Intel Announces New Quad-Core Broadwell Processors Appropriate for 15-Inch MacBook Pro

[class77]

How can Apple not upgrade to the Broadwell chip for the 15" when the 13" has better specs(newer chip, faster RAM) than the 15" flagship rMBP. The upgrade to Skylake is probably going to be a complete redesign of the MBP, but doing the upgrade to the Broadwell chip would make it comparable to the 13" and could be accomplished with the current form.

 

[MagicBoy]

There is no unit price. OEMs negotiate the price. It follows though from watching the market and performance that Nvidia was most likely not willing to give much of a discount, while AMD surely was ready to make an attractive offer. I am guessing they pay half what they'd paid for the nvidia chip. Nvidia sells enough as it is they are quite comfortable and their name has the better reputation and their Maxwell chips get the better reviews. Apple is known to be a tough negotiatior and in Nvidia they probably faced someone who was not willing to back down, because they knew they got a product worth a lot. AMD gets hardly any design wins, they are rather desperate to sell something and power balance in negotiations was clearly in Apple's favour.

Yeah not seeing that. Apple tend to flip between the two GPU manufacturers. It's more likely in my eyes that the rest of the Mac range (iMac, Mac Pro) is now AMD powered so it makes software support much more focused. Apple are focused on OpenCL performance.

Just about every game out there. 3dmark fire strike, cinebench r15 opengl, also in compute it is on most tasks faster.
An 850M beats a M370X in all tasks and a 950/960M is even faster.
AMD reduced power consumption enough to beat Kepler now but there are no significant architecture changes that put it into the same ballpark as what nvidia did with Maxwell.

The MacBook Pro is marketed as a laptop for content creation and ships with OS X. Just about everything you are quoting is gaming related on Windows. Windows gamers should look elsewhere and stop complaining about the choice of graphics card. The MacBook Pro never has been a gaming laptop. I believe it's more likely that Apple are fitting the best AMD GPU they can for the budgets (parts and TDP).

How can Apple not upgrade to the Broadwell chip for the 15" when the 13" has better specs(newer chip, faster RAM) than the 15" flagship rMBP. The upgrade to Skylake is probably going to be a complete redesign of the MBP, but doing the upgrade to the Broadwell chip would make it comparable to the 13" and could be accomplished with the current form.

Broadwell H hadn't been announced until today and we don't know what the yields are like. Broadwell is a die shrink of Haswell so the benefits are mainly power consumption related. The new core design comes with the Skylake architecture.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

This is completely illogical. There are now already two overlapping product lines, the new Macbook, and the Air, that are thin and sexy. It makes no sense for the Macbook Pro to be thin at the expense of Pro. Oh BTW, I like the Macbook/Macbook Air true laptop form factor for what it is, especially with the new Core-M processors that can operate fanless at an average of like 5W. It is just completely illogical to make the Pro in that form factor-- there are already two product lines.



I guess this is one of those, "If I ran Apple, I would .... " issues. Well, if I ran Apple, I would call the marketing folks together and ban their use of the word "thin". Twiggy was naturally thin, but, most people would be anorexic at the same BMI. It doesn't make sense for every person to be that thin, and, it doesn't make sense for every product, either. Ban thin -- it is used up anyway, like magical.



Absolutely. You can do a lot with an integrated GPU, but, let's face it, an HD 4400 is like 5% of a higher-end desktop GPU like an R9 290X or GTX 980. Some discrete GPUs are much closer to a desktop GPU.

Yeah, not saying I disagree with you, per say, just that the next redesign of the MBP line with undoubtedly be thinner than it is now.

 

[sniffies]

Apple's future nomenclature:

MacBook
MacBook Pro

iMac
iMac Pro

iPad
iPad Pro

iPhone
iPhone Plus

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Yeah, not saying I disagree with you, per say, just that the next redesign of the MBP line with undoubtedly be thinner than it is now.

I've been thinking about that. I'm hoping that you are wrong, but, I'm planning my next MBP purchase before Skylake, unlike most of the people posting here. The new Macbook is a perfect example of what I'm afraid of. I think it is bad design to force everyone to buy, carry, and constantly plug in/remove the $79 dongle to get basic connectivity that should have been separate ports. My current (recent) work MBP has to have one TB port devoted to the GigE controller, and if I need to move it to another wired location, I need to remember to bring the GigE dongle with me. That is bad design. It should be simple, but, not so simple that to use it everyday requires doing something more complicated. I'm afraid that somebody will think a couple of TB ports should work for everything, in which case, I will have to carry around a (e.g. Elgato, etc.) TB multi-port adaptor with the MBP.

 

[class77]

Broadwell H hadn't been announced until today and we don't know what the yields are like. Broadwell is a die shrink of Haswell so the benefits are mainly power consumption related. The new core design comes with the Skylake architecture.

Whatever the benefits of Broadwell over Haswell, the quad core Broadwell that was announced today will probably be an upgrade over the Haswell. It will also not required a redesign of the current rMBP. The Skylake chip will probably require a remake of the notebook and I'm betting that it will be 2nd quarter 2016 before it happens so that both the 13" and the 15" rMBP can benefit from the makeover. Just a guess on my part

 

[macduke]

It wouldn't have been foolish at all to wait another two weeks before refreshing the 15" given that very little was changed.

Someone else may have addressed this, but considering that the chips won't be available until July at the earliest and some as late as August, it's not really waiting another two weeks.

 

[placidity44]

Huh. Pardon my ignorance but I didn't read close enough into the 2015 rMBP release. I just assumed they had marginally better CPU's which were Broadwell. So essentially the 2015 rMBP has slightly improved battery life, faster PCIe storage, Force Touch, and upgraded GPU's? I'm waiting for Skylake to upgrade my rMBP but i'm really hoping they in fact come out later in the year and not sometime early next year. I'd hate to buy a new rMBP now and have a redesign later in the year or early next year.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Whatever the benefits of Broadwell over Haswell, the quad core Broadwell that was announced today will probably be an upgrade over the Haswell. It will also not required a redesign of the current rMBP. The Skylake chip will probably require a remake of the notebook and I'm betting that it will be 2nd quarter 2016 before it happens so that both the 13" and the 15" rMBP can benefit from the makeover. Just a guess on my part

You're most likely correct that the redesign of the MBP's will come Super late Q1 (Think end of March) or Q2 2016. It isn't that Skylake will require a redesign rather give Apple an excuse and a reason to do so.

It would be highly unlikely that they don't take the opportunity of the new architecture and TB3/USB-C port technologies to shave off several millimeters of thickness, probably ending up somewhere around 13.5 - 14mm or so. Active cooling will be the limiting factor here as far as thinness goes. MagSafe will be gone. It is questionable whether they will leave legacy ports on there or not - knowing Apple, I am guessing not. I'd rank it as "probable" that you will not see a mDP, USB-A, HDMI or SDXC port on these at all, much as lots and lots of you don't want to hear that.

We're most likely going to see two TB3 enabled USB-C ports, one or both of which will be designated as the "power/charging port(s)", and maybe two additional ordinary USB-C ports. It will probably NOT be a tapered design ala MBA or rMB, rather a refinement/evolution of the current "flatbed" design they have now. It will probably get slightly narrower as well, even though the screen size might, just might, get a 1" bump across the board, see below.

Thinness won't only be achieved by shrinking the bottom part of the chassis, but also bringing the rMB display technologies to the Pro line. On the 15" (Maybe 16"?? - side note hunch, 12" iPad Pro, 12" & 14" rMB's, 14" & 16" rMBP's, 13" MBA stays on unupgraded staying on Broadwell, 13" cMBP stays on also unupgraded, 11" MBA killed) you will see a low TDP dGPU, don't expect a super high powered monster - you see what they have chosen to put in the 5K iMac, so let's not be unrealistic here.

Greater than 50/50 chance in my book that the rMB keyboard gets carried into the redesign of the MBP's as well - Apple engineers are personally contacting almost all rMB owners reporting a problem with the keyboard, they are extremely keen on it for some reason, I think this is why - and there you have it, the realistic expectations for the redesigned 2016 MBP's.

It probably isn't going to jive well at all with those calling for a chassis thicker and bigger than the MBP's are now, or envisioning the unlikely return of an Ethernet port onboard, but that stuff was never going to happen in a million years, it just isn't Apple's MO.

Having had an 11" MBA for the past 4 years as my primary professional machine (finance, accounting & management consultant, not audio, photo or video to be clear) and now just waiting for my rMB to arrive, it is already second nature for me to have a couple of adapters in my laptop case, for those occasional times they are needed. And that, I think, is what Apple sees as the point.

Think about a 5K Apple cinema display (or 3rd party, whatever) that has all of those legacy ports onboard, and connects them all to the laptop at full speed AND provides said laptop with power AND can daisychain to that external RAID array for super mass storage, AND does all this with one cable. No spiderweb adapter mess at all. Simple, elegant, super fast and efficient. That's pretty much Apple in a nutshell.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

It would be highly unlikely that they don't take the opportunity of the new architecture and TB3/USB-C port technologies to shave off several millimeters of thickness, probably ending up somewhere around 13.5 - 14mm or so. Active cooling will be the limiting factor here as far as thinness goes. MagSafe will be gone. It is questionable whether they will leave legacy ports on there or not - knowing Apple, I am guessing not. I'd rank it as "probable" that you will not see a mDP, USB-A, HDMI or SDXC port on these at all, much as lots and lots of you don't want to hear that.

You are depressing me.

Greater than 50/50 chance in my book that the rMB keyboard gets carried into the redesign of the MBP's as well - Apple engineers are personally contacting almost all rMB owners reporting a problem with the keyboard, they are extremely keen on it for some reason, I think this is why - and there you have it, the realistic expectations for the redesigned 2016 MBP's.

You are depressing me further.

It probably isn't going to jive well at all with those calling for a chassis thicker and bigger than the MBP's are now, or envisioning the unlikely return of an Ethernet port onboard, but that stuff was never going to happen in a million years, it just isn't Apple's MO.

Having had an 11" MBA for the past 4 years as my primary professional machine (finance, accounting & management consultant, not audio, photo or video to be clear) and now just waiting for my rMB to arrive, it is already second nature for me to have a couple of adapters in my laptop case, for those occasional times they are needed. And that, I think, is what Apple sees as the point.

But, that is my point. You are happy with an MBA. You don't do audio/photo/video/programming/engineering/science. So, you don't need an MBP already. Stick with the ultraportable. Ultraportable users don't need an MBP anyway-- why screw up the MBP and try to make it into an MBA?

Think about a 5K Apple cinema display (or 3rd party, whatever) that has all of those legacy ports onboard, and connects them all to the laptop at full speed AND provides said laptop with power AND can daisychain to that external RAID array for super mass storage, AND does all this with one cable. No spiderweb adapter mess at all. Simple, elegant, super fast and efficient. That's pretty much Apple in a nutshell.

I understand the "vision", but, it fits your profile -- the profile of an MBA/rMB user. It doesn't fit the profile of existing audio/photo/video/programming/engineering/science users.

 

[Wahlstrm]

So, is the quad mini coming back now?

 

[MyopicPaideia]

But, that is my point. You are happy with an MBA. You don't do audio/photo/video/programming/engineering/science. So, you don't need an MBP already. Stick with the ultraportable. Ultraportable users don't need an MBP anyway-- why screw up the MBP and try to make it into an MBA?

I understand the "vision", but, it fits your profile -- the profile of an MBA/rMB user. It doesn't fit the profile of existing audio/photo/video/programming/engineering/science users.

Listen, I completely agree with you that my user profile is definitely not the MBP profile. I'm not saying I will ever buy one, because I probably won't. I'm just looking at what realistically Apple's vision of their future product line is.

Ethernet is a 35 year old technology; USB-A is a 20 year old technology. Just think about that for a minute in relative terms. Apple as a company is turning 40 years old next year, an original pioneer of the personal computing world as we know it today.

Whether we like it or not, these old technologies are headed out - to interface with them will require adapters eventually. As the connectivity standards evolve into smaller interfaces, the machhines themselves will shrink as well, bith in size and weight.

Eventually I see the entire consumer and corporate computing industry moving to iPhone-sized computers, more powerful than today's MBP's, that interface wirelessly with displays that house the connectivity bits. This is probably 15-25 years down the line, but the direction things appear to be moving. For heavy audio/video/science/research applications, there will still be workstations, of course.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

Well this announcement coming so close to the release of the updated 15" rMBP must mean that Apple is skipping Broadwell for it completely.

Why? Brand new thinner rMBP design with Skylake and TB3/USB-C!

OMG no. No more "thinner" crap please. I want MORE POWER (especially GPU) not THINNER. Apple, please keep your thin notebooks in a crapperrific thin lineup like that new ghastly 12-inch Macbook with one connector (including power)....god awful POS that it is. That notebook might as well be a glorified iPad crossover and given how useless the keyboard is, they might as well have included touch screen control. No 15"+ Macbook Pro should resemble that monstrosity, IMO.

Listen, I completely agree with you that my user profile is definitely not the MBP profile. I'm not saying I will ever buy one, because I probably won't. I'm just looking at what realistically Apple's vision of their future product line is.

Ethernet is a 35 year old technology; USB-A is a 20 year old technology. Just think about that for a minute in relative terms. Apple as a company is turning 40 years old next year, an original pioneer of the personal computing world as we know it today.

And yet Ethernet is still faster and more reliable than ANY WiFI connection in existence and a desktop simply doesn't need WiFi. It needs speed and reliability. I can't get the theoretical limits of WiFi in the same room as the router even. The car is over 100 years old. That doesn't make it obsolete. It's called UPDATES to technology. You might as well say the transistor is obsolete since it's OLD OLD OLD. Show me something better.

Whether we like it or not, these old technologies are headed out - to interface with them will require adapters eventually. As the connectivity standards evolve into smaller interfaces, the machhines themselves will shrink as well, bith in size and weight.

Adapters for a dead technology is fine. Show me the money. You'll still need whatever replacement connectors on the new machine. That Macbook has ONE connector for EVERYTHING including power and that is not only stupid, it's ASININE. At the very least, they should have included more USB-C connectors (dead minimum of two to even be functional in the slightest). WTF is the point of having the thinnest lightest most compact notebook around if the design is stymied by having to carry around a whole fracking BAG of adapters to do anything with it? It defeats the point of portable.

My 2008 MBP was portable. It had every connector a person could want on it including a removable battery! (2 USB, 1 FW800, 1 FW400, 1 Gigabit Ethernet, full-size DVI, Audio IN & OUT on separate plugs that also did digital and a full blown expansion port that let me add USB3 to it years later that later models couldn't utilize no matter what). THAT was a GREAT design. Everything that has come since has been a compromise in one or more areas.

Eventually I see the entire consumer and corporate computing industry moving to iPhone-sized computers, more powerful than today's MBP's, that interface wirelessly with displays that house the connectivity bits. This is probably 15-25 years down the line, but the direction things appear to be moving. For heavy audio/video/science/research applications, there will still be workstations, of course.

iPhone sized computers? Hell, a Mac Mini isn't much larger than an iPhone already (I think an AppleTV Gen2/3 is already smaller overall). Google glasses you wear. We already have the iPhone for that matter (it's a computer believe it or not). The fact is an equivalent desktop of the same time frame will ALWAYS be FASTER, often MUCH FASTER. While Joe "I don't care about computers" may be happy with just a tiny POS pocket computer, no serious computer "nerd/hobbyist/enthusiast" would ever find having JUST one of those acceptable. The fastest thing out there isn't fast enough and probably never will be.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

OMG no. No more "thinner" crap please. I want MORE POWER (especially GPU) not THINNER. Apple, please keep your thin notebooks in a crapperrific thin lineup like that new ghastly 12-inch Macbook with one connector (including power)....god awful POS that it is. That notebook might as well be a glorified iPad crossover and given how useless the keyboard is, they might as well have included touch screen control. No 15"+ Macbook Pro should resemble that monstrosity, IMO.



And yet Ethernet is still faster and more reliable than ANY WiFI connection in existence and a desktop simply doesn't need WiFi. It needs speed and reliability. I can't get the theoretical limits of WiFi in the same room as the router even. The car is over 100 years old. That doesn't make it obsolete. It's called UPDATES to technology. You might as well say the transistor is obsolete since it's OLD OLD OLD. Show me something better.



Adapters for a dead technology is fine. Show me the money. You'll still need whatever replacement connectors on the new machine. That Macbook has ONE connector for EVERYTHING including power and that is not only stupid, it's ASININE. At the very least, they should have included more USB-C connectors (dead minimum of two to even be functional in the slightest). WTF is the point of having the thinnest lightest most compact notebook around if the design is stymied by having to carry around a whole fracking BAG of adapters to do anything with it? It defeats the point of portable.

My 2008 MBP was portable. It had every connector a person could want on it including a removable battery! (2 USB, 1 FW800, 1 FW400, 1 Gigabit Ethernet, full-size DVI, Audio IN & OUT on separate plugs that also did digital and a full blown expansion port that let me add USB3 to it years later that later models couldn't utilize no matter what). THAT was a GREAT design. Everything that has come since has been a compromise in one or more areas.



iPhone sized computers? Hell, a Mac Mini isn't much larger than an iPhone already (I think an AppleTV Gen2/3 is already smaller overall). Google glasses you wear. We already have the iPhone for that matter (it's a computer believe it or not). The fact is an equivalent desktop of the same time frame will ALWAYS be FASTER, often MUCH FASTER. While Joe "I don't care about computers" may be happy with just a tiny POS pocket computer, no serious computer "nerd/hobbyist/enthusiast" would ever find having JUST one of those acceptable. The fastest thing out there isn't fast enough and probably never will be.

Jeez, talk about shooting the messenger! Don't get mad at me, I am just taking a realist look at what to expect for real from Apple. This isn't a "wish list" like what you seem to have put together.

I thought we were talking about a MBP, not the MB or desktops??? What does the iMac, Mini, or Mac Pro have to do with what should be realistically expected of the next MBP redesign? A MBP is not designed as a desktop computer.

You're not going to get taller, wider, bigger in a redesign of any Apple computer, so you better get used to it. Ethernet will never ever again feature in an Apple laptop, get used to it. 100W+ TDP GPU's will NEVER be in an Apple laptop, get used to it.

That's the reality. Your comment about that 2008 MBP illustrates this perfectly.

Obviously I agree with your last point - there being bigger faster stronger options - I never said they would disappear completely, there will always be something powerful out there for "enthusiasts" and proper creative and scienticfic work, because the boundaries of technology are moving on all fronts, not just computers. However, you just have to look at the design choices of the nMP, 5K iMac, iPad & iPhone, and the new rMB and you can see the direction Apple is going.

You're not going to be happy about it. Maybe Apple won't be providing an acceptable option for you going forward.

 

[Yebubbleman]

Intel today at Computex 2015 announced its next-generation lineup of quad-core Broadwell processors for notebooks and desktop computers, including a trio of Core i7 processors appropriate for the 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro: i7-5950HQ, i7-5850HQ and i7-5750HQ. The new processors have base frequencies of between 2.5 GHz and 2.9 GHz and feature integrated Intel Iris Pro 6200 graphics.

The fifth-generation Broadwell chips are expected to be available in the next 30-60 days, meaning the first notebooks and desktop computers with the new processors should be available in July or August.

Interestingly, Apple refreshed the 15-inch Retina MacBook Pro just last month, but noticeably missing were processor upgrades, as the new machines continue to use the same Haswell processors from the previous generation. While appropriate Broadwell chips will soon be available over the next few months, it is possible that Apple did not want to wait that long to refresh the notebook.

It is also possible that Apple will skip fifth-generation Broadwell processors entirely for the MacBook Pro and release Skylake-based notebooks as early as later this year. Intel also announced the future availability of Thunderbolt 3 with USB-C, and USB 3.1 and DisplayPort 1.2 support, and the new spec would be suitable for inclusion in the next refresh to the Mac lineup.

Article Link: Intel Announces New Quad-Core Broadwell Processors Appropriate for 15-Inch MacBook Pro

They're going to skip Broadwell in the 15" MacBook Pro. Would bet the cost of one on it. With Thunderbolt 3 coming out with Skylake and with that being a somewhat huge deal for them (being a key proponent of Thunderbolt and USB-C) and with them clearly opting to hold out with an actual third update with Haswell rather than buying into a quad-core mobile CPU that will only be supplanted by its own successor in roughly three months, they're skipping Broadwell. It made sense to adopt Broadwell for the 13" Retina because the chips were ready at just the right time (8-10 months before the launch of Skylake [as we all ought to know, the MacBook Pro line follows a relatively strict 8-10 month release cycle]). For the 15" Apple had the option to either wait for Broadwell, and then delay launching 15" MacBook Pros with Skylake or to be on time to the Skylake party and to skip the Broadwell party for that machine altogether. It was a tough decision, but they likely made the right call.

Odds are decent that this will bring a redesign of some sort to the line as a whole. At the very minimum, Skylake, bearing Thunderbolt 3, will require a port layout change. Though, knowing Apple, this will prove to be the right time for them to change things up further in the way that they frequently do with their products.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Listen, I completely agree with you that my user profile is definitely not the MBP profile. I'm not saying I will ever buy one, because I probably won't. I'm just looking at what realistically Apple's vision of their future product line is.

You are making me sad again.

Ethernet is a 35 year old technology; USB-A is a 20 year old technology. Just think about that for a minute in relative terms. Apple as a company is turning 40 years old next year, an original pioneer of the personal computing world as we know it today.

Whether we like it or not, these old technologies are headed out - to interface with them will require adapters eventually. As the connectivity standards evolve into smaller interfaces, the machhines themselves will shrink as well, bith in size and weight.

Actually, you are going astray here. You are mixing up two different things. Ethernet layer-1 (physical), and, physical connections and connectors, have changed dramatically over the last 35 years. But, Ethernet isn't going anywhere soon. In fact, more and more devices are connecting to Ethernet all the time, both wireless and wired. "Wired" goes to 100 Gbps now (using optical fiber) and could soon go to 400 Gbps. At the low end, new standards are being defined for copper-based Ethernet for wireless AP connectivity and for machine rooms.

What I think you are trying to say is that everything will be wireless. You're wrong about that.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

You are making me sad again.



Actually, you are going astray here. You are mixing up two different things. Ethernet layer-1 (physical), and, physical connections and connectors, have changed dramatically over the last 35 years. But, Ethernet isn't going anywhere soon. In fact, more and more devices are connecting to Ethernet all the time, both wireless and wired. "Wired" goes to 100 Gbps now (using optical fiber) and could soon go to 400 Gbps. At the low end, new standards are being defined for copper-based Ethernet for wireless AP connectivity and for machine rooms.

What I think you are trying to say is that everything will be wireless. You're wrong about that.

Nope, actually, I am just saying that the new wired port standards like TB3 and USB-C will replace the older 35 year old Ethernet jack and 20 year old USB-A port. They are essentially backwards compatible with adapters when you need them and are more versatile.

If you take a step back and look at it objectively, having one connector shape that can handle what it used to take at least 4 different connector types to accomplish, and do it 10-100-1000 times faster, of course that is better.

The thing is, there always will have to be a transition period, and that's where adapters come in.

As far as wireless goes, it will continue to improve to the point that on a consumer level, 90% of everything will be more than fast enough - Obviously data bandwidth will also continue to increase as well, so file sizes will continue to grow too. But wireless will probably be "good enough" at some point that it won't make much of a difference to consumer level applications and uses.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Nope, actually, I am just saying that the new wired port standards like TB3 and USB-C will replace the older 35 year old Ethernet jack and 20 year old USB-A port. They are essentially backwards compatible with adapters when you need them and are more versatile.

Ethernet (layer-2) via a TB3 connector is still Ethernet, just like Ethernet via HDMI is still Ethernet (HDMI 1.4 Ethernet Channel). Wireless Ethernet is still Ethernet. Ethernet (layer-2) runs over a wide variety of both (layer-1) media and connectors.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

Ethernet (layer-2) via a TB3 connector is still Ethernet, just like Ethernet via HDMI is still Ethernet (HDMI 1.4 Ethernet Channel). Wireless Ethernet is still Ethernet. Ethernet (layer-2) runs over a wide variety of both (layer-1) media and connectors.

You are of course correct, but that's not what is being discussed, and never has been. You wanted an RJ-45 Ethernet port in a new redesigned 2016 MBP. That port form factor is 35 years old, and hasn't been included in a MBP since the last generation chassis. That TB3 and USB-C are still compatible with today's Ethernet standards protocols is irrelevant in this context.

Not in the sense that the new ports protocols and standards are compatible with the old, that is of course relevant, so that physical adapters can be used, but rather in the physical form factor of the ports themselves.

Obviously (or not, as may be) I was using Ethernet in the context of the standard old school physical RJ-45 port form factor, not the technical data transfer protocol standard the physical port derives its name from.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

You are of course correct, but that's not what is being discussed, and never has been.

It seemed that the two different points were getting mixed together. It is, as you say, not about Ethernet. It isn't even about RJ-45's. That is what you get when you buy the dongle. It is about putting an RJ-45, and, other dedicated connectors onto the side of the MBP instead of making you buy, plug in, and often buy spares to carry with you, a handful of dongles in order to get the connectivity you need.

OBTW, wired networks are not going away in organizations. Most organizations have centralized backup, and, it is dumb to try to back up 100 Macs with 512 GB (or 1 TB) of data through a few shared wireless APs. Orgs also don't like to do patching over wireless, either. Wired networks have performance and security benefits that will keep them around for a long, long time. So, yes, I disagree with much of what you write below.

You wanted an RJ-45 Ethernet port in a new redesigned 2016 MBP. That port form factor is 35 years old, and hasn't been included in a MBP since the last generation chassis. That TB3 and USB-C are still compatible with today's Ethernet standards protocols is irrelevant in this context.

Not in the sense that the new ports protocols and standards are compatible with the old, that is of course relevant, so that physical adapters can be used, but rather in the physical form factor of the ports themselves.

Obviously (or not, as may be) I was using Ethernet in the context of the standard old school physical RJ-45 port form factor, not the technical data transfer protocol standard the physical port derives its name from.

 

[MagnusVonMagnum]

It isn't even about RJ-45's. That is what you get when you buy the dongle. It is about putting an RJ-45, and, other dedicated connectors onto the side of the MBP instead of making you buy, plug in, and often buy spares to carry with you, a handful of dongles in order to get the connectivity you need.

Exactly. I don't want to see a Macbook Pro with a lot of smooth empty side surfaces where they COULD have put a lot of useful ports. If you don't need them, they aren't hurting anything, but if they don't exist, it's not only an extra expense for dongles/hubs, but a royal PITA to carry around. There's no reason even with TB3 they couldn't have the ports (using a built-in hub or whatever). Technically speaking, all Macbooks have built-in hubs anyway (e.g. the web-cam is technically a hub connection internally). But as you can see with the current Macbook Pro models, they waste a ton of space and provide jack-squat for built-in connections. My den has wired Gigabit all around. I dock my Macbook Pro there and plug it in. 802.11N CANNOT compete with Gigabit Ethernet. I'm sure 802.11AC would do a bit better, but I doubt it would come close just the same plus I'd need to buy a new router to even use it while I've had Gigabit since my PowerMac G4 days. Updated 10 or 100 Gigabit would blow WiFi out of the water. There's also less privacy concerns over wire than over-the-air (just ask the NSA who wiretap the entire web either way 24/7/365. Snowden only scratched the surface of what they do in reality. What they admit publicly and what they do in reality are two entirely different things).

OBTW, wired networks are not going away in organizations. Most organizations have centralized backup, and, it is dumb to try to back up 100 Macs with 512 GB (or 1 TB) of data through a few shared wireless APs. Orgs also don't like to do patching over wireless, either. Wired networks have performance and security benefits that will keep them around for a long, long time. So, yes, I disagree with much of what you write below.

The thing about desktop, docked and office environments is that they don't generally MOVE so there's no need to use WiFi when wired works better and faster for the cost of a CAT5 cable. I bought an extra Gigabit switch on top of the four that came with my dual-radio router I have so many wired connections. No real susceptibility to interference from other wireless devices (and microwaves for that matter), no lengthy renegotiations to adjust the speed all the time. It just works. Admittedly with today's SSD drives, we need to start seeing 100 (or at least 10) Gigabit Ethernet STANDARD on Apple products (why on Earth are Apple's Thunderbolt adapters only 1 Gigabit in 2015 when even Thunderbolt V1.0 could handle 10 Gigabit?). The problem with adapters, though is that they use Thunderbolt bandwidth (e.g. if there were a 10 Gigabit adapter, it could saturate the Thunderbolt 1 bus all by itself) whereas dedicated motherboard ports have their own lanes separate from Thunderbolt. The other problem is that Apple's own Ethernet adapter has no pass-through and that's another potential PITA. Yeah, a dedicated dock at your house would be helpful, but what about on the road? A lot of hotels have wired Ethernet. I've been to several that ONLY have wired Ethernet. Don't forget that adapter and pray you don't need to connect another Thunderbolt device at the same time on models with only one port....

 

[robeddie]

OMG no. No more "thinner" crap please. I want MORE POWER (especially GPU) not THINNER. Apple, please keep your thin notebooks in a crapperrific thin lineup like that new ghastly 12-inch Macbook with one connector (including power)....god awful POS that it is. That notebook might as well be a glorified iPad crossover and given how useless the keyboard is, they might as well have included touch screen control. No 15"+ Macbook Pro should resemble that monstrosity, IMO.
.

I'm with ya bro. In the past few years, Apple's 'form over function' mantra has accelerated to overdrive. But I'm afraid you and I are dinasaurs. Theres just too many people who think how their computer looks is way more important than what it can do. Too many people who think carrying around a 4-pound laptop is a 'burden'.
For old fogies like you and me, its sad and depressing.

 

[corelle]

So can anybody tell me ,
Would I be able to upgrade my haswell mbp
To broadwell gpu.

 

[MyopicPaideia]

It seemed that the two different points were getting mixed together. It is, as you say, not about Ethernet. It isn't even about RJ-45's. That is what you get when you buy the dongle. It is about putting an RJ-45, and, other dedicated connectors onto the side of the MBP instead of making you buy, plug in, and often buy spares to carry with you, a handful of dongles in order to get the connectivity you need.

OBTW, wired networks are not going away in organizations. Most organizations have centralized backup, and, it is dumb to try to back up 100 Macs with 512 GB (or 1 TB) of data through a few shared wireless APs. Orgs also don't like to do patching over wireless, either. Wired networks have performance and security benefits that will keep them around for a long, long time. So, yes, I disagree with much of what you write below.

Absolutely agree. Remember, we are talking about what Apple will realistically do with their next redesign, not what you and others want. Apple is not making Macbooks with a focus on large corporate rollouts and backups. Apple is focusing on consumer, small business (90% of businesses globally are small, with fewer than 25 employees) and creative markets.

I would argue that in the large corporate setting, or organisation, as you refer to it, a stationary desktop hub would be an excellent choice. Instead of having to plug in 3-4 connectors when you get to your desk, you plug in one, and the same when you need to run to a meeting or something with it, just unplug one cable from the stationary hub.

In this environment, you don't need a bunch of dongle adapters. If you do lots of presentations now in that environment you probably already need an adapter in any case, and of course Apple is not going to include more connector ports on board than they do now, exactly the opposite.

All but one of my clients fits into this small business category, and they all use wireless as a primary connection method, and use either Dropbox for Business, Google Apps for Business, or Office 365/OneDrive for file sharing. For better of for worse, the small to medium sized business isn't hosting their own internal file sharing servers anymore, or "deploying" IT equipment from a central IT department. Its just not economically or administratively effective compared to the alternatives for these categories of organisations. Is it "better?" - no, not in a technical absolute speed/maximum security sense, but it is in a convenience/complexity sense. Is it "good enough?" - yes, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

These are the realities of these environments. I'm not saying your use case is invalid or that the points you raise are not relevant. I'm just saying that Apple has obviously identified a philosophy and a market they have identified as their primary target for design and feature sets, and it has obviously brought them great success. They realistically won't be reversing course anytime soon.

I realise that you may be just having a rant to let off steam and lament the fact that Apple is moving in this direction, and of course you're entitled to that - but unnecessarily trying to convince little old me of the superiority of wired connections and and having legacy connector ports onboard the laptop chassis isn't going to magically make Apple change their mind. Apple obviously feels that Macbook users aren't using these older connector form factors, and that they are too limiting to the design they want to acheive, and feel that a dongle adapter for the fewer times these typical users need to have that port is a more than acceptable alternative. They are trying to make the logic board as small as possible to enable a smaller enclosure with equal or better cooling properties and equal or better battery life, and equal or better displays. That means they will use those technologies that they have at their disposal to acheive this. With TB3/USB-C they have a technology that enables them to provide the same or better connectivity capabilities (with adapters) while decreasing the minimum required logic board size.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Absolutely agree. Remember, we are talking about what Apple will realistically do with their next redesign, not what you and others want. Apple is not making Macbooks with a focus on large corporate rollouts and backups. Apple is focusing on consumer, small business (90% of businesses globally are small, with fewer than 25 employees) and creative markets.

Sure, but, at some point, Apple will be hanging by a thread if it ignores what enough "others" want. Apple made its mark in this market by finding a way to make BSD "user friendly", while still retaining its "programmer friendly" environment. OS X is a huge advantage over Windows. But, if the difference in price, performance, and functionality is large enough, people will forego OS X.

Secondly, 90% of businesses is not the same thing as 90% of systems. I don't know what fraction of systems are in orgs that have over 25 employees.

Third, although a majority of my home devices are wireless-only, some important ones are not. Wired connections are still very useful, even at home and in small businesses. Not to mention a few years ago when I had to plug in everything I could all the time because neighbor AP interference was so bad. (It has gotten better.)

I would argue that in the large corporate setting, or organisation, as you refer to it, a stationary desktop hub would be an excellent choice. Instead of having to plug in 3-4 connectors when you get to your desk, you plug in one, and the same when you need to run to a meeting or something with it, just unplug one cable from the stationary hub.

In this environment, you don't need a bunch of dongle adapters. If you do lots of presentations now in that environment you probably already need an adapter in any case, and of course Apple is not going to include more connector ports on board than they do now, exactly the opposite.

I agree with you that we will see more stationary hubs, although it is surprising to me that I still can't get exactly what I want after all this time, although OWC is pretty close.

All but one of my clients fits into this small business category, and they all use wireless as a primary connection method, and use either Dropbox for Business, Google Apps for Business, or Office 365/OneDrive for file sharing. For better of for worse, the small to medium sized business isn't hosting their own internal file sharing servers anymore, or "deploying" IT equipment from a central IT department. Its just not economically or administratively effective compared to the alternatives for these categories of organisations. Is it "better?" - no, not in a technical absolute speed/maximum security sense, but it is in a convenience/complexity sense. Is it "good enough?" - yes, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.

I can't picture storing and backing up 10's of TB of image/video files etc. over a DSL or cable modem uplink, nor can I imagine betting my business on an unknown (to me) security model.

Apple obviously feels that Macbook users aren't using these older connector form factors, and that they are too limiting to the design they want to acheive, and feel that a dongle adapter for the fewer times these typical users need to have that port is a more than acceptable alternative.

See, I really don't get this. Because, if I bought a Macbook (I might), the $79 dongle would be with me always, and, I would always be asking why I had to have a dongle instead of plugging in to the upper left side like I always could before.

They are trying to make the logic board as small as possible to enable a smaller enclosure with equal or better cooling properties and equal or better battery life, and equal or better displays. That means they will use those technologies that they have at their disposal to acheive this. With TB3/USB-C they have a technology that enables them to provide the same or better connectivity capabilities (with adapters) while decreasing the minimum required logic board size.

But, that is exactly the point. You have to consider the bother, the weight, and the space consumed by the dongle along with the Macbook, because it will always be there.