bkkcanuck

tallest skil said:

fastasleep said:

Believe whatever you want, as you do.

So there’s no meaningful reason to believe there’s going to be a new Mac Mini. Got it. Thanks for confirming.

I would disagree with you and agree with you at the same time.  Yes, the information is 'rumours' and thus could be wrong... but over the last 4 years, there has typically been total silence with regards to the future of the Mac Mini.  The 'rumours' (and some from fairly well-connected people) seem to be speeding up ... not that dissimilar to the speeding up of 'rumours' before the MacBook Pro was released and more or less matched what these same people (who are the messengers of today's 'rumours') were.   These 'rumours' (i live the quoting) actually make sense in a world where the new Mac Pro, which has yet to be released, moves upscale.  There is a gap that will be left in the lineup for something that is more than what the Mac Mini was and what the Mac Pro will be.  The function that the current Mac Mini was originally strategically slotted for is really no more (though some hackers might want to fill it).  The switchers (especially developers) have typically settled on MacBook Pro or iMac (not the very low end), the home theatre hacks have been replaced by the Apple TV and iTunes (and soon Apple content), but there is still a fairly solid market within the professional community for small machines that serve specific roles that a laptop does not fill.  Apple has hired many of these professionals to act as proxies for their respective communities and has been taking a fairly active role in laying the groundwork to try to fix their neglect with respect to the professional market.   As such, IMHO, these 'rumours' make a lot of sense and if there were a place to place bets I would put down money on the fact these 'rumours' are based on reality to a reasonable extent.

But yes, these are still 'rumours' and therefore we could be disappointed... but I doubt it (in my case).

But you two... boy are you guys boring in your arguments... you prove it / you prove it / no you prove it... jeesh!  At least be a little entertaining...

kruegdude said:

I thought Apple provided a solution for the initial thermal throttling issues? Are you seeing something new and measurable?

They provided a solution to the i9 not running with the proper profile and within spec (2.9GHz all cores). One test that was CPU only hit 3.15GHz, but the lower rated CPUs were able to operate at a higher turbo-rate which means the i9 CPU does not give you much of an advantage in most things. The "issue" with the CPU running below base-clock therefore is more of an issue where the design for the i9 has you chosing between running the CPU and the GPU if both are being run at their highest performance possible. It is also possible the GPU gets priortized over the CPU thus they CPU loses out in that case. So yes, Apple did provide a solution to the defect... but the i7 seems to be the best choice cost/benefit basis. The price difference between the two i7s is $100... so it is probably a no-brainer to go with the 2.6GHz IHMO.

seankill said:

Holding out for Intel’s 10nm chips, plus a keyboard worth a damn. Also hope they can get that battery closer to 90 whr. 
I just remember converting from Dell to Mac in 2012 and the differences between the Dell and Mac that sold me were:
- MagSafe (gone, couldn’t believe that the whole PC market didn’t use a similar design; now Apple killed a crazy practical option). 
- the keyboard (the new one sucks IMO)
- the trackpad (the new and old one are fine, the best on the market, but I do like the click of my 2012 more)
- the screen. (The new ones are as amazing as ever)
- SSDs & aluminum body. 

The GPUs in the MacBooks suck but having my desktop, high end GPUs aren’t important to me anymore.

I will miss the HDMI and USB 3.x ports. I don’t have a single USB C cable. It would be nice if the Touch Bar was optional. I’d ditch it a heartbeat, reminds me of the Galaxy S edge series, neat but not terribly useful. A gimmick to charge more for. 

A great upgrade over the 2016/2017s though. 

If you are holding out for 10nm Intel parts you have at least 2 years to wait -- likely longer.  Intel has stated that they will have some CPUs at 10nm at the end of 2019. (they gave that assurance 2 years ago - so the likelihood of further delays cannot be discounted).  So SOME CPUs may be available at the end of 2019, but the CPUs that Apple uses will NOT be available until likely late 2020 at the earliest (larger die CPUs, later, smaller ones earlier - until they get the rejected rates down to economics - it is exponential in nature when you talk about die size and associated reject rates).   That is why with great financial results - Intel stock was hit after that announcement.  You have at least 2 -- possibly 3 generations of Mac laptops until they will get chips for 10nm (other than maybe the Macbook 12").

tipoo said:

Wait that multicore score of the 15" is whack, my 2015 15" gets 16K. The top end 2016 shouldn't be getting 11K. 

But the 13" does beat my 15" by a bit on both CPU and GPU now, tempted, very tempted....

My 8-core, dual CPU Mac Pro 2008 (2.8Ghz) gets 9000 and a bit on the multi-core geekbench 4 benchmarks...  so 16000 on a 13" or 22000+ on the 15" is rather insane in comparison.

christopher126 said:

Impressive. Bucking a trend against brick and mortar.

I guess it helps having the best devices for sale in the history of mankind!

I just wish it were true that they have the best devices - they might have been good in their day - but they are getting really really long in the tooth (for most of the mac line).