The ?TV ethernet port is 10/100?! Does that mean having it hard-wired to my Time Machine router is dragging down the speed of the GigE devices plugged into it, or does the TM manage flow control?
No, only WiFi gets knocked down when devices connect with a slower standard. Ports on a switch are isolated so only the connection to the Apple TV will negotiate 100Mbps and the others should be 1000Mbps if the other device ports and cabling support it.
The current AppleTV is practically overpowered for what it does. Until Apple announces an AppleTV SDK, there's probably no reason to expect a update.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Or until 4K UHD videos or H.265 encoded videos are available on iTS which would mean a better GPU, better HDMI spec, and new decoder, but I would also like 802.11ac, more antennas, BLE or GigE added.
Or if it gets an app store- particularly game-focused. Thats just it thismarty- by this time- the Apple TV should do more than it currently does.
I bet the "clickless" trackpad still clicks when you press it by using haptics. You could choose either a tactile click, an audio click, both or neither. There have been other rumors that Apple is getting into haptics in a big way and integration into laptop trackpads makes perfect sense. However I still want a touch screen more than retina for cross platform app development.
Why not just a 12" (or 11), and leave the 13 and 15" to MBP?
Price and accommodating more buyers.
People complain about the way auto makers sell options, forcing one to buy a higher model with the towing package and fancier transmission and chrome package when all you want is the seat memory. Well, Apple does the same thing. Even if all you want is the bigger screen, you have no choice but to buy the "luxury" model.
I think Apple should offer MORE models, not fewer. It's not like the current stable is particularly daunting, especially for a company as big and sophisticated as Apple. More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
1. Screen: Small, medium or large?
2. Storage: Small, medium or large?
3. Speed/Power: Basic, medium or fast/powerful?
Right now if you want a large screen or lots of storage, you have to pay for a Pro whether you need that speed/power or not. If what you want is a tiny form factor you can't get fast and powerful at all.
More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
This doesn't hold up in practise, Apple even specifically made a video to address this point:
"If everyone is busy making everything, how can anyone perfect anything? We start to confuse convenience with joy, abundance with choice. Designing something requires focus. The first thing we ask: What do we want people to feel? Delight. Surprise. Love. Connection. Then we craft around our intention. It takes time. There are a thousand no’s for every yes. We simplify. We perfect. We start over, until everything we touch enhances every life it touches. Only then do we sign our work. – Designed by Apple in California."
You can't obviously reduce the choice to one model and one spec but that is in fact the ideal and simplest option for a buyer and as specs increase, Apple can converge to this. You don't need to choose between 15 different processors that vary small amounts in speed (and Intel doesn't need to build that many but they do). All you need is a cheap option where you don't care about speed and a fast option where you do. You don't need to choose between 5 different screen sizes, the ideal there for laptops would be 2 options: ultraportable and productive i.e 12" and 15".
I think Apple should offer MORE models, not fewer. It's not like the current stable is particularly daunting, especially for a company as big and sophisticated as Apple. More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
1. Screen: Small, medium or large?
2. Storage: Small, medium or large?
3. Speed/Power: Basic, medium or fast/powerful?
Disagree. Apple should focus and not shotgun approach. Also more choices mean more confusion. Witness the variations of Windows. Witness restaurant menus.
I'm tired of hearing how great Broadwell is supposed to be. It'd better be a pink unicorn with magic shooting out of its ass, whenever it finally ships.
Actually, it's going to mostly be an power efficient pink unicorn with with otherwise about the same magic as Haswell shooting out of its ass...
I bet the "clickless" trackpad still clicks when you press it by using haptics. You could choose either a tactile click, an audio click, both or neither. There have been other rumors that Apple is getting into haptics in a big way and integration into laptop trackpads makes perfect sense. However I still want a touch screen more than retina for cross platform app development.
Haptics is grossly over rated. It has its place on something like an iPhone but on a laptop I can't see a rational reason to support Haptics in place of a real mechanical switch with real travel and feedback.
So why would the 11" and 13" MBA's be getting new screens, chassis and processors? Wouldn't Apple just phase them out and have 12", 13" and 15" MBPs? And if hell froze over maybe bring back the 17" MBP?
I really like the idea of 2" increments to the MBP line up. In this case machines of 12", 14" and 16". A 17" laptop is pretty huge and frankly for many uses very cumbersome to work with. Often you are just as well off putting a desktop machine on a cart with a large monitor.
The thing here is that each of these screen sizes could be stuffed into machines only slightly bigger than what Apple ships today. If they pay careful attention to aspect ratio and the bezel areas they might be able to ship such machines in the same foot print as today's machines.
Such a line up would take care of the MBP line up but an ultra low cost, very portable product is still needed. This would still be filled by MBA models. Apple can provide real differentiation here by plugging higher performance chips, GPUs, more RAM and such into the MBP models. I would probably go with just one MBA model at 12" for this sort of line up. Id be happy to see quad cores in the MBP for a big differentiating feature with double the RAM.
People complain about the way auto makers sell options, forcing one to buy a higher model with the towing package and fancier transmission and chrome package when all you want is the seat memory. Well, Apple does the same thing. Even if all you want is the bigger screen, you have no choice but to buy the "luxury" model.
I think Apple should offer MORE models, not fewer. It's not like the current stable is particularly daunting, especially for a company as big and sophisticated as Apple. More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
1. Screen: Small, medium or large?
2. Storage: Small, medium or large?
3. Speed/Power: Basic, medium or fast/powerful?
Right now if you want a large screen or lots of storage, you have to pay for a Pro whether you need that speed/power or not. If what you want is a tiny form factor you can't get fast and powerful at all.
And that is how business works and money is made.
All of Apple's Macs should see a 20% price cut for completely unrelated reasons, but I do not agree with your idea that more models is better than fewer models. I dislike other companies that say THIS is the product at $XXXX....but you can get a bastardized version of it for $XXX... #consumerchoice
No. All that does is cheapen your offering and lead to poor customer satisfaction. The same customer would have been thrilled with your product instead of disappointed had they simply paid a little more for the MUCH better version of what you offer.
At this point they might consider ditching Broadwell for the follow on generation.
How does that make any sense whatsoever? They have NOTHING until 2015 and you want them to ignore that and keep having NOTHING until 2017? THIS HARDWARE until 2017?!
Disagree. Apple should focus and not shotgun approach. Also more choices mean more confusion. Witness the variations of Windows. Witness restaurant menus.
I respect your opinion, but I would not frequent restaurant that would only allow me to have vegetables if I ordered the steak and lobster.
Forcing buyers into a top-of-the-line machine in order to get a larger screen is a risky strategy. In our case it worked once, in the second case we wound up saying no. What does THAT do to average selling price? This isn't Apple leaving the low-end to others, it's limiting choices for buyers in their own market.
I respect your opinion, but I would not frequent restaurant that would only allow me to have vegetables if I ordered the steak and lobster.
Forcing buyers into a top-of-the-line machine in order to get a larger screen is a risky strategy. In our case it worked once, in the second case we wound up saying no. What does THAT do to average selling price? This isn't Apple leaving the low-end to others, it's limiting choices for buyers in their own market.
Perhaps restaurants should start offering steaks at 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 oz. And also ribeye, skirt, sirloin, porterhouse, etc. with 10 different sauces, etc.
Unless the buyer decides that Apple doesn't offer a configuration that suits her/his needs and buys something else. Then no money is made at all. We accept that this happens all the time because of price, but I think it's risky to shoehorn buyers in an already rarified segment of the market.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pmz
All that does is cheapen your offering and lead to poor customer satisfaction. The same customer would have been thrilled with your product instead of disappointed had they simply paid a little more for the MUCH better version of what you offer.
I'm saying that I believe that dissatisfaction is happening NOW, because buyers have limited choices. In most cases the jump is not "a little more" but "way lots more" and besides, in some cases, price isn't even the objection.
Say, for example, I like the styling and lower cost of the Air, but I'd like a TB of storage. Nope, gotta buy a Pro for that. That's arbitrary and causes customer dissatisfaction.
Or perhaps my requirements are simple and I'd like a basic machine, but I want a 15" screen. Gotta buy a Pro. That customer may be more than just dissatisfied and actually buy something else. That's not how "money is made."
I chose those examples because I think they're realistic and probably quite common. I'm not suggesting that Apple be like Samsung and produce every possible permutation imaginable, but just that they offer good-better-best choices within their existing form-factors. Right now it's similar to shopping for a car and being forced into a truck (and, to a lesser degree, vice-versa).
Perhaps restaurants should start offering steaks at 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 oz. And also ribeye, skirt, sirloin, porterhouse, etc. with 10 different sauces, etc.
Reductio ad absurdum, huh? C'mon... how on Earth do you equate SIX models to a ridiculous array?
Air in three screen sizes.
Pro in three screen sizes.
The End.
The only "fixed" variable is screen size. Everything else can be handled with BTO options, which would require only very slightly more SKU's than they already offer -- ones that remove arbitrary limits like storage capacity in the Air. The actual number of available models would not increase substantially so inventory wouldn't become unmanageable.
As for buyer confusion, I don't buy it. Screen: Small, medium or large? Storage: Minimal, lots or in-between? Power: Simple, mind-blowing or in-between? Hardly all that daunting.
SO, tell me how that would be bad for buyers or bad for Apple? It's win/win.
[quote name="Lorin Schultz" url="/t/181432/rumor-12-retina-macbook-air-may-be-pushed-back-to-2015-next-gen-models-hit-production-in-august#post_2566795"]Reductio ad absurdum, huh?[/QUOTE]
Your Harry Potter spells aren't going to work here.
[QUOTE]C'mon... how on Earth do you equate SIX models to a ridiculous array?[/QUOTE]
How do you get only 6 models? I get 27 just from what you've stated and that doesn't include the various colours or different cellular frequency bands for different networks. That's 81 different models without including any variance for baseband radio differences.
If it ships. At this point they might consider ditching Broadwell for the follow on generation. If not that a more limited Broadwell release.
It has been pretty far in the distance for some time, but the tech sites occasionally like to claim that Apple and others will somehow defy intel's rollout schedule. It's also the same thing over again. They say that the generation after is still on target, but they aren't going to ship something for 3 months and then immediately switch over.
Your Harry Potter spells aren't going to work here.
LOL!
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
How do you get only 6 models? I get 27 just from what you've stated and that doesn't include the various colours or different cellular frequency bands for different networks. That's 81 different models without including any variance for baseband radio differences.
Laptops, not phones.
I addressed the issue of ballooning SKUs. See the very post to which you replied. There would be a few more but not a lot more, and buyers would have better choices.
Comments
No, only WiFi gets knocked down when devices connect with a slower standard. Ports on a switch are isolated so only the connection to the Apple TV will negotiate 100Mbps and the others should be 1000Mbps if the other device ports and cabling support it.
The current AppleTV is practically overpowered for what it does. Until Apple announces an AppleTV SDK, there's probably no reason to expect a update.
Or until 4K UHD videos or H.265 encoded videos are available on iTS which would mean a better GPU, better HDMI spec, and new decoder, but I would also like 802.11ac, more antennas, BLE or GigE added.
Or if it gets an app store- particularly game-focused. Thats just it thismarty- by this time- the Apple TV should do more than it currently does.
@solipsismx
Why do the MBAs bum you out? I have an 11" and love it. It's not my main machine, that's the iMac, but it does a great job and is verrrrry portable.
Honestly- it's the screen IMO. If they upgraded the 11" screen to be on par with the MBP (which the intel GPU can handle)- it'd be perfect.
It is weird they'd have an 11, 12, and 13 MBA. Why not just a 12" (or 11), and leave the 13 and 15" to MBP?
Why not just a 12" (or 11), and leave the 13 and 15" to MBP?
Price and accommodating more buyers.
People complain about the way auto makers sell options, forcing one to buy a higher model with the towing package and fancier transmission and chrome package when all you want is the seat memory. Well, Apple does the same thing. Even if all you want is the bigger screen, you have no choice but to buy the "luxury" model.
I think Apple should offer MORE models, not fewer. It's not like the current stable is particularly daunting, especially for a company as big and sophisticated as Apple. More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
1. Screen: Small, medium or large?
2. Storage: Small, medium or large?
3. Speed/Power: Basic, medium or fast/powerful?
Right now if you want a large screen or lots of storage, you have to pay for a Pro whether you need that speed/power or not. If what you want is a tiny form factor you can't get fast and powerful at all.
What is deal with a 12" screen? Why not Retina for both 11" and 13" models. What am I missing with a 12" model?
This seems to be the popular question.
To which end, it might be good to know the precise difference in power consumption between the regular 13" and the retina 12".
Perhaps the hope of staying as close to the 12-hour standard as possible played some part in the strategy for this machine?
Always assuming it really is in the works...
This doesn't hold up in practise, Apple even specifically made a video to address this point:
"If everyone is busy making everything, how can anyone perfect anything? We start to confuse convenience with joy, abundance with choice. Designing something requires focus. The first thing we ask: What do we want people to feel? Delight. Surprise. Love. Connection. Then we craft around our intention. It takes time. There are a thousand no’s for every yes. We simplify. We perfect. We start over, until everything we touch enhances every life it touches. Only then do we sign our work. – Designed by Apple in California."
This is what a thousand yes's looks like:
http://www.android.net/forum/android-phones-model/
and a thousand no's looks like this:
You can't obviously reduce the choice to one model and one spec but that is in fact the ideal and simplest option for a buyer and as specs increase, Apple can converge to this. You don't need to choose between 15 different processors that vary small amounts in speed (and Intel doesn't need to build that many but they do). All you need is a cheap option where you don't care about speed and a fast option where you do. You don't need to choose between 5 different screen sizes, the ideal there for laptops would be 2 options: ultraportable and productive i.e 12" and 15".
Disagree. Apple should focus and not shotgun approach. Also more choices mean more confusion. Witness the variations of Windows. Witness restaurant menus.
I'm tired of hearing how great Broadwell is supposed to be. It'd better be a pink unicorn with magic shooting out of its ass, whenever it finally ships.
Actually, it's going to mostly be an power efficient pink unicorn with with otherwise about the same magic as Haswell shooting out of its ass...
If it ships. At this point they might consider ditching Broadwell for the follow on generation. If not that a more limited Broadwell release.
Haptics is grossly over rated. It has its place on something like an iPhone but on a laptop I can't see a rational reason to support Haptics in place of a real mechanical switch with real travel and feedback.
I really like the idea of 2" increments to the MBP line up. In this case machines of 12", 14" and 16". A 17" laptop is pretty huge and frankly for many uses very cumbersome to work with. Often you are just as well off putting a desktop machine on a cart with a large monitor.
The thing here is that each of these screen sizes could be stuffed into machines only slightly bigger than what Apple ships today. If they pay careful attention to aspect ratio and the bezel areas they might be able to ship such machines in the same foot print as today's machines.
Such a line up would take care of the MBP line up but an ultra low cost, very portable product is still needed. This would still be filled by MBA models. Apple can provide real differentiation here by plugging higher performance chips, GPUs, more RAM and such into the MBP models. I would probably go with just one MBA model at 12" for this sort of line up. Id be happy to see quad cores in the MBP for a big differentiating feature with double the RAM.
Price and accommodating more buyers.
People complain about the way auto makers sell options, forcing one to buy a higher model with the towing package and fancier transmission and chrome package when all you want is the seat memory. Well, Apple does the same thing. Even if all you want is the bigger screen, you have no choice but to buy the "luxury" model.
I think Apple should offer MORE models, not fewer. It's not like the current stable is particularly daunting, especially for a company as big and sophisticated as Apple. More selection makes choices EASIER for buyers, not harder.
1. Screen: Small, medium or large?
2. Storage: Small, medium or large?
3. Speed/Power: Basic, medium or fast/powerful?
Right now if you want a large screen or lots of storage, you have to pay for a Pro whether you need that speed/power or not. If what you want is a tiny form factor you can't get fast and powerful at all.
And that is how business works and money is made.
All of Apple's Macs should see a 20% price cut for completely unrelated reasons, but I do not agree with your idea that more models is better than fewer models. I dislike other companies that say THIS is the product at $XXXX....but you can get a bastardized version of it for $XXX... #consumerchoice
No. All that does is cheapen your offering and lead to poor customer satisfaction. The same customer would have been thrilled with your product instead of disappointed had they simply paid a little more for the MUCH better version of what you offer.
How does that make any sense whatsoever? They have NOTHING until 2015 and you want them to ignore that and keep having NOTHING until 2017? THIS HARDWARE until 2017?!
Disagree. Apple should focus and not shotgun approach. Also more choices mean more confusion. Witness the variations of Windows. Witness restaurant menus.
I respect your opinion, but I would not frequent restaurant that would only allow me to have vegetables if I ordered the steak and lobster.
Forcing buyers into a top-of-the-line machine in order to get a larger screen is a risky strategy. In our case it worked once, in the second case we wound up saying no. What does THAT do to average selling price? This isn't Apple leaving the low-end to others, it's limiting choices for buyers in their own market.
Perhaps restaurants should start offering steaks at 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 oz. And also ribeye, skirt, sirloin, porterhouse, etc. with 10 different sauces, etc.
And that is how business works and money is made.
Unless the buyer decides that Apple doesn't offer a configuration that suits her/his needs and buys something else. Then no money is made at all. We accept that this happens all the time because of price, but I think it's risky to shoehorn buyers in an already rarified segment of the market.
All that does is cheapen your offering and lead to poor customer satisfaction. The same customer would have been thrilled with your product instead of disappointed had they simply paid a little more for the MUCH better version of what you offer.
I'm saying that I believe that dissatisfaction is happening NOW, because buyers have limited choices. In most cases the jump is not "a little more" but "way lots more" and besides, in some cases, price isn't even the objection.
Say, for example, I like the styling and lower cost of the Air, but I'd like a TB of storage. Nope, gotta buy a Pro for that. That's arbitrary and causes customer dissatisfaction.
Or perhaps my requirements are simple and I'd like a basic machine, but I want a 15" screen. Gotta buy a Pro. That customer may be more than just dissatisfied and actually buy something else. That's not how "money is made."
I chose those examples because I think they're realistic and probably quite common. I'm not suggesting that Apple be like Samsung and produce every possible permutation imaginable, but just that they offer good-better-best choices within their existing form-factors. Right now it's similar to shopping for a car and being forced into a truck (and, to a lesser degree, vice-versa).
Perhaps restaurants should start offering steaks at 6, 8, 10, 12, 14, and 16 oz. And also ribeye, skirt, sirloin, porterhouse, etc. with 10 different sauces, etc.
Reductio ad absurdum, huh? C'mon... how on Earth do you equate SIX models to a ridiculous array?
Air in three screen sizes.
Pro in three screen sizes.
The End.
The only "fixed" variable is screen size. Everything else can be handled with BTO options, which would require only very slightly more SKU's than they already offer -- ones that remove arbitrary limits like storage capacity in the Air. The actual number of available models would not increase substantially so inventory wouldn't become unmanageable.
As for buyer confusion, I don't buy it. Screen: Small, medium or large? Storage: Minimal, lots or in-between? Power: Simple, mind-blowing or in-between? Hardly all that daunting.
SO, tell me how that would be bad for buyers or bad for Apple? It's win/win.
Your Harry Potter spells aren't going to work here.
[QUOTE]C'mon... how on Earth do you equate SIX models to a ridiculous array?[/QUOTE]
How do you get only 6 models? I get 27 just from what you've stated and that doesn't include the various colours or different cellular frequency bands for different networks. That's 81 different models without including any variance for baseband radio differences.
If it ships. At this point they might consider ditching Broadwell for the follow on generation. If not that a more limited Broadwell release.
It has been pretty far in the distance for some time, but the tech sites occasionally like to claim that Apple and others will somehow defy intel's rollout schedule. It's also the same thing over again. They say that the generation after is still on target, but they aren't going to ship something for 3 months and then immediately switch over.
Reductio ad absurdum, huh?
Your Harry Potter spells aren't going to work here.
LOL!
Laptops, not phones.
I addressed the issue of ballooning SKUs. See the very post to which you replied. There would be a few more but not a lot more, and buyers would have better choices.