or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by Frank777

Yes, Affinity Publisher sounds good as well. I haven't seen it yet. It will likely take two of three versions to be usable in design shops, but it's great to see another Mac-only company doing to Photoshop what Quark should have done ages ago.
 Which is why Pixelmator is yesterday's news. Affinity Photo does CMYK, and is likely the Photoshop alternative we've been waiting for.
This is the argument that least persuades me about upgradability. Most "regular" customers use only about 20% of the features of their computer. Why then, does Apple invest significant engineering resources in upgrading OS X with features that most people will never use? Should they just offer a stripped down OS and save on engineering costs? Who "needs" a Retina screen anyway? Sherlock? Split screens? Thunderbolt? Can't we just get by with less and save the engineering...
You do realize that the point here is that you can't perform those upgrades you mention on the new iMac, right?
Look, we've debated the soldered RAM thing for years now, and while it's a problem for me I understand non-techies don't care. And Apple's profiting off that, and it's fine.   But it's really more the 5400 drive thing that bothers me.   In 2015, how much could Apple really be profiting from using outdated tech instead of the standard version? Cook is supposed to be a procurement whiz, and he can't get 7200rpm drives in quantity for the iMac?   Apple is supposed to...
 Even 7 or 8 years ago, there were a lot of low end consumers using iMacs. Today, if someone tells you their parents want a computer just to check email and surf the web, you direct them to the iPad. That's what I mean, a lot of those "average users" don't exist anymore. Students have gone entirely to laptops and iPads. So who's Apple really building the 21" iMac for? Any home users editing video will eventually feel the slower drive. Do small businesses really not care...
Soldered RAM. Non upgradable, 5400 drives. No upgrade to Thunderbolt 3 or USB 3.1. Who asked for this?   Seriously, who's the target customer for the 21" iMac?   The lower end is moving to iOS devices, and the iPad Pro will accelerate that.   The rest of us actually care about RAM upgradability and faster drives, even if we're just using iMovie to edit 4K video. Are there still enough "newbies" to the Mac these days to buy these things?   Note: I'm speaking...
The straight comparison is too low, since we know the new 15" can't drop all the ports the way the MacBook did.I'm hoping we get to the 4lb level. A drop in the starting price would also be cool, since we can't upgrade anything inside anymore.
 Actually, the current 15" is 4.49 pounds. I've been critical of Apple's obsession with shrinking the iMac's size in the past, but I've also said repeatedly that dropping the half-pound on the 15" would lead to a surge in sales from a lot of pros who currently choose the 13" just for portability. It sounds a bit silly, but I think 4lbs is really the magic number for 15", and Dell has managed to hit it first. How embarrassing.
Dell just introduced their Skylake 15", which includes Thunderbolt 3 (though not USB 3.1), a thin bezel and and hits the magic weight of 4lbs.   This comes after Redmond just went public with a 13" MacBook Pro competitor that also looks pretty good. If this continues for much longer, the next MacBook Pro rev will really look like a "Me Too" update.
New Posts  All Forums: