Apple also hasn't been advertising the Mac much in the last couple of years. The Mac vs. PC ads, which were incredibly effective, have been gone for a few years. With those hundreds of billions, you'd think Apple could spare some change for a decent Mac campaign.
I'd like to see more Apple ads...they could have gone after Microsoft again after the Windows 8 fiasco, but they opted to focus on iOS devices instead.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ash471
Agreed. We need some metric for measuring how many people are using macs. I have a 3 year old MBA and a 6 year old Mac Pro and I keep thinking about upgrading but they work just fine. And when I do upgrade, they will be passed on to others in the family, not thrown away. Apple's true market share could be several times the number of sales.
This was one of the points I was getting at. When you buy a Mac it will last a very long time. You can still use a 2007 Mac with OS X 10.10 Yosemite. Many times, all you have to do is upgrade the RAM and if you feel frisky, just slap an SSD in place of the hard drive and its like a whole new Mac.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KennMSr
Come on Mickey, shipments are NOT sales, these marketing data reporting companies bend the data to their clients benefit. Remember the ZUNE, those same firms touted how it was outshipping the iPod and was going to take over the mobile media player market, only to find out it is exactly what they said, shipments out stripped those of the iPod only to languish on the shelves of retailers, to be later blown out or returned to MS. Internet use data is a better metric of market share. Of course that could be skewed as well, since I use my iPhone and iPad to browse the internet 95% of the time rather than my MBA or iMac.
Similar, but I doubt it's the same as they started using in Late-2009 as they have worked to make the panels thinner and machines more power efficient. In 2008 they weren't using IPS or LED backlit panels, and had a lower PPI. Even if we look at the the 27" ACD, which looks to be the same panel, that didn't come out until 2010.
Since 2008 isn't even in the running for being the exact same display here is Late-2009 from iFixit compared to Late-2012, only 3 years. Does the new panel look thinner to you?
I recall panels similar to what is used in the 27" thunderbolt display starting to trickle out in late 2009, but I do mean the tail end of it. I also disagree with branding technology that way like it all makes drastic leaps year over year. That was my earlier point. It does look thinner though. So far in terms of panel SKU ifixit and tftcentral suggest it's the same one as they have used since the inception of 27" models, but the backlights and screen treatments have obviously been updated. People assume newer is better far too often. The best display I've seen to date is still the CG211, but they don't make those anymore.
Considering Apple doesn't even make the Xserve, I not familiar with really any schools using Xserves unless they've previously had it. Most use Mac mini servers (such as mine). There really isn't much you can do in a school that severely taxes a Core i7 processor. Even now, unless you have the last gen Xserve, Server isn't even supported.
That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro. Using a Mac mini as a server in a high traffic environment is just laughable. It's simply too slow. Since you ignored most of my argument seemingly because you don't really know what you're talking about, how do you explain away the lack of industry-standard PCI-e Fibre cards to connect RAIDs?
Our Macs were Media Studies machines, with simultaneous iMovie edits on 40 or more Macs at the same time. afpd was often using most of the 8 CPU cores. A Mac Mini would melt under those circumstances.
Comparing Dells to Apple's offerings is like comparing apples to oranges. No, its not the same. Try again! If you don't like Apple's offerings, then go somewhere's else and buy your cheaper, better Dell. You get what you pay for.
Since it's the same CPU, GPU, memory and HDD, there is a lot that's the same. Obviously the Mac is better quality, but since its specs are half that of the Dell, is double the price really justified? Especially since the Dell is repairable whereas the Mac isn't. If the Dell packs up in two years and the Mac lasts four, it's still better value to get the Dell, since the new one would be better specced than the Mac.
It's a lot easier to compare Macs to PCs since the Intel switch, since before it was a different CPU architecture which may well have been more expensive (or not) to make.
Nobody cares about taking their computer apart. They just want to take it out of the box and use it. Maybe you do, but you can 5 or even 50 other people you can think of isn't the majority of the computing world.
Really. Why then can you go to a local store and pick up extra memory, graphics cards, hard disks and DVD drives? If it was such an elitist activity, surely these parts wouldn't be available at many local stores?
You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.
That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro.
Citation needed...I would love to see how this is occurring!
Quote:
Really. Why then can you go to a local store and pick up extra memory, graphics cards, hard disks and DVD drives? If it was such an elitist activity, surely these parts wouldn't be available at many local stores?
You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.
There are stores that still sell floppy discs too, that doesn't its main stream. I bet your mom or sister couldn't care less about taking the PC or Mac apart to upgrade it. You're just thinking about how Apple can cater itself to your work environment. That doesn't mean everyone else wants this. Just because you want it, doesn't mean everyone else does.
Citation needed...I would love to see how this is occurring!
Because Xserves had enough room to get rid of heat and have more than one CPU. Johnny's obsessive smallness designs win out over power and function once again.
There are stores that still sell floppy discs too, that doesn't its main stream. I bet your mom or sister couldn't care less about taking the PC or Mac apart to upgrade it. You're just thinking about how Apple can cater itself to your work environment. That doesn't mean everyone else wants this. Just because you want it, doesn't mean everyone else does.
No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.
Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.
No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.
Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.
32-bit? Seriously? LOL!!!!
Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit?
Apple can't cater to everyone and it knows more than you do, what its customers want. Just because it doesn't doing what you and/or your work place wants, doesn't mean they're not doing what customers want. I just love how just because you want something you think everyone wants to it too.
How do you know that Pro customers didn't ask for something different? What makes you think this? Because its something you didn't want?
Go buy a PC then if thats what you want and stop bitching about what Apple isn't doing for you. The world doesn't revolve about you.
You really should stop posting. You're making yourself look very foolish indeed. If you had the slightest clue, you'd realise that 64-bit processing adds little to the CPU speed, the Geekbench scores improve by a few percent on the 64-bit tab. So LOL!!!! back to you.
Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit?
It hardly "blows it away". The very best Mac Pro is scored at twice the Xserve, which for a three year gap is pretty poor.
The lesser specced Mac Pros are slower than the Xserves. Look at non-Mac computers on that list and you'll find many that are 10 times the speed of the Mac Pro.
Apple can't cater to everyone and it knows more than you do, what its customers want. Just because it doesn't doing what you and/or your work place wants, doesn't mean they're not doing what customers want. I just love how just because you want something you think everyone wants to it too.
How do you know that Pro customers didn't ask for something different? What makes you think this? Because its something you didn't want?
Go buy a PC then if thats what you want and stop bitching about what Apple isn't doing for you. The world doesn't revolve about you.
Apple is continually reducing the number of people it caters for simply by removing features from their Macs. The software is great, the hardware specs: not so much.
I know pro customers didn't ask for something different because on here, on Apple's forums, on Macrumors people have been slating the new Mac Pro and pining over the old one. People are also switching away in droves from Mac Pros to Hackintoshes of all things, and to Windows. With that and Apple gradually ditching its Pro software, there're a dwindling number of reasons to justify buying an overpriced Mac Pro versus a PC. Despite your apparent knowledge to the contrary, it seems the market agrees with me, and that's why Mac sales are declining.
You say you "love" how I think everyone should want the same as me, it seems more like you're rather worried Apple won't keep catering to your narrow minded view so you're rather desperate to ensure they don't change how they operate. Increasing the options to upgrade a computer doesn't restrict who can buy it, but decreasing them certainly does.
This argument is obviously rather pointless, as you ignore the points I make and just keep beating on about the same thing. It seems by how you type, your age is somewhat less than the majority and therefore I'm the second one who's leaving you with your own rather inward-looking views.
So first you say that proof is self-evident, but then after that you say its not equivalent. You just invalidated your own argument haha. Nothing more to say here.
Really? REALLY?! THAT'S what you got from what I spent all that time explaining? Nothing about fitness for purpose or unserved markets? Wow.
Today I landed in (yet another) real-world example of how Apple's single-minded approach to design and product offerings, combined with luxury-product pricing, leaves me in a quandary.
My daughter's hand-me-down 2007 MacBook Pro is on its last legs. The keyboard is dead, the screen is failing and for unknown reasons it's getting slower and sloowwwer and soooowwwwwerrr over time. It's her birthday so I'd like to replace it, but Apple doesn't make a computer I can afford to give her. An Air at a thousand bucks has inadequate storage. By the time you get a screen big enough for general purpose use and enough storage that you can actually keep some content on it, the price is into Pro territory.
They still have the old 13" MBP for $1200, but I was a little surprised by what I get for that price, so I popped over the BestBuy.ca. I narrowed the search to 4GB RAM, 500GB hard drive and Intel i7. What I got back was a bunch of 15" machines from Dell, HP and Asus ranging in price from around $500 to $850. They're the kind of thing you'd expect -- integrated graphics, no AC wireless, nothing particularly remarkable about them unless you like touchscreen which several of them offer -- pretty generic stuff. The point is, so is the 13" Mac. There's nothing particularly remarkable about IT either. It's aluminum rather than plastic and it runs OSX instead of Windows, so those are advantages, but it has a smaller screen which is a DISadvantage. For that I pay twice as much?
Then I remembered that this is the post PC era. Maybe I should get her an iPad instead. There I pay $800 for a tiny screen and only 128GB of storage. Hm.
Last week I gave her a USB thumb drive with a couple hundred tracks from various contributors. If she had an iPad instead of a laptop, how would we do that? Hm.
She uses her computer to manage the pictures and songs on her phone. If she had an iPad, how would she do that? Hm.
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad? There's no mouse or stylus so how does one do detailed work? Hm.
I can't think of a more generic, typical example of an "average" user than my daughter, and it doesn't look like an iPad is set to replace a computer for her yet. Supplement, sure. Replace, uh uh.
Stuff like THAT is why I say Apple computers are too expensive. That doesn't mean I don't WANT Apple computers -- I do, otherwise there would be no issue, I'd just buy her an Asus -- but holy HELL they make it hard to afford. It's disappointing to realize that the cost of supplying a very average user with unremarkable needs an Apple product costs so much more than perfectly reasonable alternatives. The Apple offerings that are affordable are so compromised as to make them undesirable (IMHO). Who wants a tiny little 11" screen for their primary computer? Again, as a supplemental machine for specific purposes, sure, but for everyday use? And 128GB of storage? Do people not watch movies or listen to music or take photos?
I just don't get it. For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Because it’s a different product for a different use case.
...how would we do that?
You wouldn’t, because that’s not legal anyway.
She uses her computer to manage the pictures and songs on her phone. If she had an iPad, how would she do that?
iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad?
Apps. Don’t be obtuse.
For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Is a K-car really a car? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Because it’s a different product for a different use case.
But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, I'm serious.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
You wouldn’t, because that’s not legal anyway.
Whoops, be careful what you assume. This was perfectly legal. We are the copyright holders.
Now that we have that out of the way, how DOES one share files with an iPad user?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.
I haven't been able to find any information on how one uses an iPad and iCloud to manage music and photos on a Galaxy phone. If you have any advice, I'm all ears (eyes?).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad?
Apps. Don’t be obtuse.
Don't be a dink. WHAT apps? How? Adobe has apps for iPad, but try using one to cut out a cute little kitty in one photo and paste it into another. Not a particularly specialized or unusual activity, but one that's clearly better and more easily accomplished on a computer than an iPad, yes?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Is a K-car really a car? " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I've owned TWO, yes two, 1982 Chrysler LeBarons in my life. It was marketed as a luxury car but it was really just a Plymouth Reliant with some padded vinyl on the roof and nicer seats. We called the first one "The Couch." When it died and I got another, almost identical one, we took our inspiration from Apple and called it… "The Couch."
But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?
Different from a mouse/keyboard combo; sorry for the ambiguity.
We are the copyright holders.
Sorry, you don’t see that very often. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Now that we have that out of the way, how DOES one share files with an iPad user?
E-mail, iMessage, downloading from the Internet, AirDrop with other iDevices, AirDrop with Macs come iOS 8…
…on a Galaxy phone.
Okay, that’s like saying “I need you to build me a skyscraper here” and then telling the person after the fact that there’s still a mountain standing there.
WHAT apps? How? Adobe has apps for iPad, but try using one to cut out a cute little kitty in one photo and paste it into another. Not a particularly specialized or unusual activity, but one that's clearly better and more easily accomplished on a computer than an iPad, yes?
I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.
I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.
I'm sure you're right. The challenge lies in the user interface. One can make very precise selections with a mouse or stylus, but a fingertip is just too blunt an instrument for that kind of activity.
Is this corporate purchases beginning to pick up? I struggle to think why people would by a Windows machine for personal use in this day and age. Granted, I am biased and live in an Apple dominated computer world. I know very few people that use PC's. It used to be very different.
When Apple brings out its IOS driven clamshell Air, life will change forever, once again. Believe it.
I know only one person with MBP... and he lives in South Africa. Granted, I'm in New Zealand (so this might be regional trend) and most my friends are also gamers, so Windows machine is no brainer... but I know more than enough people whose gaming starts and ends with FB games, who are also on Windows machines. I guess this is just not Mac part of the world.
Odd trend also - among casuals (non-gamers) I know, appetite for touch-enabled laptops seems to be going wild. Personally I don't see importance of touch screen in machine with physical keyboard and touchpad, but I might be in minority here.
Odd trend also - among casuals (non-gamers) I know, appetite for touch-enabled laptops seems to be going wild. Personally I don't see importance of touch screen in machine with physical keyboard and touchpad, but I might be in minority here.
A common objection to it is the "Gorilla arm" meme, the theme being that holding your hand up to the screen for any length of time will be uncomfortable. I think people who make that argument forget that the touchscreen isn't INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them. It gives the user the choice of interacting in whichever way is most comfortable for a given task.
It's my experience that just by leaning the screen back a little further and sitting a hair closer, it's quite comfortable pinching and swiping and pressing on the screen itself. Quite similar to holding an iPad. Others' mileage may vary.
As for people who feel Macs are expensive - well, there is an old saying - if you ask for the price of a Rolls Royce, you cannot afford it.
That's the old saying. Since RR was sold to Volkswagen and then to BMW (who were already making engines and other parts for RR), it really doesn't have the same appeal as it used to; today it is more brand and specific design than unique quality. If I'd be asking for RR price, it would be because I want to see what can Merc, Bentley, BMW... offer me for that price; and they could probably offer more.
…the touchscreen isn’t INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them.
Which is why it is failing across the board.
Is it? That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked. Maybe even more with than without, though I can't say that for sure since I didn't actually count. Obviously it could just be that if one brand adds it, every other manufacturer defensively adds it to their own products, but it could also be that people like it and want it and the increase in product availability is in response to demand.
That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked.
Sure did. That little foray I took into Best Buy in 2007 showed a lot more netbooks than the last time I looked, too.
Obviously it could just be that if one brand adds it, every other manufacturer defensively adds it to their own products…
They know where technology is going and what Apple will be doing by 2020, but they think they can get there smoothly without having any platform in between to ease the transition. That’s what you get when you’re not actively doing anything, instead waiting to see what the actual industry innovator does first.
GNU/Linux systems are getting so easy to use that Dell, Lenovo, Acer, ASUS, and maybe even HP will start promoting Ubuntu as a full function OS. Right now Ubuntu has just as many great features and even more software than are available for OS X. It might not be the well known software but it functions just fine. When I owned a Windoz machine I used Open Office for my word processor not Microsux Office. Any of you who use Ubuntu will have seen that Yosemite has borrowed many features that were in Ubuntu for years.
When this happens price will definitely factor into buying decisions even more than now. GNU/Linux OSs are doing as much and more than OS X is now. With manufactures behind something like Ubuntu the quality of the experience will be much better than it is now as a free download without hardware tweaks.
Chromebooks are coming on strong. Ubuntu really won't be necessary if the speed of online apps and product venders grows. With high speed internet spreading, it is possible for people to use online apps that work in browsers to do all sorts of office related work. Owning super fast desktop machines won't even be necessary in a few years. Televisions will be connected to the web and all people will need is a way to interface with them using wireless keyboards and track pads. When that happens OS X, Windoz, and even GNU/Linux OSs will be obsolete for the average person. Businesses will be the last to upgrade because they'll still have desktop monitors.
Chrome OS and perhaps iOS will be the way people connect to the world, though HP has a new OS in development with a new architecture they call The Machine. Who will really need a desktop machine or even a laptop as they are today when 4K TVs will be in every home with 100 Mbps download speeds available from satellites? Chromebooks are the future for clam shell devices. Thin clients are the future, even for Apple. So Apple needs to get off of their high overpriced horse if they want to continue to exist in the changing world of the internet.
Comments
Apple also hasn't been advertising the Mac much in the last couple of years. The Mac vs. PC ads, which were incredibly effective, have been gone for a few years. With those hundreds of billions, you'd think Apple could spare some change for a decent Mac campaign.
I'd like to see more Apple ads...they could have gone after Microsoft again after the Windows 8 fiasco, but they opted to focus on iOS devices instead.
Agreed. We need some metric for measuring how many people are using macs. I have a 3 year old MBA and a 6 year old Mac Pro and I keep thinking about upgrading but they work just fine. And when I do upgrade, they will be passed on to others in the family, not thrown away. Apple's true market share could be several times the number of sales.
This was one of the points I was getting at. When you buy a Mac it will last a very long time. You can still use a 2007 Mac with OS X 10.10 Yosemite. Many times, all you have to do is upgrade the RAM and if you feel frisky, just slap an SSD in place of the hard drive and its like a whole new Mac.
Come on Mickey, shipments are NOT sales, these marketing data reporting companies bend the data to their clients benefit. Remember the ZUNE, those same firms touted how it was outshipping the iPod and was going to take over the mobile media player market, only to find out it is exactly what they said, shipments out stripped those of the iPod only to languish on the shelves of retailers, to be later blown out or returned to MS. Internet use data is a better metric of market share. Of course that could be skewed as well, since I use my iPhone and iPad to browse the internet 95% of the time rather than my MBA or iMac.
Similar, but I doubt it's the same as they started using in Late-2009 as they have worked to make the panels thinner and machines more power efficient. In 2008 they weren't using IPS or LED backlit panels, and had a lower PPI. Even if we look at the the 27" ACD, which looks to be the same panel, that didn't come out until 2010.
Since 2008 isn't even in the running for being the exact same display here is Late-2009 from iFixit compared to Late-2012, only 3 years. Does the new panel look thinner to you?
I recall panels similar to what is used in the 27" thunderbolt display starting to trickle out in late 2009, but I do mean the tail end of it. I also disagree with branding technology that way like it all makes drastic leaps year over year. That was my earlier point. It does look thinner though. So far in terms of panel SKU ifixit and tftcentral suggest it's the same one as they have used since the inception of 27" models, but the backlights and screen treatments have obviously been updated. People assume newer is better far too often. The best display I've seen to date is still the CG211, but they don't make those anymore.
That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro. Using a Mac mini as a server in a high traffic environment is just laughable. It's simply too slow. Since you ignored most of my argument seemingly because you don't really know what you're talking about, how do you explain away the lack of industry-standard PCI-e Fibre cards to connect RAIDs?
Our Macs were Media Studies machines, with simultaneous iMovie edits on 40 or more Macs at the same time. afpd was often using most of the 8 CPU cores. A Mac Mini would melt under those circumstances.
Since it's the same CPU, GPU, memory and HDD, there is a lot that's the same. Obviously the Mac is better quality, but since its specs are half that of the Dell, is double the price really justified? Especially since the Dell is repairable whereas the Mac isn't. If the Dell packs up in two years and the Mac lasts four, it's still better value to get the Dell, since the new one would be better specced than the Mac.
It's a lot easier to compare Macs to PCs since the Intel switch, since before it was a different CPU architecture which may well have been more expensive (or not) to make.
Really. Why then can you go to a local store and pick up extra memory, graphics cards, hard disks and DVD drives? If it was such an elitist activity, surely these parts wouldn't be available at many local stores?
You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.
That's what I said... Apple no longer makes the Xserve, despite it actually outperforming the 2013 Mac Pro.
Citation needed...I would love to see how this is occurring!
You really need to get your head out of the sand and know when you're wrong/beaten. Blindly arguing for Apple doesn't make you seem intelligent or well informed; just completely ignorant.
There are stores that still sell floppy discs too, that doesn't its main stream. I bet your mom or sister couldn't care less about taking the PC or Mac apart to upgrade it. You're just thinking about how Apple can cater itself to your work environment. That doesn't mean everyone else wants this. Just because you want it, doesn't mean everyone else does.
http://browser.primatelabs.com/mac-benchmarks
Click on 32-bit multi-core.
No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.
Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.
No it's not mainstream, but like people that fix their own cars; it's pretty common. Just because you don't know how to yourself, doesn't mean barely anyone does.
Surely Apple should be trying to cater to the needs of their customers? That's usually how businesses are run. I don't know any pro user that asked for a smaller Mac Pro, especially with the compromises Apple made. But of course not everyone needs it. Just like how not everyone will pay extortionate prices for a Mac when a PC is half the price, and costs half as much to fix.
32-bit? Seriously? LOL!!!!
Anyways, if you look at the score, the Mac Pro blows it away, even in 32-bit multicore. Longer bars are better son. Regardless, who cares about 32-bit performance when everything you want to do is 64-bit?
Apple can't cater to everyone and it knows more than you do, what its customers want. Just because it doesn't doing what you and/or your work place wants, doesn't mean they're not doing what customers want. I just love how just because you want something you think everyone wants to it too.
How do you know that Pro customers didn't ask for something different? What makes you think this? Because its something you didn't want?
Go buy a PC then if thats what you want and stop bitching about what Apple isn't doing for you. The world doesn't revolve about you.
You really should stop posting. You're making yourself look very foolish indeed. If you had the slightest clue, you'd realise that 64-bit processing adds little to the CPU speed, the Geekbench scores improve by a few percent on the 64-bit tab. So LOL!!!! back to you.
It hardly "blows it away". The very best Mac Pro is scored at twice the Xserve, which for a three year gap is pretty poor.
The lesser specced Mac Pros are slower than the Xserves. Look at non-Mac computers on that list and you'll find many that are 10 times the speed of the Mac Pro.
Apple is continually reducing the number of people it caters for simply by removing features from their Macs. The software is great, the hardware specs: not so much.
I know pro customers didn't ask for something different because on here, on Apple's forums, on Macrumors people have been slating the new Mac Pro and pining over the old one. People are also switching away in droves from Mac Pros to Hackintoshes of all things, and to Windows. With that and Apple gradually ditching its Pro software, there're a dwindling number of reasons to justify buying an overpriced Mac Pro versus a PC. Despite your apparent knowledge to the contrary, it seems the market agrees with me, and that's why Mac sales are declining.
You say you "love" how I think everyone should want the same as me, it seems more like you're rather worried Apple won't keep catering to your narrow minded view so you're rather desperate to ensure they don't change how they operate. Increasing the options to upgrade a computer doesn't restrict who can buy it, but decreasing them certainly does.
This argument is obviously rather pointless, as you ignore the points I make and just keep beating on about the same thing. It seems by how you type, your age is somewhat less than the majority and therefore I'm the second one who's leaving you with your own rather inward-looking views.
So first you say that proof is self-evident, but then after that you say its not equivalent. You just invalidated your own argument haha. Nothing more to say here.
Really? REALLY?! THAT'S what you got from what I spent all that time explaining? Nothing about fitness for purpose or unserved markets? Wow.
Nothing more to say here.
Yeah, that's probably best.
Today I landed in (yet another) real-world example of how Apple's single-minded approach to design and product offerings, combined with luxury-product pricing, leaves me in a quandary.
My daughter's hand-me-down 2007 MacBook Pro is on its last legs. The keyboard is dead, the screen is failing and for unknown reasons it's getting slower and sloowwwer and soooowwwwwerrr over time. It's her birthday so I'd like to replace it, but Apple doesn't make a computer I can afford to give her. An Air at a thousand bucks has inadequate storage. By the time you get a screen big enough for general purpose use and enough storage that you can actually keep some content on it, the price is into Pro territory.
They still have the old 13" MBP for $1200, but I was a little surprised by what I get for that price, so I popped over the BestBuy.ca. I narrowed the search to 4GB RAM, 500GB hard drive and Intel i7. What I got back was a bunch of 15" machines from Dell, HP and Asus ranging in price from around $500 to $850. They're the kind of thing you'd expect -- integrated graphics, no AC wireless, nothing particularly remarkable about them unless you like touchscreen which several of them offer -- pretty generic stuff. The point is, so is the 13" Mac. There's nothing particularly remarkable about IT either. It's aluminum rather than plastic and it runs OSX instead of Windows, so those are advantages, but it has a smaller screen which is a DISadvantage. For that I pay twice as much?
Then I remembered that this is the post PC era. Maybe I should get her an iPad instead. There I pay $800 for a tiny screen and only 128GB of storage. Hm.
Last week I gave her a USB thumb drive with a couple hundred tracks from various contributors. If she had an iPad instead of a laptop, how would we do that? Hm.
She uses her computer to manage the pictures and songs on her phone. If she had an iPad, how would she do that? Hm.
She's not a professional photographer, but she does like to bring stuff into Elements and create composite works. How would she cut out individual items in a photo using an iPad? There's no mouse or stylus so how does one do detailed work? Hm.
I can't think of a more generic, typical example of an "average" user than my daughter, and it doesn't look like an iPad is set to replace a computer for her yet. Supplement, sure. Replace, uh uh.
Stuff like THAT is why I say Apple computers are too expensive. That doesn't mean I don't WANT Apple computers -- I do, otherwise there would be no issue, I'd just buy her an Asus -- but holy HELL they make it hard to afford. It's disappointing to realize that the cost of supplying a very average user with unremarkable needs an Apple product costs so much more than perfectly reasonable alternatives. The Apple offerings that are affordable are so compromised as to make them undesirable (IMHO). Who wants a tiny little 11" screen for their primary computer? Again, as a supplemental machine for specific purposes, sure, but for everyday use? And 128GB of storage? Do people not watch movies or listen to music or take photos?
I just don't get it. For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Because it’s a different product for a different use case.
You wouldn’t, because that’s not legal anyway.
iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.
Apps. Don’t be obtuse.
For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Is a K-car really a car?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?
I'm not trying to be a smart-ass, I'm serious.
Whoops, be careful what you assume. This was perfectly legal. We are the copyright holders.
Now that we have that out of the way, how DOES one share files with an iPad user?
iCloud. Don’t be obtuse.
I haven't been able to find any information on how one uses an iPad and iCloud to manage music and photos on a Galaxy phone. If you have any advice, I'm all ears (eyes?).
Apps. Don’t be obtuse.
Don't be a dink. WHAT apps? How? Adobe has apps for iPad, but try using one to cut out a cute little kitty in one photo and paste it into another. Not a particularly specialized or unusual activity, but one that's clearly better and more easily accomplished on a computer than an iPad, yes?
For what it cost to set up my daughter, my wife, and me with new Macs, I could buy a new car.
Is a K-car really a car?
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
I've owned TWO, yes two, 1982 Chrysler LeBarons in my life. It was marketed as a luxury car but it was really just a Plymouth Reliant with some padded vinyl on the roof and nicer seats. We called the first one "The Couch." When it died and I got another, almost identical one, we took our inspiration from Apple and called it… "The Couch."
EDIT: P.S. Love your new sig!
But that was my point: I don't think you could find a more generic example of a computer user than her. If the iPad doesn't fit HER use case, what use case DOES it fit?
Different from a mouse/keyboard combo; sorry for the ambiguity.
Sorry, you don’t see that very often.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
E-mail, iMessage, downloading from the Internet, AirDrop with other iDevices, AirDrop with Macs come iOS 8…
Okay, that’s like saying “I need you to build me a skyscraper here” and then telling the person after the fact that there’s still a mountain standing there.
I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.
Relic’s pretty great.
I dunno. I can’t imagine that there isn’t ONE app for iOS with an alpha channel. That’s a simple thing.
I'm sure you're right. The challenge lies in the user interface. One can make very precise selections with a mouse or stylus, but a fingertip is just too blunt an instrument for that kind of activity.
I know only one person with MBP... and he lives in South Africa. Granted, I'm in New Zealand (so this might be regional trend) and most my friends are also gamers, so Windows machine is no brainer... but I know more than enough people whose gaming starts and ends with FB games, who are also on Windows machines. I guess this is just not Mac part of the world.
Odd trend also - among casuals (non-gamers) I know, appetite for touch-enabled laptops seems to be going wild. Personally I don't see importance of touch screen in machine with physical keyboard and touchpad, but I might be in minority here.
A common objection to it is the "Gorilla arm" meme, the theme being that holding your hand up to the screen for any length of time will be uncomfortable. I think people who make that argument forget that the touchscreen isn't INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them. It gives the user the choice of interacting in whichever way is most comfortable for a given task.
It's my experience that just by leaning the screen back a little further and sitting a hair closer, it's quite comfortable pinching and swiping and pressing on the screen itself. Quite similar to holding an iPad. Others' mileage may vary.
…the touchscreen isn’t INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them.
Which is why it is failing across the board.
That's the old saying. Since RR was sold to Volkswagen and then to BMW (who were already making engines and other parts for RR), it really doesn't have the same appeal as it used to; today it is more brand and specific design than unique quality. If I'd be asking for RR price, it would be because I want to see what can Merc, Bentley, BMW... offer me for that price; and they could probably offer more.
…the touchscreen isn’t INSTEAD OF the mouse and keyboard, it's IN ADDITION TO them.
Which is why it is failing across the board.
Is it? That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked. Maybe even more with than without, though I can't say that for sure since I didn't actually count. Obviously it could just be that if one brand adds it, every other manufacturer defensively adds it to their own products, but it could also be that people like it and want it and the increase in product availability is in response to demand.
That little foray I took into Best Buy showed a lot more machines with touch than the last time I looked.
Sure did. That little foray I took into Best Buy in 2007 showed a lot more netbooks than the last time I looked, too.
They know where technology is going and what Apple will be doing by 2020, but they think they can get there smoothly without having any platform in between to ease the transition. That’s what you get when you’re not actively doing anything, instead waiting to see what the actual industry innovator does first.
GNU/Linux systems are getting so easy to use that Dell, Lenovo, Acer, ASUS, and maybe even HP will start promoting Ubuntu as a full function OS. Right now Ubuntu has just as many great features and even more software than are available for OS X. It might not be the well known software but it functions just fine. When I owned a Windoz machine I used Open Office for my word processor not Microsux Office. Any of you who use Ubuntu will have seen that Yosemite has borrowed many features that were in Ubuntu for years.
When this happens price will definitely factor into buying decisions even more than now. GNU/Linux OSs are doing as much and more than OS X is now. With manufactures behind something like Ubuntu the quality of the experience will be much better than it is now as a free download without hardware tweaks.
Chromebooks are coming on strong. Ubuntu really won't be necessary if the speed of online apps and product venders grows. With high speed internet spreading, it is possible for people to use online apps that work in browsers to do all sorts of office related work. Owning super fast desktop machines won't even be necessary in a few years. Televisions will be connected to the web and all people will need is a way to interface with them using wireless keyboards and track pads. When that happens OS X, Windoz, and even GNU/Linux OSs will be obsolete for the average person. Businesses will be the last to upgrade because they'll still have desktop monitors.
Chrome OS and perhaps iOS will be the way people connect to the world, though HP has a new OS in development with a new architecture they call The Machine. Who will really need a desktop machine or even a laptop as they are today when 4K TVs will be in every home with 100 Mbps download speeds available from satellites? Chromebooks are the future for clam shell devices. Thin clients are the future, even for Apple. So Apple needs to get off of their high overpriced horse if they want to continue to exist in the changing world of the internet.