What about this M#(X) roadmap? Speculation/Apprx

[rezwits]

I was looking for input as far as a possible future M#(X) Apple Silicon roadmap.

I am thinking a beautiful future roadmap for Apple Silicon would be something like this:

These are approximate speculations:

March-April (2021)
------------------------
iPad 12.9 Pro with A14X
iMac (Pro or Not) with M1X
MacBook Pro 16" with M1X

September-October (2021)
------------------------
iPhone/iPad Air with A15
MacBook Air/Pro 13" with M2
MacMini with M2

March-April (2022)
------------------------
iPad 12.9 Pro with A15X
iMac (Pro or Not) with M2X
MacBook Pro 16" with M2X

September-October (2022)
------------------------
iPhone/iPad Air with A16
MacBook Air/Pro 13" with M3
MacMini with M3

March-April (2023)
------------------------
iPad 12.9 Pro with A16X
iMac (Pro or Not) with M3X
MacBook Pro 16" with M3X

REPEAT ETC...
(excel auto fill, hehe)

To me, this would be the SICKEST most INSANELY GREAT
roadmap!

Any quick thoughts?
I mean I don't want to get into, cores etc, if you want sure,
but just a general gist of the flow that's gonna start coming?
and what to expect... any ideas?

THANKS!! a whole bunch...

 

[theluggage]

I mean I don't want to get into, cores etc, if you want sure,

Well, cores etc. are kinda important factors in how powerful each chip is going to be, whereas whether Apple decides to call it "M1X", "M2", "P1" or "Rupert" is purely a marketing decision.

With the A-series there seems to be a rough rule that the number is the "core" version and an X or Z prefix means "more of the same CPU/GPU cores and/or faster clock" but I'm not sure that's ever been formalised.

From a marketing perspective, that works well for the iPhone given that is that there is usually a single, annual launch of the new iPhone range, at which point last-year's models get demoted to the cheaper option. So the newest high-end iPhones always have an A-series chip that is "one better" than the cheaper models (and the iPhone models seem to differentiate on size, camera specs, storage etc. rather than processing power, anyhow).

With the Mac, there are so many models, each with different expectations of processing power, each on its own, sometimes irregular, update cycle. If they adopt the A-series numbering scheme then - as shown in your roadmap - pretty soon you have the MacBook Air sporting an M2 while the 16" MBP "only" has an "M1X". (...and before anybody says that Mac buyers are intelligent and will see through that sort of meaningless numerology, remember that even the Mac Pro is priced at $5,999.00...). So while an A-series-style numbering scheme is feasible, there are good reasons why Apple might want to go in a different direction with the M-series. Maybe we'll see something like the M- (mobile) series, P- (pro) series and W- (workstation/desktop) series instead, that keeps the numbering separate.

I'd have thought that the priority for Apple now is to get Apple Silicon versions of the 16" MBP and lower-end iMacs out the door ASAP so they stop getting their clocks cleaned by the M1 MacBook Air (which is kinda embarrassing). That probably means more high-performance cores and a better GPU (which would need an updated CPU) plus more RAM options, support for more displays and more TB ports (...and it's still unclear whether those are M1 limitations or design choices in the M1 Macs... more RAM could just be waiting for the cost/availability of bigger LPDDR4 chips to improve).

Also, pick a few Intel Mac models for long-term support, which are going to hang around as they are for a few years, and not necessarily get replaced with direct M1 equivalents (remember the "classic" 13" non-retina MacBook Pro?). My guess: (A) the 4-port 13" MBP (esp. if the rumours of a 14" are true), and (B) the current Mac Pro (which is only a year old anyway, and unless Apple build a monster 28+ core ASi chip just for this, I suspect that the ASi Mac Pro will be something radically different with multiple M-series SoCs and/or a partial relapse to the trash can 'FCPx appliance' model.

...and I expect any new laptops this year are going to be "transitional" until the entire line gets a re-design (probably accompanied by MiniLED displays unless Apple has a MicroLED surprise up its sleeve sooner than expected) at which point the shape of the line-up could change..

 

[stw]

Yearly Mac mini updates?
I believe it when I see it.

 

[pmiles]

You plan on replacing your devices every year?

Honestly they make all their money in services... I doubt they have an aggressive computer marketing strategy on the horizon. They will replace all their INTEL Macs over the next 2 years, that is an absolute. Does that mean they will increased the rate in which they replace the ARM Macs beyond that? Doubtful.

 

[jb1280]

Apple hasn’t thrown an odd-numbered A-series SOC in an iPad since the A9X. I don’t think we see a new iPad Air until there is an A16.

Likewise, I’m unsure what pressure Apple feels to upgrade the M-series SOC to align with new iPhone SOCs. I can easily see where there’s not a major MacBook Air upgrade until there is an M2 based off the A16 architecture in 2022

 

[rezwits]

Well, cores etc. are kinda important factors in how powerful each chip is going to be, whereas whether Apple decides to call it "M1X", "M2", "P1" or "Rupert" is purely a marketing decision.

With the A-series there seems to be a rough rule that the number is the "core" version and an X or Z prefix means "more of the same CPU/GPU cores and/or faster clock" but I'm not sure that's ever been formalised.

As far as I can see the X, could be as simple as, eXtra. Meaning with M1/2/3, you get the beefier:

8/16 CPU cores option
8/16 GPU cores option
16/32 GB of RAM option

You plan on replacing your devices every year?

What I am planning is getting back to an eBay rinse wash repeat strategy, like I have done since 2013-2019, but with the M1s, I am skipping doing this for my last MacBook Pro 15 (2019), to have a FINAL Intel.

The strategy is the "RENT" strategy. Buy for $1900-2200, sell on eBay for $1300-1600, get back $1200-1500 after FEES, cost $700 per 11 months ≈$60 per month to rent. I looked at straight trade-in values with Apple, which I was hoping to do instead but they seem to only give an average of $800-1100, back for this range, which meh, I would take the eBay risk for the extra $300-400.

It's not a jerk strategy, heck I FUNDED many guys before me who used this strategy, buying around 4 or 5 Used Mac Pros and a couple MBPs.

But I feel this is the strategy for me when my "Software Development" needs budget this in and is NEEDED, i.e. compiling for M1, M2, etc.

I am just getting old now nearing the 50s and I am retired, and need a nice "avenue" for my couch days of programming during retirement. I want a NICE stable pattern, and really hope Apple does this.

I really really want a MacBook Pro 16" M#(X) whatever, right before WWDC in March-April, to fully be loaded, and then dump all the Developer Tools on that, and run run run. Then during release time, for the other platforms around September-October, iPhones included, I can have my Apps ready for release day.

Then after December, prepare for February-March offloading, and SELL, and then get another one, REPEAT...
Heck if they show that they are gonna at least do M1, M2, every year that will be almost a good enough pattern for me, but the 16" in March is a DREAM...

Thanks for replies!

 

[Zazoh]

They will replace all their INTEL Macs over the next 2 years, that is an absolute. Does that mean they will increased the rate in which they replace the ARM Macs beyond that? Doubtful.

I was thinking about this as well. They will be done. With the performance these things are putting out ... I mean how much faster do you want instant to be? Aggressive hardware releases are expensive. The longer they can delay a release the better for them.

Remember when we thought they were going to dump the mini because they went four years? Computers are in a weird state right now.

You’ve got folks using a handheld device doing all they need to do on the web in one camp. Meanwhile you got folks with 15 TB of external drives running 8 year old software bundles making it work, on the other. Confused consumers in the middle.

All this SoC stuff has been on a 500 day average upgrade schedule for the iPad. At the least, that isn’t going to change. As the M1 is that system in a hardware platform that is less versatile.

 

[leman]

Honestly they make all their money in services... I doubt they have an aggressive computer marketing strategy on the horizon. They will replace all their INTEL Macs over the next 2 years, that is an absolute. Does that mean they will increased the rate in which they replace the ARM Macs beyond that? Doubtful.

Back when Intel had their product schedule under control, Macs were upgraded every six months. New CPU and or GPU generation every year and minor CPU bump every half year. It only changed around 2015 when Intel started experiencing troubles with their process.

The current “two years between updates” is an anomaly for the Mac, not the norm. I dint see why Apple wouldn’t want to go back to their traditional upgrade schedule. It would certainly give them an advantage over the competitors and keep business booming.

 

[leman]

I was thinking about this as well. They will be done. With the performance these things are putting out ... I mean how much faster do you want instant to be? Aggressive hardware releases are expensive. The longer they can delay a release the better for them.

I disagree with this sentiment. Of course, doing nothing is cheaper... but small meaningful upgrades keep the customers interested and maintain the impression of constant innovation. And they are not that difficult to pull off - they’ve been doing it fairly consistently with the iPhone for many years. And upgrading a laptop is arguably simpler as you dint need to come up with a new design every year, just keep the chassis and bump up the internals every once in a while. Basically, frequent hardware updates will attract more customers and more business. It worked quite fine fine between 2018 and 2015, where Apple has an update every 6 months...

 

[pldelisle]

I am just getting old now nearing the 50s and I am retired,

Damn... not a long career...!

 

[rezwits]

I disagree with this sentiment. Of course, doing nothing is cheaper... but small meaningful upgrades keep the customers interested and maintain the impression of constant innovation. And they are not that difficult to pull off - they’ve been doing it fairly consistently with the iPhone for many years. And upgrading a laptop is arguably simpler as you dint need to come up with a new design every year, just keep the chassis and bump up the internals every once in a while. Basically, frequent hardware updates will attract more customers and more business. It worked quite fine fine between 2018 and 2015, where Apple has an update every 6 months...

Well my thinking is that Macs are gonna be like iPhones now in respects to new yearly chip/hardware upgrades. The thing is did you see the INTERNALS photo? for the MoBo? I am thinking they can swap these new "Apple Silicon" chips in next year NO PROBLEM. I even thought they might even do Processor Upgrades, but a NO obviously becasue, considering we can't even upgrade RAM any more!

But I am NOT even close to talk about CASE or CHASSIS upgrades, that won't happen for at least every 4-5 years, I mean heck what is the MacBook Pro 13 inch on? revision 4? going on the the 5 revision if and when M2 comes out?

Damn... not a long career...!

I decided along time ago, like when I was 12, I wanted to get a nice little place, by the time I was 50, and just retire, and code till I DIE... I know I know, mad scientist, but don't we all want to BE mad scientists? LOL

 

[iPadified]

Well we can dream about yearly ASi updates for Mac (and iPad Pro). The less than reliable "X" processor releases in the iPad have been frustrating. High end iPads has been an afterthought for Apple. I hope the iPad Pro will share the low end "M" chips while the non pro iPad models will get the "A" chips. A new iPad Pro with miniLED and M1 and 8-16 Gb RAM...is tempting.

Yearly releases of both lines is desirable but given Apples history of neglecting the "X" chips, I am pessimistic. In my view Apple have treated the "X" chips as bad as Intel has treated their line. Look at the A12Z for instance, it should have been a A13X. I hope that the "M" series will be treated better.

 

[rezwits]

Yearly releases of both lines is desirable but given Apples history of neglecting the "X" chips, I am pessimistic. In my view Apple have treated the "X" chips as bad as Intel has treated their line. Look at the A12Z for instance, it should have been a A13X. I hope that the "M" series will be treated better.

Was that A12Z the only Z? AND was there an X? since then? I don't think there has been... 🤔

Me thinks, that's because it's the a ... END of the Line... as in Z zip, DONE.

Maybe we will, only see A14, M1, A15, M2, and the M1,2,3 kinda fills the (x) spot of the A14X (that never came out), and then iPad Pros will use M1s?

One can dream, if you want...

 

[iPadified]

Was that A12Z the only Z? AND was there an X? since then? I don't think there has been... 🤔

Me thinks, that's because it's the a ... END of the Line... as in Z zip, DONE.

Maybe we will, only see A14, M1, A15, M2, and the M1,2,3 kinda fills the (x) spot of the A14X (that never came out), and then iPad Pros will use M1s?

One can dream, if you want...

Yeah, the only "Z" after a A12X. I agree, it suggests end on line for iPad Pro with the A line.