Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

Actually - I get a twitter page on that link.... I was slightly confused.

Hahahahahahahahahaha! Sorry, that's a link I shared with my wife earlier in the day. THIS is the laptop.

As for heat and battery life, I dunno, both my 2011 17" and my 2014 15" retina run hot and don't last long; the 2011 claims 81% battery capacity still and it does seem to last about as long as the 2014. My wife's 2013 13" does the same, but it also has a bad RAM slot (common on that model) and a slew of other issues, so I attribute all of its problems to the faulty design and manufacturing. Ask anyone (other than Apple) who fixes these things for a living and they'll tell you the 2013 13" model is shite. Oh well, she inherited it from her dad when he upgraded 6mo after buying it, so no skin off either of our backs I guess.

I take a lot of heat here for being an Apple hater, but I just have too much Apple gear in my home for that to be true. I use what works and I absolutely love my 9.7" iPad Pro, and use an iPad Air (1st gen, bought on release day) to control a Chromecast because the Apple TV I have went to shit after a few OS updates and I didn't see any better performance from any that my friends own. My mother-in-law inherited the Air 2 when I got my wife a Pro, and my wife has has had 5 different iPhone models in the 7 years we've been together. I gifted my mother a Macbook and bought my wife a 27" 5k iMac this past November, we have 3 working and in-use MacBook Pros in the house (the 2011 suffered the GPU issue typical of that model, so it runs Ubuntu with just the integrated graphics since it can't successfully boot anything else). That's right, I've keep and frequently use a broken MacBook Pro. Yet I get shit for being a hater. Two pieces of wall art in my office consist of the top clamshell of a G4 PowerBook with the Apple logo painted red (with green leaf) and the side of a teal G3 Mac case, the Apple logo on my 2014 rMBP is painstakingly hand-painted the actual proper original Apple rainbow colors (which I spent hours matching perfectly to the logo on an old dead Mac Classic I keep around) with a slightly iridescent topcoat.

But I take shit here for being an Apple hater.

Now that I've gotten that rant off my chest: thank you for not contributing to that.

I really just want Apple to make something that I can actually use. I greatly prefer Mac OS to Windows (I'd prefer Linux to either of those if the apps I need ran on it), but the hardware just isn't keeping up. I'm buying a machine for the long haul and I need it to not already be 2-3 years out of date when I buy it.

That's not hate, that's reality, and it's what has kept me from buying an Apple computer since the rMBP I bought at the beginning of 2014; and I only bought that because a client fronted me the money when the 2011 took a dump early on in the contract and they insisted I stick with Apple at the time. If Apple happens to have some compelling hardware on the market when I need to upgrade again in the future (far, far in the future, as the Ryzen build I just put together will last me at least half a decade with minimal upgrades along the way - mostly in terms of storage), I won't think twice. But it has to be current hardware, as recent as the best PC I could put together or, at least, within a few months of that.

The slow refresh cycle is what kills Apple for my uses, and the excuse that it lets them polish the design and get everything perfect just doesn't fly when you talk to someone who repairs them for a living. Except for major refreshes, which only happen every few years (e.g. they can be working on it from the moment the previous major refresh launches), their refreshes are just faster CPUs, faster RAM, and faster storage, with a few components replaced based on failures in the previous model. That's not a whole redesign and that's not a whole year's worth (or longer) of "polishing and perfecting", it's something a company with Apple's resources and engineering talent could pop off on a monthly basis, which is faster than the new parts come to market on average.

They'd stop seeing a lull in sales as refreshes (or rumors of them) approach, as well; it'd basically be refresh-day sales all year long as most people aren't gonna mind having hardware that's a month "out of date" but many do mind having last year's model if the new one's supposed to come out in a month or two.

Again, not hate. I want to see them push farther ahead. I want to see them take over the market, instead of just taking all of the profits. Yes, I want them to take the profits that go with that, but there's so much more to be had if they grab hold of the market!

But, I don't own Apple stock at the moment, so I suppose I really want myself to go unheard until they crash and I can pick up some cheap shares. Then I want them to push forward.

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

Well, as listed on that page, it's 4k. Come on, man, I know you can read :)

As for battery life, continuous integration. Tests run nearly constantly; every time I save a file, the functional test suite runs. Whenever I upload a file to one of several VMs (one for each type of server in the application cluster), another test suite runs that interacts with the site hosted on that cluster of VMs to verify that critical use-cases function correctly.

The 2014 rMBP did a fine enough job keeping up, provided I didn't mind the system bogging down as the test suites ran, or artificially limiting how fast they'd run in order to avoid that (hey, we all like taking more breaks, right?) but, really, it got annoying after a time. Running that load, the rMBP could manage a couple hours of battery life, tops; seems about on par with the PC, but the PC doesn't bog down under the load. I wouldn't really say it eats batteries, considering it slightly edges out the rMBP under similar loads.

Comment Re:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 1) 69

Really? My pro device has 0 hours of battery life. It's a desktop workstation and no laptop on the market can touch it in actual productivity.

Where are these supposed "professionals" working that they're away from power for hours on end? I don't know very many professionals who work poolside for hours on end; but, then I also never said that gaming machine was used professionally... I also didn't tell you it gets 5 hours under moderate load (and much longer under typical use), but it does.

Normally, I don't reply to ignorant AC comments, but you're just that special.

Comment Re:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 1) 69

Kaby Lake CPUs didn't come out at all until October 2016 and, when they did, all of the quad-core SKUs supported 64GB of RAM. That's irrelevant, though, as the Kaby Lake CPUs aren't what's in the 2016 MBP. The two prior generations (at least) supported 32GB. That includes the i5-6360U in the lowest-end 2016 MacBook Pro.

So, what's the excuse, again?

Comment Re:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 1) 69

No QUAD CORE, KABY LAKE's (or later) that supported more than 32 GB, sorry. That's what Apple was counting on.

Apple didn't need chips that supported more than 32GB in order to build a laptop with 32GB of RAM. Dafuq you talkin 'bout? And, even when they start using those CPUs with support for 64GB of RAM, you know they're only going to give us half of that.

Wait... Right, Apple does "need" a CPU that can handle 64GB of RAM before they'll sell a system with 32GB, because Apple artificially limits the quantities or RAM they'll sell in their systems to half of what the CPU can actually support.

Wasn't a big deal before they started soldering the shit to the gahdamn board.

Comment Re:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 1) 69

And IIRC, your 2011 MBP only supported 16 GB after APPLE released a FIRMWARE REVISION.

Huh, they must have released that firmware revision on DAY ONE, then... Oh, wait, no... Intel makes the CHIPSETS that contain the RAM CONTROLLERS that DETERMINE HOW MUCH RAM IS SUPPORTED and APPLE'S FIRMWARE NEVER PLAYS A ROLE IN THAT.

By the way, it is very ANNOYING and REALLY DESTROYS YOUR CREDIBILITY when you type in RANDOM CAPITALS like you did throughout your ENTIRE POST.

Don't believe me? Ask yourself how annoyed you are and how credible you think I am after reading the above statements.

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

Interesting, something from Alienware, perhaps, or similar? How much does it weigh? I ask, because I did a rather thorough evaluation of top end laptops before buying the last one in early 2015, and one of my criteria was lugging it around. My second question is battery life? While I don't get 10 hours out of my MBP, I do get over 6. A brand new Lenovo upper tier business system I tried out lasted about 2 hours and weighed an extra pound.

This is the laptop. I'll admit, I can't really evaluate battery life as I never really use it unplugged for more than an hour or so. As one would expect, it will vary with workload and yes, I've had it nealy death after just over an hour, but I've also experienced the same with my 2014 rMBP; I've also never topped 5hr with that rMBP, but I've had that PC over 80% after an hour.

Considering that it's pushing a much heavier GPU and higher resolution display, it really wouldn't surprise me if it didn't manage to win any awards for battery life. Lighter and faster than my rMBP, though, and I've noticed it runs a fair bit cooler as well.

Comment Re:But Apple get its 30% cut still. (Score 1) 69

Right, because Intel hasn't yet released any mobile chips that support 32GB in 2 DIMMs. Well, other than the i7 in my wife's gaming laptop, which was already an older model when I bought it for her more than a year ago.

Right, it's Intel's fault Apple doesn't sell laptops with the maximum amount of RAM possible. You know, just like the 2011 MacBook Pro I have sitting next to me could only possibly use 8GB of RAM (again, due to Intel's limitations, supposedly) but it's been running just fine with 16GB (and able to use all of it as well) of aftermarket RAM for 6 years.

Comment Re:I was looking forward to S8 (Score 1) 31

That's because it only affects a handful of phones in South Korea. My S8+ has a little less red than my S7 Edge, though it does have a perfect half-circle dead spot on the right side (a defect, for sure, and my replacement phone arrives on Monday). Every mass-produced device is going to have some defects; apparently the screens used in the batches of phones sold in South Korea (which were produced first as they were to be sold first) had the red tint issue, and the batch of screens they had in stock when my phone was made had black-spot issues (which aren't unheard of on "edge" models).

It happens. And it's really only a problem when the manufacturer doesn't offer the end user a fix. I'd like to point to Nintendo as an example of where it's a problem; yet people will defend Nintendo to the death when they deny the existence of any issues (though there clearly are many) while lambasting Samsung for having issue that they actually acknowledge and fix. In my opinion, though Samsung has more issues than Nintendo, Nintendo users have more problems than Samsung users, because Nintendo users are stuck with the issues Nintendo won't fix.

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

When you don't need to replace your laptop or desktop every 1-3 years like a Dell, well, I suspect your sales numbers won't be quite as growth oriented.

Funny, I have a $299 Toshiba that was bought in 2010 that's still in use. Well, I don't have it, I gave it to a friend 2 years ago, but they're still using it daily. I was actually going to reply with something along the lines of "that only happens when you buy the cheaper models, but you're still ahead dollar-for-dollar and get periodic performance boosts as a bonus; when you spend as much on a PC laptop as you do on a Mac, they tend to last as long"; then, I remembered that $299 gem.

But I'll still elaborate on my point: I can spend $2400 on a 15" MacBook Pro (I'm pulling this from memory of my purchase in 2015, prices may be different today) and hope it lasts me 5 years, of I can spend $300/yr on a cheap PC, only have spent $1500 after 5 years and, at the end of that 5 years, have something faster than the Mac I would have spent $2400 on. Going the PC route gives me a $900 savings every 5 years and continuous performance upgrades.

Of course, I need more performance than the $300 PC laptops will give me, so that's not a viable solution for me, but it does illustrate how the Mac doesn't necessarily demonstrate "better value" based on "lasting longer". For the average user, that $2400 Mac would have to last 8 years to match the value of the $300 PC; and that's generously assuming the PC is upgraded yearly like clockwork. Additionally, at some point in that 8 year cycle, the $300 PC will surpass the $2400 Mac in performance.

Apparently, since I bought the MacBook Pro in February 2015 and replaced it (I still have it, it's just rarely used now) in November 2015, I needed more performance than Apple's fastest offering at the time could provide, as well.

And it was beaten by a $1700 PC laptop which, I bet you won't guess, is still in use a year and a half later, with no signs of needing to be replaced any time in the foreseeable future. It's actually still competitive with the 2016 MacBook Pro so, if you want to say a Mac laptop will last 5 years, it looks like I'm gonna get at least 6 out of this; it's sure built well enough to do it.

If Toshiba can make a laptop that lasts (and is still going strong in daily use) 7+ years for $300, why can't Apple tap that market? Sure, there's a limit to the profit made on a $300 laptop; $150 has to cover R&N, parts, and manufacturing, then you can split the profit with the retailer (often times Apple itself) for a profit of $75 (or $150 for direct sales) per laptop. That doesn't seem too bad, to be honest. Especially when you're selling them by the warehouse-full. Which Apple would.

And Apple could totally do that with a more recent C2D than what's in your 2006 MBP. If that's enough performance for you, something more recent should be marketable to a wider audience, as well; after all, people have no problem paying $300 for a C2D-based PC these days.

But, you'll say, Apple is afraid they'll undercut MacBook, MacBook Air, and MacBook Pro sales if they do that. Right? Why does someone buy a MacBook Pro when the MacBook is so much cheaper? They need the performance and wouldn't buy a $300 C2D-based MacBook Lite (we'll call it that). Why does someone buy a MacBook when the MacBook Air is cheaper? Ok, I really can't answer that one since the MacBook Air is both faster and performs better, but there's some reason that people do (I'm guessing vanity, since they can get it in colors and it's a bit thinner). Whatever the reason (which I'm sure Apple is well aware of), Apple can design a MacBook Lite around it. Make it a bit thicker than the others, only offer one color, give it a 5-6hr battery life instead of shooting for 10-12. For a $300 price tag, there's still profit to be had and people will accept the compromises; in fact, people would pay $400 because it's Apple.

And nobody who is buying their current models would touch it. It wouldn't hurt sales of those models at all. Even if it did, Apple makes likely, what, about $400 on average, across all models? Educated guess based on knowing what many of these parts cost wholesale and estimating those costs down a bit for Apple's purchase volume. A $300-400 MacBook Lite would outsell the other 3 models by at least 2:1. That means, at $300 ($150 profit when sold directly) they could lose 75% of sales of the current models to the new model and not have lost a penny. At $400 ($250 profit when sold directly), they could suffer not selling a single of the current models and come out 25% ahead in profits.

That's all back-of-napkin math and there's a fair bit of estimation involved; it could be as bad as Apple only being able to suffer the loss of 60% of current model sales at $300 and breaking even at $400 if the current models completely stop selling. The picture could also be much brighter than the one I paint. I know the margin of error on my estimates and I aimed for the middle.

So, then, why doesn't Apple do this?

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

We'll see. Honestly, of the entire Mac lineup, the Mac Mini had the most enterprise appeal (after the rack-mountable Mac servers were discontinued) simply for the ability to cram a shit-ton of them into a small space. You can easily rack-mount 6 of them in 1U so, if you wanted to run OS X on your servers, or just wanted a multitude of smaller discreet servers, you could really pack some reasonable power into a rack. That changed when they downgraded the Mini in 2014 and I do hope they reverse course.

I wish I could get excited about the Mac Pro announcement and, had they made the announcement 2 months earlier, I would be. However, I jumped on the Ryzen bandwagon (and with no regrets, I might add) shortly before that announcement and foresee this workstation lasting me the next 5 years or longer.

I'm a software developer, I run development servers in VMs, I edit audio and video, I do graphics work, I basically do all the things that Ryzen does better than Intel's comparable (many times more expensive) chips, and I'm a casual gamer at best so I don't really care if Intel's gaming-oriented chips could buy me another 5FPS at the same price point. All-in-all, I am and will continue to be happy with my Ryzen build and won't really miss the idea of working on a Mac. Before WSL and Bash on Windows being able to do all the things I need a UNIX-like environment for, I did miss the Mac, but that reality has changed.

Pulling their heads out of their asses and refreshing the Mac Pro within a year of realizing abysmal sales would have kept me firmly in the Mac camp and I'm not the only (or even the first) person migrating away from Mac for my business needs. The new Mac Pros might be too little too late.

As long as they can still run Windows and Linux, though, there is still hope for a refreshed Mac Mini, for the above-stated reasons.

Outwardly, Apple states that they are still dedicated to the Mac, but I think that ship has sailed. We're also seeing iPad sales on the decline and there's nothing going on in iPad land; the iPhone is really what's keeping Apple afloat at this point. Yes, they're making money hand over fist, and they've got cash reserves that could pay everyone's salaries for a decade if money stopped coming in all of a sudden, I don't think Apple is going to die. But I do think the Mac has been on a death spiral for nearly a decade and has less than a decade left.

Comment Re:I have a dream (Score 1) 442

The 2012 Mac Mini wasn't underpowered (for what it was) in 2012. The 2014 Mac Mini was underpowered in 2014; in fact, it would have been underpowered in 2012 as well, while the 2012 Mac Mini was less so in 2014.

I explained the issue 3 different ways in 2 sentences, but here's a 4th in case you missed it: the Mac Mini took a huge step backward in 2014 and hasn't seen anything resembling a proper refresh since.

Comment Re:NK *is* a credible threat (Score 1) 296

To be fair, there wasn't much substance coming from anyone in the most recent election. Username is all we had to go on.

Saying that in this instance is like handing someone a pile of dust covers and telling them to look through them and pick the next book they want to read; the whole while shouting "don't judge a book by its cover!"

Slashdot Top Deals

I have the simplest tastes. I am always satisfied with the best. -- Oscar Wilde