scottw2

I'm a developer. I want a machine with:

1. Quad core i7 for fast code compilation
2. Tons of (preferably upgradable) memory to run all these virtual machines for test
3. SSD storage (512GB) that I can upgrade myself or at least have reasonable OEM prices
4. A decent keyboard to type all day long
5. USB-A ports to connect to virtually every type of devices out there, including iDevices
6. HDMI port to connect to projectors and TVs in meeting rooms
7. SD card slot to import photos from my camera to Lightroom when I go on vacation.

I don't mind a little of thickness. The touch bar doesn't impress me. For the $500 difference, I could have bought a 9.7" touchscreen also known as iPad.

Sadly, Apple does not make one.

blastdoor said:

seankill said:

Seems about right. Can't even do a spec bump for the Mac Pro.

I needed a desktop (haven't had one is 10 years), went with a PC, faster, much faster, and saved 1000$ (counting dual 4K monitors). Win10 is pretty good so far, just have to disable a bunch of junk.

I still think I will buy Apple Macbooks though.

I'm curious to hear a Mac user's perspective on Win10. I haven't used Windows since XP. 

Some things that I particularly like about the Mac relative to XP are:

1. Spaces (or whatever you want to call it these days)
2. Very smooth multitasking (I found that I had to fiddle with processor affinity and process priorities to get a windows PC to run smoothly when all logical cores were maxed out)
3. The accessibility Zoom feature
4. Awesome multi-touch trackpads
5. Single menu bar at the top plus general efficient use of window space (I guess that will probably never change in Windows)
6. Windows was always just ugly; macOS just looks more elegant to my eye

How does a high-end Windows 10 PC stack up on these things? 

I'ma Windows 10 user by day and Mac by night. My opinions (not looking to start a flamewar):

1. Windows 10 has multiple desktop too. I'll call a draw on this
2. The mouse and keyboard can lock up sometimes on Windows 10. OS X's GUI continues to work even if app is not responding. +1 to Mac.
3. "Windows + Plus" does the same trick
4. This depend a lot on what vendor you choose. The Dell XPS 13 and Surface touchpads are up there with Apple's
5. Almost Windows apps are deigned to run fullscreen, which annoys the heck out of me. Mac apps are designed from the ground up to run with varying window sizes.
6. Very much a personal taste. Windows 10 does feel too "flat" and I sometimes get lost on what's clickable and what's not. If anything, Macs are also going down this treacherous road.

I guess ynht said:

stantheman said:

Another thing that slows Mac development is Apple's reliance on Intel for an application processor. Apple doesn't face that delay and uncertainty for iPhone and iPad. Apple's work with TSMC on 7nm and 5nm processors for later in the decade puts a lot of pressure on Intel to step up its game. In recent years, Intel's biggest strategy in PC's has been partnering with Chinese makers of laptops based on the MacBook Air design. Moore's Law, it turns out, was a corporate strategy that Intel has since abandoned.

Folks keep repeating this mantra as if repetition makes reality.

The reality is that Intel has vastly improved performance per watt and has enabled extremely mobile laptops favored by Apple.  As nice as the A10 may be it can't do what the high end Core i7 does for the Mac and Intel has being going in the direction that Apple has wanted with the 4.5W TDP CoreM7.

Intel hasn't been holding Apple back.  Intel has been catering to Apple's desires.  This holds true in 2016 as much as it did in 2005.

I guess Intel is a convenient scapegoat for every Mac delay. The Mac Pro still has 2013 CPU and GPU which are Intel's and AMD's faults? The oh-so-thin, dongle-toting MBP 2016 is Intel's fault too? Or the un-upgradable 2014 Mac Mini, slower than its 2012 predecessor was due to Intel as well?

Everyone looks at Apple's income statement and see iPhones and iPads make up 75% of revenue and Macs only 10%. It's all wrong. iPhones and iPads won't sell if there are no apps for them. And the only way to make iOS apps are with Macs (Hackintoshes are frankly not worth the headaches). Every developers I've met at Apple, Google, Twitter, Facebook, etc. all use Macs. About 70% of photographers I met use Macs. Video editors like me prefer Macs. All Jony care about these days are thinness. Sure there's a big segment of users (most students) who use an MBP as nothing more than a screen to watch cat videos. Give them a thin and light notebook. For us professionals who make a living of the computer, we don't mind a bit of thickness to trade for utilities.

lorin schultz said:

The fact that Mr. Cook has to assure people that Mac desktops will continue is, to me, an indication of how bad the Mac development situation has become. Can anyone imagine him having to reassure people that there are new iPhones coming after three years with no updates?

Heck, I don't even care for an "incredible" redesign. Update the Mac Pro with the latest processor from Intel whenever these come out. In fact, shut up, take my money and ship a cheese grater with the latest Xeon and GPUs. 3 years without an update is pathetic.

Whereas laptop specs are confined by form factor restrictions, desktops are defined by high performance processors, large screens, ample storage and "a greater variety of I/O."

Show us you meant what you said, Tim. The iMac is a bunch of mobile components glued behind a big screen. The Mac Mini is un-upgradable box of mobile hardware. The "trashcan" Mac Pro looks neat until you need to connect external accessories typically required of their workloads. You need breakout boxes, cables, external everything. In a senses, the dongle mess that is the 2016 MBP starts with the trashcan.

Give Jony a challenge to design computers that: (1) upgradable, (2) has wide selection of replacement parts, (3) has ports that people actually need, (4) have regular updates and (5) look good, in that order. He only cares about thinness these days.