Why should Apple keep up with Intel's roadmap?

[suneohair]

I would estimate that 90% of people buying computers have no idea what is on the horizon. And I think that is a fair estimate.

Which means, nobody looks bad if they don't update. I can easily ask 10 random people if they know what Merom is, or even a Core 2 Duo and 9 wouldnt know, I think the chance that all 10 wouldnt is pretty high.

People here need to remember we are not represetative of the mass population, who happens to be the people buying most of the computers sold.

Today all people look at is that # in front of Ghz. And maybe a MB or GB every now and then.


And as someone may have said, some of you are getting way too wrapped up in the next processor. I mean, Merom isn't that super of an upgrade when you look at Pentium M to Core Duo. 64-bit most of you arent using.

Then you pretend as if the current notebooks will lbe equivelent to an 8086.
I understand some are waiting for MBP chassis update, that is all fine and good. But waiting around months on end for the next processor or chipset is ridiculous as much so as coming here to whine about it as if everyone is feeling this strain. No, they are buying computers oblivious to these things.

GET OVER IT!

 

[macenforcer]

I would estimate that 90% of people buying computers have no idea what is on the horizon. And I think that is a fair estimate.

Which means, nobody looks bad if they don't update. I can easily ask 10 random people if they know what Merom is, or even a Core 2 Duo and 9 wouldnt know, I think the chance that all 10 wouldnt is pretty high.

People here need to remember we are not represetative of the mass population, who happens to be the people buying most of the computers sold.

Today all people look at is that # in front of Ghz. And maybe a MB or GB every now and then.


And as someone may have said, some of you are getting way too wrapped up in the next processor. I mean, Merom isn't that super of an upgrade when you look at Pentium M to Core Duo. 64-bit most of you arent using.

Then you pretend as if the current notebooks will lbe equivelent to an 8086.
I understand some are waiting for MBP chassis update, that is all fine and good. But waiting around months on end for the next processor or chipset is ridiculous as much so as coming here to whine about it as if everyone is feeling this strain. No, they are buying computers oblivious to these things.

GET OVER IT!

Keep thinking that.

 

[ajaygrover]

The truth behind no Merom Update

All right guys heres what I think has happened.

Apple had ordered tons of Core Duo microprocessors for their notebook line when Intel announced that they are going to launch it officially. At that time the roadmap of Intel said that the Core 2 Duo is going to be launched by the end of 2006 or early 2007 so Apple did not anticipate the early introduction of Core 2 Duo and had manufactured lots of Core Duo mainboards and now wants to get rid of them quickly.

My guess is that they would introduce the new Core 2 Duo notebooks only when their inventory of Core Duos goes down - Purely a marketing trick

BOTTOM LINE: Let the people who want to by the current MB and MBs buy them so that the guys who are waiting patiently get their C2D notebooks early.

 

[thugpoet22]

If each of these processors are using the same chipset then it shouldn't be a big deal when it comes to upgrading unless you have a portable. Truthfully i dont know if apple should waiste its time with releaseing a new computer with every chip. Apple from my perspective seems much more about quality than quantity. I hope that aspect of the company doesn't change. Maybe giving people the option to buy the latest computers with the newest chipsets might be better if left up to their website. That way they wont have to keep shipping things back and forth to their stores. Or allow more venders to sell their products. Apple has to share the load if they want to move ahead. But what ever they decide to do i hope they always make quality products.

 

[Veritas&Equitas]

Apple from my perspective seems much more about quality than quantity.

I think the present situation with the Macbooks may challenge that assertion...

 

[Cloudgazer]

I have no prroblem with Intel Macs.

But the one thing I used to love about Apple was you purchased your computer (powerbook, power mac, etc) and that was it.

There was very little going on in wondering what processor this one had, and what was coming next.
Unlike the PC industry where every geek is talking about this new processor, that new graphics card, etc.

Suddenly mac users seem to be caught up in the 'keeping up with the Joneses' syndrome.

It bugs me.

 

[ziwi]

They should - just to keep up with the price / performance comparisons - 9 times out of 10 it is a faster processor versus the architecture change...

 

[Jedi128]

people would be more pissed to see a identical mbp to the one now, only with merom, than to see nothing at all.

What????? That is exactly what I want! And the sooner the better. Why is this such a bad thing? I think most of the people ranting on this forum about Merom would be perfectly happy with this outcome (an identical MBP w/ Merom).

I will continue to get pissed if they do nothing at all with the MBP, as opposed to only dropping in Merom. How does an update make people pissed?

 

[jne381]

Whether you are waiting for Merom or not, Apple is way over due, at least according to past history, for updating the MBP. Needless to say, when it is updated it should have the latest processor (Merom) in it. In any case, what should be in the update is improved battery live, and fixes for all the stuff that was wrong with the Rev A.

 

[bearbo]

What????? That is exactly what I want! And the sooner the better. Why is this such a bad thing? I think most of the people ranting on this forum about Merom would be perfectly happy with this outcome (an identical MBP w/ Merom).

I will continue to get pissed if they do nothing at all with the MBP, as opposed to only dropping in Merom. How does an update make people pissed?

each update would cost apple. i dont have articles on how much it would cost, but from a engineering's POV, change in process (yes, even straight drop in of chip) would cost apple

and one big update would cost apple less than 2 small updates of the same results

and marketing for one big update cost less than marketing of two smaller update

and people tend to not do 2 updates on the same machine close to each other


given all that, if apple update merom, that means the other stuff won't be updated for a LOOOOOONG time... and that is what people won't be happy about.

why do you need merom again? aside from the desire for the newest thing (and mind you, that doesn't give you much at this point? that by the time it does become significant from yonah, it's gonna be 2 yr old technology?)

Apple is way over due, at least according to past history

there was ONE data point, it's hardly valid statement statistically.
if you look at the graphs from mac buyer's guide, for the lack of numerical data, some updates takes twice as long as others for the same product line, which means, one data point is not historical data.

also, mbp hasn't been updated for 163 days, average acd update was 229 days, xserver 309 days, macpro/powermac 205 days, mac mini 151, imac 189, ipod 162 ... average of all those number - 207.5

where is the "way over due"?

i do agree with the rest of the stuff you said tho

 

[Veritas&Equitas]

There was very little going on in wondering what processor this one had, and what was coming next.
Unlike the PC industry where every geek is talking about this new processor, that new graphics card, etc.

Suddenly mac users seem to be caught up in the 'keeping up with the Joneses' syndrome.

It bugs me.

I'm sorry, but this post seems to reinforce the PC users' argument that those with Macs truly don't know what is in their systems, and that they don't care...I use PC's and Mac's, and while I'll admit that it seems the majority of PC users know much more about the specs of their computers than those with Macs, some Mac owners know quite a bit as well...to simply hold the position that you don't want to know what's in your computer or how it works seems to undermine the idea that Mac people really do know computers.

I don't know, even if we are Mac users, I think it's important to know "what's under the hood," how it may work, it's performance relative to competition, etc. Otherwise, we're just blind suckers for anything that Jobs & Co. shoot out, without questioning or promoting competition for better components and improved prices.

 

[emotion]

Those clamouring (and dare I say, whining) for a Core 2 Duo MacBook/MacBook Pro do not represent the majority of Apple notebook buyers.

I wouldn't be so sure. I know plenty of musicians who are holding off until the new processors are available. Myself included.

I bet there are plenty of designers, film makers etc etc who are also doing the same.

Sure, the people who just want a mac to do email might not care but are they *most* apple users? I suspect not.

 

[bearbo]

I wouldn't be so sure. I know plenty of musicians who are holding off until the new processors are available. Myself included.

I bet there are plenty of designers, film makers etc etc who are also doing the same.

Sure, the people who just want a mac to do email might not care but are they *most* apple users? I suspect not.

professionals are at most 50% of the user population (provided, they may spend more on average than average "other" users).. let along any given profession

 

[milozauckerman]

Yes, I think it's a brilliant business plan for Apple to sell items with last-generation technology at a high premium, just to show that they can.

"Gee, I can buy a Core Duo Macbook Pro for $2000 or a Dell Core 2 Duo with similar specs - or better for $1500..." - that's how you convert users. Charge them more and give them less, but wrap it in a fine, fine brand. Make Apple the Rolex of computers.

 

[miniConvert]

Apple shouldn't keep up. They should pick the best components in terms of performance, power consumption, reliability and cost and build them into systems that they believe perform the tasks they were designed to do successfully.

In the Windows world something like the processor is all there is to differentiate between different models and manufacturers because fundamentally everybody is selling the same thing. That level of differentiation doesn't exist here - Apple just needs to use what it believes will result in the best user experience.

Intel's range is vast. We're going to have to accept that Apple wont be using everything Intel cough up.

 

[ChickenSwartz]

Yes, I think it's a brilliant business plan for Apple to sell items with last-generation technology at a high premium, just to show that they can.

"Gee, I can buy a Core Duo Macbook Pro for $2000 or a Dell Core 2 Duo with similar specs - or better for $1500..." - that's how you convert users. Charge them more and give them less, but wrap it in a fine, fine brand. Make Apple the Rolex of computers.

Yeah and then tell all your employees that they should say you are paying for a better OS (which they sell for $129 mind you) and great service (for a year).

I don't mind paying more for a Mac. But $500+ dollars is pushing it. I am not saying that I need the best processor, I can manage fine with the processor that was the best a couple months ago, but, I do not want to pay a-couple-months-ago's price.

If you can package the same technology and sell it a bit more expensive then people will still switch (for the OS, looks, whatever). If you package lower grade technology and sell it for more people will think twice.

 

[jhu]

why do you need merom again? aside from the desire for the newest thing (and mind you, that doesn't give you much at this point? that by the time it does become significant from yonah, it's gonna be 2 yr old technology?)

also, mbp hasn't been updated for 163 days, average acd update was 229 days, xserver 309 days, macpro/powermac 205 days, mac mini 151, imac 189, ipod 162 ... average of all those number - 207.5

where is the "way over due"?

i do agree with the rest of the stuff you said tho

a few issues. in the x86 world, 64-bit processing is indeed faster than 32-bit due to several architectural changes. also, progress is faster in the x86 world. apple will need to keep up and give people what they want.

 

[emotion]

professionals are at most 50% of the user population (provided, they may spend more on average than average "other" users).. let along any given profession

That's precisely my point. To not satisfy 50% of your market is a bit of a failure for any company.

 

[bearbo]

a few issues. in the x86 world, 64-bit processing is indeed faster than 32-bit due to several architectural changes. also, progress is faster in the x86 world. apple will need to keep up and give people what they want.

or else... people would still stay with apple... apple doesn't lose

i dont argue that 64bit is theoretically, and eventually will be faster, but with the merom chips out nowadays, the tests don't show much of a speed bump



and apple not satisfying 50%, how much are they bothered? are entire 50% of ppl are waiting to buy a macbook pro at this time?

provided i'm not a professional in the profession that require the absolutely best of best.. my opinion might not represent them, but this is what i think..

say you are NEED the fastest available machine (or as good as you can get), then definitely getting yonah is no problem, because when application that require 64 becomes what you will need to work with, merom's not gonna be the new thing anymore, therefore you will need to get another machine

say you DON'T need, but you'd want to be future proof.. well, when 64bit becomes the basis of MOST of the applications out there, merom again would be long replaced by some true 64bit, or the entire system would be optimized with 64bit

i personally dont see much that this update can give, if merom is the only thing.

about apple keep up with intel roadmap.. i think that's a dumb question... should apple keep up with intel roadmap? as oppose to stop at yonah? of course not, however apple doesn't need to offer EVERY SINGLE chip released by intel either. apple isn't directly compete with other PC manufactures, that is, if you or your corp likes apple, you wouldn't buy a PC just because apple skipped a chip that isn't even that important, as long as apple update timely in the big picture.

 

[trueheart78]

Benchmarks From AnandTech for Notebooks.

Core Duo vs Pentium M
http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2663&p=1

Core 2 Duo vs Core Duo
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808

 

[Demon Hunter]

All of this nonsense is irrelevant because Apple already updated the iMac with Merom, indicating that they will use the latest.

 

[amin]

All of this nonsense is irrelevant because Apple already updated the iMac with Merom, indicating that they will use the latest.

This nonsense is relevant. Apple's updating the iMac with Merom proved they will at least sometimes promptly use the latest. Apple will likely not use Conroe in any desktop; and they have yet to put Merom, a mobile processor, in any of their mobile computers.

 

[kimchimonkey]

I've been a long time pc user that purchased a powerbook g4. It is a great notebook and i did love using osx, but to me the differences between a good pc and a mac isn't as big as some people make it out to be. Each computer has its own benefits and downsides.

The fact is that in terms of hardware the macbook's were a good deal a couple months ago, but now are overpriced. I do not believe that apple should be given a break. Either lower the price or upgrade the chip.

 

[jaduffy108]

What was in your post? I skimmed through it and see a bunch of apologistic fanboy talk. Do you know the points you raised for sure? Was the MBP Rev A a good product? If so why don't YOU go buy it instead?

Enjoy your overheating random shutdown "good" Macs

Oh, and at twice the price too.

### Well said Generik...but you left out underclocked GPUs, staining and "mooing"

 

[generik]

That's precisely my point. To not satisfy 50% of your market is a bit of a failure for any company.

When your market is 97% I wouldn't worry, when it is 3%... everything changes.

Instead of saying "satisying 50% of your market" change it to say "only 1.5% of the market is satisified with your product."

Does changes perspective a lot doesn't it fanboi?