Waiting for the 2018 MBP

[simonmet]

I’m certain Apple won’t release a detachable Mac-iPad hybrid for the following reason: there’s simply no elegant way to implement the attachment mechanism or send video and power without significantly compromising the iPad and/or MacBook base’s design. Sure they could move the Lighting port to the side and make it Thunderbolt 3, but how it attaches remains problematic. Compromises to the aesthetic and/or structural integrity in laptop mode have to be made.

Apple have been right to keep the two as distinct form-factors, but that doesn’t mean unifications in software can’t be made.

 

[PeterJP]

Do they? Really? Where? I do not consider benchmarks complex enough.

Sure, benchmarks are just one thing. ARM is RISC, Intel is CISC, so in theory, Intels should get more done in the same time. But RISC chips are simpler and easier to optimise. Apples and oranges.

The litmus test will be to see native macOS applications recompiled for ARM. Then we'll be able to compare apples to apples. But results will be very different per application, for example compute vs memory intensive might give different results.

 

[meme1255]

Sure, benchmarks are just one thing. ARM is RISC, Intel is CISC, so in theory, Intels should get more done in the same time. But RISC chips are simpler and easier to optimise. Apples and oranges.

The litmus test will be to see native macOS applications recompiled for ARM. Then we'll be able to compare apples to apples. But results will be very different per application, for example compute vs memory intensive might give different results.

In practice, Intel is already essentially hybrid RISC/CISC and ARM is getting more complex instructions as well.
The issue with ARM64 is the SW. And it cannot be resolved with "ARM-Rossetta" as the ARM does not bring the amount of additional performance needed (yet?). You can recompile the apps, yes. However, if Apple moves to ARM without some Intel compatibility, they'll lose many developers who choose Macs these days precisely because they can develop for every possible system on the Mac.

 

[CodeJoy]

Sure, benchmarks are just one thing. ARM is RISC, Intel is CISC, so in theory, Intels should get more done in the same time. But RISC chips are simpler and easier to optimise. Apples and oranges.

While RISC chips may have had this property 30 years ago, today with pipelining, out-of-order execution and superscalar architectures, it's no longer quite as clear. In another thread on here, some chip designers answered what the benefit of RISC in 2018 would be. The short version of it was effectively that the instruction decoder was much simpler, and that saved something like 20% chip space. This would of course allow for either performance gains if that die space is put to good use, or perhaps power savings because of a smaller die.

Ultimately, neither instructions per clock, nor synthetic benchmarks, are really very reliable performance metrics. What matters is really just how fast it runs your specific workload for your specific use case.

 

[Mr. Dee]

Sounds good to me. The reason why my view was more exotic is because the recent interview about the mac pro keeps on mentioning the workflow. I can see a possible future where you work in an iOS app in the field, then continue in the mac version at home. That would make perfect sense for things like photography: simple processing in the field for quick previews for your customer or editor, then the grunt work on mac. With Apple cnntrolling both systems, if mac gets an official port to ARM, Apple could build one system that could do both.

The signs of unification are there for what they want to produce: APFS, T2 chip in iMac Pro, the retina MacBook itself, Touch Bar, the new multi-tasking improvements in iOS 11 for iPad, Swift development environment and Face ID in iPhone X.

I think the only thing thats possibly left for them to do is introduce a new kernel, maybe Linux based.

Seems as a gorgeous MB 12" successor. We want MacBook PROs, though... Don't we?

Like my arguments before, I think what ultimately makes a device professional, is what you do with it. But the typical MacBook Pro line will most likely remain Intel based for the next 5 to 10 years; as long as Intel can squeeze as much juice out of it. But for a more mainstream, easy to update product, the ARM MacBook will be what you see most users buy - executives, grandma, students, star bucks graphic designer, disc jockey's and even some developers who are using Swift to build apps. Heck, with Apple controlling vital internals, you might see multiple revisions each year.

By the time the sun starts setting on Intel, you will see these ARM chips start creeping into the Pro line; in fact, they could become co-processors for Intel processors at first just to pro long the life of that 'institution'.

Ultimately, the success of this iOS derivative will depend on how familiar it is. It still needs to behave like a laptop not to isolate a large group of users. But it must be significant enough for an iPad Pro user to say, I am tired of the compromises; this looks like the device I can work on and still get the benefits of those hundreds of thousands of apps and games. It must integrate and work well enough that users won't say this is a confusing mess!

Just like the premise goes, you could take Macintosh 128k user from 1984 and put them in front of a Mac running Mac OS X in 2001 and they feel right at home; a similar aim must be applied to the ARM MacBook. Also, Apple must go back to its basic tenets of having no fear if this device cannibalizes other product lines like the iPad, iPhone and traditional Mac. If they build it with intended limitations, then its gonna be just like the Home Pod.

 

[EugW]

I think the only thing thats possibly left for them to do is introduce a new kernel, maybe Linux based.

Huh? It wouldn't make any sense at all for Apple to create a new unified Linux-based kernel.

 

[CodeJoy]

I think the only thing thats possibly left for them to do is introduce a new kernel, maybe Linux based.

Why would they do that? They already have a unified Unix (-ish) kernel.

 

[spencer elliott]

Hey all, I am going to read as much of this thread as I can I promise, but until then can someone answer a quick question about the 2018 MBPs? From what Ive read so far its looking like an expected drop date of June 4th for the 2018s? Is that correct?

I am still using my Mid 2010 MBP and the kernal panic crashes from the graphics card are killing me. I cannot believe I have waited this long. It is time and I think I can hold out until the summer. I would be open to a current model if the sale prices are nice.

Ok I am off to read more of this thread. Any info that seems relevant would be appreciated!

 

[RandomDSdevel]

When Apple eventually does change some XNU microkernel and BSD subsystem code out for something newer, I doubt they'd go anywhere near using anything licensed under the GPLv3 as part of it. I think it would be a pleasant surprise if the company managed to make any such changes without requiring them to bump macOS to v11, though.

 

[EugW]

Hey all, I am going to read as much of this thread as I can I promise, but until then can someone answer a quick question about the 2018 MBPs? From what Ive read so far its looking like an expected drop date of June 4th for the 2018s? Is that correct?

I am still using my Mid 2010 MBP and the kernal panic crashes from the graphics card are killing me. I cannot believe I have waited this long. It is time and I think I can hold out until the summer. I would be open to a current model if the sale prices are nice.

Ok I am off to read more of this thread. Any info that seems relevant would be appreciated!

Yes. Most of us believe it will be a June 4 launch date.

 

[spencer elliott]

Yes. Most of us believe it will be a June 4 launch date.

TY!

 

[Mr. Dee]

Why would they do that? They already have a unified Unix (-ish) kernel.

Why make Swift available for Linux and Windows, why make iTunes available for Windows.

They could for performance benefits, access to vast library of open source software without the compile overhead. With Linux planning to get rid of some UNIX tools and implement their own like ifconfig, netstat and replace them with Linux tools like ss and ip suite, it could actually resonate with IT pro's and developers.

Also, Apple could harness the benefits of the Linux kernel development and not be seen out of place. I remember there was complaint a few years back about how some of the open source developer tools for Mac OS X was sorely outdated. Remember, there already Linux heavy shops like Facebook and Google. They are basically neighbors with Apple. A developer leaving Google or Facebook for Apple would find it attractive to easily translate his or her skills because the foundations are basically the same.

Remember, this is about renewal. Apple would want this to possibly be device they can get it mostly right from the start and have it be the basis of the platform for the next 20 years. You don't want to decide that the BSD kernel has outlived its usefulness 5 years into this new era or even 10 years.

 

[vseera]

Why make Swift available for Linux and Windows, why make iTunes available for Windows.

They could for performance benefits, access to vast library of open source software without the compile overhead. With Linux planning to get rid of some UNIX tools and implement their own like ifconfig, netstat and replace them with Linux tools like ss and ip suite, it could actually resonate with IT pro's and developers.

Also, Apple could harness the benefits of the Linux kernel development and not be seen out of place. I remember there was complaint a few years back about how some of the open source developer tools for Mac OS X was sorely outdated. Remember, there already Linux heavy shops like Facebook and Google. They are basically neighbors with Apple. A developer leaving Google or Facebook for Apple would find it attractive to easily translate his or her skills because the foundations are basically the same.

Remember, this is about renewal. Apple would want this to possibly be device they can get it mostly right from the start and have it be the basis of the platform for the next 20 years. You don't want to decide that the BSD kernel has outlived its usefulness 5 years into this new era or even 10 years.

I am curious as to why you would choose to put all this in a thread with the title “Waiting for the 2018 MBP”. You clearly have needs that can be fulfilled by a phone or a tablet.

You yearn and dream for a product which has less power than the current MacBook Pro.

Would you not better spend your time yearning and dreaming with like minded people in the iPhone, iPad and MacBook 12 forums?

I don’t understand this need to preach to the unconverted. A lot of us need the power and performance and the only reason we are IN THIS THREAD is to discuss and figure out when the new MBPs drop.

No offence, but I feel you’re trolling. I just can’t explain it any other way. There’s no logical reason to put all of this here.

 

[Trolle]

This thread has reached the pinnacle of pointless

 

[CodeJoy]

Why make Swift available for Linux and Windows, why make iTunes available for Windows.

They could for performance benefits, access to vast library of open source software without the compile overhead. With Linux planning to get rid of some UNIX tools and implement their own like ifconfig, netstat and replace them with Linux tools like ss and ip suite, it could actually resonate with IT pro's and developers.

Also, Apple could harness the benefits of the Linux kernel development and not be seen out of place. I remember there was complaint a few years back about how some of the open source developer tools for Mac OS X was sorely outdated. Remember, there already Linux heavy shops like Facebook and Google. They are basically neighbors with Apple. A developer leaving Google or Facebook for Apple would find it attractive to easily translate his or her skills because the foundations are basically the same.

Remember, this is about renewal. Apple would want this to possibly be device they can get it mostly right from the start and have it be the basis of the platform for the next 20 years. You don't want to decide that the BSD kernel has outlived its usefulness 5 years into this new era or even 10 years.

I actually have no idea at all what you're on about here. You're missing the mark so much both on tech and on business, that I wonder if you're trolling or you're just stoned? Whichever it is, I'm not going to spend time on it.

 

[benface]

I also have no idea what Mr. Dee is on about, but I don’t know much about “kernel” or “compile overhead”. This is not what this thread is about. Next!

 

[Eason85]

This thread has reached the pinnacle of pointless

It will have reached the pinnacle of pointless Dec 31, 2018.

 

[TheralSadurns]

Why make Swift available for Linux and Windows, why make iTunes available for Windows.

They could for performance benefits, access to vast library of open source software without the compile overhead. With Linux planning to get rid of some UNIX tools and implement their own like ifconfig, netstat and replace them with Linux tools like ss and ip suite, it could actually resonate with IT pro's and developers.

Also, Apple could harness the benefits of the Linux kernel development and not be seen out of place. I remember there was complaint a few years back about how some of the open source developer tools for Mac OS X was sorely outdated. Remember, there already Linux heavy shops like Facebook and Google. They are basically neighbors with Apple. A developer leaving Google or Facebook for Apple would find it attractive to easily translate his or her skills because the foundations are basically the same.

Remember, this is about renewal. Apple would want this to possibly be device they can get it mostly right from the start and have it be the basis of the platform for the next 20 years. You don't want to decide that the BSD kernel has outlived its usefulness 5 years into this new era or even 10 years.

I don't think they should get rid of the BSD subsystem. Honestly though, by now it just kept the basic elements and everything that is GOOD about a UNIX-base, but turned it into their completely own version of it. It's not like they are stuck with an outdated kernel like Microsoft was/is with their NT kernel that has long outlived its usefulness.

The funny thing is actually... my company (as in where I work, not which I own ) is almost Windows only. The IT department just frowns on Macs... I (and a few select people) are tolerated in the company because we'd be VERY vocal if we had to use PCs and our productivity would go down a LOT. And, and this is the most important aspect, we take care of the admin and maintenance stuff ourselves. This was not the funny thing though, yet.
Now because of changing market dynamics my company also has to dabble in Linux, learn about it and support it on a core business level because many of our customers want to get rid of Windows server and move to Linux servers... for many reasons. Now that the IT folks learn so much about Linux they slowly start realizing how powerful macOS actually is, by providing almost ALL necessary Linux tools out of the box. Like the terminal with a billion tools preinstalled. Paired with a powerful GUI, actual industry standard applications (aka MS Office and Adobe CC vs Open Office and... Gimp), and access to various repositories like brew.
If you want it to, it works in such similar ways that I was easily able to adapt their Linux installation routines and have our company's software run on my own machine. All the while macOS is strictly not supported on the server-side. There is no documentation (apart from my own) and it consists of MANY different parts that have to fit together. Best of all... I did NOT have to recompile ANYTHING. And I am not a developer... far from it.
[doublepost=1527409895][/doublepost]

This thread has reached the pinnacle of pointless

That is ACTUALLY true. Well... considering its original purpose.

If we consider it as being a form of entertainment... then well... its far from pointless

 

[The Reasonable One]

Sounds good to me. The reason why my view was more exotic is because the recent interview about the mac pro keeps on mentioning the workflow. I can see a possible future where you work in an iOS app in the field, then continue in the mac version at home. That would make perfect sense for things like photography: simple processing in the field for quick previews for your customer or editor, then the grunt work on mac. With Apple cnntrolling both systems, if mac gets an official port to ARM, Apple could build one system that could do both.

I see what you’re saying, but people who can use iOS in the field effectively is not most of us.

At least for a programmer iOS isn’t going to cut it. So if I’m forced to dock my device to get macOS then I’ll switch to windows the second after its unveiling.

Idk iOS is nice and all but I’ve never found using iOS effective for anything useful except the word docs I’ve written. Even PowerPoint is a real pain on iPad Pro. You may be talking about a much more sophisticated iOS but as it stands currently I don’t think it can replace macOS for mobile. If I have a choice and don’t need pencil support I bring my Mac instead of iPad Pro 12.9. It just has so much more usefulness even when I’m not at my workstation. Another thing is that many people use a laptop at work and at home. You’d have to buy extra base stations in order to use them at both locations or pack the base into your bag with you which means it could’ve just been integrated into he original design.

I’m just one of those people who thinks that anything worth using a device other than your phone for is almost always going to be better on macOS except simple apps that are extremely basic in terms of what you can do with them or pencil requiring apps. I just think macOS beats iOS in terms of productivity any day.

 

[bykaraanne]

In other news, I am really hoping they don’t just announce the MBPs on the 4th and make them available a month later.

Maybe a week later is fine, like last year.

Any chance it’ll be available day of? Does that mean it will be available June 5 in asian countries cus of the time difference? I’ve never actually waited for a launch before.

 

[The Reasonable One]

Any chance it’ll be available day of? Does that mean it will be available June 5 in asian countries cus of the time difference? I’ve never actually waited for a launch before.

I don’t remember apple ever doing that. They usually take preorders so it’ll probably be a week. They also seem to like giving people who didn’t watch WWDC enough time to get hyped before the product comes out so they can get word of mouth. Be prepared though, preorders started immediately after the event in 2016. So get your CMD-R muscles ready beforehand for the store page.

Granted my thoughts come with the caveat that I’m thinking of major product releases like redesigns. So take with grain of salt but apple doesn’t usually cause chaos during big releases afaik.
[doublepost=1527412578][/doublepost]Just because no one else is calling it, I think this is going to be the year of A series chips in MacBook Pro either as main processor or as the processor running the iOS apps.

I know this is unlikely but I’m calling it so I’m immortalized in history if it comes true as the forum god who sees the future .

I do genuinely think an A10 or A11 is included to handle low power tasks as was rumored before. Kind of as the bridge between the present and the Star project hybrid Mac. It would drastically improve battery life if they made most things run on the A series so the Intel doesn’t fire all cylinders checking email. My hope is that when they eventually include this this year or later it works basically like automatic graphics switching where one is the default but the other is used when required. Only difference is they both work in tandem and the slave processor just feeds it’s results to the control processor.


Do you think it’s better for the intel or A series to be the control processor. I don’t know enough about processor idle draw to know which way is better. Can someone with more knowledge on the subject shed some light?

Edit: corrected the word star to say A series in one spot

 

[lukeyyyyy]

What Gpu’s are expected in the 2018 model? I know there’s a lot of emphasis on egpu’s but for my need I’m hoping what comes in the box will be sufficient,

Some 4K video editing and occasional league of legends gaming at 1080p.

 

[The Reasonable One]

What Gpu’s are expected in the 2018 model? I know there’s a lot of emphasis on egpu’s but for my need I’m hoping what comes in the box will be sufficient,

Some 4K video editing and occasional league of legends gaming at 1080p.

Unfortunately people here are saying it will be a rebadge if the Radeon Pro 5xx series from and. The exact name is supposed to be changed from Radeon Pro 580 to Radeon Pro 580X. Basically from what I remember they said it is just driver optimization but the gpu is identical.

Hope this helps and someone corrects me if I’m wrong.

Edit: slight chance of vega but not likely
[doublepost=1527417157][/doublepost]Quick question for the full fledge non student programmers here:

Instead of having a master and slave processor dynamic would it be effective to the. The OS on a third processor which is essentially the master and all it does is basic system upkeep stuff while relegating anything app related to the intel or more powerful A series chip? I’m just curious if instead of needing one of those chips active to control task routing they’d be able to have a dedicated OS runner and task router with two main processors as the muscle.

I’m basically thinking of the big little approach from the A series chips where the Intel is the powerful one and the A series is the low power one but instead of just a scheduler chip handling things they give they chip the basic OS tasks in order for the power hungry stuff to lie dormant as much as possible.

I haven’t taken operating systems yet (for winter quarter next year) so I don’t know but I’m really hoping one of you knows why this would or wouldn’t work if we ignored the thermals for the 3 chips. I also probably got a term wrong so please correct me as necessary

 

[lukeyyyyy]

Unfortunately people here are saying it will be a rebadge if the Radeon Pro 5xx series from and. The exact name is supposed to be changed from Radeon Pro 580 to Radeon Pro 580X. Basically from what I remember they said it is just driver optimization but the gpu is identical.

Hope this helps and someone corrects me if I’m wrong.

Edit: slight chance of vega but not likely

Ahh what a shame, with that being said the 580 should be able to handle what I’m looking to throw it’s way at present, as that changes looks like an EGPU will be the way forward.

I’m currently using a 13 inch MBP late 2013 which rocks a 5100.

 

[TheralSadurns]

Ahh what a shame, with that being said the 580 should be able to handle what I’m looking to throw it’s way at present, as that changes looks like an EGPU will be the way forward.

I’m currently using a 13 inch MBP late 2013 which rocks a 5100.

Umm... wait... but this time around you wanna get a 15", right?
Because if you wish to STAY with 13"... there won't be a dedicated GPU (most most likely).