Apple Tells Suppliers to Expect Strong MacBook Pro Shipments Going into 2017

[nt5672]

As a professional, you understand that you can't meet every customers demands (due to profitability). They're going to build the device that sells the most. And performance wise, anything more then this should be done on a desktop/server.

Kinda hard to put a desktop/server in my backpack when I travel, which is 100%. Although if the mini was a real computer and stayed about the same size, I would certainly put it and a 17 inch display in my backpack.

Oh and I do understand that some products have more profit than others, and keeping pro users happy has kept Apple in business in the past. There is more than my happiness to producing a product that has the highest level of performance possible.

 

[dilbert99]

It is an Intel limit on this CPU and using low power RAM. Apple could make a different computer that can use 32gb. But this CPU cannot use the low power RAM in greater than 16gb.

So in effect an Apple limitation. This is a pro computer that Apple decided to neuter.
[doublepost=1478729741][/doublepost]

Yep. But weight is important in a laptop. Logically it should make no sense that getting thinner is actually helpful because all laptops are super thin and easily fit into any bag. But I strongly suspect that "thin" sells devices more than we realize. Apple wanted to make this computer.

Also there have been some reports of real world tests of these machines with 16gb and they don't break a sweat even with dozens of programs up and running. Now some pros must have some points in their production and workflow where more ram helps. But this is fast RAM with a fast CPU and a very fast SSD. Probably only a tiny fraction of users could use more RAM. And it is unfortunate that there are no refreshed powerhouse desktops for those users. But Apple didn't want this laptop to solve those desktop issues.

Thin does not equal light but does help. I can fit my 15" rMBP into my bag just fine. Would I like it smaller, yes but not with all the compromises that come with it.
Would I like it lighter, oh yes.

My current 15" is the same weight as my 13"
[doublepost=1478729939][/doublepost]

As a professional, you understand that you can't meet every customers demands (due to profitability). They're going to build the device that sells the most. And performance wise, anything more then this should be done on a desktop/server.

Apple used to sell laptops that pro's wanted. They were powerful and desirable and sold in droves and had all the connectors you needed.
Profit? $250 billion in the bank = shafting the customer.

 

[shareef777]

So in effect an Apple limitation. This is a pro computer that Apple decided to neuter.
[doublepost=1478729741][/doublepost]
Thin does not equal light but does help. I can fit my 15" rMBP into my bag just fine. Would I like it smaller, yes but not with all the compromises that come with it.
Would I like it lighter, oh yes.

My current 15" is the same weight as my 13"
[doublepost=1478729939][/doublepost]
Apple used to sell laptops that pro's wanted. They were powerful and desirable and sold in droves and had all the connectors you needed.
Profit? $250 billion in the bank = shafting the customer.

You would take as much money as you could for what you do. Even if others are willing to do it cheaper. I honestly hate to say this, but MBPs have always been premium devices, and Apple is just making them even more premium now. Some people have the money to throw away and can live with it. MBPs are becoming the machine for the 1% (figuratively speaking).

 

[dilbert99]

You would take as much money as you could for what you do. Even if others are willing to do it cheaper. I honestly hate to say this, but MBPs have always been premium devices, and Apple is just making them even more premium now. Some people have the money to throw away and can live with it. MBPs are becoming the machine for the 1% (figuratively speaking).

No, sorry I can't agree with that. I have given a refund to people on eBay who have overbid for an item. I have integrity and courage.
[doublepost=1478731773][/doublepost]

I'm a software developer (primarily iOS, Android, and Java EE) and I'll be getting one. These machines are perfectly suitable for what I do.

You can't officially develop for Apple without an Apple device

 

[shareef777]

No, sorry I can't agree with that. I have given a refund to people on eBay who have overbid for an item. I have integrity and courage.
[doublepost=1478731773][/doublepost]
You can't officially develop for Apple without an Apple device

You sir, don't seem to understand how eBay works. How does one over-bid?

 

[dilbert99]

You sir, don't seem to understand how eBay works. How does one over-bid?

Offer more than I think an item was worth. I don't do it every time though, depends on what I am selling.

 

[Abazigal]

So it’s an Apple limitation. They were the ones that chose to put that CPU in the notebook.

Correct. Apple made a call given the constraints they were faced with, and chose to favour the 95% over the 5%.

 

[Elijen]

just 4 info, your signature says: "no reason to upgrade".

My signature is outdated

I need another laptop as the old one is using my GF. I would probably use it for 1 year more if I could.

 

[544263]

My signature is outdated
I need another laptop as the old one is using my GF. I would probably use it for 1 year more if I could.

yeah i thought it was outdated, just wanted to let you know.

 

[friedmud]

True professionals don't care about the price or dongles. They don't. But they hate having to use them.

Everyone's computing needs are different. Yours, as far as the laptop is concerned, seemingly could be met with a $300 Windows laptop (SSH and small compute jobs). Your work horse is a supercomputer. People without access to those may have legitimate beef with Macs falling behind Windows counterparts in performance.

Actually - those simulations generate massive datafiles that need to be manipulated on my laptop. They are 3D visualizations of multi-GB datasets (some can get into the TB... but I use other means to process those). I stress the SSD and graphics card when handling those files

Further, compiling speed is a major problem. I currently use my laptop plus 3 Mac Pros all chained together for compiling. Using distcc I do "make -j 76" and smash every available core I have sitting around me.

Finally, I'm also running smaller simulations right on my laptop. I'll routinely be using 4 cores for a simulation while I'm rendering the result in a 3D render window.

No: I need all of the horsepower I can get... and I use every drop of every machine (super or otherwise) that's available to me.

That's why upgraded SSDs, upgraded graphics cards, etc. in the new MBPs are important.
[doublepost=1478890709][/doublepost]

I agree, in part, but I think your point about Dropbox is perhaps revealing for Apple and iCloud.

Apple could show just how serious they are about the future of cloud computing if they could sort iCloud out. Right now, you're right - Dropbox IS the solution to a lot of file management and collaboration, but it shouldn't be. Virtual (file) servers between small networks are easy to achieve with dropbox. With iCloud, not so much. e.g. I can share a folder full of invoicing with my partner over dropbox. She can work on the document without downloading the whole folder and without being invited, save it back to the folder, and it's there for me when I next open it. All she has to do is log in on her computer with my dropbox details. Even with family sharing iCloud drive doesn't work as well.

Apple need to give iCloud drive the option to share folders with 'family' members to enable true collaboration. If they were to flip the switch on this I'd drop dropbox in a heartbeat. Right now I have 1TB dropbox, 200GB iCloud Drive for me, 200GB iCloud Drive for my wife, iTunes match, and family sharing for music. iCloud is a mess for this stuff.

I'm just saying that if apple could consolidate iCloud services they'd be onto a winner, and they might not be pissing people off with the lack of USB ports etc. (so much).

They'd definitely poach some Dropbox subscribers in the process too.

I agree - but at this point the world has pretty much standardized on Dropbox. In my line of work (scientific research)... everyone just expects that you share things on Dropbox. It's just the way it's done.

I don't think Apple will ever get to that level of penetration with iCloud... and maybe they shouldn't try.

I really want iCloud to be _awesome_... but I want it to be awesome for _personal_ use. I want it to be seamless to store my personal files there and things I want to share with my immediate family and have iCloud take care of the rest.

I don't think there is any fighting Dropbox for global sharing... but I think iCloud could be the go-to solution for personal file storage.

 

[manu chao]

That's a terrible mindset for a company to have. That people should just adapt to it instead of it accommodating them. It's not asking a lot for them to support current standards out of the box.

So, you would have preferred, eg, that all laptops come with at least two generation of video outputs: for example VGA+DVI and then later DVI+mDP?
[doublepost=1478898060][/doublepost]

The new MBP isn't too shabby in terms of i/o bandwidth with 4xTB3 ports which can all do anything (apart from the PCIe bandwidth restriction on 2 of them which is probably simply down to the processor not having that many PCIe lanes)

You probably know that this bandwidth restriction exists only on the 13" MBP.

I think one fly in the ointment is the idea of sharing video & data on a single socket: the "Thunderbolt Display" idea was great with 1440p video (shame Apple stunted the idea by keeping the TB display overpriced & the third-party docks took forever to appear) but if you're moving to 4k@60Hz, 5k or multiple UHD displays then it really doesn't leave much headroom for data (especially with the lack of uptake of DisplayPort 1.3) - hang one of those off a USB-C port and it takes all 4 high-speed pairs, just leaving the USB-2 legacy pair. It will run your keyboard & mouse, but you're not gonna want your ethernet or external drives running off that dock. TB3 does rather better, but still a big chunk of the bandwidth goes to the display. I suspect that the "single cable docking" dream is going to turn into 1 cable for display #1, 1 cable for display #2, 1 cable for charge & everything else. Still, not bad.

I don't know how a TB controller is splitting up the bandwidth but if a storage device and a 5K monitor sit on the same controller and the storage device needs more bandwidth, can't the refresh rate of the display be slowed down, in particular if the display displays largely static content?

And in the end, whether you need to connect two TB cables to your computer to carry the combined data load of 5K displays and other fast I/O or whether you connect one video cable to a video port and one TB cable to a TB port, it's two cables either way.

 

[theluggage]

I don't know how a TB controller is splitting up the bandwidth but if a storage device and a 5K monitor sit on the same controller and the storage device needs more bandwidth, can't the refresh rate of the display be slowed down, in particular if the display displays largely static content?

Not with "legacy" (haha) tech - a 60Hz screen needs 60 frames/second even if they're all identical. There's an AMD tech called "FreeSync" that does adaptive frame rates - and of course NVIDIA has a competing tech - but I don't know if the new Macs support FreeSync (it'll be the Intel TB3 controller and the Intel embedded graphics that are the bottleneck).

But, then, you can't guarantee that your video display will be static when you need your I/O bandwidth - if you're doing (say) video editing its actually a fair bet that the opposite is true. AFAIK FreeSync about power saving & avoiding graphics software having to sync to the vertical refresh to avoid "tearing", not reducing video bandwidth.

And in the end, whether you need to connect two TB cables to your computer to carry the combined data load of 5K displays and other fast I/O or whether you connect one video cable to a video port and one TB cable to a TB port, it's two cables either way.

My point with is that with anything up to 1440p as per the "old" thunderbolt display, there was enough bandwidth to do both video and data with one cable.

 

[manu chao]

My point with is that with anything up to 1440p as per the "old" thunderbolt display, there was enough bandwidth to do both video and data with one cable.

Even with a 4K display there will still be enough bandwidth. TB3 can take two 4K displays, meaning it can offer TB2 bandwidth for data and a 4K display on the same cable. And not too long ago, TB1 bandwidth was already sufficient for most storage.

 

[philosopherdog]

Aside from the emoji bar and thinness, in what way is it simply stunning?

In every conceivable way.

 

[jadot]

Actually - those simulations generate massive datafiles that need to be manipulated on my laptop. They are 3D visualizations of multi-GB datasets (some can get into the TB... but I use other means to process those). I stress the SSD and graphics card when handling those files

Further, compiling speed is a major problem. I currently use my laptop plus 3 Mac Pros all chained together for compiling. Using distcc I do "make -j 76" and smash every available core I have sitting around me.

Finally, I'm also running smaller simulations right on my laptop. I'll routinely be using 4 cores for a simulation while I'm rendering the result in a 3D render window.

No: I need all of the horsepower I can get... and I use every drop of every machine (super or otherwise) that's available to me.

That's why upgraded SSDs, upgraded graphics cards, etc. in the new MBPs are important.
[doublepost=1478890709][/doublepost]

I agree - but at this point the world has pretty much standardized on Dropbox. In my line of work (scientific research)... everyone just expects that you share things on Dropbox. It's just the way it's done.

I don't think Apple will ever get to that level of penetration with iCloud... and maybe they shouldn't try.

I really want iCloud to be _awesome_... but I want it to be awesome for _personal_ use. I want it to be seamless to store my personal files there and things I want to share with my immediate family and have iCloud take care of the rest.

I don't think there is any fighting Dropbox for global sharing... but I think iCloud could be the go-to solution for personal file storage.

The fact that Apple have iCloud for ANY kind of storage puts in the same arena as Dropbox, and in competition for the best user experience. Apple are always declaring that this is what they're all about - customer experience and creating amazing magical products that people can't live without.
I haven't heard Apple say "We created iCloud because we wanted to make something that was NEARLY as good as Dropbox were doing".

I can Fix iCloud in two steps.

1/ Make Family sharing about the storage. Everybody in the 'family' (say, up to 5 people) can access all of the storage with their iCloud Apple ID. It's easy to police, because you can't have an Apple ID without having an address, and you can't be invited to family sharing without being invited. This way you would have a pool of (paid for) storage for music, photos, documents, everything that can be synced and seen across multiple computers without having to log in with the master Apple ID. You can keep folders private or locked, or shared. IT'S EASY!

2/ Consolidate iTunes Match, Apple Music, Storage pricing into the family sharing ID's payment method. Currently I get billed for GB I don't use, and I also get billed for GB my family sharers need to use. They could be using the GB I'm not using! Sort out the prices. Match Dropbox for 1TB - that would be a good place to start. Make it a package price!

I'm not a programmer, but I'm not a luddite either - Even I can see that this stuff should be simple for Apple to, erm, simplify. The only reason they are not is because they don't want to.

maybe then the world wouldn't need to be standardised on Dropbox. I can't imagine that iCloud was set up to be 'Not the standard' - this half arsed approach doesn't make sense.

 

[BlandUsername]

The fact that Apple have iCloud for ANY kind of storage puts in the same arena as Dropbox, and in competition for the best user experience. Apple are always declaring that this is what they're all about - customer experience and creating amazing magical products that people can't live without.
I haven't heard Apple say "We created iCloud because we wanted to make something that was NEARLY as good as Dropbox were doing".

I can Fix iCloud in two steps.

1/ Make Family sharing about the storage. Everybody in the 'family' (say, up to 5 people) can access all of the storage with their iCloud Apple ID. It's easy to police, because you can't have an Apple ID without having an address, and you can't be invited to family sharing without being invited. This way you would have a pool of (paid for) storage for music, photos, documents, everything that can be synced and seen across multiple computers without having to log in with the master Apple ID. You can keep folders private or locked, or shared. IT'S EASY!

2/ Consolidate iTunes Match, Apple Music, Storage pricing into the family sharing ID's payment method. Currently I get billed for GB I don't use, and I also get billed for GB my family sharers need to use. They could be using the GB I'm not using! Sort out the prices. Match Dropbox for 1TB - that would be a good place to start. Make it a package price!

I'm not a programmer, but I'm not a luddite either - Even I can see that this stuff should be simple for Apple to, erm, simplify. The only reason they are not is because they don't want to.

maybe then the world wouldn't need to be standardised on Dropbox. I can't imagine that iCloud was set up to be 'Not the standard' - this half arsed approach doesn't make sense.

Icloud, dropbox, whatever, always banned in our company. Most companies these days cant even think about that type of cloud without failing a Deloitte audit. The cloud is not the answer for data.

 

[DevNull0]

In every conceivable way.

I'm not sure you and I have the same definition of "every conceivable". I think you meant to say "not a single".

 

[jadot]

Icloud, dropbox, whatever, always banned in our company. Most companies these days cant even think about that type of cloud without failing a Deloitte audit. The cloud is not the answer for data.

Yet perfect for a small business' shared server/collaborative data resource. I'm sorry your company has a more perhaps enterprise style structure, maybe with dedicated servers and, how did you put it? - 'whatever'. I just want to keep my office running via the cloud so I can free up on site storage for production.
Most companies these days aren't most companies.

 

[friedmud]

Icloud, dropbox, whatever, always banned in our company. Most companies these days cant even think about that type of cloud without failing a Deloitte audit. The cloud is not the answer for data.

Definitely the depends on the company. I can tell you that in academia Dropbox is king. It is the de-facto standard for collaboration around the globe.