OMG!!! I am in love with this machine. It is awesome. Typing is a breeze. The keyboard is actually a HUGE step up. I am much more accurate etc you name it. This machine is also fast and responsive. I am having a blast with it so far.
Hey Wizard69, and anyone else interested. I got my Macbook this morning about 10 minutes before leaving for the airport. Battery was 90% charged, so I was able to play with it pretty much all day.
It is always amazing to me that freshly opened Apple devices are ready to go battery wise. Apple does incorporate some great battery technology.
It was great for working on Word docs, using Pages (ugh), browsing, reading with the Kindle app, and pretty much anything else. I'm not going to bother installing my grandfathered-in Aperture, or the new Photo app, because that's what my iMac is for. Anyway, no glitches with multiple browser windows and docs open, iTunes running, etc.
What do you consider to be glitches? Even with my brand new 13" MBP I run into performance glitches where the machine just isn't responsive for a few seconds. Really frustrating. Maybe I'm just to type "A" but I really hate it when a machine lags even for a moment.
[/quote]
For whatever reason, I had a lot of Word hiccups (and as a writer that is putting it kindly) with my rMBP over the past couple years. I work with text so much that anything non-retina is a step back for me, and this little Macbook has been awesome so far.
[/quote]
My first introduction to retina was an iPad and now that I have a Mac so equipped I understand your feelings 100%.
I also like the keyboard, which is very quiet. I am not missing that extra 2 or 3 pounds (even the charger is lighter). I don't think there's much reason to compare the Macbook to the rMBP, which is an awesome machine that serves a different purpose.
I hope that isn't what people think I'm doing. What I've tried to imply is that the Mac Books lack of features is what has kept me off the platform. The ports issue is big with me so it isn't really a comparison issue, it is alack of features issue.
Both have retina, but one is for power users, and one is for people like me: students, travelers, etc. working with large documents, especially on the the go. Cheers.
I realize that. My point is that the machine might have gained wider acceptance with an additional port or a charger that broke out a few ports. In fact I'm not sure how Apple missed the opportunity to deliver a charger / docking station type solution.
My point is that the machine might have gained wider acceptance with an additional port or a charger that broke out a few ports. In fact I'm not sure how Apple missed the opportunity to deliver a charger / docking station type solution.
I think adapters like that are likely coming soon. Since USB-C isn't a proprietary Apple thing, Apple can't stop third parties from making such a dock/adapter, can they? Makes sense to have the charger on the floor (or wherever) connected to a few peripherals with just one USB-C cord running to the MacBook. I don't use my MacBook that way, it's only a laptop, but it's a good idea.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
One thing's for certain, the A8X provides essentially the same performance using an older 20 nm process for far less cost than the Core M. (~$20 vs. $280). So why is it that Apple used the Core M rather than the upcoming A9X and given us a better performing machine for less cost? And how on earth is Intel even going to stay competitive going forward?
What I meant by comparing models is the tendency of some people to list the features of Macbook and rMBP Pro side by side and say "Ha!" the Pro is better, faster, more powerful, etc., and a better value. Why would someone buy the Macbook when they could get the Pro or Air? And my response is that it the Macbook was not designed for those users. Of course it's reasonable to compare them to see what machine is best for your needs at any given time. Another user on this forum mentions that a Mac Air 2 is a better machine, which, for him, it probably is. I prefer OS X, the clamshell design of an actual laptop, and I want all 256GB of storage. I can't replicate professional writing and editing on an iPad, even with a bluetooth keyboard (which I have used in pinch). I don't have that kind of time or patience. The port situation cannot be overcome for some users, which I understand. It is definitely lacking, but as I said, my only USB-based peripheral is an occasional thumb drive.
This is my third day with the machine, and, as I am on a deadline, have used it heavily. I worked in a remote location yesterday at 90% brightness for 8 or 9 hours, and the battery was still at +30%. Last night, I streamed a movie using airplay and had zero dropouts. This was at a friend's house with comcast broadband (my own wireless isn't as robust, so I expect some pixelation when I try from home). I probably consider glitches similar to what you describe -- moments where something isn't responding, even for a few moments. I never want to see that spinning beachball -- I saw a lot of them with my 2010 rMBP, and Apple replaced it with the mid-2012 rMBP, which solved most of my problems. I haven't noticed any of that so far with Word, Scrivener, Pages, iTunes, Kindle, maps, mail, etc. I opened iPhoto to see how it responded, and didn't notice any lags there, though I wasn't trying to edit large images, only view them. The only lags I've seen have had to do with getting on the Apple website, which is more a function of their servers than my processor (other web pages I've visited seem fine). I seem to occasionally hit the trackpad in the wrong location when selecting text in Word, which is something I expect I'll get used to. I think I have to remember to aim farther left.
Anyway, nice to have a reasonable discussion on an Apple forum. Feel free to ask me any other questions. I'm getting back on a plane today, so expect to put on my headphones and get plenty done. Cheers.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
No matter how you configure it, an iPad is not a Mac notebook computer and it won't run Mac OS X. The MacBook is a real Mac, with a larger screen than an iPad and a real keyboard. It folds up instantly to be moved around or taken with you, unlike an iPad with separate keyboard which is kinda fiddly. Some people can get along fine with only an iPad. I find them useful for a few things but after using one for about 10 minutes, I want my Mac back. Your mileage may vary.
I think adapters like that are likely coming soon. Since USB-C isn't a proprietary Apple thing, Apple can't stop third parties from making such a dock/adapter, can they? Makes sense to have the charger on the floor (or wherever) connected to a few peripherals with just one USB-C cord running to the MacBook. I don't use my MacBook that way, it's only a laptop, but it's a good idea.
USB-C is certainly an open standard but I just think Apple wasted a very good opportunity here. Imagine if every time you docked your Mac Book, at your desk, you hooked up your external monitor, backup disk and whatever else.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
People do underestimate the iPad and iOS.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
Mac OS! In a nut shell that is a big feature for people that know how to use it. Having both a Mac and an iPad I'm often torn between which is the best for a task. Needless to say I suspect others have the same conflicts, in that case a Mac OS based machine is a safer bet for a one machine user.
Now if Apple would only deliver a Mac OS driven ARM based device.
One thing's for certain, the A8X provides essentially the same performance using an older 20 nm process for far less cost than the Core M. (~$20 vs. $280). So why is it that Apple used the Core M rather than the upcoming A9X and given us a better performing machine for less cost? And how on earth is Intel even going to stay competitive going forward?
These are questions many of us would like to ask Cook and others at Apple. Personally I'd like to see an open ARM based laptop from Apple. One that dramatically lowers price and really delivers on the potential of ARM based devices.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
No matter how you configure it, an iPad is not a Mac notebook computer and it won't run Mac OS X. The MacBook is a real Mac, with a larger screen than an iPad and a real keyboard. It folds up instantly to be moved around or taken with you, unlike an iPad with separate keyboard which is kinda fiddly. Some people can get along fine with only an iPad. I find them useful for a few things but after using one for about 10 minutes, I want my Mac back. Your mileage may vary.
Processing power and everything else not OS related (ports, screen size, etc) have to be put in perspective as only a part of the equation between the two and for some they're not that meaningful even if devices get as powerful as laptops compared to the OS. I'm in your camp. I love my iPad and use it a lot for things other than putzing around. But as IOS makes one take sometimes five steps where OS X takes one (and that's with holding a finger down and hoping the icons menu pops up soon) and has a "file system" (I use the term very loosely) that basically lets you manage files within the apps but not outside of them, I generally go to the MBP when I want to bang out 10 minutes of doing something in just 10 minutes. I know several people who don't use their iPads for any such things because they see it as stopping at a certain point where things then should be done in OS X and don't even bother to explore the crossed over common area because it seems, to them, like a chore.
These people are consumer oriented, and not adventurous users, and they're less concerned with something being possible than something being annoying, especially if they have another tool 10 feet away that isn't. I don't think they'll be swayed by arguments for a more powerful iPad as a replacement for the lowest Mac with OS X. They just see it as IOS vs OS X.
I think iOS has it's 'limitations.' But for 9/10 mainstream things it doesn't. It will get added to as things move forward. Give an iPad an A9 processor and 13 inch screen with stylus (I don't wan to wear out my fingers drawing...) and we're in business.
The Macbook? A natural evolution. A fantastic work of art. They have learned from the iPad and iPhone engineering.
I think iOS and 'X' converge ever closer but they remain true to the truck, casual, minute and seconds model. For now.
I have both. I don't see any conflict. iOS is basically 'X' and I think of iOS as more 'Mac' (the computer for the rest of us...) than the Mac is. And the sales prove it. Apple really smashed the price barrier on the iPad and the iPhone in the way they never really did with the Mac.
Maybe if the Mac hits 6 million plus sales we may see a further trimming of prices to take the fight onto he 'lawn' of Redmond.
If we're not there already.
*Looks at the enterprise alliance of Apple/IBM. Ironic considering the way PPC turned out.
As Apple moves forward on the development of its A series processor, it would certainly behoove them to put it into a lower cost notebook that could run an ARM variant of OSX. Or they could simply upgrade iOS to incorporate the functionality of OSX. There are certainly limitations to iOS in comparison to OSX. However, there are also huge advantages. Software development on iOS for ARM is simply enormous. On OSX for x86, it is minuscule. iOS running on an iPad or iPhone provides excellent battery life and far better than any x86 laptop I've ever owned. And that's no exaggeration.
I am anticipating that it's inevitable that ARM will one day entirely displace x86. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have any requirement for a computer running on an x86 processor. My work computer is only used for printing. Everything else I do is on an iPad.
It would be very nice to have a MacBook running on an A8X or A9X with a more powerful iOS that would run any iDevice application and also allow multitasking and several running processes. Software developers could continue writing new applications for a platform they already know. On a machine that is as capable as one running an outrageously expensive x86 processor.
As Apple continues to profit enormously from their mobile devices and plow those development dollars back into newer and more capable ARM chips, the days of the x86 are numbered. I know I would want a less expensive ARM based machine over one running a more expensive x86.
As Apple moves forward on the development of its A series processor, it would certainly behoove them to put it into a lower cost notebook that could run an ARM variant of OSX. Or they could simply upgrade iOS to incorporate the functionality of OSX. There are certainly limitations to iOS in comparison to OSX. However, there are also huge advantages. Software development on iOS for ARM is simply enormous. On OSX for x86, it is minuscule. iOS running on an iPad or iPhone provides excellent battery life and far better than any x86 laptop I've ever owned. And that's no exaggeration.
I am anticipating that it's inevitable that ARM will one day entirely displace x86. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have any requirement for a computer running on an x86 processor. My work computer is only used for printing. Everything else I do is on an iPad.
It would be very nice to have a MacBook running on an A8X or A9X with a more powerful iOS that would run any iDevice application and also allow multitasking and several running processes. Software developers could continue writing new applications for a platform they already know. On a machine that is as capable as one running an outrageously expensive x86 processor.
As Apple continues to profit enormously from their mobile devices and plow those development dollars back into newer and more capable ARM chips, the days of the x86 are numbered. I know I would want a less expensive ARM based machine over one running a more expensive x86.
Yes. Nicely summed up. Pretty much the way the wind is blowing going forwards.
A 'laptop' variant iOS device may arrive with the iPad+, stylus included. But less clunky than M$'s 'hybrid.'
Stick a 'laptop' iOS device/iPad+ above the current iPad but beneath the entry Air. Killer. Powered by a promising A9 chip. (The A8X is already pretty impressive.)
As you said, iOS software is massive. To me, iOS is eventually going to replace the Mac in the way the Mac replaced the Apple II. For now, they're running in parallel. Each device is true to itself. So we're still someway off.
Having said that, I want my goddamn Skylake Retina 5k iMac... (And can't we have a six core high model by now, please..?)
As for the Macbook. Played with one today. Quite astonishing. Like the innovative new keyboard. And that trackpad. So thin! Beautiful screen. SSD more than compensates for the M processor which is no slouch on most mainstream cpu tasks.
Be interesting to see what sales impact it has.
Should get a circa £100 price cut going forwards. A revision 'B' and 'C' machine is going to killer compound its appeal.
Comments
OMG!!! I am in love with this machine. It is awesome. Typing is a breeze. The keyboard is actually a HUGE step up. I am much more accurate etc you name it. This machine is also fast and responsive. I am having a blast with it so far.
It is always amazing to me that freshly opened Apple devices are ready to go battery wise. Apple does incorporate some great battery technology. What do you consider to be glitches? Even with my brand new 13" MBP I run into performance glitches where the machine just isn't responsive for a few seconds. Really frustrating. Maybe I'm just to type "A" but I really hate it when a machine lags even for a moment.
[/quote]
For whatever reason, I had a lot of Word hiccups (and as a writer that is putting it kindly) with my rMBP over the past couple years. I work with text so much that anything non-retina is a step back for me, and this little Macbook has been awesome so far.
[/quote]
My first introduction to retina was an iPad and now that I have a Mac so equipped I understand your feelings 100%. I hope that isn't what people think I'm doing. What I've tried to imply is that the Mac Books lack of features is what has kept me off the platform. The ports issue is big with me so it isn't really a comparison issue, it is alack of features issue. I realize that. My point is that the machine might have gained wider acceptance with an additional port or a charger that broke out a few ports. In fact I'm not sure how Apple missed the opportunity to deliver a charger / docking station type solution.
I think adapters like that are likely coming soon. Since USB-C isn't a proprietary Apple thing, Apple can't stop third parties from making such a dock/adapter, can they? Makes sense to have the charger on the floor (or wherever) connected to a few peripherals with just one USB-C cord running to the MacBook. I don't use my MacBook that way, it's only a laptop, but it's a good idea.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
One thing's for certain, the A8X provides essentially the same performance using an older 20 nm process for far less cost than the Core M. (~$20 vs. $280). So why is it that Apple used the Core M rather than the upcoming A9X and given us a better performing machine for less cost? And how on earth is Intel even going to stay competitive going forward?
Hey Wizard69,
What I meant by comparing models is the tendency of some people to list the features of Macbook and rMBP Pro side by side and say "Ha!" the Pro is better, faster, more powerful, etc., and a better value. Why would someone buy the Macbook when they could get the Pro or Air? And my response is that it the Macbook was not designed for those users. Of course it's reasonable to compare them to see what machine is best for your needs at any given time. Another user on this forum mentions that a Mac Air 2 is a better machine, which, for him, it probably is. I prefer OS X, the clamshell design of an actual laptop, and I want all 256GB of storage. I can't replicate professional writing and editing on an iPad, even with a bluetooth keyboard (which I have used in pinch). I don't have that kind of time or patience. The port situation cannot be overcome for some users, which I understand. It is definitely lacking, but as I said, my only USB-based peripheral is an occasional thumb drive.
This is my third day with the machine, and, as I am on a deadline, have used it heavily. I worked in a remote location yesterday at 90% brightness for 8 or 9 hours, and the battery was still at +30%. Last night, I streamed a movie using airplay and had zero dropouts. This was at a friend's house with comcast broadband (my own wireless isn't as robust, so I expect some pixelation when I try from home). I probably consider glitches similar to what you describe -- moments where something isn't responding, even for a few moments. I never want to see that spinning beachball -- I saw a lot of them with my 2010 rMBP, and Apple replaced it with the mid-2012 rMBP, which solved most of my problems. I haven't noticed any of that so far with Word, Scrivener, Pages, iTunes, Kindle, maps, mail, etc. I opened iPhoto to see how it responded, and didn't notice any lags there, though I wasn't trying to edit large images, only view them. The only lags I've seen have had to do with getting on the Apple website, which is more a function of their servers than my processor (other web pages I've visited seem fine). I seem to occasionally hit the trackpad in the wrong location when selecting text in Word, which is something I expect I'll get used to. I think I have to remember to aim farther left.
Anyway, nice to have a reasonable discussion on an Apple forum. Feel free to ask me any other questions. I'm getting back on a plane today, so expect to put on my headphones and get plenty done. Cheers.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
No matter how you configure it, an iPad is not a Mac notebook computer and it won't run Mac OS X. The MacBook is a real Mac, with a larger screen than an iPad and a real keyboard. It folds up instantly to be moved around or taken with you, unlike an iPad with separate keyboard which is kinda fiddly. Some people can get along fine with only an iPad. I find them useful for a few things but after using one for about 10 minutes, I want my Mac back. Your mileage may vary.
USB-C is certainly an open standard but I just think Apple wasted a very good opportunity here. Imagine if every time you docked your Mac Book, at your desk, you hooked up your external monitor, backup disk and whatever else.
Now if Apple would only deliver a Mac OS driven ARM based device.
These are questions many of us would like to ask Cook and others at Apple. Personally I'd like to see an open ARM based laptop from Apple. One that dramatically lowers price and really delivers on the potential of ARM based devices.
Let's see, this thing costs double of what the iPad Air 2 does for similar processing performance at half the battery life. The iPad is lighter and therefore more portable and I can go an entire work day on a single charge. I can attach a real keyboard to the iPad and it's actually a very powerful machine.
With the imminent release of the A9 processor and the iPad pro, remind me, why would I need or even want this machine?
No matter how you configure it, an iPad is not a Mac notebook computer and it won't run Mac OS X. The MacBook is a real Mac, with a larger screen than an iPad and a real keyboard. It folds up instantly to be moved around or taken with you, unlike an iPad with separate keyboard which is kinda fiddly. Some people can get along fine with only an iPad. I find them useful for a few things but after using one for about 10 minutes, I want my Mac back. Your mileage may vary.
Processing power and everything else not OS related (ports, screen size, etc) have to be put in perspective as only a part of the equation between the two and for some they're not that meaningful even if devices get as powerful as laptops compared to the OS. I'm in your camp. I love my iPad and use it a lot for things other than putzing around. But as IOS makes one take sometimes five steps where OS X takes one (and that's with holding a finger down and hoping the icons menu pops up soon) and has a "file system" (I use the term very loosely) that basically lets you manage files within the apps but not outside of them, I generally go to the MBP when I want to bang out 10 minutes of doing something in just 10 minutes. I know several people who don't use their iPads for any such things because they see it as stopping at a certain point where things then should be done in OS X and don't even bother to explore the crossed over common area because it seems, to them, like a chore.
These people are consumer oriented, and not adventurous users, and they're less concerned with something being possible than something being annoying, especially if they have another tool 10 feet away that isn't. I don't think they'll be swayed by arguments for a more powerful iPad as a replacement for the lowest Mac with OS X. They just see it as IOS vs OS X.
I think iOS has it's 'limitations.' But for 9/10 mainstream things it doesn't. It will get added to as things move forward. Give an iPad an A9 processor and 13 inch screen with stylus (I don't wan to wear out my fingers drawing...) and we're in business.
The Macbook? A natural evolution. A fantastic work of art. They have learned from the iPad and iPhone engineering.
I think iOS and 'X' converge ever closer but they remain true to the truck, casual, minute and seconds model. For now.
I have both. I don't see any conflict. iOS is basically 'X' and I think of iOS as more 'Mac' (the computer for the rest of us...) than the Mac is. And the sales prove it. Apple really smashed the price barrier on the iPad and the iPhone in the way they never really did with the Mac.
Maybe if the Mac hits 6 million plus sales we may see a further trimming of prices to take the fight onto he 'lawn' of Redmond.
If we're not there already.
*Looks at the enterprise alliance of Apple/IBM. Ironic considering the way PPC turned out.
Lemon Bon Bon.
I am anticipating that it's inevitable that ARM will one day entirely displace x86. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have any requirement for a computer running on an x86 processor. My work computer is only used for printing. Everything else I do is on an iPad.
It would be very nice to have a MacBook running on an A8X or A9X with a more powerful iOS that would run any iDevice application and also allow multitasking and several running processes. Software developers could continue writing new applications for a platform they already know. On a machine that is as capable as one running an outrageously expensive x86 processor.
As Apple continues to profit enormously from their mobile devices and plow those development dollars back into newer and more capable ARM chips, the days of the x86 are numbered. I know I would want a less expensive ARM based machine over one running a more expensive x86.
As Apple moves forward on the development of its A series processor, it would certainly behoove them to put it into a lower cost notebook that could run an ARM variant of OSX. Or they could simply upgrade iOS to incorporate the functionality of OSX. There are certainly limitations to iOS in comparison to OSX. However, there are also huge advantages. Software development on iOS for ARM is simply enormous. On OSX for x86, it is minuscule. iOS running on an iPad or iPhone provides excellent battery life and far better than any x86 laptop I've ever owned. And that's no exaggeration.
I am anticipating that it's inevitable that ARM will one day entirely displace x86. As far as I am concerned, I no longer have any requirement for a computer running on an x86 processor. My work computer is only used for printing. Everything else I do is on an iPad.
It would be very nice to have a MacBook running on an A8X or A9X with a more powerful iOS that would run any iDevice application and also allow multitasking and several running processes. Software developers could continue writing new applications for a platform they already know. On a machine that is as capable as one running an outrageously expensive x86 processor.
As Apple continues to profit enormously from their mobile devices and plow those development dollars back into newer and more capable ARM chips, the days of the x86 are numbered. I know I would want a less expensive ARM based machine over one running a more expensive x86.
Yes. Nicely summed up. Pretty much the way the wind is blowing going forwards.
A 'laptop' variant iOS device may arrive with the iPad+, stylus included. But less clunky than M$'s 'hybrid.'
Stick a 'laptop' iOS device/iPad+ above the current iPad but beneath the entry Air. Killer. Powered by a promising A9 chip. (The A8X is already pretty impressive.)
As you said, iOS software is massive. To me, iOS is eventually going to replace the Mac in the way the Mac replaced the Apple II. For now, they're running in parallel. Each device is true to itself. So we're still someway off.
Having said that, I want my goddamn Skylake Retina 5k iMac... (And can't we have a six core high model by now, please..?)
Lemon Bon Bon.
As for the Macbook. Played with one today. Quite astonishing. Like the innovative new keyboard. And that trackpad. So thin! Beautiful screen. SSD more than compensates for the M processor which is no slouch on most mainstream cpu tasks.
Be interesting to see what sales impact it has.
Should get a circa £100 price cut going forwards. A revision 'B' and 'C' machine is going to killer compound its appeal.
Impressive.
Lemon Bon Bon.