adonissmu

hmlongco said:

rogifan_new said:

Exactly. No one has yet presented a real world example where these new laptops couldn't meet their needs. They're just going off of specs and internet freakout. 

Here you go....

I’m a developer. That means I need to run Xcode, Mail, Messages, Calendar and Slack and Terminal windows and Remote Desktop. I run SourceTree and Photoshop and Word and Excel. I have a dozen Mission Control spaces in which I keep open many, many, many Safari windows and tabs.

Not to mention my occasional need to run custom Linux and Windows Server test environments in VMWare. VMs take memory. Lots of memory.

So what’s my problem? Lack of RAM. I’m forever running out of space on my 16GB machine. I reboot at least once every 3–4 days or face crashing and an unstable machine.

https://medium.com/@michaellong/apples-new-macbook-pro-is-the-most-amazing-notebook-i-m-not-going-to-buy-753fbcfb2738#.bgyyady1x

brucemc said:

kpom said:

wood1208 said:

Intel's Skylake processor is 2015 story. Kaby lake is 2016. Intel will release ICE lake 10nm end of 2017. If I was Apple, I would skip Kaby lake and pick up ICE lake in 2017 for Spring 2018 release of Macbook pro that Apple can design without any compromise.

I wouldn't be surprised if they skip Kaby Lake (but then we'll get complaints about how out of date the MacBook is next year). At the same time, the latest specs are out, and as predicted, the Skylake chips aren't significantly faster than the Broadwell chips they replaced. That's also the case with Kaby Lake vs Skylake (almost all the gains are from clock speed increases, except for h.265 encoding).

They got the basics right with the new MacBooks. If the price were $200 less about 80% of the complaints on web forums would go away.

Maybe not 80% of the complaints  - forum people have to complain about something - but fully agree that the effective price bump across the board (for which currency exchange makes that much worse for many of Apple's big markets) was the biggest issue.  Last year (or was it 2014?), you could buy the entry level 13" MBP for $1300 USD, and now that is $1500.  The entry level with the Touch Bar is $1800 USD.  For many people, especially in FX challenged currencies, the decision to purchase has become a lot more difficult.

In the end, Apple has been in this business for a long time, they are the only ones with the real data on who buys what, at which prices, for what reasons.  They have been successful in their approach for the last two decades.  At the macro level, they should be afforded the benefit of the doubt.  They made clear these machines were for "pro" users, so I certainly hope that 2017 brings in options for mainstream that have more size than the ultra-super-slim-portable 12" MacBook, or the aging-almost-no-updates-no-retina Air.  

And if Apple does determine that sales were below expectation, they always have the ability to lower prices later in 2017.

ericthehalfbee said:

crowley said:

rogifan_new said:

crowley said:

rogifan_new said:

ericthehalfbee said:

So for all the people whining about not having 32GB, I have a question.

What are you using currently? Do you have an older model MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM?

I'm curious to know the answer to this is well. Did the previous rMBP have a 32GB BTO option?

They've maxed out at 16GB for quite a while.

Early 2011 according to wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro#Technical_specifications_2

Ok so why is this shocking to anyone? Was there even a rumor that they would offer 32GB models?

People aren't shocked, they're disappointed.  Other notebooks from other manufacturers exist that have 32GB RAM.

And Android phones have 4-6GBof RAM. Does it mean Apple should put that much RAM in their iPhones too?