think Apple favors the Mac mini and iMac being distinctly different; though a modular core unit that attached to a monitor would certainly be help in terms of repairability and sustainability.

 

[Jorbanead]

A return to the 2x2 product matrix:

14" MacBook
Mac mini

16" MacBook Pro
Mac Pro Cube

I think they’ll stick to a 2x3 lineup instead. I do think to make things simple, the 24" iMac will just be called the iMac, and the new 30 (or 32") iMac will be the iMac Pro. Here’s how I see it:

Notebooks:
MacBook - up to 8 cores (4+4)
MacBook Pro - up to 14 cores (4+10)

All-in-One Desktops:
iMac - up to 14 cores (4+10)
iMac Pro - up to 22 cores (4+18)

Headless Desktops:
Mac mini - up to 14 cores (4+10)
Mac Pro - up to 36 cores (4+32)

 

[Boil]

I think they’ll stick to a 2x3 lineup instead. Here’s how I see it:

Notebooks:
MacBook - up to 8 cores (4+4)
MacBook Pro - up to 14 cores (4+10)

All-in-One Desktops:
iMac - up to 14 cores (4+10)
iMac Pro - up to 22 cores (4+18)

Headless Desktops:
Mac mini - up to 14 cores (4+10)
Mac Pro - up to 36 cores (4+32)

My proposed line-up also includes three Apple monitors; 24", 27", & 30". A Mac mini could be integrated seamlessly into the back of any of these three monitors (probably with some sort of Smart Connector) & become a full-fledged iMac...!

 

[dugbug]

I think they’ll stick to a 2x3 lineup instead. I do think to make things simple, the 24" iMac will just be called the iMac, and the new 30 (or 32") iMac will be the iMac Pro. Here’s how I see it:

Notebooks:
14" MacBook - up to 8 cores (4+4)
16" MacBook Pro - up to 14 cores (4+10)

All-in-One Desktops:
24" iMac - up to 14 cores (4+10)
30" iMac Pro - up to 22 cores (4+18)

Headless Desktops:
Mac mini - up to 14 cores (4+10)
Mac Pro - up to 36 cores (4+32)

I think given these are SoC systems the CPU/RAM/GPU options will be very limited.

We may have CPU Hz+Cores, RAM, GPU Hz+cores all in three choices: Good, better, best for any of their platforms. (Leave out mac pro for the moment).

What would that look like?
4 Cores, 10GB, Basic GPU
8 Cores, 16GB, Medium GPU
10 Cores, .1Gz Bump, 24 GB, Max GPU

 

[Jorbanead]

What would that look like?
4 Cores, 10GB, Basic GPU
8 Cores, 16GB, Medium GPU
10 Cores, .1Gz Bump, 24 GB, Max GPU

I could see even more segmentation. All they need to do is 1) deactivate cores and 2) lower the max clock speed to differentiate between different models.

Also remember that their SoC's also come with 4 energy efficient cores in addition to their performance cores, so the lowest they'll have is at least 6-core (Thats what's in the current iPhone), but I speculate that their lowest Mac chip will actually be an 8-core chip (The current iPad Pro is 8-core). Here's how it could go down:

All have 4 energy efficient cores + high performance cores. Each product gets 3 processor options. MBP = MacBook Pro MM = Mac mini etc.

Processors:
C14 - 8 Core (4+4) MBA, MBP, MM
C14a - 10 Core (4+6) MBP, MM, iM
C14b - 14 Core (4+10) MBP, MM, iM, iMP
C14x - 18 Core (4+14) iM, iMP, MP
C14y - 22 Core (4+18) iMP, MP
C14z - 36 Core (4+32) MP

 

[Yebubbleman]

I think given these are SoC systems the CPU/RAM/GPU options will be very limited.

We may have CPU Hz+Cores, RAM, GPU Hz+cores all in three choices: Good, better, best for any of their platforms. (Leave out mac pro for the moment).

What would that look like?
4 Cores, 10GB, Basic GPU
8 Cores, 16GB, Medium GPU
10 Cores, .1Gz Bump, 24 GB, Max GPU

I could see even more segmentation. All they need to do is 1) deactivate cores and 2) lower the max clock speed to differentiate between different models.

Also remember that their SoC's also come with 4 energy efficient cores in addition to their performance cores, so the lowest they'll have is at least 6-core (Thats what's in the current iPhone), but I speculate that their lowest Mac chip will actually be an 8-core chip (The current iPad Pro is 8-core). Here's how it could go down:

All have 4 energy efficient cores + high performance cores. Each product gets 3 processor options. MBP = MacBook Pro MM = Mac mini etc.

Processors:
C14 - 8 Core (4+4) MBA, MBP, MM
C14a - 10 Core (4+6) MBP, MM, iM
C14b - 14 Core (4+10) MBP, MM, iM, iMP
C14x - 18 Core (4+14) iM, iMP, MP
C14y - 22 Core (4+18) iMP, MP
C14z - 36 Core (4+32) MP

I seem to recall that the SoCs being introduced this year are all gonna be 12-core with 8 Performance and 4 efficiency cores. But I could be wrong. Not sure where I saw that. But that would give the new Air/13" Pro and 24" iMac at least 12 cores total.

 

[Boil]

I seem to recall that the SoCs being introduced this year are all gonna be 12-core with 8 Performance and 4 efficiency cores. But I could be wrong. Not sure where I saw that. But that would give the new Air/13" Pro and 24" iMac at least 12 cores total.

I am of the mind that the only Apple silicon Macs that will be released THIS year will be "low end" models, for the lowest cost of entry across the initial ASi Mac product stack; Mac mini, 14" MacBook, 24" iMac; all will use the same SoC / logic board for cost considerations & ease of working with a singular configuration (SoC / logic board) for the initial launch...

2021 would show us the 16" MacBook Pro & 30" iMac Pro...

2022 has refreshes on the initial three low end offerings & introduces the ASi Mac Pro, transition over...!

(...maybe a Mac Pro Cube or the mythical xMac is introduced in 2022 as well...)

 

[anshuvorty]

A twitter account called komiya has suggested the following timeline, we shall see soon enough:

 

[Waragainstsleep]

Doesn't really make a lot of sense does it?

 

[Kostask]

Pretty close to none at all.

I think the segmetation will be as follows:

Entry Level ("before the end of the year" as per WWDC):
MBP 14"
MacBook 13" (no more "Air")
Regular Mac Mini

Early Mid 2021
iMac 24" (with both entry level SoC and Midrange SoC)
iMac 30" (midrange Soc only)
MBP 16" (midrange SoC)
MBP 14" (with midrange SoC, only as a possibility, as a top range model)
Server Mac Mini (with Midrange Soc)

Fall 2021:
Mac Pro (High Performance SoC)
iMac 30" (High Performance SoC)

I think the Air and iMac Pros as names disappear. The entry level laptop becomes the MacBook, with pretty much the same form factor and design targets (maximum battery life, light weight and thin). The iMac Pro disappears as a name, and is replaced as by a 30" iMac using the highest performance SoC. The Mac Pro uses that same High Performance Soc, but in multiples.

The Mac Mini server edition makes a comeback, this time as a midrange SoC powered version. This allows for a regular version of the Mac Mini with the same entry level SoC as the MacBook, at a fairly cheap price.

The lowest end 14" MBP starts with an entry level SoC, just with a higher clock than the MacBook 13", and has 4 ports instead of 2, and memory size that can go higher than the MacBook. I think there is a 50/50 chance that there will also be a higher performance 14" MBP, possibly using the midrange SoC.

Even though I have called an SoC entry level, it will still bury the top end Intel parts, both in CPU speed and in GPU performance. The midrange and Performance SoCs will just beat the Intel parts by a bigger margin.

 

[Sarajiel]

This Komiya person tweets out a lot of weird stuff like a 12" AS Macbook with butterfly keyboard as one of the launch devices. ?

Entry Level ("before the end of the year" as per WWDC):
MBP 14"
MacBook 13" (no more "Air")
Regular Mac Mini

This doesn't make too much sense either. The 14.0" will most likely be a laptop with Mini-LED display with bumped up resolution to 3584x2240 (302ppi) to complement the new 16" with a 4096x2560 (302ppi) display. I suspect that we will see that new screen around WWDC 2021 as first real serious "Pro" machines. Both 14" and 16" will probably be fairly close when it comes to performance which would fill that huge void in the 13.3"/14.1" laptop space we have right now.
We might also see some 12" MBP (3k display) type device later, but I doubt that it will come with the first gen SoCs.
The MBP 13.3" w/ 2ports might stay as entry level MBP for a bit with a little weaker SoC than the new 14" MBP and the current 2.5k display.

I agree with you about the Mini and the MBA. Although I wouldn't be surprised, if Apple sticks with the Air branding and keeps it similar to the current model with the 2.5k display. Both make great machines for devs to test new AS software. I'd also expect a 24" iMac, since there have been rumors of three different new SoC IDs. Most likely:

iMac 24" -> low core count performance desktop SoC, the high core count versions probably later in the larger iMacs
MBA 13.3" -> efficiency/endurance mobile SoC, battery life somewhere in the 12h - 24h range to differentiate from any other Ultrabooks/old Macbooks.
Mac Mini -> performance mobile SoC, similar to the ones in the later MBPs and most likely everything soldered or glued together.

This would allow the developers to test their new software on almost all performance classes that will be available in 2021. Keep in mind that Apple needs as much native third party AS software as possible. People will not rush to buy new 14"/16" MBPs to run some iOS/iPadOS shovelware or emulated versions that are slower than on their old machines.

 

[Kostask]

For something that doesn't make sense, it sure seems an almost exact restatement of what I wrote.

The first AS Macs, due this fall, will have an MBP. I do not believe that there will be a two port MBP of any type. I also do not believe that there will be a Mini LED version of the MBP; Apple will wait until development of the micro LED technology (which they are are working on) before moving to new screen technologies.

I obviously have no way of verifying anything that I have written, but most of the trusted leakers (including Ming Chi Kuo) have said that one of the launch Macs will be the smaller MacBook Pro. I don't think that Apple will see it as making enough of a "splash" to put out a two port MBP with a 13.3" screen. I do think that a 14" screen, in the form factor of the current MBP 13.3", with 4 ports and a 14" screen, sporting the new AS SoC will. Resolution may be bumped up, or stay the same, it is debatable either way. When the small MBP does come out, it is almost a given that the MacBook/MBA will be following close behind, as will the regular Mini, as they will essentially be the same machine, just with variations of clock speed, maximum memory expansion, and things like that. They all may show up, or we may see just one in the fall, and the other two follow shortly after.

As I have said, even the entry level SoC in the MacBook/MBA, regular Mac mini, and the low end MBP will beat the older Intel machines by at least 50% on CPU, probably more on GPU. I think Apple wants Intel apps on Rosetta 2 to handily beat the same Intel apps on Intel. The Intel Chip that I am pointing to is the top end Intel CPU in the MBP 13". There is an excellent chance that the AS MacBook Pro at launch will have the highest clock speed, with a reduced clock speed on the MacBook/MBA, and even so, the MacBook/MBA will have the 50% performance advantage over the Intel equivalent.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

I still think merging the 13-inchers makes a lot of sense but the bit that vexes the most in the list is updating the iMac Pro before the 27" equivalent. Or at all.

 

[Kostask]

I don't think it will be ever updated. What we know now as the iMac Pro will be the new "big" iMac (27"/30"/32" or whatever screen size it comes in) high end version. The performance will be good enough to eliminate any need for an iMac Pro.

 

[Jorbanead]

I still think merging the 13-inchers makes a lot of sense but the bit that vexes the most in the list is updating the iMac Pro before the 27" equivalent. Or at all.

I don’t see them merging, just because Apple will want to have a sub $1k notebook. There are rumors of a $799 notebook and Apple wouldn’t want their pro laptops at the same price point at the iPhone 12. Also Apple sells way more notebooks than desktops so they will still want to have a variety of products with varying feature-sets and upgrade options.

But also I don’t think that list was in order (at least within the year). The Mac Pro is undoubtedly going to be the last thing they announce.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

When I say merge, I see the 13" MBP being dropped tbh. Maybe we'll get a 14" instead. But the entry level laptop has to be one of the top priorities I would think.

 

[Yebubbleman]

For something that doesn't make sense, it sure seems an almost exact restatement of what I wrote.

The first AS Macs, due this fall, will have an MBP. I do not believe that there will be a two port MBP of any type. I also do not believe that there will be a Mini LED version of the MBP; Apple will wait until development of the micro LED technology (which they are are working on) before moving to new screen technologies.

I obviously have no way of verifying anything that I have written, but most of the trusted leakers (including Ming Chi Kuo) have said that one of the launch Macs will be the smaller MacBook Pro. I don't think that Apple will see it as making enough of a "splash" to put out a two port MBP with a 13.3" screen. I do think that a 14" screen, in the form factor of the current MBP 13.3", with 4 ports and a 14" screen, sporting the new AS SoC will. Resolution may be bumped up, or stay the same, it is debatable either way. When the small MBP does come out, it is almost a given that the MacBook/MBA will be following close behind, as will the regular Mini, as they will essentially be the same machine, just with variations of clock speed, maximum memory expansion, and things like that. They all may show up, or we may see just one in the fall, and the other two follow shortly after.

As I have said, even the entry level SoC in the MacBook/MBA, regular Mac mini, and the low end MBP will beat the older Intel machines by at least 50% on CPU, probably more on GPU. I think Apple wants Intel apps on Rosetta 2 to handily beat the same Intel apps on Intel. The Intel Chip that I am pointing to is the top end Intel CPU in the MBP 13". There is an excellent chance that the AS MacBook Pro at launch will have the highest clock speed, with a reduced clock speed on the MacBook/MBA, and even so, the MacBook/MBA will have the 50% performance advantage over the Intel equivalent.

I agree that we're at least going to see a consolidation of either the MacBook Air or the 4-port 13" MacBook Pro that eliminates the 2-port 13" MacBook Pro. I'd go further to say that we're only going to have one 13.3" Mac notebook when the dust settles, but that seems hard to be sure of quite yet. The fact that we're seeing the next battery for the MacBook Air when the Apple Silicon 13" MacBook Pro is rumored to go first is a little odd. Suppliers might have the two machines confused.

I'm not sure about the Mac mini. I think it would make sense for an 8th Gen Intel based Mac to make the jump on the sooner side of things (which I guess makes it all the more curious that the two machines looking most likely to make the jump first are Macs that, just this year, got the jump to 10th Gen (albeit not very high-end 10th Gen).

I still think merging the 13-inchers makes a lot of sense but the bit that vexes the most in the list is updating the iMac Pro before the 27" equivalent. Or at all.

The iMac Pro will likely merge with the 27" iMac on the high-end. You'll have one size of Apple Silicon iMac at 24" and one size of Apple Silicon "iMac Pro" at 30" but with it mainly being the spiritual successor to the standard Intel 27" iMac (and not the Intel iMac Pro, which will still be outperformed by said new 30" iMac).

I don't think it will be ever updated. What we know now as the iMac Pro will be the new "big" iMac (27"/30"/32" or whatever screen size it comes in) high end version. The performance will be good enough to eliminate any need for an iMac Pro.

"iMac Pro" may just be a name for the larger iMac more than a Mac Pro all-in-one. That would at least make sense in terms of targeting the two iMacs to different market audiences (which is pretty much how the 21.5" and 27" iMacs have been for years now).

They ought to do that with the MacBook Pro as well. Unless we see performance in the same ballpark as the 16" MacBook Pro, the 13" (or even 14") model should have a different moniker.

I don’t see them merging, just because Apple will want to have a sub $1k notebook. There are rumors of a $799 notebook and Apple wouldn’t want their pro laptops at the same price point at the iPhone 12. Also Apple sells way more notebooks than desktops so they will still want to have a variety of products with varying feature-sets and upgrade options.

But also I don’t think that list was in order (at least within the year). The Mac Pro is undoubtedly going to be the last thing they announce.

I'm not sure I get the logic here. They already have iPhones that exceed the base price of entry level MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. I think if they can make a MacBook Air and sell it for $800 while still making the same profit, the fact that they sell a $1000 iPhone isn't going to stop them.

Selling multiple models of 13"/14" Mac notebooks just because customers who are, on average, not tech-literate enough to decipher the options want options makes no sense either. The 12"/14" MacBook Air combo + 16" MacBook Pro or 13" MacBook Air + 14"/16" MacBook Pro combo could work. But, if it's the latter, it needs to be within the same ballpark of performance as the 16" MacBook Pro or it needs to drop "Pro". Calling the 13" Intel laptop "MacBook Pro" made zero sense.

 

[Jorbanead]

I’m not sure I get the logic here. They already have iPhones that exceed the base price of entry level MacBook Pros and MacBook Airs. I think if they can make a MacBook Air and sell it for $800 while still making the same profit, the fact that they sell a $1000 iPhone isn't going to stop them.

I’ll try to be more clear. What I was assuming by the comment to merge the 13” models was that there would only be 2 notebooks in the entire lineup. So that means you would have a 13” (or 14” MacBook and a 16” MacBook Pro).
To me having only two laptops, but 5 desktops In the lineup just seems unlikely.

My comment about price was that Apple really needs to sell a laptop that’s sub-$1k for the general market (especially since cheaper laptops are selling like crazy right now). I don’t see them selling a “pro” model that’s sub $1k - only a non pro model. So whatever that laptop is it will not be called “pro” so that would only leave 1 pro laptop option.

So my point is that I don’t see them merging the MacBook Air and 13” MacBook Pro. They served different markets and price points.

 

[Yebubbleman]

I’ll try to be more clear. What I was assuming by the comment to merge the 13” models was that there would only be 2 notebooks in the entire lineup. So that means you would have a 13” (or 14” MacBook and a 16” MacBook Pro).
To me having only two laptops, but 5 desktops In the lineup just seems unlikely.

You're not likely going to see 5 desktops on the other side of this transition either. Again, the iMac Pro is likely either merging with whatever the Apple Silicon replacement to the current Intel 27" iMac or just not making the jump at all. Rumors seem scant on an Apple Silicon replacement to the Mac mini. It's possible that we'll see the number of desktops scale down substantially as well.

I see it far less likely that we'll have one 16" laptop and THREE 13" laptops on the other end of this transition. Most of the reason for there even being that many had to do with the fact that Intel's processor options for all three models had distinct thermal requirements (that likely won't be as much of a factor in the most conservative of those three chasses, namely that of the Air).

My comment about price was that Apple really needs to sell a laptop that’s sub-$1k for the general market (especially since cheaper laptops are selling like crazy right now). I don’t see them selling a “pro” model that’s sub $1k - only a non pro model. So whatever that laptop is it will not be called “pro” so that would only leave 1 pro laptop option.

Nothing wrong with that. The 13" MacBook Pro is "Pro" in name only. It's otherwise just a high-end Ultrabook.

So my point is that I don’t see them merging the MacBook Air and 13” MacBook Pro. They served different markets and price points.

They only serve different markets and at different price points because the limits of the respective three processor types in these Macs differ enough in terms of how performant they are to justify it. If you have an Air that does the work of both of the two 13" Pros, then marketing is the only reason to produce a 13" Pro, in which case you're probably not going to have many people splurging for the 13" Pro out of necessity.