A Two Thunderbolt Ports 14-inch MacBook Pro should've gotten the M4 First

[Yebubbleman]

Just my own two cents and commentary here: The Two Thunderbolt Port variant of 14-inch MacBook Pro that effectively replaced the last of the 13-inch MacBook Pros should've gotten the M4 either first or at this week's event along side the iPad Pro.

Why?

If Apple updates the lower-end MacBook Pros with the standard suffix-less version of a new given M-series SoC variant, the assumption is that the Pro and Max variants are not yet ready, but that they're probably coming sooner rather than later. This proved true with both the M1 family and the M2 family. The lower-end MacBook Pro was first to both of those and it made perfect sense for it to be so.

However, introduce M4 on the iPad Pro first and now, if you're a prospective low-end 14-inch MacBook Pro customer who is even slightly in the know, you're going to wait because you know that, with the M4 being out and in something already, the M4 next arriving in that low-end 14-inch MacBook Pro at the very least is almost guaranteed. It's a near-perfect example of the Osborne effect at work. The Two Thunderbolt Ports variant of 14-inch MacBook Pro that has just the regular M3 is probably the one Mac I'd recommend most to most folks and now it makes absolutely no sense to recommend it to anyone but the folks that have enough money not to care that what they're about to buy and hopefully use for several years is about to be replaced.

 

[theluggage]

Just my own two cents and commentary here: The Two Thunderbolt Port variant of 14-inch MacBook Pro that effectively replaced the last of the 13-inch MacBook Pros should've gotten the M4 either first or at this week's event along side the iPad Pro.

Fair enough, but what's bad for the MacBook is good for the iPad. I'm skeptical about the idea of an iPad as a real laptop alternative, and won't be rushing to the Apple Store, but it is clearly an idea that Apple are invested in and want to promote - and its clearly being pitched at the same customers & at similar prices. Giving it a temporary headstart over Macs could be a deliberate effort at promoting it. (n.b. you could equally have said that the MBP should have got the OLED display first - if they can make a 13" tandem OLED, 14" shouldn't be far behind ).

Also, it will be interesting to see what the future M-series Mac line up actually looks like and whether a no-suffix MBP even makes sense - it would make a lot more logical if the M4 was for iPads and the MBA (e-core heavy), M4 Pro was for lower-end MBP and Mac Mini (balance of p and e-cores, better display support and more RAM) M4 Max (p-core heavy) for high-end MBP and Mini and M4 Ultra for Studio and Mac Pro (Aka Real Mac Pro and Mac Pro/PCIe). The M3 range has already moved somewhat towards that - the relationships between M3, M3 Pro and M3 Max are quite different from the M2 series.

It's a near-perfect example of the Osborne effect at work.

Not really - for starters, Osborne's mistake was officially announcing shiny new models which weren't available to buy at a time when they were totally reliant on Osborne One sales to stay afloat. Even if the iPad Pro is disappointing in the long term, Apple will still sell a ton of them to the faithful this quarter, which will offset any dip in Mac sales (plus they've got the iPhone and services to keep the lights on).

Apple haven't announced new MBPs - and there are always rumors of shiny new MBPs just around the corner. The "M4 Macs Coming This Year" rumour was already circulating - although admittedly the iPad release has added credibility to that. Realistically, new MBP sales to customers who insist on the latest and greatest probably peaked last year and are likely now dominated by people who just have a pressing need for a new computer and will buy whatever is available. I think all of the Macs I've bought personally have been within a couple of months of launch - the exception has been ordering machines for work to kit out a new employee or replace a failed/stolen machine.

The Osborne story happened in the 80s, when specs were increasing very rapidly, and an 18 month old computer was often seriously obsolete, with new models often being at least twice as powerful - and the Osborne One was a very early take on the "portable" computer with lots of room for improvement. The M4 is maybe, what, 25% better than the M3 on cherry-picked benchmarks? Plus, back then, it often took months between a new computer being announced and actually being available to buy - something that Apple are good at avoiding - so customers actually cancelling orders could be a real problem. Also, that was before computers were mainstream consumer products, or even mainstream business products - the target consumer was likely to have a stack of Byte or Personal Computer World magazines in their bathroom and would be eagerly following the news on the latest developments. Now, Apple have a huge customer base of "regular" customers who accept computers as a part of life probably don't scour MacRumors every day for the skinny on the M4.5 or a scoop on new Watch bands.

On top of that, the Osborne was - underneath the "luggable" exterior - a bog standard Z80, CP/M system, so there was a lot of direct competition from alternative systems which would be just as capable of running the copies of WordStar and dBase II that you'd snitched from work. Apple have the benefit of a certain amount of platform loyalty and/or lock-in - so any disappointed MBP buyers.

That's if the Osborne effect was ever true - there's quite a bit of questioning of that (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osborne_effect)