Well, from what i have seen the Ultrabooks are not all as thin as the MacBookAir and the MBA have been around for almost a year and they are about to be updated within the next few months. Also, the Ultrabooks don't even have Intel's Thunderbolt whereas Apple was the first to support Intel's technology. Intel and most of these Ultrabook mfg are going to have a new MBA to compete against and my bet is the new MBAs to be released with be better overall. Plus, Apple can run BOTH Windows and OS X.
Steve would be on the phone asking for those Intel employees to be fired.
And perhaps they should.
Please Tim Cook, DO NOT BECOME RELIANT ON INTEL.
I doubt seriously that Steve Jobs would even care. That said, I don't have the foggiest reason how I know that Steve wouldn't want their heads but it sounded good. I do know from Steve's past accomplishments, that if he did get their heads, he'd shrink them down to the smallest form factor he can possibly get them.
As for Tim Cook, now he is a Jobs clone with upgraded social skills and will carry Apple into the future masterfully.
How much did Microsoft pay Intel to put this BS out? These new devices will be undone by the operating system, not the processor design. Intel is delusional.
If you ask users what they want from a mobile device and one of the top four answers is portable, I think you better leave the focus group testing to mommy and daddy.
The Dell XPS 13 is the nicest non-Apple Ultrabook I have seen. (the MBA is an Ultrabook IMO). If you are a Windows person or your organization doesn't support Macs, the XPS 13 is definitely worth considering...
Sorry, but I don't see it. ARM just doesn't have the power to handle a laptop at this point. Maybe eventually, but not now.
I see your point but we're talking hypotheticals. I don't know much about chips. So I'm not qualified to say what they can or can't do. However, I can't see Apple spending $278m for PA Semi if they didn't see an opportunity to make ARM much better than it is today and for their full future lineup. Maybe A6 Maybe A9 I haven't a clue but it could be sooner than we think.
The Dell XPS 13 is the nicest non-Apple Ultrabook I have seen. (the MBA is an Ultrabook IMO). If you are a Windows person or your organization doesn't support Macs, the XPS 13 is definitely worth considering...
All other laptops are essentially unusable after using a MacBook because of their inferior trackpad.
I see your point but we're talking hypotheticals. I don't know much about chips. So I'm not qualified to say what they can or can't do. However, I can't see Apple spending $278m for PA Semi if they didn't see an opportunity to make ARM much better than it is today and for their full future lineup. Maybe A6 Maybe A9 I haven't a clue but it could be sooner than we think.
They've gotten their money's worth from PA. Just the iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV use enough A-series chips to make it worthwhile.
I'm sure they'll continue improving the ARM chips, but they have a long way to go to catch up to Intel - and Intel is continuing to improve at the same time. Plus, Intel is apparently getting closer to releasing a chip that would compete well with ARM.
Quote:
Originally Posted by karmadave
The Dell XPS 13 is the nicest non-Apple Ultrabook I have seen. (the MBA is an Ultrabook IMO). If you are a Windows person or your organization doesn't support Macs, the XPS 13 is definitely worth considering...
Starting at $1429 and not shipping for over a month for the Dell.
An entry level MacBook Pro pictured next to a totally tricked out PC notebook with the latest quad core i7, a fancy discrete video chip with tons of VRAM, double the RAM, double the storage, etc.
The kicker? In almost every case the high end PC carries a lower price tag than the entry level Mac.
I like OS X and the aluminum unibody case is very practical, but there's no denying that Mac buyers pay a huge premium for them.
The premium isn't that huge in most cases. The problem w/those higher specced pc laptops is that most of them have from 1/8-1/2 the battery life. There are some laptops w/pimped out video that don't last even a single hour. Not too portable really.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Smallwheels
I wish Apple would embrace USB 3.
They will as soon as Intel does. Ivy Bridge has USB3 support built in, so expect it with all the new Apple systems this year.
So Intel is against against devices that don't uses their processors. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Except Apple is one of the biggest users of Intel chips. And in the 'ultra book' class Apple is the leading purchaser. So why does Intel favor one user over another?
Intel should not be pissing off one of their biggest customers, and one of the FEW companies that can turn the world against Intel compatible cpus.
Intel has clearly noticed the plateauing of PC sales which seem to a direct result of the iPad's emergence as well as the rapid increase in ARM development to the point that even Windows can now run on ARM so they created the Ultrabook platform for Windows-based PC vendors as a way of trying to lock in premium CPU sales. Is that correct?
Yes. This is aimed at Microsoft, not at Apple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodlink
Steve would be on the phone asking for those Intel employees to be fired.
Reading the MacWorld/PC World UK article, and it seems to me like nothing too outlandish. Intel doesn't make Macs, they sell chips to everyone. The two Intel reps are plugging their stuff. They don't dis Macs, even the "The MacBook Air is a great product, sure. It has the Intel Core processor, it's a great choice for someone who wants to invest in the Mac operating system" is just typical speak from a vendor who services both sides of the OS world and needs to shore up a little enthusiasm for where the rest of their chips are going so their stock might go from X to XY, chuckling as we are at the joy of Windows reference.
Given that they service (nearly?) every other major computer maker in the world with chips for Windows machines it doesn't really read that ridiculously given the context. They don't live or die based on how Macs sell. Naturally it's foolish talk, but it's not as if they said anything crazy (as far as anyone except Apple forums are concerned). They (or someone) need to sell some Windows Ultrabooks, so here it is.
When asked to compare existing and future products against the popular MacBook Air, the pair noted that the device is powered by an Intel Core processor, shares some of the same attributes as an Ultrabook and represents a "great choice for someone who wants to invest in the Mac operating system."
"But really, with the Ultrabook, it's about offering all those things in the same device--the great responsiveness, the great battery life--and with an operating system that people have come to love over the years, as well as all the legacy applications that they would like to run," they said.
For them it is all about getting this running Windows.
Intel doesn't make money on Windows. They make money on chips. The big problem is they should have been more careful. It does look like they were taken out of context, but they should be careful to not make comparisons to one of their customer's products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by focher
Ah, yes. I've been to an Apple Store too.
Seriously, ultrabooks are just blatant copies of the MBA. That's fine. I have no problem with copying a good design. But they bring nothing new, except the likelihood of poor quality knockoffs.
I do have a bit of a problem with copying designs, whether or not they add something to it. There's a difference between inspiration and copying, and sadly, it's mostly a cloner market now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
Cheap and plentiful is what the PC business is all about.
Wealth transfer from customers to shareholders is what Apple is all about.
Open your local Best Buy flyer and you're likely to see some variation on this:
An entry level MacBook Pro pictured next to a totally tricked out PC notebook with the latest quad core i7, a fancy discrete video chip with tons of VRAM, double the RAM, double the storage, etc.
The kicker? In almost every case the high end PC carries a lower price tag than the entry level Mac.
I like OS X and the aluminum unibody case is very practical, but there's no denying that Mac buyers pay a huge premium for them.
In a way, that's true, but sometimes the OS alone is worth the difference. I regret the Windows notebook I bought last year. The screen was lower resolution and had a poor viewing angle, the chassis and case is flimsy, the unit is heavy, the ergonomics are bad, I had to uninstall a lot of software cruft, and the default settings for something the track pad were out of whack. One can buy something based on price, but sometimes you get what you pay for. And this was a $900 laptop.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
Well they could always start to use AMD, which have much slower procesors. Or maybe use ARM designs for their desktops which again cant compete with Intel desktop processors AND will require a rewrite of more or less all desktop programs.
face it, its intel or you are screwed.
Its just a comment. Is that what it takes to get this army going?
Fine, go to AMD and enjoy your second rate performance. Or go to ARM and enjoy lagging WAYYYY behind in the power stakes.
This comment looks like you forgot what you were talking about and wrote it a second time.
Comments
Steve would be on the phone asking for those Intel employees to be fired.
And perhaps they should.
Please Tim Cook, DO NOT BECOME RELIANT ON INTEL.
I doubt seriously that Steve Jobs would even care. That said, I don't have the foggiest reason how I know that Steve wouldn't want their heads but it sounded good. I do know from Steve's past accomplishments, that if he did get their heads, he'd shrink them down to the smallest form factor he can possibly get them.
As for Tim Cook, now he is a Jobs clone with upgraded social skills and will carry Apple into the future masterfully.
Sorry, but I don't see it. ARM just doesn't have the power to handle a laptop at this point. Maybe eventually, but not now.
I see your point but we're talking hypotheticals. I don't know much about chips. So I'm not qualified to say what they can or can't do. However, I can't see Apple spending $278m for PA Semi if they didn't see an opportunity to make ARM much better than it is today and for their full future lineup. Maybe A6 Maybe A9 I haven't a clue but it could be sooner than we think.
Wasn't it already proven that people do not want that convertible laptop/tablet crap?
Yes. But, they keep hoping that the 10th time's a charm.
The Dell XPS 13 is the nicest non-Apple Ultrabook I have seen. (the MBA is an Ultrabook IMO). If you are a Windows person or your organization doesn't support Macs, the XPS 13 is definitely worth considering...
All other laptops are essentially unusable after using a MacBook because of their inferior trackpad.
I see your point but we're talking hypotheticals. I don't know much about chips. So I'm not qualified to say what they can or can't do. However, I can't see Apple spending $278m for PA Semi if they didn't see an opportunity to make ARM much better than it is today and for their full future lineup. Maybe A6 Maybe A9 I haven't a clue but it could be sooner than we think.
They've gotten their money's worth from PA. Just the iPhone, iPad, and Apple TV use enough A-series chips to make it worthwhile.
I'm sure they'll continue improving the ARM chips, but they have a long way to go to catch up to Intel - and Intel is continuing to improve at the same time. Plus, Intel is apparently getting closer to releasing a chip that would compete well with ARM.
The Dell XPS 13 is the nicest non-Apple Ultrabook I have seen. (the MBA is an Ultrabook IMO). If you are a Windows person or your organization doesn't support Macs, the XPS 13 is definitely worth considering...
Starting at $1429 and not shipping for over a month for the Dell.
Just buy a MacBook Air and install Windows on it.
An entry level MacBook Pro pictured next to a totally tricked out PC notebook with the latest quad core i7, a fancy discrete video chip with tons of VRAM, double the RAM, double the storage, etc.
The kicker? In almost every case the high end PC carries a lower price tag than the entry level Mac.
I like OS X and the aluminum unibody case is very practical, but there's no denying that Mac buyers pay a huge premium for them.
The premium isn't that huge in most cases. The problem w/those higher specced pc laptops is that most of them have from 1/8-1/2 the battery life. There are some laptops w/pimped out video that don't last even a single hour. Not too portable really.
I wish Apple would embrace USB 3.
They will as soon as Intel does. Ivy Bridge has USB3 support built in, so expect it with all the new Apple systems this year.
What kind of crack are they smokin'?
Intel can suck it!!
Ironic nice they provide chips for all the macs.
You have GOT to be kidding me.
I think what's going on here with Windows users is what they call Stockholm Syndrome.
iPad is future of computing, etc.
Intel not happy.
So Intel is against against devices that don't uses their processors. Seems pretty reasonable to me.
Except Apple is one of the biggest users of Intel chips. And in the 'ultra book' class Apple is the leading purchaser. So why does Intel favor one user over another?
Intel should not be pissing off one of their biggest customers, and one of the FEW companies that can turn the world against Intel compatible cpus.
Intel has clearly noticed the plateauing of PC sales which seem to a direct result of the iPad's emergence as well as the rapid increase in ARM development to the point that even Windows can now run on ARM so they created the Ultrabook platform for Windows-based PC vendors as a way of trying to lock in premium CPU sales. Is that correct?
Yes. This is aimed at Microsoft, not at Apple.
Steve would be on the phone asking for those Intel employees to be fired.
And perhaps they should.
Please Tim Cook, DO NOT BECOME RELIANT ON INTEL.
They pretty much are at this point.
Given that they service (nearly?) every other major computer maker in the world with chips for Windows machines it doesn't really read that ridiculously given the context. They don't live or die based on how Macs sell. Naturally it's foolish talk, but it's not as if they said anything crazy (as far as anyone except Apple forums are concerned). They (or someone) need to sell some Windows Ultrabooks, so here it is.
This line says it all:
When asked to compare existing and future products against the popular MacBook Air, the pair noted that the device is powered by an Intel Core processor, shares some of the same attributes as an Ultrabook and represents a "great choice for someone who wants to invest in the Mac operating system."
"But really, with the Ultrabook, it's about offering all those things in the same device--the great responsiveness, the great battery life--and with an operating system that people have come to love over the years, as well as all the legacy applications that they would like to run," they said.
For them it is all about getting this running Windows.
Intel doesn't make money on Windows. They make money on chips. The big problem is they should have been more careful. It does look like they were taken out of context, but they should be careful to not make comparisons to one of their customer's products.
Ah, yes. I've been to an Apple Store too.
Seriously, ultrabooks are just blatant copies of the MBA. That's fine. I have no problem with copying a good design. But they bring nothing new, except the likelihood of poor quality knockoffs.
I do have a bit of a problem with copying designs, whether or not they add something to it. There's a difference between inspiration and copying, and sadly, it's mostly a cloner market now.
Cheap and plentiful is what the PC business is all about.
Wealth transfer from customers to shareholders is what Apple is all about.
Open your local Best Buy flyer and you're likely to see some variation on this:
An entry level MacBook Pro pictured next to a totally tricked out PC notebook with the latest quad core i7, a fancy discrete video chip with tons of VRAM, double the RAM, double the storage, etc.
The kicker? In almost every case the high end PC carries a lower price tag than the entry level Mac.
I like OS X and the aluminum unibody case is very practical, but there's no denying that Mac buyers pay a huge premium for them.
In a way, that's true, but sometimes the OS alone is worth the difference. I regret the Windows notebook I bought last year. The screen was lower resolution and had a poor viewing angle, the chassis and case is flimsy, the unit is heavy, the ergonomics are bad, I had to uninstall a lot of software cruft, and the default settings for something the track pad were out of whack. One can buy something based on price, but sometimes you get what you pay for. And this was a $900 laptop.
Well they could always start to use AMD, which have much slower procesors. Or maybe use ARM designs for their desktops which again cant compete with Intel desktop processors AND will require a rewrite of more or less all desktop programs.
face it, its intel or you are screwed.
Its just a comment. Is that what it takes to get this army going?
Fine, go to AMD and enjoy your second rate performance. Or go to ARM and enjoy lagging WAYYYY behind in the power stakes.
This comment looks like you forgot what you were talking about and wrote it a second time.