timmillea

cia said:

Apple was not first on the CD ROM train.  They were one of the first to drop it, but they started adding it into their computers around the same time everyone else did.

Apple sold stand alone CD-ROM drives, long before they were integrated into computers of any description, at a loss when the total number of CD-ROM titles available globally was around a dozen and all subsidised by Apple. The big question at the time was why? In doing so, Apple seeded the 'multimedia revolution' before the term had been coined. I know, I was there and have used Macs continuously since 1985. 

Apple have a history of being early or first in and first out of every major technology. They still are. I had reply to the utter nonsense in Dk49's post. 

DangDave said:

Adding MagSafe 3 would be great and put it in line with the new MacBooks. Apple should also add a 45 or 50W GaN charger for the Mac Air replacement. 

Adding MagSafe 3 to MacBooks was genius since MacBooks are portable and can then use USB-C PD chargers. With higher charging/power wattage they can get fast charging and the MacBook Thunderbolt 4 ports get additional available power for peripherals or for fast charging iPhones etc. And, last but not least it frees up one Thunderbolt 4 port. 

Fast-charging is not the simple benefit it appears. Despite all the clever charging algorithms, there is no escaping the fact that faster charging deteriorates lithium batteries faster than slow charging. So their capacities reduce faster, e.g. you may get 500 cycles before capacity is reduced to 80% with clever fast charging, this could easily be doubled with slow charging. If you don't need a fast charge - don't do it. 

A laptop is already a bundle of compromises. There is no reason to be hysterical about a ¼" notch. It can drive external 6k Dolby Vision HDR displays! If you don't want a notch, get a Mac Mini. 

Marvin said:

The 27" iMac and Mac Pro users wouldn't benefit much from Apple Silicon, it would be mostly a side-step performance-wise. Prices can come down in higher-end models.

You clearly have not been following the rumours of the next M SoC (M1X, M2 etc.). Knowing how Apple works, you can be assured of 1) a huge performance leap like-for-like and 2) a small price increase overall. Apple do not need to bring down the prices of their Pro Macs. If you want the absolute best at any price, as many do, their pricing looks like an absolute steal. 

For example, Apple's 32' XDR Display at $5,000 + $1,000 for the stand and another $1,000 for anti-reflective glass seems a lot to we mere mortals but the alternative in pro circles offering a similar level of reference quality is $40,000. We benefit from Apple producing the very best products and selling them at prices that the masses can (just) afford whether or not they appreciate them or can use them to their fullest capabilities. 

The new 16" Mac Pro is what top film directors will be using on set. They want the absolute best and the cost Apple is likely to ask for it is totally insignificant in the overall scheme of things. Similarly for the forthcoming Apple silicon Mac Pro. It will be a screecher and the fact that it will cost less than a house is a benefit to the rest of us. 

Another satisfied 12 mini owner here. Mine was an upgrade from an SE (1st gen) so bigger, heavier but far more capable. If I had anything larger, it would not be in my pocket half as much. 

I am envious of the new 'Cinematic' video option on the 13 mini but not enough to upgrade yet. Perhaps when the algorithms for rack focus improve and the Cinematic mode is 4k, I will. 

I would be interested to see how Filmic Pro uses the Cinematic capabilities.