Next generation MacBook

Deinos

Gawd
Joined
Aug 25, 2011
Messages
556
Your guess is as good as anyone else's at this point. Mac side of Apple's release schedule is kinda unpredictable/broken given the last couple yrs of data.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
4,077
My hunch: WWDC (likely in mid-June) or shortly afterward. Apple's most likely waiting on Intel's Kaby Lake so that it can go all-in on USB 3.1, and that doesn't officially arrive until mid-year.

It sucks that the 15-inch MacBook Pro hasn't had a major update in so long, but Apple is partly a victim of Intel's stalled processor update cycle. Even Skylake wasn't that big a jump.
 

maverick786us

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 24, 2006
Messages
2,035
I think its more than an year now. Buy now Apple should have implemented skylake processors in its 15 inch MBPr just like the way they did with its 13 inch little sister
 

Jinto

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Aug 10, 2006
Messages
1,824
If you are in the market I suggest you just buy now. Lots of discounts floating around and the current ones are quite good still. Only potential upside is if you need better discrete graphics than what is currently offered.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
4,077
I think its more than an year now. Buy now Apple should have implemented skylake processors in its 15 inch MBPr just like the way they did with its 13 inch little sister

The 13-inch model uses Broadwell, not Skylake, and it hasn't been updated for about a year. I'm guessing that Apple is holding off simply because it doesn't see an appreciable gain from Skylake right now.
 
Joined
Feb 3, 2016
Messages
339
The 13-inch model uses Broadwell, not Skylake, and it hasn't been updated for about a year. I'm guessing that Apple is holding off simply because it doesn't see an appreciable gain from Skylake right now.
Isn't improved power efficiency the number one priority in laptops? Any improvement in battery life should've made it worth it to them to make the switch.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
I'm sure that the upgrade to Skylake is worth it for a number of reasons, not least of which is a much needed refresh in the product cycle. Personally I think the reason they have not yet is because they want to launch everything simultaneously. Everything.
Skylake, Thunderbolt 3 using USB-C, as well as a 4K 20" display and a 5K 27" display using USB-C and Thunderbolt 3.

Granted this is 100% speculation. I don't have anything to back that up. But Apple has created a Mac Pro capable of using 3x 4K displays and then didn't launch a 4K display. They launched a 5K iMac, but then nothing to drive other 5K displays (as Thunderbolt 2 doesn't have the bandwidth). So Apple has been seeding it's display market to other manufacturers. Something they don't like to do.

So I speculate that they will finally launch a new 20 and 27" set of screens. Laptops, Mac Pro, and iMac all at the same time. Or at least announce all of them "coming soon and orderable now" as they often do. Macbook and Mac Mini to follow more than likely at a later date. The only time I can remember that Apple changed CPU architecture on every product line all at once, or at least announced it was when they moved from IBM RISC G5 to Intel Core Duo.
 
Last edited:

CEpeep

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
6,061
Other machines won't be refreshed until WWDC in June. Only the 12" Macbook was expected to get an update before May because there had been a leak for an "Early 2016 Macbook" in an Apple plist file.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
At this point June isn't that long to wait anyway. April is done. Basically 6-8 weeks. Time is flying for me. Will be summer in a hot minute.
 

0ptional

Don't Trust Your Friends with Your Decanter
Joined
Feb 22, 2003
Messages
5,593
At this point June isn't that long to wait anyway. April is done. Basically 6-8 weeks. Time is flying for me. Will be summer in a hot minute.

I've been back and forth on buying a current ThinkPad but will probably end up buying both when the correct specs are available. InfoSec leaves me needing pretty strong hardware.
 

Putz

I have a custom title
Joined
Jul 8, 2002
Messages
5,444
typically when they release something "new an innovative" its old tech, so when you see enthusiasts with 8th gen and off the shelf stuff as 7th gen, the apple line will be releasing the latest and greatest as 6th gen
 
Last edited:

CEpeep

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Oct 23, 2004
Messages
6,061
typically when they release something "new an innovative" its old tech, so when you see enthusiasts with 8th gen and off the shelf stuff as 7th gen, the apple line will be releasing the latest and greatest as 6th gen

What? When? Apple sort of leapfrogged Broadwell, but that was because Intel completely dropped the ball on it. Whenever Intel refreshes their lineup, so does Apple. They do this sometimes with their iOS devices (releasing a "brand new" A8 device at the same time as the A9 is released, etc.) but they're not doing it with their x86 hardware.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
I've been back and forth on buying a current ThinkPad but will probably end up buying both when the correct specs are available. InfoSec leaves me needing pretty strong hardware.

As they say: buy when you need to. I'm content with my 2013 15" MBPr for now. It'd be "nice" to upgrade, but I don't need it from a business perspective. I only need my machine to grind through 1GB +/- Photoshop files, which my current machine is more than capable of doing. I will say though, that USB C/Thunderbolt 3 is going to be a big upgrade.

On that note however, the Macbook upgrade seems very underwhelming. I'm not sure if the USB C on the new Macbook is Thunderbolt 3. I didn't see that mentioned in the press release. But if it's not, I hope it's not an indicator of what's coming up. I sincerely hope that what I said in my previous post comes true: that they move to USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 on everything and upgrade their displays. If not for me, than for Apple's sake. I think their Displays in particular have been lagging. They need to up their game and quick.
 

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
4,077
On that note however, the Macbook upgrade seems very underwhelming. I'm not sure if the USB C on the new Macbook is Thunderbolt 3. I didn't see that mentioned in the press release. But if it's not, I hope it's not an indicator of what's coming up. I sincerely hope that what I said in my previous post comes true: that they move to USB-C/Thunderbolt 3 on everything and upgrade their displays. If not for me, than for Apple's sake. I think their Displays in particular have been lagging. They need to up their game and quick.

It's not Thunderbolt 3 -- just USB 3.1 gen A.

Also, I find it a bit odd that you say Apple is lagging in displays, since that's arguably its strong point. Many of the higher-res displays have gotchas. That 3200x1800 IGZO display? Sure, it's sharp, but the colors are off. That 4K display is amazing... and it shrinks the battery life to 5 hours. That and Windows still has problems with high-DPI app scaling that Apple solved in 2012. I don't want to see Apple go to higher resolutions unless it can maintain accuracy and longevity, and it's not as if the current displays look bad.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
It's not Thunderbolt 3 -- just USB 3.1 gen A.

That's a shame. There was a big opportunity missed there. They made that not an option for pros that need at least 1 Thunderbolt port for connectivity.



Also, I find it a bit odd that you say Apple is lagging in displays, since that's arguably its strong point. Many of the higher-res displays have gotchas. That 3200x1800 IGZO display? Sure, it's sharp, but the colors are off. That 4K display is amazing... and it shrinks the battery life to 5 hours. That and Windows still has problems with high-DPI app scaling that Apple solved in 2012. I don't want to see Apple go to higher resolutions unless it can maintain accuracy and longevity, and it's not as if the current displays look bad.

They are unequivocally lagging in displays. They have a 5k iMac and a 4k iMac. Both which look fantastic. And now run in 10-bit, which is a big deal for professionals.

But their 27" display? Still 2560x1440. Their 20"? Still running at 1080P. If you buy a Mac Pro and you need to view and work with video in 4K, Apple provides ZERO options. That's lagging. So your only option is to go to EIZO or NEC. That isn't a bad thing, as both NEC and EIZO provide professional level displays in terms of color accuracy and output. But that's bad for Apple if they want to capture that portion of the market.

I should note that my perspective is based around using this as a professional. I don't want an ultra-wide display. That's not useful for me in a professional (video and photo editing) environment. The displays on the iMac work more than well enough, but they aren't stand-alone.
 
Last edited:

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
4,077
That's a shame. There was a big opportunity missed there. They made that not an option for pros that need at least 1 Thunderbolt port for connectivity.

To be fair, Apple hasn't really pitched the 12-inch MacBook as a pro system. I wonder if it'll show up in the next revision, though.



They are unequivocally lagging in displays. They have a 5k iMac and a 4k iMac. Both which look fantastic. And now run in 10-bit, which is a big deal for professionals.

But their 27" display? Still 2560x1440. Their 20"? Still running at 1080P. If you buy a Mac Pro and you need to view and work with video in 4K, Apple provides ZERO options. That's lagging. So your only option is to go to EIZO or NEC. That isn't a bad thing, as both NEC and EIZO provide professional level displays in terms of color accuracy and output. But that's bad for Apple if they want to capture that portion of the market.

I should note that my perspective is based around using this as a professional. I don't want an ultra-wide display. That's not useful for me in a professional (video and photo editing) environment. The displays on the iMac work more than well enough, but they aren't stand-alone.

Oh, desktop displays -- sure. That, I think, hinges on there being a newer Mac Pro. Apple would likely want to make a 5K stand-alone display, and that would require Thunderbolt 3. WWDC, maybe?

For reference: Apple hasn't made a sub-27-inch stand-alone display for a while now. There's only the 27-inch Thunderbolt Display.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
To be fair, Apple hasn't really pitched the 12-inch MacBook as a pro system. I wonder if it'll show up in the next revision, though.

True, but then it's the only "consumer" level machine that doesn't have it. I wouldn't call the Mac Mini a "Professional Level" system either, but it has Thunderbolt.



Oh, desktop displays -- sure. That, I think, hinges on there being a newer Mac Pro. Apple would likely want to make a 5K stand-alone display, and that would require Thunderbolt 3. WWDC, maybe?

For reference: Apple hasn't made a sub-27-inch stand-alone display for a while now. There's only the 27-inch Thunderbolt Display.

You're right, but I guess I haven't looked at an Apple 20" display in a long time... long enough to not remember that they didn't have one. Anyway, that's why I've been harping on USB C/Thunderbolt 3 in this thread the whole time. Those are the updates they need to do so they can bring out a 5k standalone display. Well that and of course be on page with a universal connector.
 

blmlozz

n00b
Joined
Oct 13, 2015
Messages
5
True, but then it's the only "consumer" level machine that doesn't have it. I wouldn't call the Mac Mini a "Professional Level" system either, but it has Thunderbolt.
I would take a guess to say that the reason it's not there is because they would have needed a separate thunderbolt controller and were already stripped for PCB space. The fact that the IHC they used supports 10GBP/S USB 3.1 but they decided to (again) only use 5GBPS to save on space would say something.

Let's also be honest, although it would have been nice, there's nothing out there today that can saturate even a 5GBps bus beyond an external SSD drive, and they're not exactly flying off the shelf yet.

They are unequivocally lagging in displays. They have a 5k iMac and a 4k iMac. Both which look fantastic. And now run in 10-bit, which is a big deal for professionals.

But their 27" display? Still 2560x1440. Their 20"? Still running at 1080P. If you buy a Mac Pro and you need to view and work with video in 4K, Apple provides ZERO options. That's lagging. So your only option is to go to EIZO or NEC. That isn't a bad thing, as both NEC and EIZO provide professional level displays in terms of color accuracy and output. But that's bad for Apple if they want to capture that portion of the market.
Couldn't agree more that they've let their stand alone displays dwindle, although admittedly their demand I imagine has similarly dropped to nothing. The cinema display was not intended to be paired with the mac pro, it was actually designed for the rMPB's as a dock for professionals, and, at the time TB was the only port that could shift the amount of data for the extra ports it has. it's pure coincidence and response to the slow adoption of HDMI 2.0 that Display port and TB as display connections have taken off.

The display remember, has an integrated 'dock' of USB ports, SD card reader and gigabit ethernet. it was designed to be a hub for someone to connect their laptop and 'dock' with peripherals. Not, as a monitor for the Mac Pro. The fact that there's been an explosion of much cheaper TB docs and no one in their right mind would want a sub-par screen with an integrated dock that has outdated USB ports is sort of a mute point now. Mac pro's and Mac Mini's are simply the lowest volume products out there that actually need an external display, and only the mac pro could even comfortable run a 4K panel. I'd imagine Apple isn't exactly clamoring to make a new $1000 4K monitor when the people that could benefit from a refreshed cinema display dock--laptop owners-- have IGP's that can barely handle the internal's display resolution.
 

UnknownSouljer

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Sep 24, 2001
Messages
7,845
I would take a guess to say that the reason it's not there is because they would have needed a separate thunderbolt controller and were already stripped for PCB space. The fact that the IHC they used supports 10GBP/S USB 3.1 but they decided to (again) only use 5GBPS to save on space would say something.

Let's also be honest, although it would have been nice, there's nothing out there today that can saturate even a 5GBps bus beyond an external SSD drive, and they're not exactly flying off the shelf yet.

My understanding from
this: Thunderbolt (interface) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and this: USB Type-C - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It doesn't take any chip space.
And two, you're wrong. If you don't think that anything needs the bandwidth of Thunderbolt 3, you've been missing everything that I've been saying in this thread... repeatedly. 5K displays need Thunderbolt 3/Displayport 1.3.


Couldn't agree more that they've let their stand alone displays dwindle, although admittedly their demand I imagine has similarly dropped to nothing. The cinema display was not intended to be paired with the mac pro, it was actually designed for the rMPB's as a dock for professionals, and, at the time TB was the only port that could shift the amount of data for the extra ports it has. it's pure coincidence and response to the slow adoption of HDMI 2.0 that Display port and TB as display connections have taken off.

The display remember, has an integrated 'dock' of USB ports, SD card reader and gigabit ethernet. it was designed to be a hub for someone to connect their laptop and 'dock' with peripherals. Not, as a monitor for the Mac Pro. The fact that there's been an explosion of much cheaper TB docs and no one in their right mind would want a sub-par screen with an integrated dock that has outdated USB ports is sort of a mute point now. Mac pro's and Mac Mini's are simply the lowest volume products out there that actually need an external display, and only the mac pro could even comfortable run a 4K panel. I'd imagine Apple isn't exactly clamoring to make a new $1000 4K monitor when the people that could benefit from a refreshed cinema display dock--laptop owners-- have IGP's that can barely handle the internal's display resolution.

You have a very narrow view of the situation. The Thunderbolt Display is an either or situation. Just because a display has connections to dock a laptop more easily doesn't mean it is exclusively used for that purpose. That's like saying a truck with a tow hitch is incapable of having anything in the bed... it must be hitched to something all the time. A ludicrous statement.
#2 you'd have to be a complete fool to think Apple doesn't want you to buy their displays when you buy a Mac Pro. Let me get this right: you think after Apple has sold you a $6k computer, they don't want you to buy their Displays at $1k a piece? They'd rather have you buy someone else's displays? Do you think when you go and buy a Mac Pro at a Mac store they just suggest you go and buy NEC or Eizo monitors? When you go to an Apple store and see a Mac Pro on display, what displays do you see them with? Do you see them with a display that isn't made by Apple? Do you or do you not think that the Displays they show them working with is a suggestion of what monitor you 'should' use? It doesn't take a genius with an MBA to figure out that making more money and having more of the market is better than less money and less of the market. Apple was leading display technology on desktops up to the point in which 4k and 5k became a thing. The point I've been making all along is that Thunderbolt 3 is the gateway for them to get on top again.

Additionally the Mac Pro is just ONE of Apple's computers without displays. Let's ignore the Mac Pro. What about the Mac Mini? I can't buy a Thunderbolt Display for the Mac Mini? I can't get a complete solution from Apple for the most basic machine? To hammer the point home, the Thunderbolt Display is for ALL of their computers. Having the power "dock" is to be inclusive of their laptops not to be exclusive to their laptops.

I'm sure it was no accident that the Mac Pro is capable of supporting 6 Thunderbolt Displays on the Mac Pro.... hrmmm
Apple Thunderbolt Display - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Last edited:

Aurelius

2[H]4U
Joined
Mar 22, 2003
Messages
4,077
New, thinner Macbook Pros will reportedly have an OLED touch bar

Looks interesting. I am not sure if its worth to wait till late 2016 for that flashy screen?

I look at it this way: if your laptop is good enough right now, holding out a few more months won't hurt.

Assuming this is true (Kuo and 9to5Mac are saying the same thing, so that's heartening), I'll be interested to see it. The MacBook Pro is due for a shakeup, and I'd really like to see it made lighter without giving up performance. It'd be nice to see higher-res displays, too, although I don't think Apple should go 4K/5K just to say it can -- we've seen a lot of laptop makers shove in 4K options and watch as battery life falls off a cliff.
 

Mad Maxx

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Apr 12, 2016
Messages
6,587
I'm hoping for a serious shake up in the MBP lineup. Not that I need a new laptop. My little 13" retina is the perfect road warrior machine. I'm always willing to spend some disposable cash, though. :cool:
 
Top