Apple "Spring Forward" Event

[Raz0rEdge]

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. Numerous other tech sites are also live-blogging, and Ars (that I prefer) is here..

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

 

[vansmith]

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. 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?

 

[caribiner23]

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]

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]

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. 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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

These $79 dongles will add more ports to Apple's new MacBook

I guess this makes it all fine!

 

[oak1971]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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