> It should be possible to get a Mac with a lesser processor but at least 256GB of memory for $2000.
Apple is not known for leaving money on the table like that.
Also, projects like NVidia DIGITS ($2k for 128G) might make Apple unwilling to enter the market. As you said, Studio with 192G is $5600k. For purely AI purposes, two DIGITS' are a better choice, and non-AI usages don't need such ludicros amount of RAM (maybe for video, but those customers are willing to pay more).
> Apple is not known for leaving money on the table like that.
True -- although I will say the M series chips were a step change in performance and efficiency from the Intel processors they replaced, and Apple didn't charge a premium for them.
I'm not suggesting that they'll stop charging more for RAM than the industry at large -- I'm hoping they'll unbundle RAM from CPU-type. A base Mac Mini goes for $600, and adding RAM costs $200 per 8GB. That's a ridiculous premium, clearly, and at that rate my proposed Mac Mini with 256GB of RAM would go for $6600 -- which would roll my eyes until they fell out of my head.
But Apple is also leaving money on the table if they're not offering a more expensive model people would buy. A 128GB Mini, let's say, for $2000, might be that machine.
All that said, it's also a heck of a future-proof machine, so maybe the designed-obsolescence crowd have an argument to make here.
Apple is not known for leaving money on the table like that.
Also, projects like NVidia DIGITS ($2k for 128G) might make Apple unwilling to enter the market. As you said, Studio with 192G is $5600k. For purely AI purposes, two DIGITS' are a better choice, and non-AI usages don't need such ludicros amount of RAM (maybe for video, but those customers are willing to pay more).