Waiting for Skylake MBP thread

[shareef777]

Care to share the source where you read that? (I will be heartbroken if Apple come out with a touchscreen rMBP)

Why? Just don't touch the screen! Never understood why people get upset over features that they can simply not use. Others may find them useful (I don't though lol).

 

[j1104638]

Why? Just don't touch the screen! Never understood why people get upset over features that they can simply not use. Others may find them useful (I don't though lol).

Touchscreen in such thin conditions will likely lead to entirely different display design. Which may be optimal for the touchscreen but suboptimal for non-touchscreen. The same problem as with dGPU - rMBP with and without dGPU have the same TDP design, the one without dGPU being, strictly speaking, suboptimal (could be thinner or warmer).

 

[Wowereit]

It's quite funny, a lot of people assume that a glass display must be touch, because otherwise glass only has disadvantages.

Matte option would be nice, but it probably won't happen.

 

[knassar]

Why? Just don't touch the screen! Never understood why people get upset over features that they can simply not use. Others may find them useful (I don't though lol).

I agree with what you're saying - and that's definitely what I would do if the screen turned out to be touch-enabled.

That being said, designing around a traditional non-touch display is a very different engineering task to engineering everything around a touch screen. It adds expense, complexity, maintenance complications, and of course you have to optimise the product around a different "operating point", with a different power consumption, different parts, and so on.

I'd rather all that engineering money went into something else

 

[senthor]

Still the laptop monitor found in all of the laptops from Apple isn't very suited for non screen media due to lack of colour space. You will need a proper external monitor attached to it…

That's why I'm using a Dell screen at home.

For very large canvases I would prefer to use a desktop rather than a portable device like the cMB 13, because I would also need a display to proof the colours and a quad core processor to handle the big files. One third of the economy is still in print advertising, so I understand that it is a priority for you to keep your business focused on this segment.

I work at home mostly, but also at client's offices where sometimes hardware is offered, but mostly not. I do Colorproofing at home, where I have my 100% Adobe RGB screen. On the go, the built-in displays Apple uses are fine enough.
You still forget that there is other design work to do than advertising — I don't do advertising. My work ist mostly layouting books, brochures, and academic posters and leaflets.

Still I can't understand why you are still using a cMP 13 for heavy print work. I have tried using anything else than desktops or quad core MacBooks for InDesign, but as you say, the High Quality preview isn't very responsive with a lower end CPU.

Well, I want to replace my cMP, but I'm a student who is freelancing part-time — so I can't buy a new machine whenever I want, and that's why I'm waiting for a machine to last some time. I couldn't afford anything other then the entry-level cMBP in 2012. I prefer using one computer, as I hate keeping files in sync across devices, but apart from that, I can't afford a rMB AND a nMP/Retina iMac. And I don't want to go back to Windows anytime soon, and even if I wanted, comparable Windows laptops would be equally expensive as a rMBP.

 

[doitdada]

I know why this thread is called "Waiting for Skylake MBP", because most of you don't want to change a thing but the CPU. A bump in GHz and GPU acceleration isn't worth the cost of upgrading.

It adds expense, complexity, maintenance complications, and of course you have to optimise the product around a different "operating point", with a different power consumption, different parts, and so on.

You can also turn most of these cons into pros with the right engineering team and focus. I think of alot of gestures that I use on the trackpad that would be better to apply directly to the screen. Like rotating pictures, zooming in and simple clicks. I no longer have to navigate the mouse so much around before I click or use gestures. The way you use a mouse was invented during WW2, though made available for personal computers in 1973 by Xerox, then later "stolen" by Apple. The mouse is old, but gold. Still I am very open for movements that makes us more effective in manners like touch.

Regarding price and development costs, I would rather spend more money on something that makes the status quo old, than to invest my money into hardware that will more or less be dead on arrival.

I don't do advertising. My work is mostly layouting books, brochures, and academic posters and leaflets.

Don't stay, if it doesn't pay. I know many freelance graphic designers who ultimately became high school teachers. If you are serious about design, get into an agency or startup and learn to hustle.

 

[knassar]

I know why this thread is called "Waiting for Skylake MBP", because most of you don't want to change a thing but the CPU. A bump in GHz and GPU acceleration isn't worth the cost of upgrading.

For someone running a mid-2010 Core2Duo, that'll already be a significant leap forward ^_^ (and I'd be more than happy with a larger-scale redesign, just not one which includes a touch screen).

You can also turn most of these cons into pros with the right engineering team and focus. I think of alot of gestures that I use on the trackpad that would be better to apply directly to the screen. Like rotating pictures, zooming in and simple clicks. I no longer have to navigate the mouse so much around before I click or use gestures. The way you use a mouse was invented during WW2, though made available for personal computers in 1973 by Xerox, then later "stolen" by Apple. The mouse is old, but gold. Still I am very open for movements that make us be more effective in manners like touch.

Jobs and Ive have harped on for hours about how many man months they've spent testing touch-enabled prototypes, and how they never managed to make them work. This was the whole premise behind the iPad. "Lifting your hand up to a screen 2 feet away from you will be death to your shoulder and not a pleasant user experience. So we're putting the screen at the tips of your fingers". The idea that a touch-enabled PC is somehow new and innovative is fallacious. The idea has been done to death by the Windows PC industry. Everyone running Win10 on their machines is racing towards that status quo.

Regarding price and development costs, I would rather spend more money on something that makes the status quo old, than to invest my money into hardware that will more or less be dead on arrival.

Which brings me to this. I agree with your statement. Shedding the status quo and leaving it for dead is what Apple has been great at. I want them to do this. I just don't think the touch screen is the means to achieving that goal. (but maybe something more sophisticated on the trackpad could be awesome).

 

[shareef777]

I agree with what you're saying - and that's definitely what I would do if the screen turned out to be touch-enabled.

That being said, designing around a traditional non-touch display is a very different engineering task to engineering everything around a touch screen. It adds expense, complexity, maintenance complications, and of course you have to optimise the product around a different "operating point", with a different power consumption, different parts, and so on.

I'd rather all that engineering money went into something else

I'd imagine they have all that sorted out with the touch technology they have for the iPad Pro. As for price, well, I don't put it past Apple to mark up the price by just making it thinner and doing nothing else (heck, they could even cripple it too, a la rMB).

 

[knassar]

I'd imagine they have all that sorted out with the touch technology they have for the iPad Pro. As for price, well, I don't put it past Apple to mark up the price by just making it thinner and doing nothing else (heck, they could even cripple it too, a la rMB).

This is just a personal interpretation, and I can't really speak for Apple, but I think they experimented with this idea and it was more of a question of layout, rather than technology, that made a touch-enabled MBP/iMac a no-go.

I agree though, they wouldn't hesitate marking up a thinner rMBP. To give credit where it's due though, they know how to identify their target customers. With the rMB, it was basically the "I want to surf the web and look at my photos" demographic. Hopefully they have enough respect for the Pro customers not to cut the legs out from underneath the rMBP ^^

 

[shareef777]

This is just a personal interpretation, and I can't really speak for Apple, but I think they experimented with this idea and it was more of a question of layout, rather than technology, that made a touch-enabled MBP/iMac a no-go.

I agree though, they wouldn't hesitate marking up a thinner rMBP. To give credit where it's due though, they know how to identify their target customers. With the rMB, it was basically the "I want to surf the web and look at my photos" demographic. Hopefully they have enough respect for the Pro customers not to cut the legs out from underneath the rMBP ^^

Keeping my fingers crossed. So far so good. No complaints from me (from my original laptop, the 12" PowerBook G4), just discussing a bunch of hypotheticals.

 

[TechZeke]

maybe in one of the alternate universes where Apple and Dell/MS swapped places.
not in this one though. If they really wanted to go touchscreen they'd do it with the rMB.

On all the recent Windows machines I've used the touch screen simply makes up for the horrible trackpad. The exception being the Surface Book of course. (Microsoft put some serious R&D into their trackpads)

On my aunts 17" HP the trackpad was so **** that the touch screen was the only thing that made working in Excel usable.

Remember this:

https://www.macrumors.com/2015/11/16/tim-cook-no-converged-mac-ipad/

It basically tells us that for atleast this year, we won't see a touchscreen/tablet laptop mutation.
Who knows what Apple will do in the future. Cause usually with statements like this they end up doing the opposite after a few years hahaha

I see Apple making a Surface Book type device with a touch screen, but they would have it only compatible with to be used with the Apple Pencil, since that is really the only advantage touch would have on OSX.

 

[You are the One]

I don't let anyone (including myself) touch my screen.

 

[doitdada]

Jobs and Ive have harped on for hours about how many man months they've spent testing touch-enabled prototypes, and how they never managed to make them work. This was the whole premise behind the iPad. "Lifting your hand up to a screen 2 feet away from you will be death to your shoulder and not a pleasant user experience.

I think using your hand and screen as the primary method for navigating may be a struggle, but I would still like to have the opportunity to do so. For images, 3D models, scrolling through audio and video timelines. Resizing, fullscreening and minimising windows would also be a great use case. I'm not trying to hate it or trying hard to hold unto the past. I'm not talking about replacing it, but may it just be another way to interact, keeping both the new kids engaged and the old men on board.

I don't let anyone (including myself) touch my screen.

I have a similar feeling towards my zippo lighter.

 

[R3k]

Mods can we get permission to create a "Still Waiting for Skylake MBP" thread for preorder chitchat once it drops?

Or perhaps when it doesn't drop in March.

 

[knassar]

Or perhaps when it doesn't drop in March.

cold blooded, man.

 

[doitdada]

I guess the dGPU is getting dropped from the next MacBook Pro 15".

Discrete GPU
"According to Jon Peddie Research, Intel already owns 75% of the overall GPU market. It’s now entering the discrete GPU market, which is dominated by Nvidia (NVDA) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD). At CES (Consumer Electronics Show) 2016, Intel stated that it’s developing a gaming NUC (Next Unit of Computing) under the code name Skull Canyon. The NUC would be powered with quad-core sixth-generation Skylake Core i7 and Iris Pro 580 iGPU (integrated graphics processing unit).

Like all other Intel products, Skull Canyon could steal the market from AMD’s Project Quantum, which integrates Intel Core i7 and the Radeon R9 Fury X2 video card into an NUC-style design processor.

This is yet another integration project that removes the need to buy GPUs separately. Even if Intel charges a higher price for iGPU integrated Core i7 products, they would prove to be less expensive for PC OEMs (other equipment manufacturers) compared to buying GPUs separately."

Source
http://marketrealist.com/2016/02/intel-taps-every-opportunity-grow-pc-space/

More on AMD Project Quantum
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2973...y-and-powerful-project-quantum-dissected.html

 

[WRONG]

I'm still hopeful and curious about Polaris.

 

[Dydegu]

I made a little history of the rMBP. Sorry for the low-res; it's from Excel. Let me know if I got anything wrong. If either model is delayed until WWDC, those "days until last update" are pretty damn high. Even a double release in March would mean record delays between releases.

 

[doitdada]

Even a double release in March would mean record delays between releases.

The jump in performance hasn't been significant since 2012. Ivy Bridge is still strong with 11718 in GeekBench 3 versus the Haswell from the mid 2015 launch with 13964 (both baseline models). Thats around 20% gain, still not great considering it's close to four years since the launch of 2012 retina model. I guess thats why they no longer can rely on performance to sell computers, but features and form factor. In 2014 they added more RAM as standard, the next year they introduced force touch. Nothing is really geared towards computational power except for some gain from the new iGPU, Iris 6100, in the new Broadwell 13" Pro launched early 2015.

Why gimp performance by increasing resolution?

Because 4K is a great reason for people to switch. If your TV already has it, why can't your computer have it?

 

[mjs402]

I made a little history of the rMBP. Sorry for the low-res; it's from Excel. Let me know if I got anything wrong. If either model is delayed until WWDC, those "days until last update" are pretty damn high. Even a double release in March would mean record delays between releases.

I'm not so sure about a "4k display". I would wager that if they were going to release this in June, it may have an OLED display but at the same resolution. Why gimp performance by increasing resolution?

 

[sim888]

I made a little history of the rMBP...

Nice one Dydegu...

22/10/2013 - Haswell+IrisPro 5100 - $1999
16/02/2016 - Haswell+IrisPro 5100 - $1999

I know you added some 'features' and bumped SSD/RAM etc, but damn, that's embarrassing APPL!

 

[volcomvenom]

The jump in performance hasn't been significant since 2012. Ivy Bridge is still strong with 11718 in GeekBench 3 versus the Haswell from the mid 2015 launch with 13964 (both baseline models). Thats around 20% gain, still not great considering it's close to four years since the launch of 2012 retina model. I guess thats why they no longer can rely on performance to sell computers, but features and form factor. In 2014 they added more RAM as standard, the next year they introduced force touch. Nothing is really geared towards computational power except for some gain from the new iGPU, Iris 6100, in the new Broadwell 13" Pro launched early 2015.



Because 4K is a great reason for people to switch. If your TV already has it, why can't your computer have it?

I am really hoping for option 1 13" but with quad core and dgpu.

 

[jsnuff1]

Because 4K is a great reason for people to switch. If your TV already has it, why can't your computer have it?

Comparing a 50" TV screen to a 15" computer screen is a moot point. A TV has exponentially larger screen size which a shift from 2->4k is a significant jump in sharpness for that kind of screen size. And other than consoles, TVs don't need powerful graphics cards to drive those pixels since they are rendering video most of the time.

Sitting 2-3 feet away from a 15" monitor will have very little perceivable sharpness increase going from a MBPr screen to a 4k screen. And the MBP needs powerful graphics to render all the content most people use them for, so you'll end up with a MBP that is half as powerful graphics wise for an imperceivable gain in resolution.

Thats definitely not worth it for any real professionals using their system at 100% of its potential. I guess bragging to your starbucks buddy next to you while browsing in safari that you have a 4k MBPr will be worth it...

 

[shareef777]

Comparing a 50" TV screen to a 15" computer screen is a moot point. A TV has exponentially larger screen size which a shift from 2->4k is a significant jump in sharpness for that kind of screen size. And other than consoles, TVs don't need powerful graphics cards to drive those pixels since they are rendering video most of the time.

Sitting 2-3 feet away from a 15" monitor will have very little perceivable sharpness increase going from a MBPr screen to a 4k screen. And the MBP needs powerful graphics to render all the content most people use them for, so you'll end up with a MBP that is half as powerful graphics wise for an imperceivable gain in resolution.

Thats definitely not worth it for any real professionals using their system at 100% of its potential. I guess bragging to your starbucks buddy next to you while browsing in safari that you have a 4k MBPr will be worth it...

Not to mention it flys in the face of Apple's own marketing. It's called RETINA display for a reason. The pixels are imperceivable to the eye, so going even denser gains you nothing.

 

[volcomvenom]

They should downgrade to 1080P screens and for the 5Se half of 720p.... said no one ever.