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

Waiting for the 2019 MBP [Merged]

afir93 said:
Though, since you opened that bottle, I'm not sure if I'd call it the same situation, for a number of reasons. For one, if Apple were to use the same pixel density that they have on the current 2018 MBs/MBPs for a 17" one (namely, 220dpi), then we would likely still end up below 4K, presumably at around 2000 pixels vertically (by the way, wouldn't 4K be 2160p, not 3840p like you say, as this number derives from the vertical, not horizontal amount of pixels?). So it would be closer to 4K than we are now, but still not quite there. One could make an argument that Apple could just depart from their current pixel density on a hypothetical 17" model either way, but then again, if that were to happen then we'd also get a resolution bump in the 13" and 15" models aswell, likely pushing (at least) the 15" model up to or above the 4K barrier and making that argument irrelevant either way.
Click to expand...
If Apple releases a Retina version of the old high-res 15", that would be 3360x2100, the resolution they should have standardized by now on the 15" MacBook Pro (hopefully it'll happen next year). Still not enough to display 4K video 1:1 though, especially when taking the horizontal resolution into consideration.

The old 17" MacBook Pro was 1920x1200 at a comparable pixel density to the high-res 15". The Retina version would be 3840x2400, which is enough to display 4K video 1:1.

You're right, I meant 4K = 2160p (vertical resolution), or 1080p x 2. My mistake.
Secondly, most people would find the jump from 1800p to 2160p not nearly as large as the jump from 900p to 1080p – our current "Retina" screens are already above the threshold where the average human eye can distinguish between individual pixels at a normal screen distance, which is not true for the jump from 900p to 1080p.
Click to expand...
The Retina display is not yet to the point that a bump in resolution isn't noticeable, at least for those with better eyesight. The difference is less for compressed video, but no doubt UI elements look less crisp to me after setting my MacBook Pro to the 3360x2100 software resolution, while the panel's physical resolution remains 2880x1800.
And thirdly, I'd hardly call 4K the (one and only) standard for video content – it's one standard, alongside 1080p, 1440p and so on. There is still plenty of video content that is only available in sub-4K resolutions, for a variety of reasons. Many streaming services like Netflix have 1080p as a standard option for subscribers (with a premium-tier with 4K content above that, and even then, a large part of their library just isn't available in that resolution), a large portion of videos uploaded to YouTube and other video sites are still "only" 1080p or 1440p. And so on and on. For a great deal of people, the 4K content that they watch makes only a small fraction of the video content they consume in total.
Click to expand...
The same was true with 1080p back in 2008, the year Apple made 1920x1200 standard on the 17" MacBook Pro. In fact, most of the content on sites like YouTube was still 480p or below.
 
cool11 said:
It seems that rumors about ARM cpu on macs, are true!
Not for 2019 models, but for sure for next future models, like 2020-1.
Just read here
https://appleinsider.com/articles/1...0-or-2021-apple-car-in-2023-says-ming-chi-kuo

My question is:
Will an arm based mac, be compatible in some way, with running windows somehow on the machine?

I confess that my transition in mac world was back in 2006, when Jobs leaved motorola cpus for intel.
I knew that in any case, I can have windows at worst case scenario.
And I guess I am not the only one having such thoughts....

No problem to try ARM, but I would like some estimations/predictions if virtualization like parallels, would allow me to run windows as well, to fully cover all my needs for every case, just on a single mac machine.
Unfortunately, in articles' comments, I read that such a movement, will cut virtualization, and this is really bad news.... :(
Click to expand...

He also said that ARM MacBooks might come in 1-2 years, back in 2015...

http://www.iphonehacks.com/2015/01/kgi-report-arm-macs-ios-processor-shuffle.html

Don’t take too much from that. I’m sure Apple would like to do it, but the challenge of compatibility is huge, so if it didn’t happen for another 5 years, it wouldn’t be unexpected.

Not saying it can’t or won’t happen, but just remember this guy isn’t always correct.
 
redheeler said:
The old 17" MacBook Pro was 1920x1200 at a comparable pixel density to the high-res 15". The Retina version would be 3840x2400, which is enough to display 4K video 1:1.
Click to expand...
Yeah but again, only if Apple decides to go with a clean x2 scaling (in which case they would likely do it for all Macs – though it's a good point that the 15" ones still wouldn't be quite at 4K resolution even with such a bump). On a hypothetical 17" model with the current below-x2 non-integer scaling, we still wouldn't have a 4K resolution.

redheeler said:
The Retina display is not yet to the point that a bump in resolution isn't noticeable, at least for those with better eyesight. The difference is less for compressed video, but no doubt UI elements look less crisp to me after setting my MacBook Pro to the 3360x2100 software resolution, while the panel's physical resolution remains 2880x1800.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree, but that argument has little to do with the inclusion of a 17" model and more with getting a resolution bump in general. If you find the UI elements on a current 12"/13"/15" MB(P) to be blurry or not sharp enough, then the same would apply to a hypothetical 17" MacBook Pro with the same scaling as our current MBPs. Knowing Apple, they'd either increase it in all models or in none (the Air aside). (And I really hope that we do finally get that resolution bump with the ~2020 redesign...)
redheeler said:
The same was true with 1080p back in 2008, the year Apple made 1920x1200 standard on the 17" MacBook Pro. In fact, most of the content on sites like YouTube was still 480p or below.
Click to expand...
For 2008, yeah, that's probably true. But in 2012 when they didn't include the 17" model in their MacBook Pro redesign, 1080p video was already fairly widespread, from what I remember. Either way, my point still stands – with higher-resolution screens and all the other stuff that was previously exclusive to the 17" model coming to the lower-end models, Apple likely didn't see enough of a target audience for the 17" model, and this likely hasn't changed up to now even though the video standards have gone up, or else we'd probably have seen a new 17" model already.
 
StellarVixen said:
Because it will be 3 years from last redesign in 2016. Mac got redesign in 2013 then 2016.
Click to expand...
MacBook Pros thus far have gotten their bigger redesigns on a 4-year-basis though. 2008, 2012, 2016. Continuing that pattern, the next big redesign would be due in 2020, which is why many people seem to speak about a 2020 redesign. Sure, there's the possibility of it coming sooner, but unless we get some substantial rumors about it over the next couple of months, I don't think it's very likely.
 
afir93 said:
MacBook Pros thus far have gotten their bigger redesigns on a 4-year-basis though. 2008, 2012, 2016. Continuing that pattern, the next big redesign would be due in 2020, which is why many people seem to speak about a 2020 redesign. Sure, there's the possibility of it coming sooner, but unless we get some substantial rumors about it over the next couple of months, I don't think it's very likely.
Click to expand...

Oh, sorry, yes actually you are right, redesign was in 2012, not 2013.

If Apple sticks to this interval, than we are not going to see nothing more than internals refresh.

MBP with less bezels is probably coming in 2020.
 
afir93 said:
I don't disagree, but that argument has little to do with the inclusion of a 17" model and more with getting a resolution bump in general. If you find the UI elements on a current 12"/13"/15" MB(P) to be blurry or not sharp enough, then the same would apply to a hypothetical 17" MacBook Pro with the same scaling as our current MBPs. Knowing Apple, they'd either increase it in all models or in none (the Air aside). (And I really hope that we do finally get that resolution bump with the ~2020 redesign...)
Click to expand...
I'd like to see a decent 3360x2100 resolution for the 15" more than I'd like to see a 17". I won't be upgrading from my 15" 2012 Retina until that happens, so the sooner the better.
For 2008, yeah, that's probably true. But in 2012 when they didn't include the 17" model in their MacBook Pro redesign, 1080p video was already fairly widespread, from what I remember. Either way, my point still stands – with higher-resolution screens and all the other stuff that was previously exclusive to the 17" model coming to the lower-end models, Apple likely didn't see enough of a target audience for the 17" model, and this likely hasn't changed up to now even though the video standards have gone up, or else we'd probably have seen a new 17" model already.
Click to expand...
The 17" MacBook Pro was a niche product in 2008, yet one with enough customers that keeping it around was still justifiable. It was discontinued in 2012 because the technology for a larger Retina display wasn't cost-effective at the time, but that hasn't been true for the last few years.

My point now is that a 17" MacBook Pro would satisfy the same position in Apple's MacBook lineup, and much the same niche customer base, that it did in 2008. So why don't we have one?

The answer likely has to do with Apple having raised the prices of the smaller-screen 15" Retina to be comparable with the old 17", and kept them there even after the value-for-money of the Retina display no longer justified it. Since the 15" screen size appeals to more customers, simply charge more for them...
StellarVixen said:
Because it will be 3 years from last redesign in 2016. Mac got redesign in 2013 then 2016.
Click to expand...
The Retina redesign happened in 2012, not 2013. 2012-2016, or four years of the same design.
 
Last edited:
I think the next redesign will happen when the thermal conditions will change. At the moment the limitations with such a thin design are lying in the thermal design. If Apple is able to change from the obsolete 14nm Intel CPU to a recent 7nm (or lower) CPU like the ARM based Apple A Chips the thermal design power (TDP) will be much lower which will allow a totally different thermal design and a different MBP...
 
I have a feeling they are going to update sooner than people think. I think Apple is well aware that these new models were a bit of a mess and that people overall are more satisfied with the original rMBP design. Give me a better screen and keyboard and I'm in. SD card slot would be nice but I've pretty much given up hope on useful ports coming back. Would be a welcome surprise. Other element they should really try to bring back is magsafe. Not sure why they couldn't what people mocked up years ago and have the magnetic release on the power brick instead of the laptop (so they can still use the standard USB-C laptop ports). I say this stuff but at this point I'm probably going to buy whatever the next update is, even if its the same design.
 
More incentive for Apple to ramp up the development of A-series based Mac sooner than later.
There is of course the physical limitation on how small the node size can get before causing in other issues such as current leakage, heat generated, cost and production reliability and even ARM processors will hit that wall at some point.
If this report is correct then most likely it will result in switching to new materials and fabrication processes in addition to silicon and/or a move away from x86 architecture though it will be a slow transition given the established software base unless Apple, Microsoft, Google and even Intel (which is already diversifying purchasing startups) surprises with a new CPU architecture while maintaining backward compatibility.



cfdlab said:
So what does this mean for the future of macs

https://hardware.slashdot.org/story...l-has-killed-off-the-10nm-process-report-says
Click to expand...
 
The loss of virtualization capability, is not something that can be easily ignored, for professional users, from a move to Arm cpus. I hope that apple will find a sufficient way to offer some kind of solution, for running windows on macs. It is essential.

Besides that, I am skeptical about the movement to Arm processors, by this way:
Apple will use Arm processors for laptops, and the rest of industry will use intel?
What about mac mini/mac pro? Will these series still use intel cpus?
Such a separation from the common path of the majority of laptop manufactures, seems to be a little bit scary I think.
It seems like an isolated and lonely pathway...
Some people will possibly talk about excellence or superiority of these cpus, but on the other hand, I am not completely sure how well apple could handle it, all alone.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I can't remember in all apple history, from the early days till today, any machine using non-standard / not commercially available cpus', at any time.
In the 70's, in 80's, in 90's, in 00's, this decade, motorola, intel, etc, were/are suppliers with established business in cpu industries.
I am not sure how strong apple could be in this area. And how good/hopeful such a movements will be, for laptop users.
 
Mr Screech said:
Just mentioning the 17inch...

I'd welcome it back with open hands.
Click to expand...

Only if it has a sensible port solution and cooling that works. If Apple want's to produce toy's for the masses so be it. At least give those of us who have serious need some options, so sick & tired of these crap underperforming products....

Q-6
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: ugru and cfdlab
  • Like
Reactions: Ma2k5
Mr Screech said:
Just mentioning the 17inch...

I'd welcome it back with open hands.
Click to expand...

I bought one this past Sunday. Late 2011, 2.5 Ghz, 1 TB HDD, 16 GB RAM, Discrete Graphics, new battery, great condition, $800. I am trying to decide between getting a 2 TB SSD or a 4 TB SSD for storage and also looking at a port hub for USB3. My 2008 17 inch MBP's screen died this past summer. I currently use it with an external monitor but would like the real thing. The display on the 2011 has an LED backlight and it looks fantastic. I prefer the keyboard on the 2008 models - nice travel, and sculpted instead of the chiclet but the performance of the 2011 with the upgraded processor should be quite a nice bump. My daily driver is a 2014 Retina 15 and my office gave me a 2015 Retina 13. The supply of the 2011 17 inches is dwindling - it is a great machine for upgrading because it is so easy to work on. There are older models for even less if you don't need a lot of CPU or RAM.

I had planned to shell out $4K for a 2018 RMBP 15 but I don't really need it for what I do.
[doublepost=1540301027][/doublepost]
Queen6 said:
Only if it has a sensible port solution and cooling that works. If Apple want's to produce toy's for the masses so be it. At least give those of us who have serious need some options, sick & tired of these crap underperforming products....
Q-6
Click to expand...

Four USB-C ports, including power, isn't enough. What would be so hard about doing four USB-C + four USB 3.0? There's enough for everyone out there. I think that you just need something bigger if you want decent cooling. My daughter just bought a gaming laptop and it's really nice - but it's also quite thick. Apple could market a gaming/pro laptop that's an inch thick (or more) and market it for audiences that need high CPU/Graphics performance. The choice of good gaming laptops out there is not great - they all have their issues, some big and some small.
 
pshufd said:
Four USB-C ports, including power, isn't enough. What would be so hard about doing four USB-C + four USB 3.0? There's enough for everyone out there. I think that you just need something bigger if you want decent cooling. My daughter just bought a gaming laptop and it's really nice - but it's also quite thick. Apple could market a gaming/pro laptop that's an inch thick (or more) and market it for audiences that need high CPU/Graphics performance. The choice of good gaming laptops out there is not great - they all have their issues, some big and some small.
Click to expand...

This...
Corona 300K Rays.JPG

1277CB.png

Already there, equally why is Apple seemingly incapable of producing a capable, performant notebook that actually makes sense in the real world. Same as many others, I've dumped Apple as it's computer line up is a joke at best in 2018...

Q-6
 
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