New or updated iMac? MacPro? MacbookPro? Mini?

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
sooooooooooo many rumors about everything from patent lawsuits to data plans... does apple still make computers?
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    iMac: Fairly soon.

    MacBook Family: Spectacularly soon.

    Mac Pro: Not for about a year.

    Mac Mini: Whenever Steve remembers its exists.
  • Reply 2 of 47
    desarcdesarc Posts: 642member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    iMac: Fairly soon.

    MacBook Family: Spectacularly soon.

    Mac Pro: Not for about a year.

    Mac Mini: Whenever Steve remembers its exists.



    "spectaculary soon" sounds like a timeline "top analysts" would use.
  • Reply 3 of 47
    mr. kmr. k Posts: 115member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    "spectaculary soon" sounds like a timeline "top analysts" would use.



    It does, a bit.



    But Yeah. Following the pattern, look for refreshed iMacs in the next month and a half, new MBPs in more or less the same time frame. Mac Pro will get a refresh approximately whenever Steve feels like it.



    Crossing fingers for the 27" to keep the same design with a new Radeon 6800/6900 series GPU so I can drop the part into mine and replace the aging Mobility 4850.
  • Reply 4 of 47
    I'm waiting for the new iMacs.



    My current one is a G5 - ordered at 6:30 AM the day they were announced in Paris. I think it's about time to be replaced, and the new ones are too close for me to buy a current one.



    It's just painful to have the cash ready and still need to wait.
  • Reply 5 of 47
    Right now, Apple is quite limited by Intel's release cycle for new products. A common misconception is that the necessary Sandy Bridge mobile chips for the MacBooks are available. The truth is, they'll be released on February 20th. So no new MacBooks before that (unless Intel bumps up the date). The same goes for the desktop i3 processors, so Apple needs to wait for a direct upgrade path for the iMac.



    Mac Pro will be 3/4Q of this year, using socket 2011. The roadmap shows up to 8 core processors on it, therefore the Mac Pro should become a 16 core, 32 thread monster. Mac Mini whenever Jobs remembers.



    You can see all of the Sandy Bridge processors release dates, specs, and other stuff here
  • Reply 6 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arinoth View Post


    A common misconception is that the necessary Sandy Bridge mobile chips for the MacBooks are available. The truth is, they'll be released on February 20th. So no new MacBooks before that (unless Intel bumps up the date). The same goes for the desktop i3 processors, so Apple needs to wait for a direct upgrade path for the iMac.



    Hasn't Apple had early access to intel chips before? That is, before the competition?



    I admit I'm overly hopeful. I've been itching for a new computer but can't pull the trigger when I'm so close to the upgrades. Sandy Bridge and SSD for me! I suspect the price for SSD will drop with the refresh. Graphics sound like they'll be a bummer though...



    I'm beginning to think MBPs will update in April.
  • Reply 7 of 47
    Yes, manufacturers do get early access to the chips to design and build their machines. I'm assuming that they just cannot release systems with the chips until that date. I'm saying February 28th, maybe March 1st.
  • Reply 8 of 47
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,408moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Arinoth View Post


    Yes, manufacturers do get early access to the chips to design and build their machines. I'm assuming that they just cannot release systems with the chips until that date. I'm saying February 28th, maybe March 1st.



    I reckon February 22nd because they pretty much always launch on a Tuesday and this is already going to be the longest update gap the MBP has had so they need to get right on this.



    I wonder if Intel have planned to have their chips ready for sale alongside their new SSDs so that people wouldn't looks to other manufacturers who have their 25nm parts out already.
  • Reply 9 of 47
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by desarc View Post


    sooooooooooo many rumors about everything from patent lawsuits to data plans... does apple still make computers?



    As I see it the number one problem will likely be suitable supply of the SB chips to meet industry demand. Sandy Bridge is likely to be a hit at the same time Intels factories go into mass production on a new node. That means there is a possibility of going on allocation.



    You would think that would mean portables first but what if the allocation doesn't cover portables demand. We could see SB in a Mini first. That is an extreme but you get the idea.



    In any event my guesses;



    The iMac will likely take awhile, they most likely will wait for a desktop version of SB and might want to implement Light Peak. It could be mid year or latter.



    As to the Mac Pro who cares anymore? It could update in a year or a couple of years.



    The Mac Book Pro is interesting. I think this will be a go as soon as Apple can get enough chips. Still that would be around two months away.



    I actually see the Mini as a prime machine for SB. The volume here is low enough that they can go anytime the chips are available. Further SB delivers all the performance required for many of the common Mini duties. Oh one other thing no body at Apple has forgotten about the Mini.



    What you didn't allude to in your list is the XMac. I still think Apple needs to flesh out their desktop line up and something desktoppy at a more reasonable price than the Mac Pro is in order. This could come around the same time as the iMacs.





    All of the statements above assume we are not thrown a curve ball or two. Things to worry about include no rumors good or bad about new Macs. This is a serious problem considering March isn't that far away. Then there is AMD, Apple could wait for AMDs Fusion product for any of the iMac, Mini, XMac or possibly the MBP. If Fusion doesn't cut the mustard we could see Bulldozer in the Mac Pro. Then Apple could be waiting on tech unrelated to the CPU such as LightPeak. In the end there are many possible curve balls.



    Some here will dismiss AMD/ATI but I honestly believe their plans are better aligned with Apples than many give them credit for. Especially AMDs long term plans for GPU integration. I could even see Apple working a deal where Samsung builds low power variants of AMDs Fusion tech while AMD produces the performance versions for Apple.







    This
  • Reply 10 of 47
    mjteixmjteix Posts: 563member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    We could see SB in a Mini first. That is an extreme but you get the idea.



    I actually see the Mini as a prime machine for SB. The volume here is low enough that they can go anytime the chips are available. Further SB delivers all the performance required for many of the common Mini duties. Oh one other thing no body at Apple has forgotten about the Mini.



    Wow. And I thought you were the OCL champion...

    You'd go for SB igpu over nvidia's 320M?



    I can see SB in the Mac mini server (better cores, hyperthreading, turbo-boost, ECC support on the Core i5-2515E), but in the regular model...?



    Anyway, many desktop and mobile SB cpus have been avaialble for about a month, another batch is planned for Feb. 20 (most dual-core mobile cpus, and some desktop too). I don't see Apple implementing LP this early. So iMacs and MBPs could be updated as soon as march with AMD/ATI 5000/6000 series gpus. For the MB and MM, I have no idea what Apple will do, maybe just another C2D bump... could happen any time after march. The second half of 2011 could see SB Mac Pro, and updated MBAs, just like the other C2D-based Macs, the MBA could just get a speed/RAM/storage bump.



    If the next generation of Intel cpus (Ivy Bridge 2012) is as good as planned (igpu part and OCL drivers), then I can see Apple using Intel's igpus as a replacement for the remaining C2D/320M models.
  • Reply 11 of 47
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    I'm ready for a new Mini. Come on, Apple.
  • Reply 12 of 47
    I'm not sure if I'm being silly but the thing that's put me off getting an iMac so far is the lack of an anti-glare option and being forced to buy a massive screen if I want a top-spec. i have no need of such a large screen but would like the extra power nonetheless.
  • Reply 13 of 47
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by womblingfree View Post


    I'm not sure if I'm being silly but the thing that's put me off getting an iMac so far is the lack of an anti-glare option and being forced to buy a massive screen if I want a top-spec. i have no need of such a large screen but would like the extra power nonetheless.



    I won't buy an iMac because of the screen. The glare is unacceptable to me.
  • Reply 14 of 47
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    You'd think Apple would be investing some money into acquiring anti-reflective glass at this point. Most people don't even notice the glare or care, but still...
  • Reply 15 of 47
    recrec Posts: 217member
    I agree with people here that MBP and iMac refreshes are Apple's top priority when it comes to traditional computers and we'll see these first and soon. Combined I'm sure they represent the vast majority of Mac sales, so they're important.



    The Mac Pro is still relevant and can sell to an important niche, it makes sense there would be an update around or after 10.7. The Mac Pro may never go away, as there will always be a need for "trucks" as the mothership would tell us.



    I don't think the mac mini is a relevant machine anymore. If you look at it strictly in terms of what are consumers buying around that price point ($500-$800), it would seem they've come out in droves for the iPad (7mill+ per quarter) and alot less so for the mini (probably under 500k sold per quarter at this point, perhaps way under that). I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense for them to keep investing in a product that, relatively speaking, nobody will buy.



    That said I think the mini's days are numbered. I could see Apple doing 1 more refresh, just to be nice and for old times sake, but that's it at most. 2 years from now iPads in various configurations will be selling in excess of 25mill per quarter, why keep selling a PC at the same price that sells less than 200k per quarter, especially when getting chip refreshes from intel are not coming in a way that Apple can control.
  • Reply 16 of 47
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,408moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by REC View Post


    I don't think the mac mini is a relevant machine anymore. If you look at it strictly in terms of what are consumers buying around that price point ($500-$800), it would seem they've come out in droves for the iPad (7mill+ per quarter) and alot less so for the mini (probably under 500k sold per quarter at this point, perhaps way under that). I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense for them to keep investing in a product that, relatively speaking, nobody will buy.



    That said I think the mini's days are numbered. I could see Apple doing 1 more refresh, just to be nice and for old times sake, but that's it at most. 2 years from now iPads in various configurations will be selling in excess of 25mill per quarter, why keep selling a PC at the same price that sells less than 200k per quarter, especially when getting chip refreshes from intel are not coming in a way that Apple can control.



    I think all the machines' days are numbered in the long term but the Mini will last at least as long as the iMac because it can be used in more scenarios and is cheaper. Apple has also branched into the small server market and put on HDMI (the only machine that has it) so it can be used as a media centre. There is a Mac Mini colocation centre and they are perfect for servers - one of the guys said that jailbreakme.com runs from one of them and handles 5 million hits per month.



    Think about the amount of data people have and what higher machines offer. The Mac Pro only offers faster performance and more storage. With fast ports this year or next, bus-powered drives will suffice and next year, we will have quad-cores in everything with double the GPU speed we have now. Between the Mac Pro and Mini, the Mini wins once performance isn't an issue any more. What does the iMac offer? Just an included screen but you're stuck with the one you get. You get a 21.5" IPS for $280 so the Mini + screen + keyboard/mouse ($50) still comes in over $150 cheaper than the entry iMac. A refurb iMac is a better deal though.



    I think the whole lineup we see now will continue to be refreshed over the next 5 or 6 years but when iOS devices hit quad-core, phones and iPods will be faster than the desktops we have now. Sony's NGP renders comparable graphics to a PS3. The iOS devices will go dual-core this year but in 2 years, they can go quad-core, 64-bit etc and then the whole consumer x86 lineup will be questionable including the laptops.
  • Reply 17 of 47
    recrec Posts: 217member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


    I think all the machines' days are numbered in the long term but the Mini will last at least as long as the iMac because it can be used in more scenarios and is cheaper. Apple has also branched into the small server market and put on HDMI (the only machine that has it) so it can be used as a media centre. There is a Mac Mini colocation centre and they are perfect for servers - one of the guys said that jailbreakme.com runs from one of them and handles 5 million hits per month.



    Think about the amount of data people have and what higher machines offer. The Mac Pro only offers faster performance and more storage. With fast ports this year or next, bus-powered drives will suffice and next year, we will have quad-cores in everything with double the GPU speed we have now. Between the Mac Pro and Mini, the Mini wins once performance isn't an issue any more. What does the iMac offer? Just an included screen but you're stuck with the one you get. You get a 21.5" IPS for $280 so the Mini + screen + keyboard/mouse ($50) still comes in over $150 cheaper than the entry iMac. A refurb iMac is a better deal though.



    I think the whole lineup we see now will continue to be refreshed over the next 5 or 6 years but when iOS devices hit quad-core, phones and iPods will be faster than the desktops we have now. Sony's NGP renders comparable graphics to a PS3. The iOS devices will go dual-core this year but in 2 years, they can go quad-core, 64-bit etc and then the whole consumer x86 lineup will be questionable including the laptops.



    iMacs sell, minis don't. I think its as simple as the bottom line.



    You are talking about what you believe "in theory". You believe the mini to be better than an iMac cause you don't think integrated displays are a good idea. You say its better because its more flexible, cheaper, does X Y and Z, but all that ignores reality. Reality is, people buy iMacs, they don't buy minis.



    Apple will evaluate the longevity of any product based on that. And based on that, the iMac probably has some years left in it, maybe a very long time. Mac mini, no.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    dhagan4755dhagan4755 Posts: 2,152member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by REC View Post


    iMacs sell, minis don't.



    Where are you getting that statistic?
  • Reply 19 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by REC View Post


    iMacs sell, minis don't. I think its as simple as the bottom line.



    You are talking about what you believe "in theory". You believe the mini to be better than an iMac cause you don't think integrated displays are a good idea. You say its better because its more flexible, cheaper, does X Y and Z, but all that ignores reality. Reality is, people buy iMacs, they don't buy minis.



    Apple will evaluate the longevity of any product based on that. And based on that, the iMac probably has some years left in it, maybe a very long time. Mac mini, no.



    actually a lot of the apple fans i know of prefer mac mini over imacs, simply because imacs aren't all that worth it. those who do buy imacs are moms and dads or kids.
  • Reply 20 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by blueeddie View Post


    those who do buy imacs are moms and dads or kids.



    Again, source of this information?
Sign In or Register to comment.