The difference between Apple's Pro and consumer laptops shouldn't be screen size.
Apple needs 14" & 16" Pros with M Pro & Max chips, ProMotion, a full array of ports, and high end screens. The Pros must not sacrifice features or functionality for size and weight.
Apple needs 13" & 15" Airs whose 2 TB ports support non-powered storage, no ProMotion, no high end screens. The Airs must be as thin and light as possible.
Basically, too many buy a MacBoo Pro solely because they need a larger screen.
Agreed. A 15" MBA would be killer. I suspect Apple knows that many people buy a more powerful device than they need just because of the screen size. I also suspect they're totally ok with making more profits that way. The real question is whether they would see a net increase in profits by offering a less powerful device with a larger screen. clearly Apple has decided no.
The new M2 MBP likely will have the same physical appearance and port configuration as the current 14 inch MBP. The display (type not size) and processor will be different. The new M2 MBA will likely be very thin, remain 13.3 inches, come with MagSafe and two ports plus headphone jack, no fan, and be very light. One will be paying more for the MBP M2 external features and a fan, not the processor; basically it will be the same as today in that regard.
Go back to having a regular MacBook line, then. Calling it “pro” next to the others is both confusing and nonsensical. So the MacBook Pro M1 Pro will be faster and more capable than the MacBook Pro M2. The MacBook Pro M1 Max will be faster than the MacBook Pro M1 Pro. Then we have the MacBook Air, which is currently M1 but maybe will be M2 or M1 Pro/Max. As a longtime Mac user I had to really research the difference between the Pro and Max, as well as number of cores to see how relevant the difference would be for my usage. I finally concluded “not very.” I do sort of wish I went with a 16 inch screen as I had 15 inches for quite some time before that.
Apple's MacBook line could seem totally streamlined compared to the lineup of iPhones and iPads. It could essentially be three models: MacBook Air, MacBook Pro 14" and MacBook Pro 16". Alone among Apple products that have the "Pro" moniker, the new"Pro" MacBooks actually deserve the designation since they're now truly featured (and priced) for working professionals. If Apple mucks this up with a "Pro-ish" entry model that's little more than a heavier, bulkier Air with a couple more ports, then the Pro name is again meaningless.
Go back to having a regular MacBook line, then. Calling it “pro” next to the others is both confusing and nonsensical. So the MacBook Pro M1 Pro will be faster and more capable than the MacBook Pro M2. The MacBook Pro M1 Max will be faster than the MacBook Pro M1 Pro. Then we have the MacBook Air, which is currently M1 but maybe will be M2 or M1 Pro/Max. As a longtime Mac user I had to really research the difference between the Pro and Max, as well as number of cores to see how relevant the difference would be for my usage. I finally concluded “not very.” I do sort of wish I went with a 16 inch screen as I had 15 inches for quite some time before that.
Just go back to model numbers. It's easy to identify a PowerBook 520 from a 5300. Apple's naming got stupid with the G3 and has only gotten worse since.
I remember people didn't like the Powerbook becoming the MacBook. I'm OK with the "pro" monikers they use, but it seemed cleaner when there were distinct product lines. iBooks and Powerbooks were quite different. MacBooks and MacBook Pros were not quite as different, but they certainly weren't the same.
Comments