or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple planning to launch all-new 12" MacBook, higher-res sixth-gen iPad in 2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple planning to launch all-new 12" MacBook, higher-res sixth-gen iPad in 2014 - Page 3

post #81 of 111
I'd very much welcome what's been mentioned:smokey: in earlier posts:

- 12" rMBA
- 14" rMB
- 16" rMBP

Simple. Elegant. Streamlined. 1smoking.gif
post #82 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

I've been wondering the same thing. Recently, his drivel has been sourced from "the well connected Kuo" on AI. The most recent one says "Kuo, who has earned a positive reputation for accurately predicting Apple's future product plans, "
Which history doesn't support.
Quote:
In reality, I haven't seen any evidence that Kuo is any more accurate than any of the other idiots who masquerade as analysts.
He has been completely wrong numerous times.
Quote:
I wonder if Kuo pay AI a marketing fee.
Good possibility.
post #83 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

I have to admit that I thought there was no point to the iPad Mini and was quite wrong about that one. Yet, my argument would be that the case for a bigger iPad is a weak one. If you're going to go there, the Air makes a whole lot more sense. Th 9.7-inch form factor would be just about perfect were the device in question significantly lighter than the current iPad. A significantly larger tablet would suffer from being about the same in price as the Air yet limited in comparison. A 128GB iPad comes in at $799. A 128GB Air starts at $999 (US). A larger iPad would be quite close in price to the Air, clearly having to cost more than the 9.7-inch unit.

I'd think a 30-40% larger iPad with no other major changes outside of the larger display with increased resolution but with the same PPI, the larger casing in which to place it, and a larger battery to fill up the additional space as well as to account the additional power use for the display could start at $100-180 more which giving Apple their profit margin for what I assume will have a lower economics of scale associated with it. That makes it $599 to $679 to to start.

I do see what you're saying when you match a 128GB of NAND but I can't help but be reminded of the initial anti-iPad arguments that were comparing a $500 laptop with a 12-14" display, higher resolution, faster processor, more RAM, and a much larger storage capacity. Such a large tablet wouldn't be for me (I hardly using my 9.7" iPad 3 as it is) but I think it would be popular with many people, especially if it was there primary computing device and the total weight was at or under the current iPad 4 weight.
post #84 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

Sure, but in no way does that mean Apple will do something radically different just because they can.
I don't understand this mentality. Apple is the master at doing radical. Think about the Mac Pro, the Mini, the AIR, the iPad, the iPhone, the iMac and a bunch of other radical things they have come up with. Sure people take them for granted now but each was radical for the industry.
Quote:

As previously noted adding 30-40% more pixels to the same size display adds a lot a negatives and no real bonus unless your eyesight is good enough that more than 265 PPI on a 9.7" display that "seeing" the pixels hurts your user experience.
It isn't that simple.
Quote:
It's just not a very Apple-y route to take. Let's remember that they made statements about how developer guidelines before they had any Retina displays.
Maybe, but I see an issue with the 13" MBP being too close to the 13" MBA for Apple's liking that they would change it up to make the sizing different to help spread it out.
They are vastly different machine though.
Quote:
Also consider that the 11" MBA is $999 WITHOUT a Retina display so I'm not really sure how a 12" Retina MacBook could be $600 simply by going plastic. Even if they use a slower Core chip that isn't a ULV SFF chip the cost would still likely be over $150 for that chip. The iPad is $500 without the same number of pixels expected here but there is a huge cost reduction in other areas.
I don't see a problem. Don't forget Intel has some very high integration chips coming. As for the screen nobody knows what sort of deal they cut with Sharp. Sharp was close to going under and apparently cut some sort of deal with somebody to survive long enough to get IGZO onto the market.
Quote:
Finally, consider that it makes more sense to systematically step current products into lower price points since it's like a pyramid shape when it comes to potential buyers. To me this means they would offer no more than $799, $200 less than the current 11" MBA as the next available pricing tier (at the extreme end), but not drop it by $400. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see it, but I don't think it's very likely.

There are many factors at work here. One thing that can be agreed upon here is that Apples line up doesn't serve the entire potential customer base out there. Many people simply won't spend a grand on a laptop. Combine that with a bunch of technology converging in 2014 allowing Apple to do a decent machine at a much lower price I don't see a problem. They could do a machine with everything soldered on one board and still have a printed circuit board that is smaller than the one in the MBP.

A point of thought here, if you track the ARM based single board computer market you will see what high integration provides hardware developers. Credit card sized boards are often very impressive as is Apples "A" based solutions. Once Intel starts shipping SoCs with that sort of integration, you will see very powerful computers coming to a shop near you at very good prices.
post #85 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

I'd think a 30-40% larger iPad with no other major changes outside of the larger display with increased resolution but with the same PPI, the larger casing in which to place it, and a larger battery to fill up the additional space as well as to account the additional power use for the display could start at $100-180 more which giving Apple their profit margin for what I assume will have a lower economics of scale associated with it. That makes it $599 to $679 to to start.

I do see what you're saying when you match a 128GB of NAND but I can't help but be reminded of the initial anti-iPad arguments that were comparing a $500 laptop with a 12-14" display, higher resolution, faster processor, more RAM, and a much larger storage capacity. Such a large tablet wouldn't be for me (I hardly using my 9.7" iPad 3 as it is) but I think it would be popular with many people, especially if it was there primary computing device and the total weight was at or under the current iPad 4 weight.

You lost me at primary computing device.
post #86 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I don't understand this mentality. Apple is the master at doing radical.

When has Apple done something for the sake of doing it without having a clear goal in mind to amaze and profit? What you suggest doesn't have any of those aspects. What you suggest just sounds like the typical 'Step 1: Thow. Step 2: See if sticks to wall. Step 3: Repeat step 1." we see from nearly everyone else. It is that simple because we've seen Apple do 2x on the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, 15" MBP, and 13" MBP without once being "radical" as to negatively affect all developers and customers in more ways than they have to. Even with the MBPs the windowed OS environment means they didn't have to go exactly 2x to create a great high-density display but they did. Are you claiming Appel was boring because they didn't go 1.785304x for the MBP displays but instead thought about how this would work best as a business decision?
post #87 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carmissimo View Post

You lost me at primary computing device.

For the people that would read and comment on a tech forum our primary device is likely a Mac, but for a great many users and a growing segment of computer users the iPad is their primary device. If they have some form of PC they probably don't use it much because they find the iPad a better choice all around which is why they may think a larger iPad would be even better.
post #88 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr O View Post
 

I have fond memories of my sexy 12" Powerbook.

 

The 12" Air will most likely replace both the 11" and 13" Air.

 

It will certainly simplify Apple's 2014 product line up:

 

12" Macbook Air

15" Macbook Air ?

 

12" Macbook Pro

15" Macbook Pro

 

Interesting idea.. I see your post, and raise you this:

 

11" iBook (ARM-based, "unapologetically plastic," running iOS but able to run most general OSX apps)

12" Macbook Air

13" Macbook Pro

14" Macbook Air

15" Macbook Pro

 

I realize there's no obvious need to line up the screen sizes like that, but it feels right. Although there is no immediate benefit, I think it gives people a little peace of mind when things seem organized, and probably helps reduce the anxiety behind the "paradox of choice."

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post
 

OSX is what iOS is under it's graphical front end.  It's just the processor and the interface (touch versus Aqua) that's different.  It still has the same unix-based underpinnings.  From the command line, they both are the same.

 

Let me elaborate on the MacPad (as I have called it): I believe Apple is working on an iOS-based laptop, like a the Chromebook, but without a mouse.  It would run all iOS apps as it would have the A7/A8 processor, and it could either also have a typical desktop filing system or further expand on the iOS system of tightly integrated apps that store their data in a manner consumers don't need to understand.  It would be touch-based.  It's something beyond what any of us have conceived.  It will be more an iPad than a Mac.

 

However, Apple could really take the iOS system into the future if it could emulate an intel processor and run simple Mac apps.  Apple has a great history of transitioning products through emulation from 680x0 to PPC and PPC to Intel via Rosetta.   Today's processors are so damn fast that they can spin their wheels doing emulation and still run apps at what appears to be full-speed.  The biggest problem with any app emulation is how to bridge a mouse and keyboard interface of an old app onto a touch device.

 

You'd need a touchpad.  Wow.  It's a laptop.  It's an iPad.  It's both.  Or is it?

 

I don't know how they would handle the screen resolution differences from a Mac app to an iOS app, but Apple already has some screen fragmentation on their phones between the iPhone 4S and the 5s and 5ses (slightly taller).   If they choose to go to anything on a future iPad that is not a 2x multiple of 1024x768, they will have to have to find a solution for non-integral display resolutions.   This would open the door to ANY app resolution on the iPad (imagine 3840x2160 or 2160p) on a 9.7" iPad scaling to just about any resolution of a Mac app).  I'd love to see Apple bring classic Mac OS apps to the iPad through emulation.

 

I think Apple is working on the "next big thing" and are about to re-redefine the home computing experience.  PCs will eventually be dead to consumers.  I see only graphics and other professionals, engineers, and scientists using true PCs in the future (5-10 years out).  Consumers will use iOS devices for all their home-computing needs.  They'll be so simple, ANYONE can use them without knowledge of the OS, file systems, etc.  It's a concept Jobs had in the 80s that became reality with the iPad.  It will lead to the death of the Macintosh platform for anyone other than those generating new content or writing software.

 

Eventually, programmers will write iPad apps on an iOS device.  That device doesn't exist yet. But it will eventually.

Great points, I've had the same thoughts (minus the technical knowhow). It seems that for most users, the only benefits a "truck" mac provides are higher-performing or more "productive" apps, extra screen real estate for running the apps side by side, and the versatility (albeit confusing to many) of the hierarchical file storage system. Apple can solve all these issues (respectively) with a specially designed ARM SOC, notebook form factor, and integration of an iCloud file system that organizes cross platform files with tags (which is a new feature in Mavericks). For most users it's the best of both worlds, ease of use and familiarity of iOS, security of iOS, but able to run almost all the apps they used on their macs. Apple gets to lower the entry price of their notebook line, while increasing profit margins from the money they're saving on the CPU, GPU, RAM, and manufacturing. It also happens to be something that no other competitor can effectively compete against/copy. Hopefully we'll see this soon.


Edited by PatchyThePirate - 10/13/13 at 4:35pm

   

Reply

   

Reply
post #89 of 111
Frankly I don't see much point in positioning an ultralight laptop between the 11" and 13" Macbook Air or 1 inch below the 13" MBP...Are they going to do 14 inches too? There's just not enough difference.
post #90 of 111
Unless they're changing the size/aspect ratio of the iPad, I don't see the sense in increasing the resolution?
post #91 of 111
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

When has Apple done something for the sake of doing it without having a clear goal in mind to amaze and profit? What you suggest doesn't have any of those aspects. What you suggest just sounds like the typical 'Step 1: Thow. Step 2: See if sticks to wall. Step 3: Repeat step 1." we see from nearly everyone else. It is that simple because we've seen Apple do 2x on the iPhone, iPod Touch, iPad, 15" MBP, and 13" MBP without once being "radical" as to negatively affect all developers and customers in more ways than they have to. Even with the MBPs the windowed OS environment means they didn't have to go exactly 2x to create a great high-density display but they did. Are you claiming Appel was boring because they didn't go 1.785304x for the MBP displays but instead thought about how this would work best as a business decision?
I hope you don't believe what you wrote!

If you don't think the iPad or things like the iMac weren't radical at their debut then you are simply out of touch with reality.
post #92 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I hope you don't believe what you wrote!

If you don't think the iPad or things like the iMac weren't radical at their debut then you are simply out of touch with reality.

No, the business side of it was NOT radical. They did not use a RADICAL hexagonal display. They haven't used a curve display. They haven't used quad-core big.LITTLE processor design. They haven't used ANYTHING that would just marketing fluff that in itself would offer no real benefit to users and a hurt the user experience in many other ways as a result. Apple does not do RADICAL in that way!

They means Apple saying 264 PPI isn't good enough because their competitors use higher PPI displays so we're going increase the PPI regardless of how it affects 3rd-party apps, power consumption, or anything else that negatively affects the user experience. They do not that kind of RADICAL. Their RADICAL, if you want to call it that, is taking complexity and making work seamlessly for the end-user so that the user-experience is increased, NOT reduced.

Again, if they are so RADICAL that they would randomly increase the PPI on a 264 PPI iPad then why have they stuck to common thread for so long with the 2x, and even using the same resolution as the iPad 2 for the iPad mini*. If what you claim is accurate they would have made RADICAL changes without any rhyme or reason every time they changed it. THEY ARE NOT A CHEAP ANDROID OEM!!!

* It's also the same PPI as the iPhone 3GS. That is no coincidence. It's systematic.
Edited by akqies - 10/13/13 at 6:04pm
post #93 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

I think it's pretty brave to say he's wrong given his track record (in the comments not the article).

Apple must be planning to replace the 11" and 13" Air will a single 12" model that is even more insanely thin.

 

I'd say this is on the money. The 11" and 13" inch models are pretty close in price now anyway. Combining the weight and portability of the 11" model with a (much) better display than the 13" model feels like an upgrade with a lot of upside. I used a 12" PowerBook back in the day. It was a wonderful machine. 

post #94 of 111
PERHAPS A DUAL SCREEN MBA WITH ONE TOUCH SCREEN WITH WITH HAPTIC KEYBOARD?
post #95 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

What does “omj” mean, anyway?

i guess it stands for "oh my jesus" but i just really like the sound and i use it often in conversation. usually i say like "oh MY jayyyy" or just plain ol "oh-EM-jayyyy". it just has a nice sound to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

Yes, he’s talking about curves, but that doesn’t immediately mean his statement was hyperbolic. 😏

lol that's actualy pretty funny :)

post #96 of 111

Apple will simplify the line up.  No more Macbook Air, Just Macbook, and Macbook Pro.

 

The Macbook Air has been waiting for a Redesign already. Even its internal has shown its age when Anand said there were lots of empty space and room for improvement on its circuit broad. So looks like it is waiting for a remake.

 

The 12" will merely be, as have already been said and requested a MBA with less Bezel. Doing the same on 13" MBA will results in 14" Macbook as well. My guess is that both Display will feature a PPI of 160+.  But Not Retina.

 

May be Apple will cut the 13" Macbook Pro. With Pro only on 15.5" and Retina only.

 

All these refresh are coming in with Intel Broadwell, the 14nm shrink of Haswell with even better graphics then Haswell. Speed and Graphics performance will be the same in general. With Power usage being even further reduced.

post #97 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Bonner View Post

I thought that the retina was as high as was visible to our eyes? Why go higher unless your in a specs war?


Right on; retina is as high a resolution we humans need.

What Apple needs ASAP is a retina display on the mini iPad.

post #98 of 111
I think Ming-Chi Kuo is full of it. None of his statements make sense. Unless, of course, someone mistranslated and misreported everything he said.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #99 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by akqies View Post

For the people that would read and comment on a tech forum our primary device is likely a Mac, but for a great many users and a growing segment of computer users the iPad is their primary device. If they have some form of PC they probably don't use it much because they find the iPad a better choice all around which is why they may think a larger iPad would be even better.

They wouldn't be thinking that once they started using it. A 40-percent bigger hand-held device doesn't sound to me like something anyone would be happy with. Too cumbersome, too heavy. Even with technologies allowing for lighter devices, relative to size, you'd still be talking about a device weighing more than the current iPad by a significant amount. No matter what technology you use, a bigger device is a bigger device and can't help but feel less comfortable to hold for any significant length of time. Can't engineer around that.

Once you get to a certain size, might as well tack on a physical keyboard and make setting the device down a built-in feature. Come to think of it, Apple has done just that. It's called the MacBook Air.

The iPad is ideal for casual use. I'm on mine more than my desktop and, yes, I'm sure there are folks whose computing needs are satisfied by a device like the iPad. Yet, offering a compromised tablet that is too large to be used as a tablet comfortably, serves no purpose. If you're doing heavy lifting of any sort, a laptop or even better a desktop is the thing. If you're not doing heavy lifting, what's wrong with the 9.7-inch iPad? They're selling them by the millions and people love using them. If it ain't broke . . .
post #100 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by G-News View Post

...
I love my 11" first gen Air, best computer I have ever owned.

I feel the exact same way!
post #101 of 111

I think this thread is interesting not because Ming-Chi Kuo is right or wrong about any particular future Apple product that may be in development, but because it's important to consider what Apple does with its laptop line-up.

 

It makes perfect sense to merge the 11" and 13" MBAs into a single MacBook model. If it has a retina display, the difference between a standard MacBook and Pro model may be only be in name. Why not migrate to a single line-up all with retina screens but with a range of chip options? 

 

If a new 12" MacBook becomes a new benchmark due to its form factor (even thinner design than current MBA and MBPr) then it would be only natural for Apple to extend the design format across other models. This could mean a single range of MacBooks with say 12", 14" and 16" screens. If the 16" models had more powerful chips, they could be priced like existing 'Pro' models. Or, if Apple wants to retain the standard versus pro distinction, maybe the top model in each screen size could be labelled 'Pro'?

 

I guess it all depends on what we get.

 

Apple has been working on haptic keyboards for a while. How about a clamshell design with two screen panels? One could be a standard screen; the other could be a haptic keyboard that is customisable according to different programs, languages, functions etc. 

 

If the basic design gets any thinner, we may see the USB and Thunderbolt ports being dropped. Maybe Apple will introduce a new super-thin USB format? 

 

What is certain is that the MacBook Air has been around for a while, is a bit tired and needs to evolve. Second, is that whatever Apple creates, it's going to be a desirable piece of hardware.  

post #102 of 111

Cool.  Waiting for the 12".  Tried the 11" MBA but the screen is just too small.  The 13" is nice.  But for the price, may as well get a 13" MBP instead.

post #103 of 111

The interesting link to this now seems to be the izgo screens in the iPad air - less everything - power and thickness.  This must be the enabler to a retina air without loss of battery life.  Wether the pro meets the air at 12" size is another thing.

post #104 of 111
For 2014; all Apple has to do to update the iPad line is to add in: 802.11ac, Champagne color and Touch ID; along with an updated processor with 2GB of RAM !
post #105 of 111

Good idea the 11inch is way to small for your eyes. I owned one and sold it within a month.

post #106 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

For 2014; all Apple has to do to update the iPad line is to add in: 802.11ac, Champagne color and Touch ID; along with an updated processor with 2GB of RAM !

That 2GB of RAM should have come this year, it is a big short coming and dramatically impacts how developers can leverage the platform with new apps. I'm rather surprised actually that Apple didn't bump RAM this year.
post #107 of 111

I love to have an iPad Mini - Ultra Retina with ppi of 662!   I may hold off on buying the 2013 model since it doe not have 802.11ac nor Touch ID in it!  But the idea of a doubling of the current 326 ppi would just be super fantastic for my eyes.

post #108 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


That 2GB of RAM should have come this year, it is a big short coming and dramatically impacts how developers can leverage the platform with new apps. I'm rather surprised actually that Apple didn't bump RAM this year.

Apple management is trying to squeeze pennies for their bottom line.  An increase of 1GB RAM on the SoC  to 2GB of RAM would hurt their profit margin by about $5 an iPad unless they raise the price by $5 more that is!

post #109 of 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harry Wild View Post

Apple management is trying to squeeze pennies for their bottom line.  An increase of 1GB RAM on the SoC  to 2GB of RAM would hurt their profit margin by about $5 an iPad unless they raise the price by $5 more that is!

Actually there are a lot of ifs, ands and buts in this discussion. Doing more RAM in the SoC stack might be a problem but the iPad chip use to use external RAM. I'm not sure where RAM resides in the new iPad. You are right I the sense that the silicon is pretty darn cheap, especially considering what more RAM would do for the platform. I'm just not that sure it is cost effective in a stacked chip solution.
post #110 of 111

The fact that they have named the big size iPad as iPad Air, suggests to me that they are equating the ipadmini to macbook, ipadAir to macbook air and therefore there may be an iPad Pro in the pipe with better resolution and better everything to teach the surface and surface pro a thing or two.

 

Also, I feel that Apple also thinks that touch on the laptop is only a matter of time - regardless of all the nonsense they make up - what can you do with touch on the desktop/laptop etc. - just like in the past with iPod video.

 

Mac Pro - for all production houses, animations, films etc. tethered

Macbook Pro - Mobile Mac Pro

Macbook Air - Dead or for execs who still like blackberrys with a keyboard (read archaic and bumbling with a touchscreen)

 

iPad mini - for all mobile acts for all non-professionals (or professionals' non-professional wife/husband or simply for day to day stuff)

iPad Air - Lighter for executives (the air ... u get the idea)

iPad Pro - for techies who envy the execs but to feel they have something better

 

No harm in dreaming, is there ?

post #111 of 111
You are way to familiar with the pigeon hole.
Quote:
Originally Posted by luvosx View Post

The fact that they have named the big size iPad as iPad Air, suggests to me that they are equating the ipadmini to macbook, ipadAir to macbook air and therefore there may be an iPad Pro in the pipe with better resolution and better everything to teach the surface and surface pro a thing or two.
It does seem to suggest that. Frankly I'd like to see a iPad of around 12 to 13 inches. But before they do that they really need to bump each and every iPad with more RAM. The constant reloading of web pages is burning up a lot of my bandwidth.
Quote:
Also, I feel that Apple also thinks that touch on the laptop is only a matter of time - regardless of all the nonsense they make up - what can you do with touch on the desktop/laptop etc. - just like in the past with iPod video.
On a conventional laptop I don't see a big demand for Touch. It might work on a convertible but the whole point of a laptop is having that keyboard and screen being there to facilitate data input. Touch screens basically suck at data input.
Quote:

Mac Pro - for all production houses, animations, films etc. tethered
Macbook Pro - Mobile Mac Pro
Macbook Air - Dead or for execs who still like blackberrys with a keyboard (read archaic and bumbling with a touchscreen)
Your desire to pigeon hole hardware is not very useful at all.
Quote:
iPad mini - for all mobile acts for all non-professionals (or professionals' non-professional wife/husband or simply for day to day stuff)
iPad Air - Lighter for executives (the air ... u get the idea)
iPad Pro - for techies who envy the execs but to feel they have something better
For most users the pigeon holes you have above are laughable. For example executives are far more likely to lean towards the Mini rather than the AIR.
Quote:
No harm in dreaming, is there ?


Dream away. I really suspect that Apple has a new iPad size coming, it just makes sense to balance out the line up.

As for laptops that is a harder one to nail. I see a lower cost model as being very important to Apples marketing efforts. The question is how low can they go. With ARM 64 they can go very low priced and effectively take units away from the PC world while maintaining margins. A 12" Arm based Mac Book would be very interesting indeed.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple planning to launch all-new 12" MacBook, higher-res sixth-gen iPad in 2014