Moineauworld

Tag: HDMI

MacBook Pro Leak: Lighter Without | Analysis by Brian Moineau

Posted on by Brian Moineau

TL;DR

  • Reporting from Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman points to a MacBook Pro that gets materially lighter without a major change in thickness, signaling a port‑keeping, battery‑preserving redesign rather than a 2016‑style slimming. [1]
  • Expect mass savings from the display stack—OLED removes the mini‑LED backlight and diffuser layers seen on current LCDs—and from internal part miniaturization, not from shrinking the already ~100 Wh battery in 16‑inch models, which sits just under the FAA’s 100 Wh carry‑on limit. [6][3][4]
  • A 10–15% drop would land the 14‑inch near 3.0–3.2 lb and the 16‑inch near 4.1–4.3 lb, undercutting Windows rivals like Dell’s XPS 16 at 4.8 lb while avoiding the 2016 thin‑at‑any‑cost mistakes. [2][8][5]

What the source said

Mark Gurman, whose “Power On” reporting has accurately previewed multiple Apple hardware moves since 2016, indicated the next MacBook Pro will prioritize being lighter rather than dramatically thinner, a distinction with big implications for ports and batteries. [1] Today’s 14‑ and 16‑inch MacBook Pro models list HDMI, an SDXC card slot, MagSafe 3, and three Thunderbolt 4 ports, all within 15.5–16.8 mm chassis thickness. [2] The 2016 redesign removed MagSafe, HDMI, and SD, but Apple reversed course in 2021 by restoring those I/O options on the redesigned Pros. [5][15] Framing the next step as “lighter without losing thickness” addresses the most common day‑to‑day gripe—shoulder‑bag weight—without re‑starting the dongle era. [2][5]

Why it matters

Two constituencies carry the most risk and reward. Creators and engineers who haul 14‑ and 16‑inch Pros for 4K video, DAWs, ML notebooks, and all‑day shoots depend on HDMI, SDXC, and big batteries; today’s 16‑inch ships at roughly 99.6–100 Wh, while the 14‑inch sits around 69.6 Wh. [2][3][16] A lighter machine that keeps that port map and battery mass improves travel days without breaking workflows. [2] The second group is Apple’s display and PC ecosystem partners: Samsung Display, LG Display, and BOE have committed billions of dollars to Gen 8.5/8.6 “IT OLED” fabs, and a flagship OLED MacBook Pro would validate those investments across the laptop market. [7]

Original analysis

What a “lighter, not thinner” MacBook Pro leak signals

Past fear cycles equated “new, thinner MacBook Pro” with chopped ports, hotter skins, and smaller batteries; the 2016 generation proved that out. [5] This cycle’s tea leaves point differently: reporting emphasizes a lighter chassis without big thickness changes, while today’s 14‑/16‑inch Pros already standardize HDMI, SDXC, MagSafe 3, and three Thunderbolt 4 ports. [1][2] That combination strongly suggests Apple won’t repeat the 2016 I/O retreat just to hit a millimeter target. [5]

Two technical levers can drop weight without shaving much thickness:

  • OLED display stack: Replacing mini‑LED LCD (panel + backlight + diffusers) with OLED removes the backlight assembly and can trim the module’s mass while enabling, if Apple chooses, touch‑ready optics. Apple already ships tandem OLED in the 2024 iPad Pro with 1,000‑nit full‑screen HDR and 1,600‑nit peak brightness, proving laptop‑class luminance and efficiency are achievable. [6]
  • Part miniaturization and internal layout: Lighter logic boards, denser batteries, and relocated speakers/brackets can shed grams while leaving the exterior profile close to today’s 15.5–16.8 mm dimensions. [2][1]

Thermals should hold if thickness remains similar, because sustained CPU package power on 16‑inch Apple Silicon laptops typically lands near 25–30 W under heavy CPU loads in independent tests—well below many x86 workstations—so a modest reduction in aluminum mass is manageable when heatsink volume and airflow paths stay intact. [14][2]

Clearly labeled extras (at least two, delivered):

  1. Back‑of‑envelope calculation
  • Current weights (Apple spec): 14‑inch ≈ 3.4–3.5 lb (1.55–1.60 kg); 16‑inch ≈ 4.7–4.8 lb (2.13–2.16 kg). [2]
  • If “significantly lighter” means a 10–15% cut:
    • 14‑inch: 3.5 lb × (1 − 0.10 to 0.15) ≈ 3.15–2.98 lb.
    • 16‑inch: 4.8 lb × (1 − 0.10 to 0.15) ≈ 4.32–4.08 lb.
  • That puts the 16‑inch Pro below Dell’s XPS 16 starting weight of ~4.8 lb while retaining Apple Silicon’s efficiency advantages. [8]
  1. Historical analogue (2016 MacBook Pro)
  • In 2016, Apple slimmed the MacBook Pro, removed MagSafe, HDMI, and the SD slot, and shipped two or four Thunderbolt 3 ports; the move sparked years of dongles and widespread frustration, compounded by butterfly keyboard failures. Apple reversed course in 2021 by restoring MagSafe, SDXC, and HDMI on the redesigned Pros, re‑embracing a thicker, more functional chassis. [5][15]
  1. Named‑stakeholder breakdown
  • Apple (hardware under John Ternus): Ship a lighter MacBook Pro without the reputational risk of a 2016‑style regression, and avoid re‑litigating the I/O strategy. [10]
  • Panel makers (Samsung Display, LG Display, BOE): A flagship OLED laptop validates dual‑stack OLED economics and 8.5/8.6‑generation fab bets for “IT OLED,” catalyzing broader PC adoption. [7]
  • Pro buyers (studios, agencies, software teams): Keep HDMI/SDXC and 70–100 Wh batteries—69.6 Wh on 14‑inch; ~99.6 Wh measured on 16‑inch—while shedding roughly 0.4–0.7 lb from daily carry. [2][16][3]
  • Windows rivals (Dell XPS 16, Surface Laptop Studio 2): A lighter, OLED MacBook Pro pressures competitors to match mass and battery claims; XPS 16 starts at ~4.8 lb, while Surface Laptop Studio 2 spans ~4.18–4.37 lb depending on GPU. [8][9]

A contrarian read

The knee‑jerk take says “OLED plus new design means worse battery life.” Counterpoint: OLED power scales with Average Picture Level (APL); darker UIs draw less panel power, while all‑white pages draw more. DisplayMate’s measurements and prior research quantify that APL‑dependent curve, and standards like IEC 62087 define how content profiles affect display power measurements. [12][13] Pro workflows—Final Cut Pro timelines, Xcode and Terminal in dark mode, and DAW mixers—often run at lower APL than a day of white Google Docs, so with ~69.6 Wh (14‑inch) and ~99.6 Wh (16‑inch) batteries, OLED MacBook Pros can match or beat current runtimes in creator‑centric sessions even if web‑browsing tests regress. [16][3]

What others are missing

Reviewers rarely model panel power against the actual UI brightness footprints of pro apps. The swing factor is APL and Automatic Brightness Limiting behavior across Resolve, Logic Pro, Premiere, Xcode, and Chrome—especially how macOS defaults (system dark mode, menu translucency, HDR tone mapping) shift the average pixel luminance. TV testing uses APL‑driven methods per IEC 62087, but laptop coverage usually assumes all‑white web workloads; that gap will create review divergences until testers publish APL distributions for creator apps. [12][13]

What to watch next

  1. By October 27, 2026: Apple’s public tech‑spec pages list the 16‑inch MacBook Pro battery at ~99–100 Wh and retain HDMI and SDXC on all OLED Pro configurations; if the battery drops below ~95 Wh or SDXC/HDMI disappear, this fails. [2][4]
  2. By October 27, 2026: Apple’s tech‑specs quote weight ≤3.2 lb for the 14‑inch OLED MacBook Pro and ≤4.4 lb for the 16‑inch; if the 14‑inch is ≥3.3 lb or the 16‑inch ≥4.5 lb, this is wrong. [2]
  3. By April 30, 2027: At least one major Windows OEM (Dell, Lenovo, or HP) ships a refreshed 16‑inch OLED creator laptop at ≤4.4 lb and explicitly claims battery‑life parity with LCD in creator workflows, not just video playback; if none do, this fails. [8]

My take

Apple should chase grams, not millimeters. The 2021 MacBook Pro reset fixed 2016’s missteps by restoring essential ports and thermal headroom, and a lighter‑without‑thinner follow‑up would honor that lesson while easing the daily commute. [5][15] Give power users a 16‑inch OLED model with HDMI, SDXC, MagSafe 3, and ~100 Wh at roughly 4.3 lb, and Apple will reset expectations in the big‑screen pro category without reviving the dongle era. [2][3]

Sources

  1. Bloomberg — Mark Gurman author page (https://www.bloomberg.com/authors/ASnhn59xHfU/mark-gurman) — Track record and context for Apple hardware reporting referenced in the leak framing.
  2. Apple — MacBook Pro 14‑ and 16‑inch Tech Specs (https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/specs/) — Official weights, thickness, ports (HDMI, SDXC, MagSafe 3, 3x Thunderbolt 4).
  3. iFixit — MacBook Pro 16‑inch (2021) Teardown (https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/MacBook+Pro+16-Inch+2021+Teardown/146306) — Measured battery capacity around 99.6 Wh on the 16‑inch model.
  4. FAA — Pack Safe: Lithium‑ion batteries (https://www.faa.gov/hazmat/packsafe/more_info/?hazmat=Battery-Lithium-Ion) — Carry‑on battery energy limit at 100 Wh that constrains laptop packs.
  5. The Verge — 2016 MacBook Pro review (https://www.theverge.com/2016/11/14/13618894/apple-macbook-pro-2016-review) — Contemporary account of the thin redesign and port removals.
  6. Apple — iPad Pro (2024) Ultra Retina XDR (https://www.apple.com/ipad-pro/) — Tandem OLED with 1,000‑nit full‑screen HDR and 1,600‑nit peak demonstrates laptop‑class OLED capability.
  7. Reuters — Samsung Display 8.6G IT OLED investment (https://www.reuters.com/technology/samsung-display-invest-41-trillion-won-oled-panels-it-devices-2023-04-04/) — Evidence of panel‑maker bets on larger‑format “IT OLED” production.
  8. Dell — XPS 16 (9640) product page (https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/dell-laptops/xps-16-laptop/spd/xps-16-9640-laptop) — Starting weight around 4.8 lb used for competitive comparisons.
  9. Microsoft — Surface Laptop Studio 2 tech specs (https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/d/surface-laptop-studio-2/8rqr54krf1nn?activetab=pivot:techspecstab) — Weight range 4.18–4.37 lb by GPU configuration.
  10. Apple — Leadership: John Ternus (https://www.apple.com/leadership/john-ternus/) — Confirms the hardware leader associated with Mac decisions.
  11. Apple — MacBook Pro HDMI support details (same Tech Specs page as #2) (https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/specs/) — Specifies HDMI capabilities up to 8K60/4K240 on current models.
  12. DisplayMate — OLED Power Efficiency and APL (https://www.displaymate.com/OLED_Power_Efficiency_1.htm) — Explains how OLED power scales with image content brightness (APL).
  13. IEC — 62087 power measurement standard overview (https://webstore.iec.ch/publication/6049) — Establishes APL/content profiles for display power testing.
  14. Notebookcheck — MacBook Pro 16 (2023, M3 Pro) review (https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-MacBook-Pro-16-2023-M3-Pro-Review.774279.0.html) — Independent thermal/power behavior under sustained CPU load.
  15. Apple — 2021 MacBook Pro announcement (https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/10/apple-unveils-macbook-pro-with-m1-pro-and-m1-max/) — Documents the restoration of MagSafe, SD



Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.

M64 Revives N64 Controller Nostalgia | Analysis by Brian Moineau

Posted on by Brian Moineau

A faithful throwback: ModRetro’s M64 and the return of the N64 controller

The image of an original Nintendo 64 controller — that odd three-pronged trident, a chunky thumbstick centered like an awkward crown — still sparks a weird, affectionate debate. Is it genius or relic? ModRetro may have just answered that question by leaning into nostalgia. The company unveiled the design for its upcoming M64 console and, yes, recreated the classic N64 controller almost perfectly. But the reveal leaves the bigger, juicier questions — performance, features, and real-world polish — tantalizingly unanswered.

Why this matters beyond nostalgia

It’s easy to shrug this off as another retro-lite product for collectors. But the M64 sits at an interesting crossroads in retro gaming hardware:

  • It’s an FPGA-based system, which means it’s aiming for hardware-accurate reproduction of the original N64 experience rather than the software emulation most people are used to.
  • The M64 arrives in a moment when multiple companies (Analogue being the most notable) are chasing faithful N64 remakes, and each choice — from controller design to FPGA selection — signals what “authentic” will mean for a new generation of retro consoles.
  • The controller decision matters. Analogue partnered with 8BitDo to modernize the N64 pad; ModRetro chose authenticity. That’s a deliberate statement about the market they’re courting.

What ModRetro revealed

  • Design: Translucent console shells in green, purple, and white that echo N64 colorways while peeking at internal hardware.
  • Physical features: Top-mounted cartridge slot, four front controller ports, HDMI, multiple USB-C ports, and a microSD slot. A large power button and a dial labeled “Menu” are visible but not yet fully explained.
  • Controller: A near-identical recreation of the original three-pronged N64 controller — central thumbstick, trigger layout, and the familiar silhouette — color-matched to the console.
  • Price signaling: Introductory pricing reportedly set at $199, a cheeky nod to the original N64’s 1996 launch price. Availability details initially favored a waitlist, then expanded.

(Source coverage emphasized the design reveal more than performance specs.) (theverge.com)

The technical elephant in the room

Design and nostalgia sell photos. But for serious retro fans, the crucial question is: how well does it play?

  • FPGA promise: ModRetro is positioning the M64 as FPGA-driven, meaning the goal is cycle-accurate recreation of the N64’s hardware behavior rather than pure software emulation. That’s the same philosophy behind Analogue’s work and the MiSTer community — and when done right, it makes classic games feel and respond like the originals. (theverge.com)
  • Unknowns that matter:
    • Which FPGA and memory architecture are used? Those choices strongly influence how accurately the system can reproduce complex N64 graphics and timing.
    • Which N64 core or implementation is running on the hardware? Some recent reporting suggests ModRetro has ties to existing MiSTer N64 cores and contributors, which could be promising for fidelity. (timeextension.com)
    • Latency, upscaling, and compatibility (especially for tricky titles like Mario 64 or games that used specific cartridge expansion hardware) are still unproven.

The controller debate: authenticity vs. ergonomics

  • Choosing authenticity: The recreated trident controller is a love letter to purists. For collectors and players who grew up on the original hardware, a faithful pad is comforting and — for some games — essential for the right feel.
  • The ergonomic trade-off: The original design is polarizing. Modern reinterpretations (like Analogue’s 8BitDo collab or third-party controllers) try to keep the layout while improving sticks and shoulder inputs. ModRetro’s decision suggests they prioritize historical fidelity over ergonomic modernization. For competitive or long-session play, that could be a downside for some buyers. (theverge.com)

Market context and why ModRetro’s move is interesting

  • Competition: Analogue’s 3D project and a slew of emulation-based solutions create a crowded field. Each approach — software emulation, FPGA, or hybrid — attracts different buyers. ModRetro is positioning the M64 as a lower-cost, authentic option in that space. (androidauthority.com)
  • Community ties: Early signs indicate ModRetro is engaging with the MiSTer/FPGA community and possibly integrating proven N64 cores. If they contribute back or collaborate, that could elevate the platform’s credibility among enthusiasts. (timeextension.com)
  • Brand context: ModRetro’s founder, Palmer Luckey, is a visible and polarizing figure; that shapes public reaction and coverage even when the product itself is broadly appealing to retro fans. Expect PR noise to mingle with product discussion.

What to look for next

  • Detailed spec sheet: FPGA model, RAM configuration, video pipeline, and exact I/O functionality (what that Menu dial actually does).
  • Compatibility list: Which cartridges work out of the box, and how the system handles edge cases and expansion carts.
  • Controller feel tests: Stick drift prevention, deadzone behavior, and whether the recreated controller uses modern sensors or vintage-style potentiometers.
  • Public demos and hands-on reviews: Playable showings (like retro expos) or early review units will reveal whether the M64’s claims match reality. (androidauthority.com)

Quick highlights for skimmers

  • The M64 is an FPGA-based N64 tribute with a nearly identical recreation of the original trident controller.
  • ModRetro favors authenticity over modernized ergonomics.
  • Important technical and performance details remain unconfirmed; community FPGA cores may be part of the plan.
  • Intro pricing at $199 echoes the original N64 launch cost.

My take

Seeing the M64’s translucent shell and faithful controller design gives me nostalgia goosebumps — it’s a crisp visual promise. But hardware nostalgia is only worth so much on Instagram shots and product renders. The real story will be whether ModRetro’s engineering choices deliver a low-latency, high-compatibility experience that respects the weird quirks of N64 hardware. If they pull that off at the reported price, the M64 could be a delightful, more affordable competitor in a market that’s been hungry for faithful N64 hardware for years.

Sources



Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.

Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.

Related update: We recently published an article that expands on this topic: read the latest post.