Intel's Processor Roadmap Leaves Uncertainty for Apple's 2014 Mac Updates

[Freida]

You're holding it wrong! 1920x1200 here and 1920x1200 there, is exactly the same. The rest is viewing distance, which is variable anyway.
What do you mean, "otherwise"? We are all having iPads and we all use them as browsers. The whole internet is getting optimized for touch. No, I don't get it. Because the 17" MBP never was a bestseller, the 13" was. And the 8" iPad mini is outselling them both.

Instead you have to mess with internal HDDs and internal 17" screen in your 3 kg schlepptop*. You only have internalized all the trouble, you don't like to have externally. Next thing you add is an internal ODD. And than a FDD.

*(to schlepp + laptop = schlepptop)

I meant that physical size matters otherwise we could set ipad to 1920x1200 and use it as our main screen. (that was my point with the ipad)

Yes, I know that they didn't sell that well because they were not for everyone. (just like mac pros). For me it was portable workstation which I needed when I sometimes travelled. The biggest screen size would be the best option for me. I didn't travel that much to need as portable as possible and for my work you need as much screen as possible. At work I have 2 screens (sometimes 3 if IT department has another available) because Maya is screen hungry ))
So, seeing that people still ask for 17" I wasn't the only one who desire that size to come back. I tried 15" (i didn't have a choice when they killed 17") so I have 15" rMBP but I can tell you that I am not happy with it cause its just too small. When I have the luxury when there is another screen connected to it then I don't mind so much but on its own is just a little dwarf. And the 1920x1200 resolution on is it ok but everything is so small.
So real 17" retina would be welcome. Remove the bezel and you have a machine that is hardly any bigger then current 15". Apple can do it if they opt to. They did that with mac pro (and that wasn't selling that much either) so why not with 17"?
If they release 17" tomorrow I'm selling this 15" immediately. Lets hope

 

[LastQuadrant]

If Apple does another CPU chip change to their own ARM, I'm going to be pissed.

But then again, so we really need faster chips at this point for the average Facebook, email, & Spotify consumer? Nope. We need more optimized software.

I don't think Apple is going to change from Intel to ARM for their laptops and desktops. OS X is the Intel platform and iOS is for the tablet, smartphone, and iPod Touch.

It's all what Intel is going to do for CISC processors for laptops.

For the 15watt and 28watt Intel chips, there are roadmaps for both that would apply to Apple, it's just a matter of which ones. But the thing is Apple has TB on all of their products, so look at the respective chips as to which have TB support. I think that might solve that issue.

 

[iMcLovin]

Intel's Processor Roadmap Leaves Uncertainty for Apple's 2014 Mac Updates

I'm glad plans are more clear for desktop CPUs. I really hope apple will refresh the iMac this year with a new CPU and even better gpu than in the current. Of course a desktop gpu in the iMac would be ideal.

If a new CPU are imminent and GeForce 880M comes this month, then an iMac refresh might come sooner than usual.

 

[LastQuadrant]

'tis quite strange we've yet to see the Mac Mini make the jump to Haswell.

But as someone who recently got a late 2013 rMBP, I'm eagerly awaiting a Thunderbolt Display refresh. An iMac-like profile, reduced glare, Thunderbolt 2.0, and USB 3.0 would sure be delicious!

I am sure Apple is getting their production line up to speed since the MacMini, or whatever they are going to call them, will also be made in the USA. Same thing with the iMac replacement.

I think if the author of this article would find out what the replacement processors have TB support, that they would have those questions answered.

Obviously, if they can't jack up the processor speed, they'll add better graphics, maybe more cache or some other trick to make them perform better and smaller die size.

Yeah, I'm sure at some point, they won't be able to make these things much faster, consume the same amount of power, etc. Same goes on the ARM side. There is only so much they can do with Silicon, I think the next step is something that isn't Silicon based technology.

I wouldn't worry about it.

 

[the8thark]

The iPad is a media consumption device, a tablet, a computer is much more than that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_computer

A personal computer (PC) is a general-purpose computer, whose size, capabilities and original sale price makes it useful for individuals, and which is intended to be operated directly by an end-user with no intervening computer operator.

An iPad is a PC by this definition.

 

[monkeybagel]

Upgrades can come with more than just the processor, you know.

Indeed, however there is nothing wrong with the current models. Technology constantly advances. No matter when you buy a computer, a faster one is going to be released soon. If it is 1 month or 8 months does it really make a difference in the long run? I think the work you are getting done on whatever system you may have is the most important. In the end one generation upgrade will generally only get you a small amount of performance and how long would you be holding out to get that would you would otherwise not have a new machine to use?

I think people get hung up on the spec thing. Reminds me of the android ecosystem getting caught up in spec wars.

 

[LastQuadrant]

What I would like to see

Is obviously updated MacMinis, but I think Apple really needs to have a more robust i5/i7 based system that closely rivals the low end MacPros. Something that is headless but similar power and I/O capability of the iMac.

Why? Well, I think iMacs are great, but they are a pain to move around if you have to bring it to the local Store to get fixed.

I think if Apple made either an i5/i7 version of the MacPro, or something in that area, but for the price range of $1,500 to $3,000, with high end i5/i7, TB 2, USB 3, HDMI, 32GB RAM, fast SSD, and some nice GPUs, I think they would do well. They seem to have a hole in their lineup with regards to a headless high end i5/i7. The iMac doesn't cut it for that for all of us.

Yes, i'm surprised they haven't updated the TB Monitor to a TB2 monitor and released their own 4K display as well.

I think Apple will just release as Intel releases COMPELLING new processors that make sense. Apple typically updated computers 2x a year, now it's once a year, if that for some models.

I would think that Apple might make a quarterly product announcement in 2nd week of March and maybe we'll see the new MacMini (or whatever) then. I'm sure we might also see a new AppleTV.

 

[TMay]

They used to do the typing on typewriters. Were those computers too?

----------



In the mean time Windows PCs have bettered Macs in screen resolution, battery life, creativity of form factors, touch screens etc. This article reminded me how Apple was waiting for two years for Intel to add USB 3.0 to their chip set while every other PC manufacturer was using third party USB 3.0 controllers.

In your mind, Apple is doing it wrong; in reality, Apple is possibly the only company doing it right. They are still in the market after 30 years.

That's why Lenovo makes ThinkPads, Sony want to sell its VIAO line, and it takes HP selling seven PC's to generate the same profit as Apple selling one Mac. For the most part, the PC market was driven by a spec list, and features of little user value that differentiated one windows box from another. Apple doesn't play that game.

And for the record, most people were buying PC's to connect to the internet and that's why smartphones and tablets are, for many, many people, replacing PC's.

 

[Gudi]

The iPad is a media consumption device, a tablet, a computer is much more than that.

You're not in the position to narrow down the term computer to no longer include tablets. Any new definition needs to describe the concept of computation better than a Turing Machine.

What you mean is referred to as desktop computing with a windowing system. Unfortunately desktop is also used to describe a certain form factor of computing hardware; distinguished from laptops, who also do desktop computing while not being desktops. It is complicated. To crown it all, windows is used as a marketing name for only one such operating system. So we can't just say windows computers and mean them all.

I like to think of tablets and smartphones as mobile computers (MC), in differentiation to desktops and laptops as personal computers (PC). Still you could argue that a laptop is somewhat mobile and a smartphone is very personal. But for a start, try to convince people that iPads aren't PCs.

That definition might catch on, while tablets aren't computers is just plain wrong.

 

[tumtumtum]

+1 I've been watching house of cards...and honestly, the experience is so much better on my iPad than my macbook pro. despite the macbook pro having a quad core i7 vs. the A6x chip on the ipad
the macbook pro gets hot on my lap, runs out of battery much quicker and takes more steps to do what i want it to do.

the iPad is quickly becoming my main computer.

Yup! The wonders of hardware accelerated video decoding and rendering. A big reason why flash (with its application of of videos with older software only codecs) would have ruined the user experience on tablets/phones.

 

[iRun26.2]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Apple's ARM chips will be in Macbook Air's.

That's one of the reasons for making the 64-bit chip.

Just watch. WWDC2014

That would ruin the MBA!

Apple would lose me as a customer (but maybe they think there are enough people who would want an iPad with a built in keyboard).

 

[haravikk]

The longer we go without any hard rumours for the Mac Mini, the more I'm hopeful we'll see a Broadwell rather than Haswell update, but the waiting really is killing me; I really do need to replace my computer, and I want a Mac Mini to do it with (well I want a new Mac Pro, but I think the Mac Mini is more realistic for now) but sometimes Apple's lack of news or advance notice is unbearable

 

[ValSalva]

On the one hand laptop and desktop processors are a mature product so expecting significant improvements from year to year is just going to disappoint.

On the other hand this looks bad for Intel. PC manufactures and Apple are in the same boat. If Intel can't have anything new for yearly refreshes then they are failing.

I could see Apple trying to move to ARM for OS X just so they could control their own product releases. Suppose the 12" rMBA was ready for the middle of this year. Now Apple has to wait for Intel? Not good. It may take a few years but Apple is patient.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

There are times when CPUs don't advance quickly, such as mid-2007-2009 with the Core-2 Duos, but, there are other enhancements to be had. Move to all-SSD. 3840x2400 displays. 16 GB memory standard on all models. True matte screen.

2008 saw the release nehalem

In the laptop context, Nehalem is irrelevant. In any case, I was thinking from the mid/late Santa Rosa, through 2009, they were all basically the same Core-2 Duo. My memory was faulty-- Apple was still selling MBPs with Core-2 Duo through mid-2010.

http://www.everymac.com/systems/apple/macbook_pro/index-macbookpro.html

 

[theluggage]

No love for the Mini and where are the new Displays?

No way was a new Mini going to appear before the new Mac Pro (and probably not until the Mac Pro is in good supply). Apple will want to see how many people who don't need Xeons and FirePros will still shell out for a decent "headless" Mac.

Or they might just wait. Its no problem for Apple to still sell "old" Hardware and it's not like someone else is getting those Broadwell Processors before they do.

No! No! They must panic! If Dell builds a time machine and starts importing new Intel chips from the future, they'll be screwed!!!

+1 I've been watching house of cards...and honestly, the experience is so much better on my iPad than my macbook pro.

When it comes to media playback, the CPU is almost irrelevant - its all down to the graphics chipset having dedicated support for mp4 etc. A $30 Raspberry Pi or one of those cheap Android HDMI dongles can play back HD video without breaking a sweat.

Apple's progress in the business of computers has been grinding sluggishly to a near halt.

Yes, if only Apple were exploring other ways to make their laptops more exciting in the absence of new, more powerful CPUs. Maybe they could introduce much higher resolution laptop displays, find ways of cramming in more batteries, move to solid-state discs (maybe switching to PCIe SSDs to avoid the SATA bottleneck) or introduce some sort of "external PCIe" expansion interface?

...then maybe they'd at least fare better than other PC manufacturers for whom business has been grinding rapidly to a halt.

NB: a lot of that market collapse is because an awful lot of people don't need faster processors and are finding that their 3,4,5-year-old computer is still doing the job, and that simple upgrades like adding an SSD have far more impact on performance than a small incremental increase in CPU speed.

Right now only Windows RT runs on ARM.

Kids these days. Some of us were running PC software on an ARM in 1988 (sorry: PDF link).

...then there was SoftWindows etc. for PPC.

Anyway, running Windows is probably less important now that it was a few years ago.

 

[yegon]

Fortunately, x86 will be around for a good while longer where Mac's are concerned. We're still a few years away from ARM getting even close to Intel CPU's in terms of performance. It's amazing how some people overestimate the abilities of current ARM mobile cpu's based on their ability to perform some of the same tasks that their desktop/laptops can perform, eeesh. It's quite eye opening really, and tells me they haven't really a clue what they're talking about.

That said, it will be very interesting in an indeterminate number of years into the future as Intel and ARM are clearly converging on the same point, albeit from opposite ends of the spectrum - ARM being energy efficient by nature and gradually getting better performance, Intel at the bleeding edge performance wise and gradually getting more energy efficient. When they both converge at the same point, then Apple may, or may not, consider making such moves.

 

[Gudi]

It's sort of a misnomer. Formed mostly because people really wanted them to be and "notebook" has established connotations outside of computing while "laptop" has very few.

To my knowledge laptop and notebook used to be synonyms. But since we now have ultrabooks as well, it makes sense to use notebook only for those laptops who aren't ultrabooks.

MacBook Air = ultrabook
MacBook Pro = notebook

ultrabook + notebook = laptop
laptop + desktop = personal computer

It looks too good, to be thought different.

 

[Rafterman]

That would ruin the MBA!

Apple would lose me as a customer (but maybe they think there are enough people who would want an iPad with a built in keyboard).

I would assume that Apple would make OSX run on ARM chips, just like Microsoft modified Windows to run on ARM-like and RISC processors.

----------

I meant that physical size matters otherwise we could set ipad to 1920x1200 and use it as our main screen. (that was my point with the ipad)

Yes, I know that they didn't sell that well because they were not for everyone. (just like mac pros). For me it was portable workstation which I needed when I sometimes travelled. The biggest screen size would be the best option for me. I didn't travel that much to need as portable as possible and for my work you need as much screen as possible. At work I have 2 screens (sometimes 3 if IT department has another available) because Maya is screen hungry ))
So, seeing that people still ask for 17" I wasn't the only one who desire that size to come back. I tried 15" (i didn't have a choice when they killed 17") so I have 15" rMBP but I can tell you that I am not happy with it cause its just too small. When I have the luxury when there is another screen connected to it then I don't mind so much but on its own is just a little dwarf. And the 1920x1200 resolution on is it ok but everything is so small.
So real 17" retina would be welcome. Remove the bezel and you have a machine that is hardly any bigger then current 15". Apple can do it if they opt to. They did that with mac pro (and that wasn't selling that much either) so why not with 17"?
If they release 17" tomorrow I'm selling this 15" immediately. Lets hope

Getting rid of the bezel on any laptop is hard because they need room for the wireless and bluetooth antennas, so they remain vertical during use. Putting the antennas in the keyboard part of the case would make the antennas horizontal and they do not work as well in that configuration. That's why I don't think we have ever seen a notebook with no bezel, like phones have.

I suppose they could make the lid thicker to accommodate the antennas, but then that also would interfere with antenna reception, especially if the wireless access point is behind you.

 

[Piggie]

It's a shame, but it's times like this you realize the cold hard thruth

All Apple does, like many, it fit other people's parts into nice looking boxes and writes code to make it all work well together.

From the iPad to the Mac Pro.

Util Apple actually R&D's and makes something of their own they can only make products using other people's products/inventions/innovations.

They naturally don't want to, as they they will really have to compete as opposed to just go and cherry pick from others.

It would be lovely so see Apple actually made something for real hardware wise and not just a pretty enclosure to put things in.
And no I don't mean the Arm chip, They didn't make that (the clue is in the name) any more than I made me mecanno crane, I just assembled it and modified it from other people's products.

They have the money, and they had/have the time. Until they do, they will never be able to pull ahead.
How can you pull ahead of Samsung, when Samsung make your parts?

It's the people who make the actual thing who have the actual advantage.

 

[Internaut]

There's scope for Apple to innovate in other ways, that aren't necessarily reliant on new processors. For example, Apple's expertise with touch, and gestures, could make for a compelling MacBook Air*. At the lower end, looking at the performance of Windows 8.1 on Intel's new Bay Trail** processors, Apple has scope for reducing minimum entry cost for OSX.

* Being able to poke and prod the screen in front of you, is actually nicer than you might think.

** My other laptop is a Bay Trail model I've bought, so I can mess about with Windows 8.1. In terms of slickness, it compares well with my 2011 MacBook Air, and the iPad, but you'll miss Apple's little refinements.

 

[kahkityoong]

Yes, indeed, and they were computers, just like the iPad is a computer. All arguments that the iPad isn't really a computer are veriations of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

Why do you bother with this? Almost everybody agrees that iPad is a computer. There's a always a pseudo autistic/obsessive type on these threads whose mind can't grasp that the definition of a computer might be becoming wider than what they have stuck in their head.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

apple is sad...just sad...
apple should have a big update for each year rather than minor spec bump.

Maybe need to focus more on MP.

Clearly you skipped class the day the Economies of Scale lecture was discussed.

Also since Apple does not produce desktop processors how do you propose Apple achieve these annual big updates (w/ its usual margins) when Intel or any other co. cannot do the same?

 

[businezguy]

In your mind, Apple is doing it wrong; in reality, Apple is possibly the only company doing it right. They are still in the market after 30 years.

That's why Lenovo makes ThinkPads, Sony want to sell its VIAO line, and it takes HP selling seven PC's to generate the same profit as Apple selling one Mac. For the most part, the PC market was driven by a spec list, and features of little user value that differentiated one windows box from another. Apple doesn't play that game.

And for the record, most people were buying PC's to connect to the internet and that's why smartphones and tablets are, for many, many people, replacing PC's.

Don't forget that HP came close to closing down their PC business about 3 years ago. Only reason they kept it is because major investors objected. The Wintel platform is now on an irreversible decline.

 

[DavidG328]

'tis quite strange we've yet to see the Mac Mini make the jump to Haswell.

But as someone who recently got a late 2013 rMBP, I'm eagerly awaiting a Thunderbolt Display refresh. An iMac-like profile, reduced glare, Thunderbolt 2.0, and USB 3.0 would sure be delicious!

I saved an email from a Craigslister who tried to lowball me on a Mac Mini last year that was a month old at the time. He swore up and down that the Haswell chip would be coming within a month...I just emailed him again to remind him his Haswell Mac Mini isn't out. Oddly satisfying.

 

[Gudi]

Yes, I know that they didn't sell that well because they were not for everyone.

Of course Apples pricing scheme favors smaller screen diagonals. However it makes much sense to put the beefier higher TDP CPUs in the bigger laptops. Would more people have bought the 17" MBP if it wasn't the most priciest one? Sure, but than it wouldn't be optimized to its maximum.

For me it was portable workstation which I needed when I sometimes travelled. The biggest screen size would be the best option for me.

Apple never optimizes for only one aspect. And size and weight remain a concern in every computer, even in the iMac and Mac Pro. So no wonder the 17" MBP had to justify its existence. If screen resolution is no longer a differentiator, than screen size remains the only advantage. And with a quad-core CPU the 15" rMBP is an equally good workstation. It just didn't add up for the 17-inch.

I didn't travel that much to need as portable as possible and for my work you need as much screen as possible.

For someone not traveling that much and needing as much screen as possible, the best option is to use a 15" rMBP with external 27" monitors. Apple has you covered and also covers those who travel more than you do.

Remove the bezel and you have a machine that is hardly any bigger then current 15".

The bezel isn't that big anymore and if you can further reduce it, why not make the whole machine a little smaller and a little lighter? As long as the internals keep shrinking, the whole thing won't grow bigger.