or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The future of the MacBook Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The future of the MacBook Pro - Page 2

post #41 of 199
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Well, the laws of physics.

We're talking about GPUs, right?

We sure are. The 650M has a max of 2 GB and I think by default the $2,799 should have had that if I already didn't make that clear in previous posts. So when the nVidia 700M series is released (740M and up) I hope they have at least one model with the max amount of memory on the best card that can be handled.

If that is a 750M, put 2 GB in there. If it is 4 GB, perhaps include that as an option but I doubt that is possible. I had a friend who did tell me that you need to be careful because some OEMs like to load up a lot of memory on a mediocre card and sell it as something amazing. Having said that, you couldn't put a GTX 660M in the rMBP because of the (I think) TDP.

I also hope the screen issues are resolved by that point and I think they will be.
post #42 of 199
Thread Starter 
Bump. Thoughts on the next retina MacBook Pro? Anyone?
post #43 of 199
Originally Posted by Winter View Post
Bump. Thoughts on the next retina MacBook Pro? Anyone?

 

Haswell, TDP-equivalent modern nVidia chips, maybe 802.11ac finally, and either slight bumps to SSD capacity or cheaper at the same sizes.

 

I tend not to go any more specific than that these days.

post #44 of 199
Thread Starter 
I am bumping this thread since my mini and iMac thread is being overrun with MBP posts. : P
post #45 of 199

A lotta good that will do!    

 

Sadly I suspect we are many months away from refreshes for any of these machines.   If intel has indeed slipped as far as delivery of Haswell mobile parts it might be September before this discussion gets interesting.   In the end all of these threads are really about one thing, that is Haswell and its GPUs.   It is how Haswell performs that will mold the future of these machines.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

I am bumping this thread since my mini and iMac thread is being overrun with MBP posts. : P
post #46 of 199
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

A lotta good that will do!    

Sadly I suspect we are many months away from refreshes for any of these machines.   If intel has indeed slipped as far as delivery of Haswell mobile parts it might be September before this discussion gets interesting.   In the end all of these threads are really about one thing, that is Haswell and its GPUs.   It is how Haswell performs that will mold the future of these machines.  

The good news is that once the Haswell machines get released, we can start the 2014 thread! lol.gif
post #47 of 199

Many audio video guys I know in LA are sticking with their old 17" MBP. I hope APPLE decides to support its core group of power users

who would love  feature packed 17" with 32 gb ram, blu ray, discrete high end GPU and a large SSD.

These are not web surfing college kids but guys who work on their machines many hours a day and use all those options the average user doesn't need.

They CANNOT use mp3 in their business which is why an optical disc burner is essential. If you are a pro you understand. If not, please don't regale with how great a15 retina display is.  

post #48 of 199
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post
Many audio video guys I know in LA are sticking with their old 17" MBP. I hope APPLE decides to support its core group of power users who would love  feature packed 17" with 32 gb ram, blu ray, discrete high end GPU and a large SSD.

 

Again, never happening. Ever.


They CANNOT use mp3 in their business which is why an optical disc burner is essential. If you are a pro you understand. If not, please don't regale with how great a15 retina display is.  

 

Saying this proves you don't know what you're talking about and that they don't have a clue what they're doing, either.

post #49 of 199
Thread Starter 
I feel they just needed to max the memory of the 650M to 2 GB. The next rMBP 15" should be even better with the Kepler refresh.

The 17" is nice and before you know it, 32 GB will be available.
post #50 of 199

Yeah you know better. Where did you learn manners? When you record in the professional world 90% of the time artists want CDs as reference. Of course one can plug one in but that's a lot less convenient, especially on the road.

post #51 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

When you record in the professional world 90% of the time artists want CDs as reference. Of course one can plug one in but that's a lot less convenient, especially on the road.

Isn't it also inconvenient for this 90% to carry CDs around?

Artists most certainly need color accurate displays and the Retina displays aren't just high-res displays but IPS displays as opposed to the older TN models.

32GB RAM support will likely come with DDR4 and SSD sizes will increase as prices drop. Optical is going to be external from now on. 17" might come back once the Retina prices drop but it wouldn't be essential that this happens.
post #52 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

Many audio video guys I know in LA are sticking with their old 17" MBP. I hope APPLE decides to support its core group of power users

who would love  feature packed 17" with 32 gb ram, blu ray, discrete high end GPU and a large SSD.

These are not web surfing college kids but guys who work on their machines many hours a day and use all those options the average user doesn't need.

They CANNOT use mp3 in their business which is why an optical disc burner is essential. If you are a pro you understand. If not, please don't regale with how great a15 retina display is.  

What you're describing is a type of machine that Apple has never made or addressed. They have never used either the high end of mobile gaming gpus outside of the larger imacs. 32GB today would require 4 sodimms. A number of other brands support this through hardware branded as mobile workstations. These typically have quadro or firepro mobile versions (mostly different drivers and clocked a bit lower), support for 4 sodimms, and typically decent display options. Some have blu-ray options. I haven't seen it on all of them. As for ssds, today 512 or 768 is the highest I have seen from any brand even in that hardware class. I have yet to see cto options for 1TB ssds. It's a more common feature to have more than one drive supported internally rather than one large SSD. The models are out there. Look at Lenovo's thinkpad W xxx models or HP elitebooks. I don't remember what Dell calls their line. There are quite a few options from smaller brands as well. Apple has simply never offered these features, so they wouldn't have current customers that consider them a hard requirement unless they're trying to migrate from an older mac pro to a macbook pro as a primary computing device.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


17" might come back once the Retina prices drop but it wouldn't be essential that this happens.

I find that unlikely. Once you're a couple years out, if a 17" display was a hard requirement, too many of those people would have moved on.

post #53 of 199
Thread Starter 
Was the 17" MacBook Pro a huge seller before it was canceled? I don't believe it was though I invite to be proven wrong.

How is the 11" MacBook Air doing? I honestly feel it should go by the wayside but that's just me.

Less is more I feel.

13" MBA, 13" rMBP, 15" rMBP, Mac mini, iMac, and one Mac Pro.

Your mileage may vary.
post #54 of 199

Most likely it wasn't a great seller.   For most people a 15" machine is a big laptop.  

 

The problem as I see it Apple can't be focused on just massive sellers, they do need to support an array of users though.   Any 17" machine would need to be profitable of course but with Apples pricing structure I suspect that over charging drove demand way down.   Apples solution in such cases is to kill the product instead of adjusting pricing to meet market realities.   That isn't always the right thing to do, sometimes you need to accept thinner margins on certain products to avoid alienating to many customers.   

 

As for the 11" AIR it is apparently doing very well.   It is an ideal platform for students not in need of a high performance platform.  I couldn't see investing in one but that has a lot to do with rather old eyes.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Was the 17" MacBook Pro a huge seller before it was canceled? I don't believe it was though I invite to be proven wrong.

How is the 11" MacBook Air doing? I honestly feel it should go by the wayside but that's just me.

Less is more I feel.

13" MBA, 13" rMBP, 15" rMBP, Mac mini, iMac, and one Mac Pro.

Your mileage may vary.

Less is more is a mantra often proven wrong.   It is one of the reasons Samsung has had so much success against Apple, the don't rely upon the concept at all.   Rather they try to offer enough platforms that there is something to please everyone even if that means putting up with Android.  Frankly Apples lack of success with the desktop line up proves without a doubt that less is not more and can lead to disasters in sales with slip ups in schedules, quality or product diversity.   More so Apples expanding laptop line up and the success there highlights that less is more is exactly the opposite of what you want to strive for.    The goal should be right sizing the product line.  

post #55 of 199
Thread Starter 
When I think of less is more, I think of how Jobs introduced products when he came back. The famous "quadrant" if you will.

Maybe it's just me, but I find an 11" screen to be too small.

I am hoping they eventually drop the 11" Air and make the 13" Air $999 or less but that's just me.

As for the graphics in the 15" MacBook Pro (maybe even the 13" but this is doubtable), my eyes are heavily reliant on the Kepler refresh.
post #56 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Was the 17" MacBook Pro a huge seller before it was canceled? I don't believe it was though I invite to be proven wrong.

I really wanted to find a cheesy magic 8 ball graphic, but I couldn't find a good one. Anyway look at the remaining models. The prior versions of the 13 and 15" remain. Prior to the early 2013 refresh you still had the $2200 version of the 15" classic macbook pro. If the 17" was popular today, it probably would have remained. Phasing it out at that time meant that it was probably a slow moving product that was likely to lose some ground to the rMBP, even though more pixels doesn't grant you the same thing as display real estate. Higher resolution + IPS is too tempting. The 17" didn't have a lot of other defining features. In the PowerPC era the 17" reserved the highest clocked cpus. That is no longer the case, and they didn't hold additional drives internally or a better gpu. The hardware was virtually identical to the 15" with a larger screen. As for the express slot, when that was removed from the 15" version, it lost a lot of third party support. I wouldn't have invested in express cards after that as manufacturers can be slow on things like driver updates when it comes to limited markets with relatively thin margins.

post #57 of 199
Thread Starter 
Perhaps if the 17" MBP had a better video card to begin with, it might have sold better, no? Are 17" notebooks popular in the PC World now?
post #58 of 199
Originally Posted by Winter View Post
Perhaps if the 17" MBP had a better video card to begin with, it might have sold better, no?

 

I don't really see that as being a reason.

post #59 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Perhaps if the 17" MBP had a better video card to begin with, it might have sold better, no? Are 17" notebooks popular in the PC World now?

17" notebooks are always a niche, especially now. I was pointing out that the class of notebook being referenced was something that Apple never offered. Some of the other oems offer them. They probably carry high margins, but I would not expect them to be high volume items.

post #60 of 199
Thread Starter 
I went into Best Buy tonight and just felt like looking around and saw a Samsung 17" notebook with 2 GB of the 650M for $1,399. Of course I thought that was not too shabby but it dawned on me just before I wrote this that it's useless if it isn't GDDR5 memory but DDR3.
post #61 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

This is continued from the mini/iMac wishlist topic but I want to keep them separated. Can we all pretty much agree that the retina MacBook Pro is the future and that eventually the unibody MacBook Pro is going away.

Yes, it's clear that the old, thick, and heavy MacBook Pro with the internal optical brick will go away.  I guess it will happen with the introduction of Haswell processors, but it might have to wait for the introduction of Broadwell processors.  It will depend on relative sales and on Retina display yields.

 

When Apple are able to consolidate their MacBook Pro line by dropping the internal optical brick, it might be an opportunity to introduce a 17" Retina MacBook Pro.  There should be some pent-up demand for a 17" model, which may now be absent due to the low yields and very high cost of 17" Retina displays.


Edited by mcarling - 3/16/13 at 3:12am
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #62 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

I went into Best Buy tonight and just felt like looking around and saw a Samsung 17" notebook with 2 GB of the 650M for $1,399. Of course I thought that was not too shabby but it dawned on me just before I wrote this that it's useless if it isn't GDDR5 memory but DDR3.


The software on this forum is doing weird things to my posts, so I am rewriting. I deleted a bunch of stuff and rewrote before, then it posted the old stuff. I'm not sure what is wrong. Anyway I was going to say I dislike the consumer grade notebooks, and the requirements for things like gaming tend to be a bit different than offloaded computation or OpenGL apps where a high degree of precision is required (CAD or 3D apps). Video ram is frequently listed as a parameter when it comes to minimum spec requirements in specialized apps, so it tends to be a bigger deal to me. I pay attention in the case of Apple, as they don't really do specialized hardware. Their line kind of is what it is, so if you use a Mac you have to look at what is available in terms of computers and added peripherals to come up with a complete solution.


Edited by hmm - 3/15/13 at 3:22pm
post #63 of 199
Thread Starter 
Let's continue to debate a possible integrated only 15" rMBP. How much would you price it at? This is important because if you were to introduce it, I think $1,800 is too much.

Of course suppose it was introduced and you had the 13" base at $1,199, the upgraded 13" at $1,499, the base 15" at $1,799, the base discrete at $1,999, and the high end discrete at $2,199.

For the $2,199 model, whatever graphics card is put in, there needs to be an option for maxed out graphics memory or the graphics memory should be maxed out as standard be it 2 GB or 4 GB.
post #64 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

Let's continue to debate a possible integrated only 15" rMBP. How much would you price it at? This is important because if you were to introduce it, I think $1,800 is too much.
Well $1800 would be too much. However the rMBP is marketed to people that could benefit from a discrete GPU even with Haswell. As such I don't think we will see Apple dropping the discrete GPU in rMBP. The qualifier here would be that the current situation remains the same and that there is no OpenCL support yet for the intel chip. If Apple comes out with solid support for OpenCL on Intels GPU then all bets are off.
Quote:

Of course suppose it was introduced and you had the 13" base at $1,199, the upgraded 13" at $1,499, the base 15" at $1,799, the base discrete at $1,999, and the high end discrete at $2,199.
In general MBP prices are a bit on the rich side, Apple could afford to adjust pricing some.
Quote:
For the $2,199 model, whatever graphics card is put in, there needs to be an option for maxed out graphics memory or the graphics memory should be maxed out as standard be it 2 GB or 4 GB.

Well this I have to agree with, Apple is just plain stingy when it comes to memory of any type. The interesting thing here is that Haswell supposedly supports uniform access to system memory. If Apple can alter Mac OS to support this the days of worrying about system RAM dedicated to a GPU will be gone. Software often lags hardware with respect to capabilities like this so Haswell could become one of those bastards that are transitional. Frankly at this point we don't know how Apple will go about supporting GPUs as equals when it comes to memory management. Due to this lag the full capabilities of Haswell may never be realized in Mac OS.
post #65 of 199
Thread Starter 
According to nVidia, the 750M is supposed to be 6.5x faster than the Intel HD 4000. We'll see how it fares next to Haswell.
post #66 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

According to nVidia, the 750M is supposed to be 6.5x faster than the Intel HD 4000. We'll see how it fares next to Haswell.

They are claiming the 750M is 75% faster than the 650M too though. It's only clocked 15-30% faster and the same architecture.

They list the 650M as being 4.5x faster than the HD4000. So 6.5/4.5 means the 750M is only 44% faster than the 650M but they say 75%. They're just trying to use the best numbers in all cases.

You can see the benchmarks between the HD4000 and 650M:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-HD-Graphics-4000.69168.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-GT-650M.71887.0.html

In almost every test, the difference is closer to 3x faster. NVidia is using a single best case for marketing.

Assuming that the 650M is 3x faster than the HD4000 and Haswell is 2x faster, that means the 650M would remain 1.5x faster. That means Haswell would be closer to the 640M. What's funny is they list the 640M as 4x faster than the HD4000, which would make the 650M only 12% faster, which is true in some cases but not most cases. It's basically any numbers to make them look better than Intel.

Performance is going to vary between different tests but Haswell should at least bring the IGP to the 640M, which is a decent level of performance. If it goes in the entry 15" MBP so they can sell a rMBP at $1799, it might seem disappointing vs the 750M but not so much vs the 650M.
post #67 of 199
Thread Starter 
Now the question is how much video memory the 15" MBP and even the iMac have with the new cards. Hopefully none of them have 512 MB and the MBP has 2 GB somewhere.
post #68 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



Assuming that the 650M is 3x faster than the HD4000 and Haswell is 2x faster, that means the 650M would remain 1.5x faster. That means Haswell would be closer to the 640M. What's funny is they list the 640M as 4x faster than the HD4000, which would make the 650M only 12% faster, which is true in some cases but not most cases. It's basically any numbers to make them look better than Intel.

Performance is going to vary between different tests but Haswell should at least bring the IGP to the 640M, which is a decent level of performance. If it goes in the entry 15" MBP so they can sell a rMBP at $1799, it might seem disappointing vs the 750M but not so much vs the 650M.

Drivers and supported functions are sometimes more important than raw performance numbers, but it depends on the targeted range for the machine. They have to determine who might buy it.

post #69 of 199
Thread Starter 
So have the classic 15" be integrated only? I wouldn't mind that with a price drop.
post #70 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter View Post

So have the classic 15" be integrated only? I wouldn't mind that with a price drop.

What do you mean by classic 15" ???  Do you mean non-Retina?  It is possible that Apple might offer non-Retina MBPs with Haswell, but I would be surprised.  I'm not even sure that Apple will offer non-Retina MBAs with Haswell.

Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #71 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcarling View Post

 I'm not even sure that Apple will offer non-Retina MBAs with Haswell.

The retina versions received minor revisions recently. The classic versions went untouched. The older style still exists as selling the rMBP at those price points would likely lead to either supply constraints or margins that are not in line with Apple's expectations. In either case these remain the entry level notebooks within Apple's lineup, in spite of being over $1000 regardless and closer to $1400 with a decent configuration. I suspect it will be another year before you see retina Airs, but I have been wrong before. I also thought an imac redesign would come this year after further studying of various screen treatments at the smaller sizes, but they have recently accelerated how quickly they propagate certain kinds of changes through the line.

post #72 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

I suspect it will be another year before you see retina Airs, but I have been wrong before.

I would love to put a wager on that.

Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #73 of 199

Interesting watching Dell's fall from greatness. Back in the day they used to at least offer ALL the latest and greatest hardware so the customer could max out performance, if so desired. Then they adopted the "its good enough for the masses" idiots philosophy which is stock in trade for bean counters, and since then, major decline. I think this is what Apple may be doing as they abandon their most loyal and biggest spending high end power users who want Mac pros and 17" Macbook Pros with lots of options. The reverse halo effect is never pretty. 

post #74 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

Interesting watching Dell's fall from greatness. Back in the day they used to at least offer ALL the latest and greatest hardware so the customer could max out performance, if so desired. Then they adopted the "its good enough for the masses" idiots philosophy which is stock in trade for bean counters, and since then, major decline. I think this is what Apple may be doing as they abandon their most loyal and biggest spending high end power users who want Mac pros and 17" Macbook Pros with lots of options. The reverse halo effect is never pretty.

Not quite. Dell went after high volume at the expense of profits and lowered quality. They only ship something like 3x Apple's volume but make 5% or less net margin vs Apple's 20-25%. Not only that, Apple's average selling price is significantly higher.

They also didn't have a plan B. They saturated their primary market by selling too much too soon and didn't bother thinking about what to do when that happened. They have no real place in the 'post-pc' market.

This is nothing like what Apple is doing at all. Dell also has a healthy workstation market so they didn't sacrifice it in favour of consumers:

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/02/19/dell_q4_f2013_numbers/

"Dell doesn't report operating margins by product category, but if it did there seems little doubt that the enterprise system business is propping up the PC client business, much as was the case with IBM before it sold off its PC business to Lenovo."

In terms of loyalty, Mac Pro buyers think they are the most loyal and biggest spending customers, even when posting things like this:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/156913/my-new-mac-pro-a-2009-with-a-intel-xeon-westmere-3-33-6-cores

Buy used or hang onto an old Mac Pro, buy 3rd party components to spec it up and avoid paying for a new one. Guess how much Apple gets out of that. Doing everything possible to avoid paying Apple money is the polar opposite of loyalty.

Apple is currently providing for their most loyal customers - the iMac, Mini, MBA and Macbook Pro buyers, who upgrade regularly and pay for their BTO options. The 17" MBP most likely wasn't regularly upgraded due to the initial price. Apple could bring it back if there's a price gap when the rMBP price drops but 17" MBP buyers are no more important than 15" MBP buyers. There is an assumption that paying $2500 for a machine makes you a better customer than one paying $1800. It's not the case unless they have the same upgrade cycle, which is not likely, given that one of the primary reasons people give for paying more is 'it lasts longer'.

There's no sense in abandoning a high profit margin sector for the sake of it and Apple hasn't for now but it wouldn't affect the company in either the short or long term if they did. Apple is continuing to deliver quality products at a premium with high resolution, anti-glare, IPS displays with the highest-end desktop/laptop CPUs Intel offers with high performance features like Thunderbolt, fast GPUs and fast SSD drives.
post #75 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post



In terms of loyalty, Mac Pro buyers think they are the most loyal and biggest spending customers, even when posting things like this:

http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/156913/my-new-mac-pro-a-2009-with-a-intel-xeon-westmere-3-33-6-cores

Buy used or hang onto an old Mac Pro, buy 3rd party components to spec it up and avoid paying for a new one. Guess how much Apple gets out of that. Doing everything possible to avoid paying Apple money is the polar opposite of loyalty.

Apple is currently providing for their most loyal customers - the iMac, Mini, MBA and Macbook Pro buyers, who upgrade regularly and pay for their BTO options. The 17" MBP most likely wasn't regularly upgraded due to the initial price. Apple could bring it back if there's a price gap when the rMBP price drops but 17" MBP buyers are no more important than 15" MBP buyers. There is an assumption that paying $2500 for a machine makes you a better customer than one paying $1800. It's not the case unless they have the same upgrade cycle, which is not likely, given that one of the primary reasons people give for paying more is 'it lasts longer'.
 

You make way too many assertions from a couple forum posts. Beyond that you can't even make such an upgrade with a meaningful generation gap. Note how it's 4,1 -> 5,1. That's a 2009 vs 2010 configuration. The 2012 is just the same as the 2010 with a couple specs shuffled. The only part worth addressing is that growth in software demands hasn't been entirely consistent, so people may be holding onto these things for longer periods of time. The really interesting things to me are technologies like CUDA where basic workstations can leverage things that used to be the domain of smaller node based servers, but it's no different from anything that has happened before. Minicomputers could never handle mainframe loads. Desktop workstations could never replace dedicated hardware. I could probably think of more cliches, but they're all the same concept. Mac Pro like machines aren't exactly at the very top. They are a smaller market, but whoever owns these divisions, they will be around for some time. That doesn't mean Apple will maintain interest.

post #76 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

You make way too many assertions from a couple forum posts.

It always stays at a couple no matter how many examples come along. It must be at least a handful by now.

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/forum/360597-28-upgrade-macpro
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1505370
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=781908
http://macperformanceguide.com/Mac-MacPro-upgrade.html
http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/step_by_step_mac_pro_processor_upgrade
http://www.ifixit.com/Answers/View/118042/Mac+Pro+1.1+Change+out+CPU
http://store.apple.com/uk/question/answers/mac/can-i-upgrade-the-cpu-on-mac-pro/Q2DCC7FHTU2UUT9X2
http://forum.netkas.org/index.php?topic=3829.0
http://www.staze.org/mac-pro-11-cpu-upgrade/
http://forums.appleinsider.com/t/144215/upgrading-a-2006-macpro-2-66-ghz-machine
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3969568?start=0&tstart=0
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4894228?start=0&tstart=0
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4074230?start=0&tstart=0
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4685505?start=0&tstart=0
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1375414
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1540397
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1533098
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1419182
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/41988597
http://www.waitingoutside.com/2010/02/upgrading-a-2006-apple-mac-pro-11-with-2-xeon-x5355-processors/
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/music-computers/668475-mac-pro-1-1-cpu-upgrade-advice.html

You know what the problem is. When you hold onto hardware for 6 years, the resale value is gone so it's a much better option to upgrade components than to buy new.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

The only part worth addressing is that growth in software demands hasn't been entirely consistent, so people may be holding onto these things for longer periods of time.

That doesn't explain the desire to upgrade.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Mac Pro like machines aren't exactly at the very top. They are a smaller market, but whoever owns these divisions, they will be around for some time. That doesn't mean Apple will maintain interest.

It depends on what technology comes along:

http://phys.org/news/2013-01-qubit-bodes-future-quantum.html

The CUDA revolution started with just a single research project:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ian-buck-nvidia,2393.html

The smaller form factors will keep eroding away the large ones, especially the more that GPU computing takes hold:

http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/graphics/display/20130412175120_Nvidia_Next_Generation_Maxwell_Architecture_Will_Break_New_Grounds.html

Servers will always exist but they don't use the tower form factor.
post #77 of 199

Eventually, even big iron servers will be disposable non-serviceable units.  I guess the next generation of the iMac and the Mac Mini will be completely sealed and just as upgradeable as an iPad.  The Mac Pro will probably be the last Mac to not even have user installable memory, but it will eventually happen.

 

To those who say they will never buy one, fine, keep using 201x hardware until it dies -- even when eyeglasses have 100x more computing power than your Mac Pro.

Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
Mac user since August 1983.
Reply
post #78 of 199

Twisted logic on so many levels. Fact: I personally know many users in LA who work in pro audio waiting for another 17". Its not that anyone is "MORE IMPORTANT", lol. It's still an important and high spending sector who use these for a living, just like Mac pro users. You may be happy with what;s available NOW, I and many others are not.

post #79 of 199
Thread Starter 
The immediate future of the MacBook Pro depends upon avoiding the issues with the Rev. A version.
post #80 of 199
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

I personally know many users in LA who work in pro audio waiting for another 17".

Relative to Apple's shipping volumes, the number of users you know would have to be at least in the tens of thousands to be significant though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

Its not that anyone is "MORE IMPORTANT", lol.

You suggested that customers who buy Mac Pros and 17" laptops are "their most loyal and biggest spending high end power users". These are the same people who would say that if they don't get what they want they'll either stop buying until they get what they want or switch to a Windows PC. They spend big once and then don't upgrade and if there isn't a specific upgrade, the loyalty is worth nothing.

Buyers of 15" Macbook Pros are currently Apple's most loyal high-end power users and as such get the foremost attention from Apple.

If the prices drop in June and they don't bring back the 17", the people waiting will just have to deal with the 15". Apple has to make a higher screen resolution again and they might not be able to get the yields good enough to justify doing for such a low volume of customers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Trajan Long View Post

It's still an important and high spending sector who use these for a living, just like Mac pro users. You may be happy with what's available NOW, I and many others are not.

Apple has already stopped selling the Mac Pro across Europe and this will be the case for the next few months. The 17" MBP has been out of sale for about a year now. If these events had a significant impact to Apple, you can bet they'd have done something about it.

It may be significant to some potential buyers but you use whatever tools are available.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winter 
The immediate future of the MacBook Pro depends upon avoiding the issues with the Rev. A version.

They need to fix some of the quality problems:

http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/macbook-pro-retina-lg-class-action-suit-started/

but these things happen. Now that they have the manufacturing line setup for Retina displays, they shouldn't have the same problems they did before and they have no reason to change the design again.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The future of the MacBook Pro