HobeSoundDarryl

badmonk said:

I don’t understand the pro usb-c camp as very few people use a cable to off-load data and lightening is a pure male into female connector that is bound to be more resilient than usb-c.  Tony should know this as an engineer.

Apple should delay as long as possible.

Just reframe the thinking. Apple has chosen to use USB-C over Lightning in iPads and Macs. So Apple is in "the usb-c camp" with those products. Is Apple wrong for using USB-C in them instead of lightning? 

Generally, the answer is NO... which then leads to the conclusion that some of our opinions revolve around whatever Apple has decided and will even flip flop or split when Apple is split:

• USB-C is wrong for iPhones because Apple still clings to Lightning there.
• USB-C is right for iPads and Macs because Apple embraces USB-C there. 

Reminds me of how much "we" ridiculed phablet-sized phones while Apple called 3.5" and then 4" screens perfection: one handed use, fragmentation, pants with bigger pockets, et all. Then Apple goes phablet to overwhelming acceptance as "best iPhone ever" followed by "how did we ever get by with those puny screens." All these years later and I'm still not seeing all these pants with bigger pockets... and wow, how our one-handed-use hands magically grew!!!    

Even more reminds me of original iPad mini launch where Apple rolled out one iPad with retina and mini without. Then "we" spun how retina made perfect sense where Apple was using it and how nobody needed retina where Apple wasn't offering it... until the next year when the latter iPad had an upgrade to a retina screen and then retina was the reason "we" spun to urgently upgrade. So apparently nobody needed retina for that one year but then everybody needed retina as soon as Apple offered the next generation version with it. 

Should Apple comply and roll out USB-C in the next iPhone, will Apple be wrong for doing so? Will the "pro-lightning camp" come back in those threads ripping into Apple for making a terrible decision? Based on repeating history of "whatever Apple decides is right" (and thus "my" opinion- even if presented quite passionately at any given time- is actually fluid), NO. Instead, the "pro lightning camp" will very likely and readily flip their opinion as soon as Apple flips their choice of connector: USB-C will be terrific in iPhones as soon as Apple decides to roll out iPhones with USB-C. Until then... apparently... (other than iPads and Macs) USB-C makes little sense because Apple doesn't offer an iPhone with USB-C now.

just cruisin said:

$3,000 ????

Wait until you see the price of a not-included strap. 

Nice article! I like the extrapolations- seemingly logical in every way.

Like others, I'm quite curious to see what happens for the rumored Mac Pro. Is that a QUAD (MAX)? If so, how does it fit together? Or is it some kind of x-serve-like networked ULTRAS that work together but are not directly connected: baseline has 2 ULTRAS, top of the line has 8 or 10 or more?

Also, the rollout of M1 makes it easy to jump to a time extrapolation too: first comes M2, then M2 PRO & MAX in the Fall (yes I'm shaving a year), then M2 ULTRA next spring because that was the order of M1. However, if we do that, where does Mac Pro "jump in"? Does Mac Pro with M1 QUAD come soon? If not pretty soon, you have to assume it is going to get M2 which would seem to flip the natural time extrapolation on its ear. For example, if an M2 QUAD hits for Mac Pro, why isn't PRO, MAX and ULTRA already available- or available at the same time- too? It already seems a little messy to perhaps roll out M2, then M2 QUAD (for Mac Pro), THEN PRO & MAX and finally ULTRA. 

That makes me wonder does Mac Pro get some other chip branding especially/exclusively for Mac Pro? I'm not thinking it is going to wait through M2 PRO, M2 MAX and M2 ULTRA before it releases. So that would imply that M1 doesn't set the timing example for the rest of them... making me think that perhaps PRO to QUAD all hits in the Fall together unless maybe M1 QUAD Mac Pro rolls out pretty soon... or Mac Pro with X100 or some completely-different painted name on a chip hits instead.

I look forward to seeing whatever- and whenever- it is. 

Beats said:

mpantone said:

Beats said:

Making a worse Apple TV isn’t the solution. Make a premium version for once!

Apple has a conundrum with its Apple TV hardware. Displaying video content (TV shows, movies, etc.) doesn't require powerful silicon.

The 1080p Roku stick is $25 at Amazon; last year's 4K version is $34. You can buy one of each for the price of an Apple TV remote. So any recent A-series SoC has enough horsepower; it can even be a heavily binned sample with some CPU and GPU cores disabled. A premium priced Apple TV doesn't provide any benefit to Joe Consumer in terms of watching video. A 16-core M-series SoC isn't going to make that latest Marvel Comics movie look any better.

However Apple is also marketing Apple TV as a casual gaming console. This does require more graphics horsepower but since the Apple Arcade games are relatively lightweight, today's Apple TV doesn't need to compete technology-wise with the Xbox Series X|S or the PlayStation 5.

If you get a $500 Xbox Series X and subscribe to Xbox Game Pass, how appealing would an $800 Apple TV with an Apple Arcade+ subscription look? And what if you can AirPlay your iPhone to your television set and play games on that instead?

If Apple wants to pursue the videogame market, they will likely need separate video streaming hardware and videogame playing hardware.

The biggest issue is original content. Apple doesn't have enough compelling exclusive games for a $300+ console to survive today. Remember that at that price level, they would be competing with Nintendo Switch which has sold over 110 million units between the original and OLED models.

Remember that another competitor is Nvidia Shield ($150, thirty dollars cheaper than the entry-level Apple TV 4K box) which runs GeForce NOW at 120Hz with the 3080 subscription.

Apple will need to double down on original videogame content if they are going to compete in that market. They will also need to consider pricing very carefully because there are compelling alternatives where Apple TV is already priced.

Videogame industry revenue surpassed Hollywood box office revenue back in the Nineties so it's clear to Apple where people's eyeballs are spending.

I agree with this and everything has a solution (which is scary if you think 500 years ahead).

The 4K Apple TV is too expensive. They should drop the price to $99 and keep it to only 32GB. This would be the “base” Apple TV. Then if they decided, the can make a cheaper option that is $49 with no remote or those original AppleTV remotes.

Here’s where it gets fun:
Apple can then develop a high end device for the rest of us. The crappy Arcade dilemma also has a solution.

Speculators have come up with some pretty cool names.

Apple TV Pro
and
Apple Arcade+

The Pro version can have an M1 Pro and 256GB hard drive. With Arcade being partly streamed and iCloud, it in theory could be sufficient space.

Now Apple can hire big studios to create big games for Arcade+. The subscription would be higher like $9.99 and included with Apple One high tiers.

I don’t know where you got that $800 number from. I’d imagine it being closer to $499. 

The problem didn’t seem to be with limitations or pricing but with Apple just not caring enough for gaming. They have more money than MS/Sony/Nintendo but aren’t willing to spend it on high end studios or original titles.

The easy way to give the Pro hungry what they want is to revive Front Row. If you don't recall, Front Row was a pretty good variation of the AppleTV UI app for Macs. People especially loved to hook a Mac mini to the their TV, run Front Row and enjoy the most powerful AppleTV-like device available. 

It should be EASIER to make a Front Row 2 since the code runs on Apple Silicon already... maybe the infamous "just flip a switch in the compiler" easy. 

Then, an app and a M1 Mac Mini or even Studio could be the new "Power AppleTV." 

Conceptually, an M2 Mini will show at some point and there will be a lot of M1 Minis out there that might be looking for something to do in potential early retirement. If so, perhaps it could move to the TV and be the new Power AppleTV? Just a crazy idea to efficiently feed some of this want. 

Ahead of the event, I was pretty much mentally ready to buy the rumored M1 MAX Mini "loaded" with an expected price point of about $5K for the desired config. I ended up with a M1 ULTRA Studio (not quite) "loaded" for a little over $6K. I would have been perfectly happy with that (rumored) Mini and am very happy with this Studio instead. 

I suspect a (probably) M2 PRO Mini launches to replace the Intel Mac Mini still for sale. Else, it seems Apple would have discontinued that one with the launch of Studio to fully imply Studio is Deluxe or Power Mac Mini. Instead, it survived the day- and since- which- to me anyway- means something must be coming to fill that spot. Best guess: M2 PRO perhaps priced a little less than speculated in this thread. My guess is $1499. I know "priced less" and "modern Apple" are very strange-to-impossible bedfellows but the alternative is that M2 MAX Studio perhaps shifts its "starting at" to $2499 to create clear pricing range space for a PRO Mini. That seems a bit more doubtful to me than a M2 PRO Mini starting at about $1499. 

I also doubt a reveal of this product at WWDC UNLESS M2 has some specialized processor additions (not more RAM, more graphics cores, slightly narrowed space between transistors/pathways, etc)... more like machine learning cores and/or dedicated video processing cores speciality-purpose cores. What would those be? Hard to speculate. Perhaps something that ties to the rumored AR/VR goggles/glasses? Or something else important to reveal to developers OUTSIDE of Apple but not necessarily shipping for at least a few more months? If M2 is mostly M1 "a little faster"/"a little more energy efficient"/etc, I doubt it rolls out at WWDC.

Rumored QUAD Mac Pro seems best bet... especially if it is going to offer true modularity (including slots) like existing Mac Pro, as that would seem thoroughly worthy of showing to developers so they can plan accordingly and learn about how Silicon will function with slots and typical stuff inserted in those slots. Else, I envision a software-only show, software-focused event as it is generally intended to be.