Kuo: Demand for new MacBook Pro models tepid due to high prices, disappointing specs

15791011

Comments

  • Reply 121 of 211
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,033member
    cropr said:
    Soli said:
    spheric said:
    Yep. 16GB LPDDR3 (which is what Apple uses) is industry norm. They'd use LPDDR4, if that existed. 
    I've read that even Kaby Lake won't support LPDDR4 so we'll be stuck with 16GiB until at least Cannonlake in 2018. But given Intel's very long release cycle where the proper chips for the performance notebooks come last in the cycle, and repeated delays with their chips, I wouldn't be surprised if 32GiB doesn't happen until 2019. God, I hope that isn't the case.
    Dell  XPS15 with Kaby Lake supports 32GB of RAM, so your info must be wrong,
    Is it really that hard to read before you reply? No one is saying that these Skylake chips can't support more than 16GiB, what everyone is saying is they can't support more than 16GiB when using LP RAM. The LP refers to Low Power. Why is that so hard to grasp? Why does it confound you that Apple wants to maintain a 10 hour battery life within a certain weight and volume ratio? Why can't you understand that it's not possible without LPDDR4 which isn't available for this Skylake architecture. It's been explained and rehashed on every fucking tech site since last Thursday.
    tmaycanukstormpscooter63philboogie
  • Reply 122 of 211
    mj webmj web Posts: 918member
    I earmarked a MBP purchase but have now put the brakes on. The prices are silly! $2-3K laptops? 256 GB drives? 8 GB RAM standard, 16GB max? "Pro"? Apple Care +++? Tim Cook is an effete snob who has lost touch with all but the most ardent AI readers. Apple was, is, and always will be doomed under Cook's mismanagement. The MBP is a big disappointment and a big joke.
    edited November 2016 duervoavon b7
  • Reply 123 of 211
    jbdragon said:

    You know, throwing PRO in the name doesn't make it so!!! You need to do a whole lot more then that. At some point, people are just not going to take it anymore. Weak processors and limited Memory and now needing a bunch of DONGLES!!! You need you're USB-A dongles, and card reader dongle and so forth. I get the touch strip and I like that feature, but it is very thin and really skyrocketing the costs. To me it just looks like Apple wants even larger profit margins then they already have. How will they sell? We'll see, but I won't be buying one.

    I am a "pro" with a dead 17" MacBook Pro that I have to replace ASAP. I will be using whatever I buy for "pro" video, audio and graphics work. I have a few questions for those who have decided not to buy the new MacBook Pro:

    1. 16GB memory limit. What have you found that offers more? How does the alternative compare in terms of overall usability and value? Are the display, storage, GPU and user interface comparable?

    2. Ports. It seems obvious to me that the USB-C connector is going to be ubiquitous, and it won't be long before we look at the USB-A connector the same way we now do a D-Sub or Centronics parallel plug. Having C ports strikes me as a nice bit of future-proofing. Plus (and this is HUGE for me), ANY port can connect to ANYTHING. Instead of running out of USB ports while a Firewire or HDMI port sits empty, I can simply use an adapter to connect whatever I want to whichever port I want. What kind of use cases have led you to the conclusion, that I may have overlooked, that retaining existing, single-function ports better suits your work?

    3. Price. This will be the most expensive computer I've ever bought, and I always buy the most maxed-out, top-of-the-BTO version available. That said, it will also be the most capable computer I've ever purchased. MOST of the price increase (not all, but most) is in solid-state storage. Apple's prices for this are WAY higher than the alternatives, but what they offer *is* better. First, it's faster than anything I can put together on my own. Second, it allows me to have 2TB on-board, while alternatives require either spinning platters or external cases to get that much. How do you deal with large storage requirements in the field? If adapters are considered an inconvenience, I gotta figure outboard drives must be even worse, no?

    If there's something I'm missing I'd love to look at it. While I very much prefer macOS over Windows (how do people function without QuickLook?), all the software I use is cross-platform so I'm not adverse to using Windows if it yields an overall better experience and dollar value. I'd be genuinely grateful for suggestions of alternatives to the new MacBook Pro.
    sphericduervo
  • Reply 124 of 211
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,498member
    dysamoria said:
    If they do sell poorly, the insulated arrogance of Apple shareholders and board of directors will just respond with "well that clinches it: no one wants pro computers anymore. Let's discontinue them across the board and focus all company efforts on iOS devices. They can easily replace the old fashioned computer anyway."
    You sum it up very well. It always made me laugh that Steve Jobs would often throw a line into his presentations that went something like "it was the number one feature our customers want". Yes, but there was no way the customer was going to get the number two or number three or number four most requested feature. That's Apple. They know best. How long did we wait for USB 2? Recordable drives? 17" CRT iMacs, large screen iPhone and a list as long as your arm of other needs. Some things never came and were constant headaches. When QuickTime was making waves they refused to support .avi files as they were non-standard. It didn't matter that most of our files were in that format and that support could have been added 'unofficially' at the drop of a hat. 

    Here we are in November 2016, Christmas is on the doorstep (Apple's biggest quarter) and the Mac is dead in the water. We have laptop class graphics cards wedged into anorexic, architecturally out-of-date, glue filled iMacs with woefully innefficient thermal management which slow cook themselves to death and you pay through the nose for it. The Mini? The MacBook ehem, 'Pro', iPad?

    Apple is leaving it late to refresh the lines and instead of waiting until after the xmas season to update pricing on existing models in the UK, it does it now. If a Christmas Mac was on somebody's list, it's off now. But Apple knows best!
    edited November 2016 duervo
  • Reply 125 of 211
    mr4jsmr4js Posts: 55member
    Kuo, typical click bait. Writes trash in his underwear from his garage. Everybody I know wants one of these. The issue with 36 GB is overblown, most have no need for it.
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 126 of 211

    I'm not trolling; I'm looking for informed advice ("and you're posting here??").

    I've had a 13" MPB with 8/512 for a few years now as my primary computer, running XCode, MS Office, some games, and various other things.  I don't run Photoshop and I don't do any video editing.  I run for months at a time without rebooting and have no stability issues.  I've ordered a new 13" MBP w/ TB so I can pass my current MBP to my college student daughter.  I ordered $2000 8/512 configuration.

    So the question is, for my situation, is $200 to upgrade to 16 gig of RAM a reasonable investment or a waste of money?  I don't think I've suffered at all from only having 8 gig to date, so there is some probability that I would literally never notice the difference between 8 and 16 gig.  I'll likely replace this MBP in about 3 years just to have a new toy to play with.

    What would you do in my situation? 

    I am not an expert on computer hardware, so consider that when evaluating my comments:

    My last machine had 8GB of RAM. It worked fine for most things, even at five years old. The interim machine I'm using until the new one arrives also has 8GB. It's also fine for most things. It's not enough for Pro Tools, and when editing in iMovie it doesn't preview transitions very well -- they skip and hiccup. More RAM would likely improve that.

    On the old machine, I noticed a fair amount of swapping to the hard drive when I had more than a couple of apps open. Once I replaced the hard drive with an SSD I stopped noticing. The storage on recent Macs is so fast it may mitigate any swapping issues fairly well.

    All that said, I see that the "minimum" and "recommended" RAM specs for most of the software I use has gone up every couple years, so more RAM may be a good future-proofing move. It will also improve the overall user experience by providing consistently "snappy" performance with fewer lags.

    $200 is a really, really big hit for only 8GB of RAM, but if you average it over the time you're likely to own the machine you may decide it's worth letting Apple have a pound of flesh because over time you'll grow it back and then some.
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 127 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member
    If he is right, then there will not be very many disappointed customers to complain about this years purchase, when the new processor Macbook Pros are released next year. /s Apple does not yet create their own laptop processors so they were held back by Intel. Perhaps they should have taken steps years ago to address this like they did for the iPhone.
    You're terribly blind or completely underestimating Apple if you don't assume that they've been taking the appropriate steps for years now. I am extremely doubtful that we'll see the fruits of this by the end of the decade, though. This is extremely difficult stuff, and transitioning an entire platform is a massive endeavour.
  • Reply 128 of 211
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,498member

    felix01 said:
    If demand is so weak, why is the delay to get one being measured in multiple weeks?
    Pent up demand? Production issues? Low amount of initial units? Samsung Virus? These machines are going to be expensive to repair if the new tech has issues. A slow roll out would make some sense. They take (or reserve) your money and then keep their collective ear to the ground to identify anything  that crops up in user land that can fixed on the production line. Exploding MacBook Pros wouldn't be good for their image. ha!

    They are already taking a bashing from all angles on the pricing so any minor glitches will get magnified at this point in time.

    Whatever the reason, I'm in the camp that was priced out of the market. I believe huge swathes of the user base have suddenly found themselves in my position.
    duervo
  • Reply 129 of 211
    anomeanome Posts: 1,486member
    If the demand is tepid, why has the wait time doubled in the few days since pre-orders started?
    Soliwilliamlondon
  • Reply 130 of 211
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,605member
    "What I said, and I made it very, very clear, was that the base line specs were not fitting of the pro label. 256GB, at this point in time is not pro. Dual core is not pro. Integrated graphics is not pro. "

    By that definition, only the 15" MBP would qualify as Pro. Apple is not going to put a quad-core CPU & discreet GPU into the 13" version.
  • Reply 131 of 211
    Rayz2016 said:

    If you don't believe wireless is the way forward. 


    Wireless may well be the way forward, but it isn't there yet.

    For example, without an AppleTV, there's simply no way for me to beam audio or video to a group. Maybe we'll eventually see a universal standard on TVs and audio systems that allows wireless streaming from any device, but so far no such thing exists.

    Then there's networking. I can't even explain this one. I have an AC wireless system. Downloading an update to a brand-new, top-of-the-line Air, the machine reported wireless speeds of over 800 Mb, but the download window reported remaining time for the download at 26 minutes. Just for giggles, I plugged in an ethernet cable via Apple's Thunderbolt adapter and the remaining download time dropped to 6 minutes -- FOUR TIMES the speed. My internet connection is only 50 Mb, so the wireless should not have been a bottleneck. I have no idea why the wired connection was so much faster, but it reinforced in my mind the notion that wireless is not necessarily the best way to work, at least not yet.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't disagree with you that a world without wires would be much more convenient. We just need wireless systems that perform as quickly and reliably as wires, and for the rest of the world outside Apple's ecosystem to be accessible before it will become a viable alternative.
    For the record, you don't "need" an Apple TV to do that. Most modern receivers support AirPlay (and Google's "cast" feature.) However, it would be even better if TV's themselves supported AirPlay. Unfortunately, I'm more inclined to believe that we won't see that. In fact, I've started to see more TV's being sold lately that do not even have TV tuners in them. Essentially just making them a dumb display device. Not sure if this suggests a trend or not (meaning a reliance on an external receiver/tuner).
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 132 of 211
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 6,498member
    "What I said, and I made it very, very clear, was that the base line specs were not fitting of the pro label. 256GB, at this point in time is not pro. Dual core is not pro. Integrated graphics is not pro. "

    By that definition, only the 15" MBP would qualify as Pro. Apple is not going to put a quad-core CPU & discreet GPU into the 13" version.
    And why on earth not? Ah! Silly me! I should have known better. They'd end up too thick!!
  • Reply 133 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member
    "What I said, and I made it very, very clear, was that the base line specs were not fitting of the pro label. 256GB, at this point in time is not pro. Dual core is not pro. Integrated graphics is not pro. "

    By that definition, only the 15" MBP would qualify as Pro. Apple is not going to put a quad-core CPU & discreet GPU into the 13" version.
    There is no quad-core processor available that Apple COULD put into the 13" version. 

    Oddly, I don't care at all about discrete graphics. None of the numerous "pros" I work with in my main line of business do. We're audio. 

    The video guys around me do, of course. But like hell they're going to buy a dual-core. 

    I was wishing for a quad with integrated graphics. I'd love for a 13" version of that, because portability is king for me, but I've known for a long time that Intel wasn't going to make that happen. So I'm thankful that the new 15" is as light as the old 2011 13" 'Pro that it's replacing, and only marginally wider/deeper. 
  • Reply 134 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member

    They just need to remove the obsolete Macbook Air from the list. That prevents all the models from getting into their appropriate price slots. Remove the Macbook Air, put the Retina Macbook in its $999 slot, then pull down all the remaining models' prices accordingly. But apparently they fear that such an abrupt ending of the popular Macbook Air would be disruptive. They're not wrong totally, because we all know that buyer behaviour is irrational (no offense). Just one example: everyone has a 4K capable smartphone, so the $1300 4K capable Retina Macbook with its 256 GB SSD should sell like cake, right? But not so, the owners of those 4K capable smartphones buy the obsolete 4K capable Macbook Air (unsuited to the 4K leisure with its 128 GB) because it is $300 cheaper !.. Would they buy an obsolete smartphone for $300 less? Absolutely not.

    So they should have the "courage" to remove the obsolete Macbook Air from the list as soon as the new models were announced. Their lack of courage coupled with irrational buyer behaviour leaves us with such irrational prices.

    If I'm wrong with my insight then all the models are in their correct price slots so nothing to complain about...
    No, you're spot-on. That's exactly what Apple would love to do, and what they're GOING TO do.

    Except that they CAN'T sell the retina MacBook for $999 just yet. It will take a year or two for prices to drop, and the MacBook Air will stick around until then. 

    Same with the new 'Books: Next revision, or the one after, the entry-level 15" with integrated graphics will return, the legacy models will disappear, and the new 13" 'Books drop in price to fill the gaps evenly as the MacBook shifts downward in price. 

    We're just not quite there yet.
  • Reply 135 of 211
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,605member
    spheric said:

    They just need to remove the obsolete Macbook Air from the list. That prevents all the models from getting into their appropriate price slots. Remove the Macbook Air, put the Retina Macbook in its $999 slot, then pull down all the remaining models' prices accordingly. But apparently they fear that such an abrupt ending of the popular Macbook Air would be disruptive. They're not wrong totally, because we all know that buyer behaviour is irrational (no offense). Just one example: everyone has a 4K capable smartphone, so the $1300 4K capable Retina Macbook with its 256 GB SSD should sell like cake, right? But not so, the owners of those 4K capable smartphones buy the obsolete 4K capable Macbook Air (unsuited to the 4K leisure with its 128 GB) because it is $300 cheaper !.. Would they buy an obsolete smartphone for $300 less? Absolutely not.

    So they should have the "courage" to remove the obsolete Macbook Air from the list as soon as the new models were announced. Their lack of courage coupled with irrational buyer behaviour leaves us with such irrational prices.

    If I'm wrong with my insight then all the models are in their correct price slots so nothing to complain about...
    No, you're spot-on. That's exactly what Apple would love to do, and what they're GOING TO do.

    Except that they CAN'T sell the retina MacBook for $999 just yet. It will take a year or two for prices to drop, and the MacBook Air will stick around until then. 

    Same with the new 'Books: Next revision, or the one after, the entry-level 15" with integrated graphics will return, the legacy models will disappear, and the new 13" 'Books drop in price to fill the gaps evenly as the MacBook shifts downward in price. 

    We're just not quite there yet.
    I think by this time next year, we'll see just that.

    "Next revision, or the one after, the entry-level 15" with integrated graphics will return"

    Would love to see that model return as well.
    edited November 2016 duervo
  • Reply 136 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member
    avon b7 said:
    "What I said, and I made it very, very clear, was that the base line specs were not fitting of the pro label. 256GB, at this point in time is not pro. Dual core is not pro. Integrated graphics is not pro. "

    By that definition, only the 15" MBP would qualify as Pro. Apple is not going to put a quad-core CPU & discreet GPU into the 13" version.
    And why on earth not? Ah! Silly me! I should have known better. They'd end up too thick!!

    The lowest-end Skylake quad-core that Apple uses consumes 45W. 

    Apple CANNOT stick a 45W processor into that case. A quad-core processor generates way too much heat. The limit for the 13" thermal envelope is about 30W, and has been for over a decade (the initial Core Duo MacBook from May 2006 used a 31W processor in its higher configuration). 

    Go search out a 13" quad-core laptop — by any manufacturer. Go on. We'll wait. They might even exist. 
    tmaypscooter63
  • Reply 137 of 211
    dewmedewme Posts: 4,628member
    Why are people complaining about the price of the new MacBook Pros? Every other vendor who is trying to build a comparably configured computer with build quality that does not come close to Apple's and whose product support is laughable compared to Apple's is charging as much or more than the MacBook Pro computers for their stuff. Corporate computer support surveys have shown that Apple computers are less expensive to support. Home and small business users who have had to contact Apple Support after having been subjected to the support from other products like Microsoft or Samsung would be happy to convey why they are much happier with Apple products and the Apple ecosystem. No comparison. 
    pscooter63
  • Reply 138 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member
    wood1208 said:
    If I am Apple, I align Macbook refresh in-line with Intel's new processor release, not year after. With that said, the next upgrade should be in-line with 10nm Cannonlake processor to be released 2H2017 for 2018 Macbook pro upgrade with no compromises. Some leaked info suggests Cannonlake SoC that integrates 4/6/8 cores and Converged Coherent Fabric (CCF) which acts like a NorthBridge plus on chip voltage regulator.
    And that is exactly what Apple did. 

    Except, if you are Apple, what do you do if you time everything to align with Intel's new processor release, and suddenly Intel fucks you over by seriously delaying their release, and then their architecture turns out to be so buggy that you can't risk using it for months until you're sure they won't turn your machines into lemons right off the bat?

    Again, you do exactly what Apple did. You wait, and after much shouting and hardball price cut demands, and more swearing, and lots and lots of pacing up and down board rooms, and more waiting, and lots and lots of testing, you finally release. 
  • Reply 139 of 211
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,074member
    avon b7 said:
    jbdragon said:
    netrox said:
    I am definitely not buying a new MacBook Pro anytime. It's a huge disappointment. It's overpriced. It's underwhelming. Although TB3 is great but it will take a while for TB3 devices to come out. 


    You know, throwing PRO in the name doesn't make it so!!! You need to do a whole lot more then that. At some point, people are just not going to take it anymore. Weak processors and limited Memory and now needing a bunch of DONGLES!!! You need you're USB-A dongles, and card reader dongle and so forth. I get the touch strip and I like that feature, but it is very thin and really skyrocketing the costs. To me it just looks like Apple wants even larger profit margins then they already have. How will they sell? We'll see, but I won't be buying one.
    What processor isn't in this MBP that should have been?
    Let's just say that at these prices for a pro machine, the processors should be quad core across the base line. SSD should start at 512GB and graphics should be discrete. These machines are to see pros through 2017 but the base specs are not worthy. Apple doesn't offer the touch bar on the entry level model, gives you half the TB ports (not only more dongles but more dongle switching!) and it remains to be seen if people will like the feel of the new keyboard. If you BTO up to 1TB SSD, Apple wants 740€ - and it wants it NOW (at point of sale). As they are not user upgradeable there is no possibility of giving the machine a new leash of life (at a cheaper third party price) when your pocket has recovered from being emptied and better, cheaper options have come to market.

    The magic word is 'pro' not 'posh'

    Apple spent much time and money giving us the touch bar which has little or no impact on productivity. Ask any pro if they'd prefer 512GB SSD out of the gate over the touch bar and you'd see a constant stream of answers with the words '512GB SSD'. Try the same question with a discrete graphics card instead of intel (for the models that don't offer one) or with quad core etc

    if these prices are pushing key components down to lesser offerings across the line to cover the cost of development of the touch bar, then someone screwed up at the planning stage. They screwed up big time.

    These are just some of the reasons these models don't offer pro users what they need at what they consider a fair price. in fact it's worse, as these users feel ill treated by the impossibility to purchase higher capacity SSDs or RAM in a competitive environment after the sale. Something many are beginning to detest.

    As a result I fully expect sales of these models to implode. Possibly in a way that hasn't been seen in a very long time. I could be wrong of course but it's as simple as looking at what's on offer and deciding if the price is acceptable for the offering and the conditions. Initial reaction all over the net has been overwhelmingly negative (or worse!) on the pricing front.

    On the face of it, these machines are literally out of reach of the budgets of potential customers and that should have been tackled when these machines were still on the drawing board. If your finished machine is unaffordable to your customers and you knew it when you were designing it, it is an EPIC fail.

    Apple needs to rethink things and make sure the basics of a pro machine meet your average pro user's needs, then slap on some bells and whistles until pricing becomes impossible.

    To make matters worse Brexit and Apple have combined to basically destroy sales in the UK.

    To make matters worse still, Microsoft caused waves and pulled the rug out from under Apple's feet the day before.

    To compound everything, the analogue headphone jack issue ('It takes courage') has led people to question how things are being coordinated within Apple. Needing an adaptor to connect Apple's latest phone to Apple's latest MBP just makes them a laughing stock.

    Thinness? Let's not get into that subject again.

    Something is wrong.
    The first year Apple will probably have good sales because of pent up demand from users waiting so long.  Especially this holiday and the 2017 Back to School sales.  The second year may be tougher. 
  • Reply 140 of 211
    sphericspheric Posts: 2,278member
    wiggin said:
    kpom said:
    JayB said:
    I wonder how many commenters are paid by Apple about these things. Along with how many commenters are only getting this new computer cause they work at a tech site.

    Apple is a joke without Steve Jobs. Their new business strategy is change everything just slightly enough to get gullible tech geeks that still think Apple is high end to buy their product. 

    Let's just change all the ports so people t
    Have to buy out our new cords. Lets claim everything not sold directly from us is a fake.
    Let's over price our computer that is using technology from 4 years ago. 

    Funny how all you claim so many people are buying Apple. All my Mac friends have switched to PC in the last few years. So I guess the claim goes both ways.


    You are right. Steve Jobs would never have released a Mac that dropped every legacy port Apple had ever used in the past. /S. 
    You might want to check your /s at the door and take a look at the complete history, not just one cherry picked example. Yes, Jobs did this once, in the late 90s with the original iMac. At the time, pretty much the only thing anyone plugged into two of the "lost" ports (SCSI and serial) was a printer. Any other devices were quite rare.  (ADB was also removed, but Apple included a USB keyboard and mouse in the box, so no functionality was lost. And the iMac still had built-in modem and Ethernet ports.)

    There are at least two more recent examples where Jobs did, in fact, leave the old ports in place...the first Apple laptop with FW800 (still had FW400) and the first one with Thunderbolt (still had FW800).

    So you conveniently ignore these much more recent examples of Apple providing an orderly port migration design iteration and have to go back 15 years to find an example that supports your position. Not really a very solid argument.
    Since you're now talking about examples where they dropped individual ports, let's have a look: 

    — Removing the PCMCIA slot in 2009 (and replacing it with the consumer-toy SD card slot). There wasn't even ANY alternative available until Thunderbolt happened, in 2011.
    — Removing the dedicated audio in.
    — Removing Ethernet.
    — Removing the modem.
    — Removing VGA.
    — Removing DVI. 
    — Heck, ANY of the (feels like a dozen) monitor connection transitions Apple has gone through - VGA, DVI-I, DVI-D, ADC (remember ADC?), mini-DVI, micro-DVI, mini Displayport (not to mention Target Display Mode on the 27" iMac), whatever else I can't remember… 

    Most of those (except PCMCIA) allowed the use of older peripherals via dongles (ADC to DVI adapter brick for, what was it, 149€?) or new cables. Just like today. 

    And, of course, — non-Mac, but still: 30-pin iPod connector to Lightning.

    Apple has CONSTANTLY dropped ports and replaced them with alternatives they considered more useful in the long term, or (as with the thankfully short-lived micro-DVI) which they required for engineering reasons. 
    williamlondon
Sign In or Register to comment.