One more Intel Mac? Good, which means we will have several more years of support for Intel machines.
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 References Unreleased 2020 16-Inch MacBook Pro in Boot Camp Update
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't understand. He asked whether it would be intel 10 or intel 11, post #4 just says not ARM.
I dunno, the names of macbooks are always by year and that graphics update didn't cause the 2019 mbp to get a new name.
Tiger lake is meant for the ultra thin and light models. Intel doesn't have the Tiger Lake chips that Apple usually use for the high-end MBPs, like the 16-inch MBP.
Tiger Lake-H has been preannounced, just not with a concrete date yet (but apparently with the info that it'll go up to eight cores).
In addition to that, we'll probably see Rocket Lake-H, possibly sooner (and maybe with up to ten cores), but not 10nm.
Guys, you think there will be a redesign for the ARM Macs? is too strange that they release a new machine with a whole new system in a design that is 4 years old. Furthermore, in this line, nobody has seen or reveal any rumor about a hypotetic new design as a year ago with the 16 inch MBP (i.e. hidden icons in Catalina, some leaks of the charger). It seems nothing is in the line, Kuo dissapeared, also Gurman, compared in a year ago. I dont feel that hype! 
I think what you mean is you don't give a crap about windows on a Mac - many people do, me included. No Windows OS VMs = no Mac for me unfortunately. A hundred bucks does not get you the ability to run say 10 Windows Servers as I am right now on the Mac Mini to my right, or the couple of user environments I have running very well on my iMac Pro in front of me.
I've yet to find a Windows laptop that will run my demo set virtually either, although I'll be shortly trying to on the 17" XPS. That's why I'm hoping I may get one more gen out of the 16.
Of course I could do what I need with expensive Window Intel machines. Of course I could. I just prefer doing it on MacOS. But preference doesn't get the day job done, being able to actually do the things that keep me in houses & holidays does.
If you need Windows too, it's a tough decision. But also, consider if you want a first gen product, a truly big first gen product, something Apple hasn't done in years. I think it'll be better to skip this first iteration and get the (hopefully) bug free second version. And I'm not just talking hardware bugs, Mac OS has to run very stable on it too and also all 3rd party apps have to transition too. All of this needs time for a smooth experience.
Haha, I was just replying about this to one of the first posters, then saw your message.
I'm using one of those ''last good macbook pro'', it's still very fast, but shows its age when doing a lot of 4K editing and animation work. So I'm tempted too if this turns out to be a last Intel MacBook Pro.
I have a 2019 MacBook Pro 16 I got 11 months ago and I can tell you it has been one of the best computers I have owned. I use a Razer EGPU box with a EVGA 2060 KO card with soon a 3080 card and the system runs everything wonderfully. Bootcamp and Windows 10 runs with no problems. I run Oculus Quest 2 VR headset, which is the most fun I have had with computers in years. To play Star Wars Squadrons in Virtual Reality and a HOTAS flight stick is magic. And then I can jump back to Mac Big Sur and do all my business work. Also with my Samsung Odyssey G7 gaming monitor the system is great for everything.
No one except for Apple themselves. During WWDC they stated that more Intel equipped Macs are still coming.
Apple is also technically an OEM. There is no reason why they cannot work together on this and bring ARM Windows to run on AS Macs. This isn't 1990 anymore. Apple and Microsoft have been working closely together on various projects and MS themselves are quite keen to move onto as many platforms as possible and not rely solely on the x86 platform.
Apple have a pretty good idea how many people are running Bootcamp. They will either give you a solution, or somebody has already drawn across the word "Bootcamp" on the white board with a red marker years ago.
Last edited:
Not at all. Windows is an occasional workload, and the Mac has far better overall economics. Having a single machine that does both has been a huge cost saver, and increase employee sat significantly.
just because some people only use canned mass market software doesn't mean everyone, or even most, do. The corporate market is an important piece and it requires intel compatibility. Apples walking away from it.
Arm windows is mostly experimental without arm applications. And the market for those would be so small that many of the important vendors will spend the resources to port to a completely different architecture.
as far as knowing how many people need intel, it's not just bootcamp, it's virtualization. And in both cases, unless the user or company enables diagnostics (which few companies do), Apple is dark to a large number of users.
remember Craig even indicated in an interview that they were aware of the issue. That's rare for Apple to acknowledge, and holds out hope for some magic long term solution.
There is no reasonable way to consider playing games to be anything close to "real work", so I don't think games being ported or not counts.
Virtualization could definitely be an issue, but Parallels has been very quiet since WWDC, I wouldn't be surprised if there is a major announcement when the first Mac is launched.
I have VirtualBox with Windows on my 4.2 GHz i7 64 GB 5k iMac, and only use it for the convenience when performing simplest tasks since it is such a terrible experience. If I have to work for any extended period of time, or with apps requiring any kind of performance, I use a different computer anyhow.
Considering Ubuntu Desktop is available for Raspberry Pi it would be odd if it isn't available for AS shortly after launch, which means you should be able to run anything you can compile yourself. Of course this means some proprietary software may be cut off (once again, unless there is some virtualization rosetta magic happening) but I definitely consider this an acceptable loss. It's not like there will be no way to run this software in the future, and for those of us that desperately want the 12" back it is definitely the right trade-off.
I haven't ever heard of any significantly large corporate environment running Windows on Apple hardware. Can you give any examples?
BootCamp-041-96204 for MacBook Pro 16,4 comes with drivers for Intel Tiger Lake.
Let's guess why Apple would include these drivers in the package ...
Let's guess why Apple would include these drivers in the package ...
bootcampdrivers.com have been releasing updated AMD drivers for months now.
MacBooks are available in a bunch of companies, among dell and hp, etc. Usually only a couple of configs are offered and maintained.
Particularly interesing is, that most of the Microsoft employees (mostly .NET specialists) I follow on Twitter use Macbooks (and iPhones, if anybody cares).
There are plenty of examples in many companies. Not only related to using Windows but also Linux.
Attachments
Last edited:
Macs have been available as an option at several of the large companies I have been at, but always running macOS. For Windows, Dell or HP has typically been the only supported configurations.
All the companies in that image deliver native Mac software, and .NET is available on macOS. Are you sure any of them actually support running Windows exclusively on Apple hardware?
Pretty much, yeah. But I have no evidence at hand. And .NET on macOS is not that mature, really. Mono is a thing but it sucks and .NET Core is not fit for desktop development on other OSes than Windows. But the people I follow all use Visual Studio (there is basically no great alternative) and VS for Mac is really bad.
I'm talking about people that specifically do not develop for macOS here.