Apple Predicted to Release Ultra-Slim 12-Inch MacBook with Retina Display in Mid-2014

[mortenandersen]

Interesting information - but still: There is no point discussing "the ideal ratio"..

Interesting you say that, because 16:10 is 1.6, which is the golden ratio; which is subsequently found in the proportions of your eyes, shellfish, trees, leaves, and architecture. This proportion has also consistently been shown to be the most pleasing to the eye.

Also, you're not losing anything with 16:10 -- 16:9, by design, is supposed to decrease vertical res -- not increase horizontal res.

Every point you've made is null and void.

I would be a grave mistake to take part of a discussion on the "information level" in your post. You may be completely right on this level.

And still: It doesn't rock my experience (subjective experience) that IMO and with my eyes, I really much more prefer a screen with the ratio 16:9 than a screen with the ratio 16:10.

It looks to me as if you are arguing in vain, like the parent who insists and even TRIES TO DECIDE on behalf on the child that the child HAS TO LIKE the fish he/she is served on the plate, and not only eat it.

Your concluding remark in your post - "Every point you've made is null and void." - gives the reader a hint of some degree of arrogance (and ignorance) - which BTW is not an unusual combo.

 

[eltaurus]

if 11" ---> 12"

then 13" ----> 14"

& 15" -----> 16" || 17"

 

[ValSalva]

if 11" ---> 12"

then 13" ----> 14"

& 15" -----> 16" || 17"

I wouldn't mind the 12" in this rumor as much if Apple did the same to the 13" MBA and made it a 14" - even though there would be a decrease in native resolution to both Airs.

I don't think a move to a 16" rMBP is possible without making the chassis larger. The bezel on the rMBP is already pretty small.

 

[Trinity]

will they remove audio output, usb and thunderbolt ports to make it so slim? Each milimeter of slimnes in MacBooks means centimeters of clutter in our bags!…

 

[mortenandersen]

A very interesting calculation...

lewisdorigo wrote in post 319:

"I did some calculations, too, and worked out that:
If the height of the new display was 5.82", it’s width would be 10.35" — keeping the same 16:9 aspect ratio — and the diagonal would be 11.9" (close enough for Apple to call it 12"). That’s only 0.14" taller, and 0.24" wider, so would still fit within the footprint of the current Air.

Also; at that size, if they were to double the resolution of the current 11" Air, it would have the same pixel density as the retina iPad."

As I am not much into the technicalities of pixels and so forth, I would be very interested to know whether this "format" (ratio) or length and height of the display for the rumored 12" Air will be the most natural (and least demanding) further road of development for Apple? And if so, wouldn't it also be a very good choice for the ratio of the display?

For me this is important and good information: "That’s only 0.14" taller, and 0.24" wider, so would still fit within the footprint of the current Air." Hope this is correct!

 

[SPUY767]

[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Apple may be planning to release a 12-inch MacBook with an all-new design and high-resolution Retina Display in the middle of 2014, according to KGI Securities anaylst Ming-Chi Kuo.

Image​

Specifically, the new MacBook is expected to feature a clamshell form factor even thinner than the current MacBook Air, and may debut at a lower-price point than the current Retina MacBook Pro line due to an improving yield rate. While Kuo stops short of calling the new model a replacement for the current MacBook Air line, his description of the model suggests that it would indeed supplant Apple's current ultra-slim notebook line.Kuo's claims match with a report from NPD DisplaySearch analysts earlier this week claiming that Apple is planning to introduce a new 12-inch MacBook Air next year. That new model was predicted to use a high-resolution 2304 x 1440 display

Both rumors also fall in line with earlier reports that Apple is set to move to IGZO displays for many of its future products, allowing for higher-resolution displays with lower power consumption.

Kuo has generally been quite accurate with his predictions over the past several years, including accurately outlining many of the details of Apple's 2013 launch plans as far back as January. Other accurate predictions have included the introduction of a "third MacBook line" that arrived in the form of Retina MacBook Pro models and the discontinuation of the 17-inch MacBook Pro last year.

Article Link: Apple Predicted to Release Ultra-Slim 12-Inch MacBook with Retina Display in Mid-2014

I'll have my popcorn waiting for other companies to release notebooks that are "thinner" by dimensions that can only be measured with a micrometer.

 

[ohbrilliance]

What I world really like is a 15inch MacBook Air with a retina display

I'd like a 15" MBA with retina display but with a smaller bezel and footprint not much larger than a 13"...

 

[KohPhiPhi]

Regarding the rumors for a 12" Retina MBA...

I'm all for retina standards as long as they don't decrease the actual screen real state of the current 13" MBA (1440x900).

If all they do is to take the current 11" MBA (1366x768) and double it to transform it into Retina, then I'm staying with my current 13" MBA. I value desktop real state over ultra-crispy resolution finess because, due to work, I require multiple applications loaded up at the same time.

This is just the same reason as of why I bought the 13" MBA over the 13" rMBP: the rMBP might be crispier but it fits less amount of stuff on the screen.

 

[ezekielrage_99]

That's what she said

Beat me to it.

 

[mr.bee]

Why are so many people making a big fuzz about this?

surely the next thing on the agenda of the MBA is the screen and surely you can replace the screen of the current 11' in a 12' even within the current form factor.

that's the least they need to execute next year.

 

[theluggage]

And again not even a rumor about a 17'.

17' ?! I'd need a bigger house.

Seriously, though: I have a 17" and like it as a 'luggable' to shuttle between desktops - but I'm not sure about taking it on a trip. Having said that - I have seen at least one person trying to use it in economy class...

I'd also guess that they just didn't sell enough to be worthwhile.

 

[kazmac]

if this happens

Perhaps I will look into it.

Retina screen, light weight and long battery life are all I really need/want in a laptop since my days of design are pretty much over. This would be perfect for what I do these days. Naturally, it would have to be perfect for my eyes and back first and foremost.

Interesting...

 

[iRun26.2]

Has anyone considered a 12" Macbook Air may not be an Macbook Air rather a ARM laptop to compete with the Chromebook/Ultralight market?

This maybe consistent with the rumours of a larger iPad and new Macbook Air for 2014.

That is a scary thought. I think Apple is smarter than that.

----------

Like I said here: https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/18132362/

This laptop is going to run on an A7X or A8 ARM part.

Mac OS X will be upgraded to run both ARM & Intel architectures, like what happened when it ran PowerPC & Intel architectures.

Apple will start to use ARM CPUs for their low-end Macs.

Then I'll have no choice but to go back to buying Windows notebooks. Depressing...

 

[NutsNGum]

They've given up on the professional market around six years ago. Didn't you notice?

Another first for them! Microsoft only managed to alienate their entire professional market over the last eighteen months.

 

[iRun26.2]

I don't think being able to attach a keyboard to a 12.9" iPad and switching from iOS to OSX would be a mistake. Besides, iOS and OSX appear to be on a collision course anyway.

You can have that. The mistake would be replacing the current MBA with a iOS device with a keyboard.

 

[ghboard2010]

11", 12", 13", 15" . . .

Methinks Apple has lost their way. A ship without a rudder. It does not appear that these people have any idea of what to do next.

Hmmmmm, how about adding a 14" Macbook Air Pro Special into the mix. Just imagine that; 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 inch sizes.

Of course we're talkin' 'bout a prediction, not an actually shipping product. Still with three different sizes, why a fourth? The 11, 13, 15 mix seems pretty good. If it ain't broke don't fix it.

 

[CausticPuppy]

Interesting you say that, because 16:10 is 1.6, which is the golden ratio; which is subsequently found in the proportions of your eyes, shellfish, trees, leaves, and architecture.

Clearly, Apple needs to use the Golden Ratio much more prominently in their designs.

In fact, here is the iPhone in its most pleasing form, 100% golden ratio certified. It would be impossible to make the iPhone look any better than this!

Source - http://inventikasolutions.com/the-myth-of-golden-ratio

You'd be surprised at how much of nature and architecture does NOT use the golden ratio. Even the Parthenon's use of GR is a myth-- there's nothing as far as the measurements to actually back that claim up, even though it's commonly used as an "example" of GR in ancient architecture.

Your shellfish example turns out to be a mathematical urban legend. In reality it's nowhere near a Fibonacci spiral.


The moral of the story is that the "golden ratio" is not required for good design.

 

[gnasher729]

Methinks Apple has lost their way. A ship without a rudder. It does not appear that these people have any idea of what to do next.

Of course. Some "analyst" publishes his fantasies about future Apple products, and you think that Apple has lost their way. The logic escapes me.

 

[Thunderhawks]

will they remove audio output, usb and thunderbolt ports to make it so slim? Each milimeter of slimnes in MacBooks means centimeters of clutter in our bags!…

Since everybody works differently, it's hard to please all the consumers.

For example: I like the all in one approach of having a superdrive in my MBP, but if I am honest, I rarely used in in the last 3 years.

So, anybody who needs a drive will have to lug extras.

I do hope that despite slimness in the new MBPs we get to keep the option to swap hard drives and memory.

Otherwise we are looking at very high buy in prices and one kind of has to plan ahead what configuration to buy.

May hurt sales of MBP's, as many users buy on price.

And, I hope they bring the 17" back. Love it

 

[newyorksole]

Of course. Some "analyst" publishes his fantasies about future Apple products, and you think that Apple has lost their way. The logic escapes me.

I think logic has escaped him too.

 

[TsunamiTheClown]

I hate to say it but between the iMac and now the macbook, apple is turning me off with all this need to be the thinnist out there, it gets to the point where it starts hampering performance, it does'nt always have to be the thinnist

I hear ya, but bear in mind the "thinness" of the new iMacs was probably mainly an attempt to lighten them for VESA mounting purposes.

The lightening of all these devices is probably a serious improvement in every instance. Thinness is not so much a benefit i will agree. However the one seems to follow the other.

----------

Clearly, Apple needs to use the Golden Ratio much more prominently in their designs.

In fact, here is the iPhone in its most pleasing form, 100% golden ratio certified. It would be impossible to make the iPhone look any better than this!

Image

Source - http://inventikasolutions.com/the-myth-of-golden-ratio

You'd be surprised at how much of nature and architecture does NOT use the golden ratio. Even the Parthenon's use of GR is a myth-- there's nothing as far as the measurements to actually back that claim up, even though it's commonly used as an "example" of GR in ancient architecture.

Your shellfish example turns out to be a mathematical urban legend. In reality it's nowhere near a Fibonacci spiral.


The moral of the story is that the "golden ratio" is not required for good design.

I think we have all gone through our GR design phase... you should have seen some of the clumsy furniture that i made during my GR phase, sheesh.

 

[Wild-Bill]

All I know is.....

The 12" PowerBook is still, IMHO, one of the best laptops Apple ever produced.

Bring on the 12" PB G5 !!!!!!!! LOL

 

[satchmo]

How much thinner do we need these MBA's to get?
There needs to be a balance between being premium and feeling too light and cheap.

For example, the iPhone 5 strikes a pretty good balance although verging on being too light and tin-like IMO. The iPhone 4s certainly feels much more substantial.

 

[melendezest]

I also wish they'd bring back the 17, although I don't think it'll happen.

It is still my favorite of all Apple laptops for the following reason: Flexibility

-Huge screen with lots of real estate (that is easy to see). No retina needed.
-Fast and powerful; true desktop replacement (for the iMac at least).
-Ports galore: I get Firewire 800 (and 400 with adapter), TB, 3ea USB 2s, Ethernet
-Expresscard slot: allows me to add whatever ports I could need. I use it currently for some e-SATA drives I got, although Thunderbot adapters are coming along. I also (easily) removed the optical drive and have two 750GB drives RAIDed in a stripe config, making it nice and fast (until I get SSDs).
- Upgradeable RAM, none of the soldered crap

In short, until cancelled it was the most flexible of Apple's laptops and unlike anything else on the market. This thing is irreplaceable for me, aside from a newer, lighter version with USB3 and TB2 on it. I've owned 13, 15, and 17 MBPs and this is my favorite, by far. Granted, I don't carry it around all the time, but my 8 year old daughter swears by it and takes it all over the house, so if she can do it, so can I.

 

[Val-kyrie]

Or how about:
12" Retina MacBook Air
14" Retina MacBook Pro
16" Retina MacBook Pro

Would make more sense to me.

The question is whether hi-res/retina panels for such screen sizes are available and how a 14" or 16" screen would affect the design of the 13" and 15" current MBP chasses respectively.

Really, Macrumors? How is it even physically possible to make something thinner than the MacBook Air (with a smaller battery) and have a Retina display (increasing power needs) while still maintaining a great battery life?

How much do you really have to shave off to call it thinner? 0.1mm? The obsession with thinness is just the current marketing fad.

The rumored resolution for the 12" ( 2304x1440, desktop size of 1152x720 (16:10) ) can't be true

Now, the Apple laptops' desktop size is as follows:

MBA 11: 1366x768 (16:9)
MBA 13: 1440x900 (16:10)
rMBP13: 1280x800 (16:10)
rMBP15: 1400x900 (16:10)

So, as we can see, in terms of desktop space, now, the screen of the MBA 13" is better that the one of the rMBP 13"

Making a 12" screen of 2304x1440 -> 1152x720 (16:10) not only will make that potentially rMBA 12" to have less desktop space that the current MBA 13", but also less than the rMBP 13", and even less than the current MBA 11".

I hope the new Retina MBA's screen resolution (despite the size of the panel) will be 2880x1440 (1440x900 desktop size, same as today's MBA 13" or rMBP 15") so it won't be a step back.

Actually, if Apple is going to unify the MacBook lines under one moniker, then it would make sense for Apple to transition to a 16:10 ratio for the (current) MBA. I would not put this past Apple for several reasons: (1) Apple may be unifying the design of its current models with an eye toward future consolidation; (2) Apple can market the higher numbers for the screen's resolution; (3) the average person only looks at the screen resolution and will be sold on the clarity of the screen without any thought to the loss in screen real estate (i.e., the actual number of pixels available).

It is also interesting to ponder a possible transition by Apple to ARM CPUs. Personally, I don't want to go through another transition and the announcement of such in 2014 would put me in a quandary concerning what to buy, since my professional programs function only on the x86 architecture and I can only afford to purchase new computer equipment about every 5 years. I just don't see such a transition occurring unless MS also announces such a transition, but this seems less likely in light of the failure of the Surface RT tablet.

The mac product line will soon start to consolidate with the growth in post-PC devices. The macbook air in different sizes will be replaced by one size device, the Macbook at 12 inches. The pro machines will stay at 13 and 15 inch.

This helps Apple reduce the footprint the Macs take up in store for more iOS device space. It increases their yield and reduces production lines for laptops. It also is a more straight forward consumer proposition without multiple multiples at the same size like it is currently with three different 13" devices.

This seems plausible for 2014, but I have always liked the 14" form factor, so I am hoping Apple will transition to 12/14/16" screens. This would create form separation on paper (12" and 13" appear too close together for marketing) and a 16" retina model would provide an alternative to the loss of the 17"cMBP.

Serious Question:

If this thing is coming out mid-2014. Would it be a Haswell or Broadwell machine ? I doubt broadwell will be ready in less than 12 months. But mid 2014 seems awfully late to release a Haswell ultrabook

My guess is Broadwell, but the ARM proposition stated by others is also interesting. My guess is that Haswell is late on Macs because (1) Apple wants the revised chipsets from Intel (without the USB-sleep bug) and/or (2) Apple wants to release the new MBP alongside OS X Mavericks. I will guess that the upgrade to Broadwell will entail a shorter cycle as a result of the first possibility I listed.