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.
KGI: Apple to Launch Cheaper MacBook Air in 2Q 2018
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I don't understand the fascination with ARM processors in Macs for many people. It can't see how it would cost less (why would you charge less just because your costs go down), it will limit software greatly, and I doubt the performance. It makes it harder for people to develop for Mac. It eliminates Windows compatability - which might appear minor but seeing the number of people I see go through my shop with Parallels and Boot Camp (about 20%) it would not be shocking to see those people bolt if you couldn't.
I just don't see it.
I just don't see it.
And I disagree and it all goes back to marketing.
The good/better/best has been marketing 101 forever for a reason.
Need differentiation between product lines and a clear entry/consumer/pro model.
Now you are have good/better/best within a product line.
However, currently, there is no clear distinction between models.
And yet HP and Dell, who are constantly held up on this forum as how Apple should run the Mac business, is an absolute mess when it comes to product line with literally dozens of overlapping models in every segment.
You are viewing it from a 'professional' perspective.
A huge majority of users user their computer for word processing, email, and internet.
With the focus on Web 2.0 apps, there is little reason to develop actual software outside of software as a service...especially in the consumer market.
Hell, even corporations are moving to web platforms for lots of their internal applicants built upon services that are leverage by native apps on mobile.
The Dell and HP model rely on service level contracts, something that Apple has little to no interest in.
They are not converting the entire macOS platform over to ARM in Q2 2018... Before they even announce Marzipan in June at the earliest. Developers need time (probably more than a year of slow transitioning) to rewrite their apps. This isn't something that will happen overnight.
Last edited:
Marzipan is just an indicator that Apple leadership is not that interested in the future of the Mac. They it seems, believe we will be all on iPads in the future and marzipan is just to keep the die hard macheads happy with software updates to the legacy platform.
I don't agree - Marzipan is just a way to get more third party software on the Mac - software that wouldn't have otherwise existed. OS X has been around for almost 20 years - if someone really wanted to develop macOS-native software they would have done it by now. It's a much smaller market and the time and energy it takes to develop for isn't worth it to most developers. Giving them a way to easily port their iOS apps (assuming Apple doesn't make a mess of it, and I'm sure they learned what not to do from UWP) will do nothing but good for the Mac platform. It isn't replacing Cocoa it's just another option.
I highly doubt Apple is going to be using Marzipan in any of its own software (or if they do, they will be indistinguishable from a native macOS program with no less functionality), it is strictly an option for third party developers.
Last edited:
Look, our immediate and extended family have iPhones/iPads and to have this outlook you have to ignore the many problems that Apple has released in the mobile side. No one in our family installs updates when released because of the problems they have had.
I understand if an update effects me as a tech user, but when the problems are so bad they effect my wife, her sisters, my brothers, etc., then its gone off the rails and new leadership is needed. Cook is supposed to be the guru of the supply chain, but Apple has had significant supply chain problems. What is he doing outside of magazine covers and news articles?
Back-Light Logo Again Please.
So females can c me when im at Starbucks using the free wifi. Hope they make a Big logo this time.
So females can c me when im at Starbucks using the free wifi. Hope they make a Big logo this time.
Apple sees the billions of potential customers in Asia and Africa. Hence the SE line. After iPhone SE we'll going to see iPad SE (former Mini 3 with A9/A10) and Mac SE (former mini) and Macbook SE (former Air). SE = couple of generations old chassis with one or two generation old CPU. Limited memory and storage.
Three lines, good, better, best. SE, regular and Pro. Bargain, normal and Expensive.
Last edited:
I miss the simplicity of these options.
Worked for Apple back when it was a way smaller company. Not so much today given their size and scale.
That said, Apple’s trend with Macs has been to go increasingly upmarket. I don’t see a cheaper MBA in the works. If anything, I will be surprised if the MBA lives to see another year.
I miss the simplicity of these options.
It's honestly not that much more complicated today if you want to artificially pigeon-hole what is "Consumer" and what is "Professional" work based on hardware performance.
Consumer Desktop: iMac
Professional Desktop: iMac Pro and Mac Pro
Consumer Portable: MacBook and MacBook Air
Professional Portable: MacBook Pro
As for Mac Mini, I'd argue it's a "Professional" desktop for even though it is not very powerful, the people who buy it use it for specialized tasks.
I don't think it's that cut and dry, with the 13" pro, you have the nTB, which is a glorified ultrabook, and the TB is barely better if we're being honest - a bit more thermal headroom, but not a whole lot more brute force. The 15" with H series CPUs and dedicated GPUs (albeit low-mid tier ones) - yes that just squeaks across into professional territory. Then you have the 2015 15" - realistically at this stage, the graphics limit it to high end consumer notebook too - 45W chip or no. There's a lot of bleed between the roles of the computers, and I guess that's going to happen when you have a policy of not avoiding cannibalisation of your own other products. Of course, you could argue that spending all day writing in Word is also professional work and you'd be right, but I think professional in this instance is referring to a more powerful workstation for those crunching numbers, or running complex software.
With the desktops, the sealed unit of the iMac pro makes it more of an intermediate tool - perfect for even the highest level of video editing and probably not a whole lot else really (at least not for anyone who wants long term value out of their machine). Real pros doing something like 3D animation would not really consider it as nothing is upgradable. The Mac Pro is basically just lingering there at the moment - really not a good investment. The Mini is in a similar position (I presume it's audience will be split between iMac, Mac Pro and lower cost MBA in the future).
Yes, when you dig down into the granularity it's more complicated, but as others have noted, the market has expanded and fragmented a fair bit in the two decades since Steve came up with that product matrix so having a single model for each product family like in 1998 isn't really going to address that (and even in 1998 there were different configuration options within each family even if they all looked the same on the outside).
Last edited:
Absolutely agree - but look at the MacBook lineup - you've got 3.5 lines of products crowded into one small section of the market. The MacBook, both flavours of 13" MacBook pro and MacBook Air - all 12 or 13" (no larger screen options); all low-intermediate power; all thin & light portables. That is overly complex and all targeting the same user base. Then you have no machine at all targeting those who don't need masses of power, but want a 15" or larger screen. And of course, the very top end of the mobile workstation market is also left uncatered for. A new, simplified lineup is needed, but it won't be forthcoming because Apple is now more interested in rigidly maintaining margins than having a clear offering. How much more simple, and not just more simple but more encompassing of different user needs would the following be:
Pro: 15" and 17" Macbook Pros. The 17" is leveraged properly to offer a truly powerful portable-in-a-pinch workstation. Only dedicated graphics options, only higher tier storage (512GB+). The 13" is jettisoned because realistically you can't get much above consumer grade components in it. $2,399 and $2,999 starting prices.
Consumer: 12", 13" and 15" MacBooks. Latter two top out at 28W Cpus max, former uses Y series. No dedicated graphics options, no more than 3 storage tiers and 2 RAM tiers each. $999, $1,199 and $1,399 starting prices.
Presumably the market research shows this wouldn't be the most profitable configuration, but how much simpler, when each model has it's own little niche to slot into with minimal overlap.
MacBook Air is aimed at the "price sensitive" consumer since it is the only Mac portable under the $1000 price point (if just). This is why I believe the goal here is to keep the machine as-is (maybe a CPU change due to unavailability of the Broadwell line) and lower it's price by $100-200 to better appeal to that market.
MacBook (Retina) is aimed at people who want maximum lightness. Effectively folks who do not or cannot use iOS for their workload, otherwise they would have an iPad Pro.
I do agree with you that the MacBook Pro is a bit of a mess in the 13-inch segment, but part of that is due to the addition of the Touch Bar in the MBP family. It's clearly expensive to make so Apple had two choices - make the entry point $400+ higher by only offering Touch Bar models or also offer one without the Touch Bar to keep the price closer to what it was from 2015.
Of course, now we see people asking for the same cheaper non-Touch Bar option in the 15-inch area, which would make the product mix even that much more convoluted.
Honestly, if Apple felt they could move a half-million or more 17" MacBook Pros a quarter at $3999-4999 I am sure they would be offering it. I'm guessing the actual market for a 17" would be a fair bit closer to 50,000 (if not less) than 500,000, however, and that seems to be too low to justify the offering.
Neither do I, in fact it's incredibly fustrating. It's an exciting topic that has been ruined by the hundreds of people saying "this is where Apple will start using their own CPUs" or "I think Apple will launch the new ___ with an ARM processor". Most of these comments are wrong in their assumption and it's making the topic incredibly boring.
The cost savings are significant, but if Apple translated that to the consumer price, it would probably be $100-$200 maximum less. I'm glad you mentioned Windows compatibility, as that is very important. It wouldn't actually eliminate Windows compatibility (as there is Windows for ARM), but would limit it as it would on macOS with X86 emulation and simply the differences between X86 and ARM. Performance may be there in a few years but right now the advantage would be power consumption but having an ARM coprocessor for low power tasks would be the solution, and it is what Apple is doing for now.
Sure each of those has its own set of specific strengths - but I wouldn’t say someone considering an air would completely rule out a ntb Pro, or even a MacBook if the price was right (I’m sure at times of the year the MB must be offered for nearing $999) and likewise, someone considering a MacBook for its portability might think about getting a pro for more power on the go as it’s not that much more of a burden etc etc - broadly they are interchangeable such is the degree of overlap. I wonder if the rumoured low cost model does turn out to be a redesigned air, if the ntb will disappear and where that will leave the TB version? That’s a hell of a price jump as you say... idk about the 15” there are a few ways they could go as configuring it, but I can’t imagine any that results in a $1,999 price tag short of dropping to a 28W U chip with iris graphics now intel doesn’t offer iris pro H chips any more.MacBook Air is aimed at the "price sensitive" consumer since it is the only Mac portable under the $1000 price point (if just). This is why I believe the goal here is to keep the machine as-is (maybe a CPU change due to unavailability of the Broadwell line) and lower it's price by $100-200 to better appeal to that market.
MacBook (Retina) is aimed at people who want maximum lightness. Effectively folks who do not or cannot use iOS for their workload, otherwise they would have an iPad Pro.
I do agree with you that the MacBook Pro is a bit of a mess in the 13-inch segment, but part of that is due to the addition of the Touch Bar in the MBP family. It's clearly expensive to make so Apple had two choices - make the entry point $400+ higher by only offering Touch Bar models or also offer one without the Touch Bar to keep the price closer to what it was from 2015.
Of course, now we see people asking for the same cheaper non-Touch Bar option in the 15-inch area, which would make the product mix even that much more convoluted.
Honestly, if Apple felt they could move a half-million or more 17" MacBook Pros a quarter at $3999-4999 I am sure they would be offering it. I'm guessing the actual market for a 17" would be a fair bit closer to 50,000 (if not less) than 500,000, however, and that seems to be too low to justify the offering.
Almost certainly the 17” would have to be a showcase product, but are Apple now really disinterested in anything but profit to the extent that’s out of the question? A lot of companies know the value of halo products that aren’t profitable in themselves, I don’t see that Apple should be immune? Anyway fun to theorise and fantasise but like you say I don’t expect much change to really be forthcoming!
NOt everything Ming chi kuo says hits the mark his average rate is below 50% ,what is cheaper than mac book air? I say this is one of those silly analysis of Ming. Doesnt even make sense.
Yup. 100% agreement. I admit I'm only echoing what others have already said, but here it is: Apple increasingly emphasizes form over function, and be damned all you whining consumers who want port configurations to have at least a modicum of year-over-year stability, keyboards to be comfortable (even if, god forbid, the case has to be 1 mm thicker or four ounces heavier), etc. Apple, please listen: You have iPads and iPhones to sell to the fashion conscious by the gazillions, and you can change them every year, sprinkle fairy dust on them or whatever else you imagine millennials might want. At least with the Macbook Pro, could you not emphasize, versatility, practicality, end-user convenience, and performance? Function over form? You know, like a computer.
A cheap $499 Macbook Air is better, though if Apple ever does it i want a ARM based macbook Air. People who think that why an obsession with ARM based Laptop ? Well that is the ultimate dream and wont die. Specially people who liked Macs when they were PowerPC and could chew and spit Intel for a breakfast. ARM can someday achieve those stats back and give better performance than Intel simply because of its better design choices that