Redesigned MacBook Pro with OLED will be significantly lighter, Bloomberg reports
Apple may introduce a redesigned MacBook Pro by the end of November. Bloomberg reports that the laptop will use a touchscreen Tandem OLED display and be significantly lighter than the current model, although no exact weight reduction was given.
Apple is preparing a redesigned MacBook Pro that could be introduced by the end of November, according to Mark Gurman’s Power On newsletter. The laptop is expected to become the first MacBook with a touchscreen and Tandem OLED display.
The main reported design change is a significant reduction in weight. Apple is said to be miniaturizing internal parts and rearranging components to make the computer easier to carry.
Gurman did not provide an exact weight. For comparison, the current 16-inch MacBook Pro weighs up to 4.8 pounds, while the 15-inch MacBook Air weighs 3.3 pounds.
Expected hardware features
Earlier reports have associated the redesigned MacBook Pro with OLED, touch input, Dynamic Island and a thinner chassis. Bloomberg also expects the machines to use Apple’s M5 Pro and M5 Max chips.
The newsletter says Apple has chosen to skip a higher-end M6 chip in order to accelerate the launch of M7. This remains a report about an expected configuration, not an official specification.
Apple is also reportedly preparing changes to macOS Golden Gate to support touch input and Dynamic Island. Those changes are expected to arrive with macOS 27.2.
What we know
- The redesigned MacBook Pro could arrive by the end of November.
- The laptop is expected to feature a touchscreen Tandem OLED display.
- Apple is reportedly reducing weight through smaller parts and a rearranged interior.
- The machines are expected to use M5 Pro and M5 Max chips rather than a higher-end M6 version.
Trust: Single source
- The story relies on one publisher. A second independent confirmation has not been established from the cited sources.
- Cited links: 1. Publisher groups: 1. Sources: 9to5Mac.
- This describes the available source evidence, not a probability of truth or a claim of manual editorial review.
View sources1
COMMUNITY
Discussion
Sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Start the discussion.