While the rumor mill has so far missed most of its guesses about the MacBook Pro release, it seems to be on the safe side when it comes to predicting a budget MacBook coming this spring.
As the expected spring 2026 release of the low-cost MacBook approaches, the mill is accelerating with predictions, leaks and direct guesses about the new unit. Mirror Daily throw into the ring not only the specifications, but also the expected order volumes for the unit.
The specs the publication lists for the unit aren’t particularly eye-opening. The machine is believed to use the A18 Pro processor, as is the case with most of the rumors so far.
Performance on the A18 Pro is similar to the M1 processor, with the A18 Pro having higher single-core performance. This makes sense for the intended use of the machine, as most casual workloads are limited to a single core.
The multi-core performance on the A18 Pro also beats the M1, but only by a bit. The M5, currently in the 14-inch MacBook Pro and coming to the MacBook Air soon, is about 70% more efficient than the A18 Pro.
As for the price, Apple is reportedly still considering between $699 and $799. However, it is unclear whether the rising cost of RAM and flash media will be a problem.
The report claims that Apple will sell about 22 million MacBook Air units in 2025, up slightly from 2024. That makes some sense and is in the ballpark of other places that estimate Apple’s sales volumes.
Apple is rumored to order between five and eight million units for 2026, which is roughly what Ming-Chi Kuo predicted in that June report I mentioned earlier. Foxconn and Guangda are said to be the main manufacturers of the unit.
Rumors of a cheap MacBook have been around for years. The 2026 release gained momentum following a June 2025 prediction by noted leaker Ming-Chi Kuo.
It’s unclear if he released the message Thursday Mirror Daily is a “me too” message or not. The publication is not privy to the exact leaks from Apple’s supply chain.
At first glance, it looks like information obtained from other leaks. A “leak” is likely, given everything else we’ve heard, but we’re skeptical that the publication has unique sources.