A lot of smart watches and trackers use transflective LCD screens to get their long battery life. They are basically LCDs without backlights. The downside is a dim, low contrast screen.
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 Executive Hints at Apple Silicon Mac Pro and Ongoing Focus on Apple Watch Battery Life
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I always thought e-ink would be good for use in things that require semi-static labels such as keycaps on a keyboard that can be changed to show different character sets or emojis.
Entry-level M1 Ultra Mac Studio is $4K - 20-core CPU (16P/4E) / 48-core GPU / 64GB RAM / 1TB SSD; bump it to the base M2 Ultra - 24-core CPU (16P/8E) / 60-core GPU / 96GB RAM / 1TB SSD - and add $2K for the Cheesegrater 2.0 chassis, hefty PSU, & PCIe slots; that will keep an entry-level M2 Ultra Mac Pro at the same $6K cost as the current 2019 Intel Mac Pro...
Maxed out M1 Ultra Mac Studio is $8K - 20-core CPU (16P/4E) / 64-core GPU / 128GB RAM / 8TB SSD...
Apple is charging $800 for 64GB of RAM, that will bring us to 192GB of RAM, which should be the maximum for the M2 Ultra SoC...
So yeah, a maxed out M2 Ultra Mac Pro should be about $10K...
Now for the truly hypothetical...
- M2 Extreme Mac Pro - 48-core CPU (32P/16E) / 152-core GPU / 384GB RAM / 8TB SSD - $20K
- ComputeModule - (64GB, 128GB, & 192GB RAM options) - $2K to $4K
- ComputeModule Duo - (128GB, 256GB, & 384GB RAM options) - $4K to $8K
Last edited:
We believe strongly that Apple silicon can power and transform experiences from the MacBook Air to all the way up to the Mac Studio. We've been very clear from the beginning that our goal is to take our entire product line to Apple Silicon. And that's something we intend to do.
Is there a Mac other than the Mac Pro that has not got a AS chip? Not that I'm aware of. Unless you are gonna say the Mac Pro is dead and there is an unannounced product like the Mac Studio. Wouldn't Apple have patted themselves on the back and say, mission accomplished, job done, transition complete if they were in fact done? "we intend to do" sure sounds like they are not done.
Is there a Mac other than the Mac Pro that has not got a AS chip? Not that I'm aware of. Unless you are gonna say the Mac Pro is dead and there is an unannounced product like the Mac Studio. Wouldn't Apple have patted themselves on the back and say, mission accomplished, job done, transition complete if they were in fact done? "we intend to do" sure sounds like they are not done.
Even more frustrating is that the exec hints Apple still has no way to actually extend the battery life and the best they can do is faster charging. Maybe they need to look for something other than Lithium to make the batteries. Everyone is obsessed with Lithium these days, but it seems batteries made of it are too sh***y in terms of battery life.
He did, but I have a theory (it's a long shot) as to why the Mac Pro was not included in the statement...
He's right that the M-series SoCs worked perfectly in those systems, "from the MacBook Air to all the way up to the Mac Studio", as these are basically closed boxes that optimize performance and efficiency. But the Mac Pro is an open, expandable system, where components need to be easily replaceable and upgradable. And an SoC such as the M-Series is antithetical to this type of system.
There's another line in the article that might be an allusion to this...
I believe the Mac Pro will be exactly at is now, with discrete CPU (ASi or Intel), expandable memory, PCI-E slots, discrete GPUs (ASi or AMD). It will also have a new T-series SoC with ISP, NPU, media engines, Secure Enclave, etc.
I have no doubt the Mac Pro will be updated. Apple dumped a lot of time and resources redesigning it, even go so far as to create a Pro Workflow group within the company to work with professionals in certain core fields. Not to mention developing their MPX modules and the Afterburner card. This was all done while they were also planning to transition the Mac to ASi, so I find it difficult to believe the Pro was not designed with that in mind.
(The Studio Macs are a replacement for the higher end iMacs. Yes, we'll get a larger iMac, but it'll top out with an Mx Pro, just as the mini does.)
Last edited:
Hoping to see the new Mac Pro at WWDC.
I was just about to post that.
That's very different from, "and that's something we've done"
1. Two reasons, I can think of...
All M2 Max SoCs are being used for MacBook Pros.
Apple has an update schedule. The Studio isn't even a year old yet. And they may plan to skip a generation since, these are lower selling systems. So no M2, have to wait for M3.
2. Product differentiation... a mini with a Max is a Studio.
Lithium has the most power for a given volume and weight so chemistry is not likely to provide a quit jump in charge time in the near term.
The most likely way for Apple to get better battery life will come when they switch the Watch chips to 3nm. The current chips are built on 7nm and have not been significantly updated in the last several versions. 3nm chips should use noticeably less power. I suspect that could happen as as soon as next year.
Best Buy actually uses e ink (or a very low power/refresh rate LCD) for a lot of their product labels on the shelves now. I think they’re e ink because I’ve seen them get updated and it’s like a full second for it to update completely.
Hundreds of Best Buy Stores will have E INK Price Labels - Good e-Reader
Best Buy is getting bullish about changing their price tags from paper to digital. The company has just signed a deal to outfit 119 stores in the United States with E INK based ESL and spent $13 million to make it happen. Deliveries under this order are scheduled to begin during the second...
goodereader.com
They are, and have been. Numerous labs in academia, government, and industry have been agressively pursing research into a wide range of alternate battery chemistries for several years. But none of the higher-performing alternatives to lithium are commercially practical yet. You'll know when they are when you start seeing them in devices.
I don't get all the focus by the MR Kremlinologists 
on Borcher's quotes when it comes to the Mac Pro. According to what was published in India Times, the interviewer never asked about the MP, and Borcher never took the initiative to mention it. So there's really nothing there when it comes to the MP, other than the interviewer's own interpretation (which may or may not be based on something Borcher said that wasn't published):
In sum, based on what Borcher was reported as saying, there's no new info. here about the MP, which most continue to expect to see some time in 2023.
on Borcher's quotes when it comes to the Mac Pro. According to what was published in India Times, the interviewer never asked about the MP, and Borcher never took the initiative to mention it. So there's really nothing there when it comes to the MP, other than the interviewer's own interpretation (which may or may not be based on something Borcher said that wasn't published):In sum, based on what Borcher was reported as saying, there's no new info. here about the MP, which most continue to expect to see some time in 2023.
"We believe strongly that Apple silicon can power and transform experiences from the MacBook Air to all the way up to the Mac Studio."
To me that reads EOL MacPro.
To me that reads EOL MacPro.
Best Buy actually uses e ink (or a very low power/refresh rate LCD) for a lot of their product labels on the shelves now. I think they’re e ink because I’ve seen them get updated and it’s like a full second for it to update completely.
Hundreds of Best Buy Stores will have E INK Price Labels - Good e-Reader
Best Buy is getting bullish about changing their price tags from paper to digital. The company has just signed a deal to outfit 119 stores in the United States with E INK based ESL and spent $13 million to make it happen. Deliveries under this order are scheduled to begin during the second...
That's something that's been done in Europe for some time – I've seen them in French hypermarkets, where paper shelf-edge labels had been completely replaced by ESL technology.
More details in this article: https://www.thegrocer.co.uk/technol...ctronic-shelf-labels-heres-why/661068.article
...so just say "We believe strongly that Apple silicon can power and transform experiences across the whole Mac range".
Specifically describing the range as "MacBook Air to Mac Studio" when they're still selling a "Mac Pro" certainly implies that the Mac Pro is no longer seen as part of the range and/or they don't believe that it could be "transformed" by Apple Silicon. OK, so most likely that was just the sort silly choice of words that people spout when trying to respond to a question without answering it, but it is certainly not - as the article would have it - any sort of confirmation that a new Mac Pro is coming, and there is the slight chance that it could have been a meaningful slip.
Not now, but the iMac Pro and 5k iMac* were very much part of the range back in 2019 when Apple first said they were going to transition "the entire range" to Apple Silicon - so "Take the entire range to Apple Silicon" has been proven to mean "whatever the entire range ends up as after we've dropped a few models".
(* which was actually a sensible decision given that Apple Silicon has demolished the performance gap between laptops and desktops, so it makes more sense to produce large screen display/docks that can work with MBPs rather than all-in-ones).
Yeah, I don't understand the call for e-ink on the Watch. I've been using a nice full-color e-ink screen in a project of mine, and while it looks decent enough, A) the display quality is nowhere near Apple's standards for the Watch, and B) the refresh time is absolutely nuts. You would go crazy watching that damn thing flicker and stutter every time you switched to an app or a notification.
All prior Intel models were kept around until there was an ASi model to replace it.
- The Intel based 27" iMac was sold up until the Mac Studio was released*.
- The Intel based Mac mini was sold up until the M2 Pro mini was released.
- The Intel based Mac Pro is still around, because they haven't released anything to replace it yet. If the Studio was a replacement for the Mac Pro, there would be no reason they would still be selling it. However, it is still around because they want people to know that they still sell it and they are planning on upgrading it at some point just as they did with those other last Intel holdouts.
*The Mac Studio line was meant to replace the high-end iMacs. It does not mean we will not see another large iMac. I do think they intend the larger iMac to only ever get an Mx Pro with a very slim chance of an upgrade option to a Max.
Mac Desktop Line up...
Mac mini Mx/Mx Pro
iMac 24" Mx, 30" Mx Pro(/Max?)
Mac Studio Mx Max/Ultra
Mac Pro ASi/Intel* CPU
*Yes, Intel. Either keep the current the model around or the new model will have CPU on a "daughter board" so you choose Intel or Apple's new ASi CPU. I think there are enough users on the extreme high-end who still need Intel support. When they no longer do, they'll be able to switch out Intel card and "upgrade" to ASi.
Last edited:
So what? The point was that when Apple first said they would transition the entire range, 5k iMacs and iMac Pros were part of that range and they've been dropped rather than transitioned to AS. A Mac Studio + Studio Display combo isn't an AS iMac.... YMMV whether you think it's better or worse but it's not a direct replacement.
I believe the statement at the end of the Mac Studio launch was something like "That just leaves one system to transition - the Mac Pro - but that's for another day". Translated: there might be an AS Mac Pro but there certainly ain't gonna be an AS 5k iMac in the immediate future... and there are very clear reasons why Apple might not produce a new high-end iMac: a lot of customers who previously had an Intel MBP for portability and an iMac for power can now get all the power they need from an Apple Silicon MBP with a large screen, which will decimate the iMac market, while people who do want desktop systems will want to choose the display that suits there purposes - and even Apple already offer a choice of two displays. Much more sensible to make a range of laptops, headless desktops and displays which will work with either.
Yes. They do actual 24/7 monitoring. I used to own several FitBit models, and heart rate data was always constant.
I think the key here is that Apple may achieve their objectives by eliminating models rather than transitioning them e.g. the iMac and, maybe, the Mac Pro.
The statements can be read two ways, we are done and it scales from the Mini to Mac Studio or we have one left to transition. However the market for the Mac Pro is very specific and the integrated system approach on the Apple Silicon die is not compatible with the objectives that were set in the past for the Mac Pro. Heck we even lost the ability to upgrade the memory for the iMac when they killed the iMac (27") and substituted the much more expensive Mac Studio/Studio Display option. So they have gradually eliminated all the abilities we had to add memory and larger disk space (albeit via 3rd party kits) to our machines in the pursuit of performance and efficiency. This is not compatible with the Mac Pro philosophy where the machine could be scaled to meet ones needs as your requirements changed.
If this meets customer needs or Apple are willing to walk away from the old Mac Pro customer base, so be it. They are obviously in debate otherwise they would have made some sort of clear statement or announcement, but I think they have options they are not revealing and are not sure where to go. I know the idea of buying a $10K machine that cannot evolve with my business is a definite no and I will end up (as I have actually done now) moving back to the Windows AMD/Intel world for my serious desktop machines where I can scale the machines as I need and know I am going to get 7 years or so life out of them. We have to regard Apple machines as disposable items which are replaced every 3 to 5 years or less. Just like iPhones......
The statements can be read two ways, we are done and it scales from the Mini to Mac Studio or we have one left to transition. However the market for the Mac Pro is very specific and the integrated system approach on the Apple Silicon die is not compatible with the objectives that were set in the past for the Mac Pro. Heck we even lost the ability to upgrade the memory for the iMac when they killed the iMac (27") and substituted the much more expensive Mac Studio/Studio Display option. So they have gradually eliminated all the abilities we had to add memory and larger disk space (albeit via 3rd party kits) to our machines in the pursuit of performance and efficiency. This is not compatible with the Mac Pro philosophy where the machine could be scaled to meet ones needs as your requirements changed.
If this meets customer needs or Apple are willing to walk away from the old Mac Pro customer base, so be it. They are obviously in debate otherwise they would have made some sort of clear statement or announcement, but I think they have options they are not revealing and are not sure where to go. I know the idea of buying a $10K machine that cannot evolve with my business is a definite no and I will end up (as I have actually done now) moving back to the Windows AMD/Intel world for my serious desktop machines where I can scale the machines as I need and know I am going to get 7 years or so life out of them. We have to regard Apple machines as disposable items which are replaced every 3 to 5 years or less. Just like iPhones......
1. The point is, they weren't dropped until a there was a system that could replace them. (The iMac Pro was dropped right after the transition began - it was a redundant system anyway after the new Intel iMacs were released in August just before the first M1 Mac was released.) Don't you think it's odd that only a little over a year into the transition they released an entire new line? A new line of systems makes no sense during a transition, unless they were created to replace something. Never did Apple say they were going to transition every single model in those two years, they specifically said range. From MacBook Air to MacBook Pro, from Mac mini to to iMac to Mac Pro. The iMac did transition, but only the 24" has made it (so far). Maybe they didn't think the M1 Pro/Max were worth redesigning the larger iMac for? Maybe they wanted to sell more $1799 Studio Displays? Who knows, but the lack of a 27" iMac model in no way indicates that the Mac Pro will not be updated.
2. How in the hell did you "might" out that statement?
3. And stop with the cannibalization crap especially across systems with different form factors. No one is going to buy an iMac if they need a laptop. And no one is going to a MacBook if they have no need for a laptop and want a larger screen. Furthermore, Apple couldn't care less if one Mac line ate into sales of another. I'm pretty sure the Mac mini and the MBA didn't decimate the 24" iMac market.
4. Except... Uhh... the 24" iMac. Why bother redesigning it? Just because they said? Or maybe Apple thinks/knows the iMac is still a really popular system.
Bottom line, it is huge stretch to equate EOL'ing a model of the iMac to dropping the Mac Pro line.
Pragmatically, The iMac Pro got subsumed by the 2020 5k iMac. Once Intel 'desktop' CPU processor packages went to 8 (and up) cores the iMac Pro was on slippery slope (regardless of Intel -> AS transition). That Intel screwed up the W-2x00 transition from 2100 to 2200 series only greased the slope with even bigger dose of WD-40. Apple didn't immediately lop off sales, but they didn't do anything to stop that subsumption either. Given pandemic supply chain disruptions, that is not all that surprising. They let parts they could readily get, slowly die off to fill the gaps.
The iMac was replaced. Apple explicitly said so. Mac Studio + Studio Display not being a replacement is a 'form over function' argument. The Mac Studio is playing essentially the same role in the Mac product line up as the iMac 27" did. Functionality wise, it is a an extremely viable replacement in most contexts. If you want a "All-in-one" just buy a VESA bracket Studio display and buy a stand that can attach the Studio to. Not going to get a blessing from Apple's 'thinness design politburo' but it would be 'all-in-one'.
The 'iPad on a stick' iMac design path and the iMac Pro are two diverging design concepts. If the 'thinness' folks have taken over the steering wheel of the iMac, then the old 'iMac Pro' concept of pushing the higher AIO thermal envelopes is probably done. It has little to do with Apple Silicon and more to do what road the industrial design folks are driving down. There is no iMac Mn Pro ( or Mn Max) path either if the main logic board has to be stuffed into the narrowest bezel , chin possible to best approximate the iPad features.
The 'iMac on a stick' isn't strictly a direct replacement either. Don't even get a Ethernet socket by default on the entry model. Even if do, it is stuffed into an odd-ball, afterthought location. If Apple has stuffed just only an M1 into a dramatically thinned out 27" iMac (e.g., basically shipped Studio Display with a M1 instead of an A13), then that really wouldn't have been a real direct replacement either. Yes, you can pay even more money to get the Ethernet port and a decent minimum number of ports back... but largely the same thing with the Studio+Studio situation also... just pay more money.
The Mac Mini , MBA , MBP 13" all leveraged repurposed chassis to launch and the iMac 24" drove out into iPad-land. ... Tossing a M1 Pro , Max , and probably even an Ultra wouldn't have been that hard if they simply just reused the iMac Pro chassi. They didn't. There is evidence that Apple was throwing away the classi iMac chassis. And likely painted themselves into a corner on the big screen version.
That is an entirely contrived interpretation. "leaves one system to be transition" pretty overly implies that it is going to be transitioned. If it not going to be transitioned then why use that descriptive verb?
I think a major contributing reason is much more basic than that. The pragmatically proprietary 5K display only worked at the lower price point that Apple was willing to pay because they drove (herded ) so much volume to the component for a relatively long period of time. ( In year one Apple could price those displays at their year 3 rate because had super long commitments to buy for 3+ years, so just got discounts up front since production line was not going to change at all (no screen upgrades) for a very long period of time).
What Apple wants to commit to at 27" at this point in time is likely in flux. The Studio is using a partially tweaked version the legacy screen , but it probably isn't going to be extremely competitive over next 3 years to what will come out in the general market. microLED is still more expensive than Apple wants to pay at class iMac 27" screen prices. Double layer OLED not looking as affordable either. Neither is miniLED. So if going to do a price hike... might as well loop it in as a docking station Display.
Pretty good chance the 24" iMac drifts aimlessly until they figure out 'next gen to commit to for 3-6 years' at an acceptable price point too.
Screen panel tech is going through an evolutionarily burst of activity now and they runs counter to the iMac's need to a long term , cheaper screen component costs. The current 24" screen may drifted into the same catagory as the 'educational iMac' ... long term system on ancient tech (that gets cheaper over time) that doesn't try to keep up on performance at all. Would be totally unsurprising if it fell back to just the limited 2 port model when pushed into the "bargain iMac' mode. There never was a 'edu 27" iMac".
The screen technology transition is playing as big a role as the Apple Silicon one... and it isn't on some explicit deadline that Apple set ( which is even more reasonable move by Apple to map out for the panademic supply chain disruptions. I doubt in 2020 they knew which way they were going to go in 2023-24. They had some 2018-2019 but they had been all shot-to-crap. )