i mostly like the new macbook pro, but wish there was an option for those of us who aren't utterly obsessed with the thinnest, lightest possible laptop uber alles. sticking with my mid-2012 13" for as long as it'll run.
The machine is fine on most levels (the need for a bag full of dongles, not being one of them) . The problem is price and what you get for it. I am not poor but I'm not going to pay 2,699€ for a 15" base system with 256GB SSD. That's one lost sale. I think there are millions more in my situation. Apple's next earnings call may well be very interesting.
Subtract the VAT, convert EUR to the USD, what you'll find is +/- the US Apple Store price (VAT is stated separately with total price in every EU Apple Store). Compare with last year's models and you'll find nothing wrong with the prices. Sometimes (no, mostly) we become poor because of reasons beyond our control. If your Central Bank prints a sh*tload of Euro for quantitative easing, then you become poor, for example. The same was true for Americans during the quantitative easing years.
And this isn't just a spec bump, but an entire redesigned case with all new components, which makes the whiners an even more perplexing group.
What exactly is perplexing about users complaining about being raped, pillaged then burnt at the stake on Apple's forced SSD options?
That's right, Apple is forcing you to buy this new MBP thereby removing your option to not buy one.
That's right, Apple has given us a large range of SSD choices, but you want them to support some standard 2.5" SATAIII option (since it's the most common) and allow you to buy a new MBP without an included drive so you can have full control over what you put in it, because… options. Brilliant¡
And let's not forget that you complained about Apple offering the option of a 256GB SSD for those users that don't need a 512GB, 1TB or 2TB option in their MBP.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
And yet Ireland is not breaking any law. This is totally a political move concealed as a tax investigation. Where were the Commission when Ireland was implementing these incentives?
I'm a developer also and there is no reason to have that much stuff going at once. It just seems like you're unorganized tbqh.
But every development setup is different. If I make an iOS apps 8 GB is sufficient, or for a multi platform web app 16 GB is sufficient, but for serious back end systems, this might be completely different. A customer of me reported a race issue between different nodes on a MongoDB cluster; in order to solve this I needed such a cluster on my development machine (running in Docker containers) and 16 GB is not enough to avoid swapping.
For "serious" back end systems 32GB isn't enough. For one of our projects we have a full set of VMs on AWS that replicate our 20 or so node deployed configuration for dev testing and a smaller set of 4-5 node development clusters that we can fire up on demand (single string, no redundancy or load management, etc).
It's a rather small window where 16 GBs isn't enough but 32 GB is enough. Especially when dealing with DB clusters and sufficiently sized test data sets.
So far every developer that has complained strikes me as better served by getting better devops support rather than 16GB more RAM. 16GB is a nice to have and an occasionally useful bandaid but without good devops you're always going to be less efficient regardless of how much horsepower is on your laptop.
And this isn't just a spec bump, but an entire redesigned case with all new components, which makes the whiners an even more perplexing group.
What exactly is perplexing about users complaining about being raped, pillaged then burnt at the stake on Apple's forced SSD options?
That's right, Apple is forcing you to buy this new MBP thereby removing your option to not buy one.
That's right, Apple has given us a large range of SSD choices, but you want them to support some standard 2.5" SATAIII option (since it's the most common) and allow you to buy a new MBP without an included drive so you can have full control over what you put in it, because… options. Brilliant¡
And let's not forget that you complained about Apple offering the option of a 256GB SSD for those users that don't need a 512GB, 1TB or 2TB option in their MBP.
And this isn't just a spec bump, but an entire redesigned case with all new components, which makes the whiners an even more perplexing group.
What exactly is perplexing about users complaining about being raped, pillaged then burnt at the stake on Apple's forced SSD options?
That's right, Apple is forcing you to buy this new MBP thereby removing your option to not buy one.
That's right, Apple has given us a large range of SSD choices, but you want them to support some standard 2.5" SATAIII option (since it's the most common) and allow you to buy a new MBP without an included drive so you can have full control over what you put in it, because… options. Brilliant¡
And let's not forget that you complained about Apple offering the option of a 256GB SSD for those users that don't need a 512GB, 1TB or 2TB option in their MBP.
When your only line of defence is to 'imagine' what I want based on poor speculation, that defence is flawed at its core. Was it too much for you to just ask me?
You are wrong - yet again. You have your opinion but please ask about what I want before just going ahead and jumping to conclusions.
Have I mentioned SATA anywhere? No Have I mentioned any desire to purchase a 0GB storage? No.
What I want is user-upgradable Macs and I want them for a variety of reasons. Apple can do as it pleases and I will react to its offerings as I see fit. At the moment it's a no sale. The more people refuse to buy, the more Apple will take note. That's a fact.
Do I want glue instead of screws just to make things thinner/lighter/more difficult to repair? Nope.
With upgradeability, what I want is to be able to upgrade the SSD, RAM and battery at my leisure and with the seller of my choice. This should not seem strange to you. Historically this has largely been the case (even for Apple). They can use industry standards (preferable) or not, but make these items user accessible and document the specifications for third parties to be able to provide parts.
It is not an outlandish desire. Not in the slightest.
Apple has a very poor record with SSD. I mean poor in the extreme. Largely 'slow' and never competitively priced. Would you care to argue this point too? In short, Apple's pricing is at the expensive end of the wedge. For a pro machine at these prices, 256GB is not enough. Yes, that's my opinion.
Apple has been criticised for this behaviour from the day they started soldering SSD to motherboards (RAM too). It is not just my opinion. It is the opinion of many.
With a little luck, the eu will pass legislation (similar to what it did with phone chargers,) to make the battery user accessible. Batteries have a programmed (by chemistry) lifespan is always less than the normal lifespan of the machine. Users should have access to them for safe disposal or replacement.
That's what I want. It's very different to what you claimed I wanted. Very, very different.
Feel free to ask next time before speculating on what I want.
Number of people complaining they NEED 32GB: 100 Number of people actually needing 32GB: 6 Number of people actually needing 32GB but will be more limited by only having 4GB video RAM unlike the TitanX in their desktop: 2 (editing and grading 4.6K typically wants more than 4GB video ram) Number of people actually needing 32GB but would be better off employing better devops practices as opposed to spinning up a gazillion VMs locally: 2
So the 2 guys editing and grading 4K on their laptops (but not 4.6k) are unnecessarily lugging around a 12lb Dell Precision desktop replacement laptop or a svelte 9lb gaming laptop around rather than the 4lb 32GB MBP unicorn. Which would be 8 lbs after you cram a GTX970M, 32GB and a desktop CPU into it. Oh and a unobtanium heat sink so it doesn't catastrophically catch on fire like a recent flagship phone by some company in Korea and still be moderately thin...
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
Oh dear. I wasn't following that one? Yes, I was. 'The EU is forcing Ireland'. Yes. I know but the EU cannot claim the taxes directly from Apple. That's why I said Ireland. Or were you simply stating the obvious? Ireland gave incentives. Again, I know.
It would seem it is you who has not been following this. The 'incentives', in the eyes of the eu, and after a complete three year investigation, were deemed to amount to state aid. Something which is ilegal. The case will now be heard and appeals will be processed. What you might not know is that Apple itself decides how much of its income it will make taxable and then pays the tax on at bargain basement rates. Isn't that just great? The company decides how much it will make available for taxation. The same company that channelled billions around the world to avoid US taxes. Last time I heard, I think they were 'negotiating' with the US government on the best way to repatriate some of that money. Apple's perfect world perhaps. I love those 'values'.
Anyway I think Tim Cook went on record to call it all 'political crap' or something similar. It seems that Apple has offices all over the EU, sells its products in those countries and then 'accounts' for them in Ireland with Ireland's amazing tax breaks. Perhaps you will understand why other EU member states are not at all happy with this.
My thinking is that if Apple puts the word 'values' on the table, it should act in a fair but competitive way. With SSD pricing it is ripping off its users because those users have no option to source them elsewhere. It can do this of course, but I don't consider it fair or competitive or even reasonable. That's why I'm not buying one of these machines now. It's my decision. Apple is telling me 'take it or leave it'.' Fine, but I'm telling Apple the same. My price is €€€. Take it or leave it. Let's wait and see who blinks first. I doubt Apple will make a loss by reducing prices.
With upgradeability, what I want is to be able to upgrade the SSD, RAM and battery at my leisure and with the seller of my choice. This should not seem strange to you. Historically this has largely been the case (even for Apple). They can use industry standards (preferable) or not, but make these items user accessible and document the specifications for third parties to be able to provide parts.
It is not an outlandish desire. Not in the slightest.
Apple has a very poor record with SSD. I mean poor in the extreme. Largely 'slow' and never competitively priced. Would you care to argue this point too? In short, Apple's pricing is at the expensive end of the wedge. For a pro machine at these prices, 256GB is not enough. Yes, that's my opinion.
Apple has been criticised for this behaviour from the day they started soldering SSD to motherboards (RAM too). It is not just my opinion. It is the opinion of many.
With a little luck, the eu will pass legislation (similar to what it did with phone chargers,) to make the battery user accessible. Batteries have a programmed (by chemistry) lifespan is always less than the normal lifespan of the machine. Users should have access to them for safe disposal or replacement.
That's what I want. It's very different to what you claimed I wanted. Very, very different.
As far as i know, the currently used batteries have matched or exceeded the expected lifetime of the machine for six or seven years now. I know mine is still doing fine after five and a half years, while the book itself is slowly but surely dying. I could get it replaced at a dealer of my choice for under 150€, though. Not necessarily with a BRAND of my choice, but having worked in computer retail for a bit of my life, I can tell you that limited-but-high-quality options in this particular regard are a Very Good Thing.
Your wish to replace RAM is understandable and not particularly outlandish, it's merely completely outdated by technology. There is no socketed RAM available that Apple could use, and in fact, soldering it removes a common point of failure. Your complaint sounds a bit like thalo and his cohorts back on MacFixit in the early day of OS X, complaining that they could no longer manually reserve RAM for individual applications as they could under OS 9. If you're going to max out anyway, max out right away. You're a pro. Budget for it.
As for SSDs: the new ones appear to be socketed, not soldered. It's worth noting that the previous generation weren't slow at all, but al available replacement options were about half the speed of the original.
The SSDs in the new MBP appear to be the fastest stock SSDs in the industry, and priced very competitively, from what I've read.
What exactly is perplexing about users complaining about being raped, pillaged then burnt at the stake on Apple's forced SSD options? Absolutely nothing. Or do you think that locking users into your system at the point of sale and with exorbitant pricing is the right way to do business?
This is like whining about Tesla requiring users have lithium-ion batteries rather than lead-acid batteries. Is it perplexing? No. Is it silly? Yes.
The reason why Apple requires SSDs is because without them it's bog slow. What's a crime is that they still sell iMac's with just a 1TB HDD. They should dump that in favor of a 128GB SSD only although they can, and should, probably make the base model a 1TB fusion drive.
There are folks with brand new Dell laptops that are insanely slow because they have HDDs in them.
I'm sure you'll be complaining when Apple drops to 2GB LPDDR4 RAM and 1TB worth of Optane memory storage attached via a DDR4 interface. OMG! Apple is forcing us to use Optane that is 1000x faster than SSDs!
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
Oh dear. I wasn't following that one? Yes, I was. 'The EU is forcing Ireland'. Yes. I know but the EU cannot claim the taxes directly from Apple. That's why I said Ireland. Or were you simply stating the obvious? Ireland gave incentives. Again, I know.
It would seem it is you who has not been following this. The 'incentives', in the eyes of the eu, and after a complete three year investigation, were deemed to amount to state aid. Something which is ilegal. The case will now be heard and appeals will be processed. What you might not know is that Apple itself decides how much of its income it will make taxable and then pays the tax on at bargain basement rates. Isn't that just great? The company decides how much it will make available for taxation. The same company that channelled billions around the world to avoid US taxes. Last time I heard, I think they were 'negotiating' with the US government on the best way to repatriate some of that money. Apple's perfect world perhaps. I love those 'values'.
Anyway I think Tim Cook went on record to call it all 'political crap' or something similar. It seems that Apple has offices all over the EU, sells its products in those countries and then 'accounts' for them in Ireland with Ireland's amazing tax breaks. Perhaps you will understand why other EU member states are not at all happy with this.
My thinking is that if Apple puts the word 'values' on the table, it should act in a fair but competitive way. With SSD pricing it is ripping off its users because those users have no option to source them elsewhere. It can do this of course, but I don't consider it fair or competitive or even reasonable. That's why I'm not buying one of these machines now. It's my decision. Apple is telling me 'take it or leave it'.' Fine, but I'm telling Apple the same. My price is €€€. Take it or leave it. Let's wait and see who blinks first. I doubt Apple will make a loss by reducing prices.
What "values"? One thing to keep in mind is that, whatever loopholes might exist, they exist because governments specifically designed them into existence. They were put in place specifically to allow corporations to save money. Claiming they are immoral for employing them is like calling me immoral for tax-deducting professional gear as a business expense. Are you sure you could sleep better if you knew that I wasn't accounting for a whole bunch of gear, just so I can be sure to pay more taxes than I owe? I can figure expenses against income because my state has designed a system to encourage people like me to become free-lancers. Wouldn't I be an idiot for not exploiting it?
regarding component choices: shouldn't you be building your own machine? You have no choice over who makes the display panel, after all, or the wi-fi chip. Or the Thunderbolt controller, for that matter. Did you know that Apple is FORCING YOU to buy THEIR CNC-machined case??? Hmmm.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
Oh dear. I wasn't following that one? Yes, I was. 'The EU is forcing Ireland'. Yes. I know but the EU cannot claim the taxes directly from Apple. That's why I said Ireland. Or were you simply stating the obvious? Ireland gave incentives. Again, I know.
It would seem it is you who has not been following this. The 'incentives', in the eyes of the eu, and after a complete three year investigation, were deemed to amount to state aid. Something which is ilegal. The case will now be heard and appeals will be processed. What you might not know is that Apple itself decides how much of its income it will make taxable and then pays the tax on at bargain basement rates. Isn't that just great? The company decides how much it will make available for taxation. The same company that channelled billions around the world to avoid US taxes. Last time I heard, I think they were 'negotiating' with the US government on the best way to repatriate some of that money. Apple's perfect world perhaps. I love those 'values'.
Anyway I think Tim Cook went on record to call it all 'political crap' or something similar. It seems that Apple has offices all over the EU, sells its products in those countries and then 'accounts' for them in Ireland with Ireland's amazing tax breaks. Perhaps you will understand why other EU member states are not at all happy with this.
My thinking is that if Apple puts the word 'values' on the table, it should act in a fair but competitive way. With SSD pricing it is ripping off its users because those users have no option to source them elsewhere. It can do this of course, but I don't consider it fair or competitive or even reasonable. That's why I'm not buying one of these machines now. It's my decision. Apple is telling me 'take it or leave it'.' Fine, but I'm telling Apple the same. My price is €€€. Take it or leave it. Let's wait and see who blinks first. I doubt Apple will make a loss by reducing prices.
What "values"? One thing to keep in mind is that, whatever loopholes might exist, they exist because governments specifically designed them into existence. They were put in place specifically to allow corporations to save money. Claiming they are immoral for employing them is like calling me immoral for tax-deducting professional gear as a business expense. Are you sure you could sleep better if you knew that I wasn't accounting for a whole bunch of gear, just so I can be sure to pay more taxes than I owe? I can figure expenses against income because my state has designed a system to encourage people like me to become free-lancers. Wouldn't I be an idiot for not exploiting it?
regarding component choices: shouldn't you be building your own machine? You have no choice over who makes the display panel, after all, or the wi-fi chip. Or the Thunderbolt controller, for that matter. Did you know that Apple is FORCING YOU to buy THEIR CNC-machined case??? Hmmm.
nht said: There are folks with brand new Dell laptops that are insanely slow because they have HDDs in them.
And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Poor battery life, poor display quality, poor construction/design/manufacturing, Dell's own SW suite infused with Windows that can be very difficult to find all the drivers when you try to install with an retail version of Windows and even then they might not be optimized, and pay-to-play apps that OEMs put on machine to help make a profit on the back end.
But the spec sheet at Staples shows some rudimentary value that makes it appear better than other vendors. It's funny, the ones that fall for this aren't the people that admit they don't know anything about computers, but the ones that think they know about computers when they recite stuff like "Skylake can handle up to 64GiB of RAM but Apple's too cheap to include it."
What exactly is perplexing about users complaining about being raped, pillaged then burnt at the stake on Apple's forced SSD options? Absolutely nothing. Or do you think that locking users into your system at the point of sale and with exorbitant pricing is the right way to do business?
This is like whining about Tesla requiring users have lithium-ion batteries rather than lead-acid batteries. Is it perplexing? No. Is it silly? Yes.
The reason why Apple requires SSDs is because without them it's bog slow. What's a crime is that they still sell iMac's with just a 1TB HDD. They should dump that in favor of a 128GB SSD only although they can, and should, probably make the base model a 1TB fusion drive.
There are folks with brand new Dell laptops that are insanely slow because they have HDDs in them.
I'm sure you'll be complaining when Apple drops to 2GB LPDDR4 RAM and 1TB worth of Optane memory storage attached via a DDR4 interface. OMG! Apple is forcing us to use Optane that is 1000x faster than SSDs!
Here we go again. Where the blazes did you get the idea that people think we don't need SSD? Did you hear it from me? Nope. I am not whining. I am complaining. I have outlined my complaint and you still don't understand what I've said. If you understood, you wouldn't even be mentioning non SSD disks in your reply. I have no problems with SSD.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs. With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
Oh dear. I wasn't following that one? Yes, I was. 'The EU is forcing Ireland'. Yes. I know but the EU cannot claim the taxes directly from Apple. That's why I said Ireland. Or were you simply stating the obvious? Ireland gave incentives. Again, I know.
It would seem it is you who has not been following this. The 'incentives', in the eyes of the eu, and after a complete three year investigation, were deemed to amount to state aid. Something which is ilegal. The case will now be heard and appeals will be processed. What you might not know is that Apple itself decides how much of its income it will make taxable and then pays the tax on at bargain basement rates. Isn't that just great? The company decides how much it will make available for taxation. The same company that channelled billions around the world to avoid US taxes. Last time I heard, I think they were 'negotiating' with the US government on the best way to repatriate some of that money. Apple's perfect world perhaps. I love those 'values'.
Anyway I think Tim Cook went on record to call it all 'political crap' or something similar. It seems that Apple has offices all over the EU, sells its products in those countries and then 'accounts' for them in Ireland with Ireland's amazing tax breaks. Perhaps you will understand why other EU member states are not at all happy with this.
My thinking is that if Apple puts the word 'values' on the table, it should act in a fair but competitive way. With SSD pricing it is ripping off its users because those users have no option to source them elsewhere. It can do this of course, but I don't consider it fair or competitive or even reasonable. That's why I'm not buying one of these machines now. It's my decision. Apple is telling me 'take it or leave it'.' Fine, but I'm telling Apple the same. My price is €€€. Take it or leave it. Let's wait and see who blinks first. I doubt Apple will make a loss by reducing prices.
What "values"? One thing to keep in mind is that, whatever loopholes might exist, they exist because governments specifically designed them into existence. They were put in place specifically to allow corporations to save money. Claiming they are immoral for employing them is like calling me immoral for tax-deducting professional gear as a business expense. Are you sure you could sleep better if you knew that I wasn't accounting for a whole bunch of gear, just so I can be sure to pay more taxes than I owe? I can figure expenses against income because my state has designed a system to encourage people like me to become free-lancers. Wouldn't I be an idiot for not exploiting it?
regarding component choices: shouldn't you be building your own machine? You have no choice over who makes the display panel, after all, or the wi-fi chip. Or the Thunderbolt controller, for that matter. Did you know that Apple is FORCING YOU to buy THEIR CNC-machined case??? Hmmm.
Please believe me. The EU doesn't conduct a thorough three year investigation and require a member state collect back taxes from a company to the tune of 13 billion dollars, basing its demands on a 'loophole'. It is crystal clear that you haven't even read the public summary of the EU case.
Also, your wording could be taken to imply that loopholes are purposely wired into legislation. They are not. They are often accidents (much like bugs in software) which are detected and corrected in posterior legislation.
As for values, it wasn't me that put that word on the table. It was Tim Cook. All in a fluster as Apple was being pointed to as owing taxes. Let him define the Apple values and I will contest many practices that put those values to task. We can start with taxes if you like.
As for components your view is somewhat obtuse. Nobody has so much as argued for personal sourcing of components. It has more (but is not limited to) to do with the configurable components and upgrading them after the sale.
There are folks with brand new Dell laptops that are insanely slow because they have HDDs in them.
Yes. And as you stated, there are mac users in exactly the same position - or worse. I agree. It is a crime.
It would have been entirely possible to remove the reference to Dell and say the same of those Macs.
Of course there are also extremely good pc's too. What is probably worse is that those Macs are outdated, thermally compromised, can have integrated graphics, are barely configurable and are way overpriced. And, as of today at least, are the same machines that Apple wants us to buy into this Christmas. Could we say old and stale?
That they have 1TB platter based drives is just a tiny part of the problem. Of course, if they were user upgradeable they might be a tad more attractive.
Comments
That's right, Apple has given us a large range of SSD choices, but you want them to support some standard 2.5" SATAIII option (since it's the most common) and allow you to buy a new MBP without an included drive so you can have full control over what you put in it, because… options. Brilliant¡
And let's not forget that you complained about Apple offering the option of a 256GB SSD for those users that don't need a 512GB, 1TB or 2TB option in their MBP.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for charging similar or lower prices for the same quality of SSD upgrades as others offering the same technology (which,apparently, they are). FORCING them, even, to accept this superior technology. Rather than allowing them to carry heavier, bulkier devices to accommodate cheaper, slower SSDs.
With slots for replaceable RAM that is at least four years behind.
Oh, and that tax bill. Since you apparently weren't following that one: the EU is FORCING Ireland to collect. They don't want it. They specifically designed their tax legislation as an incentive for major corporations (of which Apple is just one) to set up shop there and help the flailing economy back on its feet. And wow, it actually worked. Except that Ireland (not Apple) was breaking EU law by placing these tax incentives. Apple - and hundreds of other corporations - were following the letter of the law that applied where they settled.
It's a rather small window where 16 GBs isn't enough but 32 GB is enough. Especially when dealing with DB clusters and sufficiently sized test data sets.
So far every developer that has complained strikes me as better served by getting better devops support rather than 16GB more RAM. 16GB is a nice to have and an occasionally useful bandaid but without good devops you're always going to be less efficient regardless of how much horsepower is on your laptop.
You are wrong - yet again. You have your opinion but please ask about what I want before just going ahead and jumping to conclusions.
Have I mentioned SATA anywhere? No
Have I mentioned any desire to purchase a 0GB storage? No.
What I want is user-upgradable Macs and I want them for a variety of reasons. Apple can do as it pleases and I will react to its offerings as I see fit. At the moment it's a no sale. The more people refuse to buy, the more Apple will take note. That's a fact.
Do I want glue instead of screws just to make things thinner/lighter/more difficult to repair? Nope.
With upgradeability, what I want is to be able to upgrade the SSD, RAM and battery at my leisure and with the seller of my choice. This should not seem strange to you. Historically this has largely been the case (even for Apple). They can use industry standards (preferable) or not, but make these items user accessible and document the specifications for third parties to be able to provide parts.
It is not an outlandish desire. Not in the slightest.
Apple has a very poor record with SSD. I mean poor in the extreme. Largely 'slow' and never competitively priced. Would you care to argue this point too? In short, Apple's pricing is at the expensive end of the wedge. For a pro machine at these prices, 256GB is not enough. Yes, that's my opinion.
Apple has been criticised for this behaviour from the day they started soldering SSD to motherboards (RAM too). It is not just my opinion. It is the opinion of many.
With a little luck, the eu will pass legislation (similar to what it did with phone chargers,) to make the battery user accessible. Batteries have a programmed (by chemistry) lifespan is always less than the normal lifespan of the machine. Users should have access to them for safe disposal or replacement.
That's what I want. It's very different to what you claimed I wanted. Very, very different.
Feel free to ask next time before speculating on what I want.
Number of people complaining they NEED 32GB: 100
Number of people actually needing 32GB: 6
Number of people actually needing 32GB but will be more limited by only having 4GB video RAM unlike the TitanX in their desktop: 2
(editing and grading 4.6K typically wants more than 4GB video ram)
Number of people actually needing 32GB but would be better off employing better devops practices as opposed to spinning up a gazillion VMs locally: 2
So the 2 guys editing and grading 4K on their laptops (but not 4.6k) are unnecessarily lugging around a 12lb Dell Precision desktop replacement laptop or a svelte 9lb gaming laptop around rather than the 4lb 32GB MBP unicorn. Which would be 8 lbs after you cram a GTX970M, 32GB and a desktop CPU into it. Oh and a unobtanium heat sink so it doesn't catastrophically catch on fire like a recent flagship phone by some company in Korea and still be moderately thin...
It would seem it is you who has not been following this. The 'incentives', in the eyes of the eu, and after a complete three year investigation, were deemed to amount to state aid. Something which is ilegal. The case will now be heard and appeals will be processed. What you might not know is that Apple itself decides how much of its income it will make taxable and then pays the tax on at bargain basement rates. Isn't that just great? The company decides how much it will make available for taxation. The same company that channelled billions around the world to avoid US taxes. Last time I heard, I think they were 'negotiating' with the US government on the best way to repatriate some of that money. Apple's perfect world perhaps. I love those 'values'.
Anyway I think Tim Cook went on record to call it all 'political crap' or something similar. It seems that Apple has offices all over the EU, sells its products in those countries and then 'accounts' for them in Ireland with Ireland's amazing tax breaks. Perhaps you will understand why other EU member states are not at all happy with this.
My thinking is that if Apple puts the word 'values' on the table, it should act in a fair but competitive way. With SSD pricing it is ripping off its users because those users have no option to source them elsewhere. It can do this of course, but I don't consider it fair or competitive or even reasonable. That's why I'm not buying one of these machines now. It's my decision. Apple is telling me 'take it or leave it'.' Fine, but I'm telling Apple the same. My price is €€€. Take it or leave it. Let's wait and see who blinks first. I doubt Apple will make a loss by reducing prices.
Your wish to replace RAM is understandable and not particularly outlandish, it's merely completely outdated by technology. There is no socketed RAM available that Apple could use, and in fact, soldering it removes a common point of failure.
Your complaint sounds a bit like thalo and his cohorts back on MacFixit in the early day of OS X, complaining that they could no longer manually reserve RAM for individual applications as they could under OS 9.
If you're going to max out anyway, max out right away. You're a pro. Budget for it.
As for SSDs: the new ones appear to be socketed, not soldered. It's worth noting that the previous generation weren't slow at all, but al available replacement options were about half the speed of the original.
The SSDs in the new MBP appear to be the fastest stock SSDs in the industry, and priced very competitively, from what I've read.
This is like whining about Tesla requiring users have lithium-ion batteries rather than lead-acid batteries. Is it perplexing? No. Is it silly? Yes.
The reason why Apple requires SSDs is because without them it's bog slow. What's a crime is that they still sell iMac's with just a 1TB HDD. They should dump that in favor of a 128GB SSD only although they can, and should, probably make the base model a 1TB fusion drive.
There are folks with brand new Dell laptops that are insanely slow because they have HDDs in them.
I'm sure you'll be complaining when Apple drops to 2GB LPDDR4 RAM and 1TB worth of Optane memory storage attached via a DDR4 interface. OMG! Apple is forcing us to use Optane that is 1000x faster than SSDs!
regarding component choices: shouldn't you be building your own machine? You have no choice over who makes the display panel, after all, or the wi-fi chip. Or the Thunderbolt controller, for that matter.
Did you know that Apple is FORCING YOU to buy THEIR CNC-machined case???
Hmmm.
regarding component choices: shouldn't you be building your own machine? You have no choice over who makes the display panel, after all, or the wi-fi chip. Or the Thunderbolt controller, for that matter.
Did you know that Apple is FORCING YOU to buy THEIR CNC-machined case???
Hmmm.
But the spec sheet at Staples shows some rudimentary value that makes it appear better than other vendors. It's funny, the ones that fall for this aren't the people that admit they don't know anything about computers, but the ones that think they know about computers when they recite stuff like "Skylake can handle up to 64GiB of RAM but Apple's too cheap to include it."
2) Your two sentences.
My complaint has nothing to do with platter based drives.
It has nothing to do with SSD technology.
Please re-read what I've said and try to understand.
Also, your wording could be taken to imply that loopholes are purposely wired into legislation. They are not. They are often accidents (much like bugs in software) which are detected and corrected in posterior legislation.
As for values, it wasn't me that put that word on the table. It was Tim Cook. All in a fluster as Apple was being pointed to as owing taxes. Let him define the Apple values and I will contest many practices that put those values to task. We can start with taxes if you like.
As for components your view is somewhat obtuse. Nobody has so much as argued for personal sourcing of components. It has more (but is not limited to) to do with the configurable components and upgrading them after the sale.
It would have been entirely possible to remove the reference to Dell and say the same of those Macs.
Of course there are also extremely good pc's too. What is probably worse is that those Macs are outdated, thermally compromised, can have integrated graphics, are barely configurable and are way overpriced. And, as of today at least, are the same machines that Apple wants us to buy into this Christmas. Could we say old and stale?
That they have 1TB platter based drives is just a tiny part of the problem. Of course, if they were user upgradeable they might be a tad more attractive.