The name of the Mac Studio is well-chosen because it is perfect for … studios. With tasks that need and fly with good multi-core performance. Apple started to roll out the base M1 first - with the base Macs. The single-core performance of an M1 compared to the bigger ones (Pro, Max, Ultra) is not that much different. The difference lies in their multi-core performance. And if you need a good multi-core performance, the M1 Max or M1 Ultra will be a ton faster than the M2 or M2 Pro.
Macworld has an article dealing with the question if somebody should wait for a M2. It dates back to November, but it still is a nice read:
When I see what I am doing with my Macs, I know that I definitely would not do justice to a Max or Ultra CPU because I do not have those high-end multi-core tasks.
I would love to have a Mini with a M Pro, though. And that is what I am hoping for in the future. A M2 Pro would be nice and apparently Apple is considering one to close the gap between the base Mini model and this crazy powerful Mac Studio when the Mini eventually will be moved to the M2 family.
“Modular” in the same way stereo systems can be component based (amp, receiver, turntable) or all in one (like the “HiFi” system my parents had). In this sense it is definitely modular.
But in the ‘open it up and change things’ sense it certainly is not.
Which is both understandable (I don’t work on my car anymore either) and disappointing (I had a 2010 Mac Pro that I kept upgrading into 2019).
It will be interesting to see in what sense the next Mac Pro is modular.
I think I answered my own question really, as to why the Studio is a new line.
Looking at the CPUs by themselves, it’s just an extension of what’s in the Mini.
But, the Studio is the whole package. Rather than just putting in a better CPU and then getting bottlenecks elsewhere, the Studio is improved in every area to create a system that is perfectly balanced (in theory). Faster SSD, faster bandwidth, more RAM (no idea if the RAM is faster yet).
Personally, I rarely need more than my M1 Air. Alright, I never need more than this.
But, throughout the year I do little projects that would make use of the power (most recently I’ve been transcoding and editing 24h audio files, making my Air hotter than it’s ever been…yet still responsive whilst working away on that, which is its brilliance).
As an enthusiastic hobbyist, I see a Mac Studio with the better Max chip in my future, and hopefully it will keep me content for many, many years.
The M1 Ultra has twice the memory bandwidth of the M1 Max (which has twice the memory bandwidth of the M1 Pro, which in turn has three times the memory bandwidth of the M1). So yeah, it’s fast.
Well written, from Michael Tsai with quotes from Adam Engst, Dan Moren and Nick Heer: Thoughts about what to buy, if the Studio is too much. I am in that camp. I will wait for a Mac Mini in its next incarnation with a Mx Pro CPU. I will stick to my Intel Mac Mini as my desktop Mac until a new higher end Mini materializes. The Studio would mean to have a mostly idling monster wasting energy in my case. But I would like to have 32 GB of RAM. In a fast (mostly single-core with a little multi-core speed if needed), quiet, small, power saving machine that is a dedicated desktop.
For what was just announced the ability to stack slices would be good. Isn’t there such a dock slice for Mac Mini? I doubt it works with Studio, though.
I have the prior version under my mini, without the SSD slot. Very nice that the ports are in front.
There are other versions by other manufacturers as well. While it should work with any computer it certainly would not fit snugly with any but the mini methinks. I expect to see a similar product for the Mac Studio, maybe on top because of the airflow path?
I plan to get a Studio and I see how I could adapt this to use with it, should I see the need to do so. My wife just went from an old iMac (2014 if I recall correctly) to an M1 mini, so she may be getting a new (to her!) doc in the not to distant future.
Are you talking about rack enclosures? If so, there’s definitely one for a Mac Mini. And no, the existing ones wouldn’t work with the Studio - but since the Studio is basically just a taller Mini it wouldn’t take much to build a different enclosure.
It would be pretty inefficient rack-wise though, as it would require a 3U rack space where the Mini only requires one.
Actually it’s what @MevetS said - the Satechi one.
I’m also thinking that a price-dropped Gen 1 M1 Mini might have a place in our house. But the price hasn’t dropped enough yet. (Especially given my order of a Studio Max.)
P.S. Yes, I know that rumors are just that. But … I … will … not … wait … any … longer. Especially with my M1 MB Air on the couch: my desktop needs to be a M1 (it hard to go back to a slow Intel (i7 ) after experiencing a M1). Now. So, ok, it is the Studio M1 Max then.
I think the current M1 Mini, with a Studio display, is a worthy alternative to the 27" iMac in the Apple ecosystem. The problem with the iMac always was that the screen stays relevant much longer than the CPU. One of the reasons iMacs held out so long even when they were technically aged computers.
The Mac Studio with the Studio Display equals the iMac Pro given the significant performance jump.
These solutions give Apple the opportunity to refresh hardware more often to a more reasonable price… You would expect a good display to survive 3-4 generations of CPU. My 10 year old 30" Dell monitors are still good today, just can’t use them anymore because of I/O changes (who uses dual-DVI or HDMI 1 anymore?)
Apple has taken some of the the best qualities of an iPad (instant-on, no fan, and stout battery life) and put them into my M1 MacBook Air. Add in the amazing performance bump that M1 gives over even a fast i7 intel chip, and I continue to be delighted with this machine every day I get to use it!
) after experiencing a M1). Now. So, ok, it is the Studio M1 Max then. 
anything that says nice things about Apple’s M1 chip!