Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces 'Let Loose' Event on May 7 Amid Rumors of New iPads
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well mine is 2n gen 10.5 and the coat is all gone, fingerprints everywhere... so yes!
Apple only releases products with retina screens. a 32" display requires 6k to be retina - have a look how much a 6k XDR display costs... I can't see many people wanting to spend that on an all-in-one where the screen can't be used in target display mode.
Agreed - it wouldn't surprise me to see references to March 2024 in the video metadata similar to how the M2 MBPs video had November 2022 references. It would make no sense to have an event only a month before WWDC.
It is a bit sad not to have the live demos, but the media still turn up to Apple HQ, mingle and "experience the devices" in person. Look out for all the "first impression" and "hands-on" articles/videos on May 7th. The photos usually have other journalists in the background.
I know it’s not happening, but I just want a new iPad mini.
As much as I'd like to see an M4 in the yet to be released iPad Pro, I have my doubts. The MacBooks top out with M3 chips, correct? Note I do understand the MacBook Pro laptops have M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max chip choices.I don't know the plausibility of M4 vs. M3 this soon but I'll again offer this concept: if M3 has the "unfixable" hack vector and it apparently does... and the Corp opts to keep selling it anyway, the seeds of a class action are growing. That's the oldest class action catalyst in the book: knowing you are selling something that can cause harm to buyers but doing it anyway.
So we can believe whatever we want to believe but if M3 has the hole and M4 doesn't, the rumored rush to M4 may be about minimizing that eventual settlement. Once a Corp knows there is a flaw that can cause customers harm, continuing to sell anyway is going to lead to a legal event(s). The best way to minimize that expense is to stop selling the problematic thing ASAP. Before you know about the problem, you have a little bit of "we didn't know" legal wiggle room. After you know, you have no defense against the implication that you opted to keep selling anyway for the money. If we can't bear such a thought for the favorite company, mentally change the brand name to process this concept... or just watch some afternoon television and pay attention to endless stream of "we get money for you" legal commercials to see this same basic concept playing out over and over again against all kinds of companies who knew... but kept selling anyway.
In this case, if we assume M4 is going to close the hole, rushing to M4 makes more sense than rolling out even more new stuff with M3. Else, if M4 is in short supply, Corp may be doing what many have done before and just building in the assumption of some future settlement for each unit sold into their expectations.
Pair the concept of why iPads that were heavily expected and has a bit of a history of normally updating in March waited until May: did M4 need the added time to be ready for new iPads?
And then there's the simple profit motive: apparently, N3E is the cheaper chip process. And I heard somewhere- but this could be the wildest of speculation- Apple likes to harvest every possible nickel out of each transaction.
So those hoping for M4 seem to have some legit hope. Would Apple launch M4 in iPads? That seems unlikely... but again I think about the legal point referenced above. Would a Mac or two launch with this if M4 is THE chip launched here? What Macs are still on deck? Studio and Pro. Any rumors about them getting updated soon? Yes, there have been some. How long is this presentation to "only spec bump a few iPads"? 2 Hours. Hmmmm.
I just don't see Apple letting a tablet leapfrog over their laptops even if the M3 Pro, and M3 Max might still beat out an M4 in an iPad performance wise.
Do I know what I'm talking about? No, not really. But it would blow me away if there was an M4 iPad released soon. Then there is the question of whether a new version iOS will really take advantage of the M4 now or in the near future.
I love my M1 iPad Pro, and I bumped RAM and storage up hoping against hope the then new M1 would truly take advantage of all of the "upgraded" hardware. IMHO it did not.
Should I be totally off with my crystal ball I will happily eat my words washed down with a nice glass of vino!
About time. I expect iOS 17.5 and iPadOS 17.5 to be available by May 6, 2024 to support the new iPad models, though.
unlikely. WWDC/iPhone 15 were prerecorded and mark considers those as events.
Now should I return my iPad Pro 11” I just bought 2 days ago?
Hoping for some decent hw prerequisites for this pencil, such as M4 with 8GB of RAM, for more premium experience.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
As much as I'd like to see an M4 in the yet to be released iPad Pro, I have my doubts. The MacBooks top out with M3 chips, correct? Note I do understand the MacBook Pro laptops have M3, M3 Pro, and M3 Max chip choices.
I just don't see Apple letting a tablet leapfrog over their laptops even if the M3 Pro, and M3 Max might still beat out an M4 in an iPad performance wise.
Do I know what I'm talking about? No, not really. But it would blow me away if there was an M4 iPad released soon. Then there is the question of whether a new version iOS will really take advantage of the M4 now or in the near future.
I love my M1 iPad Pro, and I bumped RAM and storage up hoping against hope the then new M1 would truly take advantage of all of the "upgraded" hardware. IMHO it did not.
Should I be totally off with my crystal ball I will happily eat my words washed down with a nice glass of vino!
I agree with much of this. M4 is NOT logical in isolation... particularly with a seemingly established concept of iPhone FIRST, trickle down to Macs or iPads, then trickle down to the other (iPads or Macs)... and get to an AppleTV eventually.
However, again, there is ONE special circumstance to influence "normal": legal risk in continuing to sell chips with an "unfixable" hack hole in them. A company can't just opt to keep selling something that can bring harm to buyers and avoid the legal events that will certainly follow. The ONLY remedy once they know about it is to replace the product with a different one ASAP... and the different one mitigates the legal risk.
As an exercise, change the subject. Corp sells this revolutionary fire retardant called Asbestos. It's incredible... and ideally used in anything subject to the risk of fire. They make vast fortunes with this incredible product. Then they come to realize there is an unforeseen flaw in the product that causes tangible harm to users of it. A choice must be made: keep raking in huge revenue by continuing to sell it or alter or replace the product with something that resolves the harm. The Asbestos makers opted to keep selling Asbestos. They chose to keep the money tap flowing... knowing that it would catch up to them and they would have to pay eventually.
Is that too extreme? How about J&J talcum powder? Or Roundup bug killer? Or the infamous Ford Pinto fiasco? There are actually THOUSANDS of such incidences. Those are just some of the ones that resulted in HUGE legal payouts because they were tied to lives being lost... and thus are generally known to about everyone on some level. This hardware hack hole probably won't kill one person, but it may facilitate some classic computer-based crimes, resulting in losses of money of size should it affect many Apple product owners. Everyone with a M1-M3 has the "unfixable" hole in their Mac.
Long story short: in ALL of these cases where a company knows but keeps selling anyway, the outcome is always the same. There will be a legal consequence, usually a settlement of size, mostly enriching lawyers instead of the people actually affected. The right move to minimize the size of that settlement is to replace the problematic products as fast as possible. Thus, if M4 is ready, don't choose to launch new products with the problem in them.
I fully grasp the illogic of M4 launching in iPads vs. the established historical sequence of events. So maybe the 2 hours rolls out some Macs too? I don't know. I simply offer the reality of what pretty much always happens throughout history as a unique catalyst for Apple to move beyond M1-M3 and related hardware ASAP. Whether that means iPads with M4 or not is TBD. I am simply not so quick to cling to traditional (sequence of events) against this unique variable... and the certainty of what history shows will follow.
The easy thing to do now is look the other way. A head in the sand that that kind of thing can't happen to Apple is an easy assumption too. But we see regular class actions against Apple and some of those result in settlements. This one will too whether these iPads launch with M3 or M4. Now that the hole is known, the only real question is the ever-growing size of the settlement to follow. The faster Apple stops selling M1-M3 products, the smaller the eventual settlement size.
Last edited:
Once he sais “as I have mentioned earlier” , you will understand from the context which version is he referring to. Lol.
Is this the issue you mean? The one that can be fixed by the application developer by flipping a switch?
I think you're overselling the severity of this security flaw. Even if you weren't, Apple has survived a previous class-action of a similar nature.
Let prices loose. New iPad Pro starts from $4000.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I'm not saying this will destroy Apple or Apple is doomed... so no need to blow it out of proportion. What I am saying is that the plausibility of rushing to M4 could be to minimize the size of the eventual settlement. My guess is that that settlement- like many others- will seem like pennies on the many dollars that Apple rakes in... as all such settlements usually are. However, the ultimate SIZE of the settlement grows as time passes... worsening by choosing to sell more products with the problem AFTER the problem is known.
This is not an attack on Apple. This is not some kind of troll thing. Apparently, there is simply a structural "loose end" in M1-M3 that they didn't catch while making them and now it is revealed and established. Anyone can make mistakes and there are always mistakes being made by all kinds of companies. The Asbestos makers, J&J, Roundup and Ford, etc. didn't set out to make products to harm people- those we're all unintended/unexpected mistakes too... sometimes not discovered and tangibly known until many years later.
Conceptually, M4 (or maybe we wait for M5?) closes the hole. If so and if Mfix is ready to roll, the point of my posts is mostly to say there is a unique reason to NOT follow the established sequence of events and go ahead and get M4 out there. And there are enough M4 rumors flying around already to not arbitrarily dismiss the concept because we think we see some tradition in 2.5 generations of M-series releases that everything starts with iPhone first, then Macs/iPads... etc. That's only an apparent pattern until Apple changes it... like how M-base is released months before M-pro & M-max. That already altered that apparent pattern of hardware releases last October.
More simply: if M4 resolves the issue and is ready, Apple should use it NOW... and make the other transitions as fast as possible to minimize the eventual settlement size. There are other rumors supporting this "rush to M4" thing, not solely revolving around this legal concept but also tied to A.I. and the expanded profitability of chips made in the N3E process. There have been rumors last few days that expected Mac upgrades were just skipping M3 versions and jumping over to M4.
And the classic "throw just one switch in the compiler" always sounds so very good... like how all Mac apps could go silicon by throwing that one switch. Yet here we are years later with still a pretty good number of apps not yet converted. Those "one" switches must be HEAVY.
Can I be wrong about this? I certainly, CERTAINLY can. This is called rumors and our posts are speculation. Another of my logical chains of thought had me believing that Vpro would not roll out with "outdated" M2 months after the launch of M3, M3PRO and M3MAX chips... and yet, it did launch with M2. So can new iPad launch with M3? They certainly can. Could they launch with M4? They certainly can if it is ready. Who knows for sure? Only Apple.
Last edited:
Starting at $4K is wild. Up to $4K i can see.
M-Series chip aside, i'm calling it now. the iPad Pro will come with a "next-gen" vapor cooling chassis. [which will be trickled down to iPhone 16 Pro/Max]. This would allow for a "Pro" M-series chip, 36GB of RAM and up to 8TB of SSD.
First time ever, maxed out iPad Pro w/cellular for $5,500.
Releasing M4 to fix the issue after 5 months of M3 has to be the most disrespectful act. If that's the case, then Apple should involuntary recall every M3 Mac for free replacements.
The shortest time between M2 and M3 is 9-months. M1 to M2 is 1 Year, 3 months.
There has to be a statute of limitations where we have the ability to act. 5 months definitely feel like it. After a year, you're on your one.
If it has dual os I’m all in. When keyboard is attached it goes to macOS or something like that. Or user option. Would be awesome mobile companion to complement the Mac Studio as a primary machine.
Can we get 14" iPads? Or is this just putting an M3 chip and OLED on the existing iPads?
And still no eraser on the apple pencil, bummer.
And still no eraser on the apple pencil, bummer.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Appreciate the concept: a corporate view might see it differently:
- Risk some disgruntled customers unhappy about tech advancing faster than an apparent normal believed to be seen in only 3 generations of chip rollouts. Haven't we all been there at one time or another?
- Pile on additional settlement budget for rolling out new products with a hardware hole that will almost certainly require a cash settlement eventually.
As a customer, I completely feel what you share there. Customer don't want to feel like the new tech they recently bought is a generation behind any quicker than some norm they perceive in their own head. I jumped on an M-series ULTRA Mac as the last Mac I purchased. About 6 months later a next gen MAX chip Mac rolled out with much of the same "muscle." I would have liked longer time with "king of the hill" tech in that very expensive Mac. But that's how it goes with tech.
Business tends to think mostly in dollars & cents in matters like this. If there's any merit to what I've shared, one scenario doesn't have direct cost at risk (just a harsh slap at goodwill)... the other is a running tab.
And Apple's history shows that Apple products don't always wait about a year to advance. Recall the infamous iPad 3 as one example.
Last edited: