So I got 13" 2017 a week back but the small screen isn't doing it for me so I gotta get the 15" one. So I'm wondering if I should return this and spend another $1300 (that's how much I'll have to spend roughly) to get the 15" 2017 right now or if I should wait for the 2018 model. If 2018 is a few months away and I'll have to spend roughly the same amount for the upgrade then I guess I should wait. What would you suggest?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is it worth getting MBP 2017 right now or wait till 2018 model?
- Thread starter jas5279
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If you need the computer now because what you have is not up to the job buy now, if you have a perfectly adequete solution at the moment wait for the hex core chips that should hit the 15 inch next year.
All of the above is complete guesswork, until there is a leak or keynote nobody has a clue what is coming or when. Looking at the buyers guide the MBP is currently 'neutral', based on recent history it could be anything from 221 to 527 days between updates:
https://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Retina_MacBook_Pro
Waiting for the 'next big thing' means never buying anything
https://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Retina_MacBook_Pro
Waiting for the 'next big thing' means never buying anything
All of the above is complete guesswork, until there is a leak or keynote nobody has a clue what is coming or when. Looking at the buyers guide the MBP is currently 'neutral', based on recent history it could be anything from 221 to 527 days between updates:
https://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Retina_MacBook_Pro
Waiting for the 'next big thing' means never buying anything
Actually that stuff is nailed on, all the relevant CPU’s will move to quad core for the 13 inches and hex core for the 15 inches because that is what’s available. Vega graphics seem very likely too, especially with Intel getting in on AMD graphics built onto their own chips.
Remember how skylake was available, and it took Apple until Kaby Lake was released for a year to put it in the 2016 MBP?
Exactly, being technically possible and a dead-cert for the next refresh are two completely different things.
1. Intel are not going to keep high volume production of the lower spec chips and the new spec chips. You just won't be able to buy the older version fairly quickly (not at volume Apple need!)
2. Apple simply cannot ignore competitors shipping machines with 40% faster chips.
The new chips are a dead cert. Of course when Apple release the next version it very uncertain.
For starters, new CPU generation. We already got a taste with the 15W low-tier Kaby Lake R refresh — in burst scenarios its approaching the performance of the 45W quad-core Kaby Lake. The new low-wattage quad-core (13") and hex-core (15") CPUs will be even better. Also, we are likely to get a nice GPU boost with Vega.
[doublepost=1510574616][/doublepost]
Apple was waiting for volume availability of a high-end Skylake chip, which never happened. So they had to completely rework their plans.
Actually the highest tier sky lake chips weren’t available, just like the Broadwell which never made it into the 15 inch because of intels arsing about.
Very true and Apple holds all the cards being the sole provider. It's target audience wont care less, Mac's will continue to sell. Apple wont move until there's a benefit to Apple itself, last few years should have clearly illustrated that one...
Q-6
There is a lot of talk lately about this "2018 MacBook pro" but the reality is that besides wishful thinking we really have zero evidence that there will even be a revision next year. Also if there is a 2018 model then everyone will just start talking about the 2019 model.
The real question here is can people wait to see if a revision is released in 2018 while knowing that there may not even be one.
There may be one, dont get me wrong. But we have zero evidence of it.
The real question here is can people wait to see if a revision is released in 2018 while knowing that there may not even be one.
There may be one, dont get me wrong. But we have zero evidence of it.
Except its not true. Apple needs a lot of high-end third-party components, and if the third party can't deliver them, there is not much Apple can do. Other companies might ship more computers, but the big portion of those computers are low-end parts. This is what most likely happened with Iris Pro Broadwells/Skylakes. Also, remember how in late 2016/early 2017 it was almost impossible to get a Polaris 11 GPU? The likeliest explanation of that is that Apple has bought essentially the entire supply, leaving only lowest quality chips for the rest of the market.
They moved quite a lot with the 2016 refresh you know. They could have kept the old design, just slapped some faster hardware on it. People would still buy them and the profit margins would likely be higher (and of course massive savings on R&D etc.). Your vision and Apple's vision simply don't align here. Which is cool. There are plenty of people who love the ideas behind the new Mac.
[doublepost=1510665080][/doublepost]
We can still make fairly accurate guesses based from Apple's release history and current state industry of the art. Right now, Apple shows indications of wanting to revive their old release schedule, which always closely followed the hardware availability. The real problem is Intel, not Apple. Intel's release schedule is totally messed up, which makes the old good "two updates per year" very difficult to pull out. Thats also probably the reason why Apple stopped relying in Intel's integrated graphics in the 15" model and went back to their traditional "dGPU in every 15" design.
I agree, equally I agree to differ
The 16/17 MBP works for many, however it also works against many other users. Perspective clearly differs; one of being satisfied, the other higher expectations.Please do not take this as being derogatory or condescending as this is not the intent. W10 isn't the great panacea, equally nor is macOS. with both OS having issue. I find myself more drawn to Linux and Unix as a primary OS, however proprietary SW often can and does prohibit.
"Reverse the tides" what would you do if Apple cut you out of your workflow? Retire or fight and speak your mind? My money's on the latter. I can see as a business manager Apple is absolutely on the mark, as a fan of the Mac; disillusioned, disappointed and more importantly no longer a professional user...
Q-6
If you need it now, then go for it. I was waiting for the 2018 models, but my 2011 MBP died last week and I need a new machine now. I'm trying to decide if I should go for 2017 MBP or iMac.
Would you benefit at all from more power? If the current 15” is already overkill for your use, there will likely be zero benefit to you from waiting for the 2018 model.
I would complain until the day's end
Frankly, I'd also be a bit lost, since nobody else makes a machine I want...For the original poster. The 2018 with a new hex core CPU will be middle, say WWDC time, of 2018 or later.
I would complain until the day's end
I can work in Windows and it decent OS these days, equally like many others extremely unhappy with Apple's direction with the Mac, equally myself and my peers are not Apple's target audience for the Mac, nor is that intended to be derogatory.
Ultimately Apple knew the move would alienate a good number of professional users, sales are up and that's really all Apple cares about now. Personally always seen great advantage to running both Windows & OSX systems, with Linux or Unix replacing Apple. The "flipside of the coin" for Apple is the loss of credibility in some circles and the diminishing "halo" effect. Apple's clearly aware and moving, equally too little, too late for many, with the MBP being the last straw...
Q-6