if I still owned AAPL I would be a cheerleader here. Simple fact is, AAPL wants to sell you 3 devices. I would highly prefer one device.
In fact if Apple had a phone that plugged into a tablet screen and could be used as a desktop machine, like the Asus Padfone, I'd buy it immediately and switch from android.
I am not buying 3 devices. I have a MacBook Pro. If the iPad Pro ran OS X and had a better keyboard add-on I'd consider it. The Microsoft Surface is exactly what I want. But from Apple. MS is doing a great job, hardware wise, oddly enough. The flex-keyboard-add on is awesome. I just want OS X with iOS touch-based frontend. Well, maybe. iOS always annoyed me it feels so gimped compared to Android even after it copied most of the features in it. (remember how it went years before even having copy and paste..My Galaxy Note still runs rings around iOS for my use case, ymmv of course)
Apple used to have this idea executed well actually. Remember the Duo. Well, how about making that as an iPhone->iPad->Laptop/Desktop?
Your'e talking about the Desktop, which is an app that rides on top of OS X. Apple replaced that Desktop app with a different one for iOS. They then removed all of the drivers that wouldn't be useful. Those are the main differences. If you remember that the OS X Desktop is an app, and not an integral part of the OS, then you can understand what I'm saying.
No I'm not talking about the desktop - by which I assume you mean the Finder. The Finder is indeed just another app which is unusual in that it is always running and cannot be killed (not totally true as you could run PathFinder instead, but...) only relaunched, whereas iOS has Springboard which the user cannot relaunch except by restarting the device. How much of what "rides on top of OS X" as you put it, could you remove before a user would say "That's not OS X"? OS X is the whole package - startup dual-boot, the Finder (or equivalent ...) and Desktop, configurable firewalls, selectable network locations, hardware network connections and ethernet ports, installing an app from a USB drive or the web, mounting of external devices, an exposed file system, a terminal app, AppleScript, browser plugins, multiple user logins and more. iOS has none of these.
However, you're simply confirming exactly what I said - they share the same UNIX underpinnings and a lot of code, but they're different. If they "replaced that Desktop app with a different one for iOS and then removed lots of drivers" then it's clearly not the same is it? If you are in Preview or Mail on OS X you can access a file anywhere on the filesystem, there is no equivalent on iOS - the closest is iCloud drive. An app cannot have multiple resizable documents on iOS - not at the OS level anyway, though no doubt a twisted developer could create such a thing with a bunch of UIScrollViews but Apple would probably reject the app!
When Spheric (a few posts back) quoted Steve Jobs as saying that iPhone "runs OS X", SJ was not being technically true but he was getting over a crucial concept - that iPhone was not some dumb phone like every other "smartphone" in 2009, but something with a really serious OS running on it. We understand that now, 6 years on, but Apple developers (of which I am one) certainly recognise that they are not the same; when I create a new project in Xcode it asks if I want OS X or iOS (and now watchOS and tvOS!) but I have to choose - they are not interchangeable. My next app will be written with iOS and OS X in mind and will share as much code as is possible between them, given the similarities in Cocoa between the two, but some features of my OS X version will not be possible on the iOS version. That's because OS X is not iOS.
if I still owned AAPL I would be a cheerleader here. Simple fact is, AAPL wants to sell you 3 devices. I would highly prefer one device.
In fact if Apple had a phone that plugged into a tablet screen and could be used as a desktop machine, like the Asus Padfone, I'd buy it immediately and switch from android.
I am not buying 3 devices. I have a MacBook Pro. If the iPad Pro ran OS X and had a better keyboard add-on I'd consider it. The Microsoft Surface is exactly what I want. But from Apple. MS is doing a great job, hardware wise, oddly enough. The flex-keyboard-add on is awesome. I just want OS X with iOS touch-based frontend. Well, maybe. iOS always annoyed me it feels so gimped compared to Android even after it copied most of the features in it. (remember how it went years before even having copy and paste..My Galaxy Note still runs rings around iOS for my use case, ymmv of course)
Apple used to have this idea executed well actually. Remember the Duo. Well, how about making that as an iPhone->iPad->Laptop/Desktop?
Why not just ask for a re-sizable screened device with a transformable keyboard / trackpad, that can be phone sized, then stretched to tablet size, laptop size or even desktop sized. That way your one device can be all things to you...
The argument for making one device work for all cases, is an old one that unfortunately just results in too many compromises. It's true in computing devices, just as it is in transportation devices. You may want a car that can carry a cord of wood, but a pickup truck is better at that. And yes, a pickup truck can act like a car, but then you have to be ok with the compromises the truck has over a car (gas mileage, driving dynamics, etc.). I could use the spork as another example. Why do we need a spoon and a fork when we can have a spork? Or go further, why make a screwdriver, wrench, knife when you can simply have a swiss army knife that has all these things put together? How about tires - which do you think are better, dedicated summer and winter tires, or "all-season" tires? Or what about doctors? There is a reason why there are specialized doctors. In other words, there are more good reasons to have specialized devices than there are reasons to have one device try to be all things.
It used to be called MacOS a long time ago, before OS X came out.
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS? I wish I would have kept my old Macs - even if they didn't still work, they would have looked great as 80's modern artwork.
The 13" Macbook Pro (which is the one that is comparable to the Surface Book) only has a dual core i7. I think you're comparing the wrong laptop (15" MBPr) which most have been doing lately.
I am comparing price points..... top end of the line where the prices and most of the specs match (after all we are talking about Ultimate). The screen sizes are not exactly the same (13/15, 13.5).
Apple has five models - all 13" inch models (for apple are the "low end" with less high end options - all i5 processors), 15" ones have i7 processors
Microsoft has six models (the sixth is a new one with 1TB storage no matching price point on apples).
So I took the top one at 512GB storage: Apple i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,499 for Apple and the Microsoft i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,699.
I am comparing price points..... top end of the line where the prices and most of the specs match (after all we are talking about Ultimate). The screen sizes are not exactly the same (13/15, 13.5).
Apple has five models - all 13" inch models (for apple are the "low end" with less high end options - all i5 processors), 15" ones have i7 processors
Microsoft has six models (the sixth is a new one with 1TB storage no matching price point on apples).
So I took the top one at 512GB storage: Apple i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,499 for Apple and the Microsoft i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,699.
I'm with you on this. It's what I did when MS announced pricing. If I were looking, price of course would be part of my decision making, so it is a valid comparison. The only potential negative with the larger 15" rMBP would be just that - size and weight. Some people will undoubtably decide to pay more for less with the SB, which is clearly their choice, but I find it really funny that the tables have turned so completely - this is what the PC users used to say about Apple computers, that you get less for more money.
The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/320#post_2797752" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>blends</strong> <a href="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/320#post_2797752"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br /><br />The 13" Macbook Pro (which is the one that is comparable to the Surface Book) only has a dual core i7. I think you're comparing the wrong laptop (15" MBPr) which most have been doing lately.</div></div><p>I am comparing price points..... top end of the line where the prices and most of the specs match (after all we are talking about Ultimate). The screen sizes are not exactly the same (13/15, 13.5). </p><p> </p><p>Apple has five models - all 13" inch models (for apple are the "low end" with less high end options - all i5 processors), 15" ones have i7 processors</p><p>Microsoft has six models (the sixth is a new one with 1TB storage no matching price point on apples). </p><p> </p><p>So I took the top one at 512GB storage: Apple i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD <span class="huddler-mention">@ $2,499 for App</span>le and the Microsoft i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD <span class="huddler-mention">@ $2,699.</span></p>
The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.
That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.
Simplified? No, it's different. How "simplified" does something have to be before it's not the same, just similar.
There is no windowing (in the usual sense) on iOS, there are things that Mac apps can do that iOS can't due to sandboxing. There no exposed file system (iCloud drive isn't it). These are just a few or many differences in the interface let alone the conceptual architecture.
When developing software on iOS there is no NSDocument class as documents don't exist in the same way as they do on OS X. Screen co-ordinates inside your code run in different directions. Write code that creates a class that inherits from UIView and then try and build it into an app on OS X - it won't.
As I said, they are similar. But not the same. Of course they share many things as both are built on UNIX and they clearly share many similar items and concepts even at a coding level but that stems from their common inheritance. If iOS is OS X then surely we would have a single OS running on iPhone and Mac, no? Sort-of Windows 10 like .... If Apple has said that iOS is OS X then I'd like to see the link.
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS? I wish I would have kept my old Macs - even if they didn't still work, they would have looked great as 80's modern artwork.
Yeah, they had that for some time. I think they stopped it when the clone program began, because the clones weren't Macs.
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS? I wish I would have kept my old Macs - even if they didn't still work, they would have looked great as 80's modern artwork.
The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.
That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.
You are correct I looked at all the models that you can buy over the counter - not the build to order options.
If you are looking for "the ultimate" or "the most powerful" computer that you can buy your use case is more on the power side / less on the portability side. There is no "ultimate" laptop from Microsoft when it comes to power. The 1TB SSD option for the Surface is a nice to have option which I have no doubt will be an option once Apple gets around to releasing the next gen of laptops (which Microsoft have done early in the cycle; while Apple I suspect is waiting for the higher graphics options of Intel processors to reach market).
I can however add a massive array of high speed DAS based storage to the Macbook Pro, while there is no option for that with the Microsoft version. USB-3 has to much latency in it to be useful for things other than large file / aka backup storage -- and 1GB ethernet is too slow.
The pen/stylus option for the Surface Book is a YMMV type of option because it is best used with a tablet and if you are really pen/stylus oriented -- the Surface Book really is not the best option for that (both the Surface Pro and the iPad Pro are better options for that).
From the jump, i'll state that i'm an MS guy. So allow me to give the other perspective.
The first word i key on is 'touch-first' apps and how these seem to be somehow the holy grail of anything. To a Windows guy(or gal)... 'touch-first' apps mean just one thing. Cut-down versions of real software featuring a subset of commonly used functionality refactored to be controlled using your finger. You really want to know why you don't see true 'professional' versions of content creation software, even on this IPAD Pro? Because to handle that level of fidelity, it needs to be a desktop-centric program. Even Apps like Photoshop and Office are a shell of their desktop counterparts. Great if you want to filter an image or make a basic document, but piss poor if you're making production images out of multiple sources or doing any type of complex document/spreadsheet processing involving multiple sources of data. But those limitations are expected, as the 'touch centric' app is meant to be easy breezy 'greatest hits' functionality that caters to the drive-by user.
Which brings me to the Surface. People are quite correct in that the Surface does not focus and feature touch-first apps. However, they also like to comment on how the touch is 'crappy'. Ya.. try no. The key to Microsoft's touch implementation is that both touch and pen support are integrated directly into and are usable as needed by desktop applications. This is the strength of the Surface, why the touch screen is important, and why the product is selling and gaining traction, particularly in its primary market, which is the business workflow.
Someone builds say a 3D model in a desktop application, and then detaches the tablet from the keyboard and can HAND the tablet to a customer who can then use touch or pen controls to look and examine various aspects of that model to provide feedback. What do you do on a Mac Pro? Look over a shoulder, or a very unintuitive turning of the computer to the customer and having to show them how to use the controls. Have them download an app on their Phone? Lol... that'll go over well. Telling a customer to download something is a haha fail moment. The simple fact is that you can't just reach out and touch and manipulate the desktop application, as you can on the Surface.
Now, i don't think that anyone would disagree that for casual consumption, the IPAD is king, but the Surface is an integration using computers in business that is very foreign to a native IPAD user, and something they've never come across because they spend all their day playing with their computer, rather than using it to create stuff. Its also why Tim suddenly came to Jesus on slapping a keyboard and stylus on the IPAD 'Pro'(really... in its current form its the exact same thing as the old Surface RT that Microsoft took a billion dollar write-down trying to sell), really quick with this fast-follow of a device in order to try to fool people into thinking this is a great content consumption device for businesses, um.. like the Surface! Because in that arena, outside of point-of-sale, and initial first buyers that have run headfirst into the severe limitations, the IPAD hasn't really made any sort of traction into the actual workflow of companies. Instead, Apple has inadvertently ceded that arena to Microsoft while depending on the Macbook to do those things and party like its 5 years ago, and are hastily trying to play catch-up while Microsoft fires another salvo with designing a laptop-first, tablet-second version of the Surface to compete directly with that Macbook.
Either way, long story short... the Surface is rapidly gaining traction because there are very concrete reasons you would need one to help a workflow, oh.. and you can replace a lot of your older workstations with it, saving money.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/360#post_2798226" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>blends</strong> <a href="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/360#post_2798226"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br /><br />The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.<br /><br />That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.</div></div><p>You are correct I looked at all the models that you can buy over the counter - not the build to order options. </p><p> </p><p>If you are looking for "the ultimate" or "the most powerful" computer that you can buy your use case is more on the power side / less on the portability side. There is no "ultimate" laptop from Microsoft when it comes to power. The 1TB SSD option for the Surface is a nice to have option which I have no doubt will be an option once Apple gets around to releasing the next gen of laptops (which Microsoft have done early in the cycle; while Apple I suspect is waiting for the higher graphics options of Intel processors to reach market). </p><p> </p><p>I can however add a massive array of high speed DAS based storage to the Macbook Pro, while there is no option for that with the Microsoft version. USB-3 has to much latency in it to be useful for things other than large file / aka backup storage -- and 1GB ethernet is too slow. </p><p> </p><p>The pen/stylus option for the Surface Book is a YMMV type of option because it is best used with a tablet and if you are really pen/stylus oriented -- the Surface Book really is not the best option for that (both the Surface Pro and the iPad Pro are better options for that). </p>
I just read my reply to you and realize I came across childish and aggressive. I sincerely apologize.
<div class="quote-container" data-huddler-embed="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/360#post_2798226" data-huddler-embed-placeholder="false">Quote:<div class="quote-block">Originally Posted by <strong>blends</strong> <a href="/t/189736/apple-resists-macbook-ipad-pro-convergence-as-microsoft-struggles-with-surface-windows-10-hybrids/360#post_2798226"><img alt="View Post" src="/img/forum/go_quote.gif" /></a><br /><br /><br />The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.<br /><br />That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.</div></div><p><br />The difference between the 13.5" SB and the 15" rMBP is not that great of a difference. Sure, the rMBP is a bit longer, 14.3" vs 12.7" and a bit wider at 9.73" vs 9.14" and it's 1 lb. heavier, but the rMBP is not as thick at .71" vs .81" of the SB. </p>
You guys are hilarious. From the jump, i'll state that i'm an MS guy. So allow me to give the other perspective.
The first word i key on is 'touch-first' apps and how these seem to be somehow the holy grail of anything. To a Windows guy(or gal)... 'touch-first' apps mean just one thing. Cut-down versions of real software featuring a subset of commonly used functionality refactored to be controlled using your finger. You really want to know why you don't see true 'professional' versions of content creation software, even on this IPAD Pro? Because to handle that level of fidelity, it needs to be a desktop-centric program. Even Apps like Photoshop and Office are a shell of their desktop counterparts. Great if you want to filter an image or make a basic document, but piss poor if you're making production images out of multiple sources or doing any type of complex document/spreadsheet processing involving multiple sources of data. But those limitations are expected, as the 'touch centric' app is meant to be easy breezy 'greatest hits' functionality that caters to the drive-by user.
Which brings me to the Surface. People are quite correct in that the Surface does not focus and feature touch-first apps. However, they also like to comment on how the touch is 'crappy'. Ya.. try no. The key to Microsoft's touch implementation is that both touch and pen support are integrated directly into and are usable as needed by desktop applications. This is the strength of the Surface, why the touch screen is important, and why the product is selling and gaining traction, particularly in its primary market, which is the business workflow.
Someone builds say a 3D model in a desktop application, and then detaches the tablet from the keyboard and can HAND the tablet to a customer who can then use touch or pen controls to look and examine various aspects of that model to provide feedback. What do you do on a Mac Pro? Look over a shoulder, or a very unintuitive turning of the computer to the customer and having to show them how to use the controls. Have them download an app on their Phone? Lol... that'll go over well. Telling a customer to download something is a haha fail moment. The simple fact is that you can't just reach out and touch and manipulate the desktop application, as you can on the Surface.
Now, i don't think that anyone would disagree that for casual consumption, the IPAD is king, but the Surface is <span style="line-height:1.4em;">an integration using computers in business that is very foreign to a native IPAD user, and something they've never come across because they spend all their day playing with their computer, rather than using it to create stuff. Its also why Tim suddenly came to Jesus on slapping a keyboard and stylus on the IPAD 'Pro'(really... in its current form its the exact same thing as the old Surface RT that Microsoft took a billion dollar write-down trying to sell), really quick with this fast-follow of a device in order to try to fool people into thinking this is a great content consumption device for businesses, um.. like the Surface! Because in that arena, outside of point-of-sale, and initial first buyers that have run headfirst into the severe limitations, the IPAD hasn't really made any sort of traction into the actual workflow of companies. Instead, Apple has inadvertently ceded that arena to Microsoft while depending on the Macbook to do those things and party like its 5 years ago, and are hastily trying to play catch-up while Microsoft fires another salvo with designing a laptop-first, tablet-second version of the Surface to compete directly with that Macbook.</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">Either way, long story short... the Surface is rapidly gaining traction because there are very concrete reasons you would need one to help a workflow, oh.. and you can replace a lot of your older workstations with it, saving money.</span>
Wow, you really have consumed copious amount of MS cool aid. Touch makes little sense in the way that MS is trying to promote it as a natural part of laptop computer input. This Frankenstein like keyboard, mouse, finger input that just doesn't work. If you're talking specific drawing or 3D modeling, that is not mainstream needs / use. That's specific to a very small subset of the computing population and certainly, even MS themselves focus showing limited, at best, touch input usually revolving around the home screen tiles. And your comments about the iPad not being used by business is about as far from the truth as you can get, if you just look at Apple's financials.
MS is trying to sell people on this false need for a one device does it all, that doesn't even exist. And they're not doing a good job evidenced by how almost every shot and ad showing the Surface and SB focus on keyboard input - in other words they've designed a laptop with removable keyboard and a laptop with removable screen, but other than drawing or flipping through photos on screen they can't even suggest how to make touch work, because in their world it really doesn't.
You really want to know why you don't see true 'professional' versions of content creation software, even on this IPAD Pro? Because to handle that level of fidelity, it needs to be a desktop-centric program.
Hence why multitouch is eventually coming to the desktop.
Ya.. try no.
It’s pretty awful.
This is the strength of the Surface
And yet you dismiss the iPad Pro.
...the product is selling and gaining traction...
lol
What do you do on a Mac Pro?
Actual work, I thought, since a tablet is a consumer device only and nowhere near as powerful.
a very unintuitive turning of the computer to the customer and having to show them how to use the controls.
Or just own a second display.
for casual consumption, the IPAD is king
Yeah, okay, you’re just as deluded as every other troll who comes here. Run along now.
really... in its current form its the exact same thing as the old Surface RT that Microsoft took a billion dollar write-down trying to sell
At least you’re creatively stupid. It takes effort to be this blitheringly obtuse.
Its also why Tim suddenly came to Jesus on slapping a keyboard and stylus on the IPAD 'Pro'
Guess who came up with the patents Microsoft has been using all this time.
Either way, long story short...
We’ll be laughing at you in five, ten, and fifteen years as Microsoft continues its sheer collapse into the annals of history as the most thieving corporation in tech.
Hence why multitouch is eventually coming to the desktop.
In this decade, or the next? Shoulda, woulda, coulda. The capability has beein in Windows for 6 years and in devices for 3. Nice to know that Apple is going to eventually catch up here. Of course, whenever I tend to talk to macbookers, they usually claim that touch is not needed there, nor will it ever be. They love their gesture navigation or something. Actual touch inside of programs. Not needed they all claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
And yet you dismiss the iPad Pro.
Its good for what it does. But people act like it can do everything, and integrating itself properly into a business workflow is not one of those things. Its simply not built for it, any more than a mini-cooper is built to go offroading. The Surface does things that no Apple product can. If it didn't, it would not sell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
lol
$3 billion business and growing. Now if we want to try to compare volumes between it and any particular relatively cheap Apple product, I agree.. there is no comparison. I saw someone above give a claim of 3 million units sold and laugh at that. When the products cost between $899-$1499 and have a high profit margin, 3 million units is good, particularly if you're growing. People tend to take notice, like Tim Cook. The moment he hastily slapped a keyboard and pen on the IPAD, he fooled nobody as to why he did it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Or just own a second display.
Oh.. so now you're dragging a second display into the conference room? As opposed to just handing the display which is a tablet to the customer? Really? Such dark ages stuff.. second display indeed lololol.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
At least you’re creatively stupid. It takes effort to be this blitheringly obtuse.
No really. Surface RT was an IPAD like tablet that could run apps, and they put a keyboard and stylus onto it. Beat for beat its the exact same as an IPAD Pro without the app ecosystem, the better UI, and the brand name. Maybe that'll be enough to finally sell Surface RT as a product? I don't know. All I do know is the market destroyed it, while simultaneously buying into Surface Pro(which provided the capability of a full Windows PC) to the point that Microsoft in 3 years has built it into a $3 billion dollar growing business that even Tim Cook is reacting to. But good luck on the IPAD RT. It still doesn't get it into the 2-in-1 market by simply slapping a keyboard and pen on it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
Guess who came up with the patents Microsoft has been using all this time.
Apple hadn't been using those patents. First, the keyboard dock pictures on the original IPAD I nearly died laughing at. Connecting a traditional actual physical keyboard to a tablet? Those were the days lol. Either way, Apple was about as interested in making a true semi-permanent keyboard cover for the IPAD as they would be in becoming an OEM for Windows PC's. The Surface was even ridiculed for having done so, when it came up with its variation on the idea. Well.... at least until the Surface Pro started to sell and Apple started to realize that Microsoft was hitting a segment of the market that they either didn't have a device for, or had a device which is long in the tooth(MacBook) and ill-equipped(no touch) to compete in.
When I heard they went the Surface RT route to try to bridge the gap, I couldn't have been happier. I'm sure there are Apple faithful that will buy it, but it will not make inroads into the true Surface market, which is the business workflow combined with light Windows users fed up with OEM trash and willing to pay a premium for a solid computer that they can go mobile with. Right now that's a $3 billion a year business and growing. And I know that seems like sock change to a high-volume, lower price point seller like Apple, but money is money, and Apple IS taking notice and responding.
Comments
Oooh
8-)
if I still owned AAPL I would be a cheerleader here. Simple fact is, AAPL wants to sell you 3 devices. I would highly prefer one device.
In fact if Apple had a phone that plugged into a tablet screen and could be used as a desktop machine, like the Asus Padfone, I'd buy it immediately and switch from android.
I am not buying 3 devices. I have a MacBook Pro. If the iPad Pro ran OS X and had a better keyboard add-on I'd consider it. The Microsoft Surface is exactly what I want. But from Apple. MS is doing a great job, hardware wise, oddly enough. The flex-keyboard-add on is awesome. I just want OS X with iOS touch-based frontend. Well, maybe. iOS always annoyed me it feels so gimped compared to Android even after it copied most of the features in it. (remember how it went years before even having copy and paste..My Galaxy Note still runs rings around iOS for my use case, ymmv of course)
Apple used to have this idea executed well actually. Remember the Duo. Well, how about making that as an iPhone->iPad->Laptop/Desktop?
Your'e talking about the Desktop, which is an app that rides on top of OS X. Apple replaced that Desktop app with a different one for iOS. They then removed all of the drivers that wouldn't be useful. Those are the main differences. If you remember that the OS X Desktop is an app, and not an integral part of the OS, then you can understand what I'm saying.
No I'm not talking about the desktop - by which I assume you mean the Finder. The Finder is indeed just another app which is unusual in that it is always running and cannot be killed (not totally true as you could run PathFinder instead, but...) only relaunched, whereas iOS has Springboard which the user cannot relaunch except by restarting the device. How much of what "rides on top of OS X" as you put it, could you remove before a user would say "That's not OS X"? OS X is the whole package - startup dual-boot, the Finder (or equivalent ...) and Desktop, configurable firewalls, selectable network locations, hardware network connections and ethernet ports, installing an app from a USB drive or the web, mounting of external devices, an exposed file system, a terminal app, AppleScript, browser plugins, multiple user logins and more. iOS has none of these.
However, you're simply confirming exactly what I said - they share the same UNIX underpinnings and a lot of code, but they're different. If they "replaced that Desktop app with a different one for iOS and then removed lots of drivers" then it's clearly not the same is it? If you are in Preview or Mail on OS X you can access a file anywhere on the filesystem, there is no equivalent on iOS - the closest is iCloud drive. An app cannot have multiple resizable documents on iOS - not at the OS level anyway, though no doubt a twisted developer could create such a thing with a bunch of UIScrollViews but Apple would probably reject the app!
When Spheric (a few posts back) quoted Steve Jobs as saying that iPhone "runs OS X", SJ was not being technically true but he was getting over a crucial concept - that iPhone was not some dumb phone like every other "smartphone" in 2009, but something with a really serious OS running on it. We understand that now, 6 years on, but Apple developers (of which I am one) certainly recognise that they are not the same; when I create a new project in Xcode it asks if I want OS X or iOS (and now watchOS and tvOS!) but I have to choose - they are not interchangeable. My next app will be written with iOS and OS X in mind and will share as much code as is possible between them, given the similarities in Cocoa between the two, but some features of my OS X version will not be possible on the iOS version. That's because OS X is not iOS.
if I still owned AAPL I would be a cheerleader here. Simple fact is, AAPL wants to sell you 3 devices. I would highly prefer one device.
In fact if Apple had a phone that plugged into a tablet screen and could be used as a desktop machine, like the Asus Padfone, I'd buy it immediately and switch from android.
I am not buying 3 devices. I have a MacBook Pro. If the iPad Pro ran OS X and had a better keyboard add-on I'd consider it. The Microsoft Surface is exactly what I want. But from Apple. MS is doing a great job, hardware wise, oddly enough. The flex-keyboard-add on is awesome. I just want OS X with iOS touch-based frontend. Well, maybe. iOS always annoyed me it feels so gimped compared to Android even after it copied most of the features in it. (remember how it went years before even having copy and paste..My Galaxy Note still runs rings around iOS for my use case, ymmv of course)
Apple used to have this idea executed well actually. Remember the Duo. Well, how about making that as an iPhone->iPad->Laptop/Desktop?
Why not just ask for a re-sizable screened device with a transformable keyboard / trackpad, that can be phone sized, then stretched to tablet size, laptop size or even desktop sized. That way your one device can be all things to you...
The argument for making one device work for all cases, is an old one that unfortunately just results in too many compromises. It's true in computing devices, just as it is in transportation devices. You may want a car that can carry a cord of wood, but a pickup truck is better at that. And yes, a pickup truck can act like a car, but then you have to be ok with the compromises the truck has over a car (gas mileage, driving dynamics, etc.). I could use the spork as another example. Why do we need a spoon and a fork when we can have a spork? Or go further, why make a screwdriver, wrench, knife when you can simply have a swiss army knife that has all these things put together? How about tires - which do you think are better, dedicated summer and winter tires, or "all-season" tires? Or what about doctors? There is a reason why there are specialized doctors. In other words, there are more good reasons to have specialized devices than there are reasons to have one device try to be all things.
It used to be called MacOS a long time ago, before OS X came out.
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS? I wish I would have kept my old Macs - even if they didn't still work, they would have looked great as 80's modern artwork.
The 13" Macbook Pro (which is the one that is comparable to the Surface Book) only has a dual core i7. I think you're comparing the wrong laptop (15" MBPr) which most have been doing lately.
I am comparing price points..... top end of the line where the prices and most of the specs match (after all we are talking about Ultimate). The screen sizes are not exactly the same (13/15, 13.5).
Apple has five models - all 13" inch models (for apple are the "low end" with less high end options - all i5 processors), 15" ones have i7 processors
Microsoft has six models (the sixth is a new one with 1TB storage no matching price point on apples).
So I took the top one at 512GB storage: Apple i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,499 for Apple and the Microsoft i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,699.
I am comparing price points..... top end of the line where the prices and most of the specs match (after all we are talking about Ultimate). The screen sizes are not exactly the same (13/15, 13.5).
Apple has five models - all 13" inch models (for apple are the "low end" with less high end options - all i5 processors), 15" ones have i7 processors
Microsoft has six models (the sixth is a new one with 1TB storage no matching price point on apples).
So I took the top one at 512GB storage: Apple i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,499 for Apple and the Microsoft i7, 16GB memory, 512GB SSD @ $2,699.
I'm with you on this. It's what I did when MS announced pricing. If I were looking, price of course would be part of my decision making, so it is a valid comparison. The only potential negative with the larger 15" rMBP would be just that - size and weight. Some people will undoubtably decide to pay more for less with the SB, which is clearly their choice, but I find it really funny that the tables have turned so completely - this is what the PC users used to say about Apple computers, that you get less for more money.
The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.
That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.
Yeah, they had that for some time. I think they stopped it when the clone program began, because the clones weren't Macs.
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS? I wish I would have kept my old Macs - even if they didn't still work, they would have looked great as 80's modern artwork.
That's what I remember seeing - thanks for sharing that spheric!
Isn't that what popped up when starting the computer - a logo of MacOS?
It certainly was :-)
And may be again ...
Edit: Late to the party here! But this one's in German ;-)
The 13" MacBook Pro Retina is available with a 3.1Ghz dual core i7, not just all i5s. People comparing which 13" laptop to buy aren't ALWAYS going to look at 15" laptops too. That's fine but you failed to mention the 13" MBPr with the i7. Instead you pretended as if it doesn't revenue exist. I'm not looking to argue or anything but I'm comparing size and specs and your comparing price points.
That's like comparing a coupe with a sedan with a similar price point. The 13" MBPr has an i7 dual core cpu (which I already pointed out) and the 15" MBPr has a 1TB SSD available for an additional $500. I see your point but you're comparing a medium sized high end 2 in 1 laptop from Microsoft with a larger higher end laptop only (that doesn't support touch or a pen/stylus) and making it seem as though one is more superior than the other while ignoring everything but price.
You are correct I looked at all the models that you can buy over the counter - not the build to order options.
If you are looking for "the ultimate" or "the most powerful" computer that you can buy your use case is more on the power side / less on the portability side. There is no "ultimate" laptop from Microsoft when it comes to power. The 1TB SSD option for the Surface is a nice to have option which I have no doubt will be an option once Apple gets around to releasing the next gen of laptops (which Microsoft have done early in the cycle; while Apple I suspect is waiting for the higher graphics options of Intel processors to reach market).
I can however add a massive array of high speed DAS based storage to the Macbook Pro, while there is no option for that with the Microsoft version. USB-3 has to much latency in it to be useful for things other than large file / aka backup storage -- and 1GB ethernet is too slow.
The pen/stylus option for the Surface Book is a YMMV type of option because it is best used with a tablet and if you are really pen/stylus oriented -- the Surface Book really is not the best option for that (both the Surface Pro and the iPad Pro are better options for that).
From the jump, i'll state that i'm an MS guy. So allow me to give the other perspective.
The first word i key on is 'touch-first' apps and how these seem to be somehow the holy grail of anything. To a Windows guy(or gal)... 'touch-first' apps mean just one thing. Cut-down versions of real software featuring a subset of commonly used functionality refactored to be controlled using your finger. You really want to know why you don't see true 'professional' versions of content creation software, even on this IPAD Pro? Because to handle that level of fidelity, it needs to be a desktop-centric program. Even Apps like Photoshop and Office are a shell of their desktop counterparts. Great if you want to filter an image or make a basic document, but piss poor if you're making production images out of multiple sources or doing any type of complex document/spreadsheet processing involving multiple sources of data. But those limitations are expected, as the 'touch centric' app is meant to be easy breezy 'greatest hits' functionality that caters to the drive-by user.
Which brings me to the Surface. People are quite correct in that the Surface does not focus and feature touch-first apps. However, they also like to comment on how the touch is 'crappy'. Ya.. try no. The key to Microsoft's touch implementation is that both touch and pen support are integrated directly into and are usable as needed by desktop applications. This is the strength of the Surface, why the touch screen is important, and why the product is selling and gaining traction, particularly in its primary market, which is the business workflow.
Someone builds say a 3D model in a desktop application, and then detaches the tablet from the keyboard and can HAND the tablet to a customer who can then use touch or pen controls to look and examine various aspects of that model to provide feedback. What do you do on a Mac Pro? Look over a shoulder, or a very unintuitive turning of the computer to the customer and having to show them how to use the controls. Have them download an app on their Phone? Lol... that'll go over well. Telling a customer to download something is a haha fail moment. The simple fact is that you can't just reach out and touch and manipulate the desktop application, as you can on the Surface.
Now, i don't think that anyone would disagree that for casual consumption, the IPAD is king, but the Surface is an integration using computers in business that is very foreign to a native IPAD user, and something they've never come across because they spend all their day playing with their computer, rather than using it to create stuff. Its also why Tim suddenly came to Jesus on slapping a keyboard and stylus on the IPAD 'Pro'(really... in its current form its the exact same thing as the old Surface RT that Microsoft took a billion dollar write-down trying to sell), really quick with this fast-follow of a device in order to try to fool people into thinking this is a great content consumption device for businesses, um.. like the Surface! Because in that arena, outside of point-of-sale, and initial first buyers that have run headfirst into the severe limitations, the IPAD hasn't really made any sort of traction into the actual workflow of companies. Instead, Apple has inadvertently ceded that arena to Microsoft while depending on the Macbook to do those things and party like its 5 years ago, and are hastily trying to play catch-up while Microsoft fires another salvo with designing a laptop-first, tablet-second version of the Surface to compete directly with that Macbook.
Either way, long story short... the Surface is rapidly gaining traction because there are very concrete reasons you would need one to help a workflow, oh.. and you can replace a lot of your older workstations with it, saving money.
I just read my reply to you and realize I came across childish and aggressive. I sincerely apologize.
Wow, you really have consumed copious amount of MS cool aid. Touch makes little sense in the way that MS is trying to promote it as a natural part of laptop computer input. This Frankenstein like keyboard, mouse, finger input that just doesn't work. If you're talking specific drawing or 3D modeling, that is not mainstream needs / use. That's specific to a very small subset of the computing population and certainly, even MS themselves focus showing limited, at best, touch input usually revolving around the home screen tiles. And your comments about the iPad not being used by business is about as far from the truth as you can get, if you just look at Apple's financials.
MS is trying to sell people on this false need for a one device does it all, that doesn't even exist. And they're not doing a good job evidenced by how almost every shot and ad showing the Surface and SB focus on keyboard input - in other words they've designed a laptop with removable keyboard and a laptop with removable screen, but other than drawing or flipping through photos on screen they can't even suggest how to make touch work, because in their world it really doesn't.
You really want to know why you don't see true 'professional' versions of content creation software, even on this IPAD Pro? Because to handle that level of fidelity, it needs to be a desktop-centric program.
Hence why multitouch is eventually coming to the desktop.
It’s pretty awful.
And yet you dismiss the iPad Pro.
lol
Actual work, I thought, since a tablet is a consumer device only and nowhere near as powerful.
Or just own a second display.
Yeah, okay, you’re just as deluded as every other troll who comes here. Run along now.
At least you’re creatively stupid. It takes effort to be this blitheringly obtuse.
Guess who came up with the patents Microsoft has been using all this time.
We’ll be laughing at you in five, ten, and fifteen years as Microsoft continues its sheer collapse into the annals of history as the most thieving corporation in tech.
Hence why multitouch is eventually coming to the desktop.
In this decade, or the next? Shoulda, woulda, coulda. The capability has beein in Windows for 6 years and in devices for 3. Nice to know that Apple is going to eventually catch up here. Of course, whenever I tend to talk to macbookers, they usually claim that touch is not needed there, nor will it ever be. They love their gesture navigation or something. Actual touch inside of programs. Not needed they all claim.
And yet you dismiss the iPad Pro.
Its good for what it does. But people act like it can do everything, and integrating itself properly into a business workflow is not one of those things. Its simply not built for it, any more than a mini-cooper is built to go offroading. The Surface does things that no Apple product can. If it didn't, it would not sell.
lol
$3 billion business and growing. Now if we want to try to compare volumes between it and any particular relatively cheap Apple product, I agree.. there is no comparison. I saw someone above give a claim of 3 million units sold and laugh at that. When the products cost between $899-$1499 and have a high profit margin, 3 million units is good, particularly if you're growing. People tend to take notice, like Tim Cook. The moment he hastily slapped a keyboard and pen on the IPAD, he fooled nobody as to why he did it.
Or just own a second display.
Oh.. so now you're dragging a second display into the conference room? As opposed to just handing the display which is a tablet to the customer? Really? Such dark ages stuff.. second display indeed lololol.
Quote:
At least you’re creatively stupid. It takes effort to be this blitheringly obtuse.
No really. Surface RT was an IPAD like tablet that could run apps, and they put a keyboard and stylus onto it. Beat for beat its the exact same as an IPAD Pro without the app ecosystem, the better UI, and the brand name. Maybe that'll be enough to finally sell Surface RT as a product? I don't know. All I do know is the market destroyed it, while simultaneously buying into Surface Pro(which provided the capability of a full Windows PC) to the point that Microsoft in 3 years has built it into a $3 billion dollar growing business that even Tim Cook is reacting to. But good luck on the IPAD RT. It still doesn't get it into the 2-in-1 market by simply slapping a keyboard and pen on it.
Quote:
Guess who came up with the patents Microsoft has been using all this time.
Apple hadn't been using those patents. First, the keyboard dock pictures on the original IPAD I nearly died laughing at. Connecting a traditional actual physical keyboard to a tablet? Those were the days lol. Either way, Apple was about as interested in making a true semi-permanent keyboard cover for the IPAD as they would be in becoming an OEM for Windows PC's. The Surface was even ridiculed for having done so, when it came up with its variation on the idea. Well.... at least until the Surface Pro started to sell and Apple started to realize that Microsoft was hitting a segment of the market that they either didn't have a device for, or had a device which is long in the tooth(MacBook) and ill-equipped(no touch) to compete in.
When I heard they went the Surface RT route to try to bridge the gap, I couldn't have been happier. I'm sure there are Apple faithful that will buy it, but it will not make inroads into the true Surface market, which is the business workflow combined with light Windows users fed up with OEM trash and willing to pay a premium for a solid computer that they can go mobile with. Right now that's a $3 billion a year business and growing. And I know that seems like sock change to a high-volume, lower price point seller like Apple, but money is money, and Apple IS taking notice and responding.