- Last Active
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.
TThe additional $200 in the Surface Studio gives you a 28" touchscreen and a GTX1060 w/6GB in the entry model, which is far better than what Apple offers in the iMac 5K and even the iMac Pro.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.Maybe the reason for the low Surface sales is that there are options from other vendors that sell similar devices with Windows at a lower cost. Compare that to Apple, that is the only vendor of iOS and macOS devices. Still, I find impressive how MS is doing after only six years in a saturated PC market.
macxpress said:larrya said:Should this really take 2 years??
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.
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.
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.
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.
Johan42 said:Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
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...
williamlondon said:danvm said:"My post didn't had the purpose to defend to PC..."
Second, if you read my post, I mentioned that I consider the Mac a PC. My comment was comparing PC's (Windows / Mac) with smartphones as devices.
racerhomie3 said:Johan42 said:Diminishing returns is here. Apple’s planned obsolescence as well. Who will prevail? The customer who has no sense will.
brian green said:This comparison reminds me of the days when Phil would do a speed test on stage with the latest and greatest PC versus the Mac, and the Mac would always win. It was a smack down.
I think the best thing we can do as a computer community is show Apple that they persistently come up short, and that engineers ought to actually focus on the best specs possible, rather than settling for average or bare minimum for a premium price point.
I'd love to see Phil out there again with a MacBook Pro trouncing the competition like they did in the old days. Sadly, when all of the components are off the shelf compatible to every other manufacturer, Apple would have to make the conscious decision to spec out a laptop with that specifically in mind, and it's my opinion that Apple engineers have no plans to be the best in regard to performance.
I am aware that a critical component to functionality is the OS itself and Windows 10 has made significant improvements in stability from what I've read. MacOS is stable, and functional, while I believe we're well past the days of seeing significant improvements and speed increases from one version of the OS to another. Most of us run the latest version and it "just works", much to our daily contentment. I feel the significant disparity is revealed in speed of workflow throughput. We've seen 4k become the standard for video, and HEVC has proved a significant space saver while remaining visibly lossless to the average user, yet creating more work to be done by the CPU and GPU. I have not seen a noticeable speed improvement with the change of filesystem to APFS either. When we're seeing other laptops outperforming the MacBook Pro, it's not only a loss of pride in the brand we choose to spend our hard earned money on, it's also taking more time because the laptops we're offered by Apple Engineers are less capable than those by other manufacturers.
It has been my opinion, for several generations of Mac products, that Apple Engineers have cared significantly less about performance, and more about esthetics. While Apple laptops look nice, they fall short in providing the best performance for their Prosumer users, which is truly unfortunate for those of us who refuse to leave the Mac ecosystem. When the components of laptops are largely from the same vendors and assembled by other manufacturers, it's harder to differentiate them. While I hope Apple persists in incorporating more of their own chips into their products, I am finding it difficult to imagine the day when Phil will be back out on that stage showing us the Mac trouncing the PC once again. At least the Mac will look nice though.How do you get to the conclusion that macOS is more secure than Windows? Personally I think both environments do an excellent job from a security POV.And too: Don't forget the entire Apple Ecosystem that simply doesn't exist in the world of Windows. I love how my Apple Watch unlocks my MacBook and how my messages flow between my Watch, my phone and my MacBook - etc, etc, etc,....
Don't forget that MS have their ecosystem too. Two examples that come to my mind are gaming and business / enterprise. The integration of the Xbox / Xbox Live and Windows 10 ecosystems is non existent in Apple devices. And the business / enterprise ecosystem MS have is miles ahead of what Apple offers. From what I'm seeing, both environments have excellent ecosystems, with a strength in some areas and weakness in other.
mr. h said:Keychain adaptors are small but they still bulk up your keychain. If I had an HMDI adaptor and USB-C to USB-A adaptor on my keychain, I'd no longer be able to fit my keys where I need them to fit. Again, I ask the question, why not have four TB-3 ports AND USB-A, HDMI, and SD-card slot? People who so easily dismiss these as "not necessary" because you can "just replace all your cables" obviously don't ever have to collaborate or work with anyone else, where you don't have control over what cables are available or what kind of USB stick someone else has. It's clear that Apple left out all other ports for two reasons:
1. To increase margins
2. To try to force a migration away from "legacy" ports.