Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Working on Trio of New Macs With Custom Co-Processors That Could Launch This Year

From the Bloomberg article:

"For several years, Apple has been steadily designing more and more of the chips powering its iPhones, iPads, Macs and Apple Watches. This creates a better user experience and helps trump rivals. Recently the company got a fresh incentive to go all-in on silicon: revelations that microprocessors with components designed by Intel Corp., Arm Holdings Plc and Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. are vulnerable to hacking."

I stopped reading after that gem.
 
Dave245 said:
The Air is now old it needs removing in favour of the MacBook in my opinion, the MacBook is thinner lighter and has a Retina display, I do agree that they should make a bigger version tho at least 13” and make it a little more powerful and able to run things like Final Cut Pro X.
Click to expand...

That's why I said to update the Air as well.

The Air is thin and light enough, IMO. Having something thinner and lighter is just for bragging rights. Besides, with the thinner MacBook's body, Apple will have to gimp it with slower processors and GPUs since there wouldn't be enough space for a cooling fan.

Upgrade the Air's display to a retina. Cram as much battery in the chassis as they can like with the MacBook so it will still be able to get at least 12 hours of battery run time. Offer more than 1 USB-C port. Keep MagSafe connector if possible.

But if Apple can do all that with a 14" MacBook, improve the keyboard feel, and not give it a gimped processor (minimum of i5 processor with i7 option, not M like with current MacBook), I'd be happy.
 
laz232 said:
Too bad if it also has to work with software that I use for my work (which has involved designing chips for Apple)... I do *not* want a transition from Intel /AMD architecture - because I need more than a glorified iPad...
Click to expand...

Why the bulk of us can't seem to grasp this, I never know. There have been a thousand threads that imagine or imply a shift to A-series processor. Every one of them points out the software transition issue. And yet every new thread seems to forget that such a shift at best only arrives with Apple software mostly functional. For all of the big boy software NOT branded Apple, there is likely some level of transition that- based upon last time- could take at least a couple of years to fully migrate.

Yes, Rosetta helped make that tolerable last time. Is there a solid Rosetta for Apple to buy this time for such a transition? Imagine, iPads trying to emulate a full Intel system running full version of Intel-based software not made by Apple.
 
sw1tcher said:
That's why I said to update the Air as well.

The Air is thin and light enough, IMO. Having something thinner and lighter is just for bragging rights. Besides, with the thinner MacBook's body, Apple will have to gimp it with slower processors and GPUs since there wouldn't be enough space for a cooling fan.

Upgrade the Air's display to a retina. Cram as much battery in the chassis as they can like with the MacBook so it will still be able to get at least 12 hours of battery run time. Offer more than 1 USB-C port. Keep MagSafe connector if possible.

But if Apple can do all that with a 14" MacBook, improve the keyboard feel, and not give it a gimped processor (minimum of i5 processor with i7 option, not M like with current MacBook), I'd be happy.
Click to expand...

The MacBook is ultraportable I think that’s the appeal over power. Altho I will say some people on this forum have said the core M processor is underrated. I’m not a specs guy but the MacBook seems to me like something you would use on the go, train, airplane and so on. I don’t think it’s about bragging rights! I do agree that I’d like to see a MacBook possibly 13” or 14” with around 12 hours battery life and a Retina display.

I just think Apple could drop the price of the 12” MacBook so that becomes £999 and a 13” or 14” added to the lineup in order to take the place and price point of the current MacBook at around £1,249 and then remove the Air.
 
Minxy said:
Just make a powerful MacBook Pro13-inch without a Touch Bar, but with a powerful graphics card, by March.
Click to expand...
And lose the sale of a single 15" MBP? I don't think so. Apple has a history of forcing upsales by purposely down-specing macs that take away from higher margin Macs.
  • Mac Mini - Say goodbye to Quad Core
  • Mac Mini - when they HAD to put in a dGPU, they put 1/2 the vRAM that even the most pessimistic person could have predicted
  • Mac Mini - User upgradeability? Nope, same case, but soldered RAM and a 76 step process to replace the Spinner, and screw you - no more internal dual storage
  • 13" MBP - a dGPU - BWAHAHAHAHAAAHA
  • 13" MBP - Quad core option? Not on your life

I'd be shocked if apple gives the 13" an i7-8550U. If it does, there will certainly not be discrete graphics. Though I could see one or more 15" MBPs get the intel/Radeon on package CPU, to eliminate the dGPU. And a switch to AMD CPUs would too huge of a shift for Safe Timmy to do.
 
Last edited:
nvmls said:
Another chance to make things right Apple, please consider:

-Better keyboard.
-Enhanced battery technology/longevity and use time.
-Remove that gimmick touch bar, wastes battery, if you want to waste it somewhere, be on the iconic glowing logo.
-Bring back magsafe or come up with something better, we both know you can do it. Battery charging indicator led please I'm no visionary here.
-Put a god damn high end GPU (hopefully desktop line).
-If you want thinness somewhere, make it happen on screen bezels.
-Reasonable port options, tb 3 is fine but don't just lock options to that, the future must be great but if tomorrow I get ran over by a bus I'd need to use them today please.
-512GB base storage please, be serious.
-64 RAM option wouldn't hurt, even though 32 limit would be acceptable for the short term.
-Make at least RAM & SSD user replaceable.
-Improve thermals, not just re-positioning and replacing fans, think outside the box, we both know you can do it.
-Try avoiding penny pinching tactics please.
Click to expand...

Wow man! You're hired!

Zombie Steve. Is that you? ;)
 
EdT said:
What I want is a computer with a 3 or 4 terabyte hard drive, 10 ghz clock speed, 20 core processor, the native ability to VM every OS with little to no degradation a 20 K screen, and a video graphics card that can handle 10 times that graphic throughput at 360 FPS.

I never said my requirements were sane or possible.
Click to expand...
Wait!!!

Starting at $499.

We can continue now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ocnitsa
keysofanxiety said:
An architecture change wouldn't suddenly turn macOS into iOS. They've done it before with PPC to Intel with far less resources. It's likely that Swift/Xcode will have an option to recompile apps for the ARM architecture or an emulator for the interim.

Also as ARM is being developed for a full-blooded W10 version then that would dispel any BootCamp concerns. If MS fully commit to it (imagine an Apple A-chip Surface Pro!) then the transition would happen very quickly.

The ARM chips are crazy powerful in their iOS devices, especially when considering there's no air cooling. It's almost definitely going to happen IMO, it's just a question of when.
Click to expand...

The PPC to x86 went well because there was a huge increase in performance in going to x86.

A lot of the design SW I run is only supported on Win7, and is heavy on CPU usage.
Emulation would drag - no matter how good performance / Watt is - at a certain point you need performance. The SW vendors (Mentor, Cadence, Ansoft, Keysight, Mathworks) will not be recompiling for / supporting ARM.
[doublepost=1517250488][/doublepost]
HobeSoundDarryl said:
Why the bulk of us can't seem to grasp this, I never know. There have been a thousand threads that imagine or imply a shift to A-series processor. Every one of them points out the software transition issue. And yet every new thread seems to forget that such a shift at best only arrives with Apple software mostly functional. For all of the big boy software NOT branded Apple, there is likely some level of transition that- based upon last time- could take at least a couple of years to fully migrate.

Yes, Rosetta helped make that tolerable last time. Is there a solid Rosetta for Apple to buy this time for such a transition? Imagine, iPads trying to emulate a full Intel system running full version of Intel-based software not made by Apple.
Click to expand...
The writing on the wall: Apple does not care about professionals outside of a narrow slice of "creatives" (whatever that demographic that "inspires") . No matter what BS TC spouts, actions speak louder than words (cancelling Pro SW tools, Mac Pro, Mac Mini, 2016 Macbook Pros, introducing the iPad as a professional end-all-be-all)
[doublepost=1517250660][/doublepost]
Mydel said:
II feel like that currently the processors from Apple are advanced enough to offload the common tasks to them what would save battery and speed up whole system. Im not sure If there is a time for ARM notebooks. I mean I wish it was here as I am not a fun of Intel by any means but I remember when Apple moved from PPC....That was a few years of nightmare. However IF they have software ready I would give it a try. I dont use iPad as its no different than iPhone that I use daily and just not good enough as compared to MBP / I really do not like iOS in anything but iPhone. I would also buy iPad if it was running OSX though. Immediately!
Click to expand...


That's not really how software works - you can't say (without recompilation + significant optimization): here are some hetereogenous CPU cores and a custom Gbps interface bus: "now go faster!"
 
I desperately NEED a new modular Mac Pro. I feel like I'm dying without it. The 2013 Mac Pro is soooo old, and the iMac Pro doesn't meet my needs (no all-in-one will ever meet my needs). PLEASE let the modular Mac Pro be announced and released this year!
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevekr
One of the great, GREAT (but somewhat undersold) advantages of the Mac is the ability to natively be 2 computers in one. Run macOS and/or run Windows in one box. No Windows machine does that at ANY price (hacks aside). People who use their computers in their work inevitably need to be able to run something(s) only available on the Windows side of things. Macs can be a great, single solution for that.

However, jettison Intel and then it's just a macOS machine again... or maybe a macOS and iOS hybrid machine. But it's probably no longer a Windows machine too. For some of us, that's fine- we hate Windows/Microsoft/Google/Samsung/<anyone we can see as a competitor to Apple at all>. But then there's the rest of us that can't get all we need done within the bubble.

Break that capability and we'll face having to have a computer to run Windows vs. wanting/wishing we had a computer than can run macOS too... and then probably be pressed to buy the former because needs trump wants most of the time. Yes, we can buy TWO computers again to cover both bases but which one goes on the business trip- the one we need vs. the one we want? Before you know it, we've mostly adopted to the Windows way of doing things just because we have to use the other one more often and/or it's the one that goes with us to more places because we might need to do something on Windows. And then we increasingly have a hard time justifying keeping a Mac too.

There's no making the whole world come around to becoming readily compatible with our individual wants, nor reasonably expecting clients to jump through hoops and/or be patient until we can find some way to make something we can do on a Mac be able to be something they can get going on their tech.

Put in an A-series chip if you like. But better keep an Intel in there too. A segment of Mac buyers need those Macs to be able to run Windows well at least some of the time.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: AppleScruff1 and Val-kyrie
tkatz said:
Might be a bit off topic, but am I the only one that is a bit scared of the idea of a "Modular" Mac Pro? Using the term modular makes it sound like Apples going to sell me a piece of hardware that is only upgradable via purchasing (probably expensive) proprietary components from them directly. What I really want is an updated version of the cheese grater with support for multiple processors, high wattage psu, and the latest off the shelf gpu. The fans can even be as loud as a 787 taking off if need be. I basically want an upgradable high end PC running macOS with Apple's support.

Am I alone in this line of thought?
Click to expand...

I'm definitely worried about this too. I surely hope "modular" means user-upgradeable in the sense that we can use non-proprietary components, such as PCIe cards.
 
KensaiMage said:
Better, faster, stronger Macbook and Macbook Pro please :)
Click to expand...

tumblr_mm5lvbn7aS1rh8icyo1_500.gif
 
T'hain Esh Kelch said:
Well, security seems to be one of the few things that Apple really are good at, at this point.

Yes, no software is perfect, and neither is Apples, but in comparison to so much else and certain companies approach to customer security, I do think Apple is at or near the top.
Click to expand...
Getting root access with an empty password is a sure sign of having good security.
 
tkatz said:
Might be a bit off topic, but am I the only one that is a bit scared of the idea of a "Modular" Mac Pro? Using the term modular makes it sound like Apples going to sell me a piece of hardware that is only upgradable via purchasing (probably expensive) proprietary components from them directly. What I really want is an updated version of the cheese grater with support for multiple processors, high wattage psu, and the latest off the shelf gpu. The fans can even be as loud as a 787 taking off if need be. I basically want an upgradable high end PC running macOS with Apple's support.

Am I alone in this line of thought?
Click to expand...

Modular = Modules. Interchangeable and upgradeable perhaps, but most likely proprietary. The new Mac Pro will definitely not be a standard PC tower style design.
 
There's a lot of upside to the T2 coming to Macbook Pros, there is one thing I'd miss however. In the iMac Pro it controls the fans, meaning you can't set them with SMCFanControl or similar anymore. Macbook Pros can err on the side of toasty to stay silent so I'd often set the fans higher before starting a workload, this would prevent that.

Other than that, I'm enthused by a T2 rMBP refresh, with ULV quads expected for the 13 and either Kaby Lake G with the Radeon combo chip/HBM2 for the 15, or else a later in the year release with 6 core Cannon Lake.

Also, Butterfly 3 is needed to address the jamming.
 
chrfr said:
The iMac Pro also has no Touch Bar but has the T2. Given the changes to the boot process in the iMac Pro, it's clear that all future Macs will move in this direction and have some sort of coprocessor to handle boot security and functions that the T2 in the iMac Pro now handles.
Click to expand...

So in a nutshell all Macs will eventually have co-processors to handle certain security and other functions. [Never saw that coming... yeah.] :rolleyes:

Also to those fearful of iOS taking over macOS with this "step," I highly doubt that Apple will be able to run one (mac)OS on x86 and one (i)OS on ARM chips in the same thin chassis without overheating Macs, so I am not alarmed about a transition to ARM ... yet. However, I will be watching this rumor keenly.
 
Glmnet1 said:
I agree with part of what you say, but removing the 27" iMac would be horrible, we'd be stuck choosing between a 21" (way too small IMO) and a 5k machine with specs not needed by most. The 13" MBP also fill a fairly big gap in performance between the MB and 15" MPB.

Also, the Mac Mini should be upgraded and renamed "Mac", to follow the ***** and ***** Pro pattern.
Click to expand...

The iMac 21" is ridiculous, should not even exist anymore. 27" and that's it. Change panel resolution and internal components and that's about it.

In any case, I don't see myself buying any other iMac or MacBook anymore. Used to have the iMac 27" mid 2011 (Top of the line) but its MXM AMD 6970 2GB GPU which went toast. Getting asked 700 EUR for a replacement in 2017 by Apple takes some serious "courage"... There's also no real options with aftermarket GPU... Apple peski Bios and locked down hardware. Very well.

I learned my lesson the hard way with Apple. Not buying any other computer from them unless: RAM, CPU, GPU and HDD is user serviceable. And if Apple does not make one anymore, so be it. Hackingtosh or Win10 PC it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevekr
They should put an A11 in the macbook/pros and use them to run the OS and common apps (Mail, Calendar, Safari, Video decoding, etc) and then kick on the Intel CPU whenever more power or x86 is needed. I can envision 24+ hours of battery life using low power mode.

Apple pioneered the GPU switching concept, why not CPU switching as well. This would leverage Apple's close hardware/software relationship and having insane battery life would again set Macs apart from PC's and they'd be practically untouchable.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: RogerWilco
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back