Waiting for the 2017 MBP (Kaby Lake / Cannonlake / Coffee Lake??)

[Cougarcat]

Serious question: why do people want 32GB RAM? What programs demands that much? Generally curious.

VMs

 

[richpjr]

I ordered one for my work laptop, only because my 5 year old MBA is wheezing along and I need a Mac for iOS development. But that doesn't mean I am the least impressed by this underwhelming and overpriced release.

 

[wallysb01]

Kaby Lake won't have Iris Pro parts, and it would be suicide to use Iris (650?) on the 15" retina.

Wait, why? High end Intel Graphics have been able to do plenty for most non-gaming needs for some time. I thought with Skylake we could already get 3 4K displays on Intel graphics, which would mean two external 4Ks and your laptop screen. And Kaby Lake is supposed to be a lot better, right?

The Polaris chip is small and low power, something that wasn't available to them in the past. It's probably dirt cheap (for them, at least) and they can claim to have a dGPU on all models, regardless Iris Pro painted them into a corner and they successfully wrestled their way out so there could be a kaby 15" in the first place. I don't think they'll ditch dGPU any time soon.

No way. Its not cheap. You're kidding yourself if you think that. It might be cheap to manufacture each additional part, but that's not the true cost to Apple or AMD. But the cost to them means just about jack squat when it comes to how much it costs to the consumer anyway.
[doublepost=1477846191][/doublepost]

Serious question: why do people want 32GB RAM? What programs demands that much? Generally curious.

I do bioinformatics and work a lot in python/R. Sometimes we are using really big data and handling large data frames already stresses out 16GB of RAM. Visualization software can be a memory hog too. Throw some Photoshop/Excel/Safari usage on top and yeah, it goes quickly.

I just don't really understand why we need to gimp the computer in such a way. RAM is cheap and it doesn't use that much battery unlike what's his face is talking about, but if you don't have enough, you're screwed. So what if I get an extra hour of battery life if I can't run the software I need....

If you want to browse Facebook for 12 hours without charging, get a damned iPad/MacBook and make the MacBook Pro for real ***** work!

Sorry, didn't mean to rant, but Apple is off the deep end on this one.

 

[HurryKayne]

No way is that going to happen as early in March; the earliest we'll see an update is WWDC or possible next October. Significant updates to a new design don't happen in a few months (exception: iPad3).

Me too,but i also fear Apple will neglect for the next 2-4 years as they did tiil now and will disappoint again.The Apple i knew appears to have disappeared.I need an Os based machine because is the system i'm working with but or the Air or the 15 with 450 will be my last Macbook if that Cook's team is gonna stay.I understand all but not at this price so i'm preparing to transition my work off to Apple and i didn't want to,but Cook...who cares right?

 

[Seed101]

Serious question: why do people want 32GB RAM? What programs demands that much? Generally curious.

HD and increasingly, 4K After Effects projects...why are you happy with 16gb?

Surely, even a moderate user can see consumption of ram going up over the next 3-5 years as software develops....it's not going to go down is it?

 

[wallysb01]

I think this is a dream,i fear Apple will neglect for the next 2-4 years as they did tiil now and will disappoint again.The Apple i know appears to have disappeared.I need an Os based machine because is the system i'm working with but or the Air or the 15 with 450 will be my last Macbook if that Cook's team is gonna stay.I understand all but not at this prices so i'm preparing to transition my work off to Apple and i didn't want to,but Cook...who cares right?

I don't know how much it means, since it feels like Apple was so different back then, but the retina MBP introduction does offer some hope. The June 2012 model was $2200, which later dropped to $2000 after a spec bump in Oct of 2013.

I wouldn't exactly be holding my breath for this to happen in under a year's time, but with Kaby Lake showing up in, what, 6 months? I would say there is a reasonable chance this happens by next Summer.

 

[WRONG]

So, this is where are we waiting now?
Let's break the WFSMBPT record and reach 1500 pages!
(joking)
(maybe)
So, more seriously, given the crazy choice of Apple not to use the Iris 580, and the availability of the Iris 650, we actually could see a Kaby Lake upgrade in the "near" future.
My god, I feel so confused now.

 

[HurryKayne]

I don't know how much it means, since it feels like Apple was so different back then, but the retina MBP introduction does offer some hope. The June 2012 model was $2200, which later dropped to $2000 after a spec bump in Oct of 2013.

I wouldn't exactly be holding my breath for this to happen in under a year's time, but with Kaby Lake showing up in, what, 6 months? I would say there is a reasonable chance this happens by next Summer.

I really hope so,i'm fighting against myself,i see the 16 GB or ram and Tb3 and the need for adapters and again more needed money for them,then i see the mag safe projects on Kickstarter,the usb-c to hdmi cables,the usb-c keys with the slot for mini sd card included and i say,ok i can handle,i don't know i have very mixed feelings and that touch strip band,band,whatever seems a bit insulting,why not to offer an entry 15 without that innovation,i suppose because no one would have bought the 2799 one..so i'm considerin to take this one and to swap later with a Kaby Lake,i don't know.

 

[Mohamad-pro]

Currently using a maxed out mid 2012 rMBP and I was more than happy to pay to upgrade to 32 GB ram, they didn't want my money, I feel underwhelmed since I waited a long time for this model to be released, and still thinking about cancelling my order.

 

[TheralSadurns]

Serious question: why do people want 32GB RAM? What programs demands that much? Generally curious.

I work for a b2b software company that develops some sort of database software. We go out to prospective customers and present our software in 4-8 hour workshops.

The software itself is based on Java running atop a wildly server with an SQL backend.
We also have another product that has similar requirements.
During the presentation we have to run one or multiple such servers.

All of that runs only on Windows (Windows VM in my case) and another one in a Linux VM. All of these eat RAM for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

Oh and... I ofc have to run the client software too.
[doublepost=1477862508][/doublepost]

I think the task manager provides more detailed view in a way that works well - just my opinion


Apple does not have the same full screen ability as Windows and they just added some of it, though I think Windows implementation is a better


I find the alt-f4 keys just as intuitative as OS X's I mean just consider paste without formatting and its key combination


Except when it doesn't. Seems like Apple (and others) don't adhere consistently with that philosophy


Windows has a search feature, and I find Spotlight to be so problematic on OS X, I use EasyFind which is way more flexible and powerful then Spotlight

I guess it is what people are used to.

I myself have used Windows 3.1 all the way to Win 10.
In 2005 I started using Macs.
I could never really get myself to use many shortcuts in Windows. Most of them are really arbitrary. Like Alt-F4 or F5 to reload.
Granted people can get used to them. But nothing inherently makes a logical connection between these shortcuts and the commands they perform.

On the Mac... yes a few are also really weird, granted. But basically all are done with the Command key. Not Control OR Alt OR Win.
The Command key is sometimes aided by a modifier key such as Alt or shift.
And often enough I have found myself in the situation where. I wanted to do something... and just TRIED the most logical command.
I.e.: "mhh I wanna reload something...mhh... let's try cmd+r" and it worked. "I wanna export something... let's try Cmd+e"... you get the drill.

Personal preference but I really really hate the task bar and window's window management. In my opinion you can hardly call it that.

Great invention there though: Window snapping
(I use better snap tool for that).

And generally under their new CEO I really like what Microsoft is doing lately. So don't get this as pure MS bashing or something.

 

[Krafty]

HD and increasingly, 4K After Effects projects...why are you happy with 16gb?

1. Because I don't do anything that intensive.

2. Didn't say it should be capped at 16GB, should be a 32GB option for all those who would want it. Was curious to see what programs/professions using thats type of RAM from the people who do use RAM intensive software but of course, gotta expect a hostile response here on MR.
[doublepost=1477864757][/doublepost]

VMs

Wait, why? High end Intel Graphics have been able to do plenty for most non-gaming needs for some time. I thought with Skylake we could already get 3 4K displays on Intel graphics, which would mean two external 4Ks and your laptop screen. And Kaby Lake is supposed to be a lot better, right?



No way. Its not cheap. You're kidding yourself if you think that. It might be cheap to manufacture each additional part, but that's not the true cost to Apple or AMD. But the cost to them means just about jack squat when it comes to how much it costs to the consumer anyway.
[doublepost=1477846191][/doublepost]

I do bioinformatics and work a lot in python/R. Sometimes we are using really big data and handling large data frames already stresses out 16GB of RAM. Visualization software can be a memory hog too. Throw some Photoshop/Excel/Safari usage on top and yeah, it goes quickly.

I just don't really understand why we need to gimp the computer in such a way. RAM is cheap and it doesn't use that much battery unlike what's his face is talking about, but if you don't have enough, you're screwed. So what if I get an extra hour of battery life if I can't run the software I need....

If you want to browse Facebook for 12 hours without charging, get a damned iPad/MacBook and make the MacBook Pro for real ***** work!

Sorry, didn't mean to rant, but Apple is off the deep end on this one.

I work for a b2b software company that develops some sort of database software. We go out to prospective customers and present our software in 4-8 hour workshops.

The software itself is based on Java running atop a wildly server with an SQL backend.
We also have another product that has similar requirements.
During the presentation we have to run one or multiple such servers.

All of that runs only on Windows (Windows VM in my case) and another one in a Linux VM. All of these eat RAM for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

Oh and... I ofc have to run the client software too.
[doublepost=1477862508][/doublepost]


I guess it is what people are used to.

I myself have used Windows 3.1 all the way to Win 10.
In 2005 I started using Macs.
I could never really get myself to use many shortcuts in Windows. Most of them are really arbitrary. Like Alt-F4 or F5 to reload.
Granted people can get used to them. But nothing inherently makes a logical connection between these shortcuts and the commands they perform.

On the Mac... yes a few are also really weird, granted. But basically all are done with the Command key. Not Control OR Alt OR Win.
The Command key is sometimes aided by a modifier key such as Alt or shift.
And often enough I have found myself in the situation where. I wanted to do something... and just TRIED the most logical command.
I.e.: "mhh I wanna reload something...mhh... let's try cmd+r" and it worked. "I wanna export something... let's try Cmd+e"... you get the drill.

Personal preference but I really really hate the task bar and window's window management. In my opinion you can hardly call it that.

Great invention there though: Window snapping
(I use better snap tool for that).

And generally under their new CEO I really like what Microsoft is doing lately. So don't get this as pure MS bashing or something.

Thanks for the responses. Just want knowledge on what other people do.

 

[Seed101]

.

1. Because I don't do anything that intensive.

2. Didn't say it should be capped at 16GB, should be a 32GB option for all those who would want it. Was curious to see what programs/professions using thats type of RAM from the people who do use RAM intensive software but of course, gotta expect a hostile response here on MR.

1. Then why use a MBP?

2. Fair enough...only 32gb isn't an option for those who want it.
Do you think you've received a hostile reception?

 

[Krafty]

1. Then why use a MBP?

2. Fair enough...only 32gb isn't an option for those who want it.
Do you think you've received a hostile reception?

1. Because I need 15" real estate. I didn't buy a 17" to brag.

2. Yes. Because I never stated I was happy with the 16GB cap. I just asked for a straight answer from people who do use more than 16GB RAM, thats all. Never did I justify that the MBP should only be 16GB. I understand its not an option, which is why I said - granted I wont ever use more than 16GB - that the option should be there regardless.

But its fine, my question has been answered.

 

[argentum47]

For my purposes (sciences), if a task actually requires more than 16 GB of RAM, it means that I don't want to be running it on such a weak computational machine as a rMBP. I have dedicated Linux and Windows machines for doing those heavyliftings which I access with my rMBP via SSH/remote.

But in 2016 where 16 GB of RAM is well below $100, having a 16 GB cap is a no-go. Apple's claim of impact on battery life is laughable. RAMs only consume like 2~3 W of power, well below of what display & CPU, etc consume. They have negligible effect on battery life whether you have 16 or 32. They're just trying to maximize margins on dated DDR3, and are lying through their teeth like politicians

 

[vipergts2207]

iMac, Mac Mini, Mac Pro owners would like to hear more about this "usual shorter update cycle" of which you speak. Remember that the 2014 and 2105 MBP updates were really minor, with lots of resulting complaints on these boards. Infrequent updates is the new normal (not saying > 500 days, though that was exceptional).

I was talking specifically about the MBP line's update history. I'm not saying KL MBP's in the middle of next year are a sure thing, just looking at certain signs that point to the possibility. As for the other Macs, maybe the iMac is under a redesign delay, like the MBP may have been? It could even be supply restrictions on the Touch Bar, as perhaps Apple wants to bring it to their standalone keyboard and ship it with new desktops. There really is no excuse for the Mac Pro and Mac Mini though. Wouldn't be surprised if both those lines are killed off. Comparing MBP and iMac update timeframes, the MBP's were far more consistent. All of the recent ones except for the Skylake release were 247-294 days apart, whereas the iMac has a range of 147-577 days. Much more sporadic for sure.

 

[Ampidire]

Serious question: why do people want 32GB RAM? What programs demands that much? Generally curious.

I'm in Information Security and run multiple VM's locally as well as accessing/from a server all day. The RAM helps me continue working off-site (which is often) and means I don't lose host-OS performance.

 

[Woochoo]

Wait, why? High end Intel Graphics have been able to do plenty for most non-gaming needs for some time. I thought with Skylake we could already get 3 4K displays on Intel graphics, which would mean two external 4Ks and your laptop screen. And Kaby Lake is supposed to be a lot better, right?

But you know, a GPU is not only for gaming, and if dedicated GPUs exist is because they still offer raw performance iGPUs can't. An iGPU is ok for driving some hi res displays, but nothing else, if you have to do some GPU intense works like 3D rendering, animation, video editing, transcoding, etc. your iGPU will fall short. Not to say those who want to develop for VR. Tell those people that they can't do it with their 2,5k € machine... And that's why probably Apple went for a Radeon for their flagship (yet it barely equals to a RX 460 which is not really impressive to be honest).

 

[vipergts2207]

https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-kaby-lake-7th-gen-core-processors-faq-update/

Just read this article on CNET and here's an excerpt.

"The clock has stopped. The chips are down. Intel's seventh-gen Core processors, codename Kaby Lake, are now official -- but they aren't as big an upgrade as you'd expect from Intel. Sure, they're a little bit faster and a little bit more power-efficient. But the best thing about Intel new CPUs might actually be this: the deals you'll find on PCs with last year's chips."

Ahahaha, now that's funny!

 

[rezwits]

https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-kaby-lake-7th-gen-core-processors-faq-update/

Just read this article on CNET and here's an excerpt.

"The clock has stopped. The chips are down. Intel's seventh-gen Core processors, codename Kaby Lake, are now official -- but they aren't as big an upgrade as you'd expect from Intel. Sure, they're a little bit faster and a little bit more power-efficient. But the best thing about Intel new CPUs might actually be this: the deals you'll find on PCs with last year's chips."

Ahahaha, now that's funny!

It's true tho, it's a great time to get a Skylake...

 

[SuprUsrStan]

https://www.cnet.com/news/intel-kaby-lake-7th-gen-core-processors-faq-update/

Just read this article on CNET and here's an excerpt.

"The clock has stopped. The chips are down. Intel's seventh-gen Core processors, codename Kaby Lake, are now official -- but they aren't as big an upgrade as you'd expect from Intel. Sure, they're a little bit faster and a little bit more power-efficient. But the best thing about Intel new CPUs might actually be this: the deals you'll find on PCs with last year's chips."

Ahahaha, now that's funny!

Basically, the only improvement Kaby Lake is going to bring is native 4K H265 decoding which is a moot point with the 15" macbook pro's since they all have dedicated graphics cards that would be doing the decoding anyway.

 

[Ampidire]

Why do almost all of these articles and reports and w/e ignore the fact that H-series 45w quad core Kaby Lake processors aren't even planned? There literally *isn't* a Kaby Lake chip that could go in (at least) the 15" MBP... It doesn't exist now and it isn't even planned to exist. Cannonlake (the architecture previously known as skymont (prince joke(meta))), isn't until the second half of 2017, or even later for H series chips...

Still, I'm pretty bummed Apple went with DDR3 and non 6x70 (Iris 580) chips this go. Still needing to buy a machine before the end of the year, so I'll probably end up with a maxed out 15" like I planned (but will wait for applications I use day-to-day to support the Touch Bar before I go all in (VMWare (maybe switch to Parallels?), Chrome, Official Office release builds, VLC, Slack, FireFox, Visual Studio Code, Remote Desktop, etc.).
[doublepost=1477889218][/doublepost]

Basically, the only improvement Kaby Lake is going to bring is native 4K H265 decoding which is a moot point with the 15" macbook pro's since they all have dedicated graphics cards that would be doing the decoding anyway.

As well as native USB 3.1 and Intel Optane SSD support (I see Apple entirely in love with this tech).

 

[vipergts2207]

Why do almost all of these articles and reports and w/e ignore the fact that H-series 45w quad core Kaby Lake processors aren't even planned? There literally *isn't* a Kaby Lake chip that could go in (at least) the 15" MBP... It doesn't exist now and it isn't even planned to exist. Cannonlake (the architecture previously known as skymont (prince joke(meta))), isn't until the second half of 2017, or even later for H series chips...

They're on Intel's roadmap, lower half in the H-series row, 45W Kaby Lake.

 

[SuprUsrStan]

Why do almost all of these articles and reports and w/e ignore the fact that H-series 45w quad core Kaby Lake processors aren't even planned? There literally *isn't* a Kaby Lake chip that could go in (at least) the 15" MBP... It doesn't exist now and it isn't even planned to exist. Cannonlake (the architecture previously known as skymont (prince joke(meta))), isn't until the second half of 2017, or even later for H series chips...

Still, I'm pretty bummed Apple went with DDR3 and non 6x70 (Iris 580) chips this go. Still needing to buy a machine before the end of the year, so I'll probably end up with a maxed out 15" like I planned (but will wait for applications I use day-to-day to support the Touch Bar before I go all in (VMWare (maybe switch to Parallels?), Chrome, Official Office release builds, VLC, Slack, FireFox, Visual Studio Code, Remote Desktop, etc.).
[doublepost=1477889218][/doublepost]

As well as native USB 3.1 and Intel Optane SSD support (I see Apple entirely in love with this tech).

The new mac's got USB 3.1 already so that's not new. Intel Optane SSD support could be interesting but quite honestly, at 3.1gb/s and 2.2gb/s read write speeds I don't see optane offering all that much more than what we are getting. Basically I'm saying Kaby Lake offers very little over current retina macbook pro's.

AMD isn't going to release another Polaris 11 level GPU in the next 12 months so the next update is going to have the same GPU. I really don't see its worth waiting for the Kaby Lake rMBP. Perhaps we might get a taptic touch bar or small hardware tweaks but again, it'll probably be a stealth update.

 

[EnesM]

Why do almost all of these articles and reports and w/e ignore the fact that H-series 45w quad core Kaby Lake processors aren't even planned?

Where on earth did you get that info?

 

[wheelhot]

Basically, the only improvement Kaby Lake is going to bring is native 4K H265 decoding which is a moot point with the 15" macbook pro's since they all have dedicated graphics cards that would be doing the decoding anyway.

Hmm, that's true for those getting the 15" Pros, but what about those who's looking for the 13" Pros, is it worth the wait Kaby Lake?