Goodbye Macintosh?

MrRockliffe said:
Not a chance. Macs make Apple money. A lot.

If anything, high end iPads will be phased out, as the tablet market continues to decline.

Macs are a cash cow for them. They take little innovation and cost, but create big profits.
Click to expand...

Really??

The convenience, portability, ease of use etc of an ipad is a massive appeal to the public, especially those who aren't tech savey or just don't want to bother with the operations that come with a Mac or PC. In particular older people or younger children and like most things, people buy into the name which is always going to be in Apple's favour. Cheap to manufacture with massive margins suggests the iPad is going nowhere. This is a far cry from the desktops which are expensive to manufacturer and support and just don't have the same convenience or appeal anymore. Whilst there is always room for macs and PCs in for certain usages (gamers, photographers, web designers etc) in general they have lost their appeal for general family usage. My wife has hardly used my PC since she's had hers. She can do everything from the comfort of the sofa.
 
Admiral Huddy said:
Really??

The convenience, portability, ease of use etc of an ipad is a massive appeal to the public, especially those who aren't tech savey or just don't want to bother with the operations that come with a Mac or PC. In particular older people or younger children and like most things, people buy into the name which is always going to be in Apple's favour. Cheap to manufacture with massive margins suggests the iPad is going nowhere. This is a far cry from the desktops which are expensive to manufacturer and support and just don't have the same convenience or appeal anymore. Whilst there is always room for macs and PCs in for certain usages (gamers, photographers, web designers etc) in general they have lost their appeal for general family usage. My wife has hardly used my PC since she's had hers. She can do everything from the comfort of the sofa.
Click to expand...

Please re read. High end iPads.

At the moment, to continue selling vast quantities of expensive iPads, Apple are continually having to innovate, which costs them money. The majority of their sales comes from older iPads, or the lower end models like the new 2017 model.

Phones are getting bigger, and laptops smaller (for a given screen size)

Even Apple know that people aren't buying iPads as much, hence the push to make iOS on iPads more like MacOS. They've even introduced the dock now.

People want tablets, but need computers.

At the moment, the high end iPad market is like the Mac Pro market. It's dying - Apple don't sell enough of them to warrant innovation every few years.

The current Mac Pro has the same specs from 2013!!

I still don't think the Macs will go anywhere for the time being. They'll introduce evolutionary upgrades every year or so, and that will be that. Same with low end iPads.

Combat squirrel said:
Sales stats say the opposite...yes all make money but Ipad and iPhone make massive amounts more
Click to expand...

Sales are lower, but VS the amount of money Apple have to put into selling them. They (Macs) take little resources.

Adverts, new technologies (Apple even have to bring out new CPU designs for the top end iPads) - these are big costs for a rapidly declining market.

Apple aren't stupid, they know what makes them the most money. Hence why iPhones are such incremental updates every year. As much as it sucks, it makes them the most money, so why would they change? People are still going to buy iPhones.
 
For many people, an iPad will do everything they need from a home computer. It can browse the web, check e-mails, watch Netflix, etc. in a more convenient form-factor.

There’s always going to be a market for professional Apple computers though. That’s been in their DNA since the beginning. If nothing else, Apple’s own engineers need pro machines to develop the next generation of technology.

Case in point: the new iMac Pro is just about to be released.
 
I think there will be much more crossover, the iphone X is more powerful than the current Macbook air I think, which is pretty amazing.

A heck of a lot of image, video and production specialises, both amateur and professional use mac though, it would be an enormous industry to abandon, they'd have to develop a suitable replacement first - maybe ultra powerful ipads that can drive a 5k display,
 
I considered a Surface Pro although the **** keyboard put me off. When I have my MacBook on my lap I don't have to mess about with a flimsy keyboard. MacBook Pro works for me.
 
I think people are enticed by the iPhone/iPad and think to themselves you know what Apple make good products lets give an iMac/MacBook a go. I know I was and my wife too. And the below article confirms it.

Source - https://www.macworld.co.uk/news/apple/apple-financial-results-iphone-ipad-mac-sales-3581769/

How many Macs did Apple sell in Q4 2017?
Mac sales continue to increase. The company sold 5.386 million Macs in the fourth quarter of of 2018, compared to 4,292 million Macs in Q3, and 4.886 million in the year ago quarter. That’s up 25% quarter-on-quarter, and up 10% year-on-year.

It made revenue of $7.170bn from this, compared to $5.592bn in in Q3 and $5.739 in the same quarter of 2016. That’s up 28% quarter-on-quarter, and up 25% year-on-year.
 
Combat squirrel said:
Well....benches......I.e. How many calculations per second is possible...you have seen the bench results I'm sure.....
Click to expand...

Bluecube said:
Geekbench as per the link below. It’s comparing the A11 to to dual core i5 but it’s still an impressive achievement.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/a11-bionic-iphone-x-more-powerful-than-a-2017-macbook-pro-2017-9
Click to expand...


Shock as a 3 core ARM chip beats a 2 core non-ARM chip at a primarily ARM/Mobile designed benchmark :)
 
Armageus said:
Shock as a 3 core ARM chip beats a 2 core non-ARM chip at a primarily ARM/Mobile designed benchmark :)
Click to expand...

No, not at all ? - the bench is designed to test throughput of calculations per second - being arm, x86 or x64 makes no difference to this data set - any architecture is still doing basic maths - its how fast it takes to run it.

The A11 is as fast as an I5/I7 mobile chip - it is, its specs say it is, its bench on all benches that are multiplatform says it is. Also the A11 is 6 core I think vs quad/8 threads.

Why are you resisting this ? Is it to much for you emotionally ? lol

Facts, are facts, its an incredible achievement without a doubt - but apples mobile chips are home brew and enormous dies compared to snapdragon's silicon - snap dragon must compete in a competitive market to buyers who want to buy in at the lowest cost above all else - yet still be fast enough.

Apple is making the entire phone, and can afford to 'risk' higher costs involved in making a (comparatively) huge/powerful mobile chip, its still crazy energy efficient but the die size is massive and complex...but this works for apples market - they only make it for themselves so make it 'at cost' then pass the cost on to the buyer who puts down £1000 on an iphone vs £600 on an android.
 
Combat squirrel said:
No, not at all ? - the bench is designed to test throughput of calculations per second - being arm, x86 or x64 makes no difference to this data set - any architecture is still doing basic maths - its how fast it takes to run it.
Click to expand...

As I understand it started life as a mobile benchmark first and then x86/x64 versions appeared later. As there are seemingly no other cross platform benchmarks to verify it's results against, it's difficult to prove whether it is biased or not.

Combat squirrel said:
The A11 is as fast as an I5/I7 mobile chip - it is, its specs say it is, its bench on all benches that are multiplatform says it is. Also the A11 is 6 core I think vs quad/8 threads.
Click to expand...
The A11 is actually a 6 core chip (2 high performance, and 4 high efficiency) - however the multicore benchmark result is more than double the singlecore result, suggesting it was using all 6 cores to produce that score. The i5-7267U is a 2 core 4 thread part. As above though - where are any other multiplatform benches?

ARM chips (including Apple's chips) are fantastic from a power usage/performance point of view, but from a pure performance point of view they are still leagues behind. If ARM was performance comparable across the board, then server manufacturers would have switched wholesale purely on energy savings alone.


Combat squirrel said:
Why are you resisting this ? Is it to much for you emotionally ? lol
Click to expand...
Sorry forgot which forum I was posting in - next time I'll remember that criticizing Apple in any way means that I should automatically be subjected to petty insults.
 
Well they're about to launch the mega expensive iMac Pro which would be a fantastic machine to have if you have such things as solid gold toilets in your gaff (or your workplace gets you one) so they wouldn't have done that if they were abandoning computers.

I love using Apple products, I have iPods and iPads and am now looking at getting a Macbook instead of a gaming laptop and just using my PS4/Xbone instead.

EDIT: And until you can manipulate the files in a file system on an iOS device, they'll always be a need for a Mac.
 
Armageus said:
ARM chips (including Apple's chips) are fantastic from a power usage/performance point of view, but from a pure performance point of view they are still leagues behind. If ARM was performance comparable across the board, then server manufacturers would have switched wholesale purely on energy savings alone.

Sorry forgot which forum I was posting in - next time I'll remember that criticizing Apple in any way means that I should automatically be subjected to petty insults.
Click to expand...


It's not leagues behind at all - I'm not 'defending' apple - the specs and performance speaks for itself - its also not 'arm' it USED to be arm - then apple made their own design from it - its apple in house.

It's not a petty insult either, don't be so sensitive ;)

I am merely confused as to your not believing factual info - also your putting WAY to much emphasis on the whole 'it was arm ported to x64' - as if its going to make some sort of massive difference - maybe a couple of %.

Ya basically talkin nonsense because no way geek bench running in apple/x64 mode etc will make say a 30% difference, at most single %

The A11 used properly is in the same performance ball park as laptop intel chips - defo faster than AMD mobile chips by far (I use a ryzen desktop as my main rig)

I don't care if apple, intel, AMD or santa made the chip, its performance is in i5/i7 territory - this is not my opinion - its complete scientific fact whether you wish to dismiss it or not, saying 'oh but the bench isnt believable' and ignoring it won't achieve anything - if Snap dragon made a similarly powerful chip id say the Snapdragon is hitting numbers similar to intel.

A12 will ruin the current gen intel mobile chips, without a doubt.
 
I bet MacOS is already running on Apple’s Axx chips in a research lab somewhere. How does the GPU in the A11 chip compare to Intel integrated graphics?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom