toddzrx

GeorgeBMac said:
No, not quite.  I am not arguing features versus price.   I am arguing that putting an expensive processor that most people don't need into an obsolete, limited design is a bad decision.   Most users won't see a lot of difference between an A10 and an A13.   But they will see a huge difference in an extra inch of screen in the same sized phone.

As illustration:  The 2019 iPad with an A10 processor will sell for less than this rumored phone.

I think it'd be great if Apple released an SE as described by Kuo, and I bet there are plenty of other people that would agree, especially if they ask $400 for it.  I currently am on a 6S and it still works fine. The only thing I want or need out of a new phone is that it lasts me 4 or 5 years, and that means getting up to date internals; the screen size is fine and I don't care that the bezels are there. Nor do I care about FaceID since I've never used it; TouchID gets the job done just fine.

For value-conscious customers, price matters, and Kuo's predicted SE strikes the right chord. 

dysamoria said:

callmeacabernet said:

I guess if the fake news keeps calling it a "climate crisis" long enough, the uninformed will start to believe it. I for one, see no evidence of a climate "crisis."

Then you’re either not paying attention, or you just plain don’t WANT to see reality. YOU are the uninformed.

Uh, no. 

When the predictions made by warmists actually start coming true, because they actually understand the whole science behind how our climate works, then we can start looking at "global warming".  Until then, save it.

It'll be interesting to see what Apple actually releases this fall, if anything.  Will they release what is effectively a 13" MBA with a retina screen and drop the Air moniker, and kick the 13" MBP nonTB to the curb?  If so, this new MB would have to use Coffee Lake chips and a fan.  On the other hand, if they put one of these Y series chips in it, will it be fast enough to truly replace the current Air in terms of power?

OK, I'm a complete non-Pro Mac owner using a 2010 21" iMac with an SSD that's still chugging along.  So take this with a grain of salt.

Seems to me that the most important part about the new Mac Pro is that the processor, memory, and storage all need to be absolutely blazing fast, well beyond the new iMac Pro which, while pretty capable in its own right, has its thermal limits.  The processor, memory, and storage are all components that get utilized all the time so they have to perform, and I would imagine that buyers across the board require this no matter what they're using it for; it's the core capability of the machine.  I think this is what should make up the majority of the cost and capability of a new Pro.

Graphics, on the other hand, is where there's a variety of needs.  My understanding is that there's an NVidia camp, an AMD camp, and an "I don't really care" camp.  You're not going to please anyone buy restricting the GPU to just a few options, so why not just give the Pro a competent base GPU but with a lot of upgrade options, both AMD and NVidia, and externals as well?  I think this will broaden the Pro's customer base and even though Apple would lose some profit to customers who will upgrade graphics on their own, they'll make that up by just selling more Pros overall.

Of course, there should be TB3 ports galore.  I tend to think that 1 or 2 HDMI is a good thing, but again, I'm not a pro at all.

Also, I wish Apple would release a range of displays that look like the one in the article.  I can easily see 3 different models: a large 8K monitor (30" or larger), a slightly smaller 5K (27"), and a 24" 4K that's more consumer oriented.  I'd be an instant buyer of a $500 24" 4K monitor to hook up to a new Mac Mini or a new Macbook, and I would imagine that Apple would get a lot of customers like me that want a very nice looking and capable monitor like the one shown, edge-to-edge screen and all.

My wife and I have a good system going: We buy her a new iPhone every 2 years and I get her old one.  Right now, she's on a new 8 while I'm on her old 6S.  We get 4 years use out of each phone and I since I'm not a heavy user I barely notice the decrease in performance unless the battery starts to go south.  Not hard to see why the average upgrade cycle is increasing.