Why Apple will release a 27 inch Apple Silicon processor Mac as it’s first MAC With apple Silicon.

[dmccloud]

I'd give it 50/50 odds.

I'm not sure how many here realise just how desperately intel is trying to squeeze the current CPUs they have on the market for performance to get the minimal gains they have had for the past 5 years.

The last time Intel had noticeable gains with a generation switch was the switch from 7th gen to 8th gen processors (which also coincided with their last process shrink). That change provided roughly a 20% boost in performance across the board because the new processors were more efficient than their immediate predecessors. Since then, I don't believe that the 9th through 11th generation CPUs combined have equated to the same boost. The biggest changes since the 8xxx series have been base clocks, core counts, and iGPU updates. Even the "new" iGPU Intel is boasting about with the 11th gen Core series are only better than either the GeForce MX350 (a workstation class card rather than a gaming card) or a 5 year old AMD iGPU. Intel has not (and will not) compare their new iGPU to anything currently on the market because they'll get skunked like the Bills in the Super Bowl.

 

[dmccloud]

That 2 years includes the Mac Pro.

I'd suggest they will release everything they can build ASAP and maybe hold the old models for sale along-side for a limited time.

2 years will go fast and they simply don't have enough product announcement events to drip-feed this stuff out for 2 years.

Again, they want this change done sooner rather than later. The sooner their customers have product available the sooner they can switch.

Apple can hold as many events as they want, especially if they stick to this prerecorded model they have been using since WWDC. They control the narrative, the timing, and their schedule. You also contradict yourself here. Earlier in this thread you stated that "Apple want this over and done as soon as possible", but now you're stating that Apple will release everything ASAP and maybe keep the old models on sale alongside the new models. Wouldn't that prolong the transition instead of making this process be "over and done as soon as possible"? You also are so focused on the customer side of the equation that you completely overlook the critical component in this transition: the developers. Apple could make like Thanos and snap all Intel-based Macs into oblivion on December 1, but if third-party developers have not updated (or even rewritten from scratch) their apps for Apple Silicon, you'd have a lot of ticked off people who couldn't run their preferred apps on the new Macs. That would be akin to selling a car that only uses a new type of fuel that nobody makes or sells.

 

[theorist9]

That's funny. I gave reasons for my opinion, which is what is required in arguments. The "diatribe" was yours in response to one word from my entire post, a claim that "many" folks see the mini as coming first.



Oh, that's rich. "Maybe"? I just quoted more posts, clearly proving that it wasn't just "one" poster, so what are you talking about? The lack of credibility is all yours - in addition to poor reading comprehension.



I wrote: "I see many people speculating that the mini will be the first AS Mac released." - I didn't write "I see many people IN THIS THREAD speculating[...]" had I written "in this thread", you'd have a point - but I didn't, which leaves open the fact that it could be anywhere... which is exactly what I meant - I've seen it on macrumors, which is why I was able so quickly to find it in another thread... if I didn't have that experience I wouldn't even bother to look for it in other threads, but I did, so I quickly found it. It's not my fault that you cannot comprehend what you read - perhaps remedial English courses would be helpful for you, in addition to remedial courses in logic, because you are very lacking in that area too.



Quite the opposite? No, that would be if I wrote "in this thread only" - that would be the opposite. Instead, my language was inclusive. Also, that qualifier DOES exist in my post: "We've got to make better quality rumors and speculation on Macrumors." I didnt' write "[...]in this thread" I wrote "on Macrumors". GAME. SET. MATCH.

It's funny that in a thread where we are discussing Apple products you latched onto an incredibly petty point that you write posts after posts on and aren't even right about that petty point! FAIL!

Macrumors is a site where we speculate about Apple products. It's not too much to ask that we all speculate with at least some effort put into our reasoning - and that was my point. MACRUMORS, not just a single thread, and I mentioned MACRUMORS. You meanwhile are an example of the very failure I'm talking about: poor reading comprehension, pointless personal attacks, very bad reasoning and lack of evidence for silly claims. I'm not going to respond any further to you, as this derail you initiated is mere noise, the quality of your arguments is demonstrably extremely poor and you don't appear to be educable. So you can have the last word. Have a nice day!

This isn't you disagreeing with me, this is you not even understanding what I am saying, and lashing out desperately in response. So it's probably pointless to even try explaining. But I'll be foolhardy and make the attempt:

(1) I didn't respond to your post merely because of one word. If it were just that one word, I would have moved on (or written something brief). Rather, I responded because you wrote an insulting, over-the-top 8-paragraph response, containing gratuitous put-downs like "losing faith in humanity" "so little thought", "THAT IS INSANE!!!" etc. in response to one guy's innocuous one-line post, where your own post showed the very lack of thought of which you were accusing him, as well as the rest of us. I.e., I responded because you're a classic bully: You took a swing at someone that had done nothing to you. And, like all classic bullies, you've shown you can't handle it when someone calls you on your bad behavior. You could have been kind to him, and the rest of us, and simply said why you disagreed, without all the put-downs. But you chose not to. And now you don't want to accept the consequences. In sum, I responded because I think people need to stand up to bullies like you.

(2) When you post something on a thread, and speak directly to the people on the thread, as you did, the default is that the people on the thread are the listening audience. If you meant the your message to apply to MacRumors broadly, you needed to say that, and you never did. That's just communications 101. Yes, you were talking about what you'd like to see differently on MacRumors, but you didn't direct that comment to MacRumors generally, you directed it to this thread. If you see someone wearing what you judge to be sloppy clothing, and you say to him "I wish people in this city wouldn't dress like slobs", you're clearly directing your insult to him. The fact that you included "people in the city" as part of your phrasing doesn't change the direction of the intent.

(3) I wrote "Maybe there are many elsewhere, maybe there aren't" because I only found two other posters predicting the mini in your links. That's a total of three. Three does not equal many. I'm not saying there aren't many, I'm saying I didn't see that from the info. you provided. And I wrote "It's not as if you're exactly a credible source on this" because I view bullies as lacking integrity, and since you acted liked a bully (attacking another poster that did nothing to you), I don't see you as trustworthy.

 

[rkuo]

The last time Intel had noticeable gains with a generation switch was the switch from 7th gen to 8th gen processors (which also coincided with their last process shrink). That change provided roughly a 20% boost in performance across the board because the new processors were more efficient than their immediate predecessors. Since then, I don't believe that the 9th through 11th generation CPUs combined have equated to the same boost. The biggest changes since the 8xxx series have been base clocks, core counts, and iGPU updates. Even the "new" iGPU Intel is boasting about with the 11th gen Core series are only better than either the GeForce MX350 (a workstation class card rather than a gaming card) or a 5 year old AMD iGPU. Intel has not (and will not) compare their new iGPU to anything currently on the market because they'll get skunked like the Bills in the Super Bowl.

That's not the timeline that I am familiar with. The jump was from 4th to 6th gen (5th mostly bypassed the desktop so barely counts). Far as I know, the cores in Intel CPU's haven't changed since the 6th gen Skylake 14nm architecture. Everything else has been minimal tweaks.

 

[Jorbanead]

That would be very unusual for Apple to drop that many new models at once.

June 2017:

MacBook Pro with Touch Bar (Mid 2017)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2017)
MacBook Air (Mid 2017)
MacBook (Retina, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 21.5-inch, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 27-inch, Mid 2017)

Its not unusual.

 

[xxspirit4musicx]

June 2017:

MacBook Pro with Touch Bar (Mid 2017)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2017)
MacBook Air (Mid 2017)
MacBook (Retina, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 21.5-inch, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 27-inch, Mid 2017)

Its not unusual.

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

 

[jdb8167]

If they release 2 models next week, they can take the user feedback from those new machines and apply what they learn towards the next models to be updated to Apple Silicon. This is an iterative approach (which Apple excels at), not a "throw everything out but the kitchen sink" approach.

That really isn’t realistic. It takes more than 2 years to make architecture changes to a SoC. You aren’t going to be able to make many changes based on feedback before the 2 year time limit is over. Apple is going with what they’ve designed throughout the 2 year cycle.

 

[EntropyQ3]

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

Unless you're on Apples board of directors, you just don't know.
Seems unlikely though, but on the other hand there will be a fair number of computers in the channel even when the new AS models are announced, so you're likely to be able to buy them will full warranty coverage during next year, just possibly not from Apple directly.

 

[thingstoponder]

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

Not from anyone credible. I’ve only seen Komiya say that and he just makes stuff up.

 

[Jorbanead]

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

Nobody knows the answer to this right now.

 

[rkuo]

Nobody knows the answer to this right now.

From a corporate customer standpoint, it would be massively problematic to not continue selling some Intel models throughout the entire 2 year plan. People actually have to do work on these laptops and aren't necessarily ready to make the transition to ARM code, especially when the code needs to run on Intel based servers. So I think the answer is actually pretty obvious.

 

[dmccloud]

June 2017:

MacBook Pro with Touch Bar (Mid 2017)
MacBook Pro (Mid 2017)
MacBook Air (Mid 2017)
MacBook (Retina, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 21.5-inch, Mid 2017)
iMac (Retina, 27-inch, Mid 2017)

Its not unusual.

One example in the last five years doesn't qualify as "not unusual" though. Most of those models were just spec bumps with a new Intel processor as well, rather than a complete shift in the internal architecture. It's hard to draw a logical conclusion from the 2017 refresh and apply it to a complete architecture shift in 2020.

That really isn’t realistic. It takes more than 2 years to make architecture changes to a SoC. You aren’t going to be able to make many changes based on feedback before the 2 year time limit is over. Apple is going with what they’ve designed throughout the 2 year cycle.

It is realistic, because the customer feedback would apply to the hardware (chassis, cooling, keyboard, etc.) and the OS rather than the underlying architecture. I'm not talking about redesigning the processors or the underlying components, but refining the user experience and (perhaps) overall reliability of these new devices.

That's not the timeline that I am familiar with. The jump was from 4th to 6th gen (5th mostly bypassed the desktop so barely counts). Far as I know, the cores in Intel CPU's haven't changed since the 6th gen Skylake 14nm architecture. Everything else has been minimal tweaks.

There was a lot of articles written on the 8th Intel parts and the performance gains compared to the 7th generation, due in part to increased core counts of the new processors. There was also a tweak to the 14nm process (called 14nm++ by many reviewers) and a reduction in the base speeds that happened in the jump from 7xxx to 8xxx, which is why Intel and its partners touted battery life so much when those processors were released.

Intel 8th Gen vs 7th Gen CPUs: Kaby Lake Refresh Is a Lot Faster

We tested identical laptops running Intel’s new 8th gen Kaby Lake Refresh and older 7th gen CPUs. The new chips are up to 91-percent faster.

www.laptopmag.com

Intel 8th-gen Core i7 vs. 7th-gen Core i7 CPUs: An upgrade that’s finally worth it

Intel's 6-core 8th-gen Core i7-8750H breaks the rule about about not upgrading from one generation to the next. Just see how it obliterates its predecessors in our benchmarks.

www.pcworld.com

Intel 8th gen Kaby Lake-R vs 7th gen Kaby Lake performance comparison

Benchmarks and analysis comparing the latest Kaby Lake-R i5 8250U against the older 7200U and 7700HQ CPUs.

www.notebookcheck.net

 

[cesarvog]

I don't have an Apple Crystalball, so I will gladly take whatever is in Apple's Mac roadmap, whenever one of my ancient (but perfectly good) current Macs fail or get somehow sidelined on a OS upgrade. Yes, I'm perfectly aware that at least two of my current Mac won't run Big Sur. I do not care because they are perfectly usable for what they were deployed and if I have to download some extra software to make it more secure, so be it...

 

[Homy]

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

When Apple introduced MBP 17" on 24th April 2006 they removed PB G4 17" from their site by 30th April (https://web.archive.org/web/20060430064243/http://www.apple.com/hardware/). They only kept PB G4 12" and iBook G4. When MB 13" was introduced on 16th May 2006 both PB G4 12" and iBook were gone by 23rd May (https://web.archive.org/web/20060523190453/http://www.apple.com/hardware/).

We don't know what Apple will do this time but it is very possible that when one model is replaced only the old models that haven't been replaced will be available.

 

[Fomalhaut]

Guys there has been unverifiable reports that Apple is going to continue selling both Intel & ARM Macbook Pros through 2021. I need to know right now which is true.

Do you mean Intel and ARM versions of the same model and "level" (good, better, best)? If so, I think it unlikely because it would be confusing for customers unless they had some important differentiation (e.g. much lower price).

However, having an ARM MacBook Pro 13 and Intel MacBook Pro 16 seems entirely possible for a good chunk of 2021.

 

[EntropyQ3]

Do you mean Intel and ARM versions of the same model and "level" (good, better, best)? If so, I think it unlikely because it would be confusing for customers unless they had some important differentiation (e.g. much lower price).

However, having an ARM MacBook Pro 13 and Intel MacBook Pro 16 seems entirely possible for a good chunk of 2021.

We’ll see in a week.
But if they can, I’d guess they would try to avoid this situation - the higher end option being Intel based (if AS is so good, why do you put Intel chips in your higher end model?), and their higher revenue model being devalued by better performing AS lower cost models. You can try to counteract these by for instance crippling the lower end AS models (I have to pay $1000 more to have ports?), but basically, it’s just a bad situation to be in for Apple.
They may be forced to it if their silicon isn’t ready, but if so, it’s a situation they would like to get out of as soon as humanly possible.

 

[smoking monkey]

OUCH!
This thread hasn't aged well. The OP put it out there at least. But there was never going to be a 27 Imac as the first AS mac. It was always going to be a lap top. I'm still not convinced we'll get a 16", but 13" is 100 percent. I hope we get a 16" though as I'll throw money at it.

 

[Jorbanead]

One example in the last five years doesn't qualify as "not unusual" though. Most of those models were just spec bumps with a new Intel processor as well, rather than a complete shift in the internal architecture. It's hard to draw a logical conclusion from the 2017 refresh and apply it to a complete architecture shift in 2020.

Well I didn't feel like posting every time they announced multiple macs at once, but since I need something to get my mind off of the election (I'll just start from 2006):

Feb 28 2006: Mac Mini solo, Mac Mini Duo
Sept 6 2006: iMac 17, iMac 20, iMac 24
Aug 7 2007: iMac 20, iMac 24, Mac Mini
Feb 26 2008: Macbook Penryn, Macbook Penryn 15, Macbook Penryn 17
Oct 14 2008: Macbook Air Penryn, MacBook white, MacBook aluminum, MacBook unibody
March 3 2009: mac mini, iMac, mac pro
June 8 2009: MacBook pro 13, MacBook pro 15, macbook pro 17
Oct 20 2009: mac mini, iMac, macbook
June 11 2012: MacBook air, MacBook pro retina, MacBook pro, Mac Pro
October 23 2012: iMac, MacBook pro retina, mac mini
March 9 2015: MacBook pro retina, MacBook air
May 19 2015: iMac, MacBook pro retina
June 5 2017: MacBook pro touch, MacBook pro, MacBook air, iMac 21, iMac 27

So announcing 2-3 new macs at a mac event isn't really that unusual - especially considering they are transitioning over to apple silicon and this is a special event that's going to set the standard for macs going forward. Sure it's not the norm per se, but it's also not that unheard of either. We know they have been working on this for years behind the scenes, so the new macs have probably been in the pipeline for awhile now.

It does sound like we're only getting two 13in models though at the event, based off of updated info, and the 16in model is likely an early 2021 product.

 

[TDTOMW]

The one more thing
1) 27” IMac Pro
2) 21” or 24” IMac
3) 15” MacBook Pro
4) 13” MacBook
All Apple silicon cpu/gpu soc’s
IMAC will be available in December And the MacBooks January or February. I would just like everyone understand my point of view is that when we talk about Macintosh, the desktop is what we must think of. the laptops Maybe some of the best sellers. But the desktop is the face of Apple Inc. Throughout the history of Apple the Macintosh desktop have been the show piece/face of the company.
Let’s imagine an iMac based on the new Apple display but 27 inches with that beautiful built-in display stand. Just my opinion.

 

[CWallace]

If there is a "One More Thing" after the ASi Mac portion, I think it will be AirPods Studio and/or Air Tags.

 

[smoking monkey]

The one more thing
1) 27” IMac Pro
2) 21” or 24” IMac
3) 15” MacBook Pro
4) 13” MacBook
All Apple silicon cpu/gpu soc’s
IMAC will be available in December And the MacBooks January or February. I would just like everyone understand my point of view is that when we talk about Macintosh, the desktop is what we must think of. the laptops Maybe some of the best sellers. But the desktop is the face of Apple Inc. Throughout the history of Apple the Macintosh desktop have been the show piece/face of the company.
Let’s imagine an iMac based on the new Apple display but 27 inches with that beautiful built-in display stand. Just my opinion.

Sure. that's your fantasy, but unfortunately fantasy isn't reality.
There will be iMacs available in December but they'll have intel inside.
AS MacBooks or MBPs will be available in December. 100%.
But keep on livin' the dream, dude!

 

[rkuo]

The one more thing
1) 27” IMac Pro
2) 21” or 24” IMac
3) 15” MacBook Pro
4) 13” MacBook
All Apple silicon cpu/gpu soc’s
IMAC will be available in December And the MacBooks January or February. I would just like everyone understand my point of view is that when we talk about Macintosh, the desktop is what we must think of. the laptops Maybe some of the best sellers. But the desktop is the face of Apple Inc. Throughout the history of Apple the Macintosh desktop have been the show piece/face of the company.
Let’s imagine an iMac based on the new Apple display but 27 inches with that beautiful built-in display stand. Just my opinion.

Ignoring the realities of launching a bunch of new product lines at once (difficult), the MacBook is by far the biggest market for Mac's today. Nothing else even comes close. So your presumption is really not correct.

 

[CWallace]

I'm 100% confident that Apple will only launch laptop models for "immediate" sale at the event, but I do wonder if they might not tease the rumored new iMac as something we will see next year (like the iMac Pro and Mac Pro were pre-announced some six months prior to actual launch).

This event is going to be Apple's primary vehicle to talk about Apple Silicon and if they do have a desktop (or desktops) that will be ready to ship within six months, they might want to talk about them now (maybe talk about the "A14T" and the "Apple GPU").

That being said, they could talk ASi Desktops and new iPad Pros together at a dedicated 2021 event.

 

[Serban55]

Apple for sure will announce two 13" macbooks (air and pro probably)
And there is a good chance an 16" MBP as well...but thats not for sure yet it will be arm or x86 intel)
If the redesigned 24" imac will be ready for January-February i guess they can tease it as well, if its not ready, then maybe at March event
Again, Apple will not do an digital event just to announce 1 thing,..so in March we could see the new iMac along side the mini-LED ipad pro

 

[Jorbanead]

when we talk about Macintosh, the desktop is what we must think of.

Notebooks account for over 70% of sales for Macs. Not desktops. Yes 10 years ago the iMac was more of a headliner product, but it has slowly fallen to the MacBook Pro more and more. When people think of Mac, most average consumers think of a MacBook Pro these days.

Apple is going to release what is going to get the most people excited to buy their product. While an iMac may be exciting for many of us on this forum, notebooks are what most average consumers care about. Battery life and high-end performance. If you watch the WWDC keynote, specifically the part where Jonny talks about what the current issues are, he specifically mentions how notebooks are not able to produce the same level of power as desktops. Then he shows a ambiguous graph that hints that they are able to achieve desktop-levels of performance in a notebook. THAT is what is going to get headlines. Desktop-class performance in a notebook with all day battery life.