or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple throws out the rulebook for its unique next-gen Mac Pro
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple throws out the rulebook for its unique next-gen Mac Pro - Page 23

post #881 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


Cinebench is made by the same people that make Cinema 4D - it's pretty much a direct test of how Cinema 4D will run - so it's one of the least synthetic benchmarks around. This kind of processing has difficulties migrating to OpenCL because of the function calls. GPUs seem to only be able to handle smaller chunks of code. It's not so much OpenCL itself but OpenCL on the GPUs. Hopefully AMD and NVidia will eventually manage to work around these problems but what would help is if AMD actually got raytracing code to work themselves so that external developers could just use an API. NVidia has done this but they used CUDA - this is why Adobe's raytracer in After Effects isn't accelerated with AMD GPUs.

One thing with the Cinebench scores is that the numbers do lead you to think there's a bigger difference the higher the scores get. For example, a score of 27 compared to 18 looks like it might be a huge difference whereas 7 vs 4 doesn't look that much different. The latter difference however is 75% and the former difference is 50%. This perception will get worse the higher it goes e.g a Mac Pro at 35 compared to an HP at 53 - the HP is still just 50% faster though.

Apple has the sales data for their machines and I suspect that they will have found that people who buy the highest CPU models don't upgrade very often and may even extend the life of the machine doing their own GPUs upgrades as many online accounts of breaking the GPU tabs would indicate. GPUs go out of date quicker than CPUs so tying those down means that it encourages more frequent upgrades.

I guess people need to figure out what tests are best for their purposes.   

 

Have you priced out a HP Z820 computer filled to gills?  It's RIPPING expensive.  I think the MacPro with an top of the line Promise RAID that holds the same amount of drive storage will be much less expensive and still give a lot more expansion from TB2.  In the A/V market, there is a TON of TB products that they use, which they won't be able to use with the HP.   there are existing Firewire, Fiberchannel, and other products that can easily be connected to TB2 ports with a low cost or relatively low cost adapter.  That removes the need for PCI cards.  Also, the HP doesn't have as fast SSD storage whereas the MacPro will come standard with a certain amount for the OS, apps and some data.  You would have to install VERY expensive PCI cards for high speed SSD.    I think for those that work in an environment where they utilize a SANS network, they won't need lots of internal RAID.  That save a LOT of money, right there.  Anyone that does location work, will typically use external storage.  Lots of options currently available.

 

 I forgot to mention, Apple is doing some interesting things with optimization with OS X, so maybe it will help with certain speed tests due just to the OS.  I wish Apple could figure out how to really utilize MP better so they could get 2x whenever they plopped in a second processor.


Edited by drblank - 8/18/13 at 10:53am
post #882 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Cinebench is made by the same people that make Cinema 4D - it's pretty much a direct test of how Cinema 4D will run - so it's one of the least synthetic benchmarks around. This kind of processing has difficulties migrating to OpenCL because of the function calls. GPUs seem to only be able to handle smaller chunks of code. It's not so much OpenCL itself but OpenCL on the GPUs. Hopefully AMD and NVidia will eventually manage to work around these problems but what would help is if AMD actually got raytracing code to work themselves so that external developers could just use an API. NVidia has done this but they used CUDA - this is why Adobe's raytracer in After Effects isn't accelerated with AMD GPUs.
AMD has been very forthright in this regard, thy have said heterogeneous computing is their future and more so they are transistioning their GPUs to better support compute.

As to Cinebench it is still software that will need updating to reflect the new processor. Now will that make a huge difference is another discussion. Just changing to a new C++ compiler could have a big impact on how code runs on a processor. All I'm really saying is don't jump to conclusions before hardware and updated software ships.
Quote:
One thing with the Cinebench scores is that the numbers do lead you to think there's a bigger difference the higher the scores get. For example, a score of 27 compared to 18 looks like it might be a huge difference whereas 7 vs 4 doesn't look that much different. The latter difference however is 75% and the former difference is 50%. This perception will get worse the higher it goes e.g a Mac Pro at 35 compared to an HP at 53 - the HP is still just 50% faster though.
Still 50% is nothing to sneeze at.
Quote:
Apple has the sales data for their machines and I suspect that they will have found that people who buy the highest CPU models don't upgrade very often and may even extend the life of the machine doing their own GPUs upgrades as many online accounts of breaking the GPU tabs would indicate. GPUs go out of date quicker than CPUs so tying those down means that it encourages more frequent upgrades.
I'm not convinced that the Mac Pros new design is there to encourage updates. It touches upon to many other issues for that to be a prime factor in the machines design.
Quote:
I'd say the performance of this Xeon is very much down to being an architecture step behind. The Haswell i7-4770k, which may end up in the iMac scores 8.48 in Cinebench. Previously, the top-end Mac Pro has been 3x faster than an iMac but will now just be 2x despite comparing 4-core to 12-core. The 15-core Haswell should sort this and Haswell might run into delays, which would move the architectures back into alignment:
Is the answer cores or clock rate? It is pretty obvious that the 12 core throttles hard. This is why I question the wisdom of running out and buying the 12 core platform. For many users lesser machines might deliver better results. It really comes down to the users software tools and how well they leverage clock rate versus lots of cores.
Quote:
http://www.dailytech.com/Report+Intel+Delays+14+nm+Broadwell+Schedules+Haswell+Refresh+for+2014/article31770.htm

Instead of Broadwell in 2014, they'd hold the consumer chips back on Haswell. Then when the Xeon moves to Haswell, it will look better.

Well the future is hard to predict, AMD could pull a rabbit out of the hat and compel Intel once again to become agressive. (Yes more wishful thinking). It is no surprise that Intel has dragged feet with respect to XEON as they are not hurting from competition.
post #883 of 1290

I wish Apple made an i5/i7 Version of the MacPro for less money. 

post #884 of 1290
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
They sell a riser to make the two displays align

 

Ever since the first Studio Displays, I've always thought that was confusing bordering on idiotic. It wasn't until the iMac and Cinema Display got matching designs that this became totally inexcusable. It seems strange that Steve wouldn't have wanted them to match up, but, then again, he really didn't strike me as the multiple displays type. And in fact he wasn't.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #885 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

As to Cinebench it is still software that will need updating to reflect the new processor. Now will that make a huge difference is another discussion. Just changing to a new C++ compiler could have a big impact on how code runs on a processor. All I'm really saying is don't jump to conclusions before hardware and updated software ships.

The Ivy Bridge architecture has been out for over a year now and is also just a die-shrink of Sandy Bridge. Haswell is the new architecture. There's a test here that showed a small increase in performance using compiler options with Sandy Bridge but zero and in some cases a downgrade with Ivy Bridge:

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_ivy_tuning&num=2

If this was Haswell-EP, there would be a possibility of seeing a performance boost from the new architecture. I think the only possibility here is if Apple manages to run the CPU at a higher clock speed due to their cooling solution. I think these scores aren't all that bad though as long as the price points are more reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Still 50% is nothing to sneeze at.

It's noticeable; 15 minute jobs go down to 10 minutes. When it comes to Cinebench scores, 50% starts to look like a bigger difference the higher up the scores get because the numbers get further apart. The focus should be on the percentage difference and not the numbers themselves.

If Apple could leverage Thunderbolt to chain machines transparently, that would largely make any complaints about lower performance in one machine redundant. All people would have to do is buy 2 or more machines, plug them in and enable compute sharing. If they were able to virtualize the hardware to avoid software license issues, that would be even better but a lot of software has unlimited core licenses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

I'm not convinced that the Mac Pros new design is there to encourage updates.

It's at least there to encourage BTO purchases of the SSD and GPUs. Rather than buy the entry model and get your own NVidia GPU on the cheap, you have to get Apple's options. The lack of upgradeability will encourage buying new machines too, even if it wasn't intentional. This is from the company that glued the screen on the iMac though so my guess is it was intentional. I think Mac Pro owners have convinced themselves over the years that Apple was giving them special treatment by keeping them upgradeable but they inflated the margins first. By locking down the upgrades, Apple can get better profits that way and that could give them the freedom to hit a lower entry price point. At the very least, I think the new Mac Pros will offer more performance value for the money spent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Is the answer cores or clock rate? It is pretty obvious that the 12 core throttles hard. This is why I question the wisdom of running out and buying the 12 core platform. For many users lesser machines might deliver better results. It really comes down to the users software tools and how well they leverage clock rate versus lots of cores.

Ideally both but Intel seems to get better results from core-count for tasks that use all the cores. Clock speed increases probably increase temperatures faster than more cores at lower clocks. Certainly for a number of jobs that use very few cores, CPUs that can be clocked higher will perform better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Well the future is hard to predict, AMD could pull a rabbit out of the hat and compel Intel once again to become agressive. (Yes more wishful thinking). It is no surprise that Intel has dragged feet with respect to XEON as they are not hurting from competition.

If AMD keeps racking up losses like they did last quarter, they will be bankrupt soon. They have $3.9b assets, $3.5b liabilities and they made a loss last quarter of $76m. If their stockholder equity goes below zero and more importantly their cash doesn't cover their bills, the stockholders will either have to finance the company or it will be put up for sale. This is why employees don't always like having large stockholdings in companies, especially ones the size of Apple as it can come with heavy financial responsibility when it does badly.

AMD's losses do seem to be slowing down but they could be as little as a year away from bankruptcy. Everything is spiralling down, they are cutting marketing, R&D, increasing liabilities, selling property/assets, they outsourced their chip manufacturing to Globalfoundries in 2009 and that comes with its own problems:

http://www.zdnet.com/amd-amends-globalfoundries-deal-to-pay-320-million-7000008443/

They have no mobile presence at all, unlike NVidia. NVidia's stockholder equity is over 10x AMD's. NVidia actually has enough money to buy AMD. I think they'd be allowed to do that kind of purchase because they are still competing with Intel, who are the market leader. NVidia and AMD together against Intel would surely give them a little hotter competition because NVidia would be able to ship x86 machines to compete with Intel.
post #886 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

They have no mobile presence at all, unlike NVidia. NVidia's stockholder equity is over 10x AMD's. NVidia actually has enough money to buy AMD. I think they'd be allowed to do that kind of purchase because they are still competing with Intel, who are the market leader. NVidia and AMD together against Intel would surely give them a little hotter competition because NVidia would be able to ship x86 machines to compete with Intel.

 

Yah but...you're at the point where you wonder if Huang and his board would even want to bother.  Huge risk for nVidia and they'd probably be forced to sell the ATI portion to someone anyway.

 

I dunno, they just got more console business but this was business that nVidia walked away from...and ATI had both the Wii and the 360 so it's kinda a wash. Are folks really all that excited about Temash and Kabini?

 

Kaveri delayed to 2014 (yah, okay they say they always planned '14 availability). Assuming Intel's 14nm process isn't in complete disarray they're going to get hammered.  Especially with 14nm Atom in the mix in Q2 2014.

 

LOL...14nm Atom iPad design win in 2014 doesn't sound so outlandish anymore.

 

http://www.eweek.com/pc-hardware/intel-may-speed-up-atom-production-report/

post #887 of 1290

I just found this product as the perfect companion to the new MacPro.  I'm sure there will be similar products tailored for Thunderbolt 2.  But check out the Netstor NA333TB.

 

It has 16 drive bays AND 3 PCI slots all in one box. Two birds with one stone.

post #888 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

The Ivy Bridge architecture has been out for over a year now and is also just a die-shrink of Sandy Bridge. Haswell is the new architecture. There's a test here that showed a small increase in performance using compiler options with Sandy Bridge but zero and in some cases a downgrade with Ivy Bridge:
Haswell is a new architecture but the stress is on power performance not computational performance. As such it isn't a huge step above Ivy Bridge performance wise. That isn't bad at all though as it gives us Mac Book AIRs that just run circles around last years while running on battery.
Quote:
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=intel_ivy_tuning&num=2

If this was Haswell-EP, there would be a possibility of seeing a performance boost from the new architecture. I think the only possibility here is if Apple manages to run the CPU at a higher clock speed due to their cooling solution. I think these scores aren't all that bad though as long as the price points are more reasonable.
It's noticeable; 15 minute jobs go down to 10 minutes. When it comes to Cinebench scores, 50% starts to look like a bigger difference the higher up the scores get because the numbers get further apart. The focus should be on the percentage difference and not the numbers themselves.
For most users the performance should be much better than past hardware.
Quote:
If Apple could leverage Thunderbolt to chain machines transparently, that would largely make any complaints about lower performance in one machine redundant. All people would have to do is buy 2 or more machines, plug them in and enable compute sharing. If they were able to virtualize the hardware to avoid software license issues, that would be even better but a lot of software has unlimited core licenses.
It will be interesting to see if Apple does anything with clustering. Sadly I think they have abandoned it for good.
Quote:

It's at least there to encourage BTO purchases of the SSD and GPUs. Rather than buy the entry model and get your own NVidia GPU on the cheap, you have to get Apple's options. The lack of upgradeability will encourage buying new machines too, even if it wasn't intentional. This is from the company that glued the screen on the iMac though so my guess is it was intentional.
I think it is a realization of where technology is taking Apple. We are quickly coming to the point where integration will mean add in GPUs will be a thing of the past. The only machines likely to offer such features are workstations like the Mac Pro and even these machines will suffer from a why bother mentality. If a "Pro" keeps the new Mac Pro 3-4 years trying to upgrade with a new GPU will be silly as you will be putting GPUs into dated hardware.
Quote:
I think Mac Pro owners have convinced themselves over the years that Apple was giving them special treatment by keeping them upgradeable but they inflated the margins first. By locking down the upgrades, Apple can get better profits that way and that could give them the freedom to hit a lower entry price point. At the very least, I think the new Mac Pros will offer more performance value for the money spent.
They better. As to the so called "pros" out there, I don't think a lot of them really know what they want. They are simpletons that look at what worked for them in the past and can't manage to grasp an improved future.
Quote:
Ideally both but Intel seems to get better results from core-count for tasks that use all the cores. Clock speed increases probably increase temperatures faster than more cores at lower clocks. Certainly for a number of jobs that use very few cores, CPUs that can be clocked higher will perform better.
The thermal limiting of the many core models is something that 14 nm should deal with fairly well. We might not get more cores but we should at the very least get faster cores.
Quote:
If AMD keeps racking up losses like they did last quarter, they will be bankrupt soon. They have $3.9b assets, $3.5b liabilities and they made a loss last quarter of $76m.
That is actually damn food for AMD. 76 million sounds like a lot to us grunts working for a wage but for a company the size of AMD it is real close to being in the black.
Quote:
If their stockholder equity goes below zero and more importantly their cash doesn't cover their bills, the stockholders will either have to finance the company or it will be put up for sale. This is why employees don't always like having large stockholdings in companies, especially ones the size of Apple as it can come with heavy financial responsibility when it does badly.
I can see them moving forward out of this funk but it requires that the economy take off again, which won't happen with the current administration in Washington. It is hard to believe but people have gotten even tighter with money around here, I fully expect the economy to slow even more. This isn't all AMDs fault as even Intel is feeling the pain right now.
Quote:
AMD's losses do seem to be slowing down but they could be as little as a year away from bankruptcy. Everything is spiralling down, they are cutting marketing, R&D, increasing liabilities, selling property/assets, they outsourced their chip manufacturing to Globalfoundries in 2009 and that comes with its own problems:
The global foundries deal happened a long time ago. It is what AMD is doing now that will either make or break the company. I think they have a chance. Slim maybe but they have a chance. However the big problem is factors outside of their control, the economy, the rise of ARM and with it mobile computing. They have to adapt to these new realities and frankly they are trying.
Quote:
??? AMD has perfectly good mobile solutions. Apple isn't using them this year, but Apple is just as likely to drop NVidia for the next round of hardware. Beyond that AMD has been very successful with BRAZOS that has handily beat Atom in many design ins.
Quote:
NVidia's stockholder equity is over 10x AMD's. NVidia actually has enough money to buy AMD. I think they'd be allowed to do that kind of purchase because they are still competing with Intel, who are the market leader. NVidia and AMD together against Intel would surely give them a little hotter competition because NVidia would be able to ship x86 machines to compete with Intel.

In some ways I see NVidia as being on the right track trying to do ARM right. The days of x86 are slowly fading away and frankly I'm not sure Intel can do anything about it. If Apple came out with an ARM based laptop we wold know that Intels days are numbered. AMD has also been making noise about ARM and frankly that looks like a case of seeing the writing on the wall.
post #889 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Yah but...you're at the point where you wonder if Huang and his board would even want to bother.  Huge risk for nVidia and they'd probably be forced to sell the ATI portion to someone anyway.
Plus they rightly see a future world where Intel or x86 isn't the big deal it has been in the past. There is a lot of focus on the condition of AMD but Intel could find itself in a similar situation depending upon how the market evolves. They are doing everything they can to make ATOM a success but that success isn't a given at this stage.
Quote:
I dunno, they just got more console business but this was business that nVidia walked away from...and ATI had both the Wii and the 360 so it's kinda a wash. Are folks really all that excited about Temash and Kabini?
AMD gets a little more respect outside the Mac world. The big problem they have is that they are quickly loosing their GPU advantage. That is huge even though people underestimate just how important GPUs are for modern operating systems.
Quote:
Kaveri delayed to 2014 (yah, okay they say they always planned '14 availability). Assuming Intel's 14nm process isn't in complete disarray they're going to get hammered.  Especially with 14nm Atom in the mix in Q2 2014.
If they go with TSMC that could also be a 14 nm or so part. AMD does have to take a chance here with respect to TSMC.
Quote:
LOL...14nm Atom iPad design win in 2014 doesn't sound so outlandish anymore.
It would be a joke really. Intel has been caught red handed offering up performance figures that are for the most part bogus. Atom is still a hot chip and carries a lot of i86 baggage with it.
Intel is feeling the heat just like AMD is. Their balance sheet is still in the black though. The question is can they build a generic processor that meets the needs of tablet and other device manufactures and more importantly compete with Apple. If apple has a 64 bit version of their A series processors available in 2014 it could be a difficult landscape for Intel.
post #890 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

As to the so called "pros" out there, I don't think a lot of them really know what they want. They are simpletons that look at what worked for them in the past and can't manage to grasp an improved future.

 

I don't know which bothers me more... the arrogance you exhibit with this kind of pontification or the ignorance you betray while doing it. You really believe that pros don't know how to manage their own businesses, and you know better than they what's good for them? Wow. It must be nice to be omniscient.

 

Enjoy the bozo bin.

post #891 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v View Post

I don't know which bothers me more... the arrogance you exhibit with this kind of pontification or the ignorance you betray while doing it.
It is neither arrogance nor ignorance, what is say is the result of observations made over time. You should not that I was careful not to include all pros, just a "lot" of them. In any event it it pretty clear that a lot of "pros" don't understand the technology they work with on a daily basis. You may personally but if you are honest with yourself you will find many around you that don't have a clue.
Quote:
You really believe that pros don't know how to manage their own businesses, and you know better than they what's good for them?
Never said that. I'm simply pointing out the fact that many pros don't understand the technology they are working with. As for managing a business many idiots do that everyday, management isn't about being the smarter person on the block, it is a collection of skills that is hard to quantify.
Quote:
Wow. It must be nice to be omniscient.
It has nothing to do with being omniscient, it has to do with many observations of people that call themselves pros. Maybe you take English as a second language so you don't grasp the less that inclusive use of the word "lot". It doesn't mean that every pro is ignorant about the technology they use on a daily basis, just that a good portion is.
Quote:
Enjoy the bozo bin.
Bye bye!

Hopefully you will take a chill pill and realize how foolish you have been here.
post #892 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


Plus they rightly see a future world where Intel or x86 isn't the big deal it has been in the past. There is a lot of focus on the condition of AMD but Intel could find itself in a similar situation depending upon how the market evolves. They are doing everything they can to make ATOM a success but that success isn't a given at this stage.

 

 

There's a huge performance gap between Intel and ARM and Intel has closed the power gap faster than ARM has increased performance.

 

They aren't doing everything to make Atom a success until this year when the actually get it on the current process as opposed to lagging.

 

AMD's primary disadvantage was the brain drain when they made a series of bad moves.

 

Quote:
AMD gets a little more respect outside the Mac world. The big problem they have is that they are quickly loosing their GPU advantage. That is huge even though people underestimate just how important GPUs are for modern operating systems.

 

You hugely overstate the importance of GPU with respect to the OS.

 

 

Quote:
It would be a joke really. Intel has been caught red handed offering up performance figures that are for the most part bogus. Atom is still a hot chip and carries a lot of i86 baggage with it.

 

 

There's a dual core 7W TDP haswell and a 15W TDP quad i7.

 

 

The Bay Trail appear to be very good contenders for Q4 of this year.  Intel got the Galaxy 3 design win this year with the 32nm Z2560.  A little slow but at 32nm it's about what would be expected.

Quote:
Intel is feeling the heat just like AMD is. Their balance sheet is still in the black though. The question is can they build a generic processor that meets the needs of tablet and other device manufactures and more importantly compete with Apple. If apple has a 64 bit version of their A series processors available in 2014 it could be a difficult landscape for Intel.

 

Why?  It's not as if you're going to run a MBP on ARM.  Or even the MBA.  On the other hand if the 14nm Core i3 can hit a 5W TDP down from 7W there's a lot of performance per watt there.  And Apple doesn't sell their chips to anyone.  Intel doesn't compete with them at all but Samsung, Qualcomm and nVidia.

 

Lets see how good the haswell convertibles are.  North Cape looked cool.  I'd seriously love a MBA that did that.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fquWp-xTbzE

post #893 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

 

 

There's a huge performance gap between Intel and ARM and Intel has closed the power gap faster than ARM has increased performance.

 

They aren't doing everything to make Atom a success until this year when the actually get it on the current process as opposed to lagging.

 

AMD's primary disadvantage was the brain drain when they made a series of bad moves.

 

 

You hugely overstate the importance of GPU with respect to the OS.

 

 

 

 

There's a dual core 7W TDP haswell and a 15W TDP quad i7.

 

 

The Bay Trail appear to be very good contenders for Q4 of this year.  Intel got the Galaxy 3 design win this year with the 32nm Z2560.  A little slow but at 32nm it's about what would be expected.

 

Why?  It's not as if you're going to run a MBP on ARM.  Or even the MBA.  On the other hand if the 14nm Core i3 can hit a 5W TDP down from 7W there's a lot of performance per watt there.  And Apple doesn't sell their chips to anyone.  Intel doesn't compete with them at all but Samsung, Qualcomm and nVidia.

 

Lets see how good the haswell convertibles are.  North Cape looked cool.  I'd seriously love a MBA that did that.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fquWp-xTbzE

I think it's a safe assumption that Apple won't use i3 chips.  They only support i5 and i7 chips for their laptops and desktops. I don't Apple is even interested in i3's they aren't that desperate for sales to compete at the i3 level.  Most of the dirt cheap PC laptops are i3, and that's a market Apple doesn't want to play in because there is no room for decent profits.  Personally, Intel should raise their standards for processors and not destroy mfg abilities to make a decent profit.  These companies can't survive selling $400 laptops.

post #894 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I think it's a safe assumption that Apple won't use i3 chips.  They only support i5 and i7 chips for their laptops and desktops. I don't Apple is even interested in i3's they aren't that desperate for sales to compete at the i3 level.  Most of the dirt cheap PC laptops are i3, and that's a market Apple doesn't want to play in because there is no room for decent profits.  Personally, Intel should raise their standards for processors and not destroy mfg abilities to make a decent profit.  These companies can't survive selling $400 laptops.

 

Like I said, lets wait and see how the Haswell Y series do in convertible tablets this year.  14nm chips will be even better.

post #895 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post


There's a huge performance gap between Intel and ARM and Intel has closed the power gap faster than ARM has increased performance.
Intel has also fudged some numbers to make Atom look better than it is. With TSMC coming on strong with its own 14 nm process it isn't certain that Intel can grab the market share they would like.
Quote:
They aren't doing everything to make Atom a success until this year when the actually get it on the current process as opposed to lagging.

AMD's primary disadvantage was the brain drain when they made a series of bad moves.
AMD is in an interesting position right now. It looks like they have the leadership in place to rationalize a product line up. It really becomes a question of time, that is can they go black before creditors come knocking.
Quote:

You hugely overstate the importance of GPU with respect to the OS.
Not at all. Between video decode units, OpenCL and 3D acceleration GPUs are extremely important in delivering the sort of systems user expect these days. In fact without modern GPUs the OS couldn't deliver the services users expect these days.

Now we could argue about what is the OS. Core OS activities take place in the integer units of the CPU which is a limited view of an OS. These days though it is reasonable to think of things such as video encode/decode, 3D acceleration, compute support and other things as part of the OS.
Quote:

There's a dual core 7W TDP haswell and a 15W TDP quad i7.


The Bay Trail appear to be very good contenders for Q4 of this year.  Intel got the Galaxy 3 design win this year with the 32nm Z2560.  A little slow but at 32nm it's about what would be expected.
The problem is Intel needs a lot of design wins and the industry doesn't want to play Intels game anymore. It isn't just Intels market manipulation that is a problem it is the fact that the industry has changed. Systems these days are not built on a printed circuit board like in the past, rather systems are designed on chips. What Woz use to do with Pals and a few TTL chips is now done with CAD system targeting the latest silicon process. Intel just doesn't seem to be really oriented to this reality, they want to sell a handful of generic chips to as many customers as possible.
Quote:
Why?  It's not as if you're going to run a MBP on ARM.  Or even the MBA.  On the other hand if the 14nm Core i3 can hit a 5W TDP down from 7W there's a lot of performance per watt there.  And Apple doesn't sell their chips to anyone.  Intel doesn't compete with them at all but Samsung, Qualcomm and nVidia.
That is not how I see it. Apple is a primary competitor for Intel. If you look at Apples sales, Intel is loosing 50 million sales a quarter. Not only that but to be able to compete with Apple, the likes of Samsung and other device manufactures have no choice but to do their own custom chips.

In any event Intel competes with Apple but not in the traditional way. It is all about lost sales and the impact Apple has on the market. Think about the next processes node which should double available transistors to Apple and will likely do so all the way to 14nm. At some point those transistors become valuable for different functionality rather than yet another core. It is hard to say how Apple will use those transistors but it is a certainty they won't use those transistors in the same way Intel will.
Quote:
Lets see how good the haswell convertibles are.  North Cape looked cool.  I'd seriously love a MBA that did that.
I've really grown attached to my iPad, as such my need for a laptop simply isn't as strong as it once was. If I do buy another laptop it will be for performance something the MBA is not oriented towards. Of course with 14 nm chips, maybe a MBA would be in my future. As for iPad I'm not sure if this year will deliver a major enhancement to the "A" series chips. However Apple has a long ways to go performance wise, I just don't see a convertible replacing my iPad even if it has a Haswell based processor.
post #896 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

Like I said, lets wait and see how the Haswell Y series do in convertible tablets this year.  14nm chips will be even better.

14 nm will be huge. Haswell was a huge step forward in power management, 14 nm would allow for the equivalent of two haswell processors on a die
post #897 of 1290
The Y series doesn't really interest me much as the H and U series in that order and even then I am only interested in the U processors that have the best graphics. I agree with wizard on Apple making a good decision to not go after i3 processors. I was even talking to a co-worker about recommending a computer for a his daughter for school and I said if you see "core i3" skip it. Minimum should be core i5 or core i7.
post #898 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

 

Like I said, lets wait and see how the Haswell Y series do in convertible tablets this year.  14nm chips will be even better.

Apple isn't going to make a convertible.  

 

I wouldn't want OS X on a tablet.  I would like more features of OS in iOS, but I don't want the full OS X experience on a tablet.  

 

Personally, what I think is killing the PC industry is too many different chips with too subtle of a difference between them.

 

I also think it's poor taste on Intel's side that they don't even have pictures and specs on Apple desktops/laptops on their website.  The seem to promote the PC industry, but not Macs and Apple has more Intel technology inside their computers than these PCs do, especially since Apple promotes Thunderbolt I/O.  

post #899 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Apple isn't going to make a convertible.  
I would hope not.
Quote:
I wouldn't want OS X on a tablet.  I would like more features of OS in iOS, but I don't want the full OS X experience on a tablet.  
This I agree with 100%. Apple needs to rethink restrictions that aren't security related.
Quote:
Personally, what I think is killing the PC industry is too many different chips with too subtle of a difference between them.
Err no there are more valid reasons for the PC industries slippage. However I have to agree with one point Intel markets way to many trivial variants of the same processor. That plethora of models leads to other problems especially with respect to ones perception by the consumer.
Quote:
I also think it's poor taste on Intel's side that they don't even have pictures and specs on Apple desktops/laptops on their website.
That is odd. Mac Book AIRs would be the perfect vehicle to highlight Haswell. Knowing Apple though I wouldn't be surprised to find that they object to such mentions. In the end it would be interesting to know the truth.
Quote:
 The seem to promote the PC industry, but not Macs and Apple has more Intel technology inside their computers than these PCs do, especially since Apple promotes Thunderbolt I/O.  
Interesting isn't it. I have to wonder if Apple simply doesn't want to be associated with Intels Wintel efforts. This due to the fear of being linked to that industry.
post #900 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Apple isn't going to make a convertible.  

I wouldn't want OS X on a tablet.  I would like more features of OS in iOS, but I don't want the full OS X experience on a tablet.  

Personally, what I think is killing the PC industry is too many different chips with too subtle of a difference between them.

I also think it's poor taste on Intel's side that they don't even have pictures and specs on Apple desktops/laptops on their website.  The seem to promote the PC industry, but not Macs and Apple has more Intel technology inside their computers than these PCs do, especially since Apple promotes Thunderbolt I/O.  

Well it's not a tablet when docked to the keyboard. It's 11" a MBA equivalent.

The iPad mini strikes me as the best form factor for consumption and at a lower cost. An iPad Pro with keyboard doc would be a killer business machine if it could run office.
post #901 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post


Well it's not a tablet when docked to the keyboard. It's 11" a MBA equivalent.

The iPad mini strikes me as the best form factor for consumption and at a lower cost. An iPad Pro with keyboard doc would be a killer business machine if it could run office.

I think you're missing the point.  First off, for Office, you can use iWork.  It's pretty much the same thing for MOST people.  Most people don't use much else other than what iWork does, especially for a tablet.  IF someone is going to need more functionality of what Office does, then they would need a much more powerful computer, but most people don't do that.

 

I think a lot of people have this misconception that in order for a tablet to be used in a business manner that it has to run Office.    iPads are used by business professionals that use them for a LOT more than typical Office apps.  There are interior designer, architects, graphics professionals, music production, audio production, banking, etc., etc. where they use a professional grade tablet app that does something related to their BUSINESS that isn't a spreadsheet, wp, presentation software or email communications.  So this, it has to run Office for it to be a business tablet, is a line of Microsoft marketing BS.

 

An iPad is NOT an equivalent to a MBA when docked to a keyboard.  I personally, wouldn't use an iPad when a traditional laptop/desktop would be needed, and visa versa.  To buy an iPad thinking it will totally take the place of a laptop?  No, I don't think it really should be taken that way.    there are always going to be some people that want to spend as little money as possible and do as much as possible and I just think Office type apps on a tablet is more for limited functionality than full functionality.  That's why Windows 7 kinda sucks as a touchscreen tablet OS, which is essentially what Windows 8 is once you get past the start up screen.  

 

A MBA can connect to Thunderbolt devices, has much more storage, better graphics, and runs OS X not iOS. 

 

When Microsoft gets their Office app out for iOS, it won't be the same version of Office that comes on a traditional laptop/desktop.  It's more in name and compatibility, but not full functionality from my understanding.

post #902 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

I think you're missing the point.  First off, for Office, you can use iWork.  It's pretty much the same thing for MOST people.  Most people don't use much else other than what iWork does, especially for a tablet.  IF someone is going to need more functionality of what Office does, then they would need a much more powerful computer, but most people don't do that.

 

An iPad with a Core i5 would be a much more powerful computer.

 

And power not just for Office but also Aperture, iLife, Photoshop, Pixelmator, etc.

 

And Office is greatly desired because of Powerpoint and Excel.

 

Quote:

I think a lot of people have this misconception that in order for a tablet to be used in a business manner that it has to run Office.    iPads are used by business professionals that use them for a LOT more than typical Office apps.  

 

Yes, but if you need Office you're still tethered to yet another device.  Lots of folks still need Office and that simply cannot be denied.

Quote:
There are interior designer, architects, graphics professionals, music production, audio production, banking, etc., etc. where they use a professional grade tablet app that does something related to their BUSINESS that isn't a spreadsheet, wp, presentation software or email communications.  So this, it has to run Office for it to be a business tablet, is a line of Microsoft marketing BS.

 

All of whom have applications on their Mac that they do not have on their iPad.  And professional grade tablet apps are starved for more power so moving to a more powerful Intel CPU isn't a terrible thing.

 

The fact that I need MS Office if I need to replace my laptop with the iPad is not marketing BS.  It's just the way it is given the way our enterprise is set up and not something that will change any time soon.

 

Quote:
An iPad is NOT an equivalent to a MBA when docked to a keyboard.     

 

Sure it can be.  Lots of folks I know have given up their laptops in favor of an iPad and keyboard.  

Quote:
I personally, wouldn't use an iPad when a traditional laptop/desktop would be needed, and visa versa.  To buy an iPad thinking it will totally take the place of a laptop?  No, I don't think it really should be taken that way. 

 

You missed the memo on the Post PC revolution...

Quote:
there are always going to be some people that want to spend as little money as possible and do as much as possible and I just think Office type apps on a tablet is more for limited functionality than full functionality.  That's why Windows 7 kinda sucks as a touchscreen tablet OS, which is essentially what Windows 8 is once you get past the start up screen. 

 

Win7 and Win8 aren't very good tablet OS's.  That's true.  So what?

Quote:

A MBA can connect to Thunderbolt devices, has much more storage, better graphics, and runs OS X not iOS. 

 

The keyboard dock easily contain more storage along with more battery as well as TB, USB3, etc.  A Core i3/i5 based iPad would have the same graphics as the MBA.  

 

iOS is OSX modified for the iPhone and iPad and most iOS apps can run today on OSX given they are developed on OSX and often run on the simulator with code compiled for the x86 platform and not ARM.

 

There's little reason that a 11" or 13" MBA convertible couldn't run in a tablet mode that is very much like iOS when detached from the keyboard dock with a large portion of the iPad app library available.  When docked, just like in the intel reference system, it could have whatever resolution it wants so long as in tablet mode it was some mulitple of 1024x768 so current iPad apps could run with a simple recompile. 

 

Quote:
When Microsoft gets their Office app out for iOS, it won't be the same version of Office that comes on a traditional laptop/desktop.  It's more in name and compatibility, but not full functionality from my understanding.

 

The Office on OSX is full featured.  An 11" or 13" MBA convertible could run it just fine.  Which is the point.

 

A 13" MBA based iPad Pro would be even more awesome and allow Apple to keep the 10" iPad in pure tablet form.  But given the popularity of the 8" iPad Mini I'd go ahead and converge the 11" MBA and 10" iPad.
post #903 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post

 

An iPad with a Core i5 would be a much more powerful computer.

 

And power not just for Office but also Aperture, iLife, Photoshop, Pixelmator, etc.

 

And Office is greatly desired because of Powerpoint and Excel.

 

 

Yes, but if you need Office you're still tethered to yet another device.  Lots of folks still need Office and that simply cannot be denied.

 

All of whom have applications on their Mac that they do not have on their iPad.  And professional grade tablet apps are starved for more power so moving to a more powerful Intel CPU isn't a terrible thing.

 

The fact that I need MS Office if I need to replace my laptop with the iPad is not marketing BS.  It's just the way it is given the way our enterprise is set up and not something that will change any time soon.

 

 

Sure it can be.  Lots of folks I know have given up their laptops in favor of an iPad and keyboard.  

 

You missed the memo on the Post PC revolution...

 

Win7 and Win8 aren't very good tablet OS's.  That's true.  So what?

 

The keyboard dock easily contain more storage along with more battery as well as TB, USB3, etc.  A Core i3/i5 based iPad would have the same graphics as the MBA.  

 

iOS is OSX modified for the iPhone and iPad and most iOS apps can run today on OSX given they are developed on OSX and often run on the simulator with code compiled for the x86 platform and not ARM.

 

There's little reason that a 11" or 13" MBA convertible couldn't run in a tablet mode that is very much like iOS when detached from the keyboard dock with a large portion of the iPad app library available.  When docked, just like in the intel reference system, it could have whatever resolution it wants so long as in tablet mode it was some mulitple of 1024x768 so current iPad apps could run with a simple recompile. 

 

 

The Office on OSX is full featured.  An 11" or 13" MBA convertible could run it just fine.  Which is the point.

 

A 13" MBA based iPad Pro would be even more awesome and allow Apple to keep the 10" iPad in pure tablet form.  But given the popularity of the 8" iPad Mini I'd go ahead and converge the 11" MBA and 10" iPad.

Running on an iPad?    making a laptop with an even smaller display isn't a good thing.  I've used the 11inch, even that's too small of a screen.  making it any smaller would be FOOLISH.

 

But for a tablet, people don't want to run a full blown OS, they don't want to have that.  Tablet users typically just want full screen apps, and just click on the icon with very little administration/maintenance of an OS.  They want brain dead easy to use.  A full OS on a tablet doesn't make sense.  Sorry, but i understand where you are going with this, but it's just trying to make a tablet into something that too complicated for what a tablet should be.  Microsoft has already tried to stuff a full blown OS in a tablet form for many years, about 10 or so, and it's done nothing but fail.  The  whole concept of iOS and the iPad is successful because it doesn't NEED to have a full blown OS.  That just makes it more complicated to use and requires more support.  The whole concept of having windows based OS eats of screen real estate. 

 

Why aren't Windows 7/8 tablets that good?  Because it's using a full OS for a tablet.  Which is what you want to do.  That's what has FAILED.

 

They just need to improve and add features to iOS, but still keep that simple to use OS.  They will just have a slimmed down version of Office, which is what iWork does.  Apple has a LOT of iWork users on the iPad and it functionally does the same thing as Office.  People are just brainwashed into thinking that it HAS TO HAVE Office.  I guess for those brainwashed into using Office, I guess they do, but MS is coming out with the iOS version of Office, they are just dragging their feet on it.  I still think that making an IPad into trying to replace a MBA is kinda dumb.

post #904 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Apple isn't going to make a convertible.  

They should.

Look at the new Cintiq portable that Wacom just announced. It's exactly what creative professionals have been waiting for, only you're forced to use Windows on it. That machine, running OS X is exactly what Apple should have already been making. If you've ever used an a Wacom tablet with OS X, you know that it works amazingly well, and that it's a big upgrade over other input methods.
post #905 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Running on an iPad?    making a laptop with an even smaller display isn't a good thing.  I've used the 11inch, even that's too small of a screen.  making it any smaller would be FOOLISH.

 

It wouldn't be smaller.  It would stay at 11" and 13".  The iPad gets bigger.

 

Quote:

But for a tablet, people don't want to run a full blown OS, they don't want to have that.  Tablet users typically just want full screen apps, and just click on the icon with very little administration/maintenance of an OS.  They want brain dead easy to use.  A full OS on a tablet doesn't make sense.  Sorry, but i understand where you are going with this, but it's just trying to make a tablet into something that too complicated for what a tablet should be.  Microsoft has already tried to stuff a full blown OS in a tablet form for many years, about 10 or so, and it's done nothing but fail.  The  whole concept of iOS and the iPad is successful because it doesn't NEED to have a full blown OS.  That just makes it more complicated to use and requires more support.  The whole concept of having windows based OS eats of screen real estate. 

 

Why aren't Windows 7/8 tablets that good?  Because it's using a full OS for a tablet.  Which is what you want to do.  That's what has FAILED.

 

Windows 7/8 convertibles aren't bad as laptops.  Just not so great as tablets especially with the lack of tablet apps.

 

A windows based OS in laptop mode works very well.  And frankly, there's nothing about iOS that isn't "full blown" under the hood.

 

You seem to think this is about making a tablet more complicated.  I think of this as adding tablet functionality to the MBA and getting rid of one device.

 

If I could simply hit a button on the 11" MBA, remove the display and have an iPad what's not to like?

 

Quote:
They just need to improve and add features to iOS, but still keep that simple to use OS.  They will just have a slimmed down version of Office, which is what iWork does.  Apple has a LOT of iWork users on the iPad and it functionally does the same thing as Office.  People are just brainwashed into thinking that it HAS TO HAVE Office.  I guess for those brainwashed into using Office, I guess they do, but MS is coming out with the iOS version of Office, they are just dragging their feet on it.  

 

It's not brainwashing when someone sends me a Excel file with a lot of complex macros that I need to run.  There's a lot of that in business.

 

Plus there are a lot of advantages to the pro user to have OSX on a Core i5 tablet.  Lots of legacy apps will run.  Even without the keyboard if you add a digitizer (for hover).

 

Quote:
I still think that making an IPad into trying to replace a MBA is kinda dumb.

Really?  That wasn't clear before.

post #906 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post

They should.

Look at the new Cintiq portable that Wacom just announced. It's exactly what creative professionals have been waiting for, only you're forced to use Windows on it. That machine, running OS X is exactly what Apple should have already been making. If you've ever used an a Wacom tablet with OS X, you know that it works amazingly well, and that it's a big upgrade over other input methods.

 

Yah, an iPad Pro would want a digitizer in a big way.  I had a Cintiq for a while and looked at the ModBook Pro.  The problem is that they started with a 13" MBP and not a 13" MBA.  So it's thick, heavy and unwieldy. 

post #907 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post


They should.

Look at the new Cintiq portable that Wacom just announced. It's exactly what creative professionals have been waiting for, only you're forced to use Windows on it. That machine, running OS X is exactly what Apple should have already been making. If you've ever used an a Wacom tablet with OS X, you know that it works amazingly well, and that it's a big upgrade over other input methods.

FIrst off, the CIntq is for a specific crowd of people, eh?  It's not for the general population won't be buying that.  That's a great idea for those people, but it is connected to what?   A Mac or a PC desktop/laptop.  If you go their site, it connects to a Mac or PC laptop or desktop as an ADD-ON. in fact, so are the other devices Wacom makes.  So, it's meant to work more with a desktop or a traditional laptop whether it is Mac or PC, but this is not really designed for a iPad.  At least the Cintq isn't.

 

And NO, it is NOT Windows ONLY, It's both Mac and PC.  I think you probably didn't investigate that further or you read on a PC-centric site.  we all know how they can leave things out.

post #908 of 1290
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post
They should.

 

Nope.

 

What don't you get about OS X that you need to waste thousands of dollars to be shown? It should not be touchscreen based. OS XI should.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
post #909 of 1290
You guys have an interesting discussion going on here. One of which I find myself on both sides of the fence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Running on an iPad?    making a laptop with an even smaller display isn't a good thing.  I've used the 11inch, even that's too small of a screen.  making it any smaller would be FOOLISH.
It makes you wonder why net books failed. Was it the small screens or lack of performance? It is probably all of the above combined with a legacy OS that didn't work well with the screen.
Quote:
But for a tablet, people don't want to run a full blown OS, they don't want to have that.  Tablet users typically just want full screen apps, and just click on the icon with very little administration/maintenance of an OS.  
A full blown OS does not prevent full screen apps.
Quote:
They want brain dead easy to use.  A full OS on a tablet doesn't make sense.  Sorry, but i understand where you are going with this, but it's just trying to make a tablet into something that too complicated for what a tablet should be.
What a tablet should be from your perspective! By the way adding more functionality to iOS does not lead to iOS becoming Mac OS. Some of the functionality that people want can be implemented in very tablet like ways.
Quote:
 Microsoft has already tried to stuff a full blown OS in a tablet form for many years, about 10 or so, and it's done nothing but fail.  The  whole concept of iOS and the iPad is successful because it doesn't NEED to have a full blown OS.  That just makes it more complicated to use and requires more support.  The whole concept of having windows based OS eats of screen real estate. 
True but we aren't talking about half assed versions of Windows.
Quote:
Why aren't Windows 7/8 tablets that good?  Because it's using a full OS for a tablet.  Which is what you want to do.  That's what has FAILED.
Not really. At least in part it failed due to being a crap product.
Quote:
They just need to improve and add features to iOS, but still keep that simple to use OS.  
Exactly. Adding features to iOS won't turn it into Mac OS, at least it doesn't have too. There are ways to deliver analogs to a desktop OS feature in a tablet like way.
Quote:
They will just have a slimmed down version of Office, which is what iWork does.
Which for some would suck. For example many people do make use of VB for customization. That is one reason Office is so popular. The funny thing here is that this feature will likely be deleted from the iPad versions and it is on the iPad where such features might be leveraged the most.
Quote:
 Apple has a LOT of iWork users on the iPad and it functionally does the same thing as Office.
Not even close.
Quote:
 People are just brainwashed into thinking that it HAS TO HAVE Office.
Well yeah this is very often the case and in the same regard they believe they need multitasking. This I've heard from a guy that runs his spread sheets in full screen mode all the time.
Quote:
 I guess for those brainwashed into using Office, I guess they do, but MS is coming out with the iOS version of Office, they are just dragging their feet on it.  
For those that believe they need office and those that actually do need office, a castrated iOS version won't fly at all. Those that actually need office are a small fraction of those that think they need office.
Quote:
I still think that making an IPad into trying to replace a MBA is kinda dumb.
True. However a hybrid device might not be so dumb. Here a laptop like machine wouldn't be a bad idea. Note I said "like".

In the end though I think the focus on keyboards will be short lived. Give us on board Siri like voice input with the IA to support it and the need for a keyboard can be greatly diminished. All we really need is a new series of processors from Apple suitable for running an AI in parallel with the app running in the machine. A smart AI would work in tandem with Apples servers when needed. A local AI speeds up response times while freeing up Apples servers, further it has knowledge about the local system that should help with its performance.

Someplace on the net you can find an old video of an Apple Knowledge Navigator concept. I suspect this is the direction Apple wants to take iOS. UNIX will still be at the core of the OS but the interface will become very high level.
post #910 of 1290

Net books failed because the processors they were using were just too slow for the OS that was running on them and the screen size was just too small.

 

If I was going to buy a laptop, I wouldn't buy anything with a screen less than 13 inch, that's just me.  I know plenty of people buy the 11inch MBA and I'm sure they like it, but that's for casual laptop users.

 

Once you get into a tablet that's controlled by one's finger and the screen size gets smaller, there is less room for windows, menu bars, etc. and people don't want or need a full blown OS with functionality that is more designed for a desktop app, not a tablet app.

 

I am very aware that a full blow OS doesn't prevent full screen apps, but it's generally tailored for people that use both full screen and not full screen apps. I personally RARELY use full screen mode on my desktop.  I prefer to have several large windows using different apps or different windows of the same app side by side, which is why I use a 27inch screen. It's got enough room to do that.

 

No, the Windows 7/8 tablets have failed so far because they were thick, heavy, required a stylus, didn't have long battery life, etc. THey are getting them thinner but the Windows 7 UI is still not the most friendly without the use of a mouse.  It takes up a lot of real estate.

 

iWork on an iPad does what people actually use.  When you use Office, you hardly use the features.  I would say MOST people use about 20% of the functionality of Office even on desktops.  What Apple did is figure out what are the most common things done with Office and that's what they put in iWork.  The most common features.   I don't think Office for iPad is going to have full functionality of Office for the desktop.

 

How do you know a castrated version of it won't fly?  It's a tablet not a full blown desktop/laptop.  People are using tablets more of as a reader with limited functionality, rather than sitting down creating huge spread sheets, with macros, etc.  They'll use a tablet more of a reader with limited functionality and if they create a macro spreadsheet to be viewed and filled out on a tablet, then they'll use that.

 

I'm very familiar with the Knowledge Navigator project. It's already about half way there.

 

 "UNIX will still be at the core of the OS but the interface will become very high level."   I don't understand why you mentioned this.  It's already a Unix based OS and will continue to do so.

post #911 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by nht View Post


Well it's not a tablet when docked to the keyboard. It's 11" a MBA equivalent.

The iPad mini strikes me as the best form factor for consumption and at a lower cost. An iPad Pro with keyboard doc would be a killer business machine if it could run office.

The price of an iPad Pro, would probably end up being as much as a MacBook Air 13 inch.  So you might as well buy that.

post #912 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

Someplace on the net you can find an old video of an Apple Knowledge Navigator concept. I suspect this is the direction Apple wants to take iOS. UNIX will still be at the core of the OS but the interface will become very high level.

http://vimeo.com/48848412

I agree; computers should aid us more, become more pro-active. Just not in a Google Now, S Voice, TellMe or EasilyDo kind of way.
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #913 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

The price of an iPad Pro, would probably end up being as much as a MacBook Air 13 inch.  So you might as well buy that.

 

Except that the iPad Pro would be much better because I can use it to draw diagrams and run as a tablet when I want to.  It can do everything the 13 MBA can do + wacom + iPad.  

 

Why would I "might as well" buy an inferior device?

post #914 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

If I was going to buy a laptop, I wouldn't buy anything with a screen less than 13 inch, that's just me.  I know plenty of people buy the 11inch MBA and I'm sure they like it, but that's for casual laptop users.

 

 

11" vs 13" isn't much of a difference if the 11" is retina like the iPad.  When connected to my 27" display it'll be plenty of screen real estate.  When on the road you adjust.

 

Quote:

Once you get into a tablet that's controlled by one's finger and the screen size gets smaller, there is less room for windows, menu bars, etc. and people don't want or need a full blown OS with functionality that is more designed for a desktop app, not a tablet app.

 

Again, when the screen is detached it can be in pure tablet mode.  

 

And everything you write about office is the same crap everyone writes about office and yet it's still a critical business need.  That YOU don't use it doesn't mean that many folks don't need it.  It's one of those annoyances on the Mac really.  I get visio and ms project files all the time and need to parallels.  If I didn't have office I wouldn't be able to replace a PC with a mac.

post #915 of 1290
The commercial:
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
How to enter the Apple logo  on iOS:
/Settings/Keyboard/Shortcut and paste in  which you copied from an email draft or a note. Screendump
Reply
post #916 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

The commercial:

Macrumors reported on this a few days ago saying these Mac Pro trailers were being shown in cinemas before a variety of movies started:

http://www.macrumors.com/2013/08/16/apple-begins-showing-mac-pro-teaser-in-movie-theaters-with-coming-fall-2013-announcement/

Curious choice of target audience. A lot of film producers will be using the Mac Pro but they wouldn't necessarily be in the theater audience. It would be cheaper than running the ads on TV but it hits a small audience.

I think by now though, everyone who needs to know about it knows it's available. If they'd done a drop-in upgrade, it would largely have gone by without a mention.
post #917 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

Net books failed because the processors they were using were just too slow for the OS that was running on them and the screen size was just too small.
Pretty much what I said.
Quote:
If I was going to buy a laptop, I wouldn't buy anything with a screen less than 13 inch, that's just me.  I know plenty of people buy the 11inch MBA and I'm sure they like it, but that's for casual laptop users.
I tend to agree though that is more because I'm getting older and from a practical standpoint small screens and compressed user interfaces don't fly. However many young people with good eyesight have no problems at all.
Quote:
Once you get into a tablet that's controlled by one's finger and the screen size gets smaller, there is less room for windows, menu bars, etc. and people don't want or need a full blown OS with functionality that is more designed for a desktop app, not a tablet app.
People don't want the user interface of a desktop OS! Functionality is a different thing all together. For example iOS sucks when it ones to downloading and saving PDFs to the device. You can open them and save them to iBooks and it still sucks because iBooks is terrible at managing storage, naming files and the like. Simple access to the file system would do wonders in this case.
Quote:
I am very aware that a full blow OS doesn't prevent full screen apps, but it's generally tailored for people that use both full screen and not full screen apps. I personally RARELY use full screen mode on my desktop.  I prefer to have several large windows using different apps or different windows of the same app side by side, which is why I use a 27inch screen. It's got enough room to do that.

No, the Windows 7/8 tablets have failed so far because they were thick, heavy, required a stylus, didn't have long battery life, etc. THey are getting them thinner but the Windows 7 UI is still not the most friendly without the use of a mouse.  It takes up a lot of real estate.
They failed because of Windows.
Quote:
iWork on an iPad does what people actually use.
If that was the case it would be taking over the market.
Quote:
 When you use Office, you hardly use the features.  I would say MOST people use about 20% of the functionality of Office even on desktops.  What Apple did is figure out what are the most common things done with Office and that's what they put in iWork.  The most common features.   I don't think Office for iPad is going to have full functionality of Office for the desktop.
Office for iPad can't have the same functionality as the desktop version because of the developer guidelines. I'd really rather see Apple loosen up a bit in this regard, especially when it ones to interpreters.

As for that 20% figure who cares what percentage gets used by whom, what or where? The spreadsheet user that has Excel open and running 8 hours a day may not even touch the other Office apps.
Quote:
How do you know a castrated version of it won't fly?  It's a tablet not a full blown desktop/laptop.  People are using tablets more of as a reader with limited functionality, rather than sitting down creating huge spread sheets, with macros, etc.  They'll use a tablet more of a reader with limited functionality and if they create a macro spreadsheet to be viewed and filled out on a tablet, then they'll use that.
If the app doesn't support VBA then how are these spreadsheets produced elsewhere going to run? The biggest reason for Offices success is the ability to run custom scripts and the ability to package those up as an app.
Quote:
I'm very familiar with the Knowledge Navigator project. It's already about half way there.

 "UNIX will still be at the core of the OS but the interface will become very high level."   I don't understand why you mentioned this.  It's already a Unix based OS and will continue to do so.
Why did I mention this? Are you serious? It is pretty obvious as I was projecting a move to a much higher level interface.
post #918 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Nope.

What don't you get about OS X that you need to waste thousands of dollars to be shown? It should not be touchscreen based. OS XI should.

You should really take your own advice and stop posting when you don't know what you're talking about. Using a Wacom tablet with OS X is a huge improvement over using a mouse or trackpad.
post #919 of 1290
Quote:
Originally Posted by drblank View Post

FIrst off, the CIntq is for a specific crowd of people, eh?  It's not for the general population won't be buying that.  That's a great idea for those people, but it is connected to what?   A Mac or a PC desktop/laptop.  If you go their site, it connects to a Mac or PC laptop or desktop as an ADD-ON. in fact, so are the other devices Wacom makes.  So, it's meant to work more with a desktop or a traditional laptop whether it is Mac or PC, but this is not really designed for a iPad.  At least the Cintq isn't.

And NO, it is NOT Windows ONLY, It's both Mac and PC.  I think you probably didn't investigate that further or you read on a PC-centric site.  we all know how they can leave things out.


Hooray. Another guy who hasn't got a clue what he's talking about, but won't stop typing.

I've been using Wacom tablets professionally for over 15 years. I know how they work, and I know the different models. The new Cintiq portable is not an add-on. It is a stand alone portable. And there absolutely is NOT a Mac version. If there was, I'd buy it.
post #920 of 1290
Originally Posted by bsenka View Post
Using a Wacom tablet with OS X is a huge improvement over using a mouse or trackpad.

 

Not really, no. You talking Intuos or Cintiq? Even the latter isn't better than mouse/trackpad+keyboard.

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply

Originally Posted by Slurpy

There's just a TINY chance that Apple will also be able to figure out payments. Oh wait, they did already… …and you’re already f*ed.

 

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Apple throws out the rulebook for its unique next-gen Mac Pro