sagan_student

About

Username
sagan_student
Joined
Visits
67
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
445
Badges
1
Posts
188

Reactions

250Like0Dislike19Informative

  • Microsoft may follow Apple in creating own chips for Surface notebooks

    sagan_studentsagan_student
    danvm said:
    Again, people were trained with the iPod and iPhone, so they didn't need to be trained for the iPad.  The thing is that the iPad start to have usability issues when people noticed it could be used for more than what Apple allowed with iOS.  That's the reason people had an iPad, but had to move to a PC / Mac to complete their tasks.  The Surface Pro didn't had that issue.  It could be used as a tablet with a touch UI and a pen for notetaking, or use it as a laptop / PC for more complex tasks.  At the end, Apple had to copy MS and we see the results with the iPad today.  Personally I don't see anything wrong with Apple copying great ideas from MS.  Do you?
    I agree that there is nothing wrong with copying great ideas. And I do agree that people were being trained with the iPhone, but I don’t think there had been enough time with the new paradigm yet to have fully bought in. It had only been 3.5 years and the number of people with iPhones was no were near what they are now.. Developers also had not yet fully embraced the transition either and there were always the naysayers that kept saying it’s not powerful enough to be a ‘real’ computer or that it didn’t have ‘full’ programs, only hobbled apps, etc.

    If Apple had come out like MS did at that time and supported all of the same things as the surface, the iPad would have become stagnant. Just another touch screen device that under delivers (especially since the apps it would have run not had been forced to think touch first, the pencil would have become niche (used by artists only), keyboard/trackpad and mouse as an input device would’ve been the dominant way to input data). But their stubbornness has paid off as people and developers were forced to think touch first even when they moaned and complained for years for Apple to bring this stuff out. 

    Do you think that Apple never considered adding these ‘extras’ that Microsoft added with the surface?
    watto_cobra

  • Microsoft may follow Apple in creating own chips for Surface notebooks

    sagan_studentsagan_student
    danvm said:
    Regardless, it would difficult to argue that Apple did not consider the implications of leaving certain things out. I for one am glad they did as they forced me to reconsider how I interact with a computer. 

    Cheers. 
    What is interesting is that they forced you reconsider how to use a computer, that at the end it was very similar to what MS had 5 years ago with the Surface Pro 4.  And I don't think that Apple didn't add those features because the reasons you mentioned, considering how Apple criticize touchscreens for being "ergonomically terrible", at least based in their studies.  

    https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-touch-screen-mac-2010-10

    Maybe MS was right from the beginning.
    That’s the point. Had they done everything that Microsoft had done, it wouldn’t have had the impact of the iPad. It would’ve been a tool that was lost (not unlike the force touch that Apple had to finally ditched because very few people could grasp what to do with it and how to include it in their routines. And I was just starting to get the grasp of it and then they took it out.  ߤ簟Ｆzwj;♂️)

    Now that people have been sufficiently trained... err have had the experience of working in a touch first environment, it becomes beneficial to bring in or bring back other features. It’s a balancing act that Apple is generally very good at. Not that there aren’t other examples of Apple losing this battle. The file management system is another habit/way of thinking that Apple couldn’t totally kick either. 

    But now with Scribble, the iPad is something far more versatile than any other computing product and is touch first to boot. One of the best things about mg set up with the iPad Pro is that it is an iPad first and foremost. 

    Regarding your last statement (in bold), you never show your hand or perceived weaknesses in a battle. Why would you say something is great when you’re selling a device that is purposefully limiting the ways you can interact with it?

    **edit - I forgot to bold what I referring too.
    Eaksterwatto_cobra

  • Microsoft may follow Apple in creating own chips for Surface notebooks

    sagan_studentsagan_student
    danvm said: 

    And I don't get why you think it's ridiculous to copy good ideas.  Was Apple ridiculous when copied MS with the Pencil, keyboard + trackpads, FaceID and multitasking in tablet mode to iPads?  
    I don’t think it’s like that. Having now been with just an iPad Pro 12.9’ as my only computer for the past 5 years and an iPad owner since the iPad 2 came out I see it a bit differently. 

    I think it would be difficult to argue that Apple did not think about adding those features, they are just too forward and methodical in their thinking. I think it’s a combination of them not feeling like the technology was at a place where they could develop what they wanted how they wanted (we see this all the time with companies coming out too soon and under delivering). I also think that that’s Apple’s way of driving change in behaviour. If you really want to drive a new paradigm you need to change peoples behaviour. To do this one could choose to limit options. In this case, I think that if they offered everything then people are going to gravitate to what they know and nothing changes and opportunity to really drive change you stall out. I think Apple probably balanced these and other reasons for taking their time. 

    Regardless, it would difficult to argue that Apple did not consider the implications of leaving certain things out. I for one am glad they did as they forced me to reconsider how I interact with a computer. 

    Cheers. 
    Gabywatto_cobraDetnator

  • Apple service documents suggest new hardware release coming on Dec. 8

    sagan_studentsagan_student
    OctoMonkey said:
    Come on Apple TV!

    Just in time for Christmas too!  :-)
    That’s what I am hoping for too! 
    OctoMonkeybaluwatto_cobra

  • Apple's claims about M1 Mac speed 'shocking,' but 'extremely plausible'

    sagan_studentsagan_student
    cloudguy said:


    Finally, of course Apple's 5nm M1 is going to outperform Intel's 14nm Core i5. But when Intel's Core i5 is also 14nm in about 3 years (if they hire TSMC to make the chips) or 5 years (if they make the chips themselves)? Then we will see whose performance will wash over whose. Apple will have some advantages, namely the inherent efficiency of RISC vs ISA as well as Apple's strategy of maximizing performance from each core as opposed to Intel's - and everyone else's - strategy of maximizing cores. But Intel also has a performance attribute of their own: the densest core design in the industry. Meaning that a 10nm Intel design is the equivalent of a 7nm Apple one. So when Intel does get to a 5nm design, it will be the equivalent of a 3nm Apple one. So, we shall see ... 
    I think this is a huge leap you are making. Your entire argument is predicated on Intel making leaps in development like they did in the 90’s and at the same time requiring Apple’s development to slow down to Intel’s current development pace. I just don’t see that happening. 
    williamlondonmagman1979Samsonikkentropyshlee1169anonconformistcat52Rayz2016watto_cobra