Oh no, what am I going to do? My plan is to replace my retina iMac every year because after about 9 months it really starts showing it's age.
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.
Mac Update Cycle Faces Uncertainty as Intel Abandons Tick-Tock Strategy
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh no, what am I going to do? My plan is to replace my retina iMac every year because after about 9 months it really starts showing it's age.
Process miniaturization had to end at some point. The dearth of real competition just resulted in it happening a bit sooner.
Competition to what? There's no way that the iOS device processors can stand up to anything in the current MacBook Pro's, iMac's, and Mac Pro's.
It is not intel's fault if Apple decided to wait on Skylake....
Even if XCode was ported to iOS, usability would be absolutely hideous. Also the fact that many development tools that are relied upon aren't available on iOS - and questionable whether some could pass Apple's AppStore rules...
[doublepost=1460403757][/doublepost]
Tick Tock is no longer feasible. I don't think they had much other choice.
I see this as a great move for Intel, First you get people on the brand spanking new hardware, then you make it run faster, then you make it run on a lower power. Which one do you want, the brand spanking new, the fastest, or the one that's stable but has been out for 2 years? 3 ways to buy that $300 - $1000 processor. **cha-ching**
Makers of Windows and Linux machines will have the same problem with processors, why is this a particular issue for Apple?
No reason to innovate when there's no significant competition.
For most users, there are no real performance gains in x86_64 left; at this point the game is squeezing the same performance using less energy.
Realistically speaking, there isn't a lot of day-to-day difference between my 2009 i7 iMac and my wife's 2015 i7 retina iMac. The same can be said among all the retina mac pros that we have around the office; the speed differentials are pretty marginal.
Realistically speaking, there isn't a lot of day-to-day difference between my 2009 i7 iMac and my wife's 2015 i7 retina iMac. The same can be said among all the retina mac pros that we have around the office; the speed differentials are pretty marginal.
Still makes me smile when people think that ARM does not have to abide by the same laws of physics that Intel and AMD are up against, and can simply make ARM chips that will just sail past them without any problems
It's not only lack of competition, it's lack of a compelling need for more power. This has happened before, where we end up with ridiculous numbers of clock cycles that sit unused. Until there are new killer apps that really need mega processing power, people will be happy to keep their existing machines that function just fine.
I know this type of thinking is floated for trying to understand Apple OSX product release cycles but in all likelihood Apple just doesn't care about small year to year updates and releases new product when they feel like it and on their terms.
Intel: "We will still release processor updates as usual, just holding back on node shrinks. In fact, we released one of our best chip evolutions half a year ago."
Macrumors clickbait: "Apple is doomed!"
Apple: "Wut? There are new processors for Macs?" *Cook dives Scrooge McDuck-style into a pool of iOS devices that prints money*
Macrumors clickbait: "Apple is doomed!"
Apple: "Wut? There are new processors for Macs?" *Cook dives Scrooge McDuck-style into a pool of iOS devices that prints money*
Still makes me smile when people think that ARM does not have to abide by the same laws of physics that Intel and AMD are up against, and can simply make ARM chips that will just sail past them without any problems
Exactly. It's not as if Apple owns a fab. They would be beholden to TSMC and Samsung to make their ARM chips. TSMC is not going to get as good at fabrication as Intel; certainly not without x86-like volume.
Apples update cycles face uncertainty without using Intel as an excuse.....
The day that we see photo/video/web professionals editing and coding exclusively on iOS with touch gestures, I will give you my paycheck.
I don't really see the problem here. Intel did not say they were moving to infrequent updates, just that they were not going to be shrinking their chips as often and focusing on optimization.
I'm guessing this is where we're headed. The writing has been on the wall for some time.
This is silly. It's not as much about CPU processing power now as it is GPU, fast storage, modern i/o ports. I don't really care if Apple only updates every other year, maybe with silent speed bumps along. The soonest I update my machines is two years anyway, though it's been longer lately b/c Apple hasn't provided me a reason to buy a new machine. I do wish they would built their machines around the best parts available, at least for the "pro" machines. They don't even do that now, and you can't blame Intel for that.
Well, if Apple has to wait on processors from Intel, then maybe they will be more willing to focus on other improvements like more powerful graphics cards and software improvements.
I still do not understand why Apple did not use the Haswell E5 v3 Xeon processors for a Mac Pro update. It thought with FirePro 7100, 8100, and 9100 available, along with the Haswell Xeons, the Mac Pro would have been updated sometime in 2015.
Now that Broadwell E5 v4 Xeons are available, will this mean that Apple will use older graphics cards or wait for the Polaris or Tesla cards to become available?
I still do not understand why Apple did not use the Haswell E5 v3 Xeon processors for a Mac Pro update. It thought with FirePro 7100, 8100, and 9100 available, along with the Haswell Xeons, the Mac Pro would have been updated sometime in 2015.
Now that Broadwell E5 v4 Xeons are available, will this mean that Apple will use older graphics cards or wait for the Polaris or Tesla cards to become available?
Hence my statement that it would be at least an A10 and that iOS would need to be upgraded.
They simply don't care enough about the Mac that's all..
And you agree with me since it is Apple who doesn't want / care to update it is not like Intel has been standing still.