They are fanless and have a 5W thermal envelope, which fits in with the current A12X too.
The major criticisms of the design at the time was: Butterfly keyboard, the Single USB-C port and the speed of the device (Intel CORE-M is truly, truly painful). But for a $600-$700 machine with an ARM CPU? that's insanely competitive, and is in-line with the "basic" macbook branding.
Apple's been consistent about ~10 hours of battery life for a while. They've hit their spec and think that most people don't need more in typical usage. So they'll be able to shave battery volume down to continue their trend of thinner without sacrificing other specs.
The recently discontinued MacBook was a vision statement that the hardware could not quite reach, much like the first MacBook Air. Here, I think that statement realized would be a MacBook Pro that is as thin as that MacBook, and is still notably faster than the current MacBook Pro.
"Macbook" is the heart of the entire PC portable line for Apple. "Macbook"is the grounding of the brand itself.
I think Apple will release the Macbook as the first Apple Silicon machine because of the optics of confidently putting the hardware at the symbolic heart of the entire portable line.
I do not think the 12" that was discontinued should be thought of also as where the machine will be picked up in terms of form factor. This is not how Apple behaves, when tech shifts or they don't like where they left off, they change direction. (i.e. the Mac Pro trashcan -> modern Mac Pro)
Apple Silicon will allow Apple to reintroduce the Macbook as a compelling machine addressing many customer types. This base machine would pave to eliminate the Macbook Air and redesign the Macbook Pro.
With a few models of Macbook and Macbook Pro the portable product line will be simplified and clean up the confusing price / feature / performance comparison problems that exist today.
In many ways the same was true in 2006.
I'm skeptical Apple's introduction of their high performance CPUs exclusively on a low end device. A super light/ high performance 12ish inch machine seems right up their ally, but they don't want the new CPU associated with being a low-end "Intel Pentium Gold" type device.
There might be a lower end ultra-thin laptop released, but they are going to go big and push out a high performance CPU right out the gate. They didn't launch their 64 bit A series CPU on a secondary device, they won't launch this on a secondary device either.
I’d assume them to do the same: a high end (MBP?) and low end device (MB? MBA?); that’s where ARM will shine first (mobile: battery life; maybe even integrating a modem with esims).
Desktops will follow later.
You can group the Notebook Shipment into a few Categories, $1000+, those are nearly all MacBook. With the remaining going into Gaming Machine ( Which is now being rebranded into Content Creation Machine )
You have the absolute low end, Netbook style that are $300, those are not what Apple targets and they are actually competing with an iPad.
You have vast majority of the Notebook in $300 to $600. Considering the lowest MacBook offering at $699, is just the same play as iPhone SE at $399.
It is just $100 more than the median of average Smartphone selling price, and it would attract enough number jumping to Mac platform all while sucking out the oxygen for the other PC vendors.
If you look at the history of the MacBook and MacBook Air together, it's pretty clear that Apple expected to eliminate the MBA as a product category years ago; to just have "MacBook" and "MacBook Pro" categories. This was probably due to them believing Intel's roadmap for chip releases, such that they thought they'd be able to hit MBA-like performance targets in the MacBook's form-factor. But Intel's roadmap didn't pan out, and so Apple had to turn around and build more MBA-form-factor devices to hit those performance targets. Eventually, the MacBook went so long between releases that they just eliminated it, and redesigned the MBA a bit to cater more to the people who liked the MacBook form-factor (without really making the MBA any lighter, just smaller-seeming.)
All the MBA computers since 2015 "should have been" devices with a MacBook form-factor and MBA-level performance. Right now, that'd mean an ultralight with a CPU matching or surpassing the performance of the https://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?cpu=Intel+Core+i7-1060N... (which is the highest-specced option for current MBAs.)
Such a computer, if released today, would be impressive, no? It would redefine the MacBook (Air) category to be Apple's primary Mac product line, satisfactory for almost all workloads (in the same way that the iMac has been redefined to be the primary desktop Mac, satisfactory for almost all workloads.) In that world, the MBP would be relegated to halo-product status, akin to the current positioning of the Mac Pro. In Apple Stores, you'd have three differently-sized MacBooks, and then an MBP off in a corner where looking at it for too long summons an Apple Business representative.
I don't see how that's not already "going big" or "making a statement." It'd demonstrate that their Apple Silicon chips can eat Apple's own lunch, with their new mid-range Apple Silicon devices beating their old high-end Intel offerings in price:performance, even before Apple Silicon high-end chips get designed to truly replace them. The Intel MBPs, even brand new, would be immediately branded as a "legacy" category, outmoded even before replacement, only to be purchased if necessary for a specific business use-case.
(Before you suggest: no, I don't think Apple would be Osborning their Intel products if they did this. Businesses and freelance professionals would, for the time being, still have plenty of such "specific use-cases" for an Intel-based MBP. Apple also has lots of enterprise customers locked into long-term upgrade contracts, so part of the demand for the tail end of their Intel-MBP pipeline would be fixed/inelastic demand.)
Edit: Thanks to the replies letting me know that Rosetta is still a thing. I somehow forgot. Updated.
You will be able to run existing MacOS software on the new hardware under emulation. The Dev kits run emulation fairly well on a 2 year old iPad CPU so I would expect whatever new hardware they release will as well.
I still have that Air. Love that thing.
At least until iPads can do everything laptops can.
2yrs ago, my screen used to flicker. I contacted everyone and they said 'change motherboard' and Mac support people were like buy a new laptop. so I kept the laptop in cupboard for a few months and I open it to check if it works, had decided to sell it and buy a new one and viola, it was working perfectly fine.
~5yrs with no issues.
Exactly my point. The funny thing is, I bought the 2012 model at half the price of the new models and I have 0 complaints about it. No fancy keyboard issue, no fancy thermal issue. Nothing.
and to think that since then, they've made more problems than laptops!
They really don't make them like they used to. I just want a better battery backup that's it. I get 6-8hrs because I did a lot of research about how Li batteries drain (it is best if you do not let it drain below 50% because Li batteries' lifecycle depends on the high-low charge discharge cycles so if you keep discharging battery to 0% then you're scrwed in a few years)
I'll buy the 2012 model again, if this one dies out, but won't ever buy the latest models.
Butterfly keyboard still works flawlessly and even feels different from the butterfly on my work 2017 MB Pro which has worn out and misses keys.
But the 12” form factor gets too hot and CPU is weak even for browsing with just 20 tabs. But I’ve also been developing on it just fine.
And to me, it’s probably the most beautiful physical Apple product in past decade or so.
That said, the current Airs are still pretty weak on processing power and if they're not going to juice them up then a middle option would be welcome. Plus it would be a good proving ground to launch ARM with a model that's not currently available new.
I have a 2020 Air and it's pretty great but I recently saw it struggling when there's graphics-heavy stuff, namely driving a 5k external monitor while on video calls.
As you say it's getting a bit long in the tooth and I've been lamenting that there's really no replacement for it. I've been holding out hope that apple silicon will change that.
Though it never gets “too hot”, it does slow down perceptibly. Eg, a single YouTube or Netflix tab.
It's almost as heavy and as thin as the iPad, but it is a full-sized computer with a full-sized keyboard. I can play with Emacs for 20 hours writing and scripting without charging.
Also another unpopular opinion - I also love the butterfly keyboard of the 12-inch Macbook, it's quite uncomfortable but once I get used to it, I feel I can type pretty fast and it feels good. It feels firmer than the old Macbook Pro because the latter feels a little bit shaky. It also feels more clicky than the later Macbook Pro with the butterfly keyboard. It seems to me they have received too much criticism on the butterfly keyboard so they were trying to make it less edgy, but that made it lost the characteristics as well, thus they withdraw butterfly keyboard eventually.
Everything on iPadOS just seems more refined, more fluid and more fun than on MacOS. Everything from 120 Hz display, to instant waking from sleep, to battery life that is actually consistent. The overall user experience just seems lightyears ahead of the Mac, assuming your workflows are compatible with the software limitations.
iPadOS is indeed more refined, but not all of it - there's a fair number of very specific things that are a total PITA on the iPad but a breeze on my desktop Mac. That makes doing serious work on the iPad a little challenging, though it's still possible, but for most serious work I still use the desktop. But for almost anything else, I prefer the iPad's mobility and UX. It's the best drawing tablet, ebook reader, web browsing and netflix machine I've ever had, all in one.
It's still a workaround - possibly the most basic one for any kind of thin client there is. I want a consistent IDE as well and right now, you can't run vscode properly on an iPad.
I'm still hopeful that future apple silicon macs will be able to do local development with more grunt than current macs. I guess we'll see.
And yes, for doing development on the iPad basically everything is a workaround, but that doesn’t automatically make it worthless. Neither does the fact that it’s basic. I don’t get your criticism.
With your rational, I could do development on my phone as a thin client.
Yes. But it’s not getting in the way that much.
code-server is exactly what you were asking for, an IDE on iPad. You’re moving the goalposts here and not even specifying why and where to.
> With your rational, I could do development on my phone as a thin client.
No. You’re taking my argument ad absurdum. I’m saying the tradeoff isn’t that bad on iPad. That says nothing about phones.
That also means there's literally zero difference running VS Code in the browser vs. the electron app save for the browser toolbar (which Safari hides if you add a bookmark to the homescreen, which also nets you an app icon. At that point this "workaround" gives you exactly the same experience as a native app. Not sure what issues you're still seeing there.)
I'm talking about local vs remote development. Can you even spin up a webserver on an ipad to run codeserver? Or does it rely on an external webserver to run and build your application.
If you know what a thin client is, then you're effectively describing that for an iPad. Anything is a thin client - even your phone.
Until we live in a remote first world with everything built with that experience, you're just describing another type of platform like this: https://gitpod.io/#https://github.com/eclipse-theia/theia
Except you've made it a DIY thing and claiming that it's a the solution for doing development on an iPad which is clearly false.
Why not? You're basically claiming that solely because it's remote it's completely unfit for development purposes. That doesn't really make sense to me. Especially with VS Code being an Electron app the browser version is equivalent to the desktop app.
Just to be clear, I totally concede that there are certain tasks where you do run into limitations, e.g. handling files is rather a PITA, but other tasks like plain coding are perfectly fine. And if you can save the former type of work for your PC then an iPad plus code-server is actually not going to cause you any trouble with workarounds.
Am no stranger to bizarre setups. Have used remote shell on Palm PDA with foldout keyboard over IRDA via cellphone GSM modem; now this was cumbersome setup. Had Agenda VR3 Linux PDA and coded on it. It's really comfy with mb12 now tho and I like network independence.
I code on the planes all the time, somehow it's really easy to get in the flow. So I like how this setup works on the foldout tray and without network to count on. Doing tons of field work too. In late January had to code for 6 hours with my ass on a tunnel tarmac north of Trondheim. Though of course most of the time I work within network range.
I have a GPD P2 Max[0] which also has 16GiB of ram and a Intel Core m3-8100Y...
Not to brag but my CPU does seem to bench higher[1][2], and for me it can be painfully slow at times.. Though perhaps the OS is doing me no favours (Sway+Arch/Chromium)
[1]: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/compare/Intel-i7-7Y75-vs-Intel-...
[2]: https://askgeek.io/en/cpus/vs/Intel_Core-m3-8100Y-vs-Intel_C...
My office PC is a very generously specced desktop, but for user interaction tasks like coding, browsing etc there is no appreciable difference with MB12.
No, it wasn’t. I used to ru Xcode, iOS Simulator, World of Warcraft, League of Legends on the fanless MacBook with 8 GB of RAM just fine enough.
WoW and LoL are very lightweight compared to pro image or sound editing software, specially because they are doing a lot of the heavy stuff in your GPU.
Even the Mac Pro is also kinda bad with that software to be honest, specially if you spend more than half an hour using it, because of the thermal issues.
However I suspect that if they can they’ll start with a “pro” machine that beats Intel specs as their first out of the gate, to demonstrate that it’s not a compromise option.
If they are really creating an ARM macbook, this will be a great product and this chassis is definitely the right one to start with.
Are their hubs yet that can turn one USB C port into several? Or do they still only turn one USB C port into several USB A ports?
A couple years ago what I read was that the hold up was that this required more complicated chipsets that would not be available for a few months and would be expensive. More recently, I've read that this won't happen until USB4.
She uses it with a USB keyboard/mouse and PS4 controller and an external 1440p screen.. works without issue.
It's a strange thing, you can get these super complicated docking stations with all sorts of different ports, but can't get a 4-port hub that's only usb-c connectors.
At least neither tzs nor I have found such hubs.
Also, when I google with your phrase, there are no hits like that on the first page. I wonder if google is customizing my searches away from what I want...
(To be clear, USB-C and Thunderbolt 3 ports have the same form factor and Thunderbolt 3 is downwards compatible with USB-C.)
You are right, I do not see them.. I wonder if that's for a particular reason. :\
Butterfly Keyboard get most of its criticism when it moved to MacBook Pro, Because now you are putting up with a keyboard that ~50% of the people find it to have worse typing experience at the expense of a possible ( or not as we have seen other vendor capable of doing without it ) 1mm decrease in thickness.
Personally I still want the old 1.5mm Scissor Keyboard.
It will have a SIM card slot, and get at least 12 hours of battery life while using LTE.
This would be a truly compelling product, filling a niche Apple has tried to inhabit a couple of times, with the distinct possibility of getting it right this time.
Whilst I don't take my phone running because I can use my Watch for music and can make calls on it while out, I don't think I'd ever be somewhere with my laptop and no phone.
It is also true of tethering, which is quite popular.
Now, I can tether my phone to my laptop. Indeed I did so fairly often, before global house arrest.
But this is true of my iPad as well, and I opted for the cellular model instead. I'm glad I did, it's a better experience, hands down, especially when I'm traveling and want to conserve my phone's charge rather than burn it at maximum.
But if you felt differently, Apple sells a WiFi only iPad, you could simply not pay the extra for the cellular model when checking out. This would almost certainly be true for this imaginary Macbook as well.
I wouldn't buy it at all, I'm a professional developer with mild presbyopia, and purchased the standard-fancy model of the 16". But if I were an incoming freshman again? Bet I'd be pleading with my parents to get the cellular model.
Unlike a touchscreen, an LTE modem doesn't demand any changes to a desktop operating system to provide a good user experience. Again, tethering. Cell bandwidth gets cheaper every year.
People realized how crappy the camera (an well mic) was on Macs compared to other computers now that we are all video conferencing. Its sad that every PC user with a Logitech looked much better.
What about the iMac?
This is a ridiculous statement considering the camera we're talking about is 720p. The current camera is indeed better than "no integrated camera at all" and is perfectly fine for video calls with your family, or even for work, since you're probably sharing your screen and your coworkers don't need to see every pore on your face.
Perhaps they never got the levels of feedback that drove them to upgrade it. Perhaps it has to do with internal designs of using an USB 2.0 bus or something that now has to be changed to a CSI or MIPI style interface that first has to be processed by something like the T2 before it is a readable data stream for the standard Intel architecture.
They probably won't be able to fit the exact same iPhone module, the optics (Be it plastic or glass lenses) are too deep, but you could probably do with a better sensor for sure. Some manufacturers tried to 'fix' this by putting the camera below the screen which gives it a bit more space because you can then use the hinge area for the components; but now you end up looking at someone's chin all the time.
We simply don't know.
There is your answer - Physics is a harsh mistress!
Here's an article with screenshots: https://www.macworld.com/article/3018431/in-praise-of-the-gl...
For similar reasons, I don't think the iMac was ever slated to be the first Apple Silicon machine. The desktop form-factor just doesn't highlight the benefits of the new architecture the way a laptop does. Since they sell a lot more laptops than desktops, it's likely they don't even have a desktop specific CPU ready at launch time. That'll come next year or maybe even 2022 towards the tail end of their 2 year launch window.
That would mean 2 significantly different 16" MBPs in the same year. My thinking here is that it would be quite odd if they released a 14" MacBook Pro which is faster than the more expensive current 16" model.
This first launch is going to be the most scrutinized & criticized Mac Apple has launched in years. Apple knows this and they are going to put a beefy CPU in their new machine to silence the critics. If they can't beat Intel performance at launch, what are the chances they are going to be able to beat them a year down the line?
And since it would be quite weird to have the smaller MacBook be the better/ faster iOS development machine, it seems like the 16" is pretty likely. Maybe not launch day, but within the first few months at the latest.
They might keep the Intel based MacBook around and sell them at the same time, but I doubt it will be the only 16" MacBook they sell for long. It just doesn't make any sense.
https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/hgahzx/apple_gpu_...
Why? The 2015 15" came with an integrated GPU option (and that was by far the most popular SKU, AFAIK).
It's certainly the tougher nut to crack.
The rest of the PowerPC line was brought to Intel within the calendar year, and iMacs and MacBook Pros received an additional refresh replacing the Core Duos with Core 2 Duos later in the year.
At the time I remember thinking the release cadence for which models they transitioned over made perfect sense. You could make a strong argument for them to follow a similar roadmap this time around because while Macs have changed substantially since then, each Mac’s place within the lineup has not changed very much, although a MacBook Pro and a new ultra-thin MacBook around the same to show off the advantages of Apple’s chips on both sides ends of the performance per watt spectrum wouldn’t surprise me.
Nano Glass is around $500 up charge which does not seem bad but I seem to recall it has special cleaning requirements so be careful if you have family or friends who are touch prone.
SSD upgrade from 512 to 1TB is reasonable as well, around $200
Reasonable for Apple maybe, but for $200 you already get a pretty decent 1TB retail SSD.
I guess for companies flush with cash where every employees salary is in the six figure ballpark, the price of Mac configs don't raise any eyebrows in the list of expenses but at least in all companies I've worked so far if I'd have suggested we buy Macs, the bean counters would have had a fit.
Same.
I own a 2017 5K model with an i5 and the terrible cooling is my only gripe with it.
It's totally fine for bursty workloads, but once you get into a light sustained workload (eg: music production) temps go to +70ºC and the fans become quite annoying.
There have been rumors about an updated smaller iMac which will shrink the bezels and basically look like an ipad pro on a stand, with a screen size increase to 24" and Apple Silicon, coming either later this year or early 2021.
I do wonder why separate the smaller and larger iMacs lifecycles, maybe because the desktop-level Apple Silicon chips aren't ready yet? That would make sense especially if they're aiming to replace the AMD GPUs even on the top of the line larger iMac and use integrated graphics there too.
- A super-lightweight 12" Macbook-like device that lets them demonstrate how Apple Silicon opens up new categories and form factors: small, powerful and amazing battery life
- A developer machine (MBP or similar) will be necessary. There are precious few DTKs out there, and they need more developers to be running Apple Silicon. I can't imagine them not shipping this in the first wave.
So this probably doesn't mean anything in that regard.
The strongest rumors are for a MacBook Pro 13/14 and a 24” iMac. The 24” iMac suggests that they will switch to new designs with the new chips.
I don’t think that Apple will restrict their new chips to just a little MacBook. It would make it look like that is all they can do. They are going to want to come in strong and have a range of chips on different machines. Some with high efficiency and some with high performance. They seem confident and I suspect they will pull this off.
Their new iPad Pro took a big step in that direction with the keyboard, but it still doesn't have macos and mac apps.
Not sure whether they'd position it more as a "Macbook Touch" or "iPad Mac"...
I’d also speculate this means iMac won’t be the first computer getting Apple Silicon. I wonder if it will be the last?
What’s the consensus guess now? Perhaps a new MacBook Air with good performance but the real “breakthrough” is > 12 hours battery life?