or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: New 13" MacBook Pro affected by 'weak yields' of Retina display
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: New 13" MacBook Pro affected by 'weak yields' of Retina display

post #1 of 43
Thread Starter 
Apple's supply chain is struggling to build new 13-inch MacBook Pros because of difficulty in manufacturing Retina displays, a new rumor claims.

The details were published on Thursday by the hit-or-miss Taiwanese electronics industry publication DigiTimes. It claimed that shipments of three key forthcoming Apple products ? the new MacBook Pro, along with a 7.85-inch iPad and new iMac ? were delayed from September to October because of production issues.

In particular, the 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display was said to have seen delays because of "weak yields" of its high-resolution screen. Analyst Ming-Chi Kuo with KGI Securities, who has a strong track record with predicting Apple product releases, originally said in July that Apple would release a new 13-inch Retina MacBook Pro along with a new iMac in September, but those products failed to debut last month.

MacBook Pro


Kuo said that Apple had originally hoped for the new 13-inch MacBook Pro with Retina display to be unveiled at the Worldwide Developers Conference in June, but the company was unable to do so because of a low yield rate and greater assembly difficulty. Instead, Apple only unveiled a 15-inch version of its redesigned Retina MacBook Pro.

But according to Thursday's report from DigiTimes, Apple's production issues go beyond the new MacBook Pro and also extend to the company's so-called "iPad mini." The publication claimed that Apple's smaller iPad is "suffering low yields for components such as the display and chassis." Unlike the third-generation iPad, the iPad mini is not expected to have a high-resolution Retina display.

Thursday's report also said that while the iPad mini apparently has a chassis with material similar to the full-size 9.7-inch model, the 7.85-inch variety will allegedly have a "design and tactile feel" different from the full-size variety.

DigiTimes bases many of its reports off tips from Asian suppliers, but the publication has a shaky batting average with regards to accurate information on upcoming Apple products. However, the site was the first to report that Apple would adopt in-cell touch panels for its 2012 iPhone model ? a prediction that came true with last month's launch of the iPhone 5.
post #2 of 43

You know, if yields of the 13" panel are an issue, maybe an 11" MBA with Retina display might be more doable.  I just point that out to Apple, certainly not because of any self-serving interest or anything. Just trying to help is all. ;)

post #3 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrstep View Post

You know, if yields of the 13" panel are an issue, maybe an 11" MBA with Retina display might be more doable.  I just point that out to Apple, certainly not because of any self-serving interest or anything. Just trying to help is all. ;)

 

I second this!  

post #4 of 43

Odd ... wouldn't these LCD panels be the same ones used for rMBP-15"? Is there a good reason for Apple to produce a different one with a different resolution?

post #5 of 43
If this is Digitimes quoting analysts then the issue isn't production. It's the analysts being wrong about the product existence or timeline and they are covering their butts. 'Production issues' is their fav way of explaining why something that was never coming out is not coming out so they don't look stupid.

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #6 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

Odd ... wouldn't these LCD panels be the same ones used for rMBP-15"? Is there a good reason for Apple to produce a different one with a different resolution?

 

But they're 13 inches... which is different.  While the pixel density may or may not be the same as the 15", a different size will undoubtedly use different fixtures and tooling.  Yield can suffer from countless manufacturing discrepancies beyond simple technological concepts.

post #7 of 43

I love Apple, but if they're having trouble with yields for all of these retina equipped products...they're never going to catch up with demand.  Ever.  I suppose that is a good problem for investors, but generally it'd be nice to order a product and get it within a reasonable window of time.

 

The price we pay for technology advances, I guess? First world problems.

post #8 of 43

And the stock starts to go down..lol

post #9 of 43
Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.

So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.
post #10 of 43

Funny how the analyst/usual mix of people that don't really know shit pull out the unexpected yield problems once their predicted release time frame does not come to fruition. 

iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
iPad, Macbook Pro, iPhone, heck I even have iLife! :-)
Reply
post #11 of 43
This is a good question and is reason enough to question this report. The 13" screen should be easier to produce than the 15" screen. The only possibility here is that the are moving to the Sharp screen and Sharp is having issues with the production of that technology.

As for the other devices there might be some truth in the reports. A retina iMac screen would be harder to do.

In the end though I have to call BS on the report. Something just doesn't sound right. If Apple can do a 15" retina a 13" shouldn't be a problem. More importantly it would be a sign of extremely poor management to have screwed up the delivery of three completely different products in the same year. Epic really for Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post

Odd ... wouldn't these LCD panels be the same ones used for rMBP-15"? Is there a good reason for Apple to produce a different one with a different resolution?
post #12 of 43

This does not bode well for a retina 27 inch iMac.

post #13 of 43
You would have a point if this is infant the case, I'm just not convinced that there is any truth to these reports.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post

Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.
Yields are always low on any new process ramp up. The real question is this, is there any truth to these reports, if so the screwing up of this many product deliveries is a pretty sad comment on Apple at the moment.
Quote:
So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.

Well no even if the rumors are true, production issues will not curtail demand especially if we are talking about break through devices. The problem I have with this report is that it makes no sense at all. Apple has had retina devices in production for almost a year now and has meet demand for those devices. In the case of Mini and the 13" we are talking smaller devices which should mean higher yields on displays. I suspect we have analyst grasping here.
post #14 of 43
Perhaps people don't realize that Apple is having a terrible time with yields on the 15" retina MacBook Pro as well.. except they are shipping them anyways.. They are using both Samsung and LG displays in the 15". Nearly every single LG has serious image retention issues or develops them over time. There has even been issues with the Samsung displays with backlight bleeding, dead pixels, and pinkish coloring.
post #15 of 43

With the MBP Retina 15" - Apple got both Samsung and LG/Sharp to supply screens.  If you look at the Apple support threads, you would count yourself lucky if you got a Samsung made screen and be doing a face-palm if you didn't.

 

Perhaps Apple contracted the entirety of 13" Retina screen production to LG/Sharp before they were cognisant of them not being very good at it.

 

Perhaps they had to delay the 13" Retina until they work out why so many 15" Retina Pros have been experiencing numerous kernel panics.
 

post #16 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by old-wiz View Post

This does not bode well for a retina 27 inch iMac.

I doubt we will see any retina imac anytime soon. I would be happy however to see any sort of new imac at this point even with the exact same screen it has now.
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
{2010 Mac Pro-6 core 3.33-12gb 1333 ram-ati5870-velociraptor 600's-SL/win7/64-Konnekt Live/Onkyo-Dell3007wfp}
{2008 Mac Pro-8 core 3.2's-16GB-evga285} {MBP17}{ipad}{iphone 4 blk16gb}
Reply
post #17 of 43

I'm contemplating editing all articles with "DigiTimes" in them to highlight that point.

 

Something like this. Tasteful and subtle. Just bold and deep red.


DigiTimes

 

But I don't know if that's cool with the authors.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #18 of 43
It wouldn't do any good. First off DigiTimes often reports very accurate information. They do seem to report what ever comes across their editorial desks without in depth review. The problem is we have web sites that seem to pick up on the garbage or negative reporting only. This distorts people's view of DigiTimes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I'm contemplating editing all articles with "DigiTimes" in them to highlight that point.

Something like this. Tasteful and subtle. Just bold and deep red.

But I don't know if that's cool with the authors.

Well if we had professional responsible authors I'd think they would make a big stink. AI doesn't suffer from professional authors though so I'm not sure what the response would be.

The bigger problem is where do you stop. I mean honestly AI posts articles from a number of analysts that seem to get their "information" out of their ass. Do you start to label such articles "ANALYST". The fact is DigiTimes probably has more basis for what it prints than the various analyst quoted on AI.
post #19 of 43
This is just a bunch of analysts trying to explain why they were wrong. "Release in September" and when nothing happens its because of supply channel issues.

The real issue is that the analysts were wrong and don't want to admit it.
post #20 of 43
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
First off DigiTimes often reports very accurate information.

 

We talkin' 'bout the same DigiTimes? lol.gif


The fact is DigiTimes probably has more basis for what it prints than the various analyst quoted on AI.

 

Ah, so you're saying it's less a problem with the filter on their end… as it is ours? 

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #21 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by xgman View Post

I doubt we will see any retina imac anytime soon. I would be happy however to see any sort of new imac at this point even with the exact same screen it has now.


Right? Just put last year's processor in it and push it out the door already!
post #22 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post

Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.
So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.

 

Your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. 

post #23 of 43
Originally Posted by Slurpy View Post
Your post makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. 

 

I'll clarify: he believes these rumors, and he is building his view of the company on them.

 

That make more sense now? I mean, not to DO, but in context.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #24 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

This is a good question and is reason enough to question this report. The 13" screen should be easier to produce than the 15" screen. The only possibility here is that the are moving to the Sharp screen and Sharp is having issues with the production of that technology.
As for the other devices there might be some truth in the reports. A retina iMac screen would be harder to do.
In the end though I have to call BS on the report. Something just doesn't sound right. If Apple can do a 15" retina a 13" shouldn't be a problem. More importantly it would be a sign of extremely poor management to have screwed up the delivery of three completely different products in the same year. Epic really for Apple.

 

I'm a manufacturing engineer.  While some aspects of production may be easier when producing a smaller version of the same thing, there are still countless other aspects of production that can drastically affect yield rates.

 

Furthermore, we do not know that the two screens will have the same exact pixel density, which seems to be an assumption here, as if they're just taking scissors to cut a smaller piece of pie from the same dish.  While it may be true that they have the same exact pixel density (I doubt it), this still has very little to do with final production yield rates.

 

So, for the record, this is not a good question, nor is it reason enough to question the validity of this report.

post #25 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

We talkin' 'bout the same DigiTimes? lol.gif
You would actually have to read the publication to understand that. Again the problem is on our end with websites quoting things in a way they shouldn't. Take today's issue, they report Foxconn revenue is up some odd 8% this year. Now you can dismiss that if you want but the article was rather concise.

The fact that some readers, especially those that reference DigiTimes, can't filter out obvious rumor from other reporting isn't really DigiTimes fault.
Quote:
Ah, so you're saying it's less a problem with the filter on their end… as it is ours? 

No I'm saying web sites exploit what they take from DigiTimes for their own needs and do so in a way that probably isn't intended by the editors at DigiTimes. That is these quotes often are published on the web by complete imbeciles as fact when they might not be offered up that way at DigiTimes. Take a look at www.digitimes.com for a couple of weeks, I mean actually read the material, and come back and post. I'd love to see if your opinion changes any. I think you will come back with a changed opinion.

DigiTimes isn't perfect, I'm not saying that but frankly they have less of a problem with accuracy than the very liberal media in this country. As for filtering the news reported, any responsible person would do that with any source no matter the reputation. Would you make an investment decision based solely on an article posted in the Wall Street Journal? I'd hope not, no matter the reputation smart decisions require an investment in research and verification.
post #26 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009 View Post

I'm a manufacturing engineer.  While some aspects of production may be easier when producing a smaller version of the same thing, there are still countless other aspects of production that can drastically affect yield rates.
That would be true, but in the case of LCD screens making smaller ones is dramatically easier.
Quote:
Furthermore, we do not know that the two screens will have the same exact pixel density, which seems to be an assumption here, as if they're just taking scissors to cut a smaller piece of pie from the same dish.  While it may be true that they have the same exact pixel density (I doubt it), this still has very little to do with final production yield rates.
Well we could hope for new technology though I see little reason to hold up a laptop for that. The fact remains if the screen is the same technology as used in the 15" machine it shouldn't be a problem yield wise.
Quote:
So, for the record, this is not a good question, nor is it reason enough to question the validity of this report.
I disagree! For the screens to be an issue there would have to be something dramatically different about them considering the success Apple has had with iPad and the retina MBP. The article says nothing about the screens being so different.

If on the other hand the article is accurate and all three of these products are delayed due to manufacturing issues then Apple has screwed up significantly. Especially if all three of the devices are delayed due to screen issues.
post #27 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post

Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.
So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.

 

High quality products demand really high standards for Quality Control.

If your standards for acceptance are very high, you are likely to have very high fallout until the manufacturer can repeatedly and reliably produce what you ask of them.

The fact that Apple consistently has "low yield rates" prior to product launches (these reports have existed long before the iPhone 5) proves that they hold their contracted manufacturers to a very high level of performance.

This is good news.

 

In fact, the very opposite of your statement is true:

This is a serious success on the part of Apple.  Demand for Apple products will simply sky rocket as they deliver premium goods.  Apple's active supply chain quality controls have ensured demand that consistently outstrips supply.

post #28 of 43
The other thing here is that you can have a process running along producing very good yields and then all of a sudden go to hell. Tracking dozen the root cause can be a struggle.
Quote:
Originally Posted by brutus009 View Post

High quality products demand really high standards for Quality Control.
If your standards for acceptance are very high, you are likely to have very high fallout until the manufacturer can repeatedly and reliably produce what you ask of them.
The fact that Apple consistently has "low yield rates" prior to product launches (these reports have existed long before the iPhone 5) proves that they hold their contracted manufacturers to a very high level of performance.
This is good news.
Sometimes I don't think people understand what is written. If good yields are the result of poor quality control then you have questionable product reaching the consumer.
Quote:
In fact, the very opposite of your statement is true:
This is a serious success on the part of Apple.  Demand for Apple products will simply sky rocket as they deliver premium goods.  Apple's active supply chain quality controls have ensured demand that consistently outstrips supply.

Demand outstripping supply is never a good thing.

In the case of this article though I'm not too sure I would give much credit to its accuracy. It just seems fishy to me that Apple would not have a contingency plan for an issue that has been suggested here.
post #29 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

That would be true, but in the case of LCD screens making smaller ones is dramatically easier.
Well we could hope for new technology though I see little reason to hold up a laptop for that. The fact remains if the screen is the same technology as used in the 15" machine it shouldn't be a problem yield wise.
I disagree! For the screens to be an issue there would have to be something dramatically different about them considering the success Apple has had with iPad and the retina MBP. The article says nothing about the screens being so different.
If on the other hand the article is accurate and all three of these products are delayed due to manufacturing issues then Apple has screwed up significantly. Especially if all three of the devices are delayed due to screen issues.

 

While it may be theoretically easier to produce a smaller screen of the same pixel density, the actual, physical manufacturing of the item includes numerous other aspects that may adversely affect production.  This is especially true with such huge volumes.

 

For example:

1. Operators/Assemblers have to learn something new.

2. New hires will be learning for the first time.

3. A new size means new tools.

4. New fixtures.

5. New manufacturing areas where either old or new equipment has just been installed.

6. New procedures might have typos or ambiguities.

7. Material transportation might have flaws.

 

Seriously, this list is endless.  A lesser company would have higher yield rates because they wouldn't care as much, and they might let some of the crap slip through.  Besides, I can guarantee you that Apple plans for fallout.

post #30 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

I'll clarify: he believes these rumors, and he is building his view of the company on them.

That make more sense now? I mean, not to DO, but in context.

He acts as if Apple has promised the world an unlimited supply of Retina screened devices, and can't deliver out of incompetence.

Instead of congratulating them for attempting a really difficult push on the envelope, which is what a reasonable person would do without having to say so. Such fake negativity!
post #31 of 43
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post
Such fake negativity!

 

Oh, it's real negativity, it's just put on with a fake support air. lol.gif

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #32 of 43
So the 13" MBA is delayed due to poor yields of the screen.

Or maybe it's a strike at the assembly plant.

Or maybe they're having trouble getting everything working with an ARM CPU in a computer that size.

Or maybe there are quality problems.

Or maybe Tim Cook decided to make last minute changes.

Or maybe they're fixing Maps before they ship.

Come on, can we please stop with the stupid crap? There's no real evidence that Apple plans to make a 13" rMBA - much less that it's delayed.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #33 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

The other thing here is that you can have a process running along producing very good yields and then all of a sudden go to hell. Tracking dozen the root cause can be a struggle.

 

I agree.

 

 

Quote:
Sometimes I don't think people understand what is written. 

 

Just because AI regurgitates and extrapolates on DigiTimes's Apple fodder doesn't mean it's the whole story.  Let's quote the portion of the DigiTimes article that this is all based on:

 

 

Quote:
DigiTimes:
The shipment delay is said to have been caused by weak yields of the Retina Display, the sources noted.

 

Ok, so the supplier is supposedly having weak yields of the Retina Display.  Big deal.  Apple sets tough standards.  Have we seen any of these claims cause serious problems for Apple's bottom line?

 

 

Quote:
If good yields are the result of poor quality control then you have questionable product reaching the consumer.

 

While great QC will often result in lower yields, good yields do not require poor QC.  This, the converse of my statement, is absurd.  I neither stated this nor implied it.

 

 

Quote:
Demand outstripping supply is never a good thing.

 

Are you serious?

 

 

Quote:
In the case of this article though I'm not too sure I would give much credit to its accuracy. It just seems fishy to me that Apple would not have a contingency plan for an issue that has been suggested here.

 

I agree.  Of course Apple has a contingency plan.  Sometimes that just means waiting it out, but there's no way they don't have a plan.  

post #34 of 43
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post
There's no real evidence that Apple plans to make a 13" rMBA…

 

… Gotta call you on that one. I agree with everything else, but really, you can't say they don't intend to make every display they create retina, much less not just one of their laptops.

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #35 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

The publication claimed that Apple's smaller iPad is "suffering low yields for components such as the display and chassis." Unlike the third-generation iPad, the iPad mini is not expected to have a high-resolution Retina display.

Low yields for the chassis? Low yields for a not retina display? 

post #36 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

… Gotta call you on that one. I agree with everything else, but really, you can't say they don't intend to make every display they create retina, much less not just one of their laptops.

Agree - it is hard to imagine that Apple is not planning on going all retina. It is not as if display technology will cease development. The bar has been set and eventually every Apple display will be retina. 

post #37 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman View Post

Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.
So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.

 

My oh my, that was desperate ... 1oyvey.gif

post #38 of 43
Originally Posted by paxman View Post
Agree - it is hard to imagine that Apple is not planning on going all retina. It is not as if display technology will cease development. The bar has been set and eventually every Apple display will be retina. 

 

Eventually every display will be retina!

 

They'll kick. They'll scream. They'll whine. But they already know that they've lost. They already know that not only has Apple beaten them to the punch AGAIN, they have no hope of competing for the next five years, because Apple will be monopolizing so much of the manufactured product that there won't be room for them.

 

And in these five years, Apple will have problems like the ones in this thread. And Apple will, again, be the one to not only teach the industry what is best and what the real future will be like, they will have once again done all the R&D for the rest of the industry, so that when retina display yields are large enough that Dell and HP and Acer—provided any of them are even still around in five years—will be able to punch out their crap retina displays without having to worry about any of the manufacturing problems that Apple already solved.

 

And not once will Apple be thanked.

 

"The new Dell UltraVision Display. Inspired by LG."

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply

Originally posted by Marvin

Even if [the 5.5” iPhone] exists, it doesn’t deserve to.
Reply
post #39 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedromartins View Post

And the stock starts to go down..lol

Rumored crisis about a rumored product! Pretty soon, we'll have rumors about rumors about rumors. Christopher Nolan should make a movie about it!

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #40 of 43
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

Eventually every display will be retina!

 

They'll kick. They'll scream. They'll whine. But they already know that they've lost. They already know that not only has Apple beaten them to the punch AGAIN, they have no hope of competing for the next five years, because Apple will be monopolizing so much of the manufactured product that there won't be room for them.

 

And in these five years, Apple will have problems like the ones in this thread. And Apple will, again, be the one to not only teach the industry what is best and what the real future will be like, they will have once again done all the R&D for the rest of the industry, so that when retina display yields are large enough that Dell and HP and Acer—provided any of them are even still around in five years—will be able to punch out their crap retina displays without having to worry about any of the manufacturing problems that Apple already solved.

 

And not once will Apple be thanked.

 

"The new Dell UltraVision Display. Inspired by LG."

 

ROFL. Chumming for trolls?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Rumor: New 13" MacBook Pro affected by 'weak yields' of Retina display