New MacBook Pro and 13-Inch 'MacBook' Coming Next Week, iMac and Display Not Ready Yet

[AxiomaticRubric]

As one of those pro users, I agree. But I think if Apple says "Look folks, we've been busting our ass to reinvent the Mac and it's been so long since we've done anything with it because we're doing another architecture change. But here are the amazing things we can do with the new CPUs! And for you x86 users transitioning, we have <insert compatibility layer here>!"

If they introduce an ARM Mac that is so incredible it totally explains the lag and apparent disdain for their computer market, I will absolutely be on board. But if they come out with the odd x86 Mac every 3 years or so or some gimped ARM box that's mostly iOS, I may have to move back to Linux. It really depends on how they handle it.

What if new Macs will be ARM based with an optional x86 coprocessor? Then Apple could keep the Intel diehards happy with Windows compatibility etc. but allow Apple to innovate the Mac line on their own time schedule.... if it's even possible of course.

 

[tentales]

Hmmm...USB-C is new tech, it replaces all of those ports you mentioned and more. You could have 4 SD cards at once, or 3 HDMI's out. The keyboard is going to be awesome. Think MBr keyboard but with twice the travel. It seems you don't actually want new tech, just some other tech, mostly older as well. What post purchase upgrade options are you referring to? Can't really upgrade the current line up as it is, right?

Sure, a dozen SD cards with hubs. Who needs that?
Most users need 1, built-in!
I can't stand the MBr keyboard and I doubt the travel will be any greater.

A bag full of dongles is new tech for you?
Guess you weren't around in the 90s.

The point of a Pro machine is to cater to most current in use interfaces.
Current isn't old. Same reason in the past Apple didn't just supply you with 4 Thunderbolt ports and said to buy adapters for HDMI, Ethernet, USB, etc.

Upgrading memory & storage and batteries *should* be possible on a Pro machine. The Air and rMB already cater to the coffeshop crowd.

Keep making excuses for Apple, it'll drive their computer segment to lower revenues, while the Pros move on.

 

[sudo1996]

I kind of agree here, but then again, I don't. I love working with OS X and would probably have a lot of friction moving to either windows or linux, but I'm starting to look at options. I tried building a hackintosh, and while it works well there's a lot of fiddling with settings, drivers and such involved in that.

So far I'm leaning towards a custom built PC (probably windows, but linux works too), where I run OS X in a VM. You can just make it auto-start the OS X VM on boot, allocate a good amount of resources to it, make it think it has exactly the right hardware for OS X to run without problems and so on. Tab out of the VM to play games and such, and buy your user-upgradeable parts cheap just about anywhere.

I might go with this if Apple won't get a grip on their Mac lineup really soon. I guess I will know this thursday.

But why? All I can see that being useful for is if you're doing CAD or something and need the latest parts all the time for your job. Otherwise, any Mac has good enough specs. I can't see myself replacing my 2008 Mac Pro (or even upgrading it) any time soon because it's still pretty OP right now.

Maybe I'll replace the 2012 rMBP, but that's only because the display, battery, and keyboard got ****ed up somehow, and the logic board has some minor problem.

 

[Donoban]

Don't get fooled by the 'Pro' in the name. They aren't supposed to be used for stuff like that anymore.

Lol.

Everything in the 80s had the word turbo after it.

My sister had a hair dryer with a turbo.

It's probably just the era we're in. Pro will be replaced with something else eventually.

 

[sudo1996]

If they introduce an ARM Mac that is so incredible it totally explains the lag and apparent disdain for their computer market, I will absolutely be on board. But if they come out with the odd x86 Mac every 3 years or so or some gimped ARM box that's mostly iOS, I may have to move back to Linux. It really depends on how they handle it.

Currently, an A9X is about as fast as the Intel Core M found in the retina MacBook, i.e. pretty awesome for a tablet but pretty darn slow for a PC.

 

[Accipiter]

What if new Macs will be ARM based with an optional x86 coprocessor? Then Apple could keep the Intel diehards happy with Windows compatibility etc. but allow Apple to innovate the Mac line on their own time schedule.... if it's even possible of course.

I addressed exactly this elsewhere. I can't imagine them doing anything else IF they do another architecture shift.

Currently, an A9X is about as fast as the Intel Core M found in the retina MacBook, i.e. pretty awesome for a tablet but pretty darn slow for a PC.

Simple answer: That's not a desktop-class CPU. Doesn't mean Apple doesn't have one in the works.

 

[sudo1996]

What if new Macs will be ARM based with an optional x86 coprocessor? Then Apple could keep the Intel diehards happy with Windows compatibility etc. but allow Apple to innovate the Mac line on their own time schedule.... if it's even possible of course.

Considering that you "can't" even have two x86 processors in parallel unless they're both the same or very carefully picked similar Xeon processors, or at least it's unexplainably not ever done, I doubt this is practical. Typical OSs are meant to run on a certain architecture. Of course, anything is theoretically possible, but it wouldn't be Unix as we know it. I'd imagine they'd need to do away with multithreaded processes and rely on IPC across processes running from different binaries on different CPUs instead. I don't know if the CPUs would be able to share the same RAM, but probably not, and you'd be trending towards putting two entirely separate computers in one box.

 

[Larry-K]

I guess I just have to disagree...define a couple of years. Architecture change is a pretty big deal, at the same time, if it is done for a good reason, (i.e. x86 development is actually slowing to a crawl compared ARM development...I'd really like to see how the latest ARM and x86 parts compare watt for watt...what kind of performance could you get out of a 10W ARM part, for example, when you are currently getting performance comparable to a current 15W x86 part from a 4W ARM part.) and they have a 10 year road map, I'd be more than game. Let's be honest, all they really need to do to get 99% of everyone on board and not feeling compatibility nerves would be the Microsoft Office Suite and the full Adobe Creative Cloud suite. That would be a lot easier to secure today than it would have been even just a a year or two ago. You get those two on board at launch and you will get all the rest developing immediately for macOS ARM. Heck, Microsoft would probably be in to make a proper ARM version of Windows, just so they could sell the licenses to Mac users!

I think there is more to IBM coming out with their statements saving millions using Macs, and Apple's strategic partnerships in enterprise - I think they are aiming to switch architectures and do it in a big way, and one that won't rely on Rosetta mark 2 as a bridge, (although they will have a compatibility layer I think will be active for a limited time) rather offering automated alternate binaries through the MAS. Distribute your app through the MAS and you don't have to deal with it, Apple will for you, and people on x86 machines get their version and people on the ARM machines get theirs...

The 2017 iPad Pro line-up will probably out benchmark the current top end MBA in both CPU and GPU performance. Imagine a line-up where you have the MB running the same fusion quad core chip as the iPad Pro, and the MBP running a true full quad core 10W version with a 16 core GPU that outperforms anything up to 45W that Intel could throw at it.

The more I think about it, the more I think it is more than feasible, and only a matter of time until it happens. After having written this, I want one, I hope it happens sooner rather than later!

The ONLY thing that actually gives me pause is I/O compatibility. If getting USB 3.1 gen 2 and TB3 is not an issue, then I would have no reservations.

Adobe's Creative Cloud is just the beginning of Pro Apps, and there are components to it that don't run on a Mac now.

High End Pro Apps are a lot less likely to follow.

I've never heard a bunch of creatives standing around discussing how many watts they're using.

Most people in the Enterprise are running Microsoft Office, and it's the same lousy bunch of programs, more or less on any platform.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

I answer: That's not a desktop-class CPU. Doesn't mean Apple doesn't have one in the works.

They are desktop class, if you go back just a few short years. The graphics processor in the A series is as good as many from AMD or Nvidia while sipping a lot less power.

The most important thing is optimising the OS and apps to run fast. Obviously iOS and ARM are better optimised than macOS and Intel/PPC ever have been. You never hear an iOS user asking how many times the icon bounced before Safari launched.

 

[Accipiter]

Considering that you "can't" even have two x86 processors in parallel unless they're both the same or very carefully picked similar Xeon processors

Absolutely not true. Dual-processor x86 systems have existed for decades, at least as early as the first Pentium processors.

Where do you think multi-core CPUs came from? They're parallel processors in a single package.

They are desktop class, if you go back just a few short years. The graphics processor in the A series is as good as many from AMD or Nvidia while sipping a lot less power.

The CPU in my iPhone 6S also beats the absolute crap out of my old Athlon 64. Doesn't mean it's suitable for a desktop PC in 2016. If you have to "go back just a few short years" for equal desktop performance, it's not up to par for a modern desktop-class CPU.

But like I said, none of that says that Apple has no desktop-class ARM CPU in their lab. I'm sure they do, and I'm sure they have Mac OS running on it.

 

[0388631]

Romancing the idea of having a high performance desktop grade ARM processor is great, but you'd need to get a lot of companies to get on board. This applies to people who have thousands in software that requires Intel processors. Then you'd have to convince the Indie developers to get on board. They can recompile and work out the bugs on their own accord. At which time people with new devices desperately need the product but can't use it. Then you have a problem with people who use virtualization. No installing OSX, no Windows, and not a lot of Linux distros are available on ARM at the moment.

Absolutely not true. Dual-processor x86 systems have existed for decades, at least as early as the first Pentium processors.

Where do you think multi-core CPUs came from? They're parallel processors in a single package.

He never said x86 dual processor never happened. Read his post again.

 

[steve333]

Apple is very successful turning our dreams into our nightmares. I love the Mini and I own 3 server versions of them. I use one at home connected to a 27" Thunderbolt display for media server, backup server, cache and general purpose video and audio editing. The other 2 are used in my small business as our mail and file servers. All of them are 2012 or earlier models with quad core i7, user upgradable memory and drives.

I hate to see the trend at Apple. First make it non user upgradable, then trim it down in features and finally abandon it all together.

If the reason to abandon a product is based on its profit alone, then Apple should drop everything and sell only iPhones.

Yeah, I just don't get this company. Why neuter a product with so much potential? I think more people would migrate to Apple from PCs if the Mini was more robust for the price. I personally will put up with the fact that the Mini is kind of a rip off considering what it comes with but that's mainly because I hate all in ones and don't want a laptop. The Mini is all Apple has that appeals to me and apparently a lot of other customers, so why piss us off?
We don't need thinner computers, we need better computers for the price.
I wish Ivy would take a hike already, and he can take Cook with him

 

[Avenged110]

It does. The reason there is no new iMac is because there is nothing to update, there is no point in them doing anything with it until the appropriate Kabylake chip is available.

Fair point. And while I agree, why do all of the rumors mention the iMac getting a new GPU, never implying that it would also be getting Kaby Lake? The other Macs aren't waiting, why should we assume the iMac, specifically, will?

 

[Accipiter]

He never said x86 dual processor never happened. Read his post again.

I did read it. Several times in fact, to make sure I was reading what I thought I was reading. "Only identical or similar Xeons can be parallel." False.

 

[0388631]

I did read it. Several times in fact, to make sure I was reading what I thought I was reading. "Only identical or similar Xeons can be parallel." False.

No. Excusing his poor grammar, he said you can't have two x86 processors UNLESS they are the same processor or very carefully picked on XEON processors. You don't have room to play with when dealing with x86, you do when you want to mix and match Xeons. There's a short list that both processors have to adhere to, to work together without giving problems.

 

[lowkey]

Apple would have it's own roadmap since they have ARM licence. Everything would be happening in-house. And the transition would be very smooth probably. Most of iOS code is taken from Mac OS and runs just fine on ARM. There is no big problem here.

At work we use macs on Windows for Revit. Would that work? I think it would likely be a big problem. Cubase?

 

[0388631]

At work we use macs on Windows for Revit. Would that work? I think it would likely be a big problem. Cubase?

That's Autodesk, isn't it? I doubt they'd spend the time and money on ARM. Unless there's a program like Revit on ARM they can buy up.

 

[lowkey]

That's Autodesk, isn't it? I doubt they'd spend the time and money on ARM. Unless there's a program like Revit on ARM they can buy up.

Yeah Autodesk. They haven't even ported Revit to MacOS yet. AutoCad has been though

 

[Sedulous]

I dont get this magsafe obsession, its a pain in the arse for me. Who is tripping over these cables? Why dont people be careful or use common sense? Im sick of moving my mac on my lap and it falling off, having to baby it while I move my mac. Ill be glad to see it go!

Ok, I guess I will save your message so when you (or someone else) trip on the power cable, it yanks your new Mac onto the floor, and there is nothing but tears, mangled aluminum, shattered display, and trashed USB-C port... I can remind you to be grateful that that mild MagSafe annoyance is gone.

 

[seanhathaway]

Doesn't this "Hello Again" invitation seem to indicate bringing an updated Siri to the mac?

 

[Accipiter]

Doesn't this "Hello Again" invitation seem to indicate bringing an updated Siri to the mac?

No. "Hello" is a callback to the original Mac unveiling.

And "Hello again" was used for the original iMac.

It's a Mac announcement.

 

[Feenician]

Not I think it's entirely relevant (I don't think there will be ARM Macs for 2-3 years, if indeed ever) but the comments about "programming for ARM" are bothering me a bit.

Most programmers on OS X are not programming to an architecture, they're working atop libraries and frameworks the OS provides that abstract the details of hardware away from them. There would certainly be issues with some of the cruftier apps built atop custom frameworks (I'm looking at you, Adobe) but better citizens of the platform (Hello, Pixelmator) would need far less effort to port. If you look at testimonies from the time of the Intel switchover many developers were just changing target, hitting Compile, mopping up a few errors and away they went. Apple have gone to great lengths to keep these frameworks as architecture independent as possible (unlike Windows where Microsoft's ARM devices failed because they only ported the "modern" parts of Windows and just enough Win32 to get Office to run)

Anyway, not really relevant to these new Macs which will surely be x86 based.

 

[seanhathaway]

No. "Hello" is a callback to the original Mac unveiling.

And "Hello again" was used for the original iMac.

It's a Mac announcement.

But wasn't a big part of this first mac unveiling the computer speaking "Hello"? I think the invitation is hinting at new speech software on the mac.

 

[Accipiter]

But wasn't a big part of this first mac unveiling the computer speaking "Hello"? I think the invitation is hinting at new speech software on the mac.

Again... it has nothing to do with speech. It's a new Mac announcement. Period.

Sierra was the big Siri unveiling. This is different. This is hardware. Nothing to do with Siri.

 

[deany]

Sigh, again.. You read a lot into generic statements and make assumptions about things you cannot substantiate. This article doesn´t say anything about their design and innovation capability. Apple´s R&D investment increases by 35% year over year, but that still does not mean that their current building restricts them in innovating.
Please show me an article or any evidence that specifically states that.

Thanks for engaging in conversation but...

"Sigh, again"

with respect ever so sligtly patronising.

"You read a lot into generic statements and make assumptions about things you cannot substantiate"

I think the fact that apple is building the 'mothership' and relocating not a day to soon approx March 2017, in the first place substantiates my argument.

"Please show me an article or any evidence that specifically states that."

as very much like to, a non disclosure clause (not that I have one) would be enforced.

cheers
[doublepost=1477349307][/doublepost]

No. "Hello" is a callback to the original Mac unveiling.

And "Hello again" was used for the original iMac.

It's a Mac announcement.

maybe iMac Pro