PDA

View Full Version : Apple "Spring Forward" Event



Raz0rEdge
03-09-2015, 01:54 PM
Apple's Spring Forward event is going to start shortly..

The Apple Watch is likely the center of this event, but there are likely going to be other things as well..

Check out Apple's office stream at Apple - Live - March 2015 Special Event (http://www.apple.com/live/2015-mar-event/). Numerous other tech sites are also live-blogging, and Ars (that I prefer) is here (http://live.arstechnica.com/apples-march-9-spring-forward-event/)..

Lets try to keep all the discussion related to this event in this one thread..

vansmith
03-09-2015, 03:41 PM
I'm sure the Apple Watch will sell by the millions (at some point) but, if you take a step back, why would anyone pay, at a minimum, $349, for something that is a limited way to interact with a phone that, at most, takes 3 seconds to retrieve (and is so much more capable)? You can call it "personal" as much as you want but it serves no useful function above and beyond what a phone does.

And, while I think those new MacBooks are gorgeous, Apple's really pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable performance for the dollar. I'm sorry, but $1,300 for a machine with 8GB of RAM and a 1.1GHz processor is ridiculous. I don't care how fast the flash memory is, a slow processor is still slow. Not everything has to be sacrificed for thinner machines and longer battery life. Some of us, myself included, would gladly take a machine that only lasts 5 hours but actually has a processor that doesn't have 2000 era speed specs (http://www.zdnet.com/article/1-ghz-intel-claims-it-was-first/). I get that it has turbo boost and I get that this is for reasons of battery usage but at some point, enough is enough. At least Apple didn't try to ship this with 128GB SSD, or, as I like to call it, the "16GB iPhone" of computer HD sizes.


Lets try to keep all the discussion related to this event in this one thread..No. How about the weather? Did you see the game last night? What is your favourite colour? :P

caribiner23
03-09-2015, 03:49 PM
I agree, the new MacBooks are beautiful. I can't wait to see one of these in the store, but I agree with the concerns about processing power. My wife has a 2011 11-inch MacBook Air that was awesome to carry around, but it was really underpowered once she started to use it seriously. (By the way, it's for sale if anyone is interested. :) )

I don't yet see the need for an Apple Watch in my life. I like being able to put my phone on "silent" and face-down so I can disconnect for a period.

Also, when I workout I don't want to be distracted (yes, I am sure you can take yourself off the grid while using it), so the only technology I wear is a Polar heart rate monitor and chest band.

When the demo was going on, all I could think about were the people who sit in meetings looking at their smartphones.. only now they'll be playing with their watches. :)

vansmith
03-09-2015, 03:51 PM
I like being able to put my phone on "silent" and face-down so I can disconnect for a period.This. Honestly, people have a hard enough time now detaching themselves from connected technology. This only makes it worse (this goes for all smartwatches as do my critiques above).

cwa107
03-09-2015, 03:58 PM
I'm sure the Apple Watch will sell by the millions (at some point) but, if you take a step back, why would anyone pay, at a minimum, $349, for something that is a limited way to interact with a phone that, at most, takes 3 seconds to retrieve (and is so much more capable)? You can call it "personal" as much as you want but it serves no useful function above and beyond what a phone does.

I couldn't agree more. The only compelling feature I could discern is the haptic notification functionality, but even that would probably get very annoying if it were used frequently enough. As it is, I have become hypersensitive to any kind of vibration now that I'm so used to my phone alerting me that way. Imagine having to discern between vibrations on your wrist and hip, lol.

Beyond that, I have to say I chuckled heartily at the price of the 'Edition' version. I have no doubt that there will be those that happily plunk down $10K on a 1.0 product (which given Apple's track record, will have a VERY short useful lifespan), but I have to imagine that most people with that kind of disposable income will scoff at a watch that doesn't come from Rolex or Tag Heuer. And no, as trendy as Apple is, it simply doesn't have that kind of brand cachet, in my opinion.




And, while I think those new MacBooks are gorgeous, Apple's really pushing the boundaries of what is acceptable performance for the dollar. I'm sorry, but $1,300 for a machine with 8GB of RAM and a 1.1GHz processor is ridiculous. I don't care how fast the flash memory is, a slow processor is still slow. Not everything has to be sacrificed for thinner machines and longer battery life. Some of us, myself included, would gladly take a machine that only lasts 5 hours but actually has a processor that doesn't have 2000 era speed specs (http://www.zdnet.com/article/1-ghz-intel-claims-it-was-first/). I get that it has turbo boost and I get that this is for reasons of battery usage but at some point, enough is enough. At least Apple didn't try to ship this with 128GB SSD, or, as I like to call it, the "16GB iPhone" of computer HD sizes.


All style and little substance seems to be the hallmark of the Tim Cook-era Apple. Wake my wallet up when they bring back upgradeable RAM and storage. Until then, $1300 for a NetBook does not get me excited.

pigoo3
03-09-2015, 04:00 PM
I find it very interesting that Apple has "resurrected" the "MacBook".:) Guess we'll have to see what the benchmark numbers stack up.

At this early point (not much info yet) it's difficult to know why someone would purchase an $1199 12" MacBook with a 1.1ghz dual core CPU. When for $1299 someone can get a 13" retina MacBook Pro with a 2.7ghz dual core CPU & IRIS graphics.

Thinness & lightness I guess are pretty important to some folks. Got to see those benchmark numbers ASAP on the new MacBooks.:)

- Nick

dbm
03-09-2015, 04:17 PM
I'm planning on getting an Apple Watch, although the price point has made me do a double-take. It does raise a big question around life-span and upgrade options. The watch I would like costs more than a SIM-free iPhone, which is saying something.

pigoo3
03-09-2015, 04:32 PM
I know many of us need to charge our smartphones everyday. I guess the change I'm having a problem with is having to charge a "watch" daily!

I know that this finally is the "Diick-Tracy" watch every kid wanted since the 1950's (it does a lot more than tell time)!;) Just seems that "watch" and "charge daily" is a new paradigm!:)

- Nick

p.s. And no...I did not misspell "Diick-Tracy"!;)

vansmith
03-09-2015, 04:41 PM
And no, as trendy as Apple is, it simply doesn't have that kind of brand cachet, in my opinion.This is crucial here - people who have that kind of income buy expensive watches because of the brand and the ways in which it signifies status (let's be honest here). An Apple Watch doesn't do this and while, I suppose, it might carry that kind of clout in the future, it certainly doesn't now.


All style and little substance seems to be the hallmark of the Tim Cook-era Apple. Wake my wallet up when they bring back upgradeable RAM and storage. Until then, $1300 for a NetBook does not get me excited.That, or the engineering effort is going into things to support the style element. The keynote is a perfect example of this - 90% of the effort exerted to accentuate the engineering effort was done in support of the "style narrative." Great, you re-engineered the keyboard so you can make your computers thinner. Wonderful, you engineered a smaller logic board to fit but in so doing, you made extensive compromises to the horsepower (it would be magnitudes more impressive if they shrunk the LB and gave it some power). Apple has tremendous engineering capabilities but they're focusing them in the wrong places.

I think this is best exemplified by a comparison with the Surface Pro 3, both spec'd to $1300 (remove the OS comparison here for a moment):

New MacBook: 13mm thick (at its thickest), 1.1 Ghz processor, 8GB of RAM, 12" screen, 9 hour battery, 256 SSD
Surface Pro 3: 9mm thick, 1.9Ghz i5, 8GB of RAM, 12" screen, 9 hour battery, 256 SSD

To say that you have to sacrifice power for that size is ridiculous because, well, you don't. Now, I realize that comparison has some faults but the point still stands - thinness doesn't have to be an excuse for compromise.


IAt this early point (not much info yet) it's difficult to know why someone would purchase an $1199 12" MacBook with a 1.1ghz dual core CPU. When for $1299 someone can get a 13" retina MacBook Pro with a 2.7ghz dual core CPU & IRIS graphics.Wow/cool factor and the thinness. I'm guessing either of those, or both, will be a major part of that decision.

canadiantowman
03-09-2015, 05:02 PM
I was waiting for the watch to come out and now, it has so much crap that comes with it. I didn't want a watch that could do all of that, I wanted to buy something to help me with getting more active in life. I'm going to buy a Fitbit and pocket the rest $$ for a rainy day or until the wife fines it.

cwa107
03-09-2015, 05:13 PM
I think this is best exemplified by a comparison with the Surface Pro 3, both spec'd to $1300 (remove the OS comparison here for a moment):

New MacBook: 13mm thick (at its thickest), 1.1 Ghz processor, 8GB of RAM, 12" screen, 9 hour battery, 256 SSD
Surface Pro 3: 9mm thick, 1.9Ghz i5, 8GB of RAM, 12" screen, 9 hour battery, 256 SSD

To say that you have to sacrifice power for that size is ridiculous because, well, you don't. Now, I realize that comparison has some faults but the point still stands - thinness doesn't have to be an excuse for compromise.

Wow/cool factor and the thinness. I'm guessing either of those, or both, will be a major part of that decision.

As much as I loathe the Surface Pro line because it represents all that was wrong with the tablet market before the iPad came around (and shows how out of touch MS still is), you can't argue with the value proposition. If only it didn't have a fan.

dtravis7
03-09-2015, 06:15 PM
I have a graphic design friend with a Surface Pro 3. She can do everything on that as fast as on her Soldered together MBP Retnia. The whole adobe suite flies on it. Her Macs now sit unused as she needs the small size where she has to do most of her work.

She laughed at the new so called Macbook. It's trying to be a tablet but it's not in any way and no Apple Tablet will run the applications she needs for her work.

I wonder if the MBP is next to go even slimmer with that new Powerhouse MINI Logic board and one port that charges!!!

Oh forgot to mention, for ONLY $79 more you can get a new USB 3c Port adapter to give you the ports Apple stole from the user!

chscag
03-09-2015, 06:33 PM
Guys, I couldn't agree more, the whole show was a let down. Well, at least Apple dropped the price on the Apple TV down to $69 (probably because they're not selling well). :)

caribiner23
03-09-2015, 06:34 PM
One thing we forgot to mention in this thread is the price reduction of AppleTV to $69.

That's pretty significant, but as Andy Ihnatko observed on TWiT, the AppleTV is still nowhere near as comprehensive an entertainment hub as a Roku.

Anyone care to chime in on that?

dtravis7
03-09-2015, 07:05 PM
These $79 dongles will add more ports to Apple's new MacBook (http://www.engadget.com/2015/03/09/apple-macbook-usb-c-dongle/)

I guess this makes it all fine! :D

oak1971
03-09-2015, 07:08 PM
I have Roku and Chromecast.

Roku has many channels, and many are good for nothing. Only use the Chromecast for youtube and couldn't tell you what else you can do on it.

Neither has me very excited. If Apple can get quality content and a good UI experience it could be huge.

vansmith
03-09-2015, 07:23 PM
As much as I loathe the Surface Pro line because it represents all that was wrong with the tablet market before the iPad came around (and shows how out of touch MS still is), you can't argue with the value proposition. If only it didn't have a fan.At a minimum, the SP3 highlights that you can get hardware that's reasonably powerful in such a small space. Granted, MS had to add in things that hurt the tablet factor (a fan certainly does mean that you have to use it in particular ways consciously). The SP3 is also awkward in trying to straddle that line between tablet and portable notebook/maybe desktop which is, I'm sure, why the specs are the way they are.

Speaking of fans, I wonder how well this thing will hold up to crunching data. You can get away with no fan on a tablet because not much really pushes it (relatively so) but this is still a notebook class machine (supposedly...).


Oh forgot to mention, for ONLY $79 more you can get a new USB 3c Port adapter to give you the ports Apple stole from the user!This really bothers me as well. What is someone supposed to do if they need a USB port, you know, to transfer stuff to an iOS device with speed (I say this last part because, as reliable as WiFi syncing has been, it's still painfully slow)? Or, what if I want to use an external monitor? How am I supposed to power that when using an external display sucks back the battery? A more important question might be, "why do I have to choose between charging and using peripherals?"

lclev
03-09-2015, 07:58 PM
Well for what it is worth, about the only thing appealing to me with the 12" macbook is the gold colored version. I am visual and love gold (hence my gold iPhone.) I also like the full size keyboard on it. But since I also love as much processor power as I can get that leaves the 12" macbook out for me. What where they thinking???? There is nothing unique or new about it. Did they have a meeting and someone yelled "less is more!" and everyone agreed? At least add a touch screen, even though I don't like them at all, but it would have been something different. Different is not found in removing even more ports!!!

As for the watch - I originally was considering one. I am an old school watch wearer (it is always good to know just how late you really are! ;D ) I was attracted to the ability to know when a text or call came in. I frequently move around at work and forget my iphone on my desk. We have grown accustom to using texting to reach each other in a big complex. Now I am thinking I will wait for the next generation? Or see how this one shakes out first.

Okay off my soap box - for now.

Lisa

vansmith
03-09-2015, 09:09 PM
I frequently move around at work and forget my iphone on my desk.Unless you're always within 60 metres of it (with no interference) or always have a strong WiFi signal, it wouldn't be much use. ;)

I know that I'm always critical of Apple's keynotes but I think what is especially disappointing this time was the excitement and eventual letdown I had when I realized that the non-pro MB was making a comeback. I'd love to have a solidly built MacBook that has better specs than an Air but one that isn't a pro (I don't need a retina display for example nor do I need awesome graphics capabilities or non-removable components for the sake of space). I don't have exceptional needs - the most strenuous activity my current MBP gets is compiling mobile apps and if that took a few extra seconds, I wouldn't be bothered at all. I want that in-between machine and I thought I had it until I became aware that the machine has specs that make me shake my head.

lclev
03-09-2015, 09:52 PM
Unless you're always within 60 metres of it (with no interference) or always have a strong WiFi signal, it wouldn't be much use. ;)

Well we have excellent WiFi in the building and a PW only access for staff (I know cause that is my job!) but I see your point and it is a good one.


I know that I'm always critical of Apple's keynotes but I think what is especially disappointing this time was the excitement and eventual letdown I had when I realized that the non-pro MB was making a comeback... I want that in-between machine and I thought I had it until I became aware that the machine has specs that make me shake my head.

But they are offering a GOLD model!!! ;D Anyway, I too just shook my head. Why such a dismal set of specs. It is beyond me. I expect new and innovating ideas that make everyone say "WOW!" That did not happen. I think they felt they had to come out with something to add to the watch hype so they decided to resurrect the macbook. For what target audience???? If they wanted a Chromebook rival they missed the mark in the price department. What a huge disappointment.

Lisa

vansmith
03-09-2015, 10:24 PM
Well we have excellent WiFi in the building and a PW only access for staff (I know cause that is my job!) but I see your point and it is a good one.If you have a solid connection, it might be fine. I only mentioned that as I've experienced "pervasive" Wi-Fi before where devices drop between APs which I suppose isn't a huge issue if the AW has quick reconnect times but it's still a pain.

Honestly though, if you often leave your phone in one place and have a quality connection available to you at all times, an AW might actually have use for you.


But they are offering a GOLD model!!! ;D Anyway, I too just shook my head. Why such a dismal set of specs. It is beyond me. I expect new and innovating ideas that make everyone say "WOW!" That did not happen. I think they felt they had to come out with something to add to the watch hype so they decided to resurrect the macbook. For what target audience???? If they wanted a Chromebook rival they missed the mark in the price department. What a huge disappointment.I admit that I've warmed to the gold colour - it's uniquely striking.

You raise an interesting point about target and I'm pretty sure it's targeted at the 90%+ users who browse the web and do some light text editing. Most of us who gripe about these machines are people who actually understand what's under the hood whereas most people will see the superficial things that benefit them (I say superficial but that's maybe not fair as a lighter notebook is always appreciated) and be delighted. This is where I think cwa107 has a really good point - this keynote was the perfect reflection of a "style over substance" speech. While I realize that a lot of engineering effort went into it, the effort went towards things that make it a less useful machine long term.

lclev
03-10-2015, 12:01 AM
If you have a solid connection, it might be fine. I only mentioned that as I've experienced "pervasive" Wi-Fi before where devices drop between APs

I have worked my very petite behind off to have my AP's hand off flawlessly. They do a really good job. Love my Engenius AP's


IYou raise an interesting point about target and I'm pretty sure it's targeted at the 90%+ users who browse the web and do some light text editing. Most of us who gripe about these machines are people who actually understand what's under the hood whereas most people will see the superficial things that benefit them (I say superficial but that's maybe not fair as a lighter notebook is always appreciated) and be delighted. This is where I think cwa107 has a really good point - this keynote was the perfect reflection of a "style over substance" speech. While I realize that a lot of engineering effort went into it, the effort went towards things that make it a less useful machine long term.

Great points! They are playing heavily on the "shiny, shiny" factor. Many will go for the hype and pretty. And we will be answering questions on the forum about why can't their new shiny macbook can't do some processor intensive whatever or where is the place to plug in the network cable or USB etc. :D

Lisa

chas_m
03-10-2015, 05:05 AM
I'm sorry, but $1,300 for a machine with 8GB of RAM and a 1.1GHz processor is ridiculous.

I like how you ignore the turboboost as though it doesn't exist. I know you mentioned it (dismissively), but you don't seem to be aware that Apple has been selling processors of around this speed for several years now -- in, as it happens, their single most popular Mac: the MacBook Air -- to no complaints about speed whatsoever.

The reason for this includes several factors, but among them:

1. The truth of the matter is that most of the time, computers are just waiting for input. It's a waste of energy to have a 4.0GHz machine just sitting there doing nothing while you read an article, not to mention the heat generated.

2. The speed is only 1.xGHz when it is sitting idle, it ramps up as needed, up to 2.7GHz (for the "1.1" model). When combined with sufficient RAM (and 8GB is more than sufficient for typical use) and SSDs -- well, pretty clearly people do not think the current MacBook Air (at 1.6GHz on an older, slower processor) has a "speed problem," and it would seem pretty unlikely that they will think that now.

3. This is where that incredible battery life comes from. People sure seem to like great battery life over nearly anything else. Except weight. Which is another area where this thing shines.

4. When one pulls one's head out of their power-user mentality and starts to observe and really think about how the target audience for this -- not me, and not you -- actually use this machine, the choices made there start to make a great deal more sense.

Guess what: Apple didn't make this machine for the likes of you. Or me. You just need a little imagination and social study to see who this machine is aimed at, and then "look through their eyes" at their needs and how well Apple has been meeting them so far.

As I say: the MacBook Air (to which all of your MB criticisms equally apply) is Apple's *single best-selling Mac line.* Maybe there's a reason for that that us "MBP at a minimum" type users can't (or just choose not to) see.

I can come up with some nitpicks about the MacBook myself, believe me, but value for money isn't one of them. Apple has proven without fail that they provide good value for money. I don't think -- and you probably don't think if you'd quit being so reactionary -- that that tradition of theirs has suddenly come to a flying stop.

If you really genuinely think that the current MacBook at "1.1GHz" performs the same as a 1.1GHz Windows PC from 15 years ago, I'd be very interested in talking to you in PM about a little bet I'd like to arrange.

chas_m
03-10-2015, 05:36 AM
Think I'll just leave this link here for people who are clearly "out of their league" when assessing how much a watch is worth:

Amazon.com: hublot - Hublot / Watches / Men: Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry (http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UTF8&bbn=6358539011&camp=1789&creative=390957&keywords=hublot&linkCode=ur2&qid=1425835003&rh=n%3A7141123011%2Cn%3A7147441011%2Cn%3A635853901 1%2Ck%3Ahublot%2Cp_89%3AHublot&tag=daringfirebal-20&linkId=CXEWK6OUTOXIBGMZ)

dtravis7
03-10-2015, 05:54 AM
Chas, you are DEAD Wrong. Find any proper test on the best of the NEW Soldered together Minis with Dual Core CPU and run a benchmark with more than one thread. this is 2015. we are not running one single thread app like the Atari ST did in the 80s and early 90s. You will find that in any multi thread app the OLDER i7 Mini will totally BLOW away the BEST of the new MINI line. Well I have news for you, that new Macbook is a LOT slower than the best mini. You are one of the first I have seen all day PRAISE that underpowered Fanless machine that costs way more than other systems that tear it apart. You think it's progress, I say it going backwards. Some TABLETS of today are faster than that new so called Macbook.

Say what you wish but sir, you are wrong. Apple could make a bottle with a bad smell and you would probably say they did good! Sorry, it's getting old.

Nighthawk4
03-10-2015, 07:15 AM
$1300 for an underpowered laptop? You could get an iWatch for that :-)


Am I correct in the understanding that the watch doesn't do anything without an iPhone as well?!!

What is the point of that?

dtravis7
03-10-2015, 08:02 AM
$1300 for an underpowered laptop? You could get an iWatch for that :-)


Am I correct in the understanding that the watch doesn't do anything without an iPhone as well?!!

What is the point of that?

you can get 3 of the Stainless Steal version of the iWatch for that price!!!! :D

I believe the watch does some things without the iphone 6 but not things that require the internet. I am guessing on this as I am really not into a watch like that.

cwa107
03-10-2015, 10:23 AM
Think I'll just leave this link here for people who are clearly "out of their league" when assessing how much a watch is worth:

Amazon.com: hublot - Hublot / Watches / Men: Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry (http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UTF8&bbn=6358539011&camp=1789&creative=390957&keywords=hublot&linkCode=ur2&qid=1425835003&rh=n%3A7141123011%2Cn%3A7147441011%2Cn%3A635853901 1%2Ck%3Ahublot%2Cp_89%3AHublot&tag=daringfirebal-20&linkId=CXEWK6OUTOXIBGMZ)

No comparison whatsoever. Thoses watches have a useful life of DECADES, not years (or n the case of a v1.0 Apple product, more likely months).

pigoo3
03-10-2015, 10:34 AM
Think I'll just leave this link here for people who are clearly "out of their league" when assessing how much a watch is worth:

Amazon.com: hublot - Hublot / Watches / Men: Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry (http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UTF8&bbn=6358539011&camp=1789&creative=390957&keywords=hublot&linkCode=ur2&qid=1425835003&rh=n%3A7141123011%2Cn%3A7147441011%2Cn%3A635853901 1%2Ck%3Ahublot%2Cp_89%3AHublot&tag=daringfirebal-20&linkId=CXEWK6OUTOXIBGMZ)

Come on chas…this isn't a proper analogy. Linking some extremely expensive high end watches is no way to justify the price of the new iWatch as affordable.

Here's a REAL everyday watch that the common man might wear. A digital wrist watch for $15-$20:

Marathon by Timex Men's Digital Full-Size Black and Red Watch - Walmart.com (http://www.walmart.com/ip/Marathon-by-Timex-Men-s-Digital-Full-Size-Black-and-Red-Watch/38229914)

I know that the new Apple iWatch does a lot more. Which is why the iWatch shouldn't be compared to a low-cost $15-$20 or a high-end $40,000+ watch.

- Nick

caribiner23
03-10-2015, 10:37 AM
No comparison whatsoever. Thoses watches have a useful life of DECADES, not years (or n the case of a v1.0 Apple product, more likely months).

Amen to that.

When I read this, I thought about the two antique (and still working beautifully) radios in my family room: one was made in 1939, the other in 1957.

In a closet in that same room is a box containing what we affectionately call "The iPod Graveyard." That box has my first 15 GB 3G iPod, my wife's pink 1G iPod Mini, a couple of first-generation Shuffles, a dead Nano, and most recently my 3G iPod Touch. When I think of the fanfare that came with each of those products' introductions and their current value--- even if they were working-- it makes me look at any new tech product announcement with a different eye.

As for my wrist, I'll continue wearing the Bulova/Caravelle watch my parents bought me for my high school graduation. I'll keep the tech in my pocket and on my desk.

vansmith
03-10-2015, 11:42 AM
I like how you ignore the turboboost as though it doesn't exist.Except that I did acknowledge it.


I know you mentioned it (dismissively), but you don't seem to be aware that Apple has been selling processors of around this speed for several years now -- in, as it happens, their single most popular Mac: the MacBook Air -- to no complaints about speed whatsoever.The length of time that something is sold doesn't justify its existence. Coors has been selling Coors Light for years and still calls it a quality "beer." As for the speed of an MBA, it doesn't take long to find people making complaints (here (https://discussions.apple.com/thread/6612598), here (http://machmachines.com/macbook-air-running-slow-tutorial-fix/), here (http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/apple-notebooks/265557-slow-working-macbook-air.html) and here (http://www.justanswer.com/mac-computers/6hpur-macbookair-suddenly-slow-takes-4-6-seconds.html) were all found in two minutes of searching). I'm not trying to say that everyone needs desktop class processors but scaling back has its limits.


1. The truth of the matter is that most of the time, computers are just waiting for input. It's a waste of energy to have a 4.0GHz machine just sitting there doing nothing while you read an article, not to mention the heat generated.You're right but I also wasn't asking for a 4GHz processor. You can't take my argument for a faster processor to its extreme and suggest that's what I want when I didn't ask for that. In fact, my comparison with the SP3 rested on that latter device being a much better bet and it's still a sub 2Ghz machine.


2. The speed is only 1.xGHz when it is sitting idle, it ramps up as needed, up to 2.7GHz (for the "1.1" model). When combined with sufficient RAM (and 8GB is more than sufficient for typical use) and SSDs -- well, pretty clearly people do not think the current MacBook Air (at 1.6GHz on an older, slower processor) has a "speed problem," and it would seem pretty unlikely that they will think that now.If you want to count 8GB as a sufficient amount, so be it. I take it then that you disagree with these people who make the case for 8GB as the (implied) minimum (see here (http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/os-x-operating-system/321154-how-far-upgrade.html#post1638121) or here (http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/switcher-hangout/320151-solid-state-drives-2011-mbp.html#post1632227) and here (http://www.mac-forums.com/forums/os-x-operating-system/321187-have-lion-os-x-10-7-5-need-10-8-5-sim-city.html#post1638363))?


3. This is where that incredible battery life comes from. People sure seem to like great battery life over nearly anything else. Except weight. Which is another area where this thing shines.The SP3 has the same battery life, is thinner and has more than one port. It's also more powerful. Relatively so, then, my argument about hardware value for money stands.


4. When one pulls one's head out of their power-user mentality and starts to observe and really think about how the target audience for this -- not me, and not you -- actually use this machine, the choices made there start to make a great deal more sense.Thanks for the underhanded criticism, always appreciated. Back to the topic: selling less hardware than is needed because you can justify selling less to people than you can actually pack in the machine is not a sufficient justification for the kinds of hardware being sold. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.


Guess what: Apple didn't make this machine for the likes of you. Or me. You just need a little imagination and social study to see who this machine is aimed at, and then "look through their eyes" at their needs and how well Apple has been meeting them so far.Two underhanded comments in a row. Thanks. I find it interesting that the reason this machine is justified is because I lack imagination and the ability to take the perspective of those who the machine is targeted at. Is this machine really so indefensible on its technical merits that a critique of the critics involves attacking their inability to "imagine" what use the machine has?


As I say: the MacBook Air (to which all of your MB criticisms equally apply) is Apple's *single best-selling Mac line.* Maybe there's a reason for that that us "MBP at a minimum" type users can't (or just choose not to) see.Sales numbers mean nothing and you know that.


I can come up with some nitpicks about the MacBook myself, believe me, but value for money isn't one of them. Apple has proven without fail that they provide good value for money.You're the only one then...


I don't think -- and you probably don't think if you'd quit being so reactionary -- that that tradition of theirs has suddenly come to a flying stop.There's underhanded comment number three. It's interesting that my response is "reactionary" when the same could be said about your continued, almost strident, defence of everything Apple. Perhaps that's why you seem to be resorting to criticizing me.



If you really genuinely think that the current MacBook at "1.1GHz" performs the same as a 1.1GHz Windows PC from 15 years ago, I'd be very interested in talking to you in PM about a little bet I'd like to arrange.


Think I'll just leave this link here for people who are clearly "out of their league" when assessing how much a watch is worth:

Amazon.com: hublot - Hublot / Watches / Men: Clothing, Shoes & Jewelry (http://www.amazon.com/s/?_encoding=UTF8&bbn=6358539011&camp=1789&creative=390957&keywords=hublot&linkCode=ur2&qid=1425835003&rh=n%3A7141123011%2Cn%3A7147441011%2Cn%3A635853901 1%2Ck%3Ahublot%2Cp_89%3AHublot&tag=daringfirebal-20&linkId=CXEWK6OUTOXIBGMZ)My analogy was flawed (that I'll admit) but your defence of that which I critique is to make a flawed analogy? You don't honestly think that the AW and those watches are in the same class do you?

Raz0rEdge
03-10-2015, 12:13 PM
$1300 for an underpowered laptop? You could get an iWatch for that :-)


Am I correct in the understanding that the watch doesn't do anything without an iPhone as well?!!

What is the point of that?

Just like the Android Wear or Samsung's Galaxy Wear doesn't do anything without an Android phone attached to it, the Apple Watch is tethered to an iPhone for its access. The Apple Watch is an extension of some of the iPhones capabilities, it is not a replacement, was never meant to be..

The thing about the Apple Watch is that its a platform that can grow with the use of its sensors. It is likely that there are things stuffed in there that aren't advertised or exposed to developers/users yet. But as time goes on, you'll see new uses and features that come alive.

The fitness aspect of it is quite nice and being able to do the common things from the iPhone on my rest is interesting. Will likely have to play with it to see if the cost is worth it.

pigoo3
03-10-2015, 12:51 PM
It is likely that there are things stuffed in there that aren't advertised or exposed to developers/users yet. But as time goes on, you'll see new uses and features that come alive.

I was reading some of the details from the Apple live event yesterday…and there seems to be some pretty interesting/awesome apps being developed (or apps developed and ready to go) via the Apple Healthkit.:)

- Nick

dtravis7
03-10-2015, 01:46 PM
This is also wonderful news. Just read a report on ARS.

"As Apple said, to make the system this small it had to make the logic board tiny. It’s even more tightly integrated (and less upgradeable) than the current MacBook Airs. Everything from the RAM to the CPU to the SSD is soldered to the motherboard—while intrepid MacBook Air owners can at least open up their laptops and swap out the drive, the new MacBook will have the specs you order it with forever. RAM starts and ends at 8GB, and you can get either a 256GB or 512GB SSD."

So what if that HDD stick dies? Throw out the Macbook and buy another?

caribiner23
03-10-2015, 02:05 PM
So what if that HDD stick dies? Throw out the Macbook and buy another?

Ahh, you've hit the magic button. It starts with "Apple" and ends with "Care." That way, you have three years of coverage, and besides, you'll want to upgrade after that time has passed anyway, right? :) :) :)

Apple doesn't show pricing for MacBook AppleCare yet, but assume it will add about $250 to what you'll pay for the computer if you want 3-year coverage.

chscag
03-10-2015, 02:14 PM
So what if that HDD stick dies? Throw out the Macbook and buy another?

Good one Dennis, a throw away MacBook. My old 2008 white MacBook was at least upgradeable. ;D

pigoo3
03-10-2015, 02:32 PM
So what if that HDD stick dies? Throw out the Macbook and buy another?

I know that the new MacBook only has one port. Maybe if the internal storage dies…you boot the thing from an external drive. And that external drive becomes a permanent dongle! ;)

Or maybe you just duct-tape it to the bottom of the MacBook! lol;)

- Nick

p.s. If I'm going to purchase an "disposable" computer. It's gonna have to cost a lot less!

dbm
03-10-2015, 03:22 PM
Extra info:The Apple Watch Battery Is Replaceable | TechCrunch (http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/10/the-apple-watch-battery-is-replaceable/?ncid=rss)

This helps ease my concerns slightly. I'll be pre-ordering one. In many ways it's safer than buying one in a store because distance-selling laws mean it can be returned no questions asked for the first 7 days; enough time to see if the purchase is a horrendous mistake.

The watch does do some things without an iPhone tethered. We know it can store 2GB of music and 75MB of pictures. You can connect it to Bluetooth earphones. It will presumably still remind you of any synchronised reminders or calendar events.

For me, the use cases are primarily using the watch as a remote for all my Apple kit in the house, having genuinely silent notifications and the ability to discretely be notified about emails and texts in a work situation. It will be interesting to use it for Siri in the car which is currently tricky as the phone tries to use my Bluetooth dongle (for music streaming) which has no mic.

I want to buy one for my wife - she is terrible for not hearing her phone ring when it is in her bag, and that drives me nuts! I've been waiting for something like this to buy her, though I know she is unlikely to like the Gen 1 watch as it is quite thick and she like a slender watch.

dtravis7
03-10-2015, 03:28 PM
You guys are great! :D Grin

Checco
03-10-2015, 07:05 PM
I'll join chas here in voting for the MB.

Looking at it from the perspective of an elegant, highly portable notebook, I think it's decent value. Style, quality and engineering are important to me and I'm willing to pay a little for it.

While raw HP has its place, it can come at a good premium. I have an upgradeable 2012 15" MBP that is my primary (production) machine and although I love working on it, carrying it around is a chore - it feels like it weighs ton. For this very reason, I bought an 11" 2014 MBA last year and I love it too...I don't try and use it as a workhorse, but when traveling it's perfect - even just when out for a morning coffee. I can respond to mails, type up Word docs, check on my portfolio, etc, without paying the weight premium. Not to mention that battery life...

I have no intention of ever upgrading the MBA and I expect decent reliability from a notebook that's solid state, apart from a fan or two. Advances in technology provide benefit: efficiency, reliability, weight and cost, amongst others. Some may not like the integrated approach, but it is a good way forward. In our business, where we design electronics, we take a similar approach to integrated boards, it brings benefits both to us and customers. Although in the case of the this new MB, the price benefit isn't immediately apparent. This can be seen in the reduced pricing of the MBAs though and in my view the slightly higher MB pricing is due to appeal and cost recovery.

In terms of failures, Apple will likely just replace the entire logic board and I'll guess the cost will be similar, if not slightly more expensive than a comparable current model. Why? Firstly, the obvious economy of scale (which is to the extreme in this case as the notebook is made up of "one" big electronic component!) and secondly, I think Apple are quite fond of retaining their customers.

I understand your point of view, but I think we need to appreciate that technology is changing and although it seems quite radical, it is the logical and natural way forward. There is another interesting parallel here. Smartphones are either bought outright or are purchased over a couple of years with a hardware subsidy on a contract. The premium smartphones (let's use iPhone 6) cost about 25% less than an 11" MBA where I'm from. For the 6+, the difference is half that - for the 16GB. Now hang on a sec - a device that can't be upgraded, is expensive to repair and is generally kept for two years costs close to a MBA? Just something to think about when considering value.

Finally, about the performance. Everything is meant to be green today: how many computers sit there "idle" collectively chewing huge amounts of energy? Sure, one may have to wait a couple of seconds more here or there for an operation to complete...are we that coupled to the clock that a few secs make a difference in this existence? I'm certainly not. My vote goes for a more efficient device.

chas_m
03-10-2015, 11:51 PM
Say what you wish but sir, you are wrong.


Tell you what. Let's check back on this thread in a year, and see where the stock price is, how many Macs Apple is selling, and what the best-selling portable from them is. I'm betting you're the one that's wrong, and that the answers will be up, up, and the MacBook.

If I'm wrong, I'll say so. If you're wrong, you owe me an apology.

Deal?

chas_m
03-11-2015, 12:02 AM
Are those people still not "getting it:" I put the costly watch link in this thread just to show that there is a market for a $10,000-plus watch. This is not meant to be a direct comparison nor justification for Apple Watch pricing. It's just there to make you aware of a market that some of you clearly weren't aware of, but does not deserve your ridicule just because you can't afford it or don't think it's worth it to you.

Most of the people reading this message have some stupid, pointless, or otherwise niche obsession or interest that has cost them, over time, far more money than an Apple Watch ever will. We don't sit around making fun of you because of it.

dtravis7
03-11-2015, 01:47 AM
Tell you what. Let's check back on this thread in a year, and see where the stock price is, how many Macs Apple is selling, and what the best-selling portable from them is. I'm betting you're the one that's wrong, and that the answers will be up, up, and the MacBook.

If I'm wrong, I'll say so. If you're wrong, you owe me an apology.

Deal?

You are misquoting me. I said you were WRONG on the performance of that 1.1 Ghz CPU in the thing and I am not wrong!!! :D You are too much! :D

The sheep will always follow apple, so I am sure they will have even more money in a year, but that does not make that 1.1Ghz CPU and overall performance of that machine a good deal for the price.

dbm
03-11-2015, 05:34 AM
Many things cost more than is justifiable based solely on components. A friend of mine who got divorced sold his gold wedding ring. No one buys second hand wedding rings, so you only get scrap value for it, which was about a tenth of the price he had paid just three years earlier. The 'Edition' Watch is clearly intended to be a status symbol but it is not unprecedented: Four Vertu Gold Cell Phone Unveiled (http://www.extravaganzi.com/four-vertu-gold-cell-phone-unveiled-in-japan/). I wouldn't buy one, but there are people who will.

I am unsure about the Apple Watch, but I know that it has potential and I want it to succeed. If no one buys the gen 1 product, there won't be a gen 2. I don't know the figures for the iPhone 5C but it only had the 12 month run so presumably that was considered a failure by Apple and there won't be any more.

The only bind is that the model I want is the space black steel one...

vansmith
03-11-2015, 01:58 PM
Tell you what. Let's check back on this thread in a year, and see where the stock price is, how many Macs Apple is selling, and what the best-selling portable from them is. I'm betting you're the one that's wrong, and that the answers will be up, up, and the MacBook.

If I'm wrong, I'll say so. If you're wrong, you owe me an apology.

Deal?I see that you're sticking with the "the more something sells, the better it is." I'm not really sure how that's a defensible argument but so be it. I'm intrigued why finances trump technical merit when talking about technology but everyone is entitled to (flawed) justifications that they prefer.


It's just there to make you aware of a market that some of you clearly weren't aware of, but does not deserve your ridicule just because you can't afford it or don't think it's worth it to you.I'm sure we're all well aware that you can buy products in any category that are beyond our respective income levels. And really, we aren't allowed to critique things because we feel as though it's too expensive? I take it then that you'd reserve judgment for a $100,000 Android phone or a $100,000 Windows machine because "you can't afford it or don't think it's worth it to you."

Bottom line: cost of something does not insulate it from critique. If you gave me a $2 steak and a $10,000 steak, I'd subject both to my sense of taste and pleasure.


Most of the people reading this message have some stupid, pointless, or otherwise niche obsession or interest that has cost them, over time, far more money than an Apple Watch ever will. We don't sit around making fun of you because of it.Seeing as how the watch isn't available, it's hard to mock people for owning something that they can't. Secondly, no one is making fun of anyone who wants a watch. No one. We've been discussing the watch as a piece of technology, not as something personal (again, however much Cook wants to position it as "personal," it's still just a piece of technology).

I know you ardently defend Apple but I'm curious to know why this is so personal for you.

ryeh20
03-11-2015, 08:26 PM
i've read through the 3 pages and been to the Apple site and still I wonder, Can the watch surf the internet?

dbm
03-11-2015, 08:39 PM
I don't think it can. Watching a demo where the Apple Genius zooms out on the Watch home screen you can see literally dozens of apps but none show the Safari symbol.

ryeh20
03-11-2015, 09:04 PM
I can see "Watch" versions 2 and 3 etc, coming because this one is a "baby" in design. I can justify 8 or 900 dollars for a disposable iPhone because my carrier pickes up the cost if I sign a 2 or 3 year service contract. By the time the contract ends i'm excited about the new innovations my new free phone has. This will not be the case with the Watch. I have a few very expensive watches, that will last a lifetime, and always have some re-sale value in the future. I find it hard to wrap my head around this first version, at this price point, a product that is obsolete before it even hits the shelves.

cwa107
03-12-2015, 12:55 PM
Some of you will appreciate this, many of you will not. But I just about lost it....

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153223388759063

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 01:02 PM
Some of you will appreciate this, many of you will not. But I just about lost it....

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153223388759063

You just made my morning! :D

vansmith
03-12-2015, 01:34 PM
I imagine that the experience wasn't far off (although that's much funnier). I imagine someone must have pointed out how limited the machine was in spite of an executive that probably said, "screw it, build it...the profit margins are too high to care about trivial details..."

cwa107
03-12-2015, 01:39 PM
I imagine that the experience wasn't far off (although that's much funnier). I imagine someone must have pointed out how limited the machine was in spite of an executive that probably said, "screw it, build it...the profit margins are too high to care about trivial details..."

Agreed. And they know that there is a certain segment of apologists (ahem) that will buy anything with an Apple logo on it. So, why not?

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 01:41 PM
Agreed. And they know that there is a certain segment of apologists (ahem) that will buy anything with an Apple logo on it. So, why not?



And the Logo does not even Glow any longer! Bummer! :D

pigoo3
03-12-2015, 01:41 PM
Some of you will appreciate this, many of you will not. But I just about lost it....

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10153223388759063

Looks like a disgruntled employee to me. I don't think that the "engineer" person (guy with mustache & missing 50% of his teeth). Can say those things (and in the manner he said them)…and still keep his job (or maybe he lost it prior to the TV show).

- Nick

cwa107
03-12-2015, 02:24 PM
Looks like a disgruntled employee to me. I don't think that the "engineer" person (guy with mustache & missing 50% of his teeth). Can say those things (and in the manner he said them)…and still keep his job (or maybe he lost it prior to the TV show).

- Nick

I'm pretty sure the whole thing was satire.

pigoo3
03-12-2015, 02:49 PM
I'm pretty sure the whole thing was satire.

Ok…that makes me feel better.:) Not being familiar with the show's format…or what the setup info was for the "interview"…I wasn't 100% sure.

I was thinking if it was real…Apple must have a pretty bad dental plan!;)

- Nick

Checco
03-12-2015, 05:40 PM
I imagine that the experience wasn't far off (although that's much funnier). I imagine someone must have pointed out how limited the machine was in spite of an executive that probably said, "screw it, build it...the profit margins are too high to care about trivial details..."

Do you have have a clue as to the time, effort, thought and money it takes to design a notebook like that? There are many better alternatives if short-term profit what Apple is after.

This is clearly the first Apple product that:

a. Isn't cheap.
b. Takes "bold" steps in omitting aging technology.
c. Adds new features that provide a better experience.
d. Is made well, using quality materials.

Since it's so unique wrt the above, this MacBook must have profit written all over it.

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 05:51 PM
5 things Apple didn't say about the new MacBook (http://mashable.com/2015/03/09/5-things-apple-new-macbook/)

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 05:52 PM
you saying the MagSafe is Aging tech? Ever trip over your power adapter cord on a PC and have it hit the ground?

cwa107
03-12-2015, 06:46 PM
Do you have have a clue as to the time, effort, thought and money it takes to design a notebook like that? There are many better alternatives if short-term profit what Apple is after.

This is clearly the first Apple product that:

a. Isn't cheap.
b. Takes "bold" steps in omitting aging technology.
c. Adds new features that provide a better experience.
d. Is made well, using quality materials.

Since it's so unique wrt the above, this MacBook must have profit written all over it.

Please tell me you're kidding.

Checco
03-12-2015, 07:15 PM
you saying the MagSafe is Aging tech? Ever trip over your power adapter cord on a PC and have it hit the ground?

No, not the MagSafe. But in my view, the aim of the MB is to run unplugged when in use and charge on the desk at night - it's ultra-portable, think iPad. Primary function trumps it.


Please tell me you're kidding.

Nope. Of course they want to make some profit (is that not the definition of what a business is?), but it's not this sinister profit-above-all as is portrayed.

vansmith
03-12-2015, 07:15 PM
Do you have have a clue as to the time, effort, thought and money it takes to design a notebook like that?I could spend a whole lot of time and effort making a loaf of bread that tastes disgusting. Suffice it to say, effort and time do not correspond perfectly to quality nor should that ever be an excuse or reason to be insulated from critique.


There are many better alternatives if short-term profit what Apple is after.Perhaps but I don't see how that discredits my suggestion that profit is the ultimate goal. After all, this is a corporation and corporations do not make things for any reason other than to make money.


This is clearly the first Apple product that:

a. Isn't cheap.No it's not. In fact, we've been discussing the cost of the Apple Watch in this very thread and that's hardly the only example.


b. Takes "bold" steps in omitting aging technology.No it's not. One example is the removal of the optical drive a couple of years back (http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/10/28/opinion-imac-optical-media/).


c. Adds new features that provide a better experience.At best, that's a subjective assertion. In fact, I could very well argue that the remove of every port but one (and one that is hardly supported all that well right now) makes this a significantly less enjoyable experience in the short term.


d. Is made well, using quality materials.Are you saying that Apple has never made a quality product before?


Since it's so unique wrt the above, this MacBook must have profit written all over it.At no point did I say that its uniqueness clearly signals that the MB is designed purely for profit. While I do agree that this is designed to generate profit, as is absolutely everything Apple sells, my case has nothing to do with the design of the device itself.

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 07:53 PM
I keep my ipad and now Note Plugged in when by an outlet. So that does not affect me. They could have easily kept that same size and incorporated the MagSafe still.

Checco
03-12-2015, 07:59 PM
I could spend a whole lot of time and effort making a loaf of bread that tastes disgusting. Suffice it to say, effort and time do not correspond perfectly to quality nor should that ever be an excuse or reason to be insulated from critique.

You missed the point. Effort and time in my view indicate something deeper than just profit, I.e. The desire to produce a great product.


Perhaps but I don't see how that discredits my suggestion that profit is the ultimate goal. After all, this is a corporation and corporations do not make things for any reason other than to make money.

We've argued this here before. Businesses must make profit, but successful (and lasting) ones are those that do what they do best and let the money follow - I know that first hand. Sure, money is necessary, but it's extremely shallow. If you're truly passionate about anything you'll understand what I mean.


No it's not. In fact, we've been discussing the cost of the Apple Watch in this very thread and that's hardly the only example.

No it's not. One example is the removal of the optical drive a couple of years back (http://www.idownloadblog.com/2012/10/28/opinion-imac-optical-media/).

That's my point: this MB is very much an Apple product.



Are you saying that Apple has never made a quality product before?

No, see above.



At best, that's a subjective assertion. In fact, I could very well argue that the remove of every port but one (and one that is hardly supported all that well right now) makes this a significantly less enjoyable experience in the short term.


Just think about this for a moment. Many people "need" an ultra-portable device that gives a full day of autonomy, which this device does quite nicely. By definition, ultra-portable means that you'll be using it out-and-about and won't need to plug it into 57 peripherals. As I mentioned earlier in the post, I bought an 11" MBA specifically for this purpose. I chose the 11" over the 13" because it's smaller/lighter, i.e. more portable and certainly a dream to carry around when compared to my 15" MBP. Yes, it has fewer ports, way less HP, a smaller screen, etc, but that's exactly why I bought it. I don't think I'm alone in my needs.

A different/new port? Did you forget about the Lightning port? Also, seeing as it is a new port, when would be the appropriate time to adopt it? Chicken and egg.

Now, let's think about the iPad for a second. It's a nice consumption device, but it's quite difficult to be productive on it. Just have a look at the top apps on the App Store, games and more games. Again, I know first hand, because I bought the MBA when I already owned an iPad 4. Plus, sales are dropping - people are staring to see its very real limitations. What the new MB does is bring the two a little closer. The Retina display, new touchpad and compactness of the device make them fairly similar...not to mention a single port. Sure, it costs more, but look at the utility: better display, full (improved) keyboard, touchpad (with a new API), not to mention greater storage space and a full desktop OS.

So in summary then, if you need or prefer desktop-class computers, then the MB is not for you, simple. But that doesn't mean that the MB is a crappy product, people have different needs, desires and requirements, simple.

Checco
03-12-2015, 08:08 PM
I keep my ipad and now Note Plugged in when by an outlet. So that does not affect me. They could have easily kept that same size and incorporated the MagSafe still.

Possibly. But that would've meant a MagSafe and a USB-C port and in this case, space is at a premium - ultraportable. It's just a different class of computer, as is the iPad...no MagSafe there...

dtravis7
03-12-2015, 08:21 PM
Prove to me the Macbook can keep up with the i5 and i7 in the Surface Pro 3. I have a graphic designer friend who uses the whole adobe suite. She developed an health issue and needs portability. She was using her 15" RMBP then got the Surface Pro 3. She sees no difference in speed with the Adobe apps doing the very advanced work she does.

I will almost bet $$$ that 1.1 Ghz Mobile cpu in that Macbook would NOT keep up with what she does.

Dell just came out with a very slim machine like the Macbook with 2 usb 3.1c ports, even a card reader, so it can be done and the reviews are quite good on it also.

You can say but it does not run OSX? After Yosemite and all the issues and still WiFi issues after 2 fixes, I am starting not to care anymore if the machine runs OSX or not!

Checco
03-13-2015, 03:45 AM
Prove to me the Macbook can keep up with the i5 and i7 in the Surface Pro 3. I have a graphic designer friend who uses the whole adobe suite. She developed an health issue and needs portability. She was using her 15" RMBP then got the Surface Pro 3. She sees no difference in speed with the Adobe apps doing the very advanced work she does.

I'm glad to hear that your friend found a solution that works for her. She needed mobility and power and she found it in the Surface, great. But does that means everyone has the same need?



I will almost bet $$$ that 1.1 Ghz Mobile cpu in that Macbook would NOT keep up with what she does.

I agree and would be willing to bet that it will not keep up with an i5 or i7, but like I mentioned, that's not the point. Again, my MBA isn't anywhere near my 15" MBP, but I'm very happy with it for what it's used for. The right tool for the job.



Dell just came out with a very slim machine like the Macbook with 2 usb 3.1c ports, even a card reader, so it can be done and the reviews are quite good on it also.

Good for Dell, probably the only Windows PC maker that I'd consider. Honestly, the second USB port is nice, possibly, but the card reader? I think its value is debatable, as it's likely used by a very small proportion of people. And who would that be? In my view, photographers and again is this type of PC a photo-processing workhorse? In my view a traditional USB would be better value than the card reader.



You can say but it does not run OSX? After Yosemite and all the issues and still WiFi issues after 2 fixes, I am starting not to care anymore if the machine runs OSX or not!
Okay, well then it's clearly not the machine for you. Different people have different tastes and needs, for example the Surface Pro you mentioned: I'd use it as a paperweight or a door stop. But it works for others...

One final point, which is going to create a big storm. I don't have the answer, but I'm going to put the question out there. You seem to have a fairly intense dislike for new Apple products and their OS. For a site that meant to be pro-Apple or for Apple-lovers (bit of both?), is it me or is it strange to have mods/admins that bash the products so much? Sure, objective discussion is what it's all about, but fairly strong dislike...I don't know.

dtravis7
03-13-2015, 06:51 AM
On your last question, Just because I am staff here does not mean I am blind to facts. I have never been a Cool Aid drinker for either side. Give me stability, reliability and performance and I will stand behind it! That is where in the last especially 1-2 years I have seen Apple slipping.

Also on the Macbook, if the price point was lower, say $800-900 I would not be saying many negative things. For it's price I expect more and will forever miss the mag safe as well as a few other things missing from most macs today.

Another example as I and MANY others have been very hard on the new Minis. Reason? Because for the same price point they are not the machines they used to be a year before. That is very sad. I will say though for $499 for the 1.4 ghz Mini, I still feel if you love OSX and are poor it's a excellent deal. The first Mini was no ground breaker either with that 1.25 Ghz G4 CPU, but for $499 it opened the door for many to try and love OSX (including me as before that machine I had older way obsolete Macs). BUT for $1000 for the top end Mini I am not very happy with it's overall performance for that price.

As far as Yosemite, ask a lot of Devs about the Wifi and other issues. It's very machine specific and only some models are affected. My imac which is early 2008 is not affected at all but my friends much newer I5 13" MBP 2012 is and causes him a lot of pain. Apple is getting sloppy in my view. I have used every single OSX from 10.2 Jaguar from the first day they were released and never seen so many issues that after 2 updates are still there.

BTW, I warned my friend with the MBP to stick with Mavericks will all WiFi issues were solved but he did not listen and did no TM Backup either. Sad.

Also another note, I am a tester for apple and am currently testing 10.10.3 with the new Photos App. I am just being honest at what I see happening and am far from the only one that sees what I am seeing.

cwa107
03-13-2015, 08:49 AM
One final point, which is going to create a big storm. I don't have the answer, but I'm going to put the question out there. You seem to have a fairly intense dislike for new Apple products and their OS. For a site that meant to be pro-Apple or for Apple-lovers (bit of both?), is it me or is it strange to have mods/admins that bash the products so much? Sure, objective discussion is what it's all about, but fairly strong dislike...I don't know.

The primary reason for this thread is to discuss our reactions to the latest announcement. Some are positive, some are negative. This is an Apple enthusiasts community, not a lemming colony. There's nothing wrong with questioning the direction of the company if we perceive that they're walking off a cliff. Apple is not immune to mistakes and no one wants to see Apple revert back to where it was 20 years ago.

vansmith
03-13-2015, 11:59 AM
You missed the point. Effort and time in my view indicate something deeper than just profit, I.e. The desire to produce a great product.Apple is a corporation. Their effort and time are in pursuit of money first, everything else second. You can't survive as a corporation otherwise. Indeed, if profit wasn't their primary motive, their hardware would be significantly cheaper than it actually is. A great example of this is the MacBook Air, a device with a profit margin as high as 37% (http://www.computerworld.com/article/2513587/apple-mac/macbook-air-more-profitable-than-other-apple-laptops--says-analyst.html) (depending on configuration). That's magnitudes higher than other companies in the same industry. I'm not saying that this is wrong (indeed, from a business perspective, it ought to be lauded) but rather, it is demonstrative of Apple's desire for the pursuit of profit.


We've argued this here before. Businesses must make profit, but successful (and lasting) ones are those that do what they do best and let the money follow - I know that first hand. Sure, money is necessary, but it's extremely shallow. If you're truly passionate about anything you'll understand what I mean.Yes, I'm passionate about things but I don't have shareholders behind me demanding that I profit off of those. That's a crucial difference between individual pursuits and corporate ones.

I think it's really dangerous to assume that Apple is special in this regard. In positioning them as such, it insulates them from critique and consequently, they can get away with charging more than they should because "it's a beautiful product that is a consequence of passion."


That's my point: this MB is very much an Apple product.I'm not really sure how this justifies the price for a glorified netbook.


Just think about this for a moment. Many people "need" an ultra-portable device that gives a full day of autonomy, which this device does quite nicely. By definition, ultra-portable means that you'll be using it out-and-about and won't need to plug it into 57 peripherals. As I mentioned earlier in the post, I bought an 11" MBA specifically for this purpose. I chose the 11" over the 13" because it's smaller/lighter, i.e. more portable and certainly a dream to carry around when compared to my 15" MBP. Yes, it has fewer ports, way less HP, a smaller screen, etc, but that's exactly why I bought it. I don't think I'm alone in my needs.At no point did I say that there isn't a need for an ultra portable notebook. All I've been arguing is that Apple has introduced an underpowered notebook for the price that they have set. This notebook would be fine if it was half the cost of what it's set at.


A different/new port? Did you forget about the Lightning port? Also, seeing as it is a new port, when would be the appropriate time to adopt it? Chicken and egg.I don't have any issue with introducing top of the line connectivity. In fact, I think it's great. My issue, as I even made clear, is that there is only one port. One. How am I supposed to hook up a monitor and charge it at the same time? And honestly, if only having one port and then charging nearly $80 for various dongles isn't emblematic of a company seeking money, I don't know what is.


So in summary then, if you need or prefer desktop-class computers, then the MB is not for you, simple. But that doesn't mean that the MB is a crappy product, people have different needs, desires and requirements, simple.Fair enough and I'm happy to admit that I'm not the target here. That said, I'm still entitled to critiquing it and will continue to do so especially when more capable devices (in crucial ways) are available from Apple (the MBA for example).

Checco
03-13-2015, 06:24 PM
That's magnitudes higher than other companies in the same industry.

I'm not saying that this is wrong (indeed, from a business perspective, it ought to be lauded) but rather, it is demonstrative of Apple's desire for the pursuit of profit.


I'd call this their ability to sustain those profit margins. Why is this? Great products that people are willing to pay a premium for. You can't will that level of profitability into existence, just ask Samsung. You need to provide something extraordinary.



Yes, I'm passionate about things but I don't have shareholders behind me demanding that I profit off of those. That's a crucial difference between individual pursuits and corporate ones.

I think it's really dangerous to assume that Apple is special in this regard. In positioning them as such, it insulates them from critique and consequently, they can get away with charging more than they should because "it's a beautiful product that is a consequence of passion."

I'm not really sure how this justifies the price for a glorified netbook.

At no point did I say that there isn't a need for an ultra portable notebook. All I've been arguing is that Apple has introduced an underpowered notebook for the price that they have set. This notebook would be fine if it was half the cost of what it's set at.


I don't mean to justify it as a consequence of an almost misguided passion. When we work on our products, we do the absolute best that we can and this is how I see what Apple does. Engineers producing the best possible result that they can, with a specific design goal in mind...and part of the challenge is to make it profitable.

Now let's think about the gloried netbook. What do you think the incremental cost of an additional USB-C port would be? Drop profit from 37% to 35%? If that. Let's take it a little further down the design process. Okay, we want to add a standard USB port and a MagSafe port. Okay, we're going to have to make it thicker than what it is. Oh, but hang on, that means heaps more space for the logic board, batteries, etc. no need to redesign the logic board - we have one, ditto for the battery...it's called a MacBook Air. We've just shaved off how many millions of dollars in R&D? Margins are already wide and no need for costly R&D, win-win, $$$$!

Apple could've produced a slightly slimmed down MBA, but they didn't. They went ultra-slim, while adding a better keyboard and trackpad and putting in a Retina display. Importantly, they also decided against a fan, which to me takes some courage. For ultra-portable, it is preferable...completely solid-state. For sure, part of the trade-off is processing ability, as well as possibly better required efficiency, but here too the old question comes up. What are the targeted users needs? Big processing ability isn't one of them, quite clearly. But since this model won't suit everyone, we'll keep the MBAs and also upgrade them - so customer, the choice is yours.

Sure, now they have the platform for tomorrow, hopefully continuing their profitability. How did the MBA come about? It's evolution...

What I'm getting at is that it was designed for a specific purpose and that design would've cost boat-loads of money, no room for short-term profitability here.



I don't have any issue with introducing top of the line connectivity. In fact, I think it's great. My issue, as I even made clear, is that there is only one port. One. How am I supposed to hook up a monitor and charge it at the same time? And honestly, if only having one port and then charging nearly $80 for various dongles isn't emblematic of a company seeking money, I don't know what is.


I hear you, it can be a point of frustration. But in my view, it's down to design choices again. By Apple providing only a single port, I think that a very high proportion of the target market will be willing to trade ports for the other features. For those that need both, there you go, dongle is there. Once more in my case, I think that the slightly higher cost of the MB with the dongle, in the event I needed one, wouldn't bother me. If I bought it for its specific features, over the life of the product, should we say 3 years, the cost is inconsequential. At a price of $3000 different story, but where it is...? Nah.



Fair enough and I'm happy to admit that I'm not the target here. That said, I'm still entitled to critiquing it and will continue to do so especially when more capable devices (in crucial ways) are available from Apple (the MBA for example).
You are entitled to. You're also right in that the MBA is more capable than the MB. But wait, the 13" MBP is more capable than the MBA...and is also portable. But, the 15"... You make your choices and buy what's right for you. The MB family all do a particular job well and all have their target markets...

IWT
03-13-2015, 06:52 PM
There is an ancient joke from way-back which goes something like this:

An old man is walking along the road laden down by 2 large suitcases. A young chap approaches him and says " can I help you with these?". "No, thank you. See this watch on my wrist. It can tell the time in Tokyo, the weather in San Francisco, solve Fermat's Theorem, it's a calculator, library, everything." Young chap: "And the suitcases?" Old man: "Oh, they're the batteries"

Fast forward 30 years. Young chap showing off his Apple Watch. Old man asks him "what can it do?". Young chap: "nothing, but the battery is so small, it's amazing!"

Ian

pigoo3
03-13-2015, 06:52 PM
For a site that meant to be pro-Apple or for Apple-lovers (bit of both?), is it me or is it strange to have mods/admins that bash the products so much? Sure, objective discussion is what it's all about, but fairly strong dislike...I don't know.

If someone ONLY says positive things about something they like…and NEVER anything negative or critical…then I wouldn't trust this persons advice or opinions. NOTHING in this world is ALWAYS 100% positive.

Sure…admins, mods, and members on Mac-Forums will occasionally not like something Apple is doing…and we say it. That's a good thing!:)

- Nick

vansmith
03-13-2015, 09:25 PM
One final point, which is going to create a big storm. I don't have the answer, but I'm going to put the question out there. You seem to have a fairly intense dislike for new Apple products and their OS. For a site that meant to be pro-Apple or for Apple-lovers (bit of both?), is it me or is it strange to have mods/admins that bash the products so much? Sure, objective discussion is what it's all about, but fairly strong dislike...I don't know.Perhaps this is a response that only speaks to how I act but I come from a professional environment where critique and analysis are the name of the game. Thus, this is how I conceptualize things. Critiquing doesn't implicitly or explicitly suggest that something is bad, just that it needs improvement. I think what's important to consider here are the two very different meanings of critique: deconstructing something for the purposes of demonstrating how bad something is and deconstructing something for the purposes of betterment and caution (the latter of which is how I approach critique). I like Apple and the major electronic devices I use are one's Apple provide. I critique their products, perhaps more so than other staff members here, because I seek to caution people of very real limits and to offer commentary on what I feel are issues that can be resolved. Perhaps this is why I always attempt to offer references for my claims, a conscious attempt to demonstrate that this isn't personal but rather, is a critique of technical limits.

Suffice it to say, if I were a member of a community in which the leadership was highly enamoured with the "theme" of the community without tempering that love with critique, I'd be genuinely bothered. It's also worth considering the context - we are all here because we like Apple products more so than the average user. This is always an underlying reality in our conversations. Thus, it might be better to read each and every post with the following preface: "we like Apple products and I enjoy using them but...".

TattooedMac
03-13-2015, 09:57 PM
Here is a great article on WHY Apple is selling a 10K Watch Everything you know about the $10,000 Apple Watch is wrong (http://www.cultofmac.com/315436/why-the-gold-watch-is-essential-to-apples-plan/)

vansmith
03-14-2015, 12:11 AM
I'm not sure that's a very tight argument but I'm willing to admit that this is because I don't let flash and "pizazz" sway me (in fact, I find it very off-putting). That said, it does serve a marketing purpose in that people who have them may laud them which will drive people to buy cheaper ones. In some respects, this goes against my belief that the $10K variant won't be a prominent part of the culture built around the watch but who knows at this point?

chas_m
03-14-2015, 04:26 AM
Now, let's think about the iPad for a second. It's a nice consumption device, but it's quite difficult to be productive on it.

I am really quite tired of this myth. It is simply not true. I use my iPad (with a bluetooth keyboard) to be productive for a least a few hours a day, nearly every day. I do a metric ton of writing on it -- I in fact PREFER to write on the iPad over the MacBook Pro because the iPad lets me focus better. I now handle ALL my email on the iPad because I can dictate responses so easily, I could possible do this at my desk but why, when I can do it on the couch?

I don't use MS Office much but I used it long enough to know that THE BEST version of it available on an Apple product is on the iPad. At least until Office 2016 comes out for real. And did I mention free? Should I go on to tell you about how popular the iPad is in the enterprise sector? If one cannot be productive on one, how could this possibly be? Hint: it couldn't.

Yes, one can absolutely be MORE productive on a MacBook Pro most of the time, or at least more "multi-tasky" (ask any writer or creative professional how well being more "multi-tasky" works out). I'm sure that's what you meant, really. But please stop with the "difficult to be productive" BS. No, what's (apparently) difficult is for people to use their imaginations a tiny bit and see that this simply isn't true.


So in summary then, if you need or prefer desktop-class computers, then the MB is not for you, simple. But that doesn't mean that the MB is a crappy product, people have different needs, desires and requirements, simple.

I agree with this, but I would argue that the new MacBook is VERY desktop-class for what typical users have need of -- it's a million miles faster at nearly anything short of pro-level apps than my MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and a higher-clocked processor, and of course its 2x speed flash storage (1.3GB per second read time, 630MB/sec writes) absolutely smokes my 1TB hard drive. I have an advantage on ports and storage, but on nothing else -- and this is compared to Apple's current "bottom of the line" Mac!

Where I think the problem is is that what you mean by "desktop class" and what most people mean by "desktop class" has changed, and there's a big schism there. Pros need tons of ports and massive amount of storage -- typical users do not, at least not any more. Hard-core gamers need super-powerful video cards, creative pros would need more RAM and other things than the MacBook offers -- but not most other people.

The kind of people who read this forum regularly used to be "the rest of us" from the Apple ads -- the people who sought out quality, the people who appreciated value, the people who rewarded good developers. That's not the "us" Apple is courting anymore (not that they want us to go away). They're courting the mobile generation, who have different needs as you correctly point out. They're the new "rest of us."

dbm
03-14-2015, 07:12 AM
Here is a great article on WHY Apple is selling a 10K Watch Everything you know about the $10,000 Apple Watch is wrong (http://www.cultofmac.com/315436/why-the-gold-watch-is-essential-to-apples-plan/)

That's an interesting perspective, and a very credible one. Most of today's youth seem to idolise musicians, sportsmen and reality-TV 'stars'. They tend to like their bling.

Checco
03-14-2015, 12:11 PM
Nick and Vansmith, thanks for your answers. I appreciate your approach and you are right, it is important to be objectively critical. I will be honest in saying that my comment wasn't directed at you guys though.

pigoo3
03-14-2015, 12:35 PM
Nick and Vansmith, thanks for your answers. I appreciate your approach and you are right, it is important to be objectively critical. I will be honest in saying that my comment wasn't directed at you guys though.

It's all good!:)

For what it's worth I'm not really that crazy about some of the directions Apple is heading. Turning almost every computer model in to a "closed box"…that's not user upgradable (ram & storage)…and removing the optical drive.

I know that things change (computing environment)…and doing these things can help to keep costs down…and helps reduce weight (removing the optical drive)…and helps engineers make things thinner. I can live without being able to upgrade the internal storage (can always use "The Cloud" or use external storage devices). But being able to upgrade the ram was/is always nice. Since we never know what the future will bring. And being able to upgrade ram helps extend the "life" of a computer.

I'm not too crazy about the new MacBooks. I'm actually mostly ok with the design (again another "closed box" computer). The price is just too high for what we get (compared to the low-end MacBook Pro's and MacBook Air's).

The iWatch. I think that I'm on the fence with this one. I'm not really into the chunky/boxy design…it could cost a bit less…and battery life could be better. If it survives…I'm betting version 2 or version 3 will be a lot better (faster/more features…better battery life...better styling...better performance...and cost the same or less). Then I might get one. We'll see.:)

With the iWatch…Apple has got to innovate. This is the first new product since the iPad. So if it's a success (or not)…it's all good. Got to push the envelope.:)

- Nick

Checco
03-14-2015, 12:46 PM
with a bluetooth keyboard

Of course you can be (more) productive with a keyboard involved, but I'm talking about a plain iPad. I considered exactly that before purchasing my MBA. I looked at various keyboard cases considering combined weight, resulting thickness, integration and iOS, which can be limiting in certain respects. In the end I opted for the MBA. The iPad specifically excludes a keyboard. In my view adding one defeats the purpose: it becomes a device with an identity crisis!

I stand by my comment, but will clarify - a plain iPad is not a productivity device.



I agree with this, but I would argue that the new MacBook is VERY desktop-class for what typical users have need of -- it's a million miles faster at nearly anything short of pro-level apps than my MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and a higher-clocked processor, and of course its 2x speed flash storage (1.3GB per second read time, 630MB/sec writes) absolutely smokes my 1TB hard drive. I have an advantage on ports and storage, but on nothing else -- and this is compared to Apple's current "bottom of the line" Mac!

Where I think the problem is is that what you mean by "desktop class" and what most people mean by "desktop class" has changed, and there's a big schism there. Pros need tons of ports and massive amount of storage -- typical users do not, at least not any more. Hard-core gamers need super-powerful video cards, creative pros would need more RAM and other things than the MacBook offers -- but not most other people.

The kind of people who read this forum regularly used to be "the rest of us" from the Apple ads -- the people who sought out quality, the people who appreciated value, the people who rewarded good developers. That's not the "us" Apple is courting anymore (not that they want us to go away). They're courting the mobile generation, who have different needs as you correctly point out. They're the new "rest of us."

I'm all for the new MB, but it certainly isn't anything near a desktop class/pro machine. What I understand D-C to mean is the ability to handle most intensive tasks that one can throw at it. Not necessarily high-end gaming, but in today's terms: decent quad-core, 16GB RAM, dedicated graphics, etc.

Irrespective of what you call it, we're saying the same thing: it is able to fulfill the needs of many users out there. As a side note and comparison, lots of people use entry-level Windows notebooks with 2GB RAM, slooow hard disks and Celerons...and they get by. Obviously though, the MB is a tad more expensive, but will run rings around those.

However, there is no way that the MB can be compared to a D-C as I understand the definition. Bring on the fast SSD, but get crunching and the poor thing's dead. As an example, I tried to run a development VM on a 13" MBP with HDD...returned the thing for a quad-core 15", with HDD...ran rings around the 13". I have also run VMs sitting on an external HDD over USB 2 (yes, two)...not a glitch on my quad-core. SSD alone only goes so far...

Checco
03-14-2015, 01:17 PM
It's all good!:)

For what it's worth I'm not really that crazy about some of the directions Apple is heading. Turning almost every computer model in to a "closed box"…that's not user upgradable (ram & storage)…and removing the optical drive.

I know that things change (computing environment)…and doing these things can help to keep costs down…and helps reduce weight (removing the optical drive)…and helps engineers make things thinner. I can live without being able to upgrade the internal storage (can always use "The Cloud" or use external storage devices). But being able to upgrade the ram was/is always nice. Since we never know what the future will bring. And being able to upgrade ram helps extend the "life" of a computer.


This is a difficult one and it's difficult to call too. I think it depends on the direction future technology takes. Will computers become more memory efficient or will manufacturers simply add enough RAM that'll suffice for years to come? I'd guess that the curves of required RAM increases per year and average device life have been studied in some detail and hopefully that's why their decision has been taken.

On the other hand, a removable RAM module is *very* old-school thinking though (from a product, not user perspective). You're adding complexity, size and cost through connectors, etc. Doesn't it just seem logical to add enough from th get-go? But how much is enough?

I think we're unlucky enough to be stuck in an awkward transitionary period, as far as these items are concerned. Hopefully it'll settle and result in better value for the user.



The iWatch. I think that I'm on the fence with this one. I'm not really into the chunky/boxy design…it could cost a bit less…and battery life could be better. If it survives…I'm betting version 2 or version 3 will be a lot better (faster/more features…better battery life...better styling...better performance...and cost the same or less). Then I might get one. We'll see.:)

I'm 100% with you here!

pigoo3
03-14-2015, 01:53 PM
This is a difficult one and it's difficult to call too. I think it depends on the direction future technology takes. Will computers become more memory efficient or will manufacturers simply add enough RAM that'll suffice for years to come? I'd guess that the curves of required RAM increases per year and average device life have been studied in some detail and hopefully that's why their decision has been taken.

The problem with "big brother" doing the thinking for us (determining what amount of ram is "good" for all of us)…is manufacturers will do their statistical analysis's, market research, etc…and they will shoot for "central tendency". The amount of ram that they think is "adequate for most of us". This amount will be more than enough for some…but will not be enough for others.

The main problem is…electronics companies don't want to sell us products that we will continue to use for more than 3 years…since they want "repeat customers"…that buy newer products more frequently. This is called planned obsolescence. Many electronic items (computers) will most definitely be useful for way longer than 3 years. And having upgradeable ram is one key factor in this.

I have not purchased a brand new Apple computer since 1997 (18 years). And since that time…I have not owned a used computer that was less than 3 years old. In the past 18 years…I have not had any computing tasks that these 3 year-old computers couldn't handle. And believe me…paying approx. $500 for a 3 year old computer that originally sold for $1500 to $1800 new is a nice savings! Multiply these savings over an 18 year period…and you're talking a nice chunk of change!!!:)

My current "new computers" are a:

- 2011 13" MBP
- 2011 17" MBP
- 2011 27" iMac.

All three of these computers are doing great. And unless I come across a killer deal on something newer/used. I fully expect to use these computers for at least another 2-3 years.:)

All of these 2011 computers came with 4gig of ram. The ram in these models is upgradeable…but let's pretend the ram wasn't upgradeable (like many Apple computers now). In 2015 with Yosemite and beyond (2016, 2017, etc.)…4gig of ram just isn't going to cut it like it once did. So an 8gig ram upgrade will at some point be in order for these computers (actually the 17" 2011 MBP has 8gig of ram already).:)

If the ram in these 2011 computers wasn't upgradeable…I could possibly be forced into purchasing something newer. Not because the CPU's were too slow, not because the GPU's were too slow…but because they didn't have enough ram. But because their ram is upgradeable…these computers will still be usable for a total of 5, 7, or maybe even 10 years.

This is the situation that folks with newer Mac models without upgradable ram will be faced with. The computer has a fast enough CPU, and a fast enough GPU…but not enough ram to handle future OS versions, or future applications versions (ram needs which are VERY unpredictable). So a person buying a 2013, 2014, or 1015 retina MacBook Pro with 4gig or even 8gig of ram is almost certainly not going to get 5, 7 or 10 years of use out if it.


On the other hand, a removable RAM module is *very* old-school thinking though (from a product, not user perspective). You're adding complexity, size and cost through connectors, etc. Doesn't it just seem logical to add enough from th get-go? But how much is enough?

Maybe so. But just because something is "newer-thinking" does not necessarily mean "better-thinking"! Sometimes it's "Back to the Future". ;)

Non-upgradeable ram serves the purposes of manufactures to a MUCH greater degree than it does consumers. With non-upgradeable ram…companies (not just Apple) have planned obsolescence built into machines. Apple designs future OS versions. Apple (in theory) could announce the next version of Mac OS X (10.11)…and require all computers running it to have 8gig of ram.

This would force all folks currently owning Mac's with 4gig of non-upgradeable ram to either purchase a new computer…or never be able to upgrade their computers OS again.

This is why having upgradeable ram (at least for the present time until some new technology replaces ram in computers)…is a very very good thing for consumers.:)

- Nick

TattooedMac
03-14-2015, 08:24 PM
I stand by my comment, but will clarify - a plain iPad is not a productivity device.


And this is also subjective. Depends on what you call productive ?? I can sit at my iMac and build a App, and then once on the lounge I could come up with a *IDEA* moment, or I might need to change a file. From my iPad Air 2, I can download my ViewController.swift file from my Server using Transmit, edit it in the same App, or Textastic, upload it to my Server, and push it to Github using a Terminal type App and all within 5 mins.
I can also do the same with Websites built. I can change, upload, and publish sides all from within my new iPad Air 2. To me that is productivity.
I also do ALL my pages work on the iPad Air 2, as I believe its a much more user friendly and polished App to use on the device than my MBP. I also do all my Mail there too. I don't need a BT Keyboard, but I'm going to buy one anyways, because I can. Its not because I 'have to'.

vansmith
03-14-2015, 09:32 PM
From my iPad Air 2, I can download my ViewController.swift file from my Server using Transmit, edit it in the same App, or Textastic, upload it to my Server, and push it to Github using a Terminal type App and all within 5 mins.Oh yes, the nerd is strong in you. I just need you to influence Slydude. ;)

You mention GitHub - care to share your repo? Here's mine (https://github.com/bryanabsmith). No Swift code (it's all Flex ATM) though. ;)

pigoo3
03-14-2015, 10:36 PM
Oh yes, the nerd is strong in you.

Ha ha. Yoda to Luke Skywalker!;)

- Nick

TattooedMac
03-14-2015, 10:44 PM
Oh yes, the nerd is strong in you. I just need you to influence Slydude. ;)

You mention GitHub - care to share your repo? Here's mine (https://github.com/bryanabsmith). No Swift code (it's all Flex ATM) though. ;)


Haha Sly is set in his ways, I believe. . . Good luck though :)

Here (https://github.com/TattooedMac?tab=contributions&period=monthly) is mine. (nothing special) ;)
It consists of a couple of tools I like to build responsive websites, and design and now I'm learning Swift, so it has some things there from the lessons and testing.
I also have a side project in my Private Github, and was originally coded in Obj-C, but because I believe somewhere down the track, Apple is going to say, Swift is what your Apps will be coded in (not Obj-C), I'm waiting until I know enough to re-write it completely in Swift . .
Im in no rush to get it out, although I would like to get on the Watch Bandwagon, and have something out in the next 12months.

vansmith
03-14-2015, 10:45 PM
Can't I be Darth Vader instead? Can I change my message: "Oh yes, the dark...nerd side is strong in this one"

TM, mine isn't much at this point - just two apps (which are both in Google Play and the App Store so I guess they've become something valuable) designed for my academic life. I've got an idea for two more apps (one mostly built at this point) but I'm not sure I want to open source them.

TattooedMac
03-14-2015, 10:57 PM
Can't I be Darth Vader instead? Can I change my message: "Oh yes, the dark...nerd side is strong in this one"

👍


TM, mine isn't much at this point - just two apps (which are both in Google Play and the App Store so I guess they've become something valuable) designed for my academic life. I've got an idea for two more apps (one mostly built at this point) but I'm not sure I want to open source them.

There is a place for openSource, but when it comes to intellectual property, and until the project is real and in the App Store, it should stay private IMHO
There is too much re-skinning going on, and I just wish Apple would follow their own guidelines, and not let these Apps into the Store.
Its not hard to see which ones have had a colour/font/image changed to try and make it look different, but they seem to not follow it.

My App, is minimalistic, and it is something that is missing n the App Store. I have another idea, and it came from my son. Think 8 Bit retro :)

chas_m
03-15-2015, 04:29 AM
Checco: thanks for clarifying, we're clearly on the same page. :)

For the record, let me state that Apple isn't abandoning pro users: I suspect the 15" MacBook Pro is going to get a very significant overhaul this summer probably around WWDC. Apple learned **a lot** from building that Watch that is going to apply to Macs over the next few years (see the MacBook logic board as an example -- a 67 percent reduction in size in one generation?!). I also suspect the Mac Pro is going to get a notable boost this year.

Weirdly, the 13-inch MBA gains the new Force Touch trackpad but not the keyboard (rrr?), but not the double-speed flash storage of the 13-inch Air (and MacBook). I would not be surprised if that model also got upgraded over the summer.

The revamped MBPs will (eventually) offer just Thunderbolt 2 and USB-C, I would imagine. I'd still prefer a separate Magsafe, and maybe the Pro users will get one, but don't hold your breath on that. When is Thunderbolt 3 due out? :)

The Mac Pro will likely get the appropriate Intel chip upgrade, a graphics upgrade, and 2x flash drive performance, keeping the USB 3 and TB2 ports as-is. Should be a hella powerful machine.

pigoo3
03-15-2015, 10:15 AM
"chas_m" reminded me about the new "Force Trackpad" (I forgot to mention/comment on it earlier). I think that this is an interesting bit of technology…and maybe something that's difficult to comment on until you actually have a chance to try it out.

Seems from some of the mini-reviews that some folks have written as part of their initial hands-on with the new models with the force trackpad…that it's better/more useful than they first imagined.:)

- Nick

dtravis7
03-15-2015, 10:19 AM
"chas_m" reminded me about the new "Force Trackpad" (I forgot to mention/comment on it earlier). I think that this is an interesting bit of technology…and maybe something that's difficult to comment on until you actually have a chance to try it out.

Seems from some of the mini-reviews that some folks have written as part of their initial hands-on with the new models with the force trackpad…that it's better/more useful than they first imagined.:)

- Nick

I am also curious how that is going to work especially for someone like me used to feeling clicks when I press.

pigoo3
03-15-2015, 10:40 AM
From what I understand…the Force Trackpad seems to be able to detect the difference between a soft click & a hard click…or maybe it's a short click vs. a long click (a distance thing…don't press as hard). I could see folks that always press hard or fast to make a "click" maybe having some trouble.

- Nick

dbm
03-15-2015, 04:17 PM
Apparently you can set the threshold for the force touch and there are at least 10 levels of sensitivity (pressing harder on the play button in the media player gives 10 different levels of quicker play back), probably many more.

Pressing on the pad causes haptic feedback from the electromagnets built in to the force track pad, with the aim of tricking your brain into thinking that it 'clicked'. It will be interesting to see if they built this onto the next iPhone or iPad as haptic feedback for typing on the touch screen. My HTC smart phone from 2008 did this using the vibrate function and it was quite effective.

Checco
03-16-2015, 12:57 PM
The problem with "big brother" doing the thinking for us (determining what amount of ram is "good" for all of us)…is manufacturers will do their statistical analysis's, market research, etc…and they will shoot for "central tendency". The amount of ram that they think is "adequate for most of us". This amount will be more than enough for some…but will not be enough for others.

The main problem is…electronics companies don't want to sell us products that we will continue to use for more than 3 years…since they want "repeat customers"…that buy newer products more frequently. This is called planned obsolescence. Many electronic items (computers) will most definitely be useful for way longer than 3 years. And having upgradeable ram is one key factor in this.

The only way "around" this is to max. out the RAM when purchasing new and looking for maxed out units when buying used. The down side is that what Apple defines as maximum and what the board can handle aren't always the same!



I have not purchased a brand new Apple computer since 1997 (18 years). And since that time…I have not owned a used computer that was less than 3 years old. In the past 18 years…I have not had any computing tasks that these 3 year-old computers couldn't handle. And believe me…paying approx. $500 for a 3 year old computer that originally sold for $1500 to $1800 new is a nice savings! Multiply these savings over an 18 year period…and you're talking a nice chunk of change!!!:)

My current "new computers" are a:

- 2011 13" MBP
- 2011 17" MBP
- 2011 27" iMac.

All three of these computers are doing great. And unless I come across a killer deal on something newer/used. I fully expect to use these computers for at least another 2-3 years.:)

I like your approach here, I take a similar with cars...no more buying new there! Value is an important thing and that's a good saving. I have a 2011 iMac that I've taken to my office for one of the guys to use for development (I use my MBP only now) and it still does very well (SSD installed). I'm not sure if I'm quite ready for a used Mac though ;D .



And this is also subjective. Depends on what you call productive ?? I can sit at my iMac and build a App, and then once on the lounge I could come up with a *IDEA* moment, or I might need to change a file. From my iPad Air 2, I can download my ViewController.swift file from my Server using Transmit, edit it in the same App, or Textastic, upload it to my Server, and push it to Github using a Terminal type App and all within 5 mins.
I can also do the same with Websites built. I can change, upload, and publish sides all from within my new iPad Air 2. To me that is productivity.

:P That's a quick fix - I can do that on my iPhone 6 Plus too!



I also do ALL my pages work on the iPad Air 2, as I believe its a much more user friendly and polished App to use on the device than my MBP. I also do all my Mail there too. I don't need a BT Keyboard, but I'm going to buy one anyways, because I can. Its not because I 'have to'.
Well if it works for you, great! But I do think your in the minority... Is it possibly an Aussie thing? :P

pigoo3
03-16-2015, 01:51 PM
The only way "around" this is to max. out the RAM when purchasing new and looking for maxed out units when buying used.

Yes…I TOTALLY agree with you here!:) Maxing out the ram at the time of purchase is pretty much the only way we have to assure the maximum "useable life" out of current Mac models with non-upgradeable ram.


The down side is that what Apple defines as maximum and what the board can handle aren't always the same!

This in a "weird way" is actually a positive!:) I know exactly what you mean about how some Mac models are found (after release) to be able to handle much more ram than Apple "Officially" states. In many cases 2x the ram.

With these non-upgradeable ram Macintosh computer models…we probably won't run into this "problem" any more. Since non-upgradeable ram is non-upgradeable ram. So even IF these computers could theoretically handle more ram. We can't upgrade them!:(


I like your approach here, I take a similar with cars...no more buying new there!

Believe it or not…I've NEVER owned a new car. When I was younger & couldn't afford a new car…I of course always had used cars. Then when I got older & could afford a new car…I already learned that buying a new car was a BIG waste of money…for me (too much depreciation in the first few years).

Of course I've also been doing all my own auto repairs since I was 18 (at least all repairs a home mechanic can do). So this of course helps with buying "used" cars.:)

Having a brand new car is VERY nice…but can be very expensive when done every time a newer vehicle is needed/wanted. Automobiles are absolute money pits!!!;) But of course ABSOLUTELY necessary (in many cases) to get from point A to point B.:)

- Nick

TattooedMac
03-16-2015, 09:50 PM
Well if it works for you, great! But I do think your in the minority... Is it possibly an Aussie thing? :P

Yep, and it's called Aussie ingenuity :P
But in all seriousness, I really don't think people give the iOS Devices enough credit in what they can achieve. I' modding a test in the next 4 weeks once I recieve my ZAGG Folio keyboard case, and that is too use it for everything I would of done on my MBP, and see if I can pass down my MBP to the missus, and me keep my iPad Air 2 and iMac.
The only restrictions I can forsee is having to do 99% of my coding on my iMac (using Xcode) for App , 99% of my design work on my iMac (I use Affinity Designer & Sketch).

I still believe that Pages is best on the iPad, being a lot easier to use, and i love working in it, as we'll, on my iPad, because im focused, and not swayed to have a Web page open or anything else to distract me. It is me, my iPad Air 2 and Pages. . . . . .
I'll come back in 5 weeks and let you know how it went..

Sent from my iPad Air 2

PS: would love to see the stat's on how many people view and reply to these forums on a mobile device : hint hint: ��