Leaker: Apple Planning iPad Air With Under-Screen Touch ID, ARM MacBook, Game Controller, and More

[chucker23n1]

I think this is a typical case of confusing cause and effect.
Of course no one is using it for said purpose because building a Mac that has decent GPU power costs 6+ times that of a PC.

Would more people game on a Mac if Apple were to offer a $1k expandable tower? Sure.

Will enough people do so to make that worthwhile for Apple? Probably not.

Is Apple going to do that, having just doubled down on the $800 non-expandable desktop, and brought the expandable tower to $6k? Almost certainly not.

 

[Dave Y]

If you scroll down to March 10 in @L0vetodream's tweets, it says "MacBook pro X" and in the original Chinese version underneath Macbook pro 游戏本, which google translate gives as "game book".

Ties in with earlier 'sketchy' rumour of a high-end gaming computer for WWDC https://www.macrumors.com/2019/12/30/sketchy-rumor-gaming-mac-wwdc-2020/

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

I’m not confusing anything for anything. Did you miss the part where I said “gamer demand for relatively expensive Mac hardware won’t move that needle at all”.

Apple isn’t interested in pursuing PC-based gamers, period. They are not going to make a cheap tower, that is that.

btw everything you’ve seen and will see for probably the next 1.5-2 years is a Jony Ive design or at the very least blessed by Ive. Apple works years ahead.

OK, let me rephrase: Demand for machine that does better than the Mini but is not a Pro. The Mini has been buffed a lot in most specs and as such it's a nice machine. However, it's the exact opposite of Apple philosophy when you want even a little GPU power. Apple always wanted you to have a clean desk, with a s little cable as possible. If you have to connect an eGPU over TB (wich is quite expensive on its own) and has very limited bandwidth compared to PCIe x16 you will have an additional box on your desk with another power supply (cable). That's so non-Apple.
Put an nVidia Quadro or AMD Pro GPU in there and you have an entry level workstation for the broader mass, because, quite frankly, the Mac Pro is out of budget for semi-pro usage, especially the prosumer market.

And, yes, I'm well aware that they are not going to make a "small gaming mac". That was just the quickest term for "small mac with real mass storage (3,5" support for a couple TB) and PCIe board slot for GPUs or other hardware".
And that would in no world be a cheap tower. An ITX machine at >1500 without GPU is like 2.5-3 times more expensive than a DIY windows setup.
That this setup would also allow for gaming and that would then show if it's being used for that purpose. However, without having such a machine available one simply can't make a valid statement about its possible adoption in that maket.

As for Ive, more recent hardware is certainly not carrying "his (recent) signature" anymore. Phones got way thicker than they used to be. Design is also rolled back to iPhone 5 like shapes (when Ive was still good). Blessed or not, I don't care...

 

[PickUrPoison]

OK, let me rephrase: Demand for machine that does better than the Mini but is not a Pro. The Mini has been buffed a lot in most specs and as such it's a nice machine. However, it's the exact opposite of Apple philosophy when you want even a little GPU power. Apple always wanted you to have a clean desk, with a s little cable as possible. If you have to connect an eGPU over TB (wich is quite expensive on its own) and has very limited bandwidth compared to PCIe x16 you will have an additional box on your desk with another power supply (cable). That's so non-Apple.
Put an nVidia Quadro or AMD Pro GPU in there and you have an entry level workstation for the broader mass, because, quite frankly, the Mac Pro is out of budget for semi-pro usage, especially the prosumer market.

And, yes, I'm well aware that they are not going to make a "small gaming mac". That was just the quickest term for "small mac with real mass storage (3,5" support for a couple TB) and PCIe board slot for GPUs or other hardware".
And that would in no world be a cheap tower. An ITX machine at >1500 without GPU is like 2.5-3 times more expensive than a DIY windows setup.

As for Ive, more recent hardware is certainly not carrying "his (recent) signature" anymore. Phones got way thicker than they used to be. Design is also rolled back to iPhone 5 like shapes (when Ive was still good). Blessed or not, I don't care...

Apple is a huge company with a huge cost basis. 500+ retail stores, 135,000 employees. $3 billion a month in operating expenses, $1.5 billion of that R&D. (Imagine how much Newegg would have to sell DIMMs, SSDs or CPUs for if they had $3 billion a month in operating costs.)

That’s why the cheapest phone is $400, the cheapest desktop is $800 and the cheapest laptop is $1,000. The cheapest 16GB/512GB laptop: 13” for $1,900, 16” $2,400.

A Mac Pro isn’t $6k because Apple is making a ton of profit. There’s a cost buildup and $6k is what it takes for them to make their margin. If they could sell it for $5k and make their 20% net margin, they would. But they can’t.

Even if you made a smaller tower, only had 4 DIMM slots, a couple PCIe slots and put in CoreX instead of Xeon, that would save Apple maybe $400, if that. You’d still be looking at a $5k selling price. And no one would buy it.

btw, a Mac Pro is hardly out of a professionals budget. Even if the damn thing were priced at $2k, there’s no way you’re ever going to convince me $50-75 a month is meaningful in any way. The person running the machine is probably costing you $10k/month, even if only $5-7K of that is salary.

 

[chucker23n1]

OK, let me rephrase: Demand for machine that does better than the Mini but is not a Pro.

PickUrPoison isn't confused by what you're asking for. They're merely convinced that Apple isn't going to make that product.

And I'm fairly sure they're right.

However, it's the exact opposite of Apple philosophy when you want even a little GPU power. Apple always wanted you to have a clean desk, with a s little cable as possible.

They want that cleanliness on the outside and inside.

Look at the press images for the Mac mini or, say, the MacBook Pro:

The message is clearly: "our products are nicer on the inside than many competitors' are on the outside".

So yes, I'll grant your point: if you need an eGPU, you do need another cable. But really, you'd have to compare that to an average gaming tower, and those are by and large not nice on the inside.

If you have to connect an eGPU over TB (wich is quite expensive on its own) and has very limited bandwidth compared to PCIe x16 you will have an additional box on your desk with another power supply (cable). That's so non-Apple.
Put an nVidia Quadro or AMD Pro GPU in there and you have an entry level workstation for the broader mass, because, quite frankly, the Mac Pro is out of budget for semi-pro usage, especially the prosumer market.

You've answered your own question, though. Apple has that product; they just want more money than you're willing to spend.

And, yes, I'm well aware that they are not going to make a "small gaming mac". That was just the quickest term for "small mac with real mass storage (3,5" support for a couple TB) and PCIe board slot for GPUs or other hardware".
And that would in no world be a cheap tower. An ITX machine at >1500 without GPU is like 2.5-3 times more expensive than a DIY windows setup.

The thing is, I've been hearing people clamoring for that for almost a quarter century now. They had the Performance 6xxx series around 1997, and that was the lats time they offered a low-end tower. It ain't coming back.

It wasn't coming back in 2005 when people wanted one for $1k, and it isn't coming back now that you're asking for one for $2k.

 

[[AUT] Thomas]

[...]

True that and Apple doesn't need to sell anything cheap, but designing a regular ITX-size device is no rocket science. The MacPro has a lot of custom modules and a ridicolously powerful PSU, hence the price.
Pricing for phones and other stuff is mostly in line with other premium sellers.
It would be no big deal to launch a mid size mac that integrates more devices that a Mini yet is far away from a Pro without negatively affecting profits over the other models.

And I'm fairly sure they're right.

I'm pretty sure also... unfortunately. I was just stating that there would be a (potentially large) market for it...

You've answered your own question, though. Apple has that product; they just want more money than you're willing to spend.

Nah, it's just not as integrated as it could be and the CPU cooling is also questionable for a hexa core...

 

[whatta]

If you think all the feature upgrades of the 2020 4th gen are small, what will that make the 5th gen? Rumors say maybe only a faster SoC—as if it really needs to be faster.

with A14X and mini LED I am happy to purchase. landscape front camera and two usb c ports would be nice too.

 

[PickUrPoison]

True that and Apple doesn't need to sell anything cheap, but designing a regular ITX-size device is no rocket science. The MacPro has a lot of custom modules and a ridicolously powerful PSU, hence the price.
Pricing for phones and other stuff is mostly in line with other premium sellers.
It would be no big deal to launch a mid size mac that integrates more devices that a Mini yet is far away from a Pro without negatively affecting profits over the other models.

They can design and sell a smaller tower. My point is it doesn’t save them much. $10 dollars saved with fewer PCIe slots, maybe $5 saves with fewer RAM slots... connectors are cheap. $25 saved with smaller logic board, maybe $100 saved with smaller case/PSU. Biggest savings is CPU.

Apple’s costs for a smaller tower just aren’t all that much less than the current Mac Pro. You’re still looking at a $4,500-5,000 box.

PS It’s not necessary to delete quoted replies.

 

[Analog Kid]

Except that now you are effectively a prisoner of your own house, with access to a wide variety of chat services and forums.

Different channels, same old problem.

Social media is far more traceable and I know I am much more aware of what I publish in writing than I am about what I might say to colleagues in a live conversation over lunch.

I still don’t buy, or see any evidence, that engineers are risking their employment and leaking data because they’re stuck at home. The leaks are likely coming from the same places:

The first image looks like a photo of a CAD illustration, which are sometimes leaked from Apple's supply partners.

I think people are assuming that everything changed with the pandemic— some things did, but a lot of things have stayed fundamentally the same.

Leaking, say, a schematic is far easier when you have it downloaded (or can screenshot it) from your home, with your own Internet connection, than at work, where there's the risk that IT will surveil you.

Working from home means more leaks because presentations and meetings can be recorded. Pre-production hardware is brought home to be worked on.

Before, you could present sensitive information to a group and be confident it wasn't photographed or recorded. Presentation attendees would have to rely on memory to describe what the iPhone 5G notch looked like. Today, you can photograph it.

Has anyone seen a schematic or secret screen shot from a presentation or recording of a meeting from early engineering discussions, or are we only seeing information about devices that are already being shared with manufacturing? If engineering was leaking, we’d be seeing information about hardware that is years out, not months out.

Besides, was this really that hard to do from the office? Pre-production iOS hardware has been off campus for years for field testing (remember the phone left in a bar?). Meetings were almost certainly online before the move-to-home. Removable media is still widely available. Why would anyone think that someone with an interest in leaking information couldn’t do it before now?

Apple’s secrecy depends on a combination of the quality of the people they hire and the threat of repercussions if a leak is found, not on where people’s desks are.

 

[chucker23n1]

Besides, was this really that hard to do from the office?

…yes?

Pre-production iOS hardware has been off campus for years for field testing (remember the phone left in a bar?).

Yes, and remember when that happened? A decade ago. Literally when Steve was still alive.

Meetings were almost certainly online before the move-to-home.

No, meetings were almost invariably in a meeting room, in person. There are extremely few remote positions.

Removable media is still widely available.

Maybe?

It's not like locking down which media can be mounted on a Mac is an unsolved problem.

Why would anyone think that someone with an interest in leaking information couldn’t do it before now?

Apple’s secrecy depends on a combination of the quality of the people they hire and the threat of repercussions if a leak is found, not on where people’s desks are.

Or it depends on all three.

 

[subjonas]

Is it just the bezels you like? I can't think of any other example TouchID has, except on a phone (and not under screen) where you can feel it's location and activate it whilst the phone is coming out of your pocket.

I like bezels because it makes it easier to handle my device without ANY possibility of triggering an action.
Not sure exactly what you mean by the second sentence (you may have accidentally left out a word or two), but I also prefer Touch ID because I like having granular control of when I want to unlock my device (sometimes when I’m looking at the device I don’t want it to unlock, and sometimes I want the device to unlock when I’m not looking at it), as well as because of some paranoia I have about front cameras and Face ID. I also prefer Touch ID on the button so that I can do the aforementioned unlock without looking at my screen, but I’ll take what I can get.

 

[theorist9]

Is there a technically authoritative source of information explaining how popular desktop suites, like Office and Creative Cloud, would be run (at least to start) on an ARM-based Mac? E.g., will they only run (for now) within an emulator?

Here's a description of how Microsoft approached things for their ARM-based Suface Pro X. Given that Apple sealed the coffin on 32-bit apps with Catalina, it seems highly unlikely they would be going in this direction. Nevertheless, knowing what MS did informs some of what might be available for the Mac:

According to the article from zdnet linked below, the ARM-based Microsoft Suface Pro X is "capable of running most Windows desktop apps unmodified". However, "those desktop apps run in a 32-bit emulator, even though those Arm processors are 64-bit".

I.e., "the x86 emulation supports only 32-bit desktop apps". This isn't a roadblock for Office 365, for which a 32-bit version is available. But "you'll have a much bigger problem with apps that are only available in 64-bit versions. The only way to run Adobe's Creative Cloud apps, for example, is to sign in on Adobe's website and see which of the 2018 apps are available in 32-bit versions."

So, curiously, MS hasn't produced a native ARM-based version of Office for their own ARM-based machine—yet has produced it for the iPad. Why is this? Is it because porting complex x86 software (like Office) to ARM is easier in iOS than in Windows? [And, if so, would this have implication for how easy it would be to do in MacOS?] Or is what was made available for the iPad not a port of the desktop version, but rather a new version of Office that was developed from scratch specifically to run on ARM/iOS?

[See: https://www.zdnet.com/article/windo...-need-to-know-before-you-buy-a-surface-pro-x/ ]

 

[mazz0]

Not sure exactly what you mean by the second sentence

Sorry, I think I wrote “example” when I meant to say “advantage”!

 

[Tech198]

I do like that controller

 

[cmaier]

faceID is more convenient in the iPad and the Macbook

touchID is more convenient in the iPhone

False.

 

[supertiffany]

False.

yes goodluck not being hassled by touchid on a very big screen like the ipad


1. while you're typing on the keyboard, you will take extra time looking and pressing the right spot for the touchID, especially when you're hands are glued to the keyboard


versus


faceID


just open the lid, voila it unlocks.


so yeah what's false is your reply since you never used an iPad faceID before.

 

[chucker23n1]

yes goodluck not being hassled by touchid on a very big screen like the ipad


1. while you're typing on the keyboard, you will take extra time looking and pressing the right spot for the touchID, especially when you're hands are glued to the keyboard


versus


faceID


just open the lid, voila it unlocks.


so yeah what's false is your reply since you never used an iPad faceID before.

No, what's "false" is your simplistic take.

There are scenarios where Touch ID is more convenient, but by and large, people seem to find Face ID more convenient.

 

[Analog Kid]

…yes?

Yes, and remember when that happened? A decade ago. Literally when Steve was still alive.

No, meetings were almost invariably in a meeting room, in person. There are extremely few remote positions.

Maybe?

It's not like locking down which media can be mounted on a Mac is an unsolved problem.

Or it depends on all three.

Ok, if you think people can’t screenshot or photograph a computer screen on campus, nobody can carry a laptop off campus, they lock down thumb drives, Apple does no offsite field testing before release, and they only share information with each other and their suppliers face to face like some al Qaeda cell then I think the desire to see everything through a covid colored lens is leading you to argue increasingly tenuous points.

It’s not like they’re all connecting to internal systems as anonymous nodes— it will still be company owned and controlled hardware connected by VPN.

You’ll have to find some evidence of increased leaks from engineering and not thin hypotheticals to convince me. Of course I can’t say “never”, but I don’t see increased motivation, or significantly increased opportunity and I haven’t seen an increase in information that a supplier or manufacturing partner wouldn’t have.

 

[chucker23n1]

You’ll have to find some evidence of increased leaks from engineering and not thin hypotheticals to convince me. Of course I can’t say “never”, but I don’t see increased motivation, or significantly increased opportunity and I haven’t seen an increase in information that a supplier or manufacturing partner wouldn’t have.

Increased motivation? No, of course not. Increased opportunity? Yes. I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

 

[Analog Kid]

Increased motivation? No, of course not. Increased opportunity? Yes. I don't know how you can argue otherwise.

This probably isn’t important enough to keep discussing but I said “significantly increased”, and I argued otherwise in the two paragraphs you excised when you quoted me.

 

[supertiffany]

No, what's "false" is your simplistic take.

There are scenarios where Touch ID is more convenient, but by and large, people seem to find Face ID more convenient.

basically you just repeated what I said

 

[chucker23n1]

This probably isn’t important enough to keep discussing but I said “significantly increased”, and I argued otherwise in the two paragraphs you excised when you quoted me.

Right.

I "excised" the paragraphs because I understand your take, I just don't agree with it and didn't see the point in quoting the entire thing.
[automerge]1587584905[/automerge]

basically you just repeated what I said

Uh, no? Here's what you said:

"faceID is more convenient in the iPad and the Macbook

touchID is more convenient in the iPhone"

No, Touch ID is not always more convenient in the iPhone. Most people seem to think Face ID is.

 

[Analog Kid]

yes goodluck not being hassled by touchid on a very big screen like the ipad

1. while you're typing on the keyboard, you will take extra time looking and pressing the right spot for the touchID, especially when you're hands are glued to the keyboard
versus
faceID
just open the lid, voila it unlocks.
so yeah what's false is your reply since you never used an iPad faceID before.

Personally I think you have this exactly backwards. I find FaceID much preferable on my phone, but find it a hassle on my 12.9” iPP. My hand blocks the sensor when I hold it landscape for viewing and it won‘t recognize me when it is lying on the table in portrait and I want to wake it up to take notes— I have to either pick it up or make an effort to move my face over the sensor and those both interrupt the flow of whatever it is I want to take notes about.

On the phone, I naturally hold it in the right position and angle to detect me.

Use cases vary, I guess.

 

[supertiffany]

Personally I think you have this exactly backwards. I find FaceID much preferable on my phone, but find it a hassle on my 12.9” iPP. My hand blocks the sensor when I hold it landscape for viewing and it won‘t recognize me when it is lying on the table in portrait and I want to wake it up to take notes— I have to either pick it up or make an effort to move my face over the sensor and those both interrupt the flow of whatever it is I want to take notes about.

On the phone, I naturally hold it in the right position and angle to detect me.

Use cases vary, I guess.

the iPad or iPhone that has a home button and it's very easy to unlock with touchID, just press that button it will unlock (just one step)

the iPad or iPhone that has a faceID just swipe up, it will unlock (if you include tap to wake then that's 2 steps)

now if that iPad has touchID on a small portion of a big screen size like the iPad, that's more than 2 steps

you have to tap to wake, and then look for that small portion where that fingerprint scanner is and then rest your finger to unlock, that doesnt even include rotating the ipad for the right position to press unless that scanner will work even with your finger is sideways or upside down.


with touchID on the iPhone the screen is smaller and you know which is the lower half part of the screen no need for you to look longer since the screen is smaller, so it will be second nature to even know where the touchID is same with other fingerprint scanner on screen from other phones.

 

[theorist9]

It will run MacOS.

I would say the ARM Macbook would run MacOS...

But that's just a hunch...

I understand what you're saying though. When you think ARM you think iOS. But the rumors are an ARM-based laptop running MacOS. It'll be a different direction for Apple.

MacBooks will continue to run MacOS, regardless of the CPU architecture. (iPads will continue to run iPadOS.)

You guys may all be right, and my own guess about this agrees with yours: Apple has recently, and explicitly, recommitted themselves to the Mac, and designing a MacBook that doesn't run MacOS would run counter to this. But I was hoping that those who responded might be able to cite some sources. Might you have any for this? Because in their absence, I think we're all just operating on informed speculation. For instance, this experienced tech writer (also operating on informed speculation) opines the opposite:

What’s Stopping Apple From Making The Next MacBook Air Run On iPadOS? Absolutely Nothing

Could Apple go the whole hog and switch laptops such as the MacBook Air from macOS to what’s currently known as iPadOS? Yes, it could. At a stroke.

www.forbes.com