Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I think Apple should be concerned about declining sales. Just for grins, I speced a M2 iPad 11 Pro with 2TB and cellular expecting a long lead time. It was in stock at a local Phoenix area Apple store. The trade in value of my M1 iPad 11 with 2TB and cellular was around $450. A depreciation of 80% in one year. Where is the residual value to justify a premium price product?

Processor upgrades are recently so slightly incrementalental that the increase in performance for normal use is hardly discernible. All the M1 chips seem to have nearly identical single core performance per all the reviews. The boot times of my M1 Mac Book Air (16GB/1TB SSD) and my Mac Studio Ultra (128GB/8TB SSD) are about the same.

My 2019 fully optioned Intel 16" Mac Book Pro (64GB/8TB SSD) actually gets to a usable screen faster at startup.

We need more than a different color lipstick on the pig to be a new model. There needs to be a significant increase in the single core mode speeds which will could also increase the multi-processor speeds.

The basic Apple iWork programs live in the single processor world. One's typing speed controls how fast things happen. Doing the routine software updates lives in the single processor world. One would think that an operating system upgrade would be quicker on the processor system with the most cores.....

We had multi-processor capability in the 90s but Photoshop was limited th three at the most. So there was lots of interest in going from a 68030 Iici to the top of the pile 68040 of the IIfx. The 32 Mbytes of Ram was very expensive using eight 4 Mb memory chips.
Based on the reports last week they are doing better than PC sales and had a record fiscal profit. You’re entitled to your opinion but at least do your research.
 
Right on cue, after Tim Cook literally said so, and another source confirmed...Gurman chimes in with his "news".
Out of curiosity, why are you criticizing Gurman for reporting this but not MacRumors for reporting it? Not everyone listened to Tim Cook. So in his routine reporting of Apple news, Gurman reported some Apple news. But also, the quote above was: "I'm told that Apple is aiming to introduce the upgraded models—including M2-based versions of the 14-inch and 16-inch MacBook Pros—in the first quarter of calendar 2023." Can you point out to us where Tim Cook said that new MBPs were coming in the first quarter of 2023? Because otherwise, you might need to look up the meaning of "literally."
 
So, will they skip the M2 Pro/Max/Ultra line altogether and just call it M3? Hmm…
No. Because Apple designs their own silicon now, they can be on whatever timeline they want. They can have 3 year gaps between M1 and M2, it doesn't really matter when the performance is so good.

It's also about yield management. They spend months (years?) culling and optimizing yields from iPhone chips in order to bin the best parts for the iPads/Macs.

Tim Cook is the king of supply chain, everything is done for monetary and yield reasons (this is not a bad thing BTW), so there is no logistical need to 'skip' a chip generation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: amartinez1660
I think Apple should be concerned about declining sales. Just for grins, I speced a M2 iPad 11 Pro with 2TB and cellular expecting a long lead time. It was in stock at a local Phoenix area Apple store. The trade in value of my M1 iPad 11 with 2TB and cellular was around $450. A depreciation of 80% in one year. Where is the residual value to justify a premium price product?

Processor upgrades are recently so slightly incrementalental that the increase in performance for normal use is hardly discernible. All the M1 chips seem to have nearly identical single core performance per all the reviews. The boot times of my M1 Mac Book Air (16GB/1TB SSD) and my Mac Studio Ultra (128GB/8TB SSD) are about the same.

My 2019 fully optioned Intel 16" Mac Book Pro (64GB/8TB SSD) actually gets to a usable screen faster at startup.

We need more than a different color lipstick on the pig to be a new model. There needs to be a significant increase in the single core mode speeds which will could also increase the multi-processor speeds.

The basic Apple iWork programs live in the single processor world. One's typing speed controls how fast things happen. Doing the routine software updates lives in the single processor world. One would think that an operating system upgrade would be quicker on the processor system with the most cores.....

We had multi-processor capability in the 90s but Photoshop was limited th three at the most. So there was lots of interest in going from a 68030 Iici to the top of the pile 68040 of the IIfx. The 32 Mbytes of Ram was very expensive using eight 4 Mb memory chips.
Any type of BTO tech product (i.e. your 2TB upgrade) always has terrible residual.

If you really want to maximize a more regular upgrade cycle, work on a strategy to gift/sell them to family members. Aside from a few Best Buy anomalies, trade-in for Apple is not usually very good.
 
No. Because Apple designs their own silicon now, they can be on whatever timeline they want. They can have 3 year gaps between M1 and M2, it doesn't really matter when the performance is so good.

It's also about yield management. They spend months (years?) culling and optimizing yields from iPhone chips in order to bin the best parts for the iPads/Macs.

Tim Cook is the king of supply chain, everything is done for monetary and yield reasons (this is not a bad thing BTW), so there is no logistical need to 'skip' a chip generation.
Exactly— they can launch whatever they want whenever they want. So, from a marketing perspective, they could sell the delay in MBP and Mac Pros as something “worth the wait” because they all get M3 PRO/Max/Extreme chips. Maybe, maybe not, but it would be a killer line at the event. “We know we’re a little behind, but we think it’s worth the wait.” Defy expectations and call these new chips M3 since they’re 3nm.
 
That makes sense based on the fact that we have no hint that any M2 Pro/Max/Ultra chips are ready. But it's a serious blow to anyone wanting an updated M2 Mac Mini or iMac which seemed like low-hanging fruit that Apple could have delivered much sooner.
Well, maybe this is proof that M2 Pro and more powerful SoCs on the M2 family are going to be built in 3nm, who knows
 
Apple ends 2022 with arguably their most useless device.. an iPad "Pro" 😆
Whatever. The iPad Pro is a very nice device, and with the external monitor support coming in 16.2 it'll be even better. It's not achieving its full potential is all. But "useless"? It's not useless at all. You're saying "useless" but what you mean is "not what I wanted it to be." To me, the 12.9" iPad Pro is the best device for playing iPad games, the best device for watching movies, the best device for surfing the web, the best device for sculpting in 3D, and an excellent device for writing (a task in which no device has quite proved, but rather just best in this setting but not in that). It might become best at retopology and painting of 3D objects, but the failure there is on my side rather than the iPad's. There's some eternal cadre of people who seem to be in an endless snit because what they want is macOS in an iPad. That won't happen, and if you're one of those people, give up that tantrum and stop punishing the iPad Pro out of petty spite. It's an excellent device.
 
Exactly— they can launch whatever they want whenever they want. So, from a marketing perspective, they could sell the delay in MBP and Mac Pros as something “worth the wait” because they all get M3 PRO/Max/Extreme chips. Maybe, maybe not, but it would be a killer line at the event. “We know we’re a little behind, but we think it’s worth the wait.” Defy expectations and call these new chips M3 since they’re 3nm.
Also, intel did step up its game in the last 2-3 years, so Apple is probably feeling a lot of pressure not to release a Mac Pro that fares poorly in the inevitable benchmarks comparisons. I'm rocking an M1 Max MBP and it's a marvel of power and efficiency. But the pro desktop users mostly sneer at the efficiency side, caring only for the length of that bar on that benchmark. I'm not the Mac Pro target audience but I've definitely got my fingers crossed that it's going to be awesome.
 
What about the Mac Studio? Surely it will get an M2 refresh around the same time as the Mini.
 
To me, the 12.9" iPad Pro is the best device for playing iPad games, the best device for watching movies, the best device for surfing the web, the best device for sculpting in 3D

disagree. the Macbook Air is better for all of those

and an excellent device for writing

do you type on the glass? or do you ALSO need to carry a keyboard? At 12.9 inches, you are toting a crippled Macbook Air. I will agree that the iPad is superior for reading comic books and magazines. but thats it.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.