Rumor: Intel to push back Mac-bound Ivy Bridge chip shipments until June

2

Comments

  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DeanSolecki View Post


    I feel in a sense they already have done so, in regard to graphics, anyway. If the 13" MBP persists it would seem that a dGPU would be a pretty obvious way to distinguish it from the 13" Air, and restore some of it's "Pro-ness."



    Maybe, but the 13" MBP also has a lot longer battery life and a lot more capacity than the 13" MBA. That's why I bought my 13" MBP. I just don't care about the GPU specs as I don't do any photo or video editing, don't play games, or anything else that would need to have it.



    Note that the ODD in the 13" MBP takes up 25% of the internal space.
    It gets very little and is prone to breaking as one of the few remaining components with moving parts. On top of that it generates a lot of hear and uses a lot of power when if use.



    Also notice how the ODD forces engineers to restrict the logic board design and removes over 5" of useful port-side space because the ODD has to, obviously, be placed on an edge to be useful. A great many things open up with its removal. I can't wait for it to be gone.
    Imagine this logic board elongated with half those ports moving to the other side of the machine. With the CPU and GPU pushed closer to the vents in the back closer to the vents where cooling can naturally be facilitated. That's the MBP I want.
  • deansoleckideansolecki Posts: 256member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Above



    We'll see come june... I'm not due for an upgrade, but I am itching for a 15" portable as the MBA is limiting in certain tasks (and not just graphics.)



    I agree though, ditching the OD is not at all "risky" at this point.



    I think, though, that soldered ram/ssd might become an Apple trend. Apple doesn't like people opening up their hardware. Solder everything on and you remove a major motivation to do so. You also setup an up-sell because people know they won't be able to upgrade later, so they are more likely to do it up front.



    In the mobile space Apple has trended away from expandable memory, etc. and the Airs set a new precedent.



    It will be interesting to see where they take things.



    On your other points I am in agreement, except perhaps #10. Part of the reason for the "port crunch" on the Airs is the tapered design. Apple seems to be going "all-in" with Thunderbolt, although usb 3.0 adoption isn't out of the question.
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DeanSolecki View Post


    I think, though, that soldered ram/ssd might become an Apple trend. Apple doesn't like people opening up their hardware. Solder everything on and you remove a major motivation to do so. You also setup an up-sell because people know they won't be able to upgrade later, so they are more likely to do it up front.



    In the mobile space Apple has trended away from expandable memory, etc. and the Airs set a new precedent.



    There is certainly an argument to be made that Apple will move their soldered RAM up the ladder and that they can benefit finically from this decision but I don't think that will happen. I certainly don't want it to happen either.



    Quote:

    On your other points I am in agreement, except perhaps #10. Part of the reason for the "port crunch" on the Airs is the tapered design. Apple seems to be going "all-in" with Thunderbolt, although usb 3.0 adoption isn't out of the question.



    But tapering by itself doesn't mean you can't have ports, it just means that at some point on the tapering you lose side height that allows for port along every part of the edge.



    Consider now, on the 13" MBP, that you have 5.5" of ports on the left side. Now this is sans a separate mic port which is now part of the headphone jack and the Kensington lock port is on the right side next to the ODD so let's round up to 6". Ignoring the questionable need of the SD card slot in 2012 that means you need 3" on each side for ports. Of course the headphone/mic port(s) and SD card slot are thin so they would go closest to the user.



    The thickest port will be the ethernet port which can really only go on the back, right side of the chassis. But the MBAs can't deal with that because the chassis is too thin. If we assume that the MBPs will get a standard ethernet port then we assume that the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis. Nothng wrong with that. It can still mean the new MBPs are thinner than the old MBPs.



    Now consider the tapering that uses the same angle as the MBAs but starts off thicker at the back than the MBAs. That means you can add more ports to the side before you reach the point that it's too thin for ports. That should allow for 3" of ports on each side.
  • blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,180member
    If I was Apple, I'd be kind of peeved that Intel is holding back CPU supplies just because my competitors can't make products people want to buy.



    It has to be very irritating for Apple to be so dependent on Intel for the Mac. Apple is probably a long way from being able to design ARM processors that could displace Intel in the Mac, but I bet it's a longer term goal. Maybe it will happen in a 2016 timeframe.
  • geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,121member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Blastdoor View Post


    If I was Apple, I'd be kind of peeved that Intel is holding back CPU supplies just because my competitors can't make products people want to buy.



    It has to be very irritating for Apple to be so dependent on Intel for the Mac. Apple is probably a long way from being able to design ARM processors that could displace Intel in the Mac, but I bet it's a longer term goal. Maybe it will happen in a 2016 timeframe .



    Unless Apple worked out some sort of deal with Intel to have the Ivy Bridge chips first. Not sure and I have no data to back that up but I;m sure Apple with their market dominance can work something like that out with Intel. The article didn't say there was any production issues or any technical issue with the delay but instead the abundance of the old inventory.
  • firefly7475firefly7475 Posts: 1,499member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Show us the numbers of the internal space that suggest that Apple has to use a CULV processor.



    Tell us how the 18"^3 of the ODD can't offset much of the battery space and allow for the logic board to be elongated so that it's against the back of the footprint where it's thickest and where the vents will be placed thus allowing for better cooling in a smaller space.



    Tell us why it would have to be thicker despite the loss of the ODD saving plenty of internal space and allowing for easier engineering of the components.



    Tell us why Apple would release a Pro machine that only has a 10 or 17W processor instead of the standard 35 or 45W processor.



    Tell us why you think Apple can't follow the MBA's design without using CULV processors but was able to follow it in 2008 with the introduction of the unibody MBPs that also made the thickness thinner than the previous MBPs.



    Tell us why Apple can't keep the back bottom chassis with as much internal vertical space as it currently has, use a milled top chassis for the LCD which thins out and strengthens the lid and tapers the chassis toward the front at the same angle as the MBA requires a CULV processor.



    Tell me that you aren't basing your "sky is falling" FUD on some 50¢ mockups on a rumour site.



    Why are you having such a massive sook about this?



    I'm not saying "the sky is falling", I'm just saying either:
    1. Apple can't use the same 45W TDP as the current MacBook Pro --> OR <--

    2. The new MacBook Pro can't be a 15" version of the MacBook Air as stated in this article, it has to be thicker.

    I don't understand why you are whinging about what I said when two posts down you essentially say the exact same fucking thing... "the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis"



    Since you begged for some numbers here they are.
    • 2011 MBA 45cui

    • 2011 MBP 134cui

    • 2012 MBP 70cui

    That means the 2012 MBP would need to drop in volume by 48% to fit the up-sized MBA profile.



    Ditching the ODD will get around 20%. If they solder the flash and RAM Apple might get another 10%. The relative internal space compared to the chassis width... maybe another 1-2%.



    The only way to shave that much space is to shrink the battery, and the only way to shrink the battery and maintain an 8 hour battery life is to use lower TDP CPU's.



    If Apple stick with the current 45W TDP I think the dimensions will be more like:



    Height: 0.33-0.95 inch

    Width: 14.8 inches

    Depth: 9.82 inches



    That is, the same height at the back as a 2011 MBP in a wedge down to three times the height of the front of a current MBA. The width can be pushed out a little but the depth stays the same as a 2011 MBP.
  • gtrgtr Posts: 3,165member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    Maybe the 13" will not have the space or need in Apple's eyes for a dGPU but removing the ODD will make it a little easier to add one. Of course, that isn't the only consideration. Apple will obviously have to balance cot to price points, the ability to up-sell, and power requirements. It's quite possible Apple will lean to the cheaper, longer-lasting IGP for the 13" or even pull back the MBP line to just be the 15" and 17" models again.



    The "very obvious" directions I see are...
    1. removing the ODD

    2. making the overall case thinner

    3. making it taper to give an impression of it being thinner than before

    4. having a 35/45W CPU in all models

    5. having a dGPU in at least the 15" and 17" models

    6. having a fast boot/wake SSD but also plenty of internal storage (whether that's an SSD card plus a 2.5" drive or a special hybrid 2.5" drive Apple got a patent for)

    7. having at least an IPS display or a HiDPI display

    8. non-soldered RAM

    9. non-soldered SSD

    10. about the same number of ports as your have now

    11. USB 3.0 with the introduction of Ivy Bridge.




    I think that's an accurate assessment, Doctor.



    I concur.



    My MBA maxed out on 'Trine 2' the other day. Those beautiful graphics did something that no other program has done until now, and an upgrade to a MBP just may be in order.
  • jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,927member
    I don't really get the hand-wringing about how close to the Air the 15" and 17" models seems a little silly. I think they got about three years out of the current unibody generation, a new design this year doesn't seem far-fetched. Removing the ODD would give it flexibility to add a slight taper, even if it only thins out the front edge, still leaving room for plenty of jacks, as many or few as they want. An ODD isn't very heavy though, about the weight of a regular candy bar. Notebook weight is largely limited by the weight of the battery, which weighs a few times that of an ODD.



    But in short, Apple will produce what they want to produce, I'm interested in seeing what they have up their sleeves this time.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    Expected by whom? That looks pretty dumb to me. Apple made that mistake once before with the unibody transition. Did ANYONE actually buy the Late 2008 17" MacBook Pro, knowing what was coming?



    Edit: OH, IT'S DIGITIMES. THE COMPLETELY WORTHLESS SNOT RAG WHOSE CONTINUED PRESENCE ON APPLEINSIDER BEMUSES ME TO NO END.



    It is pretty crazy. They'll output enough predictions that eventually a few of them will be correct.



    Quote:

    Also, take a long hard look at that "Intel HD Graphics 4000". It's possible that's all we're getting, even in the 17".



    Don't they all have integrated graphics? The difference being that the higher level models switch between integrated and discrete graphics?
  • geekdadgeekdad Posts: 1,121member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JeffDM View Post


    Don't they all have integrated graphics? The difference being that the higher level models switch between integrated and discrete graphics?



    I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.
  • d-ranged-range Posts: 396member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post


    I'm not saying "the sky is falling", I'm just saying either:
    1. Apple can't use the same 45W TDP as the current MacBook Pro --> OR <--

    2. The new MacBook Pro can't be a 15" version of the MacBook Air as stated in this article, it has to be thicker.

    I don't understand why you are whinging about what I said when two posts down you essentially say the exact same fucking thing... "the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis"



    Since you begged for some numbers here they are.
    • 2011 MBA 45cui

    • 2011 MBP 134cui

    • 2012 MBP 70cui

    That means the 2012 MBP would need to drop in volume by 48% to fit the up-sized MBA profile.



    Ditching the ODD will get around 20%. If they solder the flash and RAM Apple might get another 10%. The relative internal space compared to the chassis width... maybe another 1-2%.



    The only way to shave that much space is to shrink the battery, and the only way to shrink the battery and maintain an 8 hour battery life is to use lower TDP CPU's.



    If Apple stick with the current 45W TDP I think the dimensions will be more like:



    Height: 0.33-0.95 inch

    Width: 14.8 inches

    Depth: 9.82 inches



    That is, the same height at the back as a 2011 MBP in a wedge down to three times the height of the front of a current MBA. The width can be pushed out a little but the depth stays the same as a 2011 MBP.



    Wasn't Apple working on better batteries that would allow higher energy densities and thinner battery packs at the same time? I remember reading about this a while ago.



    Anyway, I have to agree with SolipsismX. I think it *is* possible to shrink the MBP to MBA-size, and still put a full-blown CPU/GPU combo in it that draws 45W. Removing the ODD will not only increase the chassis volume available for battery packs, but it would also allow a little more flexibility in terms of shape and location, which will probably help a little as well.



    The CPU will not draw 45W all the time, and Ivy Bridge is supposed to not only improve power-per-watt in general, but also have improved dynamic frequency scaling and other power saving features. Add switchable graphics, and you could have a MBP that feels lightning quick at light use and still get 6 to 8 hours of battery life, but can also ramp up for heavy lifting and maybe only get 2 to 4 hours on full load.



    Of course if you had a bigger chassis like the current MBP you could stuff even more batteries in it, and maybe get 6 hours under full load, but I think right now, Apple should be prepared to trade a little battery life for trimming down the chassis. I think that would be a perfectly fine tradeoff, since almost nobody is going to put a laptop under continuous full load while not connected to an outlet.
  • jeffdmjeffdm Posts: 12,927member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by geekdad View Post


    I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.



    For all we know, that might happen, but this story isn't a valid source for that dread.
  • curmudgeoncurmudgeon Posts: 483member
    Quote:

    Sources from notebook players have told Taiwanese industry publication DigiTimes that both Intel and its first-tier notebook vendors have built up troubling inventories of the current-generation Sandy Bridge Processors. As a result, the Santa Clara, Calif., chipmaker "plans to delay mass shipments of the new processors to minimize the impact," according to the report.



    Do I read this right? We've got so many of the old CPU chips that nobody wants anymore, that we've decided to delay the new chips until after you people have bought the old chips - that you no longer want.



    The beatings will continue until morale improves.
  • screamingfistscreamingfist Posts: 971member
    i guess they will coincide with the release of 'Mountain Lion'?
  • ssquirrelssquirrel Posts: 1,196member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by marcusj0015 View Post


    God damn it!!!!!!!!111



    Right now I'm REALLY glad I decided the Mac Mini I'm using will be just fine for the next year w/some extra external storage and more RAM. Waiting till June to upgrade would have sucked.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by geekdad View Post


    I think the dread from most of us is that if they go the route of making the MBP too much like a MBA then the product will lose the dedicated graphics and some of the speed and horsepower that made it a "pro" machine.



    "Pro" is just a marketing term. It has nothing whatsoever to do with anything in the real world.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post


    i guess they will coincide with the release of 'Mountain Lion'?



    I expect all Ivy Bridge Macs to be out long before Mountain Lion.
  • shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    Apple is expected to revamp the 15-inch MacBook Pro first, followed by the 17-inch model a few months later.



    I really hope they don't do that. I know they've done this before but I hope this time we get a media event and they go "bang" here is a completely new design MBA/MBP in sizes 12" to 18".



    I also hope they don't just do minor cosmetic changes. I'd like to see a different colour - maybe all black instead of silver/black, edge to edge screen with no black border, the MBP to adopt the non-glossy non-reflective MBA screen, ditch the horrible cut out below the trackpad, USB3.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,901member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Shaun, UK View Post


    I also hope they don't just do minor cosmetic changes. I'd like to see a different colour - maybe all black instead of silver/black, edge to edge screen with no black border, the MBP to adopt the non-glossy non-reflective MBA screen, ditch the horrible cut out below the trackpad, USB3.



    That will NEVER happen.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,068member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by marcusj0015 View Post


    God damn it!!!!!!!!111



    Don't be so sure. Digitimes is not known for being reliable and for all we know that 'small volume' is the shipments to Apple which sucked up all the stock and it will take until June before there is more. It is the Apple style
  • solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Firefly7475 View Post


    Why are you having such a massive sook about this?



    I'm not saying "the sky is falling", I'm just saying either:
    1. Apple can't use the same 45W TDP as the current MacBook Pro --> OR <--

    2. The new MacBook Pro can't be a 15" version of the MacBook Air as stated in this article, it has to be thicker.

    I don't understand why you are whinging about what I said when two posts down you essentially say the exact same fucking thing... "the chassis will have to be thicker than the MBA's chassis"



    Since you begged for some numbers here they are.
    • 2011 MBA 45cui

    • 2011 MBP 134cui

    • 2012 MBP 70cui

    That means the 2012 MBP would need to drop in volume by 48% to fit the up-sized MBA profile.



    Ditching the ODD will get around 20%. If they solder the flash and RAM Apple might get another 10%. The relative internal space compared to the chassis width... maybe another 1-2%.



    The only way to shave that much space is to shrink the battery, and the only way to shrink the battery and maintain an 8 hour battery life is to use lower TDP CPU's.



    If Apple stick with the current 45W TDP I think the dimensions will be more like:



    Height: 0.33-0.95 inch

    Width: 14.8 inches

    Depth: 9.82 inches



    That is, the same height at the back as a 2011 MBP in a wedge down to three times the height of the front of a current MBA. The width can be pushed out a little but the depth stays the same as a 2011 MBP.



    Then I must have misread your intent.



    As for thickness, it can be less than 0.95" in the back and still have the same internal height space for the CPU. Remember that the lid of the new MBA are thinner than the MBPs because they are milled, not pressed.
Sign In or Register to comment.