While a processor bump for the Macbook Air would be nice, it doesn't address it's bigger shortcoming, that it's a 1000+ dollar system in 2017 with a 1440x900 TN panel. If they update that to IPS and 1600 at least that would be something.
At this point, I'd just be glad they're keeping it around...Technically, it doesn't really need to exist and the only reason it does is so Apple has a sub-$1000 laptop.
How about Apple make a MacBook model that is less than $1000?
Confused - is not Apple not making the MacBook Air? Who is?
Hoping Siri speaker device is new 4K Apple TV with speaker, no need for whole new separate device.
If Apple does come out with this rumoured device, I would expect it to be positioned primarily alongside Apple Music - great speaker sound, utilize Siri for controls & information, possibly a HomeKit hub.
While a processor bump for the Macbook Air would be nice, it doesn't address it's bigger shortcoming, that it's a 1000+ dollar system in 2017 with a 1440x900 TN panel. If they update that to IPS and 1600 at least that would be something.
At this point, I'd just be glad they're keeping it around...Technically, it doesn't really need to exist and the only reason it does is so Apple has a sub-$1000 laptop.
How about Apple make a MacBook model that is less than $1000?
They would if they could. It's not like Apple is purposely making it expensive. Remember, the original MacBook Air was very expensive at the time as well until it fell in price and then fell in price again.
We could very well see a sub-$1000 12" MacBook at WWDC. I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Possibly this is being too logical, but a simplified line of laptops: - 12" & 14" MacBooks. Consumer focused, replacements for Air lines, entry price at $999. - 13" & 15" MBPs. Pro & prosumer. (Hopefully) entry price back to something like $1399 (though perhaps not until next year).
While a processor bump for the Macbook Air would be nice, it doesn't address it's bigger shortcoming, that it's a 1000+ dollar system in 2017 with a 1440x900 TN panel. If they update that to IPS and 1600 at least that would be something.
At this point, I'd just be glad they're keeping it around...Technically, it doesn't really need to exist and the only reason it does is so Apple has a sub-$1000 laptop.
How about Apple make a MacBook model that is less than $1000?
They would if they could. It's not like Apple is purposely making it expensive. Remember, the original MacBook Air was very expensive at the time as well until it fell in price and then fell in price again.
We could very well see a sub-$1000 12" MacBook at WWDC. I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Possibly this is being too logical, but a simplified line of laptops: - 12" & 14" MacBooks. Consumer focused, replacements for Air lines, entry price at $999. - 13" & 15" MBPs. Pro & prosumer. (Hopefully) entry price back to something like $1399 (though perhaps not until next year).
Historically, there's a price drop on the next cycle after a major, costly component addition or upgrade with a case change, so I'm expecting the MBPs to drop by $100 to $200 for their relative price points.
Would love to see a powerful replacement with a Retina display for the 11" Air. Not totally pleased with the switch to USB "C" but I survived the demise of optical drives (although I still occasionally could use one). Happy to see updates for the Mac. Finally.
1) Everything says the 11" MBA is dead.
2) USB-C isn't a whim. It's the future of computing. Expect it to be everywhere.
sog35 said: Because Apple doesn't make junk. Intel chips are expensive, only with a A-series CPU could they do this without compromising quality of components
Plenty of Windows laptops are sub $1000 with the very same Intel chips. Conceivably Apple could sell a laptop even less expensive than other manufacturers because they don't have to pay a license fee for the OS. Apple products are top notch with better materials and design so they are worth the price but it has nothing to do with the cost of the processor.
sog35 said: Because Apple doesn't make junk. Intel chips are expensive, only with a A-series CPU could they do this without compromising quality of components
Plenty of Windows laptops are sub $1000 with the very same Intel chips. Conceivably Apple could sell a laptop even less expensive than other manufacturers because they don't have to pay a license fee for the OS. Apple products are top notch with better materials and design so they are worth the price but it has nothing to do with the cost of the processor.
Everything you said is correct.... but the Ax processor costs Apple 10% of what it costs Apple to put an Intel processor in a computer (on the order of more than $200+ less per machine at the low end). Apple choses top of the line CPU, fast high quality memory, unibody build metal cases instead of plastic, etc. which all adds up. The cost for a major manufacturer license fee is somewhere between $15 to $35 from what I have been able to glean (different manufacturers have different contracts) - which will likely drop to $0 for Windows S (with a full license costing $50 to the consumer for upgrading to Windows 10) which will more than be made up by mandatory store commission for any 3rd party applications.
The same Macbook 12" computer would likely be around $899 if it were an Ax processor and that Ax processor would likely be more powerful than the current generation of Core-Ms.... but you would not be able to install Windows or VMware / any Intel based Linux etc. In addition to the confusion generated between having to currently worry about which computer software is compatible (until they have it all hidden from end-user) with which Mac would cause more damage to the brand than would be worth it (at this time - things change).
While a processor bump for the Macbook Air would be nice, it doesn't address it's bigger shortcoming, that it's a 1000+ dollar system in 2017 with a 1440x900 TN panel. If they update that to IPS and 1600 at least that would be something.
Very unlikely they will update the MBA ever again. I expect Apple to eventually introduce a new 12" MacBook with an updated processor and a Touchbar, and keep the current price. The current MB will drop down to replace the MBA entry price point, likely without an update. Possibly there's a 14" MB coming with two USB-C ports and a Touchbar. They'll likely keep the headphone jack on the 12" until there's a unified USB-C audio industry standard, and then create an adapter.
While a processor bump for the Macbook Air would be nice, it doesn't address it's bigger shortcoming, that it's a 1000+ dollar system in 2017 with a 1440x900 TN panel. If they update that to IPS and 1600 at least that would be something.
At this point, I'd just be glad they're keeping it around...Technically, it doesn't really need to exist and the only reason it does is so Apple has a sub-$1000 laptop.
How about Apple make a MacBook model that is less than $1000?
Confused - is not Apple not making the MacBook Air? Who is?
I believe rogifan_new was specifically referring to the MacBook and not including the MacBook Air.
I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Agreed. The "problems" of the MacBook Air (poor screen, no USB-C, etc.) are instantly "solved" once the MacBook comes down in price. That's when the Air disappears.
I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Agreed. The "problems" of the MacBook Air (poor screen, no USB-C, etc.) are instantly "solved" once the MacBook comes down in price. That's when the Air disappears.
When the "air" disappears, customers of it will need to fit into one of many models .... which unless the Macbook Air has a direct successor would not be one size fits all.
The people that don't use it for things that need processing power of the current "air" - would probably go to the Macbook 12" or a 14" version..... with maybe a lower end one discounted, with a little less SSD space to get it with $100 cheaper option (attract people in, and maybe bump them up the $100 if they want more storage)....
Those that don't need it to be quite as light but want the power of an i5 processor would go to the low end of the "light" Macbook Pro line.
What is missing though is that entry level price of <$1,000 laptop.
Updating the Macbook Air at this point would be an admission that the price is not going down quick enough on the Macbook 12" line.
I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Agreed. The "problems" of the MacBook Air (poor screen, no USB-C, etc.) are instantly "solved" once the MacBook comes down in price. That's when the Air disappears.
When the "air" disappears, customers of it will need to fit into one of many models .... which unless the Macbook Air has a direct successor would not be one size fits all.
The people that don't use it for things that need processing power of the current "air" - would probably go to the Macbook 12" or a 14" version..... with maybe a lower end one discounted, with a little less SSD space to get it with $100 cheaper option (attract people in, and maybe bump them up the $100 if they want more storage)....
Those that don't need it to be quite as light but want the power of an i5 processor would go to the low end of the "light" Macbook Pro line.
What is missing though is that entry level price of <$1,000 laptop.
Updating the Macbook Air at this point would be an admission that the price is not going down quick enough on the Macbook 12" line.
Apple controls the price of the 12" MB. If they wanted it to go down, it would. Instead they likely want to keep the prices high to preserve their standard margin. Right now it doesn't need to come down, because the MBA serves that function as an entry level laptop. But if the SE tells us anything, its that Apple wants to ensure a quality experience even on their lowest priced hardware. So rather than upgrade the MBA, a better solution is to drop the current 12" MB down in price as they release a newer model to take its place at the higher price point. They could even drop the MBA as well to clean out inventory, but otherwise discontinue it to ensure customers are being offered the best experience possible.
I still sit on the side of once the 12" MacBook goes sub-$1000 the days of the MacBook Air are very numbered. It doesn't need to exist anymore once the 12" MacBook goes below $1000.
Agreed. The "problems" of the MacBook Air (poor screen, no USB-C, etc.) are instantly "solved" once the MacBook comes down in price. That's when the Air disappears.
When the "air" disappears, customers of it will need to fit into one of many models .... which unless the Macbook Air has a direct successor would not be one size fits all.
The people that don't use it for things that need processing power of the current "air" - would probably go to the Macbook 12" or a 14" version..... with maybe a lower end one discounted, with a little less SSD space to get it with $100 cheaper option (attract people in, and maybe bump them up the $100 if they want more storage)....
Those that don't need it to be quite as light but want the power of an i5 processor would go to the low end of the "light" Macbook Pro line.
What is missing though is that entry level price of <$1,000 laptop.
Updating the Macbook Air at this point would be an admission that the price is not going down quick enough on the Macbook 12" line.
Apple controls the price of the 12" MB. If they wanted it to go down, it would. Instead they likely want to keep the prices high to preserve their standard margin. Right now it doesn't need to come down, because the MBA serves that function as an entry level laptop. But if the SE tells us anything, its that Apple wants to ensure a quality experience even on their lowest priced hardware. So rather than upgrade the MBA, a better solution is to drop the current 12" MB down in price as they release a newer model to take its place at the higher price point. They could even drop the MBA as well to clean out inventory, but otherwise discontinue it to ensure customers are being offered the best experience possible.
Every manufacturer controls the price of the stuff they sell, if they wanted to sell it for $1 they could (even if they lost money)
Apple though does not compete solely or primarily on price and targets each machine at a large enough audience which will maintain a certain target margin. They have certain slots and tries to slot a quality machine within those slots. Currently they typically like to target at least 1 entry level laptop at just under $1000. As such within the parameters that Apple has set, I was just making it clear that the current slot handled by the current Macbook Air would have to rearrange the target markets of those that were left behind by discontinuing the Air since the Macbook 12" (which I really like) is just not able to handle the totality of customers that are current Macbook Air customers. Some will have to go with more powerful and slightly heavier option, and some like me (for my laptop needs) find the Macbook to be the superior option.
For me, I'd love to see more features of the MB Pro trickle down to the MacBook, such as the option of 16GB and the option of 1 TB of internal storage. The absence of these features, even on a build to order, forces my hand as to which portables I can consider. I don't really need the extra screen real estate; but I do need enough capacity to hold my files and enough RAM to not choke when compiling in Xcode.
Sorry to be the downer but I'm beyond tired with Tim Cook's treatment of the Mac lineup and OS as the 2nd class citizen.
Can anyone explain to me the advantage of not updating the Mac Book Air, the Mac Mini, the iMac and Mac Pro?
Are they sitting on old stock of four and five year old builds, (2014 Mac Mini, 2013/16 Mac Pro and MBA)? Or are they still actually assembling new units?
Would it cost them more to do minor spec updates? I would think the small R&D and manufacturing costs would easily be offset by the probable increased sales figures.
I'm still using my two 2010 Mac Pros because Apple hasn't offered anything worth paying for. Sure, I'm saving money by not buying, but I'd gladly purchase a couple of new Minis and a MBA if they had 2017 specs. But I'm not going to pay 2014 prices on 2014 tech in 2017.
I'm still a little insulted by that Mac Pro announcement a couple months back. It reeked of Tim Cook's dislike for anything pro and cool about the Mac. What is it? Is Tim distancing himself from the Mac because it's a relic of the Job's era? Does he not like paying Intel?
Does anyone know why Apple won't refresh their Mac line? And don't say it's because the Mac is a small percentage of sales. That's not a reasonable answer.
Btw, correction, the 12.9" iPad Pro's model number is A1652. I'm looking at mine right now.
Does anyone know why Apple won't refresh their Mac line? And don't say it's because the Mac is a small percentage of sales. That's not a reasonable answer.
Btw, correction, the 12.9" iPad Pro's model number is A1652. I'm looking at mine right now.
1) You don't mention the MBP at all, and those are the best they've ever been, so clearly Apple is investing into Macs. If you think the Touch Bar with Touch ID and Apple Pay with a special T1 chip combines all Secure Element and Secure Enclave in its own version of iOS forked what watchOS to run alongside macOS with an OS, updated apps, and APIs so that's easy for 3rd-party vendors to support the Touch Bar, Touch ID, and Apple Pay—which even Amazon and MS did right away—is giving no attention to the Mac then I can't imagine what you're standards could possibly be for your all encompassing "Mac lineup and OS as the 2nd class citizen" statement.
2) Apple just sold more Macs than any other quarter in their history. I'm sure the iPad Pro is just a fraction of those unit sales. Even the MBP might be more than the iPad Pro in unit sales, and it seemed all but guaranteed that have a higher revenue and profit.
3) When it comes to desktop Macs, Cook has already mentioned the Mac Pro isn't dead, but you need to be realistic about why HW is updated. I have a feeling you'd complain if they updated it and the performance wasn't any better—or even a little worse—as we've seen recently with Intel's CPU offerings. My guess is that the brilliant Touch Bar with its other elements will be built into a wireless keyboard, but this poses some issues not present in the notebook form factor so it takes longer to engineer.
4) As for the MBA, that old low-res display with a TN panel seems like it's DOA, at least as an x86-based machine, and I'm sure you're aware of the 12" MacBook—also not mentioned by you—so I wonder why you'd ignore that machine? Does not have Air at the end of the name really matter? For all intents and purposes the 12" MB is the new MBA.
[...] Can anyone explain to me the advantage of not updating the Mac Book Air, the Mac Mini, the iMac and Mac Pro? [...]
Would it cost them more to do minor spec updates? I would think the small R&D and manufacturing costs would easily be offset by the probable increased sales figures.
I'm still using my two 2010 Mac Pros because Apple hasn't offered anything worth paying for. Sure, I'm saving money by not buying, but I'd gladly purchase a couple of new Minis and a MBA if they had 2017 specs. But I'm not going to pay 2014 prices on 2014 tech in 2017.
I'm still a little insulted by that Mac Pro announcement a couple months back. It reeked of Tim Cook's dislike for anything pro and cool about the Mac. What is it? Is Tim distancing himself from the Mac because it's a relic of the Job's era? Does he not like paying Intel?
Does anyone know why Apple won't refresh their Mac line? [...]
Soli has done a good job addressing your MacBook Air straw man, so I'll leave that be. You may not like what Apple has done with the MacBook and MacBook Pro lines, but it's absurd to claim they've been ignored.
The iMac, too, completed a major transformation in 2015 (to Skylake and Retina displays) and will be getting more attention by the end of this year. The reason we haven't seen a Kaby Lake (launched in January 2017) iMac refresh is not hard to understand -- Coffee Lake is coming this year. So if they don't do a Kaby Lake refresh in the next two weeks, then look for a Holiday-season refresh with the latest and greatest. So yes, there probably was a business decision made there, to skip over Kaby Lake in the 4K/5K iMacs.
So all that leaves is the Mac mini and the Mac Pro. You were "a little insulted" by some of Apple's top executives' recent sit-down with journalists to talk about the 2013 Mac Pro and the failure to keep it up-to-date. I guess that means you just don't believe what they said in that meeting, or you just weren't paying attention. Good luck with that!
So really the only area where I feel your pain and completely agree with your gist is with respect to the Mac mini.
If I'm reading you right, you're saying you could replace a pair of 2010 Mac Pros with a pair of Mac minis if they were up-to-date. I actually get that. My sister replaced Mac Pros in her NYC architectural office with Mac minis in 2012. They have served her well, and they allowed her to keep the same displays, which were still perfectly good. But today those old displays look bad in comparison to 4K and 5K options. For an architect, screen resolution matters. So she's ready to upgrade. But the 2014 Mac mini just isn't great -- unlike the 2012 edition, you can't put in your own RAM and storage, and like you say, it hasn't been refreshed. Why?
I think your question can be answered for three out the four lines you mention (MacBook, iMac, and Mac Pro), but I can't really answer it for the Mac mini. I can only say that it did come up, briefly, at the aforementioned sit-down -- so there's a chance Apple will do something about it. One of the themes of that meeting was that "pro" users were adopting the iMac in ways that Apple had not really anticipated, and that Apple would respond to that by producing iMacs in "pro" configurations, whatever that means. We'll see. The same could be said for the Mac mini.
I personally think there is a gap there, between the iMac and the Mac Pro, that could be filled by a more powerful Mac mini. Again, we'll see.
Comments
Possibly this is being too logical, but a simplified line of laptops:
- 12" & 14" MacBooks. Consumer focused, replacements for Air lines, entry price at $999.
- 13" & 15" MBPs. Pro & prosumer. (Hopefully) entry price back to something like $1399 (though perhaps not until next year).
The same Macbook 12" computer would likely be around $899 if it were an Ax processor and that Ax processor would likely be more powerful than the current generation of Core-Ms.... but you would not be able to install Windows or VMware / any Intel based Linux etc. In addition to the confusion generated between having to currently worry about which computer software is compatible (until they have it all hidden from end-user) with which Mac would cause more damage to the brand than would be worth it (at this time - things change).
The people that don't use it for things that need processing power of the current "air" - would probably go to the Macbook 12" or a 14" version..... with maybe a lower end one discounted, with a little less SSD space to get it with $100 cheaper option (attract people in, and maybe bump them up the $100 if they want more storage)....
Those that don't need it to be quite as light but want the power of an i5 processor would go to the low end of the "light" Macbook Pro line.
What is missing though is that entry level price of <$1,000 laptop.
Updating the Macbook Air at this point would be an admission that the price is not going down quick enough on the Macbook 12" line.
Apple though does not compete solely or primarily on price and targets each machine at a large enough audience which will maintain a certain target margin. They have certain slots and tries to slot a quality machine within those slots. Currently they typically like to target at least 1 entry level laptop at just under $1000. As such within the parameters that Apple has set, I was just making it clear that the current slot handled by the current Macbook Air would have to rearrange the target markets of those that were left behind by discontinuing the Air since the Macbook 12" (which I really like) is just not able to handle the totality of customers that are current Macbook Air customers. Some will have to go with more powerful and slightly heavier option, and some like me (for my laptop needs) find the Macbook to be the superior option.
Can anyone explain to me the advantage of not updating the Mac Book Air, the Mac Mini, the iMac and Mac Pro?
Are they sitting on old stock of four and five year old builds, (2014 Mac Mini, 2013/16 Mac Pro and MBA)? Or are they still actually assembling new units?
Would it cost them more to do minor spec updates? I would think the small R&D and manufacturing costs would easily be offset by the probable increased sales figures.
I'm still using my two 2010 Mac Pros because Apple hasn't offered anything worth paying for. Sure, I'm saving money by not buying, but I'd gladly purchase a couple of new Minis and a MBA if they had 2017 specs. But I'm not going to pay 2014 prices on 2014 tech in 2017.
I'm still a little insulted by that Mac Pro announcement a couple months back. It reeked of Tim Cook's dislike for anything pro and cool about the Mac. What is it? Is Tim distancing himself from the Mac because it's a relic of the Job's era? Does he not like paying Intel?
Does anyone know why Apple won't refresh their Mac line? And don't say it's because the Mac is a small percentage of sales. That's not a reasonable answer.
Btw, correction, the 12.9" iPad Pro's model number is A1652. I'm looking at mine right now.
2) Apple just sold more Macs than any other quarter in their history. I'm sure the iPad Pro is just a fraction of those unit sales. Even the MBP might be more than the iPad Pro in unit sales, and it seemed all but guaranteed that have a higher revenue and profit.
3) When it comes to desktop Macs, Cook has already mentioned the Mac Pro isn't dead, but you need to be realistic about why HW is updated. I have a feeling you'd complain if they updated it and the performance wasn't any better—or even a little worse—as we've seen recently with Intel's CPU offerings. My guess is that the brilliant Touch Bar with its other elements will be built into a wireless keyboard, but this poses some issues not present in the notebook form factor so it takes longer to engineer.
4) As for the MBA, that old low-res display with a TN panel seems like it's DOA, at least as an x86-based machine, and I'm sure you're aware of the 12" MacBook—also not mentioned by you—so I wonder why you'd ignore that machine? Does not have Air at the end of the name really matter? For all intents and purposes the 12" MB is the new MBA.
The iMac, too, completed a major transformation in 2015 (to Skylake and Retina displays) and will be getting more attention by the end of this year. The reason we haven't seen a Kaby Lake (launched in January 2017) iMac refresh is not hard to understand -- Coffee Lake is coming this year. So if they don't do a Kaby Lake refresh in the next two weeks, then look for a Holiday-season refresh with the latest and greatest. So yes, there probably was a business decision made there, to skip over Kaby Lake in the 4K/5K iMacs.
So all that leaves is the Mac mini and the Mac Pro. You were "a little insulted" by some of Apple's top executives' recent sit-down with journalists to talk about the 2013 Mac Pro and the failure to keep it up-to-date. I guess that means you just don't believe what they said in that meeting, or you just weren't paying attention. Good luck with that!
So really the only area where I feel your pain and completely agree with your gist is with respect to the Mac mini.
If I'm reading you right, you're saying you could replace a pair of 2010 Mac Pros with a pair of Mac minis if they were up-to-date. I actually get that. My sister replaced Mac Pros in her NYC architectural office with Mac minis in 2012. They have served her well, and they allowed her to keep the same displays, which were still perfectly good. But today those old displays look bad in comparison to 4K and 5K options. For an architect, screen resolution matters. So she's ready to upgrade. But the 2014 Mac mini just isn't great -- unlike the 2012 edition, you can't put in your own RAM and storage, and like you say, it hasn't been refreshed. Why?
I think your question can be answered for three out the four lines you mention (MacBook, iMac, and Mac Pro), but I can't really answer it for the Mac mini. I can only say that it did come up, briefly, at the aforementioned sit-down -- so there's a chance Apple will do something about it. One of the themes of that meeting was that "pro" users were adopting the iMac in ways that Apple had not really anticipated, and that Apple would respond to that by producing iMacs in "pro" configurations, whatever that means. We'll see. The same could be said for the Mac mini.
I personally think there is a gap there, between the iMac and the Mac Pro, that could be filled by a more powerful Mac mini. Again, we'll see.