[Frank777]

I'm still evaluating what I think will happen in 2017, but I thought I'd post the thread to get the ball rolling.

Clearly the next iMac is going to be compared to the Surface Studio, and I'm not sure how Apple plans to win that PR battle (Microsoft did out innovate Apple here, good for them.) If they implement the gimmicky Touch Bar, prices will rise as they did on the MacBook Pros. Maybe they'll give us user-upgradable SSDs to quiet us down. And perhaps an 8K screen?

The coming year is probably going to see APFS shipping on Macs and a definitive answer on whether a migration to the Ax chips is going to happen. Hopefully the Mac Pro and Mini will see upgrades in January or February, and iPads in March. Those who follow the chipmaking schedule will know better. The second-gen keyboard on the MacBook Pro has been received far better than the first, so maybe the MacBook will get that upgrade.

I'm really straining though, at figuring out what overall strategy Apple is following for 2017. Jobs simplified the product quadrant, then moved to the Digital Hub strategy, then launched the iPhone/iOS strategy to follow his thinking about positioning Apple for the next wave of computing.

The modern Apple is dabbling in a bunch of areas (Watch, TV, Car, Music) but seems to be mastering none. I suppose you can't always expect growth and the Mac business is showing its age. But given how random things seem at the moment, I half-expect Apple to announce that they have a competitor for the HondaJet coming down the line. Or a new urban monorail division.

Where do you see Apple going in 2017, both in overall strategy and in product announcements?

[El Gallo]

Originally Posted by Frank777 I'm still evaluating what I think will happen in 2017, but I thought I'd post the thread to get the ball rolling. Clearly the next iMac is going to be compared to the Surface Studio, and I'm not sure how Apple plans to win that PR battle (Microsoft did out innovate Apple here, good for them.) If they implement the gimmicky Touch Bar, prices will rise as they did on the MacBook Pros. Maybe they'll give us user-upgradable SSDs to quiet us down. And perhaps an 8K screen? The coming year is probably going to see APFS shipping on Macs and a definitive answer on whether a migration to the Ax chips is going to happen. Hopefully the Mac Pro and Mini will see upgrades in January or February, and iPads in March. Those who follow the chipmaking schedule will know better. The second-gen keyboard on the MacBook Pro has been received far better than the first, so maybe the MacBook will get that upgrade. I'm really straining though, at figuring out what overall strategy Apple is following for 2017. Jobs simplified the product quadrant, then moved to the Digital Hub strategy, then launched the iPhone/iOS strategy to follow his thinking about positioning Apple for the next wave of computing. The modern Apple is dabbling in a bunch of areas (Watch, TV, Car, Music) but seems to be mastering none. I suppose you can't always expect growth and the Mac business is showing its age. But given how random things seem at the moment, I half-expect Apple to announce that they have a competitor for the HondaJet coming down the line. Or a new urban monorail division. Where do you see Apple going in 2017, both in overall strategy and in product announcements?

I think no one knows and no one even feels like they can speculate in an informed manner.

That is really the problem.

Apple released new Macbook Pro's and the rest of the line.......is all over a year old with no updates up to three years old without an update.

If there is an overall strategy, it is called outright neglect.

[PB PM]

I think we'll see one of three things happen:

1) Apple updates all of the existing Mac lines to current generation chipsets as they become available, meaning Kaby Lake CPUs for all desktops (other than Mac Pro), for the better energy efficiency of the chipsets and CPU, rather than RAW CPU power. Apple could push them as "green" friendly or something. Hopefully modern GPU's, like the Nvidia 1060 (or better, although it's unlikely) or AMD 480 for the non-entry level stuff.

2) Apple reduces the number of Mac lines significantly. No more Mac Pro, or Mac Mini. iMac's refresh with Kaby Lake CPU/Chipsets, only one 4k 21" model ($1899) and two 5k iMac models ($2500+) with new touch bar keyboards. Oh and no more Airport type products, Apple likely figures they are slowing down iCloud subscriptions. iPad's: I can see Apple dropping the iPad Air and just having the iPad Mini be the "New iPad" along side the iPad Pro models.

3) Apple drops Intel across the board, along with all desktop models. Only makes Ax based notebooks once the first gen touch bar models run the course by the end of winter 2017/early 2018.

I highly suspect option 2 is more likely for 2017, given the direction Apple appears to be going. Option 3 will likely come in 2018.

[Brave Ulysses]

I own a new 13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar and have for close to a month now.


I have not used the touch bar for a non function key purpose once. It is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen implemented. In fact, its made changing the volume and screen brightness slower and more frustrating.

My eyes just don't ever look at the touch bar and most features are redundant and slower. There is no tactical feedback and you can not use it without looking.

Additionally, when using it with an external monitor at a desk (and keyboard and mouse) it really becomes an expensive useless addition.

If this is Apple's idea of innovation, the Mac is screwed.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I own a new 13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar and have for close to a month now. I have not used the touch bar for a non function key purpose once. It is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen implemented. In fact, its made changing the volume and screen brightness slower and more frustrating. My eyes just don't ever look at the touch bar and most features are redundant and slower. There is no tactical feedback and you can not use it without looking. Additionally, when using it with an external monitor at a desk (and keyboard and mouse) it really becomes an expensive useless addition.

I didn't pay much attention to touch bar stuff, does it not use force touch like the newer iPhones? Lame.

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses ...the Mac is screwed.

That just about sums it up.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Clearly the next iMac is going to be compared to the Surface Studio,

Why is everyone so keen to make the iMac a $3,000+ niche product only interesting for graphics folks?

Considering the Surface Studio inspiring and innovative is one thing. Pretending it competes with the iMac is just bullshit.

Originally Posted by Frank777 Where do you see Apple going in 2017, both in overall strategy and in product announcements?

French fries.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by PB PM I didn't pay much attention to touch bar stuff, does it not use force touch like the newer iPhones? Lame.

Nope. No Taptic Engine; no Force/3D Touch. Too strange to be an oversight; must've been cost-prohibitive or otherwise too much of an engineering challenge for the first revision.

[Eugene]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I have not used the touch bar for a non function key purpose once. It is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen implemented. In fact, its made changing the volume and screen brightness slower and more frustrating.

They can address this with gestures. Say you split the touchbar down the middle. Slide your finger side-to-side on the right adjusts volume. Sliding from right to left quickly mutes sound. Sliding on the left half of the touchbar adjusts brightness.

Not a replacement for physical buttons, but it's better than the current implementation.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by chucker Why is everyone so keen to make the iMac a $3,000+ niche product only interesting for graphics folks?

The 4k model is just getting by with Intel's best IGP, and that's just for basic OS operation and video playback. An't going to be driving a 5+k screen with any IGP on the market today, so what do you expect to happen? There have been rumors that Intel will abandon the IGP space altogether and license IGP's from AMD in the near future, so you never know there might be hope yet.

Apple either has put in a good quality dedicated GPU, which costs money, or give up the high resolution screens. Which do you see Apple doing? Within the last year Apple has made it abundantly clear they they don't care about Mac customers who will pay less than $2.5k for a machine.

[El Gallo]

Originally Posted by Brave Ulysses I own a new 13" MacBook Pro with Touch Bar and have for close to a month now. I have not used the touch bar for a non function key purpose once. It is one of the worst ideas I have ever seen implemented. In fact, its made changing the volume and screen brightness slower and more frustrating. My eyes just don't ever look at the touch bar and most features are redundant and slower. There is no tactical feedback and you can not use it without looking. Additionally, when using it with an external monitor at a desk (and keyboard and mouse) it really becomes an expensive useless addition. If this is Apple's idea of innovation, the Mac is screwed.

I'm starting to wonder if I've been down so long that I can't remember up or if my memory is just fading.

Have the complaints about the Macbook Pro's always been the same and do they remain the same this time minus the cost?

I'm not a huge gamer. I don't need top end graphics and here is what Anandtech had to say about my current Macbook Pro nearly six years ago.

The new model isn't without its drawbacks however. The most obvious of which being price. At $1799, even the cheapest 15-inch MacBook Pro is very expensive. You're paying for the design, build quality and ultimately the right to use OS X. If those things don't matter to you (particularly the OS X item) then you'd be much better off with an ASUS or Dell. The only consolation here is that the 2.4GHz Core i5 is fast enough if you thought the previous generation was quick. While I'm not sure about the 2.53GHz Core i5, the i7 is definitely worth it if you plan on keeping the machine for a while. I originally stated that I didn't believe the i7 to be worth the upgrade. Since then I managed to get my hands on an i7 system and noted its greater-than-expected performance; my conclusion has been updated to reflect that. The 22% increase in total system cost comes with a 11 - 15% increase in performance in most CPU intensive applications thanks to the extra clock speed and cache. It's a shame that this sort of performance isn't available in the 13-inch model yet, although I suspect it's related to the next point:

The complaints remain the same. Apple didn't choose the most powerful this or that and seems to have a philosophy that manages the whole machine but doesn't give the greatest graphical chip, etc at the cost of battery life,etc.

The issue here is that six years ago the low end Macbook pro 15 inch cost $1799 and I treated myself to the mid-range one at probabout $2000-2100.

I'm now buying a generation behind Macbook Pro 15 for $2200 the same model in the current gen would be $2800.

I can even remember all the muttering back when I bought the first Macbook Pro because of the price. We complained but noted that they were the cost of the towers we all used to buy that Apple didn't seem to have much interest in and had escalated the cost on. In otherwords we were buying $2000 laptops because Apple stopped making $2000 towers. Now they don't make $2000 towers or $2000 laptops at 15 inches because.... bigger mountain of money to swim in???

I've not opened my "new" laptop. I'm looking harder at alternatives than I probably have in nearly 10-15 years. What Apple is doing just makes no sense and this is from a person who's household own an iMac, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro, four iPhones, two iPads and some old iPod lying around.

[chucker]

PowerBook G4:

January 2001: $2599
October 2001: $2199
April 2002: $2499
November 2002: $2299

PowerBook G4 Aluminum:

September 2003: $1999
April 2004: $1999
January 2005: $1999
October 2005: $1999

MacBook Pro:

January 2006: $1999
May 2006: $1999
October 2006: $1999
June 2007: $1999
February 2008: $1999
October 2008: $1999
June 2009: $1699
April 2010: $1799
February 2011: $1799
October 2011: $1799
June 2012: ($1799), Retina: $2199
February 2013: $2199
October 2013: $1999
July 2014: $1999
May 2015: $1999
October 2016: ($1999), Touch Bar: $2399

These stats are somewhat misleading as I'm only looking for 15-inch models; I'm not differentiating, for example, how much a model with a dedicated GPU is.

With the Retina revision, we see a price bump, part of which goes away, within two revisions, or 16 months. That revision, however, no longer ships with a dGPU; a dGPU variant started at $2399 ($2599?), I believe.

Still, I think we'll see the price get back down to $1999-ish with a revision or two.

[El Gallo]

Originally Posted by chucker PowerBook G4: January 2001: $2599 October 2001: $2199 April 2002: $2499 November 2002: $2299 PowerBook G4 Aluminum: September 2003: $1999 April 2004: $1999 January 2005: $1999 October 2005: $1999 MacBook Pro: January 2006: $1999 May 2006: $1999 October 2006: $1999 June 2007: $1999 February 2008: $1999 October 2008: $1999 June 2009: $1699 April 2010: $1799 February 2011: $1799 October 2011: $1799 June 2012: ($1799), Retina: $2199 February 2013: $2199 October 2013: $1999 July 2014: $1999 May 2015: $1999 October 2016: ($1999), Touch Bar: $2399 These stats are somewhat misleading as I'm only looking for 15-inch models; I'm not differentiating, for example, how much a model with a dedicated GPU is. With the Retina revision, we see a price bump, part of which goes away, within two revisions, or 16 months. That revision, however, no longer ships with a dGPU; a dGPU variant started at $2399 ($2599?), I believe. Still, I think we'll see the price get back down to $1999-ish with a revision or two.

There are three troubling facts about what you've presented. We note that Apple has managed to keep their pricing largely through innovation. For example when the Macbooks were falling into the $1699-1799 range they added the Retina screen which even today adds a few hundred dollars to PC builds. We also see revisions on a 6-12 month schedule. The troubling aspect is that from the last revision to this revision we see 15 months of time elapse. Additionally we see a price increase to their highest baseline price price in 15 years all with very little real innovation or improvement. Sure it is smaller and thinner. As others have noted the rate or return on that has been met by everyone else in the industry as well and Apple is basically blaming their OEM's for their lack of innovation in many areas all while raising their prices. We can't have X amount or RAM or Y CPU speed improvement because of Intel but we can still raise the price!

I really suspect this is going to get ugly in 2017.

[Dave]

I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple ships something with an AMD Zen CPU... If the prerelease info holds up, they're looking to offer Intel's performance for half of Intel's price.

[Eugene]

The difference between MacBook Pro and non-Pro will continue to shrink, so that's the way to look at price brackets from now on. We may see a 14" MacBook to further saturate the line-up, but I also think anyone who needs a 15" display will be willing to pay extra for it, otherwise they'll accept life with a 13" display.

[PB PM]

Originally Posted by Dave I wouldn't be too surprised if Apple ships something with an AMD Zen CPU... If the prerelease info holds up, they're looking to offer Intel's performance for half of Intel's price.

Ryzen (the new name for Zen) does look impressive, particularly in terms of power consumption. The other advantage is that AMD's IGP's (APU) are more powerful in general. Problem is AMD is just catching up with 4 year old Intel chips. For all we know Intel has been holding stuff back, for just such an event.

That said I cannot see Apple switching to AMD with the move to ARM being not long off. Apple has a good deal with Intel, and I don't see that changing until they dump x86 processors outright.

[Eugene]

Apple used multiple SSD, RAM and display suppliers with significant quality differences within the same Mac lines. My 2011 MacBook Air had an AU Optronics display and Toshiba SSD when the desirable combo was an LG display and Samsung SSD. The iPhone 6S used two physically different versions of the A9.

We're basically at the point where processors, even architectures don't really matter. Certainly the Toshiba SSD in my MacBook had a much more profound effect on my productivity than if the processor had been AMD vs Intel.

[Dave]

Someone (maybe Apple, maybe not) would need to create a ThunderBolt bridge thingy for AMD chipsets, too. AFAIK, it's Intel-only at the moment and Apple has pretty much bet the non-mobile farm on it.

[Eugene]

Thunderbolt controllers are on their own chip and tap directly into PCIe. They are more or less platform agnostic and many PC mainboard manufacturers have had AMD + Thunderbolt combos for years.

[Matsu]

I think they should bring back a big screen 17 or 18" laptop,

[Eugene]

Pixel density has pretty much killed that dream. Price/margins inflation will come from other components, namely high capacity SSDs.

[Dave]

Tim Cook says ‘great desktop’ Macs are in the works

Disappointingly, he only actually mentions iMacs. Although he does talk about he best performance and stuff, which I would associate more with a Mac Pro. It's supposedly all from an internal memo, so I'm not sure how much we should be trying to read into exact wordings.

[Frank777]

Maybe we should give up on the Mac Pro let Apple introduce an iMac Pro with a Xeon and an 8K screen.

The Pro line hasn't seen a lot of third-party upgrades, and Thunderbolt 3 is supposed to allow expansion boxes to work well.
Yes, bolting on the screen is a waste, but perhaps a Pro iMac will get annual upgrades.

Sooner or later we will have to accept that Apple's current mindset is to consumerize everything.

[Luca]

Originally Posted by El Gallo The complaints remain the same. Apple didn't choose the most powerful this or that and seems to have a philosophy that manages the whole machine but doesn't give the greatest graphical chip, etc at the cost of battery life,etc. The issue here is that six years ago the low end Macbook pro 15 inch cost $1799 and I treated myself to the mid-range one at probabout $2000-2100. I'm now buying a generation behind Macbook Pro 15 for $2200 the same model in the current gen would be $2800. I can even remember all the muttering back when I bought the first Macbook Pro because of the price. We complained but noted that they were the cost of the towers we all used to buy that Apple didn't seem to have much interest in and had escalated the cost on. In otherwords we were buying $2000 laptops because Apple stopped making $2000 towers. Now they don't make $2000 towers or $2000 laptops at 15 inches because.... bigger mountain of money to swim in??? I've not opened my "new" laptop. I'm looking harder at alternatives than I probably have in nearly 10-15 years. What Apple is doing just makes no sense and this is from a person who's household own an iMac, Macbook Air, Macbook Pro, four iPhones, two iPads and some old iPod lying around.

The problem isn't so much that Apple isn't going with ultra high end performance parts. That's never been their strategy.

The problem is that they're constantly increasing prices despite the rest of the industry going in the opposite direction. I suppose what you get with a Mac is the better build quality, while typical Windows laptops are made out of cheap plastic and break easily. That definitely will keep the price high. But it's still hard to justify paying that much for a computer.

[Eugene]

Never been their strategy? Macs from 10 to 5 years ago were insanely competitive on price and configuration.

An iMac Pro would need at least three Thunderbolt 3 controllers, and really since they are replacing RJ45 and USB Type-A, maybe a fourth so there are 8 Type-C ports on the back.

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by Dave Tim Cook says ‘great desktop’ Macs are in the works Disappointingly, he only actually mentions iMacs. Although he does talk about he best performance and stuff, which I would associate more with a Mac Pro. It's supposedly all from an internal memo, so I'm not sure how much we should be trying to read into exact wordings.

It's an internal memo that was hastily released after they got wind that Bloomberg would be calling them out today.

Less than a week to Christmas, and Apple's promising loyal customers that really good products are coming AFTER this shopping season.

Well done, guys.

[Frank777]

And I'm just reading through that Bloomberg article, and I'm appalled at how uncoordinated Apple engineering has become.

No wonder the product line is in disarray.

Engineers are now "asked to develop multiple options in hopes that one of them will be shippable"...

What?

[turtle]

I really am more and more sad with Apple's product lines. They put all their focus on iPhone and iPad but yet there is little appreciable progress in either. We all expect higher capacity and faster processing (CPU/GPU). Add a better camera to it and you have all the makings of an update. Everything is feeling incremental and that makes it seem all that much slower of an upgrade cycle.

The article is really damning of Apple's current state of affairs. I finally built a hackintosh because I can't stand the desktop options. My future expectations are simple; a desktop that uses iOS apps and is all wireless. The mini goes away while everyone is pointed to the AppleTV, which gets Safari. The Mac Pro gets pointed to the high end MBP.

All that to say I'm really looking more and more at a Surface Book.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by Frank777 And I'm just reading through that Bloomberg article, and I'm appalled at how uncoordinated Apple engineering has become. No wonder the product line is in disarray. Engineers are now "asked to develop multiple options in hopes that one of them will be shippable"... What?

Wow... that's... wow...

I kinda get it, if that means they're constantly doing R&D alongside regular "refresh the hardware" updates, but the "in hopes that one of them well be shippable" part really makes it sound like they don't have a clue what they're doing.

Is it possible to do an AMD-based hackintosh?

[turtle]

I don't think there are "good" ways to use AMD for the CPU. I don't know of any but I also haven't looked for one. It would make sense that it won't work at all though.

[Dave]

Originally Posted by turtle All that to say I'm really looking more and more at a Surface Book.

Is that the one with the 28" touch screen? I hear that the build quality is high, but the screen is about the only part that isn't under-specced. I haven't used one, though, so all I'll got to go on is a few pre-"review video release" tweets from Barnacules.

Edit: never mind... I was thinking of the surface studio...