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

HobeSoundDarryl

macrumors G5
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.

Yes, all this is the same stuff slung at every "next tier" discussion.

I saw the same stuff last time: "No support of 4K, no financial or technical reason, 4K TVs are only in a faction of households, etc." I could just go back in time before there was a 4K AppleTV and get paragraphs of "our" rationale why Apple didn't need to make an 4K AppleTV before they did... and go back further to the time before there was a 1080p AppleTV, grab the same pile of why nobody needs a 1080p AppleTV... then change a few number references, update "the chart" with different numbers and lay in maybe 20 paragraphs as to why an 8K version is not needed.

Similarly, I could make a great case that iPhone 13 is beyond "good enough" too... that M1 Macs are beyond "good enough" etc too... but we see much less of that kind of thinking with other Apple hardware. Instead, we hunger for more, more, more there. Just this ONE thing seems to get this "good enough" (in the format Apple currently has for sale right now) sentiment right up until Apple rolls out the next generation... and then it takes over as "good enough." It seems Apple is never called out as wrong when they roll out the next tier before all of the rationale we offer each other as to why that tier is not needed is addressed. The only apparent wrong is us consumers desiring something that Apple is not yet selling. Apparently, there's no need for any such thing for anyone until Apple makes it for sale.

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.
 

Ashbash75

Cancelled
Dec 17, 2017
310
519
Apple seriously needs to sort out Siri & Homekit for me to consider a new Homepod. Maybe fix the bug with stereo'ed Homepod via mac airplay would be nice too.
 

EugW

macrumors G5
Jun 18, 2017
13,740
11,446
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.
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HobeSoundDarryl

EugW

macrumors G5
Jun 18, 2017
13,740
11,446
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.
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.
 

jz0309

Contributor
Sep 25, 2018
10,105
26,423
SoCal
So Apple is going to offer more Mac choices, rumored new screen sizes and more desktop variants - good guess Gurman. Anyone can do this at this point.
As for S8 having the same specs as S7 and S6 - that really means no new functionality esp health sensors/features in AW8 - that will be a problem as the competition is catching up on Apple, Apple needs to build out its lead…
 
  • Haha
Reactions: NetMage

freedomlinux

macrumors regular
Jul 27, 2008
246
395
CT, USA
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.

Not sure we have enough information yet to establish a pattern, but I'm interested to see. I'd like to see all products have a regular and predictable cycle.

When I think about ordering the M1 mac mini, my subconscious says "2 year old computer", even if that isn't exactly true or meaningful. But I do hesitate to buy a product "late" into its lifecycle
 

DavidSchaub

macrumors 6502
Jun 16, 2016
390
425
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.

While it is possible for an annual cadence, I just don't see why it is considered probable.

Everyone historically blamed Intel for Apple letting hardware "rot on the vine" without getting updated, but we may now see that this is just how Apple likes to operate and maintain margins while amortizing manufacturing costs. We will see soon how quickly Apple updates WHAT devices. Even with the M2, Apple hasn't bothered updating the iPad Pros, iMac, Mac mini, or iPad Air yet.

So far, the M* is following the 18 month cadence of its A*x forebearers (being about the same power/thermal class chip). If I were to bet, I would suggest that 18 month cadence (skipping an A* core design every third year or so) seems the most likely.

Given that Apple has left pro Mac hardware around for YEARS, I would be shocked if any future Mac Pro got updated faster than every TWO years.

There is no NEED for apple to update Macs annually, and if they can avoid that work, they'll save more money.

As for PC competition, Apple and mac users don't really care. Intel and AMD are not sitting still and they're willing to sell to markets where power/heat is no problem and external GPUs rule... There are always tradeoffs with technology.

I find it wild how many holes product holes there are with these recent rumours:
 

Attachments

  • M2_and_M3.png
    M2_and_M3.png
    252.2 KB · Views: 95
  • Like
Reactions: 88Keys

anthogag

macrumors 68020
Jan 15, 2015
2,135
3,534
Canada
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.

I would get a newer Apple TV. I like the little box.

I am hoping Mac mini Pro will change it up a little bit. Maybe 3/4 current thickness.
 

Bug-Creator

macrumors 68000
May 30, 2011
1,757
4,676
Germany
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.

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?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nick_P

0194839

Cancelled
Dec 16, 2019
135
468
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.
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!
 
  • Like
Reactions: anthogag

xxray

macrumors 68040
Jul 27, 2013
3,024
9,134
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?

Gurman said in his newsletter:

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.

Gurman also previously said he doesn’t expect new MacBook Pros (14/16) this year, so maybe they’re coming in early 2023 with M3 coming in late 2023 since he also said in this newsletter:

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.
 

Kazgarth

macrumors 6502
Oct 18, 2020
303
836
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.
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.

That's 33% uplift for main Mac activity.

It's not that much better than the M1 in other areas (and certainly worse as a laptop in thermals & power draw), and I agree with that. But since I have the basic M1 mini and it struggles with multitasking due to only having 4 power cores, I need an upgrade for my desktop Mac that is based on M2 for the above reason.

I don't know about the M2 Extreme, it is entirely possible that would need new architecture (3nm?) to become a reality. Till then I'd keep an eye out for M2 Ultra.
 
Last edited:
  • Angry
Reactions: NetMage

Ashbash75

Cancelled
Dec 17, 2017
310
519
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.

Also for Digital Audio Workstations (DAW's), single thread is more important unless you are composing for an orchestra.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlphaCentauri

xxray

macrumors 68040
Jul 27, 2013
3,024
9,134
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.

So I was agreeing that we don’t know the pattern and that just because it took this long between releases doesn’t mean we can say the timeline will be the same for the next generation of chips.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.