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

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014
Apple's supply chain is struggling to build new 13-inch MacBook Pros because of difficulty in manufacturing Retina displays, a new rumor claims.

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

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

MacBook Pro


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

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

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

DigiTimes bases many of its reports off tips from Asian suppliers, but the publication has a shaky batting average with regards to accurate information on upcoming Apple products. However, the site was the first to report that Apple would adopt in-cell touch panels for its 2012 iPhone model ? a prediction that came true with last month's launch of the iPhone 5.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 43
    mrstepmrstep Posts: 480member


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

  • Reply 2 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mrstep View Post


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



     


    I second this!  

  • Reply 3 of 43


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

  • Reply 4 of 43
    If this is Digitimes quoting analysts then the issue isn't production. It's the analysts being wrong about the product existence or timeline and they are covering their butts. 'Production issues' is their fav way of explaining why something that was never coming out is not coming out so they don't look stupid.
  • Reply 5 of 43

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Harbinger View Post


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



     


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

  • Reply 6 of 43


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


     


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

  • Reply 7 of 43


    And the stock starts to go down..lol

  • Reply 8 of 43
    Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.

    So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.
  • Reply 9 of 43
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,354member


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

  • Reply 10 of 43
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    This is a good question and is reason enough to question this report. The 13" screen should be easier to produce than the 15" screen. The only possibility here is that the are moving to the Sharp screen and Sharp is having issues with the production of that technology.

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

    In the end though I have to call BS on the report. Something just doesn't sound right. If Apple can do a 15" retina a 13" shouldn't be a problem. More importantly it would be a sign of extremely poor management to have screwed up the delivery of three completely different products in the same year. Epic really for Apple.
    harbinger wrote: »
    Odd ... wouldn't these LCD panels be the same ones used for rMBP-15"? Is there a good reason for Apple to produce a different one with a different resolution?
  • Reply 11 of 43


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

  • Reply 12 of 43
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    You would have a point if this is infant the case, I'm just not convinced that there is any truth to these reports.
    Apple used to be famous for producing high quality products. It is then quite a black eye that they are designing and attempting to manufacture components that have high poor quality yields.
    Yields are always low on any new process ramp up. The real question is this, is there any truth to these reports, if so the screwing up of this many product deliveries is a pretty sad comment on Apple at the moment.
    So, we have the poor yields of the iPhone 5, iPad mini and 13" MacBook Pro. This is serious failure on the part of Apple and their partners. Demand for Apple products will simply fall off the cliff if they can't deliver the goods. If Apple doesn't clean up their supply chain, then Apple will never again have a problem with demand exceeding supply -- there won't be any demand.

    Well no even if the rumors are true, production issues will not curtail demand especially if we are talking about break through devices. The problem I have with this report is that it makes no sense at all. Apple has had retina devices in production for almost a year now and has meet demand for those devices. In the case of Mini and the 13" we are talking smaller devices which should mean higher yields on displays. I suspect we have analyst grasping here.
  • Reply 13 of 43
    Perhaps people don't realize that Apple is having a terrible time with yields on the 15" retina MacBook Pro as well.. except they are shipping them anyways.. They are using both Samsung and LG displays in the 15". Nearly every single LG has serious image retention issues or develops them over time. There has even been issues with the Samsung displays with backlight bleeding, dead pixels, and pinkish coloring.
  • Reply 14 of 43
    cnocbuicnocbui Posts: 3,613member


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


     


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


     


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

     

  • Reply 15 of 43
    xgmanxgman Posts: 155member
    old-wiz wrote: »
    This does not bode well for a retina 27 inch iMac.

    I doubt we will see any retina imac anytime soon. I would be happy however to see any sort of new imac at this point even with the exact same screen it has now.
  • Reply 16 of 43


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


     


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






    DigiTimes



     


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

  • Reply 17 of 43
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    It wouldn't do any good. First off DigiTimes often reports very accurate information. They do seem to report what ever comes across their editorial desks without in depth review. The problem is we have web sites that seem to pick up on the garbage or negative reporting only. This distorts people's view of DigiTimes.
    I'm contemplating editing all articles with "DigiTimes" in them to highlight that point.

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

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

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

    The bigger problem is where do you stop. I mean honestly AI posts articles from a number of analysts that seem to get their "information" out of their ass. Do you start to label such articles "ANALYST". The fact is DigiTimes probably has more basis for what it prints than the various analyst quoted on AI.
  • Reply 18 of 43
    tnsftnsf Posts: 203member
    This is just a bunch of analysts trying to explain why they were wrong. "Release in September" and when nothing happens its because of supply channel issues.

    The real issue is that the analysts were wrong and don't want to admit it.
  • Reply 19 of 43


    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

    First off DigiTimes often reports very accurate information.


     


    We talkin' 'bout the same DigiTimes? image






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



     


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

  • Reply 20 of 43
    This is a test post. It has an apostrophe (can't) and an ampersand (&). Cutoff prevention.
Sign In or Register to comment.