Apple "Spring Forward" Event

[vansmith]

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]

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.

Lisa

 

[chas_m]

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]

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

 

[dtravis7]

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]

$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]

$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!!!!

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]

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

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]

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

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

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]

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]

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, here, here and here 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 or here and here)?

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

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]

$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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Extra info:The Apple Watch Battery Is Replaceable | TechCrunch

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]

You guys are great! Grin

 

[Checco]

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.