Last Active
  • Intel's chip design, not Apple's choices, reason behind Thunderbolt 3 & RAM issues in new MacBook P

    brucemc said:
    Soli said:

    Soli said:
    blastdoor said:
    Well, it's Apple's fault that they keep using Intel processors instead of something based on their wind-storm ARM cores. 
    I would like to see this happen, but this needs to start with the low-end traditional PC offerings, not their Pro-level machines where VMs, Adobe, MS, and other large and complex apps will be used. This needs to happen with a MacBook or Mac mini-like machine where we can have a sub-$800 12" notebook of sub-$500 mini-desktop where you get more performance on their ARM-based SoCs for more users that will most use the default apps and Mac App Store apps.
    And since the choice for the Retina Macbook has been made, isn't this issue sealed by Apple for at least five years?
    Usually Apple is pretty consistent about these things, but they could always throw in a whammy. The 12" MacBook is a neat device but that ultra-low-power Intel Core is crazy expensive for the machine and I think the sales are pretty low so they could pop an ARM chip in there.

    They could also keep the 12" MacBook as is and bring back the MacBook Air, iBook, or something else entirely that runs off of ARM. Marketing is a huge factor so they may not even want to use the Mac name on the HW to help avoid confusion about it not supporting Boot Camp (unless MS offers their ARM-version of Windows) or VMs. The only two things I think we know is that 1) Apple can save hundreds on HW by using their own SoCs, and 2) their SoC already outperform the 12" MacBook and I believe pretty much every WinPC in the range that Apple could then target with a low-cost, entry-level machine based on macOS.
    IF (and I think it is a big "IF" still) Apple does make the decision to utilize ARM for a "macOS / laptop product" they are likely to call it something else (maybe an "Apple Book" given current naming conventions).  It is not a question of technical capabilities, but one of market strategy.  Does Apple want to target the "mid / upper-mid tier" of the laptop market?  They certainly could and it would be a financial success (but Apple clearly does not do things just for that reason).
    This. If Apple makes an ARM-based laptop, which I still find unlikely, it would probably be more closely aligned with the iOS architecture than macOS. Making an ARM-based Mac would be a huge mistake, since 1) performance would decrease, and 2) with zero compatibility with existing apps, they'd have the same problem Microsoft had with the early Surface tablets, before they switched them back to Intel, where people were returning the things in record numbers because while they claimed to run Windows, their Windows software didn't work.
  • Rumor: Apple to adopt USB Type-C in another upcoming MacBook, whether it's Pro or Air

    wizard69 said:
    Yeah that is what I've been thinking.    Read the headline and said no fooling.  

    As as for the Mac Book Air/Pro discussion I don't get it really.   Apple needs the Air due to the crippled nature of the Mac Book and its high costs.   If there is any sense left with the management team at Apple they will come out with a new Mac Book Air and do so at a lower price point.  
    This makes no sense. Updating the Air line is stupid. The only reason for the Air right now is to meet an entry level price point. If anything needs updating its the Retina MacBook Pro and the Mac mini.
    The Air is Apple's best-selling laptop. Thus, updating it is far from stupid.
  • Apple pulls legacy non-Retina MacBook Pro from retail store displays

    Still the best laptop design Apple has made.

    Linz Henderson
  • 'Apple File System' will scale from Apple Watch to Macs, replace HFS+

    I just watched the WWDC video about APFS. There's a huge feature that wasn't mentioned yesterday, and that's that they are planning to offer live, in-place upgrades from HFS+ to APFS, without requiring a reformat. Holy crap. This is huge and will probably make adoption much higher.

    This new file system is the best announcement they've made in the last 10 years.
    tjwolf said:
    " and filenames are still case-sensitive" - what does that mean???  Of course a file system should be case sensitive.
    HFS/HFS+ (other than a few seldom-used variants) are case insensitive, but case preserving. You can see this by creating a file called "foo", and then trying to make another file called "Foo" in the same folder. It won't work, because the file system considers "foo" and "Foo" to be essentially the same filename.
    cjcoops said:

    I agree - I've never seen anyone whine about why Microsoft doesn't support HFS read/write support natively, yet Apple is blamed for Microsoft needing license fees for ntfs ( does Apple require license fees for HFS support say on a Windows computer?).
    Apple publishes the HFS+ specification right here for anyone to use:


    No mention of a license that I can see. I suspect the main reason Microsoft doesn't support it is because yuck, HFS+.
    rcfa said:
    Lots of it sounds ZFS-like; CoreVolume storage management has been around for a while and likely shows how long Apple has been working on this.

    Key question: will it support RAID-5/6 like striping against drive failures and CRC checksums against bitrot? These are the two features that are the most critical to me.
    That's a good question. The omission of checksumming from the discussions so far does come across as odd.
    Snapshots should make TimeMachine several orders of magnitude quicker...
    That's an understatement. Snapshots should move a typical TM backup from taking ~45 minutes to seconds.
  • More evidence of 'macOS' rebranding surfaces on Apple website

    why- said:
    slurpy said:
    Oh sure, if you say so. It may be fine to hundreds of millions of others, but not you, so case closed. Nevermind the fact that it's iOS, tvOS, watchOS, but this one should be capitalized cause a troll like you says so.

    Well Mac is a proper noun or a special word or what have you. watch and TV aren't

    and I'm not sure why you're calling someone a troll for simply voicing their opinion
    You must be new here. On this board, "troll" is a synonym for "person who has an opinion that I personally disagree with."