I just don't get it. Just because the MacBook Pros have a lot of horsepower and flexibility, they are still laptops and Apple (rightfully) considers them mobile machines. The fact that people use them as desktops, or leave them plugged in 24x7, or attach them to 24 Thunderbolt devices on four TB ports is irrelevant because they are STILL laptops and a balance has to be made between portability, power, and battery life.
Enough of the rants and demands that the MBP's should be desktop-class machines. They are not, they never were. They are MOBILE machines and there will always be compromises on these systems. Get a desktop machine for the serious power, and use these laptops for the reason they were designed. I think it's great that today's laptops rival the power of desktop machines. It's great, but they are still LAPTOPS. I don't want legacy USB ports. Those ports are obsolete, and they would barely (if at all) fit on the new, slimmer chassis.
The rants about the TB3 ports on the new MBP's are laughable to say the least. People want thinner, lighter, more powerful machines and (thanks to Apple) incorporating the most current tech (and ports), and (again, thanks to Apple) taking the initiative and jettison legacy ports. Enough of it. Move on. I did, everyone will, and when the Microsofts/Samsungs of the world clone identical Apple laptops with the same ports, I'll bet money none of you will complain.
It's a moot point. Change is inevitable. "Change" is the only thing that doesn't change. When USBc becomes mainstream, I doubt you'll all be whining about it in a year from now
These developer guys only desire was 32GB ram.. not 5 video cards or 12 cores etc They are fine with the machine otherwise.. as for my 'quibble regarding USB, thats what it was a quibble... chill dude, chill. BTW--- 'Cough -- Head phone jack -- cough'...who said that--- 'squirrel, see the squirrel!
Well, it's Apple's fault that they keep using Intel processors instead of something based on their wind-storm ARM cores.
ARM still has not caught up to Intel in terms of performance, so claiming about the performance of Apple's Intel-based machines and wishing for ARM instead is an odd position to be taking.
This keeps happening. People keep going "Apple will use ARM in their MacBooks" and all you have to do is look at the iPad Pro and go "why would they bother?"
The iPad Pro is better at being a laptop than many of the Intel-based i3 parts. There is no demand to run macOS software on the iPad Pro. This is different from Microsoft's problem where they completely fumbled by releasing not one, but two different products that people didn't want. They released Windows 8 without the "classic" interface, thus subjecting desktop users to what is clearly a touch-interface that nobody had (Microsoft didn't learn this lesson with Windows CE/Mobile either) but they then put out an ARM-based Windows Surface laptop/tablet that didnt't run Windows classic software either. Microsoft illustrates the folly of trying to have one OS be everything. Microsoft should have literately stolen Apple's idea and released the "Windows 8 UI" as it's own OS even if the underlying OS could still run classic applications through a control panel widget. It should be been "Buy all your apps from the Microsoft store" just like Apple. They might have even gotten away with calling the Windows 8 UI OS "Windows Metro 8 " and then later releasing a "Windows 8 64-bit" for the desktop/laptop and drop support for 32-bit CPU's.
But no, Microsoft in all it's brilliant screwups since Bill Gates left, opted for the ARM chip for no reason and then abandoned it. See also Zune, and Windows CE/Mobile where Microsoft just outright abandoned a software/hardware product and shot off their own foot in the process. Who was going to buy a Windows Phone now? Microsoft is just going to abandon Windows Phone users, and have done so. If you want the mass market to adopt something you have to put your full support behind it, and unfortunately Microsoft only puts their full support behind their Office product and the Xbox. Nothing else. A surface-series computer is a hard sell because you know Microsoft is not going to support it for 8 years.
Exactly. All they'd need to do would be to add a trackpad to that flip-cover keyboard they have for the iPad Pro and voilà, there's your ARM-based laptop.
:sigh: You can't fucking add a piece of HW to the iPad and make it work like a windowed OS or have the same functionality as a traditional PC. If and when Apple moves to an ARM-based traditional PC it'll be based on macOS, not iOS.
Apple's priority on laptops is battery life, not max performance.
For consumers products like the IPhone and IPad performance specs are more important. OSX devices have moved more to business reliability requirements and longer product lifecycles.
The student market is often looking at an IPad + keyboard rather than a more expensive laptop.
Apple has appropriately targeted each market with a device to suit the needs. I don't see the problem, except the cost of the new offerings. From a business (purchasing) standpoint IBM addressed 'total cost of ownership' for Apple products as favorable in one of their reports.
What has people upset is Apple's pricing for a laptop has pushed them beyond most consumer budgets. For example, someone like myself needs some financial software not available on an IPad and with Apple's laptops cost, I ended up with an IPAD + a cheap Windows laptop.
Apple should introduce the 13" laptop with LTE available with financing through the ISP's (like T-mobile) to address this.
I love the way this story seeks to push the issues people are now commenting on from Apple to Intel. Apple could have introduced a Skylake update to their MB Pro series as soon as the chips were available. Skylake is now over a year old and even the 13 inch chips were introduced in Q1 2016. So I have a question. Can you put USB C and USB A together on the same machine? If the answer is yes then it seems it would have been a much better strategy for Apple to have introduced an old style MB Pro body in the spring of 2016 which included USB C allowing peripheral makers and end users time to start the transition over to the new tech. (This is the way that Apple handled many other transitions away from Firewire, etc). Kaby Lake quad core chips are going to be available in the next few months and this would have meant a much cleaner move over to an all USB C machine in the spring of 2017 with the sexy new touchbar. It seems as if the lunatics are now running the asylum if Apple's product introduction strategy is being decided by the design group rather than when the Intel chips become available. The ones in the middle are us end users who are now looking at the new models thinking why would I invest in a tech that is a year old and which forces me to upgrade all my peripherals or buy a horde of dongles which I have to schlep around with me. For once Appleinsider should question Apple's decisions rather than trying to blame Intel for something which is clearly not their problem!
One of the problems with doing a non-touch strip update to the MBP last year would mean that there would be that much less demand for the new redesigned machines at the new higher price. This release has to be seen as a success or they (Cook, Ive, Federingi) will have made a very bad decision in devoting years in developing this hardware and software wise.
To me the entry level touch strip pro should have been introduced as updated Airs in 11 and 13 with 2 and 3 Type C ports and priced similar to exist Air Prices. One Lowend 15 inch MBP with 4 typeC ports should have been released and then they should have said the higher end MBP with support for 32 GB ram would be out next year.
The Air will probably be their biggest seller because of the MagSafe port.
Article is flawed. LPDDR3 runs at 1.2V ... the same as DDR4. It's incorrect to state that the 16GB max was because DDR4 uses more power.
Skylake does not support LPDDR4, only DDR4, which is the issue. Kaby Lake won't either, except for the U-series, from what I've read, which will be another issue. I'm told Apple will have to wait until Cannonlake to get LP 32GiB support.
Article is flawed. LPDDR3 runs at 1.2V ... the same as DDR4. It's incorrect to state that the 16GB max was because DDR4 uses more power.
There's way more to the power savings with LPDDR3 than you're addressing, here, and nominal voltage is only the very tip of the iceberg, as I'm sure you're aware. Between partial-array self-refresh, temperature-compensation refresh, and the size of the chips, LPDDR3 now and LPDDR4 when it is supported for ultrabooks probably the middle of 2017 is a far superior choice for battery life than DDR3/4.
This isn't a chip engineer-focused article. Simplified, GB per GB, LPDDR3 draws significantly less power over time than DDR3/4 and the numerical "1.2V" doesn't even begin to address why.
The Air will probably be their biggest seller because of the MagSafe port.
You believe that the non-updated, old MacBook Airs with the non-Retina, TN panels that are highly limited in performance and capacity will OUTSELL all the new MacBook Pros because of MagSafe? You don't even think the 2015 MacBook Pro would outsell the MacBook Air that got a minor update 602 days ago? You think people that weirdly have to have a magnetic power connector would hamstring themselves instead of paying $39.99 for a Griffen BreakSafe USB-C-to-USB-C cable?
John Gruber posted a link to a <a href="http://mjtsai.com/blog/2016/10/27/new-macbook-pros-and-the-state-of-the-mac/">blog</a> by Michael Tsai (not exactly sure who that is). Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community. I can understand being upset about the state of the Mac Pro but I don't get the venom directed towards the MacBook Pro. It's a better machine in pretty much every way. This whole temper tantrum over 32GB RAM. I could maybe understand it if it was something Apple previously had but now took away. But that's not the case. There were absolutely no rumors that these new MacBook Pro's would even offer that option. And people are losing their minds yet they haven't spent one minute with these machines nor have there been any reviews.
Frankly I think it's ridiculous and seems a bit like herd mentality sort of like when Marco Arment posted that article about Apple's software using a clickbait headline and then everyone in the tech community was freaking out over Apple's software. Now Phil Schiller responds to why there isn't a 32GB option for the MBP and everyone in the tech world loses their mind. Ridiculous.
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
FACT: Skylake supports DDR3, and DDR3L to 64GB. I do agree that they could have used DDR3, and not LPDDR3, but given a five-fold difference in power for the same memory capacity, and a 10-fold difference with double, that would have been a problem.
LPDDR3 is surface mounted, not socketed. There are no SO-DIMM LPDDR3 chips, and LPDDR3 architecture is different from DDR3. The 32GB SODIMM you're talking about is DDR3L.
Also, we're not iMore, and have been around a lot longer than they have.
These chips seem better suited to updated MacBook Airs with their limitations like 16 GB than an update to MBP.
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
You didn't think it was rather thin, given that the only announcements were an app and two upgraded sizes of notebook?
I though it felt very stretched out, like they were covering for something that had slipped.
Apple's priority on laptops is battery life, not max performance.
For consumers products like the IPhone and IPad performance specs are more important. OSX devices have moved more to business reliability requirements and longer product lifecycles.
The student market is often looking at an IPad + keyboard rather than a more expensive laptop.
Apple has appropriately targeted each market with a device to suit the needs. I don't see the problem, except the cost of the new offerings. From a business (purchasing) standpoint IBM addressed
What has people upset is Apple's pricing for a laptop has pushed them beyond most consumer budgets. For example, someone like myself needs some financial software not available on an IPad and with Apple's laptops cost, I ended up with an IPAD + a cheap Windows laptop
Very reasonable investment indeed. You interpreted Apple's message correctly and made a wise purchase. If you can do the job with a cheaper device you absolutely don't need an Apple laptop. For features specific to Apple's platforms, here is the iPad. You've got two computers for the price of a high end Apple laptop. This is the very message Apple tries to communicate with the iPad.
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
Another blog that attempts to explain the reasons behind Apple's decisions.
This blog claims the only notebook to ship with greater than 16GB RAM weighs 17 pounds. Not sure if that's accurate but certainly if Apple offered that option the device would be a lot thicker and heavier. my guess is the market for a laptop with 32GB RAM is extremely niche. Also I remember seeing plenty of MBA owners - when asked why they don't just get a rMBP - saying that device was too heavy. So Apple's supposed to make one notebook model that's super thick and heavy just for the very small minority of users who do heavy duty workstation processes on a mobile device? That's nonsense to me.
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
You didn't think it was rather thin, given that the only announcements were an app and two upgraded sizes of notebook?
I though it felt very stretched out, like they were covering for something that had slipped.
My opinion: There wasn't enough to show off to warrant an event. These days if Tim Cook is giving updates rather than getting right to new products it means they don't have a lot to show off. I think they weren't planning to have an event but added one because of all the grumbling claiming Apple no longer cares about the Mac.
John Gruber posted a link to a <a href="http://mjtsai.com/blog/2016/10/27/new-macbook-pros-and-the-state-of-the-mac/">blog</a> by Michael Tsai (not exactly sure who that is). Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community. I can understand being upset about the state of the Mac Pro but I don't get the venom directed towards the MacBook Pro. It's a better machine in pretty much every way. This whole temper tantrum over 32GB RAM. I could maybe understand it if it was something Apple previously had but now took away. But that's not the case. There were absolutely no rumors that these new MacBook Pro's would even offer that option. And people are losing their minds yet they haven't spent one minute with these machines nor have there been any reviews.
Frankly I think it's ridiculous and seems a bit like herd mentality sort of like when Marco Arment posted that article about Apple's software using a clickbait headline and then everyone in the tech community was freaking out over Apple's software. Now Phil Schiller responds to why there isn't a 32GB option for the MBP and everyone in the tech world loses their mind. Ridiculous.
That's a very long list of disgruntled and unhappy potential customers and it shows that Apple is not in touch with what it's current user base wants. If you look at the comments there are a litany of issues there, not just about the amount of RAM. Everything from the reality that these units have gone up in price for the same spec, to the failure to update the rest of the Mac line up with modern chips, to the fact that to use ANY peripheral you now need a bag of expensive dongles. It's obvious that there is a lot of pent up frustration at how Apple is managing the Mac product line and not listening to their customers. My own take on it is that Apple is so enamored with it's iOS devices and the dictats of Johnny Ive that no one is standing up and saying what needs to be said. Pretty sad but also pretty true when you look at the reality. Yes, please make a thin, light laptop but why not make a bigger unit that includes backwards compatibility but allows the use of more RAM, bigger battery, etc so that the end users can decide which one they want to use and what is more important for them. If Apple is convinced that the MB Pro is so good what is the harm in creating some differentiation?
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
You didn't think it was rather thin, given that the only announcements were an app and two upgraded sizes of notebook?
I though it felt very stretched out, like they were covering for something that had slipped.
The beginning started off a dull, as they used to do with a bunch of dull stats. Cook had put an end to that until last week, but that's because the previous events had too much stuff crammed into a single event, IMO.
I typically don't care for the app demos, but this time I felt they were needed because they were showcasing the Touch Bar and how it can be used to increase your workflow. If someone asked me to demonstrate how the Touch Bar can be useful I'd have them watch them that even specifically to see how brilliantly it was used.
I don't think it was specifically demoed, but I'm expecting that the Touch Bar will finally let me use fullscreen apps so I'm no longer wasting part of my display for things I only ever look at periodically or at a quick glance. I hope one of the customizable options will be to include the time in the bar.
Gruber says he can't remember an Apple event that had such negative reaction from the Mac community.
I watched it last night, the second time as the first time was a lot of communicating with people about it live, and I think it was one of their best events. Not just in terms of the products which I believe are innovative, but the event itself was well done. I can't wait for mine to arrive.
Another blog that attempts to explain the reasons behind Apple's decisions.
This blog claims the only notebook to ship with greater than 16GB RAM weighs 17 pounds. Not sure if that's accurate but certainly if Apple offered that option the device would be a lot thicker and heavier. my guess is the market for a laptop with 32GB RAM is extremely niche. Also I remember seeing plenty of MBA owners - when asked why they don't just get a rMBP - saying that device was too heavy. So Apple's supposed to make one notebook model that's super thick and heavy just for the very small minority of users who do heavy duty workstation processes on a mobile device? That's nonsense to me.
Without any other information I'd wager this 17lb notebook uses a desktop-class CPU and is designed for gaming.
Well, it's Apple's fault that they keep using Intel processors instead of something based on their wind-storm ARM cores.
I would like to see this happen, but this needs to start with the low-end traditional PC offerings, not their Pro-level machines where VMs, Adobe, MS, and other large and complex apps will be used. This needs to happen with a MacBook or Mac mini-like machine where we can have a sub-$800 12" notebook of sub-$500 mini-desktop where you get more performance on their ARM-based SoCs for more users that will most use the default apps and Mac App Store apps.
It could go that way, but I don't think it has to.
I think it could actually go in the exact opposite direction -- start at the Mac Pro, and then work down. That might sound crazy, but there could be some advantages to starting with a low volume niche machine like the Mac Pro. First, if Apple screws up then they don't end up alienating too many people (and Mac Pro users are already about as alienated as you can get). Second, Mac Pro users are mostly video production people at this point, so it's a more limited range of software that needs to be targeted. Apple could literally design the SOC with heavy input from the FCP team. The result could be a killer FCP machine that really highlights the advantages of controlling the full stack.
If the Mac Pro experiment succeeds, then Apple could move down market.
I would say that the last machine to go ARM should be the Mac Mini -- it could be the last hold out for people who need Intel.
I'm amazed at how disconnected from practical usage people are who are calling for ARM to replace Intel CPU. I can only presume you're not in a studio doing a workload requiring heavy lifting to deal with that pesky "time is money" problem. Your plan above would create a "Pro" machine that would be the exact OPPOSITE of what the people asking for professional Macs actually WANT. It would be the surest way to kill Apple's board of directors' interest in selling a professional computer for studios, if the 2013 Mac Pro didn't already do that job.
That whole bit code App Store thing... It's probably irrelevant to most content-creator tools in use by actual studios. In fact, I'd like to see actual stats on that in use. But then, there's never been an example of it used has there?
But that's besides the point of many studios having abandoned Apple hardware in the first place, thanks to Apple's refusal to sell what studios want. Had the 2013 Mac Pro come with a Retina display, I'd have bought one at the time, and been content connecting external drives and audio devices. But instead, Apple left us with no high-PPI on the desktop until the retina iMac (with its eventually disposable display and laptop components, I wasn't interested).
If Apple starts presenting Macs with ARM CPUs, the low-power consumer is the right place to start. But we saw how badly that exact situation turned out for Microsoft Surface...
The big mistake was Apple not seeing that the intel roadmap was running out of steam, and designing what they need to have innovative new products every 12-14 months. It's clear, they have to do an x86 chipset. Going ARM is not a good solution for short term.
An AMD acquisition, placed under direction of Apple's current ARM chip team would yield the results we need. Otherwise the Mac in hamstrung for the foreseeable future.
The problem is that if either Intel or AMD are acquired that automatically terminates their mutual licensing agreement. Intel owns the rights to x86 and many extensions. AMD owns the rights to x64. So the only option is for AMD and Intel to merge, or any potential suitor of AMD to negotiate a brand new licensing arrangement with Intel.
Thank you for explaining that to me. I didn't know. Wot a pickle.
Comments
These developer guys only desire was 32GB ram.. not 5 video cards or 12 cores etc They are fine with the machine otherwise.. as for my 'quibble regarding USB, thats what it was a quibble... chill dude, chill. BTW--- 'Cough -- Head phone jack -- cough'...who said that--- 'squirrel, see the squirrel!
For consumers products like the IPhone and IPad performance specs are more important. OSX devices have moved more to business reliability requirements and longer product lifecycles.
The student market is often looking at an IPad + keyboard rather than a more expensive laptop.
Apple has appropriately targeted each market with a device to suit the needs. I don't see the problem, except the cost of the new offerings. From a business (purchasing) standpoint IBM addressed 'total cost of ownership' for Apple products as favorable in one of their reports.
What has people upset is Apple's pricing for a laptop has pushed them beyond most consumer budgets. For example, someone like myself needs some financial software not available on an IPad and with Apple's laptops cost, I ended up with an IPAD + a cheap Windows laptop.
Apple should introduce the 13" laptop with LTE available with financing through the ISP's (like T-mobile) to address this.
This release has to be seen as a success or they (Cook, Ive, Federingi) will have made a very bad decision in devoting years in developing this hardware and software wise.
To me the entry level touch strip pro should have been introduced as updated
Airs in 11 and 13 with 2 and 3 Type C ports and priced similar to exist Air Prices.
One Lowend 15 inch MBP with 4 typeC ports should have been released and then they should have said the higher end MBP with support for 32 GB ram would be out next year.
The Air will probably be their biggest seller because of the MagSafe port.
This isn't a chip engineer-focused article. Simplified, GB per GB, LPDDR3 draws significantly less power over time than DDR3/4 and the numerical "1.2V" doesn't even begin to address why.
Frankly I think it's ridiculous and seems a bit like herd mentality sort of like when Marco Arment posted that article about Apple's software using a clickbait headline and then everyone in the tech community was freaking out over Apple's software. Now Phil Schiller responds to why there isn't a 32GB option for the MBP and everyone in the tech world loses their mind. Ridiculous.
I though it felt very stretched out, like they were covering for something that had slipped.
http://macdaddy.io/apples-new-macbook-pros/
This blog claims the only notebook to ship with greater than 16GB RAM weighs 17 pounds. Not sure if that's accurate but certainly if Apple offered that option the device would be a lot thicker and heavier. my guess is the market for a laptop with 32GB RAM is extremely niche. Also I remember seeing plenty of MBA owners - when asked why they don't just get a rMBP - saying that device was too heavy. So Apple's supposed to make one notebook model that's super thick and heavy just for the very small minority of users who do heavy duty workstation processes on a mobile device? That's nonsense to me.
I typically don't care for the app demos, but this time I felt they were needed because they were showcasing the Touch Bar and how it can be used to increase your workflow. If someone asked me to demonstrate how the Touch Bar can be useful I'd have them watch them that even specifically to see how brilliantly it was used.
I don't think it was specifically demoed, but I'm expecting that the Touch Bar will finally let me use fullscreen apps so I'm no longer wasting part of my display for things I only ever look at periodically or at a quick glance. I hope one of the customizable options will be to include the time in the bar.
Without any other information I'd wager this 17lb notebook uses a desktop-class CPU and is designed for gaming.
That whole bit code App Store thing... It's probably irrelevant to most content-creator tools in use by actual studios. In fact, I'd like to see actual stats on that in use. But then, there's never been an example of it used has there?
But that's besides the point of many studios having abandoned Apple hardware in the first place, thanks to Apple's refusal to sell what studios want. Had the 2013 Mac Pro come with a Retina display, I'd have bought one at the time, and been content connecting external drives and audio devices. But instead, Apple left us with no high-PPI on the desktop until the retina iMac (with its eventually disposable display and laptop components, I wasn't interested).
If Apple starts presenting Macs with ARM CPUs, the low-power consumer is the right place to start. But we saw how badly that exact situation turned out for Microsoft Surface...