The problem with new Mac based Arm

[Waragainstsleep]

They tend to bump up the prices at key points that are not just spec bumps. E.g. the MBA redesign, the 2018 Mac mini, etc. Always an upward trend to give more perceived value. Mentally, people don't take well to price reductions as they perceive cheaper is inferior. If right out of the gate an ARM iMac is cheaper than the Intel iMac then you're going to be on a loser. You need to say the increase in price is due to feature X. What X is is all about marketing. It's psychology.

Thats not really sustainable though is it? We'd end up paying as much for a Mac Mini as we do for a car in another couple of decades.
The price point will tell us a lot about Apple's ambition for market share. Sure, they could go business as usual and bump the price a little while bumping performance a lot and they'd likely gain a little market share if they really stick it to Intel/AMD based machines. This boost won't last all that long as the industry scrambles to catch up with them. Even if they never quite catch up, they can be 10% slower if they are 35% cheaper.
Or Apple could go aggressive to capture real market share gains. They could look to compete more like they do with phones or tablets.
If they released a MacBook Air that was significantly more powerful than 80% of PC laptops on the market and sold it for ~$800, they'd make a huge splash. The current model starts at $900 for edu customers so this is not a big stretch at all.

 

[dogslobber]

Thats not really sustainable though is it? We'd end up paying as much for a Mac Mini as we do for a car in another couple of decades.
The price point will tell us a lot about Apple's ambition for market share. Sure, they could go business as usual and bump the price a little while bumping performance a lot and they'd likely gain a little market share if they really stick it to Intel/AMD based machines. This boost won't last all that long as the industry scrambles to catch up with them. Even if they never quite catch up, they can be 10% slower if they are 35% cheaper.
Or Apple could go aggressive to capture real market share gains. They could look to compete more like they do with phones or tablets.
If they released a MacBook Air that was significantly more powerful than 80% of PC laptops on the market and sold it for ~$800, they'd make a huge splash. The current model starts at $900 for edu customers so this is not a big stretch at all.

Sounds like you don't grasp Apple's marketing strategy. They don't go after volume so much as focus on profit per unit.

 

[NT1440]

Sounds like you don't grasp Apple's marketing strategy. They don't go after volume so much as focus on profit per unit.

That’s true, but there’s also now new opportunities opened up given they’re going to be paying MUCH less per unit for their SOC’s. They often used intel processors that were higher cost to meet one requirement or another they care about so they we’re paying Intel a handsome sum per chip. If Apple decides to continue their historical margins on the Mac, that leaves the door open to lower costs *should they choose to take it* (a big if).

 

[Waragainstsleep]

Sounds like you don't grasp Apple's marketing strategy. They don't go after volume so much as focus on profit per unit.

Thats what they've always done with the Mac. Not with the iPod, iPhone or iPad though. They were all priced much more competitively compared to their nearest rivals and have all seen market shares between 50% and 90% over their lifespans.
In recent years they have also added considerable revenue via services.
The Mac has a much smaller share than that but Apple has an opportunity to grow it. More Mac users = more service subscribers too. I'm not saying they definitely will take the Mac down this route, I'm saying if they want to now is the time.

 

[dogslobber]

That’s true, but there’s also now new opportunities opened up given they’re going to be paying MUCH less per unit for their SOC’s. They often used intel processors that were higher cost to meet one requirement or another they care about so they we’re paying Intel a handsome sum per chip. If Apple decides to continue their historical margins on the Mac, that leaves the door open to lower costs *should they choose to take it* (a big if).

Apple has never went after volume. The closest they got to it was when they sacked Sculley with the rise of WinTel and see how that went for them. A logistics guy like Cook isn't gonna reduce margins to increase volume under any circumastance.
[automerge]1595858022[/automerge]

The Mac has a much smaller share than that but Apple has an opportunity to grow it. More Mac users = more service subscribers too. I'm not saying they definitely will take the Mac down this route, I'm saying if they want to now is the time.

You're way out in left field. Tim has been touting the iPad as a computer replacement for several years now. If anything this ARM Mac allows Apple to execute on their strategy to merge Mac and iPad hardware & software over the coming years.

 

[pldelisle]

You're way out in left field. Tim has been touting the iPad as a computer replacement for several years now. If anything this ARM Mac allows Apple to execute on their strategy to merge Mac and iPad hardware & software over the coming years

But if he wants his iPad to still work, he must allow devs to have good Mac machines.

If you break this circle, the iPad, and every other iThings, are dead.

 

[jerwin]

I don’t see any reason why it would be pricier under Apple Silicon....

Consider the Mac Pro. Not a lot of computer for $6000.

8 cores, 32 gigabytes of ram, Radeon Pro 580X (whether this is equivalent to an imac's video card is not specified), 256 GB SSD.

The Mac Pro allows the buyer the option of speccing out something that the current line up doesn't have. A shedload of memory, for instance. Apple believes that this optional flexibility is itself worth an insane amount of cash.

The same values will inform Apple Silicon pricing.

 

[dogslobber]

But if he wants his iPad to still work, he must allow devs to have good Mac machines.

If you break this circle, the iPad, and every other iThings, are dead.

It's only a matter of time before an iPad can develop iPad apps. Or Mac apps.

 

[pldelisle]

It's only a matter of time before an iPad can develop iPad apps. Or Mac apps.

I was hoping for Xcode on iPad on WWDC last month, but it didn't happen.

 

[NT1440]

Apple has never went after volume. The closest they got to it was when they sacked Sculley with the rise of WinTel and see how that went for them. A logistics guy like Cook isn't gonna reduce margins to increase volume under any circumastance.
[automerge]1595858022[/automerge]

You're way out in left field. Tim has been touting the iPad as a computer replacement for several years now. If anything this ARM Mac allows Apple to execute on their strategy to merge Mac and iPad hardware & software over the coming years.

You completely misunderstood what I said.

Apple, if they keep the SAME margins,*could* (likely won’t) lower the prices a bit on their machines because they were paying intel a hefty sum (as all OEM’s do) for processors. There are cost savings to Apple here, which could open the door to things like an $899 MacBook.

I don't think it’s likely, but what I described there isn’t a volume play, volume may be generated as a result but it’s not a loss-leader type of volume play.

Does the distinction I made make sense? It’s kind of hard to explain without having ballpark SOC costs compared to Intel’s charge for the processor and licensing, but Apple is clearly going to save money with their own chips.

 

[leman]

Does the distinction I made make sense? It’s kind of hard to explain without having ballpark SOC costs compared to Intel’s charge for the processor and licensing, but Apple is clearly going to save money with their own chips.

I think it depends on the segment. On entry-level, definitively. On high-end, probably not so much. Larger chips are much more expensive to design and make and the yield gets progressively worse. I suppose they are going to subsidize their high-end Apple Silicon with their mainstream revenue. In fact, it’s Apples unique advantage, they are making so much money with phones and services that they can afford to sink billions into developing a chip series for a niche computer.

To sum it up, I don’t know whether they will be saving THAT much overall. In the long run, certainly. First couple of years? Not so sure.

 

[JMacHack]

You won't get GPU options for anything except the high end Apple machines. Even then they won't be OEM units. They'll be Apple designed units that have non-standard connectors and huge markups. If you think the cost of Apple peripherals is expensive now then just wait until you see the prices of the Apple ARM universe coming.

They haven't had a non-standard connector since ADC, in the Powermac G4.
They haven't had a proprietary connector for video in nearly two decades.
The only proprietary connector they have now is the lightning port. And that's not even a part of the iPad Pro anymore.
And there's literally nothing stopping anyone from making 3rd party peripherals now.

EDIT: as dmccloud pointed out, I had a brainfart and put "AGP" instead of "ADC" it's corrected now.

 

[dmccloud]

They haven't had a non-standard connector since AGP, in the Powermac G4.
They haven't had a proprietary connector for video in nearly two decades.
The only proprietary connector they have now is the lightning port. And that's not even a part of the iPad Pro anymore.
And there's literally nothing stopping anyone from making 3rd party peripherals now.

AGP wasn't a non-standard slot though. It was the predecessor to PCI-E, and I built many a PC back in the day that used AGP based videocards. The current Mac Pro does have the MPX slot (which is essentially a pair of PCI-E x16 connectors), and there have been rumors that the M.2/NVMe slots use a custom pinout, but I think you would have to go all the way back to the days of NuBus to find a truly proprietary connector, as Apple started moving to PCI in 1995.

 

[pldelisle]

AGP wasn't a non-standard slot though. It was the predecessor to PCI-E, and I built many a PC back in the day that used AGP based videocards. The current Mac Pro does have the MPX slot (which is essentially a pair of PCI-E x16 connectors), and there have been rumors that the M.2/NVMe slots use a custom pinout, but I think you would have to go all the way back to the days of NuBus to find a truly proprietary connector, as Apple started moving to PCI in 1995.

Never seen an NVME with custom pin out.
MPX are proprietary, but I think you can still bring a PSU cable to power non-MPX module.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

Apple's NVMe SSDs use non-standard pinout. They aren't the only ones using that pinout and it can be bridged with a small adaptor so long as there is physical space.

 

[Kostask]

Never seen an NVME with custom pin out.
MPX are proprietary, but I think you can still bring a PSU cable to power non-MPX module.

Open up a recent MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini, or iMac, and you will see an NVME drive with a proprietary connector. It is just keyed differently, so it can be adapted, but without an adapter, you cannot put a standard, off the shelf NVME SSD in any of those machines.

 

[dmccloud]

Open up a recent MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini, or iMac, and you will see an NVME drive with a proprietary connector. It is just keyed differently, so it can be adapted, but without an adapter, you cannot put a standard, off the shelf NVME SSD in any of those machines.

There is an M.2 connector that is considered to be "universal" in that it has two notches on the connector edge. I think a drive using that connector might work without an adapter, but I can't say for sure that it would work.

 

[pldelisle]

Open up a recent MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, Mac Mini, or iMac, and you will see an NVME drive with a proprietary connector. It is just keyed differently, so it can be adapted, but without an adapter, you cannot put a standard, off the shelf NVME SSD in any of those machines.

Any recent Mac computer doesn’t have connector! Air, Pro, Mini’s storage chips are soldered directly on the motherboard. iMac has standard M.2, iMac Pro too but with T2 chip it’s a pain in the a*s. Almost sure the Mac Pro use something standard too not it’s not that easy to upgrade with T2 chip.

 

[JMacHack]

AGP wasn't a non-standard slot though. It was the predecessor to PCI-E, and I built many a PC back in the day that used AGP based videocards. The current Mac Pro does have the MPX slot (which is essentially a pair of PCI-E x16 connectors), and there have been rumors that the M.2/NVMe slots use a custom pinout, but I think you would have to go all the way back to the days of NuBus to find a truly proprietary connector, as Apple started moving to PCI in 1995.

My bad, I meant ADC. My brain went "AGP, that's Apple Graphics Port, right?"

 

[pldelisle]

My bad, I meant ADC. My brain went "AGP, that's Apple Graphics Port, right?"

Accelerated Graphics Port - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[dmccloud]

My bad, I meant ADC. My brain went "AGP, that's Apple Graphics Port, right?"

ADC was a bastard child of DVI and VGA that never made any sense to me. I think that's why the Macworld crowd went nuts when Jobs unveiled the first aluminum Cinema Displays that used DVI instead of that doomed ADC connector.

 

[Joe The Dragon]

ADC was a bastard child of DVI and VGA that never made any sense to me. I think that's why the Macworld crowd went nuts when Jobs unveiled the first aluminum Cinema Displays that used DVI instead of that doomed ADC connector.

Apple Display Connector was DVI + USB + POWER (power is bad idea to pull thouhg the main PSU for both cpu and display back in the CRT days) and need to be placing tape over pins to use non apple card what BS.

 

[JMacHack]

ADC was a bastard child of DVI and VGA that never made any sense to me. I think that's why the Macworld crowd went nuts when Jobs unveiled the first aluminum Cinema Displays that used DVI instead of that doomed ADC connector.

Apple Display Connector was DVI + USB + POWER (power is bad idea to pull thouhg the main PSU for both cpu and display back in the CRT days) and need to be placing tape over pins to use non apple card what BS.

It was before my time anyway. I just wanted to point out that Apple didn't have a proprietary graphics port since then. I had one on the Powermac G4 MDD I bought a couple years back and was like "wtf is this" when I got it.

 

[Waragainstsleep]

ADC was pretty good. Its always nice not to have to plug two things into the mains. I don't recall a single G4 needing an ADC related repair. Those PowerMacs didn't need many repairs in general though, 90% hard drive failures 9% Zip and optical and the odd dodgy stick of RAM.
[automerge]1595980016[/automerge]
Oh wait, there was a recall on the PSUs in the Mirrored Drive Door models.

 

[slooksterPSV]

The problem I foresee is lack of graphics option. Because there is no reasonable Mac desktop it will be difficult for the majority of people to add graphic card options to their Macs. Unless there is an option for thunderbolt 4 this will be a deterrent. But then again it's always slower using an external gpu option.

Not true. The A-Series chips have amazingly powerful GPUs on them. That coupled with Metal, there may be more of an advantage for gaming on Mac with Apple Silicon and potential of a console. Programs will need to be ported to use the power of Metal on the A series yes but it may be better than the current base models. As for pro level, I could see Apple making potential ASICs or even leveraging to make their own GPUs for these systems specifically. More over, maybe Apple us working with AMD and NVidia to ensure compatibility between their GPUs and the A series chips.

We won’t know until next year I bet.