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

[Mr. Dee]

Its kinda hard seeing Apple releasing a Rev 2 update by June of 2017. I think they want the 2016 model to shine a little bit more, especially for those who bought one in recent times. The company does seem to understand the psychological effect of replacing something with something new within 8 months. October/November looks like a decent time frame not only for making the 2016 model reach recent vintage, but to set expectations for those anxious to upgrade to a new model.

What I find strange is the lack of updates for the Retina MacBook. I wonder if Apple is re-engineering it to feature an additional USB-C port? They did have that in mind but due to engineering problems, they couldn't get it ready. What I know for sure, my Early 2015 13 inch MBP makes stand a little taller.

The company is likely to have a major Mac event in October since new iMacs are in the works. Should put a lot of meat on a single event. Not to mention, new iPads.

Geez, if you have a big wallet, Apple is preparing a fall full of expenditures: iPhone, Macs, iPad.

 

[ugru]

What I find strange is the lack of updates for the Retina MacBook. I wonder if Apple is re-engineering it to feature an additional USB-C port? They did have that in mind but due to engineering problems, they couldn't get it ready.

No. If you believe that article, that was a problem for the rMBP, the terraced battery...

For the rMB it was a marketing decision, some of them wanted a second USB-C but in the end they settled for a new rose gold color, i think probably because they had already decided to release the non TB rMBP with 2 ports...

I hope the news about MacPro translates in a steering also for the rMBP, they made the decision to keep going for thickness and "designed themself" into the same "thermal corner"....

Make it thicker (as the 2015 one) with a bigger battery and better cooling and put inside more powerful CPUs and GPUs and more RAM. Oh, and bring back magsafe and SD card reader.

 

[cool11]

Make it thicker (as the 2015 one) with a bigger battery and better cooling and put inside more powerful CPUs and GPUs and more RAM. Oh, and bring back magsafe and SD card reader.

Do we really have such chances?

 

[c0ppo]

Do we really have such chances?

Nope. But everyone has a right to dream

 

[ugru]

Do we really have such chances?

I am a pessimist.

But Mac Pro u-turn and the new thicker iPad might be Apple beginning to admit their errors...one can only hope

 

[maflynn]

But Mac Pro u-turn and the new thicker iPad might be Apple beginning to admit their errors...one can only hope

They're admitting their errors because people are not blindly buying the products any longer. I don't get the new thicker iPad - what does that give you that the prior revision didn't? As for the Mac Pro, and potentially this year the iMac it is indeed good news.

 

[mixart]

They are not going backwards with a thicker Macbook Pro. That's for sure! I have a feeling we will see a desktop class 32GB ram option for Macbook Pro in October with a better battery, so battery life dont get worse.

 

[ugru]

They're admitting their errors because people are not blindly buying the products any longer. I don't get the new thicker iPad - what does that give you that the prior revision didn't?

A bigger battery (according to most of the reviews this is the best iPad up to now in this regard) and the camera is flush with the chassis. These 2 points alone are a huge improvement on the uslessly thin Air 2, IMHO...

 

[maflynn]

A bigger battery (according to most of the reviews this is the best iPad up to now in this regard) and the camera is flush with the chassis. These 2 points alone are a huge improvement on the uslessly thin Air 2, IMHO...

Ahh thanks.

I'm not really an iPad user so, while I'm aware of that apple updated, I was unaware of the details.

 

[Sanpete]

Make it thicker (as the 2015 one) with a bigger battery and better cooling and put inside more powerful CPUs and GPUs and more RAM.

But Mac Pro u-turn and the new thicker iPad might be Apple beginning to admit their errors...one can only hope

The longing by a dedicated and misinformed few for a bulkier MBP is peculiar. You explained well what Apple actually said, but then you perpetuated a persistent myth. There's no evidence of an error with the MBP in regard to thickness. As a matter of objective fact, the new MBP already has room for a larger battery, already gets better battery life than its predecessors (except for the 13" with touch bar), and has less trouble with heat than its predecessors.

What better processors were available when the MBP came out? The CPU was the top of the line at the time, and the dGPU (460) was faster than the laptop alternatives such as were in the Dell XPS. The Radeon Pros also have much better external monitor support than the alternatives.

The only way to get more RAM when the MBP came out, and it's still this way, was to use desktop RAM, which as Apple explained, would cut into battery life. That's one reason the XPS has worse battery life than the MBP despite having a larger battery.

I have a feeling we will see a desktop class 32GB ram option for Macbook Pro in October with a better battery, so battery life dont get worse.

Not sure that's technically feasible, as the most a larger battery can add for the 15" is 23 watt-hours. Using desktop RAM will eat between 5 and 84 additional watt-hours (estimated, depending on the load) over ten hours. Maybe they can keep the battery life the same for light use, but the non-desktop RAM version with the larger battery will do better.

They're admitting their errors because people are not blindly buying the products any longer.

I don't think there's any evidence that was any more common in 2013, or 2003, than now.

 

[You are the One]

I've been out of this since the disappointment with the latest MBP. Is there a prognosis for when Kaby Lake will start to show up in MBP's?

 

[maflynn]

I've been out of this since the disappointment with the latest MBP. Is there a prognosis for when Kaby Lake will start to show up in MBP's?

The fall

 

[ugru]

What better processors were available when the MBP came out? The CPU was the top of the line at the time, and the dGPU (460) was faster than the laptop alternatives such as were in the Dell XPS. The Radeon Pros also have much better external monitor support than the alternatives.

Quad core on the 13" and nVidia GPU for the 15".
The external monitor support is just an excuse for the need to choose a subpar CPU and GPU for the sake of the "thermal corner" they "design themself into" by continuously shrinking the container...

The longing by a dedicated and misinformed few for a bulkier MBP is peculiar. You explained well what Apple actually said, but then you perpetuated a persistent myth. There's no evidence of an error with the MBP in regard to thickness. As a matter of objective fact, the new MBP already has room for a larger battery, already gets better battery life than its predecessors (except for the 13" with touch bar), and has less trouble with heat than its predecessors.

If they used a bigger body they could have put inside better cooling (different heatpipes, bigger vents, bigger fans and so on) so they could have internals with way higher TDP and incidentally a bigger battery.

Precisely the same error Apple had to admit for the Mac Pro: They made it too small with inferior cooling for the needed TDP

It is not a myth, it is physics. Even if you continue babbling about it in every thread you answer it will not make it true. You just look like a Apple apologist...

 

[haydn!]

Prior to the last update, Apple were averaging about 9 months for the MacBook Pro cycle. If we're to believe there were some delays due to the battery redesign - which they ultimately scrapped in favour of square, smaller battery, an update back at the 9 months mark is not entirely unrealistic. It all depends I guess if Apple will want to have one Mac centric event for new MacBooks along side todays rumoured iMacs or if they'll release each new Mac separately 'when it's ready'.

 

[ugru]

In the meantime,

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/nvidia-titan-xp-gpu-mac-support/

What a coincidence...

And...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/imac-xeon-e3-64gb-ram-amd-late-october/

I bet they will make it thicker then the previous ones otherwise they will be throttling even more than the actual iMac...

 

[Sanpete]

Quad core on the 13" and nVidia GPU for the 15".
The external monitor support is just an excuse for the need to choose a subpar CPU and GPU for the sake of the "thermal corner" they "design themself into" by continuously shrinking the container...

If they used a bigger body they could have put inside better cooling (different heatpipes, bigger vents and so on) so they could have internals with way higher TDP and incidentally a bigger battery.

Precisely the same error Apple had to admit for the Mac Pro: They made it too small with inferior cooling for the needed TDP

It is not a myth, it is physics. Even if you continue babbling about it in every thread you answer it will not make it true. You just look like a Apple apologist...

You quote what I said but seem to ignore most of it.

Again, the CPUs were top of the line at the time. That's just a fact. Who is offering a quad core in a 13"? Any why? The point of the 13" is extra portability. Making it the size of a 15" to put a quad core processor in it rather defeats the purpose. You can get a 15" if you want a quad core.

Again, the 460 dGPU was faster than the standard nVidia competition at the time, faster than what was in the top-of-the-line XPS and other comparable competition. Another fact you ignore. It's obvious nonsense that the superior support of external monitors is an excuse for anything. It's plainly a superior capacity for the AMD GPUs. (Whether it matters to you isn't the standard for whether it matters.)

Again, despite your denial of plain facts, the new MBP has better heat management than its larger predecessors, along with superior graphics. Again, there is simply no evidence to support the myth that it's too thin for proper heat management. The plain facts show otherwise. Name calling and hand waving are no substitute for facts.

 

[ugru]

Who is offering a quad core in a 13"? Any why? The point of the 13" is extra portability. Making it the size of a 15" to put a quad core processor in it rather defeats the purpose. You can get a 15" if you want a quad core.

Why? because you said so?

Alienware, Razer, MSI are offering 13" (or small 14") quadcore laptops.

I know what you will say, but they are bigger and heavier. That is the point, there was no need, other than a dumb marketing decision, to keep shrinking the body and make the MBP so thin that they have to use inferior hardware (same error they made with the MacPro).

A 13" quad core makes a lot of sense sense and it will not cannibalize the 15". The lack of a dGPU will differenciate it from the 15".

If you want it thinner you can buy a rMB. If I want a more powerful laptop I have to look elsewere...

Again, the 460 dGPU was faster than the standard nVidia competition at the time, faster than what was in the top-of-the-line XPS and other comparable competition.

Define: "the standard nVidia competition at the time" because it is a pure nonsense.
nVidia 1060 and 1070 (even 1050 TI, that i am not sure if was out yet in november, btw is faster) are faster. With a wider body (hence better cooling) Apple could have used them.

Again, despite your denial of plain facts, the new MBP has better heat management than its larger predecessors, along with superior graphics. Again, there is simply no evidence to support the myth that it's too thin for proper heat management.

You keep entirely missing the reasons of my posts (probably because english is not my first language).
So i will try to explain it to you for the last time and in simple words....

No-one is telling that MBPs are not too thin for their actual internals, their form factor is good for their lackluster CPU and GPU. Apple chose inferior hardware because they decided to make ther laptop thin.

IMO They sould be thicker so that Apple could put inside better internals: better CPU better GPU more ram more battery.

Name calling and hand waving are no substitute for facts.

Precisely, so stop calling other people misinformed and/or ignorant if you keep missing the point of their posts...

 

[Sanpete]

Why? because you said so?

Alienware, Razer, MSI are offering 13" (or small 14") quadcore laptops.

I know what you will say, but they are bigger and heavier. That is the point, there was no need, other than a dumb marketing decision, to keep shrinking the body and make the MBP so thin that they have to use inferior hardware...

A 13" quad core makes a lot of sense sense and it will not cannibalize the 15". The lack of a dGPU will differenciate it from the 15".

If you want it thinner you can buy a rMB. If I want a more powerful laptop I have to look elsewere...



Define: "the standard nVidia competition at the time" because it is a pure nonsense.
nVidia 1060 and 1070 (even 1050 TI, that i am not sure if was out yet in november, btw is faster) are faster. With a wider body (hence better cooling) Apple could have used them.



You keep entirely missing the reasons of my posts (probably because english is not my first language).
So i will try to explain it to you for the last time and in simple words....

No-one is telling that MBPs are not too thin for their actual internals, their form factor is good for their lackluster CPU and GPU. Apple chose inferior hardware because they decided to make ther laptop thin.

IMO They sould be thicker so that Apple could put inside better internals: better CPU better GPU more ram more battery.



Precisely, so stop calling other perople misinformed and/or ignorant if you keep missing the point of their posts...

You're making my point at every turn. Yes, as a matter of plain fact, the Alienware, Razer and MSI are larger, close to or even bigger and heavier than a 15" MBP. How many people do you think really want a 13" MBP as big and heavy as a 15" MBP? It obviously makes more sense to just get a 15" that has both the larger screen and the quad core.

What comparable laptop was offering the 1060 or 1070 last October? Seriously, you're comparing apples and oranges, trying to argue the MBP should be a massive gaming laptop. Not even close to the market Apple is aiming at, never has been. This isn't about thinness, but about a different market. No Apple laptop has ever been like what you're asking for.

Those who think the MBP is too thin for its market are misinformed, there's no way around that.

 

[ugru]

How many people do you think really want a 13" MBP as big and heavy as a 15" MBP? It obviously makes more sense to just get a 15" that has both the larger screen and the quad core.

What comparable laptop was offering the 1060 or 1070 last October? Seriously, you're comparing apples and oranges, trying to argue the MBP should be a massive gaming laptop. Not even close to the market Apple is aiming at, never has been. This isn't about thinness, but about a different market. No Apple laptop has ever been like what you're asking for.

Those who think the MBP is too thin for its market are misinformed, there's no way around that.

Nonsense. I give up. You are even trying to convince us that in November there were not any laptop with Pascal GPU...

You do not get my point and never will because of your blind faith in Apple's decisions. Even more than apple themself that at least admitted their errors and are backpedaling on the MBP, iMac even Mac Mini...

 

[Sanpete]

Nonsense. I give up. You are even trying to convince us that in November there were not any laptop with Pascal GPU...

You do not get my point and never will because of your blind faith in Apple's decisions. Even more than apple themself that at least admitted their errors and are backpedaling on the MBP, iMac even Mac Mini...

Yes, you should have given up as soon as you saw what you said was contrary to plain facts. If there were comparable machines last year with those dGPUs, you would name them. Instead you misrepresent what I very clearly said and resort to more hand waving.

This has exactly nothing to do with faith in Apple. It has to do with facts vs myth.

 

[ugru]

This could be interesting, if true...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/mac-pro-may-not-ship-until-2019/

Citation from the original article...

"What made Apple do a 180? Well, after the announcement of the new MacBook Pro with Touch Bar, orders for refurbished "old" MacBook Pros supposedly went through the roof, and after the initial batch of reviews came out, they shot up even higher. This response to the new MacBook Pro with Touch Bar took Apple completely by surprise. Combined with the problems surrounding the LG UltraFine 5K display and the constant negativity from professional Apple users, the company decided to double down on professional users. As Apple announced, we'll be getting a new Mac Pro and an iMac Pro as a result. In addition, Apple is said to be exploring additional Retina MacBook Pro models without the Touch Bar, and other pro-oriented features, such as hooking an iPad Pro up to a Mac to use it as a Cintiq-like device."

 

[Sanpete]

This could be interesting, if true...

https://www.macrumors.com/2017/04/06/mac-pro-may-not-ship-until-2019/

Citation from the original article...

"What made Apple do a 180? Well, after the announcement of the new MacBook Pro with Touch Bar, orders for refurbished "old" MacBook Pros supposedly went through the roof, and after the initial batch of reviews came out, they shot up even higher. This response to the new MacBook Pro with Touch Bar took Apple completely by surprise. Combined with the problems surrounding the LG UltraFine 5K display and the constant negativity from professional Apple users, the company decided to double down on professional users. As Apple announced, we'll be getting a new Mac Pro and an iMac Pro as a result. In addition, Apple is said to be exploring additional Retina MacBook Pro models without the Touch Bar, and other pro-oriented features, such as hooking an iPad Pro up to a Mac to use it as a Cintiq-like device."

According to anonymous "people and sources who know their stuff." Not much to go on there.

 

[Eason85]

I really enjoyed the last two pages of "APPLE DIDN'T MAKE IT TOO THIN, BECAUSE IT FITS THE COMPONENTS". Keep it up, Toucan sam

 

[Sanpete]

I really enjoyed the last two pages of "APPLE DIDN'T MAKE IT TOO THIN, BECAUSE IT FITS THE COMPONENTS". Keep it up, Toucan sam

Glad you enjoyed reading something factual. Apple isn't now and never has been trying to make a gaming laptop like the behemoths some are comparing to.

 

[Eason85]

Glad you enjoyed reading something factual. Apple isn't now and never has been trying to make a gaming laptop like the behemoths some are comparing to.

Question: If the motherboard was physically jutting out of the case, would you say the case, at that point, would be too small?