Apple to Release New MacBook Pro and Air as Early as October, AMD iMacs and 5K Display With LG Also in Works

[agustinbg]

Apple haven't held a October event for a few years now, so unless they are going back to doing that i don't know. It seemed like they had changed it around, because for the last couple of years there has been a March event, June and then September, which is then the last event Apple holds.
Maybe you are right tho, maybe they will update the iMac with minor refresh, maybe even the iPad Pro 12.9" adding true tone and a couple of other features. If they think it's worth it maybe they will hold an October event, with it being the first time they have held 4 events in one year (that i can remember).

Yeah, actually, if Apple announces an October event, we can be sure it'll be full of great and major updates (they wouldn't hold a 4th. event just to announce minor updates). If they don't, it doesn't necessary means there won't be any updates, but most of them will be minor (thus, silent).

We'll see what happens in 8 days. If they announce the big updates to the MBP, I'd be almost sure there won't be an October event (but there might be a lot of silent updates, though).

 

[AxoNeuron]

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-2016-macs.1968541/page-8#post-23297406 I suggest reading this post.

Same for you. Read the linked post.

Thank you for PERFECTLY proving my point. The GTX 1060 manages to pack all of that power in to a card with a mere 120W TDP. The Fury X on the other hand...has a TDP of 275 WATTS!!!!!!!!

Really.....................................? It's almost like AMD is trying to ruin the environment with their garbage cards.

 

[koyoot]

Thank you for PERFECTLY proving my point. The GTX 1060 manages to pack all of that power in to a card with a mere 120W TDP. The Fury X on the other hand...has a TDP of 275 WATTS!!!!!!!!

Really.....................................? It's almost like AMD is trying to ruin the environment with their garbage cards.

Have you checked the results for RX 480 and GTX 1060? RX 480 is still faster. Both are from the same price/performance bracket.

I think you have mistaken RX 480 with Fury X results.

 

[Ankaa]

The current MBP lineup is overpriced and underpowered.

I don't know. I keep seeing these or similar lines. I remember a time, really not that long ago, when MBPs started at more than $2k for the lowest configuration ... hell, I got an MBA with ONE USB and 64 GBs of disk space back in 08 for more than $2k ... THAT was overpriced and underpowered.

It's still expensive, yeah, but seriously, it's really not THAT expensive as people make it seem like. Maybe stop whining and start saving or better yet, reconsider your 'need' for a PRO machine if you can't really afford one...

 

[Dave245]

Yeah, actually, if Apple announces an October event, we can be sure it'll be full of great and major updates (they wouldn't hold a 4th. event just to announce minor updates). If they don't, it doesn't necessary means there won't be any updates, but most of them will be minor (thus, silent).

We'll see what happens in 8 days. If they announce the big updates to the MBP, I'd be almost sure there won't be an October event (but there might be a lot of silent updates, though).

That's my point, I don't know if they will, half of me thinks they will announce new MacBook's, iPhone 7 and Apple Watch 2 at the September event, the other half thinks they will hold a separate event in order to avoid having the new MacBook Pro's upstage the iPhone 7. But they I also thought they last year, and they ended up announcing the new Apple TV, iPad Pro 12.9" and the new iPhones, so who knows.

 

[Ankaa]

What I find unbelievable is that millions of kids are headed back to school, and nothing new is available other than the refreshed Macbook.

It does make sense, though. Apple is trying hard to push the MB.

 

[AxoNeuron]

Have you checked the results for RX 480 and GTX 1060? RX 480 is still faster. Both are from the same price/performance bracket.

I think you have mistaken RX 480 with Fury X results.

Even the RX 480 consumes a whopping 30% more power than the 1060, even in the BEST of measurements.

This really isn't even a competition from a power-to-performance perspective.

 

[myscrnnm]

Please tell me they aren't going to stick with incredibly dated screen on a new macbook air in the year 2016.

I don't even care if it qualifies as "retina" but it's an absolute shame if they ship it with the same screen. Macbook Air would be my go-to model if it had a better screen.

Very surprised to hear that the MacBook Air is supposedly getting updated. I would've thought Apple would either discontinue it, or relegate it to the status of the non-Retina MacBook Pro (still sell it, but not push it). There's really no reason for the MacBook Air to exist anymore. The "Air" moniker implied that the computer was very thin and very light, but the Retina MacBook excels in these areas more than the Air.

The only thing the MacBook Air has going for it at this point is its slightly lower price point compared to the Retina MacBook. Put a better screen and updated CPU, and it'll be so close to the Retina MacBook that there would be little reason for Apple to maintain those SKUs. Maybe Apple should slightly update the CPU and remarket the MacBook Air as the MacBook SE.

 

[inkswamp]

Dunno. I just left an architectural firm running 40 iMacs and started in a new office that runs 6 of them. What's dated about it?

It was introduced at a time when Apple needed to differentiate themselves from the rest of the computer market and at a time when consumers were just getting on board with the whole Internet thing and a lot of people were not very computer savvy. The idea of a Mac that you could just pull out of the box and get up and running and on the Internet without connecting components and a lot of other hassles was genius at the time. I remember working with older women at the time who loved their iMacs for exactly the reason I just described. It was simple. Remember how it brought along USB which was easy to use and dumped other, more complicated connectivity (anyone else have SCSI-inspiried PTSD?) How about serial ports? Anyone want to go back to those days?

The world has moved on. The iMac is a quaint anachronism now. Consumers have gotten significantly more sophisticated about computers and equipment and the Internet. The all-in-one so-easy-even-grandma-can-do-it is no longer serving any real need.

 

[Ankaa]

"Look at the flowers, iMac. Just keep looking at the flowers..."

God, I wish Apple would just let go of the iMac already. The all-in-one is such a dated concept at this point. A complete ground-up redesign of their consumer desktop offerings would be wonderful but I'm sure they found a way to make the new iMac paper-thin and have figured out how to remove more "unnecessary" features.

Going on a year now since my own iMac died... still haven't bought a new Mac. Still waiting for something worth buying.

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or have issues...

 

[inkswamp]

Heh. It's not the iMac that bothers me so much as Apple's refusal to offer any other high end consumer desktop choice. The Mini is intentionally inadequate and the Mac Pro is what Apple's high end consumer desktop should be, except maybe smaller since it needs only an i7 with one consumer GPU.

Apple has tried their best over the years to lure Windows users to the Mac platform with ads and snark but it never really took off. Their ads worked in that they got attention, but every Windows-using friend of mine who took an interest in switching was puzzled by Apple's lack of offerings. You either went with a low-end box that could barely be upgraded and was still expensive for what it was and didn't even come with a damn keyboard or mouse, or... you went with a mid-range machine that was more expensive because of the built-in display, or... you went with super-expensive to get any kind of power and upgradeability.

I believe that Apple blew a fantastic opportunity back when the switcher ads were running and could have converted tons of Windows users if they'd had a decent mid-range, headless machine. The thriving Hackintosh community attests to that fact. I've said for a while now that Apple just needs to put the components of a mid-range iMac in a Mac Mini-like box, offer a decent number of ports and minimal upgradeability (e.g., a case that doesn't require an engineering background to open) and Windows users would take interest.

I sure would take interest in that.

 

[koyoot]

Even the RX 480 consumes a whopping 30% more power than the 1060, even in the BEST of measurements.

This really isn't even a competition from a power-to-performance perspective.

I do not know where do you get that number. It consumes 30, yes, but Watts, more than GTX 1060. So 25% more power for up to 24% more performance. Not to mention compute power: 4.9 TFLOPs, vs 5.8 for AMD Radeon. RX 470 is on the same level of compute performance and power consumption as GTX 1060. Both GPUs(GTX 1060 and RX 480) have exactly the same level of efficiency(35 GFLOPs/watt).

 

[inkswamp]

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or have issues...

Neither. Scroll up and read my previous post. The iMac is an anachronism at this point. It needs to die.

 

[62tele]

Very surprised to hear that the MacBook Air is supposedly getting updated. I would've thought Apple would either discontinue it, or relegate it to the status of the non-Retina MacBook Pro (still sell it, but not push it). There's really no reason for the MacBook Air to exist anymore. The "Air" moniker implied that the computer was very thin and very light, but the Retina MacBook excels in these areas more than the Air.

The only thing the MacBook Air has going for it at this point is its slightly lower price point compared to the Retina MacBook. Put a better screen and updated CPU, and it'll be so close to the Retina MacBook that there would be little reason for Apple to maintain those SKUs. Maybe Apple should slightly update the CPU and remarket the MacBook Air as the MacBook SE.

It's a great entry level Apple laptop for students and users who want a Mac at a reasonable price and performance. They would be foolish to discontinue it. Not everyone needs a "retina" display. Judging from the number of young persons I see daily with Airs it's still popular.

 

[Nunyabinez]

I think ambivalent isn't the word you're looking for if you like the idea of a 5k display

Ambivalence[1] is a state of having simultaneous conflicting reactions, beliefs, or feelings towards some object.\

I like the idea of having a 5K display, but I don't like the idea of having an internal GPU that presumably would not be upgradable, hence i am ambivalent about the rumored 5K.

 

[jweinraub]

Sell AMD if you want but the day Apple stops offering an Intel version I am done.

EDIT: Okay I'm an idiot and didn't read that it was for the GPU. I jumped to the conclusion that they'd offer AMD CPU option. Whew!

You might as well be done because I foresee in the not so distant future, Apple will get rid of Intel entirely and have a variation of the A-based processor for desktops, which after that gets the standard (as in no more Rosetta-like technology) that we will never merge iOS and MacOS will finally come to fruition. Everything will be either an App or a bookmark to some server farm.

I hope I am wrong because I may just go back to Linux, which I was using daily prior to being convinced to give Mac OS X a shot.

If you think about it, it is slowly happening with rootless...

 

[wrcardon]

Very surprised to hear that the MacBook Air is supposedly getting updated. I would've thought Apple would either discontinue it, or relegate it to the status of the non-Retina MacBook Pro (still sell it, but not push it). There's really no reason for the MacBook Air to exist anymore. The "Air" moniker implied that the computer was very thin and very light, but the Retina MacBook excels in these areas more than the Air.

The only thing the MacBook Air has going for it at this point is its slightly lower price point compared to the Retina MacBook. Put a better screen and updated CPU, and it'll be so close to the Retina MacBook that there would be little reason for Apple to maintain those SKUs. Maybe Apple should slightly update the CPU and remarket the MacBook Air as the MacBook SE.

As a frequent traveler, I hope they don't get ride of the 11" mac book air (ideally take it to 12" and reduce the bezel like the MacBook) it is the only apple laptop that fits under a reclined seat in coach (not a problem for first class or business class). I love the size of the 11" and then... when I am at home or the office, I just plug it into 2 thunderbolt displays... that cannot be done by the MacBook. So for those that don't see the need for the 11" Air (or the 13"). There are a lot of business people who use the 11" as their only computer. Many even load Windows on it (I dual boot with bootcamp).

 

[SSDGUY]

NO F'in MAC PRO?!!!

Seriously...this is like Star Trek....where no man has gone before.

Kinda like the original series … only brought excitement for 3 seasons.

 

[lympero]

If it's true, I'm sure it'll be October 31st!

 

[danielwsmithee]

As a frequent traveler, I hope they don't get ride of the 11" mac book air (ideally take it to 12" and reduce the bezel like the MacBook) it is the only apple laptop that fits under a reclined seat in coach (not a problem for first class or business class). I love the size of the 11" and then... when I am at home or the office, I just plug it into 2 thunderbolt displays... that cannot be done by the MacBook. So for those that don't see the need for the 11" Air (or the 13"). There are a lot of business people who use the 11" as their only computer. Many even load Windows on it (I dual boot with bootcamp).

The more likely outcome is that the 12" MacBook receives TB3 fulfilling your needs. Hopefully with a second port.

 

[xmonkey]

I do not know where do you get that number. It consumes 30, yes, but Watts, more than GTX 1060. So 25% more power for up to 24% more performance. Not to mention compute power: 4.9 TFLOPs, vs 5.8 for AMD Radeon. RX 470 is on the same level of compute performance and power consumption as GTX 1060. Both GPUs(GTX 1060 and RX 480) have exactly the same level of efficiency(35 GFLOPs/watt).

Really not sure where you're getting that the 480 is outperforming the 1060 by that margin. In specific DX12 benches? I guess it does in a few cases, but even then it's just barely ahead of the 1060.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/10540/the-geforce-gtx-1060-founders-edition-asus-strix-review/18

As for where the previously mentioned competitive landscape fits in, a lot of it is going to depend on what potential buyers are looking to spend. At the GTX 1060’s MSRP of $249, the card is countered by AMD’s Radeon RX 480 8GB for $239. The RX 480 is a very capable card, but the launch of the GTX 1060 puts an end to AMD’s short-lived exclusive to that market. And to NVIDIA’s credit (and AMD’s chagrin), the GTX 1060 is 12% faster while consuming less power at the same time, more than justifying the $10 price difference and giving NVIDIA a legitimate claim as the superior GPU.

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Graphi...106-Starting-249/Pricing-and-Closing-Thoughts

From a performance standpoint, the GeForce GTX 1060 looks to be faster than the Radeon RX 480. That statement is based on 5 out of our 7 games showing that result, as well as three of the four synthetic tests used as well. In the areas where the GTX 1060 was the victor, it was able to outperform Polaris 10 by as much as 38% (Grand Theft Auto V) but that shrinks to as low as 4% when looking at The Witcher 3 at 2560x1440. If the $249 price point and availability issues are solved for this release, then I think it’s clear that the Pascal-based GTX 1060 is the faster of the two options.

There are a couple of caveats. First, as we move away from the 1080p resolution and towards the 2560x1440 option, the gap between the GTX 1060 and the RX 480 moves in the direction of the AMD option. I do not believe that the 6GB vs 8GB of memory buffer is to blame, but rather the memory throughput performance. This effect follows both cards in cases where the GTX 1060 is faster and in the couple of instances where the GTX 1060 is slower.

The second caveat is more complex: the argument could be made (and likely will be) that the Radeon RX 480 is faster in the “future” outlook games. Hitman (2016) and 3DMark Time Spy are both known to use asynchronous compute shaders under DX12 – one of the key areas that AMD has been promoting and targeting. In both of those benchmarks, and the DX12-based Gears of War: Ultimate Edition, the Radeon RX 480 is able to outperform the GeForce GTX 1060. It’s worth noting however, that Rise of the Tomb Raider is also using the DX12 API, and in that case the GTX 1060 is not just faster but significantly so (20% at 1080p).

For me, it’s pretty clear that based on what the reference designs of both the GTX 1060 and the RX 480 show today, the GTX 1060 provides better overall performance for mainstream PC gamers. But the discussion about what card will be better suited for DX12 specific games and engines going forward will continue.

If you care about power consumption and power efficiency the GTX 1060 is strong step improved over the RX 480. Using 30-40 watts less power than the RX 480, both at stock settings, the GTX 1060 shows that NVIDIA's Pascal architecture, combined with the 16nm process at TSMC, has the edge over Polaris and Global Foundries' 14nm technology.

 

[koyoot]

Really not sure where you're getting that the 480 is outperforming the 1060 by that margin. In specific DX12 benches? I guess it does in a few cases, but even then it's just barely ahead of the 1060.

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ed-for-2016-macs.1968541/page-8#post-23297406
Read this post, and look at benchmarks.
It is Vulkan and DX12. And read what I actually have written. Up to. This is important. Not every game, not every scenario will reflect this.

 

[benji888]

Dell and Lenovo have had TB3 in their laptops for the best part of a year. The XPS 15 I am writing this post on has one. I honestly fail to see why Apple haven't been able to release this, especially as it is using a USB-C port....

Why would you believe this?
Regardless of native processor support, Thunderbolt controllers are used to add Thunderbolt ports to a device.

How do you think the over a dozen laptops already have Thunderbolt 3 ports?

We will see it this year.

Huh? There are currently 20+ laptops (many under $1,000) on the market with Thunderbolt 3.

Oh, sorry, I was unaware of this, some months ago I heard TB3 support was delayed for the processors Apple uses, perhaps it was delayed for the last refresh, I guess I'm behind.

However, Kaby Lake won't be in any new apple laptops this year as this processor has just been announced, not ready for production yet.

So, maybe we will see updated MacBook Pro models w/TB3 b4 end of year. Probably only the Pro models will be updated. Maybe iMacs will also get updates, but, not the MacBook (maybe next spring), and the MacBook Air is EOL, will keep making but don't expect USB-C nor TB3 in Airs.

This article leaves out Mac Pro, however, I stick by my thoughts, I think we may see this updated by end of this year. If not, then early next year.

If the iMacs are updated with TB3 before end of the year then we may see a new monitor, if not, then we may not see a new monitor until sometime next year.

 

[Appleaker]

The low-power Kaby Lake processors that are designed for the MB line were officially announced today so Apple doesn't need to wait till next year to update the MB to Kaby Lake. The MBP, on the other hand, is a different story.

Yes but the release date was unknown before today, the assumption was that they would release after October, possibly early 2017 with other Kaby Lake processors. I still think they may wait until next year as otherwise they would release Kaby lake Macs at the same time as 'all-new' Skylake Macs.
[doublepost=1472592240][/doublepost]

Oh, sorry, I was unaware of this, some months ago I heard TB3 support was delayed for the processors Apple uses, perhaps it was delayed for the last refresh, I guess I'm behind.

However, Kaby Lake won't be in any new apple laptops this year as this processor has just been announced, not ready for production yet.

So, maybe we will see updated MacBook Pro models w/TB3 b4 end of year. Probably only the Pro models will be updated. Maybe iMacs will also get updates, but, not the MacBook (maybe next spring), and the MacBook Air is EOL, will keep making but don't expect USB-C nor TB3 in Airs.

This article leaves out Mac Pro, however, I stick by my thoughts, I think we may see this updated by end of this year. If not, then early next year.

If the iMacs are updated with TB3 before end of the year then we may see a new monitor, if not, then we may not see a new monitor until sometime next year.

Yeah I guess it's confusing with the flood of news articles saying Thunderbolt 3 will be only be supported with Kaby Lake processors, implying that it's not possible with older processors.
[doublepost=1472592414][/doublepost]

I don't care if it's scissor or butterfly. The problem with the Macbook keyboard is the (lack of) key travel. If they adopt this on the MBP, it'll be another Mac I cannot buy. Sometimes it seems their plan is to cripple the Mac product line model by model.

If you care about key travel then you do care whether it's scissor or butterfly.

 

[theluggage]

I believe that Apple blew a fantastic opportunity back when the switcher ads were running and could have converted tons of Windows users if they'd had a decent mid-range, headless machine.

...no point converting tons of users if you don't make any money from them, and mid-range headless desktop machines had the thinnest margins, even then. PC box shifters can throw them together from whatever components are going cheap this month in the safe knowledge that all hardware supports Windows. If they persuade the customer to take out credit, get an extended warranty or buy a $50 HDMI cable then they make a profit. ...and that was then: now, if you haven't got the memo, these days the bottom has completely fallen out of the desktop market, because non-tech consumers want ultrabooks and power users can just upgrade their 5-year-old desktops.

Apple have an operating system and (largely free to Mac owners) software suite to maintain, and either have to choose already-supported hardware, write their own drivers or forge support deals with hardware makers. There's a reason that they make high-end notebooks, small-form-factor, all-in-one systems and Xeon workstations: they command premium prices and good mark-ups.

The danger with the "xMac" idea has always been that it (a) fails to attract customers because its way too expensive c.f. comparable PCs built from generic components but (b) it decimates sales of higher-margin products to existing Apple users. Now, releasing an easily upgradeable mini-tower system would be suicide, because you wouldn't see those customers again for a decade...