7 years of service after a product has been discontinued is pretty great. Who offers longer service on their computers, out of curiosity?
Thanks for the reply, the premise of my gripe was the apathy of the ecosystem
and perhaps society nowadays-they don't care over nostalgia.
i think 7 months is the norm for computer or any other company to service and 7 days to care about anything they make. 7 minutes of care on an airplane or tavern is the most their service people expend now.
Yeah, so Apple gives you 7 years of support for Mac hardware, which is great. I've had nothing but stellar service over the years with repairs, most of which have been free or cheap. Supporting hardware beyond 7 years isn't about "nostalgia", it's about practicability.
I'm optimistic on the new MacBooks simple because we can run iPads app and store their data on a real computer soon.
Intel is trash and Apple Silicon Macs are going to be better in every way.
But ... go ahead and buy Intel Macs anyway because we don't want to see Mac sales nosedive.
Yeah ... sorry, no.
[ blah blah ]
So yeah, if I were a Mac guy I would definitely wait. Yes, the Intel MacBooks may be cheaper because of people waiting, but lesser expensive tech with an uncertain support future is what Windows and Android people buy, right?
You seem to have some fairly serious reading comprehension problems.
The ways in which Apple Silicon Macs' will have advantages for Apple over Intel Macs has been pretty clearly spelled out at WWDC. It's silly to assume this is not going to be the case without any evidence to the contrary. It's increasingly clear you haven't spent any time watching any of the videos that explain all of this. They're freely available, you know.
The arguments for buying an Intel Mac right now were pretty clearly not anything to do with preventing sales from nosediving.
Gotta take a position and stick to it.
Yes, you seemingly do.
Yeah ... I am not going to adopt a position just because Apple - who has a financial interest in selling as many Macs as possible - and Apple fans/fan sites tell me to. I like to make my own decisions. One of the reason why I don't buy tech from a single company/platform in the first place. I have macOS, iOS, ChromeOS, Android, Ubuntu and Windows all running right now doing various things.
Here's the reality: in 2 years, Apple is going to stop selling Intel-based Macs. When that time comes, Apple's position will be that Apple Silicon is the best thing ever to happen in the history of computing and that Intel CPUs are the equivalent of fossil fuels. Intel-based Macs will be second-class citizens to be derided, mocked and laughed at. Yes, macOS updates will still arrive for Intel-based Macs but the best efforts with Apple's legendary full stack ownership optimizations are going to go to Apple Silicon. Intel-based Macs are going to get the "well I guess we have to create an Android port of our iOS app eventually" treatment.
It would be one thing if you had to wait 2 years for the Apple Silicon Macs. But you don't. Instead Apple Silicon Macs are going to be available in time for Christmas shopping season and a full range of Apple Silicon Macs for everthing but the i9 and Xeon Mac Pros and iMacs are going to be available by this time next year. So it is only a matter of deferring your purchase for a few months. Unless your MacBook is in such dire straits that it is barely functioning for the critical work that you need done and you have no spare or backup - and you are too poor to just go out and get a refurbished Mac Mini or a cheap Windows laptop during those few months to tide you over - there is no good reason to buy an Intel Mac and lots of bad ones.
This is not my sole opinion. Plenty of leading (pro Apple and Mac users) tech journalists have the same opinion. So do lots of leading Apple bloggers! Macalope has a dissenting opinion but I find his arguments in favor of buying a machine that will last 5-7 years that will be a second class citizen during nearly all that time AND have much lower resale value to be not particularly convincing.
Sorry. No one should sign up to be the ones stuck with the slower, hotter, less full stack integrated (Metal? forget about it!) Intel Macs. Are you going to? No. Of course not. Your next Mac is going to be an Apple Silicon Mac, probably as soon as you can get your hands on one after it is released. But it is easy to make decisions with someone else's money, right?
Given that Apple Silicon Macs will not be able to dual boot Windows x86/64, and probably won't even be able to virtualise it, then I'd say that is a pretty compelling reason for a lot of people to buy a new Intel Mac while they are still available. For many that'll probably be worth the downsides of being tied to technology that (according to Apple at least) will become obsolete. The current line up of Macs are still very capable machines, and Apple will support them for at least a few years of OS updates.
Actually, it might come down to need versus want:
- How many people need MacOS?
- How many people need Windows?
If you need Windows, would it not make sense to invest in a Thinkpad that could last another 10 years? Or a Mac with an expected life of about half that?
And it's not like Intel's offerings are suddenly going to suck the moment Apple launches their ARM laptops.
Something like the ThinkPad X1 Nano coming in H2 2020 looks to be a pretty solid option depending on your needs:
15 W Tiger Lake U with Xe graphics
16:10 QHD display
<1kg weight
Thunderbolt 4
5G
While it will still likely fall behind AMD's current Ryzen 4000U series chips in multicore CPU performance, the GPU looks to be better with Xe graphics.
Given their power consumption, process technology and price-performance ratio?
Good luck with that. They might make it out but I put my doubt.
I wouldn’t say everything since 2016 are bad, but they all have one or two drawbacks that made them look like lackluster:
2016-2017 were about RAM, keyboard and other small defects. 2018-2019 were about throttling, RAM & keyboard.
Not to mention that Ryzen is giving Intel a choke, making actual great design (e.g. Mac Pro and the 16”) looks bad on paper.
So I would put Intel for half of their fault. While I still don’t agree with naysayers, not everything they said are wrong. I sure hope ASi marks an end to this and moving beyond.
Comments
Huh. Okay.
Good luck with that. They might make it out but I put my doubt.
2016-2017 were about RAM, keyboard and other small defects.
2018-2019 were about throttling, RAM & keyboard.
Not to mention that Ryzen is giving Intel a choke, making actual great design (e.g. Mac Pro and the 16”) looks bad on paper.
So I would put Intel for half of their fault. While I still don’t agree with naysayers, not everything they said are wrong. I sure hope ASi marks an end to this and moving beyond.