Sanctum1972

knowitall said:

Sanctum1972 said:

macplusplus said:

asdasd said:

macplusplus said:

canukstorm said:

karmadave said:

Apple is NOT abandoning x86 architecture for Mac! More likely you will see iPad get faster with more Mac-like features. The the upcoming versions, of iPadOS and MacOS are very similar and are only likely to become more so over time. That's why Apple is continuing to invest in it's own ARM designs. 

This is what I also think will happen.  macOS / x86 will stick around for "legacy" workflows & iPadOS / ARM for "modern" workflows

And also modern furniture. Panels kiosks everywhere... The initial Surface “Table” has only promoted Hawaii Five-0 and evolved to a stupid folding AIO Desktop. It is not unusual you see a crashed kiosk somewhere asking Windows admin password. Consider iPad evolved to a wallPad. Needs a powerful chip to drive such a big display, ML/AI and alike. The future is iPad, not Mac. 

The future for most people who want to get real work done is Mac, not iPad. The iPad has its uses though, largely for people who mostly consume content. 

Apple doesn’t think so. Neither software giants like Adobe, Autodesk, Microsoft, IBM, SAP...

If Apple didn't think so, why didn't they do that in the FIRST place? It's all about the App Store. As soon as iPad came out, the App Store drove sales and despite the popularity of the tablet, it wasn't enough to handle the creative professional work due to a lack of pressure sensitive stylus. iPad Pro came along which solved SOME of the issues but not entirely. Sure it has a nice 12.9 screen size but it's not enough. iPadOS should have been implemented a LONG. TIME. AGO, not 2019. 

If this company claims to think outside the box, it just missed the boat for some time. And Apple should've anticipated that initially. 

As a professional artist, I can see the portability of the 12.9 size however, it needs to go to 11 x 17 or should I say 17 inches. And the reason for that is because usually illustrators work with A4 or 11 x 17 illustration boards for their work. I should know. I've owned the original for two years now thanks to a grant that saved me $1,000. Sometimes larger. If you've read comic books, you should know that comic book artists originally drew them in 11 x 17 to actual scale and then the finished version is scaled down. And they still do it by that standard size today.

Hell, even Marvel, DC and others have Wacom Cintiqs within their in-house studios. Some might use iPads but professionally, they use a much larger screen for that reason to spread the palettes out for better screen estate. With 11 x 17, illustrators won't have to pinch/zoom to push pixels which is somewhat discouraged in the field as you have to focus on the expressive line art, or even brush strokes. I know what I'm talking about because 'pixel pushing' has been talked about for a long time within the creative industry like concept art, digital art, comics, etc. And yes, I'm aware that one can pan around at 100% size to view on a 12.9 screen even though I'd rather see the entire image most of the time. 

This is one reason why Wacom Cintiqs are superior due to screen size so artists can draw widely with their shoulders ( it's how it's done, not from the wrist unless you're doing it with a small sketchbook by hand ). And it's astounding that Jony Ive, as a designer/artist should KNOW better than go with a 12.9 screen. Yes, Cintiqs are incredibly expensive and so are the Wacom Intuos ( old school models ) but they do get the job done very well without any feature overload or distraction.

Even graphic designers who do book page layout need to SEE the actual size in 100% scale to view. On 12.9 inches, it would be crammed too tightly unless its a tiny paperback. For a logo or such, it's manageable. I use some Adobe apps, Clip Studio Paint, Procreate, Sketchbook Pro and such on my iPad but I also do my work in my iMac. Anyone who thinks they can get away with everything in today's iPad alone without a desktop is going to realize that mistake. If I'm going to do vector work, I'd rather use a mouse for precision while seeing the entire picture. With iPad Pro using, say, Affinity Designer, you'd have to close up, pan around, use the Pencil to add a bezier curve to create a path line, and pan around. With a 17 inch screen, it would be a LOT easier on the eyes to be able to see where the path is going instead of having to pinch/zoom/pan.

Autodesk? Sure, it's nice to build a prototype on the iPad Pro but when it comes to actual heavy lifting, you need a desktop for that. I prefer doing this on a 21 inch or larger screen so I can see the 'big picture'. A 12.9 screen has limitations. However, if you're using it for basic word processing, notation, administrative work, then that's fine otherwise a laptop would be much more ideal for that. I've an old friend who does AR/VR and 3D modelling, having worked for WETA for Lord of the Rings years ago, for a living and he doesn't use an iPad Pro for that, only probably to use as a presentation for clients alone. 

And so if iPad Pro is going to replace a desktop, it needs to BEHAVE like one with actual ports and get a bigger screen size. At least, Microsoft had the right idea with their Surface Studio PC despite the high price tag. And no, Gorilla arms is inexcusable. I own a large drafting desk with a slanted angle and have been drawing on it for years and I know that Apple can do better than just the iMac design. It needs to evolve to what the Surface PC is now. THAT's the future of desktop evolution. iPad is NOT the only way nor the 'messiah'. 

But I digress. Whatever Apple has planned, they better not screw it up with their ARM plans and keep Intel for their desktops until then. But it looks like Microsoft is getting started with ARM in their Surface devices so that's bound to happen first long before Apple does it. 

Maybe draw with paper and pencil then.

KidGloves said:

People cleverer than me will be able to give good reasons but why does Apple not buy AMD? Market cap is just over $30B, more than affordable for Apple.

blastdoor said:

chasm said:

Drive was in the business of retrofitting existing cars to *become* self-driving cars. This is almost precisely what I and others have been saying Apple’s been up to. There’s no Apple iCar, and I continue to think there won’t be one.

I’ll stick with my earlier guess — Apple will “make” (really, design in California) a self-driving car, but they won’t sell it to you and me. Instead, they will sell transportation as a service, basically a classy version of Uber.

Incidentally,  there is an important technological advantage to only offering self driving cars in the context of an Uber-like service.  It will be a long time before autonomous vehicles reach level five – – and it might not ever happen.  Self driving cars operating within geofenced areas, however, might be realistic in a few years. In the context of an Uber-like service, the geo-fencing is less of an issue because the service can just decline requests that would go out of the fence.  Or, instead of declining the request, the service could dispatch a human driver, or maybe even have a human remote control the vehicle.

gutengel said:

Good that Apple didn't waste money on this overrated guy. He just good at making good looking movies, storytelling skills not so much.

UrbaneLegend said:

I find it strange that a professional user in the article would say they'd buy the Mac Pro and use it for 10 years, we've only been able to stretch out the lives of our classic Mac Pros because there was absolutely zero competition in the CPU market. Intel was happy to keep tick tocking 4 cores for the mainstream and did nothing in the HEDT space so our 12 core MPs lasted forever. AMD have kicked down the doors with Ryzen, Threadripper and EPYC and there's going to be an almighty CPU war again. You throw $15k at the Mac Pro in the Fall and by Spring 2020 you're going to feel an epic case of buyers remorse. By this time next year this shiny new cheese grater is going to look unbelievably dated when workstations costing a fraction are running PCIe4, nVidia's 7nm GPUs, much faster SSDs and 200 GigE networking.

I know Windows isn't as nice as MacOS but when push comes to shove I prefer more powerful hardware over a slightly better OS. All my software is cross platform and works the same on MacOS and Win it just works a heck of a lot faster. Of the artists I converse with on forums and on social media none is impressed with this Mac Pro so for a more balanced view I'd check out the Mac forums of the 3D community and see what less handpicked professionals think of Apple's latest white elephant.