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.
New Macbook in 2018?
- Thread starter coquemessa
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The problem is that if you want 512GB storage you get the i5 anyway.
No Thunderbolt 3 built in yet, which is not a surprise. So, these are basically just faster versions of what we had last year without big feature upgrades, which makes me pleased again with my 2017 purchase.
I have a 2017 m3 which is decently fast. No complaints.If I were buying this year though, based on paper specs I’d probably buy an i5. The i5 may have a usable boost in speeds, and I’d worry about the heat from the i7.
No Thunderbolt 3 built in yet, which is not a surprise. So, these are basically just faster versions of what we had last year without big feature upgrades, which makes me pleased again with my 2017 purchase.
If I were buying this year though, based on paper specs I’d probably buy an i5. The i5 may have a usable boost in speeds, and I’d worry about the heat from the i7.
What percentage are we talking of an upgrade from last years MacBook? also what specs could we be looking at for the new MacBook Air? i'm guessing higher than the ones on the 12" MacBook?
No real clue on the MacBook speed boost but I’m guessing maybe up to 10-15% for the m3. As for Air, I still think it may be discontinued, with the 13” no longer being an Air.
Mark Gurman has said the Air will get a redesign with Retina display and thinner bezels. I’m inclined to believe it because Mark Gurman is very accurate when it comes to Apple, he has sources inside the company.
He may be accurate about the design, but I’d be surprised if it’s still called an Air. That branding is now dated, and Apple has already indicated what it thinks of the Air branding with the releases of the new iPads in the last few years.
The problem is what else can they call it? they can't add it to the MacBook lineup because it would confuse people, having a more powerful computer under the same name? also if it's 13" then the 12" isn't that far off.
They would call it a 13" MacBook. I don't see why that is so complicated.
We can have 12" and 13" MacBooks. Furthermore, the 13" MacBook doesn't have to be significantly more powerful, even though it might be.
We already have 13" and 15" MacBook Pros which vary widely in their performance.
If anything, that would simplify the line, by removing the Airs.
BTW, we had 12" and 14" iBooks in the past. Not confusing at all.
MacBook is currently a 2 lb. fanless ultraportable with a relatively limited 5W CPU. Are you saying the 13” will also be an ultraportable?
Or they’ll just use the name, and it won’t be a MacBook as we currently know it?
I’m guessing the new 13” will be an ultraportable with MacBook performance. There is already a 3 lb 13” model and that’s a Pro.
Gotcha. If they wanted to expand the MacBook lineup, I sure wish it would be a 14” or even 15” model... 13” doesn’t seem to be much different from 12”.
So under that scenario I guess the 12” then becomes the $999 model.
Yes, despite what some of the pundits are saying, I’ve been predicting that the cheap model will be the 12”.
Could be. Of course they could do that without adding another 13” to the other two 13” models. I guess under this scenario the nTB gets discontinued along with the Air.
Looking at the re-re-release of the m3 processor Intel just launched it does not seem to have any significant improvements over last year, or am I wrong? It's the same IGP, and with a slightly higher clock speed.
I'm on the first gen 12" with entry level processor, what kind of performance gain would I be looking at if I upgrade to the yet to be released 2018 model, or just go for a refurbed 2017?
I'm on the first gen 12" with entry level processor, what kind of performance gain would I be looking at if I upgrade to the yet to be released 2018 model, or just go for a refurbed 2017?
Considering Whiskey Lake is at least somewhat new iteration of 14 nm, it got more powerful and more cores at the same time, more PCI-E lanes, and its chipset got a lot of good features, Amber Lake turned out to be quite the opposite - it's the old iteration of 14 nm, got only a small increase in performance, no new cores, still vulnerable to Spectre and Meltdown, and Intel didn't tell anything about its chipset during announce (I understand this as there is nothing cool to talk about, not that they're holding a secret over some breakthrough chipset) - Amber Lake is kinda meh.
Obviously you would get performance gain, but IMHO buying whole new Macbook for it alone is not worth it. And I don't see a way for Apple to incorporate any breakthrough feature in it to make it feasible.
What's worse... I doubt Intel is not interested in ultra-portable (Amber Lake) market. Considering they could only bake somewhat reasonable CPU on old iteration of 14 nm and even then had to increase TDP to 5W even though other gains are meh - it seems they not only struggle with 10 nm but now also struggle with 14 nm improvements. Which is very sad for us, customers. Intel is stuck so we're going to see non-interesting releases for a year or a little more.
Obviously you would get performance gain, but IMHO buying whole new Macbook for it alone is not worth it. And I don't see a way for Apple to incorporate any breakthrough feature in it to make it feasible.
What's worse... I doubt Intel is not interested in ultra-portable (Amber Lake) market. Considering they could only bake somewhat reasonable CPU on old iteration of 14 nm and even then had to increase TDP to 5W even though other gains are meh - it seems they not only struggle with 10 nm but now also struggle with 14 nm improvements. Which is very sad for us, customers. Intel is stuck so we're going to see non-interesting releases for a year or a little more.
The 12" model appears to be priced as a premium ultra portable product. This may explain why they don't offer a 128Gb variant for less money which would be the obvious way to offer a cheaper version.
It seems to me that Apple would prefer a 13" 'MBA' to be the 'budget' model and must have some idea to replace it. My thoughts - from other threads - lie on the MacBook name being linked to USB-C (not Thunderbolt 3) and lower power CPU (with lower power GPU).
This would allow for a 13" model not a million miles away from the current non touch bar MacBook Pro. Imagine dropping Thunderbolt 3, going for a non-Iris (cheaper) CPU like the i5-8250U - or i5-8265U for Gen 2 USB-C speeds, but keeping the screen as a Retina one.
I could see a 128Gb SSD, 8Gb RAM MacBook 13" with 4 USB-C Gen 2 ports and UHD620 graphics coming in at $1099 - the graphics performance would be broadly similar to the Iris powered Haswell Retina MacBook Pro which back in the day was sufficient for the 2013 rMBP. As the capability is lower than MacBook Pros it's easy to label it as a MacBook.
While there's been plenty written about another wedge shaped MBA, and Apple would sell enough to justify a custom design and CPU etc, it would potentially mean that Apple would have 3 x 13" products. I would ask why they couldn't do a non touch bar 15" MacBook.
It seems to me that Apple would prefer a 13" 'MBA' to be the 'budget' model and must have some idea to replace it. My thoughts - from other threads - lie on the MacBook name being linked to USB-C (not Thunderbolt 3) and lower power CPU (with lower power GPU).
This would allow for a 13" model not a million miles away from the current non touch bar MacBook Pro. Imagine dropping Thunderbolt 3, going for a non-Iris (cheaper) CPU like the i5-8250U - or i5-8265U for Gen 2 USB-C speeds, but keeping the screen as a Retina one.
I could see a 128Gb SSD, 8Gb RAM MacBook 13" with 4 USB-C Gen 2 ports and UHD620 graphics coming in at $1099 - the graphics performance would be broadly similar to the Iris powered Haswell Retina MacBook Pro which back in the day was sufficient for the 2013 rMBP. As the capability is lower than MacBook Pros it's easy to label it as a MacBook.
While there's been plenty written about another wedge shaped MBA, and Apple would sell enough to justify a custom design and CPU etc, it would potentially mean that Apple would have 3 x 13" products. I would ask why they couldn't do a non touch bar 15" MacBook.
You see, the problem is it's not that Apple chose not to include Thunderbolt 3 or Iris GPU into Macbook 12" - they just physically could not do it. Amber Lake hasn't changed this - Apple will still not be able to put anything more than USB-C 3.1 gen 1 and they still will use non-Iris GPU in Macbook 12".
So most of the money saving you've mentioned will not differentiate from Macbook 12" - it will be the same.
P. S. There is a very wild guess that Apple might use TDP-downed Whiskey Lakes at 10W in Macbook 12" but it's unlikely they'd be able to passively cool 10W and there is no way they'd make Macbook 12" actively cooled - not enough space inside and their marketing sold very different image for this model. This would've solved all the problems of differentiation but I very much doubt it'll happen.
The problem with calling the new 13” budget model MacBook is right there in your opening sentence. If, as you correctly state, the 12” MacBook is a “premium ultra portable product” then a 13” MacBook should be a slightly larger “premium ultra portable product”.
Why muddy the MacBook lineup? Why change the name at all? They might as well keep calling the new 13” budget model MacBook Air. MBA has a lot of brand equity and people know it as the $999 budget notebook. It’s going to get a better screen and CPU, and be $999 (or ideally $899)—why does that necessitate a name change?
That would also leave space in the premium, ultraportable MacBook lineup for a larger 14/15” model, which I think would be awesome.
Especially considering *courageous* (tm) Acer has already shown it's somewhat possible https://www.anandtech.com/show/1329...r-15inch-notebook-swift-5-at-990-grams-22-lbs .
The 12” MB tells us it’s possible, 14/15” would be much easier since you wouldn’t have to cram everything in so tight.
In my perfect world, Apple would shrink the bezels and give us a 13” in the current 12” form factor. Then add a new 15” to the lineup. It would come in at about 2.3 lbs.
I don’t expect any physical changes to the MB this year, but 2018 will make four years of the same design so next year should be a re-design of some sort. Smaller bezels are a must—iMac, MacBook pro and MacBook alike could all use them. Especially iMac.
The point I omitted to make about the Air name is for it to have a rest for a year or two and come back to market with an A-series CPU and no fan. It would once again be the thinnest and lightest laptop but this time with some serious ARM powered oomph.
12" is the point in the Intel powered Mac universe where they go as light as they are willing to go before compromising usability - slightly smaller keyboard and only one port the trade off for 'ultimate' weight saving and portability. Why else would Apple keep the base SKU at 256Gb for three generations? The experience as the 'cheapest' Mac laptop in the lineup wouldn't be very good.
13" is where Apple can at least bring in 'full size' keyboard, some decent performance (bringing in a fan), and a decent size screen.
I'm not sure how Apple would continue to pull off a 12" model that's more expensive than a 13" model (in marketing terms) but giving that 13" model Thunderbolt ports would not be a good start without adding the same Thunderbolt port(s) to the 12".
The refreshed 'Macbook' range could therefore start with a workhorse 13" with 128Gb storage at $1099 with cheaper CPU and losing Thunderbolt 3. A 256Gb version would cost $1399.
The ultraportable 12" with 256Gb would stay at $1299.
The current non touchbar 13" MacBook Pro starts at $1299 with a $1499 256Gb SKU and comes with 2 Thunderbolt ports - for an extra $300 you get quad core Iris Graphics CPU, touch bar, and 4 Thunderbolt ports. Since there is no current successor to the 15w Iris powered CPU used in the non touchbar model what could Apple do here?
The case appears like it could accommodate a 28w CPU so the i3-8109U and dual fan cooling arrangement could be used, and 4 Thunderbolt ports is possible. If necessary a slight price increase could take in the extra costs in Thunderbolt controllers and the higher cost of the higher grade CPU. The touch bar would be the big miss on this model while people wanting quad core would be pushed up to the touch bar model.
The 13" touch bar equipped MacBook Pro starts at $1799 with 256Gb SSD - above all of the other 13" machines.
I would be a bit uneasy about so many 13" models to choose from, and might be interested in a non touch bar 15" if Apple could make one work, there's so many processor and GPU combinations available and the possibility of buying a sub $2k 15" laptop might get people to step up from the 13" Pro models.
Fair comment, the keys may be bigger than scissor generation keys too - they are closer together and feel more cramped to me in an Apple Store. If 'full size' was the sole criteria Apple would have dropped the price on the 12" ages ago but they must be going on a coalition of other criteria including - crucially - number of ports and acceptable level of performance of jobs other than the most basic email/word processing. One port isn't enough for some budget users who may be using it as their sole machine and a fan less travel optimised configuration won't be much use for people trying to use Photos or iMovie heavily.
If there's a redesign of the 12" MacBook coming they surely have to go with at least 2 USB-C and up the speed of the ports to USB 3.1 Gen2 10Gbits/s