2016 MacBook Pro May Include OLED Display Touch Bar and Touch ID

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

If Apple makes a thinner laptop with similar thermal envelope ad heat/noise levels (like they did with MBP vs rMBP), that means that they were able to design the same thermal efficiency into a thinner chassis, based on newer CPU/GPU, etc.

I like the new 3.5-4.5W fanless chips. Family member has a thin, light system with one. It is great. Can do 2D graphics/video and the CPU is as fast as a 2008-ish unibody MBP-- plenty fast enough for an OS, a word processor, spreadsheet, presentation. Except the one I'm familiar with runs Windows. :-( I have no quarrel with thin, light, silent notebook computers. And, I don't mind paying a couple hundred bucks extra "Apple Tax" to get OS X instead of Windows.

But ...

That also means that if they were to keep the thicker design, they would've had more room for the cooling design, and therefore ability to make it quieter/cooler.

I also would like to see a real MBP mobile workstation, thicker, with plenty of cooling, a real keyboard, not a chiclet keyboard, a 3840x2160 display, a Xeon E3-1545M v5 mobile workstation CPU with a Polaris version of W7170M (AMD RX490M GPU is the new Polaris consumer version out soon) In other words, given the 35W-45W CPU and 50W+ GPU power budgets of yesteryear, e.g. high-end 2008 unibody, updated to today's performance and capabilities.

 

[moonjelly]

Please please please no thinner formfactor and certainly no longer battery life. Make a true mobile WORKstation like the PRO name suggest and stop this idiotic fascination with portability and battery life. It's a pro machine please put a pro GPU in it. And surprise! I tend to NOT FORGET MY POWER ADAPTER (as I'm a pro ) I don't need 10 hours off battery life. I'm fine with 2.5 hours. Just let me max out the specs so I can render stuff faster just like my buddy's who own a windows based mobile workstation. Their cpu and gpu options are about 50% to 70% faster. Shame on you apple. You should rename the MacBook Pro as it does not deserve the pro label anymore.

Expect the next MB Pro to improve power, portability, battery in balanced relation to the current MB Pro. They might attempt improvement to human interface or build innovations.

It might not satisfy everyone. If you expect Apple to sacrifice portability, battery, noise level for extreme processing power and a dozen backwards compatible ports, you are going to be disappointed.

The competition has caught on. But really, go back and look at the PC world of 10 years ago. The choices were anemic netbooks vs. low quality midrange compromises vs. powerful-but-big, loud, battery hogs with huge power supplies. If you want extreme hardware, this is still the place to look.

 

[Cartossin]

Thinner goes with your quieter, cooler wishes. The new MacBooks are thin, cool, and quiet because they use low wattage chips, thereby losing the fan. Its unlikely they will go as thin as the MacBooks. If they can marry adequate processing power with passive cooling it will be a real hat trick.

Apple's high end market segment has been the creative professional. Imagine how attractive a solid midlevel GPU and pixel level pencil support on the trackpad would be for artists and photographers.

If a Macbook pro uses a lower wattage chip, it is not a Macbook pro. It is a Macbook Air. The main design difference between the two lines is that Pros are ~30 watts and Airs are ~15 watts. It is possible apple will axe the air name and put 15 watt chips in the Macbook Pro line in which case you'll have Macbook Air levels of heat/noise at peak (which are better than the pros).

 

[moonjelly]

If a Macbook pro uses a lower wattage chip, it is not a Macbook pro. It is a Macbook Air. The main design difference between the two lines is that Pros are ~30 watts and Airs are ~15 watts. It is possible apple will axe the air name and put 15 watt chips in the Macbook Pro line in which case you'll have Macbook Air levels of heat/noise at peak (which are better than the pros).

Agreed Cartossin. That is the current design difference. But they saved about 10 watts between the 2011 MBPro and the retina MBPro while increasing performance with lowered heat and noise. Consider the new MacBooks are getting ~MBAir performance on 5 watt CPUs.

There are solid rumors the new devices are slightly thinner. That does not exclude significant performance increases and quieter MBPros. Wattage is not the only feature that distinguishes the Pro line. Apple could introduce new pro features; track pad pencil support, finger print ID, innovations that haven't leaked.

While I sympathize with the small market segment that wishes for extreme processing power and status quo for size and ports, they should not hold their breath. I'm going to miss the SD card reader. But I'm looking forward to the over-all upgrade.

 

[Cartossin]

Agreed Cartossin. That is the current design difference. But they saved about 10 watts between the 2011 MBPro and the retina MBPro while increasing performance with lowered heat and noise. Consider the new MacBooks are getting ~MBAir performance on 5 watt CPUs.

There are solid rumors the new devices are slightly thinner. That does not exclude significant performance increases and quieter MBPros. Wattage is not the only feature that distinguishes the Pro line. Apple could introduce new pro features; track pad pencil support, finger print ID, innovations that haven't leaked.

While I sympathize with the small market segment that wishes for extreme processing power and status quo for size and ports, they should not hold their breath. I'm going to miss the SD card reader. But I'm looking forward to the over-all upgrade.

While I mostly agree I take issue with your assertion that that 5watt cpu in any way beats the 15watt cpu in the macbook air. Even my 3 year old haswell beats the skylake 5watt chip overall, but perhaps loses at single thread. the currently sold MBA crushes the core M line

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

While I mostly agree I take issue with your assertion that that 5watt cpu in any way beats the 15watt cpu in the macbook air. Even my 3 year old haswell beats the skylake 5watt chip overall, but perhaps loses at single thread. the currently sold MBA crushes the core M line

That is exactly why I find the current and projected MBP line strange. Core M and related 5W CPUs do everything my 2007 MBP did (almost could do today, although I decommissioned it for other reasons). Fast enough to run OS X, word processors, spreadsheets, presentation s/w, and email, do 2D graphics and video.

And, if I want a high-performance application machine, I should be able get a 3840x2160 display, a mobile Xeon E3 CPU with Iris Pro graphics when fast GPU is not required, and, the equivalent (Polaris is here) of an AMD W7170m. With all the ports that I need. That requires a bigger chassis and bigger, quieter cooling. Why do I have to run Windows to get that? MBP used to be leading edge; now it is half a loaf.

 

[pkmaximum]

I'm surprised Apple hasn't made a display with 120hz yet given how obsessed they are about screen fidelity.