No. Display technology has lots of room for improvement. LCD sucks and OLED is not durable enough.
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.
Kuo: 12.9-Inch iPad Pro and 16-Inch MacBook Pro With Mini-LED Displays to Launch in Second Half of 2020
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No. Display technology has lots of room for improvement. LCD sucks and OLED is not durable enough.
Nothing about ARM processors in the MacBook. It looks more and more like the rumour who won't die was just that, a rumour.
Apple is planning four to six products with mini-LED displays over the next two to three years, including a high-end 12.9-inch iPad Pro with an A14X chip in the third quarter of 2020 and a refreshed 16-inch MacBook Pro in the fourth quarter of 2020, according to well-known Apple analyst Ming-Chi Kuo.
In a research note with TF International Securities today, obtained by MacRumors, Kuo said the mini-LED displays will "significantly improve productivity and the entertainment experience" without elaborating.
LG Display and GIS will be the most significant benefactors of these mini-LED products starting next year, according to Kuo.
Kuo has previously said that Mini-LED displays will allow for thinner and lighter product designs, while offering many of the same benefits of OLED displays used on the latest iPhones, including good wide color gamut performance, high contrast and dynamic range, and local dimming for truer blacks.
Kuo has also previously said that future iPad and MacBook displays will each use approximately 10,000 LEDs, compared to 576 in Apple's upcoming Pro Display XDR. Each LED would be below 200 microns in size.
Apple is widely rumored to refresh the iPad Pro in spring 2020, and if so, a new 12.9-inch model in fall 2020 would certainly be soon after.
Update: DigiTimes reports similar: "For the new MacBook said to adopt mini LED backlighting and to be released in 2020, its backlighting module reportedly will be supplied by Taiwan-based Zhen Ding Tech, the sources noted."
Article Link: Kuo: 12.9-Inch iPad Pro and 16-Inch MacBook Pro With Mini-LED Displays to Launch in Second Half of 2020
Rumour didn't say anything about what processors would be in the Macs...
...but seriously folks, the rational timescale for a switch to ARM would be something like the process for the PC-to-Intel switch: Rumours sometime in Q1/2, announcement at WWDC with the release of an openly kludgey developers-only prototype system (ISTR the Intel one was a bog-standard PC motherboard bodged into a G5 case) with the first actual product early the next year.
Any ARM plans would be a tightly-kept secret between Apple, Foxconn and TSMC - analysts' rumours tend to come from third-party commodities like displays and flash storage, from outside of the "inner circle".
Still - although I'd be up for an ARM-based Mac, I'm skeptical - the Mac Pro commits Apple to Intel for at least 3 years, and the pro end of the market will be the hardest to move to ARM (...all those specialist plug-ins for pro media apps, for example) and the noises from the last WWDC still seemed to be about building up the iPad as a "real" computer.
The "ARM Macs in 2020" story from Intel could just have been Intel worst-casing as part of their "due diligence". Plus, its good for Apple if Intel don't take their custom for granted.
Of course, if the iMac gets upgraded in 2020 then all Macs will have ARM processors - in the form of the T2 chip, not their main CPU. Actually, I wouldn't bet against most Macs already having one or more ARMs in them - they crop up as embedded cpus in all sorts of stuff (like SSDs).
I don't like buying technology that is over a year old. The pay off is 5 years from now when Apple chooses to no longer support certain models.
If it happens at all, I only see it on the low end for now. So they'd stick to dual-arch, like Microsoft kind of already does. It would let them bring back the MacBook (although I really wish they would keep that line-up remotely sane).
Yeah, I think that's the real answer: the Tx chips taking over more and more non-core functionality.
[automerge]1575383987[/automerge]
But the iPad Pro has never been on an annual cycle. Seems to be roughly on an 18-month cycle.
Meanwhile, me and millions of others are throwing their iPad Pro's in softsided leather briefcases everyday and haven't had one instance of "bending" while at the same time enjoying using our device. Keep waiting if you want, sounds like another year.
I think there's plenty of potential for ARM in mid-range laptops, minis and all-in-ones for people who are ready and able to re-think their workflow a bit. People tend to think in terms of sticking an iPhone/iPad Pro processor in a bigger box and calling it a Mac - but there already 32 core ARM server processors etc. and the pick'n'mix nature of ARM means that a serious caller like Apple can tailor systems-on-a-chip with the right combination of CPU cores/speeds, iGPU and other acceleration gizmos built in. E.g. the current problem with the Mac Mini is that intel doesn't make a desktop-class CPU with anything other than a bare minimum iGPU. Apple could build a great ARM SOC for both the Mini and the mid-range iMacs.
The machine that would be hardest to replace would be the Mac Pro - its big enough that cramming everything onto the CPU is not so crucial (unless it gives a speed advantage) and the target users often don't just need x86, but need Xeon because software support (seriously - why else would anybody pay the premium for a Xeon?) and its the worst affected by the biggest bogey man of ARM: all those obscure 3rd party pro graphics/pro video/pro music plug-ins. An ARM "Mac Pro" would be spiritually closer to the trashcan they've just dumped - more like an "appliance" for running Apple's suitably-optimised software. Still, I think the main flaw in the trashcan idea was to offer it instead of a PCIe tower rather than as an alternative.
The other problem is x86 virtualisation - if you really need that, end of argument. However, I think the days of masses of people needing Windows to run odd bits of obscure software are receding as web and smartphone apps take over (plus, Ding! Dong! Internet Explorer is dead!) - and if you need an X86 linux VM because your special-snowflake node.js or python code somehow contrives not to work on ARM Linux, just spin one up in the cloud for $5/month (billable by the day). OK, that won't work for everybody, this minute, but looking forward... Then look at all the iOS and Android developers who might benefit from the availability of native ARM virtualisation... Not to mention the emerging interest in ARM as a server platform (although, to be consistent, you can spin up an ARM Linux server in the cloud).
Basically, though, Apple would have to be prepared for a slow transition, and make sure that they continued to offer a credible range of Intel machines alongside ARM for a substantial period - not let them go to seed for years and then try and force the New Paradigm on people who aren't ready (*cough* Mac Pro twice, Mac Mini, even the 2015 MBP to a point... plus iMac Pro if it doesn't get a bump soon)
On a 4GB/6GB iPad Pro? They still support my old 2GB 9.7” iPad Pro from early 2016 with the latest iPadOS.. the slow transition to larger amounts of RAM (they were still selling 2GB iPads until mid 2019!) makes me think they’ll support these iPads for a long time to come.
The speed thing is just silly now, unless people are doing 4k video editing or something on their iPads I just don’t understand a need for faster? I’d take extended battery life over performance.
The Apple TV HD is the same size box and has an A8 in it and still sells for $149 (***). Apple isn't really shooting for "more affordable". The A12 would be cheaper than the a13 at this point if simply just want to be behind at a lower component price point. Size wise it isn't that much different from a RoKu Ultra or a FireCube.
Outside of high gaming loads I suspect the A13 doesn't particularly run that much cooler that makes any kind of substantive impact for a plugged into the wall device that doesn't have a minimalist system enclosure. ( maybe 1-3W depending on how many of the 'small' , high power efficient cores kick on). The A13 has better "AI Machine Learning" horsepower but the A12X has enough so that a decent number of the voice commands can be done locally also at about the same power levels. A13 has a bit of edge because it could complete those kinds of tasks quicker ( so can quit faster).
However, regular streaming app running workloads there probably isn't much difference. Both the A13 and A12X are overkill.
Apple's A-series tend to be functionally gated so they can shut down anything that isn't being used. So if not using most of the bigger GPU it won't cost anything substantive in power. It is a better option if trying not to be just a generic streaming box. If running a game on a iPhone 11 (A13) was faster than on the AppleTV ( if saddled a A13 running on a much bigger screen ) what kind of "value add" would the AppleTV have? Some ( bigger screen), but not in performance.
(***) The Siri Remote sells for $59 ( more than more streaming dongles ) so the TV HD base unit is priced around $90 for a A8 chip that is this point 5 generations back. The A8's cost isn't making a big impact on system cost reduction there.
Right.
My guess is they would take the A12X approach further with an A12M. It would have more thermal headroom and therefore sustain performance for longer than on an iPad (and much longer than an iPhone), and maybe have more cores as well. It wouldn't really need to, though; the A12X is already plenty fast for a MacBook Air.
I wonder if part of the reason Intel canceled their G series of CPUs (Kaby Lake-G; an Intel CPU + an AMD GPU on the same package) after just one generation is that Apple wouldn't commit to buying them, and neither would anyone else. It would've been an interesting contender for the Mac mini.
Instead, Apple opted with a more powerful CPU but far less powerful GPU. Bit of a shame.
I think that would have relegated the trash can to the same fate as the Power Mac G4 Cube: cute, but pricey, and not that interesting compared to the regular power that there's much of a target audience. Whom was the Cube for, other than aficionados? Whom would the trash can have been for if there had also been a tower?
*raises hand*
That's true, but in the short term, not having x86 virtualization is going to be rather painful for developers, which is a significant market segment for the MacBook Pro.
Yup.
Speed isn’t an issue. My 2017 is still plenty fast. I’m disappointed the only screen innovation between the 2nd and 3rd gen was edge to edge. Would also like to see a little more weight be shed (the 12.9 has gotten a bit lighter with every generation)
The Mac Cube had its cracking problem, plus, initially, a price that was too steep even by Apple standards - together, those are more than enough to account for its failure. Meanwhile, 2001 - the year the Cube was dropped - saw the launch of the Shuttle XPC and a huge craze for small-form-factor PCs.
Then, a few years later, Apple came out with the Mac Mini, which was basically the Cube done better...
...people who wanted an "Appliance" for running FCPX, Logic and other applications that were optimised for dual AMD GPUs. People who would currently be perfectly happy with an iMac Pro if it didn't force them to buy a "prosumer" 27" screen. People who don't need internal expansion - but do want to have the CPU in a soundproof box or the other side of the wall in their studio.
...but what about all the iOS/Android developers who are targetting ARM-based systems?
People have often cited this post by Linus Torvalds (don't be shy, Linus, tell us what you really think
) as an argument against ARM-based Macs - but if you actually read it, the underlying problem he identifies is the lack of ARM-based development machines - given that MacOS is already a really strong platform for web development, that sounds like an opportunity for Apple.(...also, I think his view on how much web development is affected by CPU architecture might be skewed by his little sideline in maintaining the Linux kernel - given his well documented reaction to bad coding, I think if he had ever actually looked closely at a typical bit of Javascript we'd currently be experiencing a world profanity shortage...)
...but, as I said, the two architectures would need to co-exist as equal partners for a decent transition period.
Increasingly, Apple has been missing their own product development deadlines. My guess is that they will bypass A13X and go straight to A14X and incorporate WiFi-6 in the same stroke. Their entire hardware product line has reached a quasi stasis and become commodities. Their competition will soon be catching up.
Where’s your evidence that Apple’s chips have missed deadlines and that the competition will catch up?
Does anyone really care about MiniLED? Yesterday a friend seeked my advise to buy a used Mac. His son wants to start app development. What should I tell him? Should I tell him about the keyboard that sucks and is likely to break. Should I tell him about soldered RAM and SSD so this thing can't be repaired or upgraded? Should I tell him that 256GB is enough to start but if his son needs more disk space he needs a new laptop?
"Get a Mac" turned into "DON'T BUY" and I don't see an Apple computer without rivets and glue in the next years.
"Get a Mac" turned into "DON'T BUY" and I don't see an Apple computer without rivets and glue in the next years.
It sounds like you shouldn't tell your friend anything, and instead ask yourself why your friends ask you Mac buying advice when you're clearly not into Macs.
oooooh I see, it's the LCD display + mini-LED backlight, not OLED. That's also epic, although OLED is brighter and has good contrast, LCD display is more comfortable to look at.
To be precise QLED but it is not so important because I just wanted to highlight that competitors started picture quality revolution in laptop products which was and is main strength of Apple products. So if they will not show something breathtaking I suppose that they can loose also photo video entusiasts or just Netflix / HBO fans (oops in case of Netflix they failed long time ago not supporting ultra quality on Safari).
Whether QLED amounts to picture quality revolution is debatable. QLED (contrary to microLED which remains a unicorn) retains drawbacks of LED screens and for me miniLED is a step in the right direction, toward an emissive display. Given how many dimming zones Apple is rumored to put into miniLED, we can have experience close to OLED without it's common issues. We may get substantial power savings too.
As radiologist you know that all standard consumer LCD panels offer questionable picture quality compared to pro solutions like hi end NEC monitors for example and all Macs incl. 5k iMac cannot compete. However for typical consumers that like watching movie content from time to time (like me) all changes are welcome even that OLED have a serious cons or first QLED ultrabooks are just FHD. To conclude I hope that Apple will make some real jump because Retina does not impress today in terms of of spec (resolution, Adobe RGB space, factory calibration). What is interesting that LCD panel in MBP 16 has significantly higher factory calibration error than MBP 15.
you know that all standard consumer LCD panels offer questionable picture quality compared to pro solutions like hi end NEC monitors for example and all Macs incl. 5k iMac cannot compete. However for typical consumers that like watching movie content from time to time (like me) all changes are welcome even that OLED have a serious cons or first QLED ultrabooks are just FHD. To conclude I hope that Apple will make some real jump because Retina does not impress today in terms of of spec (resolution, Adobe RGB space, factory calibration). What is interesting that LCD panel in MBP 16 has significantly higher factory calibration error than MBP 15.
Last edited:
Given that the current revision was just three months ago, and the headline says second half, don’t expect news any time soon.
(My understanding is Comet Lake-H is coming in May. So we might see a speed bump then.)