Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

New Slim 12" MacBook and MacBook Air Updates Soon

Gudi said:
To offer the maximum amount of differentiation, with the least amount of variants. MacBook Air and Pro are vastly different, not only because one has Retina and the other has not. But also 13" and 15" rMBP are different, 35W vs. 45W TDP, Dual- vs. Quad-Core, iGPU vs. dGPU. What more could a 17" rMBP offer? Its only differentiator would be 2 more inches, which is not enough anymore to justify another device.
Because everything has to have a size and 17" isn't the sweet spot for the majority of users. Most people chose 13" and than there is 15" for those who want more.
No its without merit, because it doesn't have merit. To offer even more visibility than with a 15" rMBP is unimportant to Apple and most of its customers.
Because two different sizes offer choice and three different sizes create confusion.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree that to offer more visibility is unimportant to Apple and most of it's customers. That is my point: I'm disappointed that Apple is now (apparently) all about money, and not about producing excellent computing products. It's moving all-consumer, in a big way. Hence the removal of "Computer" from their name.

Just because you say that a 17" MBP is without merit does not make it so. At least in one case, you are wrong. It has merit to me, and every other customer that bought, still uses, and wants a 17" MBP.

All the other reasons you provide are valid, if you're Apple, or fall within their use cases. Their so-called "focus" is responsible for eliminating (at least for now) my use-case. I understand why they did it. I just don't like it, as I am left to look for non-existent alternatives. So Apple, in their quest for money, "focus" and the "sweet-spot", is actually eliminating customers from their portfolio.

I wonder what would happen to Ford if they stopped selling cars because their trucks are what sells more..

Only time will tell if this strategy will pay off in the long term, as they continue to "focus".
 
johngwheeler said:
Whilst I agree that using a bigger screen aids productivity & is generally gives better visibility for a given resolution, you have to consider the compromises that this involves. Another thread has already brought this up:

1) A bigger screen means a bigger, heavier computer - at least until some kind of foldable / flexible screen technology arrives.

2) Apple has to rightly consider whether their customers are prepared to make the screen size vs computer size/weight compromise.

They have clearly decided that the majority of customers are not prepared to make this compromise and that the effort of maintaining a product for the people that do want this is simply not worth it.

This clearly irritates some former 17" MBP users, but it's a commercial decision by Apple that is unlikely to change given their current ethos of "thin and light".

3) You need to ask yourself what the purpose and function of your computer is: Is it a desktop replacement, a general purpose laptop or a portable workstation?

i) If it's a desktop replacement, you can pretty easily and cheaply add an external screen, keyboard & mouse. Or simply get a desktop Mac (more cheaply). Yes, you lose the portability (although the Mini is easily transported), but you get a comfortable, powerful machine for less money than a laptop.

ii) If you want a general purpose laptop, that combines portability and power, then arguably 17" is just too large to carry around on a regular basis. At least this is what the vast majority of people think, and this aligns to Apple's product offerings.

iii) If you really need a portable workstation, and don't have external screens available, then you are unfortunately out of luck with Apple. Other PC manufacturers do still offer these machine both in screen sizes ranging 14-18", so this may be where you end up.

One more point, which I've made before on MacRumors, is that I am always surprised by people who prefer to use the internal laptop screen when they have other screens available. You get a much better posture, desktop size and generally improved usability by using one or more external monitors. I travel to lots of different offices with my work, and there is nearly always a monitor I can use. Your experience may vary, but once you connect to that external screen, the size of the laptop's own screen becomes irrelevant.
Click to expand...

Excellent post.

1) It was the case for the (nearly) decade that Apple poduced it. People still bought it.

2) I would agree with that if they were floundering, but with hundreds of billions in cash in the bank, why not let us make that decision and offer both use cases? Rhetorical question...I know why.

3) In case of the 17", it was all of the above. And the only computer Apple made that fell in all categories.

i) Defeats the purpose of having a portable. The term desktop replacement says it all.

ii) I carried every 17" Apple made for 10 years on a regular basis, to school, work, deployments overseas, airplanes, etc. I would rather have the weight than the smaller screen. I agree that this is not for everybody, or even most people.

iii) Which is why we mourn (or whine, depending on your position on Apple's decision to eliminate it).

I've been all over the world and never had (or needed) an external monitor to use. Hence the decision to go with a large-screened laptop.

But I get it. 17" MBP is gone.

I disagree with Apple's decision but will continue to use mine until it dies.

When it does, I guess I'll have to completely leave Apple's ecosystem, as I'll no longer be their customer. And I feel that is an unnecessary, crying shame.
 
Some Mathematics & other commentary

proline said:
Interesting. So I guess the issue is that you don't know what 'desktop replacement' means. The 17" had absolutely nothing the 15" rMBP that replaced it lacked, except 2" of screen. 2" of screen does not make a product a 'desktop replacement'. 'Desktop replacements' are typically made by Dell or HP, are 2" thick, noisy, have 3+ fans, screen 17" or larger, actual desktop CPUs and GPUs, etc. The 17" MBP had almost none of these and was not a 'desktop replacement'.
Click to expand...

some mathematics
11.6^2=134.6 sq. in.
13.3 =176.9
15.4 =237.2
17.7 =313.3

~12^2 ≈140-160 sq. in.

A seventeen'r is not just 2" bigger than a fifteen, its almost a whopping 30% bigger. If http://cdn.macrumors.com/vb/images/smilies/blackapple.gif were to say perhaps elimiate the speaker grilles, there'd probably be sufficient space for a full numeric keypad, an optional BluRay super drive on a built to order machine and some other goodies. The last 17 in MBP had specs that were not dramatically different from a brand-new fully spec'd 21 in iMac other that screen dimension and resolution and there is no good reason that the specs wouldn't have been bumped along to be at least commeasurate with the best 15 MBPr. The concept of a portable desktop machine, which I suspect was the way that many of the 17s are still used, is one that is not at all without merit.
 
Matt Leaf said:
My prediction - it will be a Retina Macbook Air. Unfortunately, it's pluses will also be its shortcomings. The screen will make it the premium base Macbook and also the most expensive. The battery life will be lower, ballpark 5 hours. Thunderbolt 2 as standard. I think this points to a 15", or potentially 14" Air, as they eventually phase out both 11 and 13" models. $1499 at base. 2k specc'd out. It'll be a coveted product. The iPhone 5s of Airs.
Click to expand...

Don't think they will discontinue the Retina MBPro13 inches. So the question is,the 13 inches Retina MacBook Pro,will stay dual?This will be just nonsense...as the Iphone5c 8GB..yes you're right....
 
Vctr said:
But ... have you considered that a 19" laptop would have a definite advantage over a 17" laptop? ... Oh wait, what about a 21" laptop over a 19" laptop?!?! OH WAIT !!!
Click to expand...

When my trusted 17" MBP dies and I need to shop for a replacement, I'll test a Panasonic Toughpad 4K 20" a or some of its descendants / similar alternatives. If it still backpack-carriable, then, I'll get it. Particularly if, in some way, OSx86 can be hacked on it.

Assuming Apple doesn't re-introduce the 17" or doesn't come out with a high-end, large-screen, 4K+ OS X tablet (just like the Toughpad) in the meantime.

I really don't want to leave OS X, but it seems Apple just doesn't want to cater for the needs of people wanting a large screen.
 
jger77 said:
Based on an entirely unscientific survey (what the kids on campus are rockin') I'd say its in fact the 13 in MBP classic, education priced $999 Canadian, the DVD player is probably a big selling point, there's still a lot of archived material at the library on optical media.
Click to expand...

The lack of the Quad core processor.
But if Air will go Retina stayn dual..maybe this time we will see a 13 inches quad retina plus thunderbolt 2.

----------
Yr Blues said:
there will be no distinction between the air and pro

just have a line of Macbooks of varying sizes, all of which have retina

drop the pro/air label

same with the ipad. every new ipad is going to be thinner and lighter, just drop the air name

go by year, like cars. 2014 12" MacBook … 2014 9.7" iPad, 2014 7.9" iPad (or 10" and 8" for simplicity)

it's classier and minimalistic
Click to expand...

To have a distinction 13 inches dual retina MacBook Pro must go Quad.
Its easy,but who knows what Apple is planning for.Maybe you're right,just a 15 inches Macbook pro and the rest just Air.
 
Macboy Pro said:
Much of the resale value of Macs in the past 4-5 years has been been the ability for people to buy them and put some more memory in them or a faster/bigger drive and then use them. Macbook Pros from 3 years ago came with 250GB or 320GB SLOW 5400RPM drives and 2GB RAM. If that was soldered, the resale value would be MUCH MUCH lower. 2GB is not usable and with a a very slow 5400RPM drive, it is even more unusable. It is not as simple as you put it. Apple knows it and by soldering and going proprietary with their flash, they are forcing their products to be obsolete so you must upgrade and the guy that would normally buy your old Macbook, will also buy a new one, not yours with 2GB RAM.

MANY people do upgrade and keep their older systems longer. You are incorrect. It is the folks that don't who fail to accept that.
Click to expand...

Your hypothesis about correlation of upgradabillity and resale value is false. Check out used mb air (nonupgradable) prices and compare them with comparable windows machine - you will see that resale valu of current macs is still high...

You say many people do upgrade, I say majority does not, notebook is just consumer electronics for majority, as tablets and phones are, accept it or live in your geek dream that majority does care if memory is user upgradable in 3 years after buying pc/notebook
 
majkom said:
Your hypothesis about correlation of upgradabillity and resale value is false. Check out used mb air (nonupgradable) prices and compare them with comparable windows machine - you will see that resale valu of current macs is still high...

You say many people do upgrade, I say majority does not, notebook is just consumer electronics for majority, as tablets and phones are, accept it or live in your geek dream that majority does care if memory is user upgradable in 3 years after buying pc/notebook
Click to expand...

I suspect that the capacity to run the current OS and more importantly the most recent version of MS Office for Mac are the main selling points on previously enjoyed Macs. The folks that by secondhand machines aren't looking for gaming rigs, and are fully aware that the machines they're buying are only good enough for now, and hopefully good enough until they finish their undergrads or whatever. When those buyers have more coin, they are likely to replace their used up mac with something a little more potent, but constant user repair and upgrade are not likely.
 
melendezest said:
I don't disagree that to offer more visibility is unimportant to Apple and most of it's customers. That is my point: I'm disappointed that Apple is now (apparently) all about money, and not about producing excellent computing products. It's moving all-consumer, in a big way. Hence the removal of "Computer" from their name.

Just because you say that a 17" MBP is without merit does not make it so. At least in one case, you are wrong. It has merit to me, and every other customer that bought, still uses, and wants a 17" MBP.

All the other reasons you provide are valid, if you're Apple, or fall within their use cases. Their so-called "focus" is responsible for eliminating (at least for now) my use-case. I understand why they did it. I just don't like it, as I am left to look for non-existent alternatives. So Apple, in their quest for money, "focus" and the "sweet-spot", is actually eliminating customers from their portfolio.

I wonder what would happen to Ford if they stopped selling cars because their trucks are what sells more..

Only time will tell if this strategy will pay off in the long term, as they continue to "focus".
Click to expand...

Your analogy to Ford no longer selling cars is not comparable to Apple no longer selling a 17" MPB.

A better analogy using Ford would be that Ford stopped making the Ford Ranger in 2011. It was a small truck that probably just wasn't making enough money. Enough people wanted other models such Ford's engineering skills needed to reserved for whey their customers wanted.

I may very well be in the same boat as you if Apple changes the MBA such that it uses an ARM processor instead of an Intel x86 processor. I would have to return to a Windows machine since BootCamp would no longer work with ARM. Yes, I'd mad too, but I'd just have to go back to living with a Windows ultra-book (even though I do everything possible in OSX).

I'd even prefer Apple to make a really advanced MBA that was fully loaded with large SSDs and RAM configurations. Unfortunately (for me) the MBA is now the entry model (while it originally was very unique) and, therefor, it must be inexpensive. I can't get exactly what I want.

You, too, must get over it.
 
Last edited:
Gudi said:
Not every idea is good, only because Steve had it. People don't care about good and better, they always want the best. What the best size is, depends on wether you value bigger screen higher than lower weight or vice versa. Either way you always only want the biggest or the lightest one. So with only two options you're guaranteed to be on one of the extreme ends of either the biggest or the lightest device in its class. So two options are preferable and help with making not a but the decision. 16:9 or 16:10? Air or Pro? Small or Big? Standard or Upgrade? Those are easy questions with clear alternatives.
Click to expand...

OK.

1) I did not infer that every idea Steve had is good. I posited that the idea he had on 3 choices was great, as it covered more use cases without going overboard. It worked for them all this time, why abandon it now?

2) I agree that it is easier to make a choice with just two choices. I agree that Apple is free to decide what is best for Apple. I agree that Apple is looking at the biggest market, and thus most potential for money.

The contention I have is that Apple seems to be going in the opposite direction, possibly to their detriment. Let me explain.

When Apple was on a downward slide (under Sculley), they offered too many products. Once Steve came back, he managed to (brilliantly) bring focus and turnaround by his 2 on 2 matrix: consumer and pro.

However, inside that matrix he went to implement a 3-tier config for most of their products. This brought them great success, as it did address what I believe to be the 3 types of Apple customers/users: low end/casual users, the mid-tier/enthusiast/power user, and the pro/hardcore fan. This sustained and led to Apple's growth even through the release of the iPod (shuffle, nano, iPod), and then the iPhone. They still offer 3-tiers (or 4) for those, based on use cases (limited to capacity, but still). Apple now was turned-around financially. Their strategy paid off and brought in customers.

Now, at the height of their success, Apple is still cutting back. Why? They have more than enough money. Why not expand their business? Hell, why not keep the formula that brought them great success in the first place?

I believe the overuse of this philosophy led to Android's success in the market. Apple left money on the table (and missed out on customers) by not expanding to other carriers. By not offering a smaller iPad, by not offering a larger iPhone, by letting their competitors offer features and products that they don't.

Yes, Apple is still successful. But I believe it would be even more so had they not kept their too-strict "focus" in use, as if they were a floundering company. They seem "doomed" to repeat their hubris mistake with Microsoft (ok, a bit of hyperbole).

But it's troubling (and baffling)to see Apple say "I don't need you, I got the masses and their money" to many of their long-time customers, particularly by eliminating products that serve as a backbone to what they depend on.

Their competition is catching up. And I don't think Apple realizes the danger of their (especially long-time) customers saying "Well, now I don't need you, I found an alternative." The halo effect that led people (into Apple's ecosystem)from the iPhone to the Mac can (and does) lead people away from Apple products especially by Apple's own actions/omissions.

It's hard to argue this when Apple is at its peak. But for some reason, it feels like 1984 all over again.

----------
iRun26.2 said:
Your analogy to Ford no longer selling cars is not comparable to Apple no longer selling a 17" MPB.

A better analogy using Ford would be that Ford stopped making the Ford Ranger in 2011. It was a small truck that probably just wasn't making enough money. Enough people wanted other models such Ford's engineering skills needed to reserved for whey their customers wanted.

I may very well be in the same boat as you if Apple changes the MBA such that it uses an ARM processor instead of an Intel x86 processor. I would have to return to a Windows machine since BootCamp would no longer work with ARM. Yes, I'd mad too, but I'd just have to go back to living with a Windows ultra-book (even though I do everything possible in OSX).

I'd even prefer Apple to make a really advanced MBA that was fully loaded with large SSDs and RAM configurations. Unfortunately (for me) the MBA is now the entry model (while it originally was very unique) and, therefor, it must be inexpensive. I can't get exactly what I want.

You, too, must get over it.
Click to expand...

I'll never be over it. But I will move on. I just love to argue about what I perceive to be unnecessary, bone-headed moves by my favorite company. :p

And BTW, the Ranger is still in production. :D
 
Commy1 said:
I mean with respect to the wearable technology that's already on the market. Even Razer has made a wearable before apple. In this case, I think they're slow.
Then again, now that I think about it. How good are these first gen wearables any way? I wouldn't consider buying one, by the time everyone else is ready for an update apple may have launched something amazing. Here's hoping
Click to expand...

Apple tends to take existing product lines and revolutionizes them: the computer was revolutionized by the Mac, the MP3 player was revolutionized by the iPod, the smartphone was revolutionized by the iPhone, the tablet was revolutionized by the iPad. All of those product lines had been tried by other companies but it took the genius and hard work at Apple to make the ideas truly useful and popular.

----------
panther quest said:
I mean something like the Acer Iconia only well implemented. Sure it's been done before but never well or with any true consistency of experience. Having a vertical touch screen on a notebook form factor tends to suck but having a context sensitive pressure sensitive screen on the horizontal plane could be great, theoretically.

Image
Click to expand...

Agreed. This is why I am not (yet) terribly excited about the idea.

----------
johngwheeler said:
Totally agree. My reason for singling out the 17" is that there appears to be certain user group that wants it back. I think the only differentiator between the 15" and 17" MBP was the screeen size; my opinion is that if you need a bigger screen, you should be using an external monitor (or two) anyway - the experience is just so much better. I always plug in my MBA to an external if possible.

It never ceases to amaze me the number of people I see in offices using laptops with two unused 20-24" monitors next to them. Chiropracters must love all the trade they get from sore necks and other postural problems caused by the poor ergonomics of laptops.
Click to expand...

LOL! So true about the ergonomics. One of the things about the new MacBook Pro Retina is the sharp edge in front of the keyboard. Forces me to keep my wrists in a decent posture.

Mind you, for all those who want the 17" screen, I don't blame them for wanting a bigger size, but clearly there weren't enough of them buying for Apple to consider it worth their while to make. Oh well.
 
i just read a report about apple merging the 13 inch air and pro into a new 12 retina laptop.. i thought they would do that with the 11&13 airs not the 13 pro !!
what do you guys think ?
 
egy195 said:
i just read a report about apple merging the 13 inch air and pro into a new 12 retina laptop.. i thought they would do that with the 11&13 airs not the 13 pro !!
what do you guys think ?
Click to expand...

Well, what are the major differences between a 12/13" rMBA... And the 13" rMBP?? Not many
 
Last edited:
Mattsasa said:
Well, what are the major differences between a 12/13" rMBA... And the 13" rMBP?? Not many
Click to expand...

i'm so confused right now, what will be the available laptops from apple after this ?
11inch non-retina air
new 12inch retina laptop
15inch pro retina ?
 
Today's update from the Weiphone.com poster seems particularly informative:

(Bing Translate) said:
3/24
Going to welfare for everyone, there is bad news
First welfare: http://www.weiphone.com/apple/macbook/2014-02-18/Apple_obtained_a_patent_Killer_keyless_MacBook_multi-touch_576388.shtml
This is a proprietary, 12 inch just like him. Data interface like the IPAD, so the interface is here. Keyboard looks like touch, not sticking out.
The bad news:
It seems Apple is not happy with the current design, pushed to the back. Estimated release date ... ... ...
Or is that sentence, burst early ... ... ... ...
Click to expand...
[Google Translate says "Apple seems to be satisfied with the current design , push again" for the third to last sentence, but from context the Bing one might be more accurate?]
 
egy195 said:
i'm so confused right now, what will be the available laptops from apple after this ?
11inch non-retina air
new 12inch retina laptop
15inch pro retina ?
Click to expand...

I have no idea, this is quite confusing. but If I had to guess, I think apple is aiming for a lineup like this:

12" rMBA - cheapest - most portable -most directed towards consumer
13" rMBP
15" rMBP - most expensive - least portable - most directed towards pros

or maybe they are merging the 13" rMBP with 12" MBA... so:

12" rMBA
15" rMBP

only 2 portables?

I don't know

----------
Renzatic said:
Access to more ram, faster processor, better integrated GPU. But with that said, it's basically the same hardware, bumped up a notch.
Click to expand...

right, and the better integrated GPU is apart of the CPU, so really its just the CPU that is different.

currently

13" MBA - $1099 - 128GB - 4GB - Haswell Ultrabook CPU
13" MBP - $1299 - 128GB - 4GB - slightly better Haswell Ultrabook CPU

I see how these lineups could be merged.


If we do get a 12" rMBA that is ulta-slim fanless, has retina display, etc.
I would be very skeptical about the battery life of this notebook, and I don't see apple releasing a new notebook with less than 7/8 hours of battery life
 
Mattsasa said:
I have no idea, this is quite confusing. but If I had to guess, I think apple is aiming for a lineup like this:

12" rMBA - cheapest - most portable -most directed towards consumer
13" rMBP
15" rMBP - most expensive - least portable - most directed towards pros

or maybe they are merging the 13" rMBP with 12" MBA... so:

12" rMBA
15" rMBP

only 2 portables?

I don't know

----------



right, and the better integrated GPU is apart of the CPU, so really its just the CPU that is different.

currently

13" MBA - $1099 - 128GB - 4GB - Haswell Ultrabook CPU
13" MBP - $1299 - 128GB - 4GB - slightly better Haswell Ultrabook CPU

I see how these lineups could be merged.


If we do get a 12" rMBA that is ulta-slim fanless, has retina display, etc.
I would be very skeptical about the battery life of this notebook, and I don't see apple releasing a new notebook with less than 7/8 hours of battery life
Click to expand...

i thought the same about merging the air models into one till today, but after that report what about the 11 air ? no clue whatsoever
 
gnomeisland said:
Sorry but I disagree there is LOTS of historical precedent and actually the Mac App store (and iPad app) store would make this transition much less painful than the last two processor switches Apple did. Apple ran parallel X86 development for YEARS with hardly any rumors until shortly before the change was announced. Regardless of whether this product, or any future product, will feature a desktop class ARM processor I'm willing to wager that Apple has a fully working OS X on ARM prototype. Given the specs of this laptop it seems VERY likely this will be the platform the introduce it on.

Without a doubt there will be a very good X86 emulator and a very careful migration platform. And, yes, I think it will be iOS compatible. Or do you think Apple has made of the UI changes (launch pad, etc.) to OS X since 10.6 because they're actually *better*?!
Click to expand...

Bibbler said:
So let me get this straight. You believe that not only will OS X be ported to ARM and run decently, but it will also be able to emulate an Intel processor at a workable speed.

I think you must have some secret knowledge of major breakthroughs in ARM processors in the past year.
Click to expand...

As much as I do not like the idea of ARM processors, and while it may yet be too early for a transition, it is very possible that Apple AND Microsoft could transition from Intel to ARM platforms together; however, I would not expect one to transition without the other. So long as MS supports Windows RT, there is the possibility for a platform change for Apple.


Shaun said:
Yes I agree but why does Apple need 2 lines of MB? Why do they need a MBA and MBP? It's just overlap. It's 2 products basically doing the same thing. It makes no sense. They may simply restructure their line up so we end up with a 12" MBA, 14" MBP and 16" MBP. That I could understand.
Click to expand...

Possible lineup?
12" screen in 11" footprint - MBA with IGP or Iris gfx
14" screen in 13" footprint - MBP with Iris or Iris Pro gfx
16" screen in 15" footprint - MBP with Iris Pro or dGPU

While I am enthusiastic about the power savings in the NVidia 8xxx series of dGPUs, I think Apple will undoubtedly reserve dGPUs for only the highest spec'd and priced MBP model.
 
Mattsasa said:
The current MacBook Airs actually do support 4k displays via thunderbolt
Click to expand...

The thunderbolt 1 cable on the Air does not support 4K. The newest Macbook Pro's have thunderbolt 2 which does support 4K.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back