And I know several people who bought and are passionate about small, lightweight 2-door cars with manual transmissions.

Sometimes that isn’t enough to justify dedicating a mass production line to that product.

But it somehow is enough to do that for things like the Mac Pro or the Mac Studio that are clearly niche products compared to the rest of the Mac lineup?

I'm not sure it's fair to compare cars to phones or other tech products. Phones are not very repairable these days, but even if you manage to keep a 15-year-old phone working, the unnecessarily ever-changing protocols, APIs, and standards will render it unusable for most practical purposes. So you're kinda forced to upgrade every now and then. A 15-year-old car though? It takes the same fuel and drives on the same roads as brand-new ones. And spare parts are most certainly still available.

I think there are a bunch of related questions though:

- Are the Mac Pro and Mac Studio getting yearly updates?

- Are they as intricate to design and manufacture as phones?

- Are they liable to eat into sales for more profitable models?

Personally, I'd be happy to get a new Mini if they made one, but I'm not shocked that they're not catering to that market.

The Mac Pro that famously gets very infrequent updates and is far behind the rest of the line on CPU generarion? I would not be at all surprised if Apple kills it off in the near future.

The comparison to cars is the market. A company makes products it wants to and that it thinks will pay back their investment, and that will be the most profitable choice among the choices of product they could make.

Sorry, you aren’t going to debate your way into Tim Cook choosing a less profitable product to make.