or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › With dearth of major chip upgrades from Intel, Apple opts for cheaper Macs in 2014
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

With dearth of major chip upgrades from Intel, Apple opts for cheaper Macs in 2014 - Page 2

post #41 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarenDino View Post
 

I am starting to tire of Apple, yes their stuff can be good but boring now and these spec boost are futile, nothing to cream your pants about, even iPhone 6 is not that exciting.

 

the problem is you -- expecting mature product categories like all-in-one desktops to bring excitement to your life. that isnt what theyre in business for...

post #42 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

More like doubt of your sincerity or mental powers, pick one. 

 

I'm hardly going to rely on you to assess my mental capacities.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

When you're called out for missing the point, you change your demand to across the board price reductions, never mind you needed the latest upgrade in the previous post. What's a person to think about your intentions?
 
I said I "need to upgrade my iMac" not "I need the latest upgrade."  (You obviously missed the point.)
 
As for my "demand" for price reductions, I didn't use that word.  You did.  I suggested it might be a good idea (note the question mark after my statement about reduced prices).
 
A rational, informed consumer would not buy a new iMac right now, knowing a processor upgrade is right around the corner.  If "right around the corner" has been delayed due to a third-party supplier, one might think Apple wise to try to compensate by adding some incentive for buying a current model now.  Simply announcing a cheaper model in the lineup today without touching a single spec on any of the other models left some potential buyers (me included) cold.
 
Sue us.
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #43 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now? 1frown.gif

Just buy a refurb and move on with your life.

 

It's just a computer after all.

post #44 of 66
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

They can do something about this.

 

No, that’s not this.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #45 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maestro64 View Post
 

I personally still believe Apple will be moving Macs to their ARM processor, you seeing it today they are making OSX look and act more like IOS. With their new development tools it will make it easier for companies to make apps for both OSX an IOS.

 

Also, if you look at apple past, they start high and as they market begins to slow they move down into the next level. Mac sale maybe slowing so now they are considering the next level down and this change is a low risk approach to testing the waters.


I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market. 

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #46 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


I call it like I see it. And I'm not the only one who thinks this new iMac is overpriced. I do think its a bean counter move. Said the same thing about the 8GB 5C. At least Apple didn't send out a press release on that one.

There are so many great things about Tim Cook's Apple. They could have really given us a 'whoa' moment pricing this at $899 or even $999. Especially with Windows 8 being such a turd. And I hate seeing Chromebooks gain share in education markets.


The Chromebooks are great. I use one everyday. Cheap and good. Good for schools. Most students don't need a MacBook Air/Pro.

post #47 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob53 View Post

How much work would it take to shift to ARM? What do Intel CPUs do that ARM CPUs don't? I've heard acceptable GPUs might be a problem with ARM CPUs. Is the A7/8/whatever fast enough to power a desktop or is Intel still way ahead in this market?

I thought Grand Central was supposed to make it easier and automatic for applications to make use of multiple cores without any/much reprogramming. If so, why aren't we seeing two or three dual or quad core CPUs being used in an iMac? Wouldn't that be a way to improve the overall power of an iMac without having to wait for the latest Intel CPU? If this would work, then maybe the iMac needs to put on a little more girth to fit the extra CPUs. I don't see the iMac getting multiple GPUs, especially since the iMac isn't really geared toward the type of applications that use GPUs for computational power.


That's like asking why people don't drive SmartCars instead of Ford F350's. Different capacity and different purpose.

ARM's purpose is low-power, which is why it's perfect for mobile and lousy for everything else but microservers. (Because you can fill a data center cage with 12 4U rack servers filled with 2160 of them (4 x 45) in the same power envelope as 8 Xeon CPU's per 45 ARM parts.)

Until there is a dramatic shift in how programmers design programs to multithread efficiently (which just won't happen, people don't want to think different enough), there is no point in Apple considering switching to ARM parts in a desktop, and it would just sink their PC business, and send people back to Dell and Windows, which would also sink the Apple ecosystem by extension. As long as Intel is still producing parts, Apple doesn't need to switch.

There will come a time when the ARM parts might be of performance parity, but that's not happening anytime soon. Likewise Intel will never deliver on a x86 part that is power efficient enough for a mobile phone. Their parts are just too power-hungry. Atom/Celeron parts have never been good parts, and belong in interactive signage.

Have a look
http://www.notebookcheck.net/SoC-Shootout-x86-vs-ARM.99496.0.html
post #48 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii View Post

Yes, there is a similarity between the Air and iMac updates. It makes you wonder if Apple might switch to their own ARM CPUs at some point.

 

The switch to Apple chips is coming Intel is slowing down like Motorola and IBM.

post #49 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post


Did you miss the point of this story? The problem is Intel's, likely the die shrink. What do you want Apple to do?

 

Move on from Intel.

post #50 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by formosa View Post
 

 

Never say never. Apple's shift from the 68000 (CISC) to PowerPC (RISC) was mostly seamless from the user's point of view. And who saw the shift from PowerPC to Intel? Apple said they were running their last few versions of Mac OS on Intel (for years) before that switch.

 

And Apple has accumulated companies and new hires for the A-series processor development. It is not out of the realm of possibility that Apple makes the switch to A-series for more products.

 

Bam!

post #51 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now? 1frown.gif

Will we see any refresh in the fall? I don't know how much longer I can wait. Good grief, Apple.


I have a 2009 iMac too.  It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7.  About 8 months ago, I replaced my original 1TB hard drive with a 1TB SSD Samsung EVO840, which essentially turned it into a new machine and it is a serious screamer.  Even with that, my iMac is beginning to show its age with the occasional creaky fan noise and other (very, very minor) annoyances probably due to its age and condition.

My business partner picked up his new iMac a couple months ago, and even though I was more than happy with mine, I was very much impressed with the quality of the new iMac, and very much liked the IPS display.  It was a big difference compared to mine.  The performance of the PCIe SSD drive was very much noticeable compared to my SSD, obviously because of my SATA 3gb/s interface.  

The iMac probably won't get it's major refresh until near the end of the year anyways.  That's Apple's semi-"normal" upgrade cycle fro serious updates on iMacs.  So one way or another, you'd have to wait if you want the latest and greatest iMac.

If your iMac is causing you to lose precious time and money, you'll be more than happy with what's available now.

post #52 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post
 

 

You said: "Anyone demanding Apple to do something about this is either willfully ignorant or trolling."

 

They can do something about this.  They can reduce the price on their overaged hardware to incentivize buyers while they wait for beyond-their-control new components to materialize.  Or bump up the stock HD sizes.  Or add an SSD by default.

 

There's nothing unreasonable or "ignorant" about such a request.  Product refreshes for Apple's desktop lineup have been woefully slow for years.  They don't need across-the-board updates all the time to keep the product line fresh.  Make some minor component tweaks or play with the price to juice sales.

 

Apple will do something, they will be moving away from Intel.

post #53 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by sflocal View Post
 

I have a 2009 iMac too.  It was a B.T.O. quad-core i7.

 

Sadly my 2009 pre-dates yours with a CD2 processor.  :(

 

I'm ready to buy, but not until we get the upgraded 2014 model, whatever that might be.  I was foolish enough to buy just before the big upgrade in 2009.  I'm not going to make that mistake again.

 

I was really hoping today's announcement would be "it."

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #54 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 


I doubt they will completely abandon X86. They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture. If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market. 

 

All of Apple in house apps probably already run on Arm cpu's, Apple for the third time in 12 years has a cpu's supplier screwing off, this time around Apple has an in house solution, I don't think they will wait for Intel, Adobe or Autodesk. The intro of Swift, Metal, and the future introduction of the A8 series cpu say's Apple is moving on.

post #55 of 66
A thousand bucks or so for a Mac (remember, for a Mac, notwithstanding the mini), is actually on the low end.
post #56 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danox View Post
 
All of Apple in house apps probably already run on Arm cpu's, Apple for the third time in 12 years has a cpu's supplier screwing off, this time around Apple has an in house solution, I don't think they will wait for Intel, Adobe or Autodesk. The intro of Swift, Metal, and the future introduction of the A8 series cpu say's Apple is moving on.

Nobody knows, but I still think it is unlikely.  Releasing a new die shrink architecture happens about every two years. This time it looks like it will be around two and a half years instead. I would imagine as the dies get smaller the process becomes increasingly difficult, so I'm guessing it might take a little longer. Intel is two factors ahead of Apple in die shrink. Apple's A7 is 28nm the Broadwell is 14nm. What other chip foundry is Apple going to get that sort of manufacturing from? Apple doesn't make their own chips you know?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #57 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post


I doubt they will completely abandon X86.
Completely no but i can see them offering an iOS based device that s. cross between an iPad and a laptop.
Quote:
They just released the new Mac Pro and the types of applications that professionals use are written for X86. Those major applications from Adobe and Autodesk or even Apple Pro apps take years to rewrite for a different architecture.
That isnt accurate at all, thoug it is very dependent upon the code base. For many developers, using good practces, it is a matter of throwing a switch and having XCode target a new archtecture. in the case of iOS we are effecitvley already doing that. build an app to run on Apples simulators and it is essentiallynrunning i86 code.
Quote:
If Apple was going to make a Mac that used ARM, it would likely be a very low end notebook that was running some flavor of iOS. I really don't see them killing off their professional market. 

Most certainly! An iOS based machine solves the consumer confusion issue cleanly. As we are seeing with iOS 8, iOS can eqsily be extended to offer more capability vs a "desktop OS or cell phone OS". The problem here is that such a machine isnt likely to appeal to someone like me who really needs a complete OS. however for many users a more powerful iPad would be welcomed.
post #58 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post
 
That isnt accurate at all, thoug it is very dependent upon the code base. For many developers, using good practces, it is a matter of throwing a switch and having XCode target a new archtecture. in the case of iOS we are effecitvley already doing that. build an app to run on Apples simulators and it is essentiallynrunning i86 code.

I doubt those major titles are using Xcode which is why I mentioned it. They probably have tons of legacy C++ pre complied blocks which may ultimately get imported into Xcode but it is not going to be like flipping a switch. Most of those titles are built in such a way as to facilitate them being ported cross platform to Windows/Mac. 

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #59 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post
 

 

How about reducing the price of *all* of these overdue-for-a-refresh models rather than just introduce a single cheaper model that appeals to very few of us on this forum?

Maybe because "us on this forum" represents an almost infinitesimal fraction of Apple's customer base?

post #60 of 66

Correct.

 

Apple sells way more notebooks than desktop computers, and a huge percentage of the MacBooks are Airs. That means many Mac users are quite content with the wimpiest Mac in Apple's lineup.

 

My guess is that Mac Pros are about 2% of Apple's total Mac unit sales. It's not surprising that many tech rumor forum readers favor high-performance machines, however it is completely ludicrous to ignore the reality of Apple's primary user demographic.

post #61 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flaneur View Post

Did you miss the point of this story? The problem is Intel's, likely the die shrink. What do you want Apple to do?


Same thing they did with the MBA's woulda' worked better for me (and I'll wager for volume and net, if not margin %) - slight speed bump, $100 decrease across the models, and the new one - a the magic under a grand Mac at $999....  ...but then I dunno the what the bill of lading adds up to.  And bet few of you calling for this do either.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanimal View Post

http://www.macrumors.com/2014/05/19/intel-broadwell-holiday-season/

Intel CEO seems pretty confident that Broadwell will ship Q4.

 

Well, so far this year from Intel - with this being at least the second release date pushback - it's "there goes Moore's law"....

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

So we're sort of in a similar situation that Apple was in in the first half of the last decade. A partner who can't get new parts out fast enough.

At the very least the Mini could get a bump to Haswell...this current model is the longest-lasting in the Mini's history. It's dated.

 

Except this time the Win makers are caught in the same bottleneck, so no relative disadvantage....

...on the other hand, by the time the A9 or 10 roll out, they could well be used in "other products" that previously would've had "Intel Inside" - not the whole line I'd guess and one thing to go would be running Windows natively.

But with their whole Win 8 fiasco - "It's a PC OS! (Except with no native productivity apps in its new mode) "It's a tablet OS!" (Except it's all focused on running a stub of old Windows Office and OEM's abandoned it like a hot rock. And it's being merged with the phone OS now.) "It's a phone OS with the same UI!" (Except the API's for all three of these are different) "It's an espresso maker!" - and for other reasons, with the maturity of the Mac ecosystem and web/cloud apps independent of any OS, being able to run Windows is less and less important for most people and many companies.

 

But I digress....

 

Bottom line, closing down Bootcamp for at least some definitely attractively priced and nicely functional machines one can see being released, certainly by 2016 if not '15, is well within the realm of possibility.... ...certainly a differentiator and puts more of their destiny in their own hands, which is always leverage...

...Could also be the move that pushes Intel into the fab for other companies business - and they have a history now of working at least fairly well with Apple, so could even be good for both families.


Edited by bigpics - 6/19/14 at 10:12am

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply

An iPhone, a Leatherman and thou...  ...life is complete.

Reply
post #62 of 66
Quote:
Apple's rumored MacBook Air with Retina display would be a prime candidate for Intel's more efficient Broadwell chips. The notebook is rumored to pack a high-resolution panel into an all-new 12-inch design that would be offered alongside the current 11- and 13-inch MacBook Airs with standard resolution screens.

 

Um, no. Apple's not going to offer three sets of MacBook Airs (11", 12" 13"), alongside two sets of 13" MacBook Pros.

 

Not unless they've learned nothing from the bad old days of Amelio.

The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #63 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveH View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

 

How about reducing the price of *all* of these overdue-for-a-refresh models rather than just introduce a single cheaper model that appeals to very few of us on this forum?
Maybe because "us on this forum" represents an almost infinitesimal fraction of Apple's customer base?

The 'infinitesimal fraction' of us here is infinitely higher than zero.

What you mean to say is that there are one or two Apple users who don’t frequent AI.
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
"If the young are not initiated into the village, they will burn it down just to feel its warmth."
- African proverb
Reply
post #64 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

I really, really need to upgrade my iMac (2009). So apparently the time is not now? 1frown.gif

Will we see any refresh in the fall? I don't know how much longer I can wait. Good grief, Apple.

It’s Apple’s fault Intel hasn’t finished developing anticipated CPU upgrades.

post #65 of 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danox View Post
 

 

Move on from Intel.

…because that’s so easy to accomplish and no one at Apple ever considered this.

post #66 of 66
1.4 GHz chip and they couldn't get the price down to $999? I have no problems with slower chips, I happily use a MacBook Air when not sitting at my iMac, but it seems hard to justify getting an iMac at half the speed for only $200 savings. At $999 I'd be pretty enthusiastic about it, at $1,099 it seems DOA.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › With dearth of major chip upgrades from Intel, Apple opts for cheaper Macs in 2014