The fact that you are among the lucky group who can work effectively with a small amount of RAM is not necessarily an argument against eliminating user-upgradability.
I do agree that using Aperture on a 2 GB machine is sometimes painful. Yet, this is a laptop, not a desktop or tower machine. But you’re wrong in thinking I’m against the user-upgradability; on the contrary, I am very happy that I can increase memory, storage capacity or change my battery any time just by pushing a slider in the Unibody enclosure…
2GB is plenty for users who only work with text and use Safari. Usually the sorts of consumers who use their laptop for text and web browsing don't spend $2500 on their laptop.
2 GB is plenty also if you do development. But developers can be tempted to invest $ 2,500 on a brand new machine that gives more processing power, both conventional and GPU, and has a nice display. SSD is not an issue either; a mean developer need barely exceeds a few GB of text/binaries/icons/auxiliary stuff…
In a very near future, RAM will not be as important as it used to be. Of course this is a Pro machine, and pro apps do better with more RAM. But as developers become better and technologies become better integrated, as well as with the help of SSD, software will require less RAM to do the same work. And disk swapping (when ram is full and the software uses memory on the disk) on an SSD is almost seamless, and will become more seamless as they get speedier. Who know, RAM may as well disappear in a few years.
I do agree that using Aperture on a 2 GB machine is sometimes painful. Yet, this is a laptop, not a desktop or tower machine. But you’re wrong in thinking I’m against the user-upgradability; on the contrary, I am very happy that I can increase memory, storage capacity or change my battery any time just by pushing a slider in the Unibody enclosure…
2 GB is plenty also if you do development. But developers can be tempted to invest $ 2,500 on a brand new machine that gives more processing power, both conventional and GPU, and has a nice display. SSD is not an issue either; a mean developer need barely exceeds a few GB of text/binaries/icons/auxiliary stuff…
True, but how large large of a market to developers constitute?
I think the point that seems to be getting lost here is that while many people only need 2-4 GB RAM, many other people need more, and 4-5 years from now everyone will need more than they need now. Thus the need for a way to upgrade RAM in computer representing a serious investment.
In a very near future, RAM will not be as important as it used to be. Of course this is a Pro machine, and pro apps do better with more RAM. But as developers become better and technologies become better integrated, as well as with the help of SSD, software will require less RAM to do the same work. And disk swapping (when ram is full and the software uses memory on the disk) on an SSD is almost seamless, and will become more seamless as they get speedier. Who know, RAM may as well disappear in a few years.
Ridiculous. RAM is orders of magnitude faster than SSD--and it will stay that way as long as flash retains its idiosyncrasies.
I appreciate Apple pushing us all forward with great technology, but as the complainers here (like me) can attest, it's not all sweetness on their part. One could even argue that the new iPad and retina MBP are both premature/transitional, too. The new iPad takes forever to charge, can't hold a charge while running GPS, and is significantly heavier and even a tad thicker than the iPad 2--because of its ginormous battery and USB power limits. (We'll all welcome the new i-connector for faster data transfers and faster charging). The guts of the retina MBP are dominated by battery--and the system is bigger and heavier than it otherwise would need to be--just to achieve the same battery life as before. The retina MBP foregoes built-in ethernet but doesn't offer 802.11ac. So the retina displays and platforms are wonderful to look at but they're certainly not as ready for today as one would like.
They are loving it if they work for Apple. You either replace a drive, a motherboard or a battery. So many fewer whacky things to go wrong.
If they don't work for Apple and are worried about not being able to charge those hours spent tracking down those whacky issues, then not so much.
One hopes Apple recognizes there are only 3 truly serviceable parts and don't continue to take issue with authorized service providers who keep ordering motherboards. In the past if you order too many in a month, you get your hand slapped by Apple. But now there's no choice; you can't swap RAM, HD, etc.
Where I'm having trouble with this latest round of engineering and marketing decisions at Apple is their continued use of the label MacBook PRO.
I didn't join the chorus of critics bemoaning the shortcomings of the Air when it came out because it was never MEANT to serve users like me. For many, many users it was (and is) just fine, and the sacrifices in power and flexibility were offset by gains in portability and... well, probably something else, too.
But what about those of us for whom ultimate portability and cool factor are NOT the primary criteria? The introduction of smaller, lighter, less capable models was fine as long as I had still had the option of trading size and weight for power and versatility. I had a CHOICE. Now I don't. I can't get a big screen. I can't get upgradeable storage. The digital audio I/O is gone (which probably doesn't matter to most people but is a key component in how I use my existing 17" Pro).
If they had just called this thing a MacBook Retina and still offered a more versatile and capable "Pro" alternative I'd be happy. Yes, it will be larger and heavier, and it may cost somewhat more, but just as some people are willing to sacrifice capability for size, some of us are willing to give up a degree of portability for greater power. I spend only a comparatively short time carrying the computer to the gig, but hours and hours using it in demanding applications. Sure, size and weight still matter when taking the computer to a client site or on location, but not at the expense of capability. What Apple is doing is closing the door on users who need a high-end but portable device.
From date of hardware purchase, not AppleCare purchase
"Every Mac and Apple display comes with a one-year limited warranty and up to 90 days of complimentary telephone technical support. Extend your coverage to three years from your hardware product’s original purchase date with the AppleCare Protection Plan."
Apple should really be giving at least 2 years, if not 3, warranty if this is considered a "Pro" machine. One year warranty compared to the price of thing isn't good enough anymore.
Ridiculous. RAM is orders of magnitude faster than SSD--and it will stay that way as long as flash retains its idiosyncrasies.
SSD's speed relative to RAM. You were responding to someone who pointed out that swapping to SSD will be much less damaging to performance than swapping to hard disk. And since SSDs are much faster than hard disk, that's absolutely true.
Where I'm having trouble with this latest round of engineering and marketing decisions at Apple is their continued use of the label MacBook PRO.
Yet another person who confuses "I have a problem with this" with "Apple should never do this".
For many, many, many Pro users, 16 GB of RAM is plenty for now and well into the future. And many of them don't keep their computers all that long, anyway, so it's not as necessary to plan for years into the future.
Now, granted, a small number of pro users can't get by with 16 GB of RAM, but they're not using MacBook Pros, anyway.
Also there are PS users who never edit more than one 25 meg image at a time, but there are those who need ten 200 meg images loaded together and many who spend all day working with psd files of over a gig. So right tool for the right job and all that, but the RMBP isn't a machine to grow with, which is something we're all used to. Gotta pop for the maxed out model if you think you'll be getting there eventually.
So what are those people using today? The current MBP has 16 GB Max RAM, so if the new MBP doesn't have enough RAM, then the current one isn't good enough, either. So what are they using? Probably a Mac Pro - so soldering RAM onto the MBP is irrelevant.
Plus, of course, the problem with insufficient RAM is excessive swapping. Since the new MBP has a fast SSD, swapping will not harm performance as much as the older one, so you still get a performance gain.
The soldered RAM may or may not be an issue for me. I tend to install as much RAM as is practical at the time of purchase and rarely upgrade later. I've never let Apple max it out though, because the cost has been OUTRAGEOUS! I've always ordered replacement RAM from OWC or Crucial at the same time I ordered my Mac from Apple. For me the question is just how the cost of being forced to buy RAM from Apple will compare to buying good quality sticks from a reputable source?
A much bigger concern for me is the proprietary storage. Every single Mac I have ever owned has had a mid-life drive upgrade. Over time storage prices fall and available capacity increases. Even SSDs have come down by more than a third since just last fall. At some point before I'm likely to replace my computer my local supplier will have 1TB SSDs for $500. Will I be able to upgrade a RetinaMac to take advantage of that? If not, I'm much less likely to buy into this new design.
I've also read that solid-state storage deteriorates over time. Obviously so do hard drives, and I've had two fail in the last three years, but replacing them was simple. What happens when the SSD in the Mac starts to slow down? Am I at the mercy of the Genius Bar or do I have alternatives?
You need to think deeper and refresh yourself if you are a former hardware engineer rendering an opinion. Your thought process is indicative of the lack of progress in design most of the electronics industry has seen over the last decade.
Glued batteries are because the SINGLE largest cause of battery failures/overheats is fastener puncturing.
I agree to the equation no fastener = no puncturing. But, on my late-2008 MacBook, this equation has been solved in a much more elegant way: the combination of the lock, the removable part of the enclosure and the connector keep the battery firmly in place, and it can be changed at any time without even possessing a screwdriver. Now I call that intelligent design. Glue is just awful.
Your comments on soldering RAM totally ignore modern IC robotic assembly techniques. Your assessment was only a statistically significant problem when done by early robotics or human hands, even with alignment guides. Production engineering has come a long way in the last 20 years, making previous assumptions obsolete.
Well, okay, the last PCB I designed was using the very first BGA chips. At that time, soldering issues with this new packaging were the norm.
We finally have an engineering outlook that takes more into account than just the engineers hourly cost and bottom line cost of manufacturing into account. Sure the results look alien to run-of-the-mill engineers, the results are coming from considering issues long left off the table either out of ignorance or lack of desire to increase the scope of the examination. These incorrectly labeled "engineering prototype actually industrialized without any further refinements" artifacts which are the result of exactly the opposite, actually have a far higher ROI for the engineering and manufacturing process costs than the old fashioned process of limiting the design process by cost constraining it. It's not surprising that an old school informed dismissal misses the point on all counts.
You’ll have to make yourself clearer for me to answer meaningfully. Either I’m tired (it’s beginning to be late here in Paris), either my command of English is insufficient to figure out what you mean (I am not a native English speaker).
If you right, and this is a deliberate choice, and not one commanded by haste, then John Gruber’s comment is right: this MacBook retina is a hardware Back to the Mac from iOS. We are beginning to behold engineering practices that were reserved to consumer products (sealed bodies, glued parts, whatever) like the iPad slowly creep into what is deemed a "professional computer". That "professional" adjective means, to me, a machine almost fully user-serviceable, with standard screws, easy accessibility to parts, etc. In this sense, the 2008 MacBook I own is more professional that this new machine: care has been taken to ensure more-than-easy swap of HD and battery and memory upgrade, albeit requiring to remove some screws, is straightforward and officially supported. Since that first Unibody model, Apple has made a U-turn: the recent MacBooks Pro are trickier to upgrade, let alone this new retina one.
The soldered RAM may or may not be an issue for me. I tend to install as much RAM as is practical at the time of purchase and rarely upgrade later. I've never let Apple max it out though, because the cost has been OUTRAGEOUS! I've always ordered replacement RAM from OWC or Crucial at the same time I ordered my Mac from Apple. For me the question is just how the cost of being forced to buy RAM from Apple will compare to buying good quality sticks from a reputable source?
A much bigger concern for me is the proprietary storage. Every single Mac I have ever owned has had a mid-life drive upgrade. Over time storage prices fall and available capacity increases. Even SSDs have come down by more than a third since just last fall. At some point before I'm likely to replace my computer my local supplier will have 1TB SSDs for $500. Will I be able to upgrade a RetinaMac to take advantage of that? If not, I'm much less likely to buy into this new design.
I agree with this and that's why I bought the 256GB MBA just in case. I would love to upgrade the ram 8GB but that's obviously not going to happen and I knew that in advance.
MBA with retina display, 8GB ram and 512GB SSD sounds perfect to me.
True, but how large large of a market to developers constitute?
Insignificant, of course.
I think the point that seems to be getting lost here is that while many people only need 2-4 GB RAM, many other people need more, and 4-5 years from now everyone will need more than they need now. Thus the need for a way to upgrade RAM in computer representing a serious investment.
At the same time, compilers like Clang have made real progresses lately both on speed and size. Binaries sizes are no more an issue; only data is.
Where I'm having trouble with this latest round of engineering and marketing decisions at Apple is their continued use of the label MacBook PRO.
I didn't join the chorus of critics bemoaning the shortcomings of the Air when it came out because it was never MEANT to serve users like me. For many, many users it was (and is) just fine, and the sacrifices in power and flexibility were offset by gains in portability and... well, probably something else, too.
But what about those of us for whom ultimate portability and cool factor are NOT the primary criteria? The introduction of smaller, lighter, less capable models was fine as long as I had still had the option of trading size and weight for power and versatility. I had a CHOICE. Now I don't. I can't get a big screen. I can't get upgradeable storage. The digital audio I/O is gone (which probably doesn't matter to most people but is a key component in how I use my existing 17" Pro).
If they had just called this thing a MacBook Retina and still offered a more versatile and capable "Pro" alternative I'd be happy. Yes, it will be larger and heavier, and it may cost somewhat more, but just as some people are willing to sacrifice capability for size, some of us are willing to give up a degree of portability for greater power. I spend only a comparatively short time carrying the computer to the gig, but hours and hours using it in demanding applications. Sure, size and weight still matter when taking the computer to a client site or on location, but not at the expense of capability. What Apple is doing is closing the door on users who need a high-end but portable device.
How is this device less capable? Let's go over your points shall we? First, regarding upgradeable storage, the machine was just released, so buy in accordance with your current needs. If down the road you need to change the size of your internal drive, rest assured by then you will have alternatives at that point, just like you can buy alternative storage for MBAs now but not the first week they were released. That complaint seems silly. As far as RAM, it has already been proven by Hiro why the non-upgradable form is superior in terms of performance, which is what you'd want if you cared about a "pro" machine and not about "cool" factors and portability. As far as digital audio I/O, what the hell are you saying it is gone? Did you fail to see that spiffy new HDMI port on the machine? You realize HDMI can do digital audio right? Maybe your complaint then is that the machine isn't catering to your antiquated Toslink tech. Well, that's your problem and has nothing to do with the "pro"ness of the new machine. In fact, this is too "pro" for your needs.
So, try again regarding the failure of this machine to live up to its "pro" label...
I put 32GB of DDR3 in my laptop for less than the cost of the 16GB upgrade for the RMBP. If you want to look at 8gb as a "gift from apple due to lower prices", well then, enjoy the blinders.
We are not in the post-PC era; we are in the disposable PC era.
Computer and electronics manufacturers have completely abandoned the idea of making quality, long lasting products with big price tags and moved to making gadgets with smaller price tags that have to be replaced frequently
It makes sense not to make electronics to last, because they change so frequently now. Some things, like furniture or beautiful leather books you still want to make to last.
At the same time, compilers like Clang have made real progresses lately both on speed and size. Binaries sizes are no more an issue; only data is.
Binary size matters for a different reason nowadays. If you notice, Mountain Lion is now doing the same thing as iOS: keeping binaries in memory after you quit them (with the program counter frozen of course).
It makes sense not to make electronics to last, because they change so frequently now. Some things, like furniture or beautiful leather books you still want to make to last.
lol that is ridiculous statement...I think most people would not expect a laptop of this price to be disposable. You are the perfect customer if you believe it is.
i dont get the fuzz.. they clearly soldered the RAM because of space issues.. look at the thing, its mostly batteries... i dont think this is an Apple evil masterplan.. And to make the complaining even dumber, they still sell the old school variant.....
and to those of you saying OS X can be run fine with 2 GB RAM, are you kidding me?!? I cant imagine using a pro-app with that..
lol that is ridiculous statement...I think most people would not expect a laptop of this price to be disposable. You are the perfect customer if you believe it is.
I was referring more to the lack of upgradability.
Comments
I do agree that using Aperture on a 2 GB machine is sometimes painful. Yet, this is a laptop, not a desktop or tower machine. But you’re wrong in thinking I’m against the user-upgradability; on the contrary, I am very happy that I can increase memory, storage capacity or change my battery any time just by pushing a slider in the Unibody enclosure…
2 GB is plenty also if you do development. But developers can be tempted to invest $ 2,500 on a brand new machine that gives more processing power, both conventional and GPU, and has a nice display. SSD is not an issue either; a mean developer need barely exceeds a few GB of text/binaries/icons/auxiliary stuff…
Quote:
Originally Posted by astonmartindb9
In a very near future, RAM will not be as important as it used to be. Of course this is a Pro machine, and pro apps do better with more RAM. But as developers become better and technologies become better integrated, as well as with the help of SSD, software will require less RAM to do the same work. And disk swapping (when ram is full and the software uses memory on the disk) on an SSD is almost seamless, and will become more seamless as they get speedier. Who know, RAM may as well disappear in a few years.
Exactly.
Nobody will ever need more than 512 KB.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EauVive
I do agree that using Aperture on a 2 GB machine is sometimes painful. Yet, this is a laptop, not a desktop or tower machine. But you’re wrong in thinking I’m against the user-upgradability; on the contrary, I am very happy that I can increase memory, storage capacity or change my battery any time just by pushing a slider in the Unibody enclosure…
2 GB is plenty also if you do development. But developers can be tempted to invest $ 2,500 on a brand new machine that gives more processing power, both conventional and GPU, and has a nice display. SSD is not an issue either; a mean developer need barely exceeds a few GB of text/binaries/icons/auxiliary stuff…
True, but how large large of a market to developers constitute?
I think the point that seems to be getting lost here is that while many people only need 2-4 GB RAM, many other people need more, and 4-5 years from now everyone will need more than they need now. Thus the need for a way to upgrade RAM in computer representing a serious investment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by astonmartindb9
In a very near future, RAM will not be as important as it used to be. Of course this is a Pro machine, and pro apps do better with more RAM. But as developers become better and technologies become better integrated, as well as with the help of SSD, software will require less RAM to do the same work. And disk swapping (when ram is full and the software uses memory on the disk) on an SSD is almost seamless, and will become more seamless as they get speedier. Who know, RAM may as well disappear in a few years.
Ridiculous. RAM is orders of magnitude faster than SSD--and it will stay that way as long as flash retains its idiosyncrasies.
I appreciate Apple pushing us all forward with great technology, but as the complainers here (like me) can attest, it's not all sweetness on their part. One could even argue that the new iPad and retina MBP are both premature/transitional, too. The new iPad takes forever to charge, can't hold a charge while running GPS, and is significantly heavier and even a tad thicker than the iPad 2--because of its ginormous battery and USB power limits. (We'll all welcome the new i-connector for faster data transfers and faster charging). The guts of the retina MBP are dominated by battery--and the system is bigger and heavier than it otherwise would need to be--just to achieve the same battery life as before. The retina MBP foregoes built-in ethernet but doesn't offer 802.11ac. So the retina displays and platforms are wonderful to look at but they're certainly not as ready for today as one would like.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hiro
They are loving it if they work for Apple. You either replace a drive, a motherboard or a battery. So many fewer whacky things to go wrong.
If they don't work for Apple and are worried about not being able to charge those hours spent tracking down those whacky issues, then not so much.
One hopes Apple recognizes there are only 3 truly serviceable parts and don't continue to take issue with authorized service providers who keep ordering motherboards. In the past if you order too many in a month, you get your hand slapped by Apple. But now there's no choice; you can't swap RAM, HD, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sleepy3
EWWWWWWWWW
SAMSUNG PARTS???!!!
NOT GONNA BUY!!!
I assume you dont own a iPad or iPhone then?
Where I'm having trouble with this latest round of engineering and marketing decisions at Apple is their continued use of the label MacBook PRO.
I didn't join the chorus of critics bemoaning the shortcomings of the Air when it came out because it was never MEANT to serve users like me. For many, many users it was (and is) just fine, and the sacrifices in power and flexibility were offset by gains in portability and... well, probably something else, too.
But what about those of us for whom ultimate portability and cool factor are NOT the primary criteria? The introduction of smaller, lighter, less capable models was fine as long as I had still had the option of trading size and weight for power and versatility. I had a CHOICE. Now I don't. I can't get a big screen. I can't get upgradeable storage. The digital audio I/O is gone (which probably doesn't matter to most people but is a key component in how I use my existing 17" Pro).
If they had just called this thing a MacBook Retina and still offered a more versatile and capable "Pro" alternative I'd be happy. Yes, it will be larger and heavier, and it may cost somewhat more, but just as some people are willing to sacrifice capability for size, some of us are willing to give up a degree of portability for greater power. I spend only a comparatively short time carrying the computer to the gig, but hours and hours using it in demanding applications. Sure, size and weight still matter when taking the computer to a client site or on location, but not at the expense of capability. What Apple is doing is closing the door on users who need a high-end but portable device.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dcr
From date of hardware purchase, not AppleCare purchase
"Every Mac and Apple display comes with a one-year limited warranty and up to 90 days of complimentary telephone technical support. Extend your coverage to three years from your hardware product’s original purchase date with the AppleCare Protection Plan."
http://www.apple.com/support/products/mac.html
Apple should really be giving at least 2 years, if not 3, warranty if this is considered a "Pro" machine. One year warranty compared to the price of thing isn't good enough anymore.
SSD's speed relative to RAM. You were responding to someone who pointed out that swapping to SSD will be much less damaging to performance than swapping to hard disk. And since SSDs are much faster than hard disk, that's absolutely true.
Yet another person who confuses "I have a problem with this" with "Apple should never do this".
For many, many, many Pro users, 16 GB of RAM is plenty for now and well into the future. And many of them don't keep their computers all that long, anyway, so it's not as necessary to plan for years into the future.
Now, granted, a small number of pro users can't get by with 16 GB of RAM, but they're not using MacBook Pros, anyway.
So what are those people using today? The current MBP has 16 GB Max RAM, so if the new MBP doesn't have enough RAM, then the current one isn't good enough, either. So what are they using? Probably a Mac Pro - so soldering RAM onto the MBP is irrelevant.
Plus, of course, the problem with insufficient RAM is excessive swapping. Since the new MBP has a fast SSD, swapping will not harm performance as much as the older one, so you still get a performance gain.
The soldered RAM may or may not be an issue for me. I tend to install as much RAM as is practical at the time of purchase and rarely upgrade later. I've never let Apple max it out though, because the cost has been OUTRAGEOUS! I've always ordered replacement RAM from OWC or Crucial at the same time I ordered my Mac from Apple. For me the question is just how the cost of being forced to buy RAM from Apple will compare to buying good quality sticks from a reputable source?
A much bigger concern for me is the proprietary storage. Every single Mac I have ever owned has had a mid-life drive upgrade. Over time storage prices fall and available capacity increases. Even SSDs have come down by more than a third since just last fall. At some point before I'm likely to replace my computer my local supplier will have 1TB SSDs for $500. Will I be able to upgrade a RetinaMac to take advantage of that? If not, I'm much less likely to buy into this new design.
I've also read that solid-state storage deteriorates over time. Obviously so do hard drives, and I've had two fail in the last three years, but replacing them was simple. What happens when the SSD in the Mac starts to slow down? Am I at the mercy of the Genius Bar or do I have alternatives?
I agree to the equation no fastener = no puncturing. But, on my late-2008 MacBook, this equation has been solved in a much more elegant way: the combination of the lock, the removable part of the enclosure and the connector keep the battery firmly in place, and it can be changed at any time without even possessing a screwdriver. Now I call that intelligent design. Glue is just awful.
Well, okay, the last PCB I designed was using the very first BGA chips. At that time, soldering issues with this new packaging were the norm.
You’ll have to make yourself clearer for me to answer meaningfully. Either I’m tired (it’s beginning to be late here in Paris), either my command of English is insufficient to figure out what you mean (I am not a native English speaker).
If you right, and this is a deliberate choice, and not one commanded by haste, then John Gruber’s comment is right: this MacBook retina is a hardware Back to the Mac from iOS. We are beginning to behold engineering practices that were reserved to consumer products (sealed bodies, glued parts, whatever) like the iPad slowly creep into what is deemed a "professional computer". That "professional" adjective means, to me, a machine almost fully user-serviceable, with standard screws, easy accessibility to parts, etc. In this sense, the 2008 MacBook I own is more professional that this new machine: care has been taken to ensure more-than-easy swap of HD and battery and memory upgrade, albeit requiring to remove some screws, is straightforward and officially supported. Since that first Unibody model, Apple has made a U-turn: the recent MacBooks Pro are trickier to upgrade, let alone this new retina one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
The soldered RAM may or may not be an issue for me. I tend to install as much RAM as is practical at the time of purchase and rarely upgrade later. I've never let Apple max it out though, because the cost has been OUTRAGEOUS! I've always ordered replacement RAM from OWC or Crucial at the same time I ordered my Mac from Apple. For me the question is just how the cost of being forced to buy RAM from Apple will compare to buying good quality sticks from a reputable source?
A much bigger concern for me is the proprietary storage. Every single Mac I have ever owned has had a mid-life drive upgrade. Over time storage prices fall and available capacity increases. Even SSDs have come down by more than a third since just last fall. At some point before I'm likely to replace my computer my local supplier will have 1TB SSDs for $500. Will I be able to upgrade a RetinaMac to take advantage of that? If not, I'm much less likely to buy into this new design.
I agree with this and that's why I bought the 256GB MBA just in case. I would love to upgrade the ram 8GB but that's obviously not going to happen and I knew that in advance.
MBA with retina display, 8GB ram and 512GB SSD sounds perfect to me.
At the same time, compilers like Clang have made real progresses lately both on speed and size. Binaries sizes are no more an issue; only data is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
Where I'm having trouble with this latest round of engineering and marketing decisions at Apple is their continued use of the label MacBook PRO.
I didn't join the chorus of critics bemoaning the shortcomings of the Air when it came out because it was never MEANT to serve users like me. For many, many users it was (and is) just fine, and the sacrifices in power and flexibility were offset by gains in portability and... well, probably something else, too.
But what about those of us for whom ultimate portability and cool factor are NOT the primary criteria? The introduction of smaller, lighter, less capable models was fine as long as I had still had the option of trading size and weight for power and versatility. I had a CHOICE. Now I don't. I can't get a big screen. I can't get upgradeable storage. The digital audio I/O is gone (which probably doesn't matter to most people but is a key component in how I use my existing 17" Pro).
If they had just called this thing a MacBook Retina and still offered a more versatile and capable "Pro" alternative I'd be happy. Yes, it will be larger and heavier, and it may cost somewhat more, but just as some people are willing to sacrifice capability for size, some of us are willing to give up a degree of portability for greater power. I spend only a comparatively short time carrying the computer to the gig, but hours and hours using it in demanding applications. Sure, size and weight still matter when taking the computer to a client site or on location, but not at the expense of capability. What Apple is doing is closing the door on users who need a high-end but portable device.
How is this device less capable? Let's go over your points shall we? First, regarding upgradeable storage, the machine was just released, so buy in accordance with your current needs. If down the road you need to change the size of your internal drive, rest assured by then you will have alternatives at that point, just like you can buy alternative storage for MBAs now but not the first week they were released. That complaint seems silly. As far as RAM, it has already been proven by Hiro why the non-upgradable form is superior in terms of performance, which is what you'd want if you cared about a "pro" machine and not about "cool" factors and portability. As far as digital audio I/O, what the hell are you saying it is gone? Did you fail to see that spiffy new HDMI port on the machine? You realize HDMI can do digital audio right? Maybe your complaint then is that the machine isn't catering to your antiquated Toslink tech. Well, that's your problem and has nothing to do with the "pro"ness of the new machine. In fact, this is too "pro" for your needs.
So, try again regarding the failure of this machine to live up to its "pro" label...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo42
I put 32GB of DDR3 in my laptop for less than the cost of the 16GB upgrade for the RMBP. If you want to look at 8gb as a "gift from apple due to lower prices", well then, enjoy the blinders.
1333MHz DDR3...
Or 1600MHz DDR3L?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bregalad
We are not in the post-PC era; we are in the disposable PC era.
Computer and electronics manufacturers have completely abandoned the idea of making quality, long lasting products with big price tags and moved to making gadgets with smaller price tags that have to be replaced frequently
It makes sense not to make electronics to last, because they change so frequently now. Some things, like furniture or beautiful leather books you still want to make to last.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EauVive
At the same time, compilers like Clang have made real progresses lately both on speed and size. Binaries sizes are no more an issue; only data is.
Binary size matters for a different reason nowadays. If you notice, Mountain Lion is now doing the same thing as iOS: keeping binaries in memory after you quit them (with the program counter frozen of course).
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascii
It makes sense not to make electronics to last, because they change so frequently now. Some things, like furniture or beautiful leather books you still want to make to last.
lol that is ridiculous statement...I think most people would not expect a laptop of this price to be disposable. You are the perfect customer if you believe it is.
i dont get the fuzz.. they clearly soldered the RAM because of space issues.. look at the thing, its mostly batteries... i dont think this is an Apple evil masterplan.. And to make the complaining even dumber, they still sell the old school variant.....
and to those of you saying OS X can be run fine with 2 GB RAM, are you kidding me?!? I cant imagine using a pro-app with that..
Quote:
Originally Posted by fredaroony
lol that is ridiculous statement...I think most people would not expect a laptop of this price to be disposable. You are the perfect customer if you believe it is.
I was referring more to the lack of upgradability.