While “iPads” in total have higher sales numbers, iPad Pros do not. I’d argue they make up a small fraction of overall iPad sales.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple's Next-Gen Chip Technology on Track for 2025 Debut
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
While “iPads” in total have higher sales numbers, iPad Pros do not. I’d argue they make up a small fraction of overall iPad sales.
The OP doesn’t understand anti-trust law. No wonder there was so much gnashing of teeth here in response to the EU and DOJ actions.
TSMC has no monopoly on chip production, nor are there any allegations of collusion, price fixing, or other unfair competitive practices (correct me if I’m wrong). The purpose of anti-trust laws is not to remove any and all competitive advantages between companies.
With the intro of the M4 in the iPad, Apple has opened the door to unveil other variants anytime. If, as rumored, Apple is moving away from Ultra = 2x Max, and they planned on skipping the M3 for the Ultra variant, then the design phase of that chip would’ve started a while ago and is more than likely already in production. I think we’ll see ”low-volume” M4 systems sooner rather than later, which includes the Mac Studios and Mac Pro at WWDC.
If Apple really wants to push AI at this year’s WWDC, then they’re going to need the systems to back that up.
Not that old tbh but would have really liked to disable something I don’t need, with the features associated with it. Would rather used this chip for something other, for example to increase performance even more
Increasing the performance doesn't really seem to be an issue with the M lineup. They're like electric cars, who cares it goes 0-60 in 2 seconds versus 2.3 seconds. What's the real reason you want to turn it off? Privacy concerns?
I think it'd be interesting to study how AI algorithms perpetuate and exacerbate age bias and discrimination since it's going to reflect and amplify society. Seems the difference in this chart is an optimism that it'll make life much easier.
Funnily enough, we have super fresh estimates for the new iPad Pro models from the supply chain. 9 million. Which is comparable to the Macbook Airs.
As I wrote, I suspect that the reason the M4 showed up in the iPads first is simply that the M3 Airs were introduced so comparatively recently.
The place you don’t want to be in Taiwan if China invades is the tsmc plants as the US will make sure there is nothing remaining.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
But at least we are all paying a lot less for our Macs since Apple is not having to pay the Intel premium anymore.
I recall too many people posting that one to help “sell” the Silicon switch.
But at least we are all paying a lot less for our Macs since Apple is not having to pay the Intel premium anymore.
I recall too many people posting that one to help “sell” the Silicon switch.
That always made me "LOL"
Anyone using their brain should have realized that Apple would simply pocket any "savings" -- especially Tim Cook Apple
I give him credit for being the absolute squeeziest of lemon squeezers..
I don't know how much more he can turn up the squeeze knob ... but he's going to try, I'm sure of that
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Well, at least now extra RAM and/or SSD is a much better buy when competition is impossible! Oh wait.
Well, at least now extra RAM and/or SSD is a much better buy when competition is impossible! Oh wait.
Apple RAM is "better"
SSDs too ... for instance the Apple ones are now slower than NVMe options
See how much better that is?
😂
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
But who has the most profitable SSD… because that’s all that matters.
Exactly! While I use ChatGPT on Quorra’s Poe, I don’t even have my actual main mail attached to it. And having something that will use AI features all the time is somewhat concerning.
But I know that anyway they won’t ever allow to disable these features, that’s how they will earn money. Over time Apple might start selling data too, like Google or Microsoft do
Have you done an analysis of MacBook prices of the past decade, with adjusting prices according to inflation?
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Another reason I expect the pattern some of us think we see is about the flip from M-base, then M-PRO & M-MAX, then M-Ultra to the reverse of that schedule (albeit with iPad already out for THIS generation). In other words, I expect M4 Ultra-based Mac Studio & Mac Pro soon- possibly WWDC- else oddball-timed summer event, the PRO & MAX in the Fall and then thereafter always lead with Ultra and work DOWN to Base (a full reversal). Why:
- Profit Per Unit sold: Ultra Macs are apparently most profitable but "as is" releases make them appealing for only a short window of time before next-gen MAX eats some of their lunch. Flip the apparent schedule and Ultra Macs are king of the Mac Power hill for the entire generation's run... and thus all who must own "latest & greatest" and/or "most powerful" are tempted to pay way up for one. Apple covets maximize cash-per-transaction more than anything, so stop here as this one alone is probably enough.
- It seems very poor planning to basically abandon "most powerful" Macs for the stretch of M2 to M5.
- Because they can. Yields don't have to be super high for the most expensive Macs.
- The almost certainly coming class action regarding the "unfixable hardware hole" in M1-M3 seems to beg for fastest possibly rush to M4 (assuming it closes it). If so, I don't seen M < 4 lasting much longer for any of them. Else, bigger settlement. And settlement size gains steam when company knows it is selling a product with a harmful issue but opts to keep on selling it anyway.
- Qualcomm Snapdragon competition. Does anyone want to hear how a dirt cheap PC based on that is more powerful than a Mac Pro or Mac Studio Ultra for thousands more?
Last edited:
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
Well when you put it like that, everything is wonderful and Apple- and Apple pricing- is perfect in every way. Thanks for correcting my view.
Bonus: I now fully appreciate $2200 for an 8TB of SSD upgrade and/or $200 for 8GB of additional RAM. Let's just blame it all on inflation... so we don't have to shine any light on say- margin in the last decade expanding from the old target of 38%-40% to nearing 48-50% now. We could spin that as inflating margin. It's not Apple raking in more money, it's inflation pumping up those margins.
Hopefully, they can raise their prices much more, keep them "another record profit quarter" quarters rolling and we can just keep slinging "inflation", "covid", "supply chain", etc. to each other to try to rationalize it. Praise be thee Apple!
I’m sure they are looking at it on the back burner, but not as a replacement for M series chips. Quantum computers are thought to be good for certain kinds of calculations, they are not intended as procedural devices that execute algorithms a step at a time. Also, as yet we have no idea how to embed one of these in a consumer device.
2nm line widths is just amazing. Of course, most of the chip is built with things at larger dimensions, but still. 2nm is roughly 5 to 10 atoms, depending on the material. Atoms themselves are smaller than this but in a crystal the atomic spacing is on the order of 0.2 to 0.4 nm for many materials. I find it amazing that things even work a these dimensions.
But at least we are all paying a lot less for our Macs since Apple is not having to pay the Intel premium anymore.
I recall too many people posting that one to help “sell” the Silicon switch.
I will say that I am definitely getting more value out of my M1 MBA in the form of better performance and battery life. The base model sufficed for me. I am also aware that many people are unhappy with the prices that Apple charges for their ram and storage upgrades, but in my opinion, I would rather pay more for something which I prefer (ie: a Mac with the specs upgraded as necessary) and pay less for something I know I wont quite enjoy using as much (eg: a windows PC, even if I can upgrade the ram myself and even if it works out to be cheaper overall).
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I can agree with that. I too don't mind paying more for something I prefer. However, unchecked as it is where there is ZERO competition for things like RAM & SSD and the very same statement could support RAM & SSD moving from 3X-5X market to 5X-8X market... and then 10X market. Why not? If we want Mac, just charge any price. Increase it any amount. We'll find a way to justify it and pay, pay, pay.
Not long ago, we had the very same great macOS, Mac-only apps, etc with some-to-much flexibility depending on Mac to upgrade the guts as needed and with highly competitive-driven pricing and even the ability to run anything Windows too. Now we have ONE choice for everything and that store operates like it knows it. If we want Mac, pay up! And perhaps we will pay even more if we want Mac? And then perhaps we will pay even more than that if we want Mac? And so on. And then we'll get on public forums and rationalize paying more and more and more to others... like its our job to sell tech.
Not many years ago, I was an Apple everything guy. Now I own a Mac and a PC on a desktop and am seriously considering my first ever PC laptop... not because I prefer PC but because I don't want to just pay any price "for something I prefer." I'd rather NOT go even more PC but I don't value the "preferred" enough to pay a LOT more for it anymore.
That said, I appreciate my newer Silicon Mac more than my aging Intel Mac too... but not at any price. And if there was a 2024 Intel Mac option, I'd likely appreciate it much more than my aging Intel Mac too. But to each his own. Apple appreciates every nickel we are willing to pay.
The Apple remedy for me? VALUE. Offer a spike(s) in value for the money... like the Apple that won me over in the first place more than 20 years ago. Apple was premium priced then too but it wasn't so in our faces. That Jobsian Apple seemed more concerned with building incredible products and stockholder delight was a byproduct of that. Modern Apple seems to only care about "another record quarter" and every decision seems to revolve around extracting more-more-more from us. Throw consumers some real bones. Pump up some goodwill again. Etc. Else, see some long-termers reach their "straw" moments, add a PC (or other), discover it's not terrible and then open the door to more PC choices instead of only thinking Apple and nothing but Apple.
Not long ago, we had the very same great macOS, Mac-only apps, etc with some-to-much flexibility depending on Mac to upgrade the guts as needed and with highly competitive-driven pricing and even the ability to run anything Windows too. Now we have ONE choice for everything and that store operates like it knows it. If we want Mac, pay up! And perhaps we will pay even more if we want Mac? And then perhaps we will pay even more than that if we want Mac? And so on. And then we'll get on public forums and rationalize paying more and more and more to others... like its our job to sell tech.
Not many years ago, I was an Apple everything guy. Now I own a Mac and a PC on a desktop and am seriously considering my first ever PC laptop... not because I prefer PC but because I don't want to just pay any price "for something I prefer." I'd rather NOT go even more PC but I don't value the "preferred" enough to pay a LOT more for it anymore.
That said, I appreciate my newer Silicon Mac more than my aging Intel Mac too... but not at any price. And if there was a 2024 Intel Mac option, I'd likely appreciate it much more than my aging Intel Mac too. But to each his own. Apple appreciates every nickel we are willing to pay.
The Apple remedy for me? VALUE. Offer a spike(s) in value for the money... like the Apple that won me over in the first place more than 20 years ago. Apple was premium priced then too but it wasn't so in our faces. That Jobsian Apple seemed more concerned with building incredible products and stockholder delight was a byproduct of that. Modern Apple seems to only care about "another record quarter" and every decision seems to revolve around extracting more-more-more from us. Throw consumers some real bones. Pump up some goodwill again. Etc. Else, see some long-termers reach their "straw" moments, add a PC (or other), discover it's not terrible and then open the door to more PC choices instead of only thinking Apple and nothing but Apple.
Last edited:
That's largely where my thoughts are as well. No other plan makes sense to me without basically ending the high-end desktop line. If they do an M4 desktop launch for WWDC or this summer, they give the M4 lineup hype which they can extend through the rest of the year with another autumn laptop release. If they extend the desktop refresh out to mid 2025, and release it with a then has-been chip generation, there's no hype and even less incentive for people to invest in it. It'd also be an unprecedented delay in the Apple Silicon releases, not something they've done yet. They've only accelerated release dates from previous generations, quite possibly with the goal of getting on an annual release schedule similar to outlined above where "new chip" hype can be milked for profit all year.