nht

foregoneconclusion said:

SpamSandwich said:

Go get ‘em, Mr. President.

Why? What's to be gained? Tariffs have already proven to be a failure with China.

sumergo said:

lkrupp said:

Just another way of saying only stupid people buy Apple products. Casting spells but he could see right through them because a wizard too? My ass.

I also enjoyed the silly hubris of "Steve & I were both minor wizards", but you didn't expect Mr Gates to admit that he was always totally outclassed by Mr Jobs did you ;-)

cropr said:

macxpress said:

Meaning, you just replace the existing cable you own with a USB-C/Thunderbolt to whatever you need cable. If you need to carry around USB 3.0 (USB A) cables with your laptop then something isn't right anyways. You shouldn't need to be taking your office desk with you in your bag everywhere you go these days. Get with the times! Replacing a cable that will most likely be the future connector of products going forward will be a hell of a lot easier and cheaper than getting a bunch of more expensive dongles. For example, you can get a USB-C to HDMI cable for $20 or you can buy the Apple USB-C to HDMI dongle for $80. USB-C/Thunderbolt is the most versatile port Apple has ever put in a Mac, period! You can pretty much get everything you want through 1 port instead of needing to have 10 different ports scattered along the side of a laptop. Plus, you can plug it into either side versus before it was almost always on the left side only (including charging). 

I am working in 4 different working locations  (2 co-working locations, my official office and my home).  I have 1 external monitor that accepts USB-C,  but 100% of external monitors and projectors I need to connect to have a HDMI cable attached, so I don't need a cable or dongle if my portable has a HDMI port available.   You story simply does not fly in a real professional environment.   One of the reasons why I bought a Dell XPS 15 and not a Macbook Pro was exactly the HDMI port

If the maximum resolution of the monitor is supported by HDMI (as in 99% of the use cases), USB-C connectivity does not give any technical advantage, it only increases the price.  So in most environments people don't have a compelling reason to replace their existing monitors with a USB-C compatible one.

GeorgeBMac said:

"Laptops" live a mostly binary life:  

-- Half spend most of their lives travelling (room to room, office to home/office, or city to city)
-- Half spend most of their lives sitting on a desk

Without getting into what the split actually is, Apple has largely ignored the second category in its single minded rush to thin, light, minimalist designs.

Here, they have a chance to break out of that prison.

Will the new MacBook be upgradeable, have a great keyboard that people like to use, and ports that people need and use?  
Or, will it be just more of the same -- just a little bigger?

Frankly, if it's just a bigger version of the same, there is no chance that I would buy one.

Mike Wuerthele said:

nht said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

nht said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

nht said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

nht said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

nht said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

wallym said:

As a developer, I need both mac and windows support.  To openly campaign to remove Windows compat is to be irresponsible to the marketplace.  If users don't need Windows, that's fine.  Don't penalize me for your lack of needs.

I don't think you, nor FredFref read the article.

Why does a dissenting opinion mean they didn't read the article?  Maybe they read, disagreed with the basic premise "cross-platform software compatibility is now mostly irrelevant to the wider user base" and everything that follows.  Especially since you had a poll, found 35% that said, yes they needed windows and then proceeded to hand wave that away as AI readers aren't a representative sample.  Which begs the question of WHY RUN THE POLL IN THE FIRST PLACE?

The next assertion "for Apple's biggest user base, the need for Windows compatibility isn't the same as it is for the main readers of this site" is fabricated out of thin air and has zero supporting data.  Whether true or not it's based on nothing but speculation.

If the primary uses of the Macs are Pro and everyone else migrates to iPads then a significant fraction of Mac users (dare I say 35%) will want x86 compatibility.

But, nope...because they disagree they didn't read the article.

That's not why I said that, and you know it. And, there's a lot more to this quote of mine than what you clipped out. And, I didn't even say anything about the ludicrous assumption that this article is a "campaign" to remove Windows compatibility.

It wasn't handwaved away. What it is, is that 35% of the user base that reads AI doesn't need it, which is an overly conservative estimate of what the larger user base needs and does with their machines, and you know this as well, based on your own interactions with the rest of the AI readership. And, even if you translate it literally, it does mean that the majority doesn't care about Windows on the Mac.

Why run the poll and then disregard it?  So what if 35% isn't the majority?  It's still a large part of the user base.   

And how do you know that it is "an overly conservative estimate of what the larger user base needs"?  On what data is this assertion based on?  Why do you assume that the majority of your readers are pros?  Why did you not include in your survey to self identify if they were pros or just general users?  Never mind that these polls are generally horridly misleading anyway.

The article, and you, would like to make it seem like it's 0.35% of the user base to sell the idea that x86 compatibility is no longer needed.  Apple may have a good idea as to the number but you don't.  Moreover you ignored the entire enterprise market because it's inconvenient.  Does IBM and other major Mac deployments believe x86 compatibility is irrelevant?  I have no idea and neither do you.  It would have been fairly easy to reach out to IT folks highlighted in past articles and ask "hey, is x86 compatibility important to your Mac enterprise deployment?"

Nope.

But hey...35% is an overly conservative estimate of what the larger user base needs...

Regarding the bolded section, we are, and your own supposition of how that is going so far is wrong because what they care about so far is iOS development and general productivity. We'll see how it goes in total when we're done.

In regards to our audience, exactly who do you think AppleInsider is read by far, far more? College grads with advanced degrees, industry folk, designers and whatnot, or the "new Apple user" which is iOS centric, where the iPhone is a halo for the Mac and not the other way around?

And the demographics for Mac users are what?  Gee maybe folks who are "college grads with advanced degrees, industry folk, designers and whatnot"?  

Nah.

I will assert, based on personal experience, that there are very few enterprise iOS developers that don't care about MS project, DOORS and a bevy of windows/x86 corporate tools...still dependent on Excel with macros.  People send me a lot of stuff in Visio to boot.  Also, most of us aren't iOS developers but enterprise developers and the docker tool chain is a significant part of devops.

Yeah. we're not done. So far, we've spoken to IBM, Cisco, and Deloitte. There are about eight more on the docket. The point of this article, stands, though, that there is a line, where below it, the need for Windows is non-existent.

And you have failed to show where that line is.  Again, is the AI demographic you just stated significantly different than that of Mac users?  Or have most of the "new Apple users" that don't frequent AI already moved to the iPad or never bought a Mac in the first place and have a windows laptop somewhere?

I'm not really sure what you're asking, here.

We didn't set out to draw precisely where the line is, so there is no failure to show something that we didn't set out to show. The piece is more to remind folks that there is a line, even though that there is the assumption that Windows compatibility is everything to everybody. We were pretty clear in the end of the piece in regards to the Mac Pro maybe never shifting.

Who do you think reads AI? Do you not think it's primarily Apple devout for decades? William addresses this in the piece, somewhat, in regards to who reads AI. Who reads AI  should be apparent from the forums at least. Based on what we know, the "average" AI reader has been in the Apple ecosystem for well over a decade, is pretty heavily technologically savvy, has many Apple devices and has for ages, well before the iPhone 3gs, iPad, and iPhone 6 explosions in Apple user volume.

If we could tap into 1% of the "new" Apple customer, we'd be sitting on a gold mine. Most of the new Apple users bought an iPhone and have just that so aren't relevant to this particular conversation, or got an iPhone or iPad and said "hey, this Mac thing might be pretty great" rather than the other way around like it was a decade ago.

This is the point.  The article (and you) argues that the poll results are irrelevant (ie "overly conservative") because it does not represent the "larger user base needs".  I argue that the AI demographic more closely matches that of Mac users than the larger "new Apple users" and therefore not necessarily "overly conservative".

If around a third of the prospective user base needs a feature it sure as hell isn't a minor feature.  There isn't any "assumption that Windows compatibility is everything to everybody" but that a significant part of the Mac user base (say closer to 35% than 3.5%) wants that feature.

There is nothing an ARM based Mac does that an ARM based iPad Pro couldn't do with a couple further tweaks to iOS.

So why go through the disruption of a significant processor change and leave the Mac lineup half Intel and half ARM?

We didn't say they were irrelevant, and I'm not sure why you keep saying that. What they are is overly tilted in favor of virtualization and windows compatibility given what we know about who reads and interacts with AppleInsider. And, even given that, the majority still isn't doing it, and it isn't close.

At no point are we saying that there won't be disruption.

And as far as why do it? You just have to look to the last two major Mac processor shifts -- Vendors not delivering what they promise.