mpantone

entropys said:

 marketing still controlling SOC design I see.

ditto the 24GB of RAM. Why 24? So it is less than the 32GB on the MBP. The upgrade to 24 or 32 GB is the same price.

My guess is that Apple believes that most usage cases for the Air and lower-end MB Pro units are sufficiently served with 24GB of RAM (8GB for graphics, 16GB for applications).

There are also power/heat and cost considerations as well.

Remember that M-series SoCs include the RAM in the package, not as separate chips like on Windows x64 PCs. In particular, the Air is fanless so the heat envelope is a serious consideration. Too much heat and the system will throttle on an extended workload. That would be a waste because you'd be paying for extra performance but not having that available except for a small window of time.

Especially for a notebook computer, ideally the system can run at the silicon's maximum performance with the thermal solution for that particular system. For sure, Apple's M Silicon design team specifically targeted the MacBook Air as the primary hardware platform. Assuming they move the iPad Pro to the M2, again the power considerations are of paramount importance since you really don't want to put a fan in a tablet.

Cost? More transistors = more cost. These are the entry-level products and Apple wants big fat gross margins on the units they move the most.

For sure, this paves the way for an M2 Pro SoC with more cores (CPU, graphics, machine learning), more RAM, and maybe even a little more memory bandwidth.

I give a 0.02% chance of this happening.

As is typical for Apple, they will unveil new version of their various operating systems (iOS, macOS, iPadOS, etc.) at WWDC which will be available to developers leading up to their official release in the fall: new iPhones running on new A-series SoCs on the new iOS. It makes sense that new Macs running on new M-series SoCs will debut on the new macOS.

If they attempt to ship new M2 Macs on Monterey, there would likely be little new functionality offered by the current macOS Monterey unless they heavily forked macOS which isn't Apple's modus operandii. It's worth pointing out that there are no developer betas of the next generation macOS right now. Zero, zippo, zilch.

Things were different when Apple was still relying on Intel CPUs, Intel integrated GPUs and Radeon GPUs for their Macs but that time is passed.

New Macs = new M-series SoCs = new macOS.

And unless the new macOS ships in June, there isn't going to be a new M2 Mac on store shelves.

A more interesting topic is whether Apple will follow a "tick-tock" release cadence: Mx and Mx Pro SoCs in even-numbered years (2020, 2022, 2024) and Mx Max and Mx Ultra SoCs in odd-numbered years (2021, 2023, 2025).

For sure, Apple's macOS QA has declined substantially over the past few years and I'm not convinced that they are capable of releasing a high-quality macOS to support four flavors of M-series SoCs at the same time. (I would love to be proven wrong.)

bloggerblog said:

What's iTunes?

It's a music player application originally called SoundJam MP released in 1999 for Macs and subsequently acquired by Apple. In 2003 as iTunes, it was released for Windows.

Apparently you have forgotten that early iPods shipped in both Mac and Windows versions. In fact there were Mac-targeted models with a FireWire port and Windows-targeted models with a USB port.

Apple has since integrated iTunes functionality in Finder for a couple of years but for Windows machines, they still offer this standalone player. 

Nothing new. The Windows version of iTunes is almost at its 20 year anniversary.

It's worth pointing out that iTunes for Windows has enjoyed a longer continuous period of active development compared to Winamp (which stagnated around 2013). Winamp debuted in 1997.

entropys said:

Best thing about the xm5s is the still very good XM4s will be even cheaper.  And the XM4s fold up compactly.

I can’t understand what value proposition there is for Airpods Max.

While I've never tried any of the Sony cans or the AirPods Max, I'm wondering the same thing. (I own Bose QC25s which have gone unused since I acquired my AirPods Pro).

Just looking at the numbers, the AirPods Max are 5 ounces heavier than the XM5s. That is a LOT of extra weight on your head.

blastdoor said:

If Apple can offer something technically superior to Oculus (and I'm sure they can), at a decent price, and marketed with the usual Apple marketing, I think they could do very well. 

Disclaimer: I own an Oculus Rift S.

The VR hardware itself works adequately even though it's still in its infancy from a consumer standpoint.

I'm sure Apple can make something better than what I currently own. However it won't be cheaper, not with Apple's business model and gross margins that's for sure.

The bigger problem is the current lack of compelling content. I have a few games and the only one that truly stands out is Half-Life: Alyx. There are other environments and scenarios such as sitting in a virtual living room and watching 3D movies and videos or exercise apps.

My main issue with the technology is that I hate HMDs, headphones, skiing goggles, scuba masks, etc. They aren't comfortable.

blastdoor said:

It's a shame that the person leading the effort doesn't have the ability to make that case to senior management. 

My guess is that most of Apple's senior management team have tried the various competitors' HMDs as well as various kinds of content. For a brief interval there were HMDs that accommodated smartphones (like Google Cardboard and more carefully crafted ones); I had a Mattel one that looked like the old school View-Master. I no longer own the View-Master since it only accommodated a handful of iPhone models, none of which I still own.

I believe PS4 has a VR option; Sony has announced VR coming for PS5.

And let's not forget Nintendo Virtual Boy (1995). 

There were also "arcade" implementations of VR like the Aladdin Magic Carpet ride at Disney's EPCOT Center also back in the mid-Nineties so it's not like VR is new tech. Apple execs should be familiar with it.

It's worth pointing out that recent market studies have shown that most VR headsets end up collecting dust after a short spurt of interest. Again, I think this tied heavily to the lack of compelling content and experiences. It's not like anyone is going to use a VR HMD to watch a regular 2D movie or listen to Spotify.