Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Several multiples faster and almost twice the battery life at the same price, yet it seems like all I see are complaints about longevity and upgradability... some people will literally never be happy, and it's 100% by their own choice.
As usual, you upgrade by selling your old device on eBay, and using that money towards a new one. The other method is handing it down to someone else. No fan, low power, low heat, SSD, that should all help with longevity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Return Zero
the people who bought MB Airs before will be happy as will those who bought the entry level Pro before ...
the folks you are talking about will get they new Macs next year ...
Where Apple is starting with this transition, and the target audience - makes total sense
Well I am not happy, because only the Air has normal keyboard. You sound like my old manager, who still can't get over that developer work no longer needs top-level cpu performance in the age of build serves and cloud, however memory is more paramount than ever. It's already too bad, that for some reason they make two models with different storage, but for more ram you have to wait a month til they ship it from China.
 
That's all they've done really. The performance gains against the 8th intel and integrated graphics isn't all that impressive. It's good, but not amazing. Battery life is the major thing that these new machines really have going for them.
Why would you call a three times faster CPU/GPU compared to intel i7 not impressive at all? I think there is a massive difference. Or is it just me?
 
The only thing I’m worried about is longevity. These Macs don’t seem to be upgradable in any way and I wonder how good they will perform in 5 or 10 years.

I own a 2008 iMac and still works kind of fine to this day. My A4 iPod is no longer usable.
For a fair comparison, you shouldn't compare portable devices and non-portable ones.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mazz0 and hot-gril
Why would you call a three times faster CPU/GPU compared to intel i7 not impressive at all? I think there is a massive difference. Or is it just me?
3X faster CPU, yeah, that blows even my own expectations (criticized as optimistic or just idiotic by other members here) out of the water if true. I was thinking 50-100%. GPU, nah, that's too specialized for there to be a fair comparison.

The extreme is all those ASIC research projects that "are 100X faster than competitors" that aren't even built for the use case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Le0M
Upside: the Apple platform is more unified with computers that have great performance and battery life.

Downside: no mention of virtualization... at all.

Glad I didn't wait bought my Intel-based MBP in August...
 
It's not low RAM with the efficiency of Big Sur (which is more or less now a tuned, jacked up iPad OS with real usability).

Apple's controlling the whole stack, hardware to software. 16 GB of a system made entirely efficient is 32 GB of a system needing disparate parts.

These are the entry level Macs making a leap in performance. I'm curious, in a good way, about what will be announced in 2021.
That is true when using the computer for average tasks. But it's not true when dealing with big files and/or 3D modelling. Sometimes 16 of ram just isn't enough, regardless the OS optimisation.
 
I heard the lady said one 6k monitor. But are we sure we can't connect more monitors with lower resolution?
One 6k display in tech details page, it used to say for intels something like one 5k or 2 4k. For m1 it's just 1 6k.

edit:they must do something with this, at least allow two displays when the lid is closed. That's what I need anyway. I use one display vertically and one horizontally.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Le0M
Seems kind of backwards, no? Wouldn't the MB Air be the "ultra-long battery life" version, since it is all about portability and decreased processing power?

I guess it's size is what holds it back a bit.
I think this is done for two reasons. 1) To meet a price point. 2) To allow to be fanless so heat is not generated much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kovalchuk71
It's not low RAM with the efficiency of Big Sur (which is more or less now a tuned, jacked up iPad OS with real usability).

Apple's controlling the whole stack, hardware to software. 16 GB of a system made entirely efficient is 32 GB of a system needing disparate parts.

These are the entry level Macs making a leap in performance. I'm curious, in a good way, about what will be announced in 2021.
Apple doesn't control the 3P software you run on the Mac and especially not the RAM-wasting websites you visit.
 
One 6k display in tech details page, it used to say for intels something like one 5k or 2 4k. For m1 it's just 1 6k.
Yeah, I read that, but it doesn't really say whether you can plug in more low res monitors. The intel version allows for 2 4K monitors to be plugged in, so I find it hard to believe that the new Macs can't. But I guess we'll just have to see once they're out in the wild ;)
 
It's fine to disagree. Maybe not 16-->32, but perhaps 20 GB? 24? I don't think that's unreasonable.


“Simultaneously supports full native resolution on the built-in display at millions of colors and:
One external display with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz”
 
Low ram is definitely planned obsolescence. Look for next versions of macOS to be very memory intensive, making these glorified iPads crawl.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: mazz0
Low ram is definitely planned obsolescence. Look for next versions of macOS to be very memory intensive, making these glorified iPads crawl.

I am not sure where you get that from, but in a lot of use cases the RAM requirements don’t actually change that much - one of the reasons that you can find so many computers with 8 or 16GB around the last 10-15 years.

And iPads have even less RAM and that works out well for plenty people too. Not that these would be iPads of course, but nicely played.
 
For a fair comparison, you shouldn't compare portable devices and non-portable ones.
That’s probably true. But those are the oldest intel and Apple arm devices I have. In fact, I think the A4 was the first Apple-designed chip.
 
Someone tell me why this is bad.

Because it's made by Apple, of course

I was explaining the news of the keynote to my non "techie" friends and all they could came up was trashing Apple: they couldn't care less about perf improvements, battery or anything else. Funny thing is most of them own iPhones.
 
Yeah, I read that, but it doesn't really say whether you can plug in more low res monitors. The intel version allows for 2 4K monitors to be plugged in, so I find it hard to believe that the new Macs can't. But I guess we'll just have to see once they're out in the wild ;)
just buy intel version and connect as many monitors you wish
 
So, the only things that make the Pro a Pro are the touchbar and more weight? I can't imagine someone saying, yeah I really want a touchbar and I'm willing to pay $300 for it... and I really prefer a heavier laptop.:rolleyes:
It will be interesting to see side by side performance with the Air and the Pro. Supposedly the exact same CPU & GPU but I suspect the air will be thermally throttled because it has no fan?
 
And the 16" will have even more since the Intel ones both 13" and 16" both were at the same 9-10 hours battery life
so the perf/w being so impressive, more battery capacity in the 16" will get probably at 21-22hours
Unlikely with a screen that is more than 20% larger than the 13 inch.
But it’s going to be impressive nevertheless.
 
That's all they've done really. The performance gains against the 8th intel and integrated graphics isn't all that impressive. It's good, but not amazing. Battery life is the major thing that these new machines really have going for them.

My god, you are lost
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.