Both will use a new generation of first-party Apple Silicon processors that will also appear in the 2021 MacBook Pro lineup. Apple's first piece of Mac silicon, the M1, debuted in 2020.
I took these statements to suggest that the new 2021 products would use something different/newer than the current M1, such as M1X or M2. Am I interpreting incorrectly?
I would assume that releases in Q1 and Q2 would be M1X, D, T, Z, etc. by Q3-4, M2 should release. I doubt they will go longer than an annual release.
if there were an exception, it would be the M1 going longer than a year. But they will likely hit an annual stride with M2, 3, and onward. That’s my best guess.
Just refine the old ‘floating monitor’ (“Luxo lamp”) version of the iMac. It was a great design and the monitor could actually be repositioned in intelligent ways back then.
G4 iMac was Apple doing what it does best. One of my top five Apple product designs. In case nobody was curious what the other four are in no particular order:
iPod shuffle - no buttons (own)
iPhone 4 (own/ed)
iPhone 12 (admire on the internet)
Mac Pro “cheese grater” (own)
Honorable mention - G4 cube & “Trash Can” Mac Pro.
I am amazed by Apple’s technology acquisition strategy. I am in awe of their long term planning. I wish I could work at a company that had the discipline to say “no” like Apple does. There are many reasons I admire the company, but the thing I love the most about Apple is that they are willing to take major design risks. Like not some goofy styling tweak that can be remedied by a twenty thousand dollar tooling fee. Not a bizarre color option that ends up costing half a million in unsold goods and warehousing fees.
No, like a MAJOR design risk, like an MP3 player with no buttons. Like a phone made almost entirely of glass. Like a cylindrically shaped workstation grade desktop that took millions in tooling investment for the outer shell alone - not to mention the hardware tooling for the innards, the custom graphics boards and on and on. So risky, that there’s a really good chance half your customer base in that segment call you nuts and some even will switch platforms suspecting you’ve basically given up entirely. That kind of risk.
And the ability to know when they’ve made the wrong decision and start over. And not just make some tweaks mind you, but start from scratch. It’s really just a lot of fun to watch.
But to actually reply to your comment; I wonder if they would go with something like stuffing iMac components into something similar to the pro display, which would be pretty sweet imho.
Just refine the old ‘floating monitor’ (“Luxo lamp”) version of the iMac. It was a great design and the monitor could actually be repositioned in intelligent ways back then.
I kept the parts of my lampshade iMac after it finally died years ago. Still trying to figure out what to turn it into.
My only concern with creating something similar is physics related. The lampshade iMac base was heavy compared to the display. A new version would be the opposite and probably require the base to be firmly attached to a table -or- forget about a base, put electronics inside the monitor and sell a VESA-only version so people could use whatever VESA mounting solution they want or have. No $1k mount. ;-)
didn't like my emoji
They could simply make the base L-shaped like the iMac is now. If it’s balanced properly there shouldn’t be a problem. Totally agree that having adjustable height would be awesome.
Given the target market, I wouldn’t be surprised if the next Mac Pro remains intel. Performance is the key factor for the Mac Pro and the high end intel processors still beat the M1. Having native software is also important and allowing extra time for developers to port their code may be helpful.
I wonder if Apple may be considering a multi processor model for the Mac Pro. I don’t know how easy or difficult that would be to implement but it would be a way to scale the M1. Otherwise Apple would be looking at developing a completely separate high-performance model of their processor to fill a wry small market. Intel has the server market for their Xeon processors but Apple wouldn’t have that extra market to distribute the cost.
As I recall, the Mac cube’s biggest problem was mediocre performance at a ludicrous price. Given the similarly ludicrous price positioning of the HomePod and AirPods Max, I fear Tim Apple might try the same trick again.
I guess the reason he's the CEO and the company's profits and revenue grew as much as it has under his leadership is that he is that dumb.
I purchased a new TOL 27" iMac four months ago with the intent that it will be my final Intel Mac and when the time comes to retire it, Apple's ASi models will have gone a few years and most if not all the bugs currently plaguing their 1st-gen M1 machines will be an old memory.
I'm really excited for what Apple is going to do this year. Considering the amazing performance of their M1 machines compared to what Intel has, it's tempting (for me) to buy one sooner than later if they're as good as we're expecting them to be.
I sure hope they design the glued screen out of the iMacs and make them upgradeable. But I think Apple’s gradually getting back to common sense design decisions since Ive’s gone.
Ok,mahatma I just read is that Apple is indeed planning a smaller Mac Pro in addition to the current Intel model that will have an Apple,chip inside. Depending on how they do it, that would be what I would prefer anyway. Alongside that, a less expensive pro monitor. That would be good too. I still think that Intel Mac Pro will be gone early 2022.
Obviously these are just rumors, but if they are true, then my guess that Apple will use a chiplet approach is likely wrong, at least for 2021. This smaller Mac Pro sounds kind of like a headless iMac — essentially the legendary xMac. Such a machine could share the same SOC with the iMac and large MacBook Pro, perhaps running at a higher sustained clock speed and with more cores enabled.
A Big Mac Pro with Intel might get Ice Lake and the latest AMD GPUs.
Maybe Apple will wait for 3nm to replace Intel in the highest end Mac pro. Maybe then they will go chiplet.... or maybe they will never go chiplet and instead people who can benefit from that much parallelism can just buy multiple Macs pro.
This is 36 cores on Intel’s 10nm process which is analogous to TSMC 7nm. Intel’s process that is competitive with TSMC 5nm is delayed until maybe 2023.
So in 2022, if Apple were to come out with a 32 core SOC on 3nm process, it would be a full two nodes ahead of Intel. That process advantage might negate the need for a chiplet approach.
Of course, that ignores AMD, who also uses TSMC, lags Apple by just one node rather than two, and uses a chiplet approach. Apple might not match AMD at the very highest end. But that’s true now, too.
If the smaller Mac Pro is still going to use MPX modules it can really only reduce in one dimension.
Assuming Apple M series do still support 3rd party GPU this year or next. Then again if they have own Gpu in the wings they likely offer that as an MPX as well.
As others have said would love for Apple to make the stand optional on the new iMac and screen put the circle Mount of the pro display on both with a cheaper fixed height stand for the retail box versions. Take inspiration from the Mac Pro steel frame. BTO stand free, vesa Mount or fully adjustable pro stand.
How many people here really believed it would take Apple two years to do this? Nobody? I didn’t either. I believe Jobs said it would take two years to switch to x86, but it took less than a year, from what I remember, without looking it up. If Apple took two years, it would impact sales. But in case of problems, they have to give themselves breathing space, and these aren’t Apple’s statements, after all.
but I’m waiting to see what they do with a Mac Pro. I was going to buy one in 2019, but I didn’t, because of it having the nearly obsolete PCIe 3. Now, it’s great that I waited.
Your are correct. The announcement was June 2005 with completion in June 2007. First Intel macs came out in early 2006 and they were done by the end of 2006. So, about six months faster than they had said and less than a year from when the first intel Mac shipped.
I would say the primary difference here is Intel chips existed at the time of the announcement so Apple wasn’t waiting on any sort of development on intel’s part. In this case I’d assume Apple didn’t make the decision to move lightly or pull the timeline out of thin air but did provide themselves some wiggle room to complete development of the Apple Silicon going into the Mac Pro. Also worth noting that the 2 year timeline was given a few months into a global pandemic that had disrupted its supply chain and there was no indication of how that would resolve. So finishing this year is plausible.
The previous times Apple has made a small pro desktop, things have gone terribly wrong. The Cube was a real miss, and we all know how the 2013 Mac Pro turned out. Hopefully the third time is the charm.
As I recall, the Mac cube’s biggest problem was mediocre performance at a ludicrous price. Given the similarly ludicrous price positioning of the HomePod and AirPods Max, I fear Tim Apple might try the same trick again.
I guess the reason he's the CEO and the company's profits and revenue grew as much as it has under his leadership is that he is that dumb.
Do you really need someone to explain to you that profits and revenue don’t necessarily have a causal relationship with product quality? Especially the case where hot and heavy usage comes in: compact/tiny Macs are great, until you need them for workloads that result in considerable heat generation. Then they throttle. They even die earlier. Well documented. The pre-trashcan and current [and insanely expensive] Mac Pro designs are the only machines Apple have made in over a decade that can handle such thermals. They really need a Mac Pro that can handle heavy thermals that’s NOT only for corporations and plutocrats...
For general use, though, Macs are fantastic little machines. Typically very quiet, both in running noise and the lack of rattling & creaking noises made when picked up & carried (looking at you, PC industry).
Apple could bring back the trash can Mac as the problem was thermal capacity. The Apple Silicon generates much less heat.
There’s still the issue of raw power. It has yet to be proven that Apple can provide a workhorse machine like the current Mac Pro when their own SOC is used, instead of Intel Xeons. Also the RAM issue...
Happy to hear that a new budget display is in the works!
Please also bring target disk mode to Apple Silicon Macs - then I will switch...
Agreed. Could this FINALLY be the year I buy a new computer?? FINALLY???
The only reason i didn’t buy the 2013 Mac Pro was a lack of a first-party Retina display. They never solved that, the machine festered, and hard core use showed that they had the same thermal failure issues as all other compact Apple computers.
I’d be very happy to buy a power-user’s desktop machine AND standalone Retina display from Apple this year. I would especially like if I could use that same display with my next gaming PC, instead of wasting more space and money having TWO displays as well as the requisite TWO computers.
I despise PCs & Windows. Used them my whole life and the experience made me hate them with a burning passion. But I also like gaming, and I don’t like consoles... Aaand Apple continue to show zero motivation to support high-end gaming, or maintaining any API long enough for the rare ports to survive more than a couple OS upgrades.
When boot camp existed, I had hopes of buying a Mac Pro and running games on a Windows partition. ONE computer for both needs (gaming in Windows, everything else in Mac OS). Apple failed to provide a new and reasonable pro machine for years, and I waited.
And waited. And waited.
Then the Mac Plutocrat and its Pixar-studios-only display came along. Threw my hands up and gave up.
Along with the “if you can’t afford it, we don’t think you need it” machine/display, Apple corporate wants to push the rest of us to replace our hardware about every three years. That just doesn’t work for people with severely limited incomes. You’re either “the computer for everyone” (as a “born-again user”, I hate bad design, overly geeky software, and tech-geeks who see computers as an end all of their own, rather than a MEANS)... or you’re an expensive luxury brand.
Apple could bring back the trash can Mac as the problem was thermal capacity. The Apple Silicon generates much less heat.
There’s still the issue of raw power. It has yet to be proven that Apple can provide a workhorse machine like the current Mac Pro when their own SOC is used, instead of Intel Xeons. Also the RAM issue...
No it isn’t proven that Apple could replace the Mac Pro with their own silicon. That said, I think if they said that they could replace all their Macs with Apple silicon ones within two years that they will have something with the power and equivalent ram to replace the Mac Pro.
Apple could bring back the trash can Mac as the problem was thermal capacity. The Apple Silicon generates much less heat.
There’s still the issue of raw power. It has yet to be proven that Apple can provide a workhorse machine like the current Mac Pro when their own SOC is used, instead of Intel Xeons. Also the RAM issue...
Comments
if there were an exception, it would be the M1 going longer than a year. But they will likely hit an annual stride with M2, 3, and onward. That’s my best guess.
I am amazed by Apple’s technology acquisition strategy. I am in awe of their long term planning. I wish I could work at a company that had the discipline to say “no” like Apple does. There are many reasons I admire the company, but the thing I love the most about Apple is that they are willing to take major design risks. Like not some goofy styling tweak that can be remedied by a twenty thousand dollar tooling fee. Not a bizarre color option that ends up costing half a million in unsold goods and warehousing fees.
Mac Pro quad/Mac Pro
Mac Pro/Mac Pro X
https://wccftech.com/intel-ice-lake-sp-cpu-with-36-cores-112-threads-at-3-60-ghz-leaks-out/
This is 36 cores on Intel’s 10nm process which is analogous to TSMC 7nm. Intel’s process that is competitive with TSMC 5nm is delayed until maybe 2023.
Please also bring target disk mode to Apple Silicon Macs - then I will switch...
For general use, though, Macs are fantastic little machines. Typically very quiet, both in running noise and the lack of rattling & creaking noises made when picked up & carried (looking at you, PC industry).
One can hope...
Agreed. Could this FINALLY be the year I buy a new computer?? FINALLY???
The only reason i didn’t buy the 2013 Mac Pro was a lack of a first-party Retina display. They never solved that, the machine festered, and hard core use showed that they had the same thermal failure issues as all other compact Apple computers.
I’d be very happy to buy a power-user’s desktop machine AND standalone Retina display from Apple this year. I would especially like if I could use that same display with my next gaming PC, instead of wasting more space and money having TWO displays as well as the requisite TWO computers.
I despise PCs & Windows. Used them my whole life and the experience made me hate them with a burning passion. But I also like gaming, and I don’t like consoles... Aaand Apple continue to show zero motivation to support high-end gaming, or maintaining any API long enough for the rare ports to survive more than a couple OS upgrades.
When boot camp existed, I had hopes of buying a Mac Pro and running games on a Windows partition. ONE computer for both needs (gaming in Windows, everything else in Mac OS). Apple failed to provide a new and reasonable pro machine for years, and I waited.
And waited.
And waited.
Then the Mac Plutocrat and its Pixar-studios-only display came along. Threw my hands up and gave up.
Along with the “if you can’t afford it, we don’t think you need it” machine/display, Apple corporate wants to push the rest of us to replace our hardware about every three years. That just doesn’t work for people with severely limited incomes. You’re either “the computer for everyone” (as a “born-again user”, I hate bad design, overly geeky software, and tech-geeks who see computers as an end all of their own, rather than a MEANS)... or you’re an expensive luxury brand.
You can’t be both.