danvm

Microsoft has priced the Surface Studio 2 at a very high tier -- it starts at $3,500, with nothing underneath it in the Surface lineup apart from its three mobile products. That's $200 more than Apple's 27 inch iMac upgraded to a Core i7, 16GB of DDR4 RAM and 1TB of SDD storage at Apple's premium prices.

Apple is known -- and often reviled by PC fans -- for its premium pricing. Yet in this case, an iMac is not just cheaper when similarly configured, but offers a wide range of significantly lower priced options starting at $1,800 for the 5K iMac, or $1,100 for the smaller 4K model where Microsoft does not.

T

Microsoft has never sold so many Surface PCs in a year, and its sales haven't really grown since it launched the Surface idea, so it's not really clear what he's trying to say in calling Apple's vastly larger Mac business "mediocre at best." But the words he uses are that "Apple is in a position where it can let the Mac line go old and stale because Apple isn't a computer company anymore. It's now a company that sells the iPhone."

In reality, the fact is that Apple's Mac operations have generated $25.2 billion in revenues over the last four quarters. Microsoft's total Surface revenues over the same period were $4.7 billion. Of course, most of that was from sales of its hybrid tablets, more comparable to Apple's iPad business which itself generated another $19.5 billion.

macxpress said:

larrya said:

Should this really take 2 years??

You realize that most Apple products that are totally brand new take many years to design, engineer, and fine tune before its announcement? This isn't just slapping parts together like a DIY PC and call it good. Apple is not Dell, HP, etc. If all you want is a bunch of parts slapped together then by all means, go get that or create your own.

If you need a professional Mac in the meantime, the iMac Pro is actually a great Pro Mac to get. It will still have significant value, even next year should you want to sell it for a new Mac Pro.

I suppose you have no idea the engineering and design involve in HP workstations.  I suggest you check the HP Z8, which is miles ahead off what Apple offers today.  This model is capable of 3TB of RAM (yes, Terabytes), two CPU's with a max of 56 cores, a three NVidia Quadro P6000.  Do you really think that a device like this is a "bunch of parts slapped together"? 

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations-z8/index.html?jumpid=cp_r11260_us/en/psg/hp_desktop_workstations/z8-mdplink

In addition, these models have been updates in a frequent basis, so high end customers have the latest specs always.  There is no excuse for what Apple has done to the Mac Pro line.

GeorgeBMac said:

If its online it can be hacked & stolen -- and identity theft is a growth industry.

Why would I trust Microsoft with my ID?
Actually, that's one of the big reasons why I stick to Apple products -- security and privacy.  They're not invulnerable, but they're better than the rest.   Far better.

There is a large list of enterprises and business that trust MS authentication platform (Azure AD / AD) for their users and customers ID's.  And now they are moving to password less on their services and products, as a method to improve security. 

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/cloud-platform/passwordless

Like you said, if it's online, it can be hacked and stolen.  But MS have been prove very solid from a security POV, specially with their cloud services.  I think that's the reason MC team with MS for this project.  

StrangeDays said:

Johan42 said:

Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.

You’re high. Apple devices have the longest lifespan in the business — both in official support terms (iOS), and in real world useful lifespan. My primary desktop is a 2011 iMac. I have an iphone 4s that was used as a primary device by a family member until a year or two ago and now is a backup device. What other brand has the same support and lifespan longevity? 

One of my customers have some users with 9-year old Dell Optiplex.  Those PC's had zero issues after all of these years, and as today the run the latest version of Windows 10.  Different from your 2011 iMac, that latest macOS version you can run in it is Sierra.  Now most of my customers moved to Lenovo business PC's, some of them with 6-7 years with no issues.  Now they are planning to upgrade to SSD, since RAM and CPU is adequate for their tasks.  High quality PC's can work as long as Mac devices. 

jcs2305 said:

indiekiduk said:

That's quite a bold statement given it's going to take something major for the 2015 MBP and even more for the 2012 Air users to upgrade given how bad the problems with the keyboards are, and waste of money touch bar, and dongle hell, and and and...

You do realize they sell the MBP without the touchbar right? 

Yes, there are MBP 13" without touchbar, but the MBP 15" has no option without touchbar. 

SpamSandwich said:

Here’s the thing:

Price isn’t the point. The Surface is a pile of hot garbage compared to the generally lean and efficient iPad.

I don't think that the Surface is as bad as you said compared to an iPad.  I have a Surface Pro 4 that completely replaced my iPad, notebook and desktop (since I have the Surface Dock).  I wouldn't be able to do that with an iPad.  And during these years, I have seen how the iPad have been copying many elements I had many years ago in my SP4, like the Pen/Pencil, side-by-side apps in tablet mode, Windows Hello / FaceID and more recently the keyboard with trackpad.  

I think that the iPad is the best tablet in the market.  But the Surface does many things better than the iPad, specially when you add the keyboard / trackpad.  For example, if I work with a complex document or spreadsheet, the Surface is a better device.  Same as multitasking, where the iPad is very limited compared to Windows.  

I would agree that the iPad is very efficient in many tasks, but I can said the same of the Surface in many tasks too.  IMO, it all depends of what you need, the apps / applications and your workflow.  I consider both, the iPad and the Surface Pro, excellent devices.

freediverx said:

MaxLe0p0ld said:

I wonder, why they still not bundle TEAMS into the Package - and also in TEAMS the eMail Lookup remains a Challenge -
as long as an Address is not in Active Directory, the App will not find it - it will not check your own Contacts for matches, such a Bug for over a year now...

And why will TEAMS not update via AutoUpdate on the Mac?

Remember that the end user has never been Microsoft's customer. Their customer is the whoever makes corporate software purchase decisions in large companies. The fact that their products are full of annoying quirks and omissions just reflects the fact that they're not designed with your needs in mind.

MS recently announced that they have 47.5M MS 365 subscriptions for consumers. So it looks they have a lot of end users customers.  

netrox said:

libertyforall said:

So add side loading, disable by default, give customers the choice.  
VOILA.  

That's not how it works.

When Facebook and Netflix decide not to do on App Store, what choice do you have? They will force you to pay on the side, not in App Store to get around the 30% fee. 

I am tired of people thinking that they should have a free choice when it's deigned to protect you from criminals. 

From what I know, Facebook and Netflix are available in the Play Store even though Android allow sideloading of apps.  Why would it be different with the iOS App Store?  

9secondkox2 said:

Apple should do this. EA is huge with fantastic IPs. 

That would provide Apple with tremendous leverage in the gaming scene and plug the only hole Macs have. 

Mass Effect
F1
Dragon Age
Fifa
Need for Speed
Titanfall
Battlefield
Command and Conquer
Dead Space
Numerous Star Wars games

 Etc etc etc

its a treasure trove. 

The Bungie acquisition gave Microsoft the must-have it needed back when. 

This would do that for Apple. 

Apple Arcade is crap. Sorry. It’s a joke. It’s the same as not even trying. Just a way to get recurring payments from people who don’t buy games much. In the beginning, it was a way to focus on higher quality mobile games. But now it’s just a subscription tier for the same old crap. 

Apple has the ecosystem, hardware, software, APIs,  and trusted brand to dominate the gaming industry. 

Focus on M2 Pro based “Apple Arcade” console (or have a new Apple TV+Arcade higher tier device), Mac and iOS and then port the games to third party console and pc a few months later. Create movies and tv series with these IPs and feature them on Apple TV+. It’s a business that wouldn’t be denied. So much potential here. 

I don't know if I could say that Apple has a ecosystem when they don't even have a controller.   

Also, I don't think the M2 would do something in the gaming market.  The switch is evidence that you don't need the most powerful device to win in the gaming market.  If Apple decide to enter the gaming market, will it compete with Nintendo or MS / Sony?  

And here is another issue, upgradability.  Will Apple allow gamers to upgrade their devices?  One of the things PC gamers value is upgradability, and Apple is terrible at this.  

My point is that acquiring / merging with EA would be one of many things Apple need to do enter the gaming market.  

The process of Apple making the iPad a better desktop have been slow and confusing.  For some reason, the have been adding elements like multitasking, and mouse / trackpad support in a limited way.  If a device as the Surface Pro X, with a slower processor, is capable of a full desktop experience, I suppose the iPad, at least could do the same with its more capable specs.  

After having a Surface Pro 4 and iPad for years, I can say the iPad is a better tablet. But the Surface Pro is a better device when you work with a keyboard + trackpad / mouse.