macOS Ventura Expected to Launch in Final Week of October With Support for Next 14-Inch and 16-Inch MacBook Pro

[Allen_Wentz]

Where is the logic of using we are all waiting for 3-nanometer chip design SoC's excuse? The M1 Pro/Max/Ultra are more than adequate to use updating Mac minis, iMacs (both sizes) for desktops. The recent M2 could be used also for Mac mini and 24" iMac. Mac Pro is not going to use 3-nanometer chip design as it's delayed needlessly. Apple obviously has part shortages necessitating this dribble of AS based computers. Also I'm sure they have manufacturing problems too or there would be more product rollouts using the existing AS SoC's.

IMO this comment makes the error that many observers make. That is, looking at Macs as existing lines simply being updated. Apple is in the midst of a change to using its own silicon, which is huge. Apple chips change everything, and Apple should be expected to renovate product lines accordingly. The Studio is one obvious change component already in place, and it will likely force the Mini down and the Mac Pro up.

Given that the (excellent) Studio fills the desktop midrange, Mac Pro must go high. Personally I see no way that high can be achieved with existing Mac chips. Multiple M2 Ultras glued together are too pedestrian for what (after all this time, after the CEO specifically pimping the MP and with Studio solidly filling the middle range) the Mac Pro needs to be. IMO 3nm process will be required for the Mac Pro because of the added transistor count that 3nm provides, and if it adds 6 weeks or 6 months delay no one will care much. But folks will care if the next MP is not a real performer.

 

[Realityck]

IMO this comment makes the error that many observers make. That is, looking at Macs as existing lines simply being updated. Apple is in the midst of a change to using its own silicon, which is huge. Apple chips change everything, and Apple should be expected to renovate product lines accordingly. The Studio is one obvious change component already in place, and it will likely force the Mini down and the Mac Pro up.

Given that the (excellent) Studio fills the desktop midrange, Mac Pro must go high. Personally I see no way that high can be achieved with existing Mac chips. Multiple M2 Ultras glued together are too pedestrian for what (after all this time, after the CEO specifically pimping the MP and with Studio solidly filling the middle range) the Mac Pro needs to be. IMO 3nm process will be required for the Mac Pro because of the added transistor count that 3nm provides, and if it adds 6 weeks or 6 months delay no one will care much. But folks will care if the next MP is not a real performer.

I don't see the (excellent) studio fills the desktop midrange. Unless you are reflecting on the times when Apples Mac products years back were typically $4500 for a display and desktop. The fact that it was specific features lacking except when it is kited with a Studio Display with FaceTime/Centerstage and spatial audio speakers shows how Apple was trying to force limited choices onto buyers. Yes we acknowledge the extreme differences in price/capabilities with much lower performance Mac mini and also the much higher costs associated with a Mac Pro. So if wasn't for the all in one M1 based 24" iMac existing , I would have to give Apple Mac desktop lineup a D grade for god awful AS marketing for Mac Desktop presently.

So should existing desktop lines be updated, heck yes, instead of timid marketing against Mac products outside iPhones, iPads and laptops.

 

[chucker23n1]

I don't see the (excellent) studio fills the desktop midrange. Unless you are reflecting on the times when Apples Mac products years back were typically $4500 for a display and desktop.

The Studio at $2,000 is already far beefier than the Mac mini, and a display can be had for $100.

The fact that it was specific features lacking except when it is kited with a Studio Display with FaceTime/Centerstage and spatial audio speakers shows how Apple was trying to force limited choices onto buyers.

Many Studio Display reviews seem to have come down on “it may have been better to put a lens in that doesn’t do Center Stage”.

 

[Realityck]

The Studio at $2,000 is already far beefier than the Mac mini, and a display can be had for $100.

Know anyone that want to live with that? Hey they have a new LG 32 4K display for $499

LG showcases new 32-inch 4K Smart Monitor with built-in AirPlay 2, 65W USB-C, more

LG has been on a roll this year with its unique new monitors, and today, we’re getting a first look at the latest addition to its lineup. Taking on Samsung and other brands who have connected workstation displays, the new LG Smart Monitor arrives with built-in webOS streaming functionality to...

9to5toys.com

I still want a large 5K mini-LED display.

 

[chucker23n1]

Know anyone that want to live with that?

I was on a rMBP + two $100 1080p displays setup for years. Now I’m on notchMBP + two $300 1440p displays. It’s fine. It’s a bummer there’s no Retina, especially given that subpixel rendering is dead now, but I’d have to spend an additional 2x$1300 just for the base models, and yeah, no.

My point is, no, we’re not in the $4500 for display and Mac era. Your Studio doesn’t need to cost that much since the base model is already quite good (except for the internal SSD size, but that matters less on a desktop), and your display probably shouldn’t be one of Apple’s overengineered design studies.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

Don't know about bugs, but there is a Youtube channel "ArtIsRight" and he tests performance of various photography apps on Intel and M1 M2 Macs. Based on his tests Capture One does not scale well with more RAM, CPU cores and GPU cores on M Macs, meaning it does the job faster but not THAT fast for what the hardware is capable of. https://www.youtube.com/c/ArtIsRight/videos

He did tests for all Apple Silicon Macs with different configurations, even M1 Ultra and newest M2 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro in base or 24GB RAM variations. I recommend to check his results. Was not happy when I discovered it either, as I mainly use Capture One as well.

Art's testing is interesting but limited. I could not find tests of the Max MBP or the Studio Ultra. In the past C1 has been on top of things, so I expect that sooner or later C1 will perform well on M2 boxes.

Certainly, however, IMO anyone using apps like C1 should be buying at the higher end not the lower end: 32 GB or 64 GB RAM; Max chips not Pro or less; minimum 1 TB SSD; 400 GB/s memory bandwidth or more. Although we photogs can make do with less it makes sense to buy stronger hdw because app demands do not decrease over time.

IMO Art's tests of lower end 8 GB and 16 GB boxes have zero value for the kind of user that invests in C1; we already know that even 16 GB RAM is limiting to handling modern image captures of 40+ MP. Testing how some 8GB-RAM-constrained workflow behaves answers no questions for me, because the same workflow will likely be sensitive to different bottlenecks when running under 32+ GB RAM.

 

[Allen_Wentz]

I don't see the (excellent) studio fills the desktop midrange. Unless you are reflecting on the times when Apples Mac products years back were typically $4500 for a display and desktop. The fact that it was specific features lacking except when it is kited with a Studio Display with FaceTime/Centerstage and spatial audio speakers shows how Apple was trying to force limited choices onto buyers. Yes we acknowledge the extreme differences in price/capabilities with much lower performance Mac mini and also the much higher costs associated with a Mac Pro. So if wasn't for the all in one M1 based 24" iMac existing , I would have to give Apple Mac desktop lineup a D grade for god awful AS marketing for Mac Desktop presently.

So should existing desktop lines be updated, heck yes, instead of timid marketing against Mac products outside iPhones, iPads and laptops.

I was referencing headless desktop boxes only, and yes, the Studio does fill the headless desktop midrange very well. Personally I dislike AIO desktop boxes like iMacs and have no comments regarding them. Also I have not commented on Apple displays (personally I currently use an MBP + three 4K Viewsonic image pro displays).

 

[Yvan256]

Maybe I missed it, but what happened to the rumours of a 15" MacBook Air M2?

 

[Realityck]

Maybe I missed it, but what happened to the rumours of a 15" MacBook Air M2?

That was always wishful thinking IMHO. Yes I saw many ask about that, but then you kinda think about what is better a large loaded 15 MBA with reg display versus base models of 14" or 16" MBP that use a mini-LED screen? I also suggested going the opposite direction with a more petite M2 12" MacBook Air model.

 

[spritle]

Maybe I missed it, but what happened to the rumours of a 15" MacBook Air M2?

It's coming - along with 15.25", 15.5" and 15.75" models.

 

[chucker23n1]

Maybe I missed it, but what happened to the rumours of a 15" MacBook Air M2?

They can always add that as a mid-cycle update some time next year.

 

[MiaBchDave]

End of the month for Ventura? Anyone would think the latest beta is bombed with bugs??? Too long this has been in beta for.

I think there's some major issue with project management and engineering if they think this is anywhere near ready. If nobody has coined it yet, I will trademark MacOS Vistura as the new name for this OS in honor of the mess that Windows Vista was upon release. Major core OS features, like adding printers in System Settings, are a straight gamble on whether they work or not in the latest Ventura betas.

 

[Boil]

IMO 3nm process will be required for the Mac Pro because of the added transistor count that 3nm provides, and if it adds 6 weeks or 6 months delay no one will care much. But folks will care if the next MP is not a real performer.

I could see Apple only putting out the base M2 SoC and the M2 Pro SoC, both on N5P...

M2 in 13" laptops, Mac mini headless desktop, 24" iMac AIO desktop, & iPad Pro tablets...

M2 Pro in Mac mini headless desktop and the 14"/16" MacBook Pro laptops...

M3 (N3E +) family previewed at WWDC 2023 with the M3 Extreme in the new ASi Mac Pro kicking it all off...

M3 family has hardware ray-tracing, ASi Mac Pro supports optional ASi GPGPU add-in cards...

Remaining assorted M3 Macs are released thru 2023, anything with a design carrying over from the Intel era is redesigned...

 

[nick42983]

Maybe I missed it, but what happened to the rumours of a 15" MacBook Air M2?

According to Gurman's full article on Bloomberg it's slated for release next year, they wouldn't release it this year and undercut the new M2 Air and upcoming MBPs even if it's ready: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/news...d-m2-14-inch-and-16-inch-macbook-pro-l9a5t9rc

 

[HowardEv]

I'm still waiting for the M2 Pro Mac Mini. Apple is clearly dragging its feet on this one.

Hopefully the delay is because it’s getting a new form factor, much smaller, battery, passive cooling, and a touch display on top. (Yeah like an iPhone but with an M2)

 

[applesed]

That was always wishful thinking IMHO. Yes I saw many ask about that, but then you kinda think about what is better a large loaded 15 MBA with reg display versus base models of 14" or 16" MBP that use a mini-LED screen? I also suggested going the opposite direction with a more petite M2 12" MacBook Air model.

Some said it’s not going to be an air just MacBook, so I’m not sure they need to put a screen lesser (than mbp) in it. Honestly there just needs to be one that has the screen size and weight of pre-AS 15 mbp. Current one is a beast.

 

[Matt Leaf]

Betting on a midnight colour drop to boost sales and create the Oo-ahh factor. Colour matched cables. M2. Not sure what else could be improved. Can’t say I’m in a rush to update to Ventura tho, Monterey feels relatively stable right now. It’s crazy think it’s like 8 months between now and when they get up to announce the next OS.

 

[cuhulin]

I feel like we are reaching a peak with all of Apple's product line. Looking back products like the PowerMac G4 QuickSilver in 2001, the Mac, was a 17 year old product at that time. And in some ways, it felt like there was still more untapped potential. We were going into this era of the Mac/PC as a hub. But the iPhone, iPad and the Mac all seem like they are hitting a wall. The iPod certainly reached its own after 20 years.

Its truly hard to say what more really to expect from these products. Because we've been doing pretty much the same thing we did on them nearly 30 years ago, 40 if you go back to the original Apple II and IBM PC. Sure, there have been insane progress: graphical user interface, performance and mobility, communication and networking (5G), artificial intelligence (Siri, Google), video and audio. But a lot of that was in some ways inevitable.

The Apple Watch is another one I forgot to mention. I hope in 10 years, maybe the Watch can do things like tell you when you are sick and contagious and advise you to stay home and get medicine.

That probably is true with some of the products, like the Iphone, but it is less so with some of the others.

The Mac, and specifically the M-series chips that transformed the Mac over the last 2 years, has at least one more major step in front of it - adding in general purpose graphics capabilities competitive with Nvidia and AMD. Right now, Apple uses special purpose subsystems to do video and photo tasks, but that leaves a lot unaccounted for, and I am sure that Apple is aware of it. Of course, there also is gaming, which I don't think Apple will leave in its current state.

The point of Stage Manager, which is still a generation 1, or even 0.5, is to bring general computing capabilities in a non-MacOS, non-Windows way to the Ipad. That will be tremendously useful someday for people who don't want to carry or use a macbook or other laptop as much. (I own and use both, and I would love to leave the macbook home more and rely more on my Ipad for short trips and the like, and I don't think I am a special case on this.)

Put differently, Apple is not at the peak, and it won't be for a while, but you probably are right that there is a peak and we are a lot closer than we were when Apple came to the market with the original Apple II.

 

[VerizonLover]

The point of Stage Manager, which is still a generation 1, or even 0.5, is to bring general computing capabilities in a non-MacOS, non-Windows way to the Ipad.

Then why is Stage Manager being included in macOS 13?

 

[skardvin]

Yes but how about applications? People run windows to run windows software, not run windows to use notepad.

High Sierra is the last 32-bit compatible OS without compromise. I don’t care how Apple brands Mojave’s 32-bit support. An OS popping up windows yelling at me “your 32-bit app will no longer be supported” is not an OS I’m willing to use for 32-bit applications.

What is 32-bit? /s