Meh. As someone who was an early adopter of DVD and HD, and a moderately early adopter of 4K and 5G, I will say that 8K is a completely different kettle of fish IMO.
The main support for 8K that may be useful in the next several years is playback of 8K content generated by iPhones. There is no financial or technical reason to support 8K in Apple TV otherwise. However, none of those 8K iPhones even exist yet. Same goes for Apple TV+ content. You have to realize the installed base of 8K TVs represents less than 0.001% of TVs out there, and there are no mainstream movies that are mastered at 8K. Most movies, regardless of the original scan, are downsampled to 2K (yes 2K) or 4K for mastering, with only very rare ones mastered at 6K, and none at 8K. Furthermore, there will never be 8K physical media, and 8K streaming is not on the radar yet for any of the major commercial streaming services. (YouTube and Vimeo don't count.)
In other words 8K in an Apple TV is pointless in the near term... unless you think it must be there for future iPhone footage from iPhones. Except, none of those iPhones exist yet. But even then, Mark Gurman's Apple TV rumor states the chip will be A14, which as far as we know does not support hardware 8K acceleration. Maybe A14 supports hidden 8K decode acceleration, but as mentioned I suspect Apple will simply wait for A16 or A17 before releasing a new 8K-capable Apple TV. That wouldn't be for several years, which is perfectly fine, since 8K right now is pointless.
Actually, my point was they could release a 4K A14 Apple TV in 2022/2023, and then maybe an 8K A16/A17 Apple TV in 2025.As to your guess at timing, I agree. AppleTV getting updated again so relatively soon after the last update makes me think he's predicting far too early. In my recall, the next tier cameras need to exist for upwards of a generation of iPhone and then arrive in iPads before AppleTV gets some tangible upgrade love. So my guess would also be 2+ years out... not this year.
But I'll welcome it either way. Better hardware must lead all other things. Then software can be released to take advantage of it. It doesn't ever work the other way.
Why for the faster single-core? Just curious.I'd gladly buy M2 Ultra/Extreme right now.
I skipped the M1 Studio because I already have the basic M1 mini & MBP.
I want a desktop Mac with a faster single core.
If Apple can release M2 Pro/Max in Q4 of this year, that means they plan to update base M, Pro, Max every year. An annual update cadence would be incredible.
No s**t?Following the M2 series of Macs, Gurman said Apple will then transition to Macs with the M3 chip,
I agree. It should be nothing less. The game possibilities would truly open upthey should release apple tv 4k with M1 chip
If Apple can release M2 Pro/Max in Q4 of this year, that means they plan to update base M, Pro, Max every year. An annual update cadence would be incredible.
The reason M2 was late had nothing to do with the chip design being late. It had to do with waiting for the Macbook Air redesign to launch.
People say M2's performance improvement over the M1 was small (~18% CPU, 35% GPU, 40% Neural Engine). But if you're getting this improvement every year, it will leave Intel and AMD in the dust.
The iPhone pays for Mac chips. Mac chips are simply using whatever CPU, GPU, NE cores were in the last iPhone. This strategy makes it extremely cost effective for Apple to update Mac chips annually.
M1 would be ideal. It’s plugged into the wall.I suspect would just be something like A16 or A17. No need for M anything. But that would be several years from now.
If Apple can release M2 Pro/Max in Q4 of this year, that means they plan to update base M, Pro, Max every year. An annual update cadence would be incredible.
Apple should invest their R&D in a Dolby Atmos HomePod Theater system with a big ass sub! Would be an instant buy for me!The new HomePod needs to be better if I get one.
It needs a direct WiFi connection to iPhone or iPad for lossless playback and perhaps BlueTooth connectivity.
It needs better bass, a subwoofer.
Sofar we have seen:
A14 -> M1 : 4 weeks
M1 -> M1Pro/Max : 1 year
M1Max -> M1Ultra : 6 months
A15 -> M2 : 9 months
No pattern to detect and we don't even know what went on behind the scenes.
Did one of these get delayed to coincide with a new product/design?
Did one of these get delayed by having design issues?
Did one of these get delayed by low yields for bigger chips?
Did one of these get delayed by a limited supply of wafers for anything 5nm?
Did one of these get delayed by supply issues outside chip manufacturing?
The new M2 chip, part of the MacBook Air and 13-inch MacBook Pro announced at WWDC and optimized with macOS Ventura, is also the core of several other products in the pipeline. Those are likely to come in much quicker succession than the M1-based Macs did.
Apple is also already at work on the M2’s successor, the M3, and the company is planning to use that chip as early as next year with updates to the 13-inch MacBook Air code-named J513, a 15-inch MacBook Air known as J515, a new iMac code-named J433 and possibly a 12-inch laptop that’s still in early development.
S8 coming to the series 7?
This was a typo and I have corrected it to say Series 8. Thanks!“a new HomePod with the same S8 chip coming to the Apple Watch Series 7”
Wat.
Gurman said in his newsletter:
Faster single core, because 90% of my time spent on web-browsing. And the M2 scores 400 in Speedometer 2 benchmark vs 300 with M1.Why for the faster single-core? Just curious.
And even M2 Ultra won't likely have much faster single-core than M2, and in turn, M2 single-core isn't hugely faster than M1 single-core.
I'm not 100% convinced M2 Extreme will actually exist. It might as a 4 x M2 Max SoC, but previously I had predicted it would have a different nomenclature. I was thinking the naming would be different because it would have a somewhat different architecture particularly related to memory, even if it recycled most of the same cores.
Ideal for what? Unless you think they need a higher end gaming machine, it's simply not necessary for an Apple TV.M1 would be ideal. It’s plugged into the wall.
Why for the faster single-core? Just curious.
And even M2 Ultra won't likely have much faster single-core than M2, and in turn, M2 single-core isn't hugely faster than M1 single-core.
I'm not 100% convinced M2 Extreme will actually exist. It might as a 4 x M2 Max SoC, but previously I had predicted it would have a different nomenclature. I was thinking the naming would be different because it would have a somewhat different architecture particularly related to memory, even if it recycled most of the same cores.
A 27" M2 Pro iMac would be awesome.I hope there will be an M2 Pro iMac option as well. Although I'm happy with my M1 iMac, I absolutely would have ponied up for an M1 Pro version (with 32 GB) if it had been available.
So?
Pretty much everything in my list could still happen.
Unless the already have higher M2s in (pre)production and fixed all other possible supply issues.