What will disappear next?

capathy21 · Jul 5, 2014

Thermonuclear said:
"Just buy an Apple adapter", so they said. "There's one for every kind of port which has been deleted."

Because many Mac models do not have native HDMI output but do have native mDP/Thunderbolt output, one of the common video adapters needed is a mDP-to-HDMI (or Thunderbolt-to-HDMI).

First, Apple makes no such adapter.

Second, Apple's only recommendations for this adapter are made only by Belkin. There are only two, and they are identical except for cable length.

Third, the cheaper of the two costs US$45 -- not very cheap at all.

Forth and worst, the reviews of these adapters say that they are basically busted junk and a waste of money.

Read for yourself: http://store.apple.com/us/product/HA825ZM/A/belkin-mini-displayport-to-hdmi-cable-2-m65-ft

This is all extra bad because the number of monitors with HDMI input (like hundreds of millions of consumer TVs) is many orders of magnitude greater than those taking DP/Thunderbolt input.

Nearly as bad are the reviews for Apple's only mDP-to-dual link DVI adapter for use with anything other than an Apple monitor. And this adapter is even more expensive at US$100.

Also, how many free mDP/Thunderbolt ports does your Mac have left after you plug in all the stuff? Remember that there is no such thing as a cheap Thunderbolt hub or switch, so no help there. And each of those adapters must appear either at a the end of a chain or just by itself.

Today we have Thunderbolt, Thunderbolt 2, and stories of future Thunderbolts with different speeds, amperages, protocols, etc. But how many different Thunderbolt displays are there? Just one so far, after three years. Who knows how many different adapters will ultimately be needed?

If you know you need HDMI then buy a Mac that has an HDMI port. Problem solved.

GGJstudios · Jul 5, 2014

Thermonuclear said:
Because many Mac models do not have native HDMI output but do have native mDP/Thunderbolt output, one of the common video adapters needed is a mDP-to-HDMI (or Thunderbolt-to-HDMI).

First, Apple makes no such adapter.

Apple isn't required to make any specific adapters, especially since there are 3rd party adapters available. Apple doesn't even make all the components that go into their computers.

Thermonuclear said:
Second, Apple's only recommendations for this adapter are made only by Belkin.

You're not limited to only those adapters that are recommended by Apple. There are plenty more out there, made by many manufacturers, that will work just fine.

Thermonuclear said:
Third, the cheaper of the two costs US$45 -- not very cheap at all.

Shop around. There are others available at better prices, some less than $7.

Thermonuclear said:
Forth and worst, the reviews of these adapters say that they are basically busted junk and a waste of money.

Again, you're not limited to Belkin adapters, any more than you're limited to buying Apple computers. There are plenty of alternatives out there for the consumer who is willing to do a bit of homework to find out what products meet their specific needs. Apple isn't required or expected to spoon-feed complete solutions for every consumer's unique needs.

Thermonuclear said:
Nearly as bad are the reviews for Apple's only mDP-to-dual link DVI adapter for use with anything other than an Apple monitor. And this adapter is even more expensive at US$100.

The same applies here. You're not limited to Apple products or Apple-recommended products.

Thermonuclear said:
Also, how many free mDP/Thunderbolt ports does your Mac have left after you plug in all the stuff? Remember that there is no such thing as a cheap Thunderbolt hub or switch, so no help there. And each of those adapters must appear either at a the end of a chain or just by itself.

How many displays do you plan to run on your Mac? You can easily accommodate multiple Thunderbolt devices, with the display at the end of the daisy chain. The number of displays supported is in no way limited by the ports/adapters required.

Thermonuclear said:
Today we have Thunderbolt, Thunderbolt 2, and stories of future Thunderbolts with different speeds, amperages, protocols, etc. But how many different Thunderbolt displays are there? Just one so far, after three years. Who knows how many different adapters will ultimately be needed?

Again, you're not going to run 4 or more displays on your Mac. There are plenty of ports to run all the displays your Mac will support.

You truly are grasping at straws to support an argument that didn't hold water from the beginning. You're now trying to create scenarios that have little or nothing to do with the real-world use habits of the vast majority of Mac users.

The bottom line is this: The folks at Apple knows what they're doing. So far, the product decisions they've made have been met with overwhelming acceptance from millions upon millions of users, enough to build Apple's outstanding success to date, and there appears to be no end in sight.

It is obvious that Apple isn't going to maintain a computer model line that includes outdated, less popular or unnecessary features that may appeal to a very small minority of consumers. For those consumers that must have such features, there are plenty of alternatives available, either by using adapters or external devices, or by buying a different brand of computer that better meets their needs.

We get it. You don't like Apple, or you don't like their choices in product design. Get over it! They're not going to change anything because you choose to whine in a forum that Apple doesn't even read. This may come as a shock to some who haven't been around enough to figure out how the world works: you can't always get everything you want, nor should you expect to. The world (thankfully) doesn't revolve around you or your opinions.

WilliamG · Jul 5, 2014

crsh1976 said:
Look at the features that don't get used much, see that alternatives are available and mainstream enough, etc.

To me, Thunderbolt makes little sense on consumer hardware because of the typical pro uses and pricing linked to it, but who knows. Ethernet should have probably gone the dodo way already if it weren't for wifi's reliability issues in some environments.

I use Thunderbolt daily on both my iMac and Mac mini.

melendezest · Jul 10, 2014

leman said:
I sure hope that complainers with horrible argumentation will disappear next

But in all seriousness:

You totally lost me here... of course the new product is more capable. Its faster, lighter, has better screen, faster WiFi, faster storage, faster everything. You can connect an external RAID box filled with SSDs and still saturate the SSD speed, for all what is worth. You call that less capable?

Wrong! You can do everything and then more. Want to rip a CD? Buy a drive. Need ethernet? Get an adapter. There is absolutely no reason for Apple to put all that junk into the machine so that all of us should suffer because you still need to use legacy media for some reason.

In your logic, the 2011 model sucks because it does not have a floppy drive, a serial port or a build-in Zip drive reader.

----------

I have with great interest read your exchange with scaredpoet. In any case, point does not make any sense. If your chain of arguments show anything, is that computers became more affordable, that is all. The Mac Pro is a specialised machine and it is priced not far off other machines of similar capabilities. Comparing it to a $329 Dell is like comparing a racing car to a cheap family vehicle on the basis that 'there was a time where all cars were expensive'. There was also time, where a pair of boots would cost you half of your years wage now you can buy better ones for pocket money. Still does not stop some people from being really expensive boots, for whatever reasons.

LOL. The new machine is more capable because I have to buy more stuff to do what I could in 2011 (and still need to do now). It was Apple who put it in before, so I guess it was junk then too. What a boneheaded argument.

No, it isn't faster at anything (I can put two OWC SSDs in RAID 0 internally; good luck keeping up). It is more flexible too, should I want speed and capacity. Oh, hey, I can add MORE memory too.

Yes, it's a pound lighter. Whoopteedo. Even my 9 year old girl loves to carry my 6.6lb 17 all over the house, both floors, ALL DAY. You can take that lighter argument to the girly Pride parade Apple's so interested in. No sissies/wusses here.

Yes, it has a marginally sharper screen. I'll take more real-estate, thanks.

Faster WiFi? Really? For what I do, I can't tell between wired Ethernet and WiFi as it is. I doubt the new one will blow my hair back.

Please.

----------

joe-h2o said:
No, you really weren't, and if you were, you worded it very poorly.

What you're trying to do is redefine your argument because you've been called out on it being total nonsense, and failing.

Tell me again how your 17" MBP (quote) "runs rings around anything (emphasis yours) Apple puts out now".

I'll wait.

Nope. Not redefining a damn thing. The only thing that's failing here is people's reason and logic. But that's America today.

Tell me what a new MBP can do that mine can't. I'll wait.

I already listed what I can do with mine that the new, so-called "better" MBP can't in another post.

melendezest · Jul 10, 2014

capathy21 said:
It is pretty much impossible to address your point of view without bringing up the Apple's business decisions (since that is the entire point), but I will try. When I recently purchased my Macbook(retina 13 inch MBP), I could have gone with the classic, mid 2012 non retina Macbook Pro since it had all of these old features and ports. The question was, why would I want to?

1)It's over a pound heavier which yes, it makes a lot of difference when carrying it from class to class, to and from work, etc.

2)It is dated technology. The processor is already two years old. It has a standard, slow 5400 hard drive, older graphics etc. Yes the drive can be updated to SSD and ram expanded but for the cost of those upgrades, I could have had the retina MBP.

3)Technology has evolved. It's not just about "for the sake of coolness or whatever," these archaic features just aren't needed anymore for most users. Anything that you claim is a bonus on your old machine can be done on my 2013 retina MBP with an adapter. I haven't lost any functionality from what your machine could do, I have gained so much more.

1) Should I ever need to plug into an ethernet connection, a 5 dollar adapter from Amazon will allow me to do that. (Before you tell me how I shouldn't have to buy an adapter to accomplish what your machine accomplishes) I would much rather have one less port on the side of my machine which means one less internal components which means lighter, easier to transport, and overall less than can go wrong later.

2) Should I need to use an optical drive(haven't in over 5 years)-I can get an external for 20 bucks for the one time I actually need it. (again much prefer the less bulk and lightness of a machine with no drive on the side of it. It's unnecessary weight and more moving parts that could break later.

3) VGA-Same solution as #1.

I could keep going but you get the point. All of these archaic features that have been removed are no longer needed by 9 out of 10 users. What we have gained is much more important to most everyone.

1) Battery life-Removing things like an optical drive allowed Apple to change the design of the battery, allowing for much better battery life. 9-15 hours off charge for a laptop is MUCH more important than having an optical drive that may get used once a year.

2) Speed-all of the new machines are significantly faster than their predecessors. Once you experience everyday tasks on a newer Mac with PCIe based storage etc, anything else feels like stepping back in time.

Long story short, anything that you think you have to have such as an optical drive, ethernet port etc can all be done on the newer macs with a simple adapter or usb cable. You also gain a much faster machine with much better battery life and a display that blows the older displays out of the water.

So in my opinion an the opinion of the majority of consumers, the newer machine are MORE capable than the old ones. There is a more efficient way of doing 90 percent of the tasks that these old features were designed for. Instead of discs, use thumb drives or sd cards, instead of ethernet, get on wifi. Are there rare times when you may need these things? Sure. Get an adapter. I would much rather have an adapter in my bag than lug around a 5 or 6 pound laptop with a ton of ports on the side that are not necessary most of the time.

Again I use the comparison of the classic non retina mbp which is still available today, and the retina mbp or the Macbook Air. People are choosing the lighter, faster, and more efficient machines. Yes less ports is more efficient for most users. I find the weight difference possibly the most important improvement. College students, young professionals and artists are the bulk of Apple's consumers. They don't want to lug an archaic machine around. They want light, thin, fast, and yes aesthetically pleasing machines. That is the future of computers and technology in general.

Again, people keep saying that the new machine is faster. BS.

Yes, it is, if the old is kept stock. But that's the point, isn't it? My MBP is a computer. The new "MBP"s are appliances. I can connect to anything, with less dongles. I can expand to any legacy or future connection. I can upgrade, add RAM, swap things as needed like optical, raid, dual SSDs, fusion drives, HUGE capacity.

I am simply not willing to trade all that for a marginally thinner, lighter machine with a gazillion dongles, (although the Air has admittedly killer battery life) that I'd have to "throw away" after a while.

I understand why Apple did it but I feel they should have sold both side-by-side indefinitely, even in the cMBP was BTO only for those that don't want a desktop iPad. To me the Air and current MBPs are ultra books, where the 17 was and still is a portable (and even more flexible) iMac.

So, I ask the TS's question again:

What will Apple sacrifice in capability and functionality at the altar of "thinness" and sexyness" on the next hardware revision?

capathy21 · Jul 10, 2014

melendezest said:
Again, people keep saying that the new machine is faster. BS.

Yes, it is, if the old is kept stock. But that's the point, isn't it? My MBP is a computer. The new "MBP"s are appliances. I can connect to anything, with less dongles. I can expand to any legacy or future connection. I can upgrade, add RAM, swap things as needed like optical, raid, dual SSDs, fusion drives, HUGE capacity.

I am simply not willing to trade all that for a marginally thinner, lighter machine with a gazillion dongles, (although the Air has admittedly killer battery life) that I'd have to "throw away" after a while.

I understand why Apple did it but I feel they should have sold both side-by-side indefinitely, even in the cMBP was BTO only for those that don't want a desktop iPad. To me the Air and current MBPs are ultra books, where the 17 was and still is a portable (and even more flexible) iMac.

So, I ask the TS's question again:

What will Apple sacrifice in capability and functionality at the altar of "thinness" and sexyness" on the next hardware revision?

The new machines are most definitely faster. PCIe storage is the difference and yes it is faster than SATA SSD. Other than the RAM and HD, the classic machine still keeps the same internals it was made with. You can't upgrade the processor.

There is no need for them to sell these side by side when the demand for the classic machine isn't there. Sure hardcore enthusiasts on Mac Rumors love their 17 inch MBP's but most consumers want thinner and lighter.

Why would you have to throw away the Air? If you get it with the specifications that fit your needs, it's non upgradable parts would be relevant just as long as a classic machines non upgradable parts would.

Why would you need a gazillion dongles? Do you really only connect to the internet via ethernet, or use an optical drive every day? Everyone I know who has an Air or a retina pro doesn't even own a single adapter for anything and they are able to do everything from college papers to running a business. I mentioned adapters several times as an option for the rare occasion that users need older features.

You look at it as if they've removed all of these vital features when in fact, they've understood that there is a better, more efficient way of doing things.

It's like letting go of cassette's for CD's and CD's for Mp3's. Things change, features change, most users do not need any of the things you think are advantageous about the classic machines.

In a few years, all new laptops will be without optical drives, ethernet ports, firewire etc. It's not Apple being evil, it's called being ahead of the curve. Many other computer manufacturers are doing the same thing by removing older features that have become unnecessary for most.

capathy21 · Jul 10, 2014

melendezest said:
ou can take that lighter argument to the girly Pride parade Apple's so interested in. No sissies/wusses here.

This comment here tells me all I need to know about your mindset.

Thermonuclear · Jul 11, 2014

scaredpoet said:
So, again, YOU are monitoring the line, not your elderly parent. So in the case of a cell phone, the situation would be the same.

I am not monitoring the line (well, I am now), the program I wrote was monitoring the line.

There is a separate phone in a different part of the house on the same landline circuit and adapted for special needs which can be used by my parent for conversion.

The setup I had with the Apple USB modem worked well until Apple decided to pull modem support just for the hell of it. Attempting to connect the modem in any recent version of OS/X gets an immediate rejection dialog.

Again, I suggest that people like you and Apple should not denigrate the needs of others just because the majority of people may not have such needs.

And I really, really don't give a screw about any phone company. Misbehavior on their part will prove to be very expensive for them at the next tariffs hearing in front of the Public Utilities Commission. Their lawyers know this and that's why they rightly advise them to always provide reasonable accommodation.

Also, for those who answer any of my posts with ad hominem attacks instead of rational response, don't bother in this or any other thread. Thanks be to the ignore list.

melendezest · Jul 11, 2014

capathy21 said:
The new machines are most definitely faster. PCIe storage is the difference and yes it is faster than SATA SSD. Other than the RAM and HD, the classic machine still keeps the same internals it was made with. You can't upgrade the processor.

There is no need for them to sell these side by side when the demand for the classic machine isn't there. Sure hardcore enthusiasts on Mac Rumors love their 17 inch MBP's but most consumers want thinner and lighter.

Why would you have to throw away the Air? If you get it with the specifications that fit your needs, it's non upgradable parts would be relevant just as long as a classic machines non upgradable parts would.

Why would you need a gazillion dongles? Do you really only connect to the internet via ethernet, or use an optical drive every day? Everyone I know who has an Air or a retina pro doesn't even own a single adapter for anything and they are able to do everything from college papers to running a business. I mentioned adapters several times as an option for the rare occasion that users need older features.

You look at it as if they've removed all of these vital features when in fact, they've understood that there is a better, more efficient way of doing things.

It's like letting go of cassette's for CD's and CD's for Mp3's. Things change, features change, most users do not need any of the things you think are advantageous about the classic machines.

In a few years, all new laptops will be without optical drives, ethernet ports, firewire etc. It's not Apple being evil, it's called being ahead of the curve. Many other computer manufacturers are doing the same thing by removing older features that have become unnecessary for most.

Your pulling the "it's faster" argument out of nowhere. Until someone A/B's an SSD'd RAID 0 2011 machine (which I can do with mine) against a RMBP, this is pure conjecture.

The RAM, HD, Optical availability (which is what enables RAIDing), built in connectivity to STILL IN USE peripherals, an expansion slot that allows connectivity to ANYTHING ELSE, old or new, means the new machines are NOTHING like the old. This is nowhere near like the cassette/CD migration. This is more like moving from gas to electric vehicles. Forward-thinking, capable (for many), efficient. But NOT for everyone. No more light-trucks, just heavy-duty ones and (electric) cars.

They are thinner and lighter. That's it. I lose the ability to do things with the new, not to mention flexibility in HOW I can do those things. Period.

Again, regardless of why Apple did it, the fact is I can do more with the old machine. I simply cannot replace my 17 with a retina. It doesn't have the HARDWARE I need for me to be able to do what I need to do. I need to hunt old MBPs down, 'cause I ain't switching to Windows if I can help it.

The fact that most people don't need something doesn't make it better. I used an iPad 1 exclusively in college, and in the TelCo I work for people are using iPads to do everything they need to do (all I'd need for what I get paid for is a VPN and an SSH Client). This doesn't mean that real (portable) computers are obsolete.

That is why (I feel) there should be categories of devices, which Apple clearly disagrees. Apple's goal, based on their trend, is to converge categories: iPad, and Air. The MBP will die as soon as they can retina the Airs, I'll wager. Once the iPad is powerful enough, so will the Airs. The iPad is the culmination of Steve Jobs's vision: A "computer for the rest of us". This doesn't Apply to their desktops, mind you, I'm talking about portable devices.

----------

capathy21 said:
This comment here tells me all I need to know about your mindset.

And yours does the same for me.

scaredpoet · Jul 11, 2014

Thermonuclear said:
Again, I suggest that people like you and Apple should not denigrate the needs of others just because the majority of people may not have such needs.

Neither I nor Apple are denigrating anyone's needs; please don't be so dramatic. I am merely stating the reality of the situation: landlines are on such a decline that even the phone companies don't want to maintain them anymore. And they purport that an array of newer, superior and even free technologies exist that serve the need you specify, in an arguably better and easier fashion.

Which I should also note: the need to screen and restrict calls on modern hardware and services actually isn't very specialized or limited in scope... it just happens to be that the very convoluted way you've chosen to serve that need is extremely niche, and not supported in the face of the many other ways that can be implemented using current tech.

And I really, really don't give a screw about any phone company.

They provide your dial tone, so you probably should give a screw. Or at least, not blame Apple or me personally for what's reality, and what's coming. Don't shoot the messenger, and all that.

Misbehavior on their part will prove to be very expensive for them at the next tariffs hearing in front of the Public Utilities Commission.

I'm sure you're great at raising hell there. But you should probably also talk to the FCC if you want to keep your copper, as trials are already moving forward.

scaredpoet · Jul 11, 2014

melendezest said:
Your pulling the "it's faster" argument out of nowhere. Until someone A/B's an SSD'd RAID 0 2011 machine (which I can do with mine) against a RMBP, this is pure conjecture.

Well, we can end the conjecture and put the argument to rest pretty easily. All you need to do is run this app and post the results.

If you don't want to install an app, you can do something similar from the command line.

Then, anyone with an rMBP can post their results and compare. then we can settle to everyone's satisfaction whether an SSD will beat your super-fast RAID 0.

By the way: Reallly? A RAID 0 spinning-rust array in a laptop? You have backups of your data, right? Just making sure...

Also, I will give you one thing: If you stick two SSDs in your 17 inch MacBook Pro and configure them in a RAID 0, you'll likely smoke anything on the planet in terms of disk I/O. It would definitely alleviate most data integrity/reliability concerns, too.

They are thinner and lighter. That's it. I lose the ability to do things with the new, not to mention flexibility in HOW I can do those things. Period.

So, I'm really wondering what this super-special thing is that you're doing that can't be done on anything newer. I've outfitted whole labs with new Macs that are still interfacing with old equipment, and also seen 2007-2009 era Mac portable hardware get upgraded in a similar fashion with current models. The legacy connectors most certainly exist. So I'm wondering what it is exactly that you're saying simply cannot be done if you upgrade to anything newer.

Again, regardless of why Apple did it, the fact is I can do more with the old machine. I simply cannot replace my 17 with a retina. It doesn't have the HARDWARE I need for me to be able to do what I need to do. I need to hunt old MBPs down, 'cause I ain't switching to Windows if I can help it.

See, this is another case of someone painting themselves int a corner without even bothering to look ahead. Eventually - maybe a few years from now, maybe a little sooner than that - that 17 inch Macbook Pro will break in some way and the parts will not exist to repair it. Then what happens?

I'm not saying you MUST upgrade to a new Mac. Far from it. But to be in a place where a device that's long past any warranty stage and whose support days are numbered, with NO migrating onto ANY other platform... that's gotta be some pretty rare and interesting thing you're doing, particularly when most of the rest of the world is already moving on.

The fact that most people don't need something doesn't make it better. I used an iPad 1 exclusively in college, and in the TelCo I work for people are using iPads to do everything they need to do (all I'd need for what I get paid for is a VPN and an SSH Client). This doesn't mean that real (portable) computers are obsolete.

I agree. Fortunately, real, portable computers continue to be sold, and probably will for many years yet.

That is why (I feel) there should be categories of devices, which Apple clearly disagrees. Apple's goal, based on their trend, is to converge categories: iPad, and Air. The MBP will die as soon as they can retina the Airs, I'll wager.

Possibly. Or the MBP could become the Air, if they can manage somehow to make it thin enough. I disagree that Apple abhors categories though. They clearly have them. They simply don't like to make a zillion categories that might cause confusion. They've been down that road before, back in the 1990s, and nearly perished because of it.

melendezest · Jul 11, 2014

scaredpoet said:
Well, we can end the conjecture and put the argument to rest pretty easily. All you need to do is run this app and post the results.

If you don't want to install an app, you can do something similar from the command line.

Then, anyone with an rMBP can post their results and compare. then we can settle to everyone's satisfaction whether an SSD will beat your super-fast RAID 0.

By the way: Reallly? A RAID 0 spinning-rust array in a laptop? You have backups of your data, right? Just making sure...

Also, I will give you one thing: If you stick two SSDs in your 17 inch MacBook Pro and configure them in a RAID 0, you'll likely smoke anything on the planet in terms of disk I/O. It would definitely alleviate most data integrity/reliability concerns, too.

So, I'm really wondering what this super-special thing is that you're doing that can't be done on anything newer. I've outfitted whole labs with new Macs that are still interfacing with old equipment, and also seen 2007-2009 era Mac portable hardware get upgraded in a similar fashion with current models. The legacy connectors most certainly exist. So I'm wondering what it is exactly that you're saying simply cannot be done if you upgrade to anything newer.

See, this is another case of someone painting themselves int a corner without even bothering to look ahead. Eventually - maybe a few years from now, maybe a little sooner than that - that 17 inch Macbook Pro will break in some way and the parts will not exist to repair it. Then what happens?

I'm not saying you MUST upgrade to a new Mac. Far from it. But to be in a place where a device that's long past any warranty stage and whose support days are numbered, with NO migrating onto ANY other platform... that's gotta be some pretty rare and interesting thing you're doing, particularly when most of the rest of the world is already moving on.

I agree. Fortunately, real, portable computers continue to be sold, and probably will for many years yet.

Possibly. Or the MBP could become the Air, if they can manage somehow to make it thin enough. I disagree that Apple abhors categories though. They clearly have them. They simply don't like to make a zillion categories that might cause confusion. They've been down that road before, back in the 1990s, and nearly perished because of it.

Ok, for starters, Apple's near-death in the 90's was not due to their hardware diversity. Introducing one more line (or category) of device across their portfolio is not going to cripple Apple today, either. And I should clarify this: Apple should play in more categories. But I really don't feel like debating their business decisions. As I've mentioned in every post I've had on this thread, I'm purely comparing (older) hardware with (newer) hardware.

Now to your points:

I never said my RAID 0 spinners are faster than an SSD. What I did say is that I can RAID 0 2 SSDs on my 17. As you mention, good luck keeping up with that. But, I can also put in a just-as-fast-if-not-faster SSD in and still have a choice of keeping the optical (should I want to) or have a secondary high capacity drive. My RAID 0 spinners give me more than adequate speed (for what I need), and HUGE capacity, which is what I really use. Yes, I have several external drives with ESATA, FW, and USB2/3 connections that I use for backups, Time Machines and the like.

With the new machines you're stuck with what you got. Yes, many could get by with less internal storage , less built in connectivity, less (read: NO) expansion, less flexibility. But that is the point, to me, less is NOT better.

I'm not doing anything "super-special" as you put it. As always, it's about the "how" and not the "what", particularly when talking about Apple products. TB has pretty much any adapter out there (haven't seen eSATA, though), so you can mitigate most of my concerns. But the point is that I didn't have to mitigate anything with prior hardware. The last 17 needed NOTHING added to it (well, USB3 would've been nice, but the Expresscard slot takes care of that). Not even retina. The screen on the 17 is spectacular as is.

So, if Apple released a new 17 RMBP or Air, I'd still be stuck, simply because I cannot mitigate one crucial piece (right now, at least): internal storage. I need and use as much as I can get (3TB right now). I use, but do NOT trust the cloud. I am able to grab my 17 and go anywhere and do anything, at any time, and have all my data, connect to anything, no external drives, no dongles, no nothing. I also sync my 17 and my 2011 27in iMac; they are clones of each other. Try that with a RMBP.

This was not me painting myself into a corner, this was Apple jumping the gun and abandoning a standard (HD form factor in this case) for proprietary hardware. See the reasons why many were disappointed with the new Mac Pro. Same thing. Great, sexy machine for many, but for a lot of users it is a non-starter. With no mitigation.

I actually designed an all Apple business IT infrastructure for an university project, right before they killed the xserve. I had to start over that project. My team had a whole "that's what you get" attitude too, since I was the only Apple evangelist in the class. After that, and seeing what they did to the MP, and what they're doing to the MB "Pros", I would not rely on Apple anything, lest the rug be pulled from under you.

Apple removing "Computer" from their name was EXACTLY right. Their intentions we're there for all to see. Silly us.

Thermonuclear · Jul 11, 2014

melendezest said:
I actually designed an all Apple business IT infrastructure for an university project, right before they killed the xserve. I had to start over that project. My team had a whole "that's what you get" attitude too, since I was the only Apple evangelist in the class. After that, and seeing what they did to the MP, and what they're doing to the MB "Pros", I would not rely on Apple anything, lest the rug be pulled from under you.

The same could be said of Apple software as well as hardware.

Apple's latter implementations of Mail, Calendar, and the Contacts applications left many users with artificially limited or busted programs where it would have been simple for Apple to provide backwards compatibility or application upgrades. But if Apple did this, then there wouldn't be as much motivation for the affected users to buy shiny new Apple hardware.

And when Apple developed OS/X 10.8 Mountain Lion, the beta version just before the first release had working 32 bit EFI boot support as required for many 64 bit Macs already sold and in use. Example: the first several models of the Mac Pro. But Apple ripped out that boot support for no reason other than to again motivate costly hardware upgrades.

Apple's AirDrop and some other wireless features are restricted to models which have only the latest 802.11 WiFi or Bluetooth, although earlier hardware would have worked just fine with less restrictive software. Again, a pulling of the rug to get more sales.

Are Apple's computers expensive? They could be even more expensive than you might think because you might have to dump your Mac in a landfill every three years just to keep the software functionality it had the day you bought it.

scaredpoet · Jul 11, 2014

melendezest said:
I actually designed an all Apple business IT infrastructure for an university project, right before they killed the xserve. I had to start over that project. My team had a whole "that's what you get" attitude too, since I was the only Apple evangelist in the class. After that, and seeing what they did to the MP, and what they're doing to the MB "Pros", I would not rely on Apple anything, lest the rug be pulled from under you.

Then don't! Switch platforms. Oh right, you don't want to. So, yes, you've painted yourself into a corner. Absolutely, 100%. And yes, that IS what you get.

scaredpoet · Jul 11, 2014

Thermonuclear said:
Apple's latter implementations of Mail, Calendar, and the Contacts applications left many users with artificially limited or busted programs where it would have been simple for Apple to provide backwards compatibility or application upgrades.

Can you provide specific examples of this? I'm using Mail, Contacts AND calendars for my work proposes now, and they connect to a variety of IMAP, MS Exchange, CalDAV/CardDAV and ldap interfaces without being "busted."

And when Apple developed OS/X 10.8 Mountain Lion, the beta version just before the first release had working 32 bit EFI boot support as required for many 64 bit Macs already sold and in use. Example: the first several models of the Mac Pro. But Apple ripped out that boot support for no reason other than to again motivate costly hardware upgrades.

It's certainly common for people to be upset when support is pulled post-beta for older product lines, and the easy thing to do would be to blame economics. But the truth is, we won't know for sure the reason why it happened (and of course, it's doubtful naysayers like yourself would accept ANY other reason as valid). I have to wonder if those same users would have been bitterly complaining that Mountain Lion runs too slow on the same hardware, if it had been permitted.

Apple's AirDrop and some other wireless features are restricted to models which have only the latest 802.11 WiFi or Bluetooth, although earlier hardware would have worked just fine with less restrictive software. Again, a pulling of the rug to get more sales.

Again, the cynic's view. This one though is much more clear-cut: Airdrop makes use of a standard called WiFi direct in order to make the peer to peer network that Airdrop requires to work. If you don't have the hardware that adhere to the standard, you don't have Airdrop. This isn't something that you can just program up in software for non compliant and expect to work well, if at all. Nor is it Apple solely that is changing and upgrading the Wifi standard over time.

Are Apple's computers expensive? They could be even more expensive than you might think because you might have to dump your Mac in a landfill every three years just to keep the software functionality it had the day you bought it.

Actually, that's not correct at all. The functionality does stay the same; you just don't get new features after a while. It's not as if Apple gives you Airdrop when you buy the device, and then takes it away from you arbitrarily. Nor do they forcibly format your hard drive if you don't or can't upgrade the latest new OS the day it comes out. In fact, updates are still being rolled out for users of Lion even today.

capathy21 · Jul 11, 2014

melendezest said:
Ok, for starters, Apple's near-death in the 90's was not due to their hardware diversity. Introducing one more line (or category) of device across their portfolio is not going to cripple Apple today, either. And I should clarify this: Apple should play in more categories. But I really don't feel like debating their business decisions. As I've mentioned in every post I've had on this thread, I'm purely comparing (older) hardware with (newer) hardware.

Now to your points:

I never said my RAID 0 spinners are faster than an SSD. What I did say is that I can RAID 0 2 SSDs on my 17. As you mention, good luck keeping up with that. But, I can also put in a just-as-fast-if-not-faster SSD in and still have a choice of keeping the optical (should I want to) or have a secondary high capacity drive. My RAID 0 spinners give me more than adequate speed (for what I need), and HUGE capacity, which is what I really use. Yes, I have several external drives with ESATA, FW, and USB2/3 connections that I use for backups, Time Machines and the like.

With the new machines you're stuck with what you got. Yes, many could get by with less internal storage , less built in connectivity, less (read: NO) expansion, less flexibility. But that is the point, to me, less is NOT better.

I'm not doing anything "super-special" as you put it. As always, it's about the "how" and not the "what", particularly when talking about Apple products. TB has pretty much any adapter out there (haven't seen eSATA, though), so you can mitigate most of my concerns. But the point is that I didn't have to mitigate anything with prior hardware. The last 17 needed NOTHING added to it (well, USB3 would've been nice, but the Expresscard slot takes care of that). Not even retina. The screen on the 17 is spectacular as is.

So, if Apple released a new 17 RMBP or Air, I'd still be stuck, simply because I cannot mitigate one crucial piece (right now, at least): internal storage. I need and use as much as I can get (3TB right now). I use, but do NOT trust the cloud. I am able to grab my 17 and go anywhere and do anything, at any time, and have all my data, connect to anything, no external drives, no dongles, no nothing. I also sync my 17 and my 2011 27in iMac; they are clones of each other. Try that with a RMBP.

This was not me painting myself into a corner, this was Apple jumping the gun and abandoning a standard (HD form factor in this case) for proprietary hardware. See the reasons why many were disappointed with the new Mac Pro. Same thing. Great, sexy machine for many, but for a lot of users it is a non-starter. With no mitigation.

I actually designed an all Apple business IT infrastructure for an university project, right before they killed the xserve. I had to start over that project. My team had a whole "that's what you get" attitude too, since I was the only Apple evangelist in the class. After that, and seeing what they did to the MP, and what they're doing to the MB "Pros", I would not rely on Apple anything, lest the rug be pulled from under you.

Apple removing "Computer" from their name was EXACTLY right. Their intentions we're there for all to see. Silly us.

Not sure what to tell you old schoolers, I guess you are screwed. The future is cloud storage, completely wireless connections between computers, devices and everything else. ports are going away because they aren't needed. It would be a good time to realize this. When Job's introduced the Air 6 years ago he warned you that it was the future of notebook computers. You've had 6 years to start your transition.

It has been Apple's mission for a long time. This is nothing new. They make no secret that they don't want you expanding or modifying their products. Job's whole mission was to make computers/devices that just worked, no maintenance, no headaches, no problems.

melendezest · Jul 11, 2014

capathy21 said:
Not sure what to tell you old schoolers, I guess you are screwed. The future is cloud storage, completely wireless connections between computers, devices and everything else. ports are going away because they aren't needed. It would be a good time to realize this. When Job's introduced the Air 6 years ago he warned you that it was the future of notebook computers. You've had 6 years to start your transition.

It has been Apple's mission for a long time. This is nothing new. They make no secret that they don't want you expanding or modifying their products. Job's whole mission was to make computers/devices that just worked, no maintenance, no headaches, no problems.

Yes, we old-schoolers are screwed, thanks to Apple's obsession with thinness and coolness.

Yes, the future is cloud storage, completely wireless connections between computers, devices and everything else. But that's the issue. That is the future. Today, we still use the "old-school stuff", yet Apple discontinued a machine I can use today. Ports aren't going away because they aren't needed. They're going away because it saves Apple money by not having them. Because it conflicts with some BS sense of aesthetics that says a hole on the side of the machine (that actually connects to something useful) is "clutter". Please. Spare me.

When Jobs introduced the Air, he didn't kill the other models (including the 17, mind you). That happened after he died. I can't transition to something that doesn't exist. The cloud is not ready. Wireless, although plentiful, is not ubiquitous yet. Again, the machines of the future (RMBP) are shoe-horned into today's infrastructure. Apple gives me NOTHING to transition to.

Apple built my 17. It was perfect then. It still is. The issue of this entire thread being discussed is how they no longer want you tinkering. I remember when Apple specifically and purposefully built their machines for easy access to everything, like the first iMac G5. All MBPs until Air/Retina. Power Macs and Mac Pros. Easy access to RAM, HDD, PCI slots, etc, were carefully and ingeniously engineered for our benefit.

Again, it was Jobs's vision brought about the machines I love, up until he died. We're not talking about a different manufacturer here. We're talking about how Apple changed, sacrificing functionality, flexibility and capability in their machines for the sake of style and appliance sales.

My 17 still works with no issues, no headaches, no problems, as designed. It is Apple who introduced an issue, a headache, and a problem by changing who they are; trading computers for appliances and leaving those who need the former in the cold.

Yes, I know we have to let it go. Apple is a different company now, with different priorities (and customer-base). I for one, will wait for the infrastructure to catch up with Apple's too-forward decisions. I'd love a Retina 17 with a 4TB SSD for the same (ie. reasonable) price I paid for my current 17 when it was new. But it'd still be less flexible than the machine I have now (it would just serve my current needs with minor mitigation).

But no one can try to tell me that the current machines are "the best ever".

That, my friends, IS the kool-aid.

melendezest · Jul 11, 2014

scaredpoet said:
Then don't! Switch platforms. Oh right, you don't want to. So, yes, you've painted yourself into a corner. Absolutely, 100%. And yes, that IS what you get.

Thanks Captain!

Yep, that is what I get for really liking Apple products.

I mean, why should I be frustrated with Apple?

They always do the right thing!

They always stand by their customers!

They can do no wrong!

Everything they do is awesome!

There. Happy? No? Wait!

Baaaaaaa. Baaaaaaaa.

Now we're good.

capathy21 · Jul 11, 2014

melendezest said:
Yes, we old-schoolers are screwed, thanks to Apple's obsession with thinness and coolness.

Yes, the future is cloud storage, completely wireless connections between computers, devices and everything else. But that's the issue. That is the future. Today, we still use the "old-school stuff", yet Apple discontinued a machine I can use today. Ports aren't going away because they aren't needed. They're going away because it saves Apple money by not having them. Because it conflicts with some BS sense of aesthetics that says a hole on the side of the machine (that actually connects to something useful) is "clutter". Please. Spare me.

When Jobs introduced the Air, he didn't kill the other models (including the 17, mind you). That happened after he died. I can't transition to something that doesn't exist. The cloud is not ready. Wireless, although plentiful, is not ubiquitous yet. Again, the machines of the future (RMBP) are shoe-horned into today's infrastructure. Apple gives me NOTHING to transition to.

Apple built my 17. It was perfect then. It still is. The issue of this entire thread being discussed is how they no longer want you tinkering. I remember when Apple specifically and purposefully built their machines for easy access to everything, like the first iMac G5. All MBPs until Air/Retina. Power Macs and Mac Pros. Easy access to RAM, HDD, PCI slots, etc, were carefully and ingeniously engineered for our benefit.

Again, it was Jobs's vision brought about the machines I love, up until he died. We're not talking about a different manufacturer here. We're talking about how Apple changed, sacrificing functionality, flexibility and capability in their machines for the sake of style and appliance sales.

My 17 still works with no issues, no headaches, no problems, as designed. It is Apple who introduced an issue, a headache, and a problem by changing who they are; trading computers for appliances and leaving those who need the former in the cold.

Yes, I know we have to let it go. Apple is a different company now, with different priorities (and customer-base). I for one, will wait for the infrastructure to catch up with Apple's too-forward decisions. I'd love a Retina 17 with a 4TB SSD for the same (ie. reasonable) price I paid for my current 17 when it was new. But it'd still be less flexible than the machine I have now (it would just serve my current needs with minor mitigation).

But no one can try to tell me that the current machines are "the best ever".

That, my friends, IS the kool-aid.

I can understand your frustration but I don't agree that the rmbp is shoe-horned into today's infrastructure. Outside of a few users, the things you don't want to let go of aren't being used and haven't in a while. We are in the future. I am not sure how you don't understand that no one I know uses anything other than wifi, cloud storage, thumb drives, memory cards and bluetooth. Disc aren't needed, wires(other than the charger) aren't needed. I am not sure what else we are waiting for. It isn't kool-aid, it's efficiency.

If you don't think the current rMBP wasn't Steve Jobs vision, just go back and watch many of his product announcements on youtube. If he said "thin and light" once he said it a million times. He was obsessed with aesthetics, with making the devices as thin as possible. Again it's nothing new. They used to make a 17 inch desktop replacement when that was the best that technology offered. It can hardly be considered a portable machine when we now see what true portability looks like. They've been working toward this for a long time. Battery life, thinness and lightness have always been the ultimate goals.

It's design progress, it's amazing that so much power can fit into a machine like the rMBP. It runs silent, stays cool, battery lasts forever and the display is gorgeous.

Your needs are unique. I'd say .01 percent of computer users need multiple terabytes of storage on a laptop. Of those users, most of them would realistically understand that in order to have that kind of storage, an external drive would be necessary. Yes you can rig up all kinds of custom configurations on your 17 MBP. If that works for you, then great. But you have to realistically understand that your needs are very rare, and when you and thermo approach it with a zero compromise attitude, and expect Apple to continue old technology on your behalf, it's just not being realistic.

It's just like being upset that floppy drives were removed, or VCR's aren't being sold anymore. Eventually it will be DVD and Blu Ray players that are obsolete.

I can't be mad at Sony for not making VCR's anymore when I don't want to bother evolving the way in which I watch videos. It's the same company. They used to make VCR's which met my needs of watching my video collection. It's the same principle. Changes aren't always convenient for everyone but they happen.
It's just the way it is.

dyn · Jul 12, 2014

melendezest said:
No, it isn't faster at anything (I can put two OWC SSDs in RAID 0 internally; good luck keeping up). It is more flexible too, should I want speed and capacity.

You need to do some homework regarding SSDs. If you did you'd have known that in most cases the old SATA2 SSDs will not be any slower than the current PCIe SSDs or any SSDs in RAID0. Why? Because of the workload of most people

The other thing that you fail to understand is the difference in controllers that are used in SSDs. OWC uses a cheap and really crappy controller from Sandforce. This controller is aimed at being cheap so nothing weird there. In this case the controller will only be able to run at full speed when you have data that it can compress. Most data that people have however is already compressed and cannot be compressed any further thus the SSD will never be able to run at its max. This is why all those benchmarks from Sandforce SSDs show a great difference in speed. Anybody with a non-Sandforce controller will be faster than your OWC SSDs in RAID0 because of this.

Then there is the connection. If you use SATA3 you won't be able to go any faster than 6Gbps. Apple is not using SATA any more, they've switched to PCIe which has a lot more bandwidth. Anybody with a workload that takes good use of this will be faster than your setup.

And finally: there is more than sequential speeds. The iops do not change and it's this that is important for something like virtualisation. Yet the access time increases a bit because it has to locate things on 2 disks instead of 1.

There is so much more to an SSD than you think...

Yes, it's a pound lighter. Whoopteedo. Even my 9 year old girl loves to carry my 6.6lb 17 all over the house, both floors, ALL DAY. You can take that lighter argument to the girly Pride parade Apple's so interested in. No sissies/wusses here.

I've had only 1 user who didn't mind carrying a heavier notebook around. It goes in his trolley anyway. For his new notebook I suggested a fast model (he required such a machine) which was a bit heavier than his current notebook. The reply I got was: "do I get a butler with that to carry that piece of lead?". That notebook was about 3kg... Most people use it to carry it around further than bedroom-livingroom, like on a plane to a completely different part of the world. You know, in a plane where you have to pay for each additional kg you carry with you...

Faster WiFi? Really? For what I do, I can't tell between wired Ethernet and WiFi as it is. I doubt the new one will blow my hair back.

Try using wifi in a hotel or any convention. It sucks big time. Even 2.5G is faster. Many people also have black spots where the wifi reception is crap. Same problem there. Ethernet is much more reliable in that regard. I don't consider that to be a big problem though. Before wifi you simply had no network connection, now we do.

Tell me what a new MBP can do that mine can't. I'll wait.

First define a workload because what you are requesting is highly dependant on that. Some workloads will show no difference (surfing the web, listening to music, email? no problem on the first gen iPhone!), but some do (doing lots of virtualisation and compiling...oh you'll definitely notice the PCIe SSD; the 802.11ac wifi connection can also do a lot when you have proper reception).

pcd109 · Jul 12, 2014

not true

skottichan said:
The problem with your argument. Comparable workstations by other manufacturers are all in line with Apple's prices, comparing a workstation to an entry level consumer machine is disingenuous at best.

Allow me to contradict you. I can have a Dell T3610 With a 6 core CPU(the same as in 4k mac pro) 32Gb of RAM, Nvidia K4000, 256GB SSD+2Tb HDD all for 2500$, so less then the quad core option from Apple. So much for the cheap Apple. Second, you stated that you are a professional graphic designer. Allow me to ask you: you don't have the need for replaceable hhd's? If your answer is not, i will start to question how professional are you. I work with Apple machines since 90's, i done graphics for top 500 companies(including giant Shell) but i NEVER-EVER remember a time when on a pro machine(no matter what vendor) i could not change the HDD and/or RAM. Well, never became real december 2013 when the Apple nMP introduced proprietary slot for they pcie ssd. And no, Apple has not invented the pci ssd, they are on the market and you can purchase one and fit it on any pc with a free pcie slot. So then why Apple has a proprietary slot for this??? I worked in very large multi-national companies and the name of the game is STANDARD. This is why Apple was so high regarded in the industry: it was innovating, but respecting the standards. To your understanding: if my hdd fails, i just replace it and meet my deadline. I have about 10 hdds from witch 5-7 are in good shape and use them all the time. Now, i invested in FireWire external cases and they are still working grade. I understand that industry advances and there are changes. I am with you on this one. BUT, to have for the internal drive a proprietary connection, it's unheard of on a professional machine. So both sides have a point on this:
- technology advances(ports replaced/changed etc)
- Apple is trying to force user to buy from them by removing user access and STANDARD

As for the iMac since it's an all-in-one i guess you could argue that the hdd need not to be user replaceable. For RAM though is hard not to see that apple is forcing to purchase from them. In Eu the prices for BTO(as well as standard configurations) are very high. The bottom line iMac(not the new one) it's almost 1800$. To sell a 1.8k machine without user replaceable RAM and HDD it's outrageous, and the reason why Apple is still a niche player. Just my opinion on this.

melendezest · Jul 12, 2014

dyn said:
You need to do some homework regarding SSDs. If you did you'd have known that in most cases the old SATA2 SSDs will not be any slower than the current PCIe SSDs or any SSDs in RAID0. Why? Because of the workload of most people

The other thing that you fail to understand is the difference in controllers that are used in SSDs. OWC uses a cheap and really crappy controller from Sandforce. This controller is aimed at being cheap so nothing weird there. In this case the controller will only be able to run at full speed when you have data that it can compress. Most data that people have however is already compressed and cannot be compressed any further thus the SSD will never be able to run at its max. This is why all those benchmarks from Sandforce SSDs show a great difference in speed. Anybody with a non-Sandforce controller will be faster than your OWC SSDs in RAID0 because of this.

Then there is the connection. If you use SATA3 you won't be able to go any faster than 6Gbps. Apple is not using SATA any more, they've switched to PCIe which has a lot more bandwidth. Anybody with a workload that takes good use of this will be faster than your setup.

And finally: there is more than sequential speeds. The iops do not change and it's this that is important for something like virtualisation. Yet the access time increases a bit because it has to locate things on 2 disks instead of 1.

There is so much more to an SSD than you think...

I've had only 1 user who didn't mind carrying a heavier notebook around. It goes in his trolley anyway. For his new notebook I suggested a fast model (he required such a machine) which was a bit heavier than his current notebook. The reply I got was: "do I get a butler with that to carry that piece of lead?". That notebook was about 3kg... Most people use it to carry it around further than bedroom-livingroom, like on a plane to a completely different part of the world. You know, in a plane where you have to pay for each additional kg you carry with you...

Try using wifi in a hotel or any convention. It sucks big time. Even 2.5G is faster. Many people also have black spots where the wifi reception is crap. Same problem there. Ethernet is much more reliable in that regard. I don't consider that to be a big problem though. Before wifi you simply had no network connection, now we do.

First define a workload because what you are requesting is highly dependant on that. Some workloads will show no difference (surfing the web, listening to music, email? no problem on the first gen iPhone!), but some do (doing lots of virtualisation and compiling...oh you'll definitely notice the PCIe SSD; the 802.11ac wifi connection can also do a lot when you have proper reception).

This entire post misses the forest for the trees.

Again, my machine allows me to use whatever I want to put in it, so I'm not limited to OWC drives.

Who cares about a very specific workload? Everybody's argument against my machine's superior flexibility is that Apple targets most users. I doubt "most users" have a "workload" that will tax their computer to the point can be used for a comparison point here.

That said, and as I mentioned before, until someone actually posts the results of a comparison speed test of a RMBP besting a 2011 MBP with RAIDed SSDs you are posting nothing but theory and parroting Apple marketing. If we use the "typical" user workflow, I bet that my 17 with RAIDED SSDs will smoke anything out there. But yes, this is theory too.

Now, lighter is good, no question. But 1-2 lbs lighter is not better at the expense of flexibility and power. I concede, this is personal preference. Which is why I contend that Apple should have kept the Air line for those that prefer portability, the RMBPs for those who want power and lightness, and the cMBP for those that want power and flexibility at the expense of weight. 2 out of 3 are appliances. And please, spare me the "Apple focus" argument. It is pure, fresh, BS, and only meant to save "more-money-than-God" Apple money.

The RMBPs and the Air are the same type of machine. Ultrabooks. My 17 is a desktop replacement. Apple simply pulled out of that segment. I carried my 17 all over the world, from Kuwait to Japan (those are REALLY long flights from the States). No need for external drives, hell, no need for a TV in tents (military). Multiple people can see everything clearly on a 17inch screen. I can easily connect to any infrastructure without having to remember to bring too many adapters. I can even tailor my machine for the type of "mission" I'm performing: will I need a lot of capacity, a lot of speed, or a combination of both? No problem. Legacy optical media or network connectivity required (the world doesn't advance as quickly as Apple wants it to)? No prob. RMBP? Stuck with stock configuration, in dongle hell, and external peripheral nightmare.

So once again, let me clarify this: The RMBPs are great machines. For most people, they are perfect. Way better than any other (alternative) machine currently in production.

But they are not a better machine than the cMBPs particularly for the user.

They are really better for Apple: easier to manufacture, non-upgradeable in any way, way less cost to build, less materials, and bigger profit margin.

They achieved this by, as always, taking AWAY from the cMBPs. By making them LESS. By telling and selling Apple users the notion that they need to compromise. That users don't need what Apple says they don't need. And Apple users perpetuated the stereotype, drank down the kool-aid, and cheerlead blindly: "These machines are the best ever!!"

Well, I disagree. The Emperor is NAKED.

Thermonuclear · Jul 12, 2014

melendezest said:
They are really better for Apple: easier to manufacture, non-upgradeable in any way, way less cost to build, less materials, and bigger profit margin.

They achieved this by, as always, taking AWAY from the cMBPs. By making them LESS. By telling and selling Apple users the notion that they need to compromise. That users don't need what Apple says they don't need. And Apple users perpetuated the stereotype, drank down the kool-aid, and cheerlead blindly: "These machines are the best ever!!"

Well, I disagree. The Emperor is NAKED.

If Apple made automobiles, then each of its cars would have the hood welded shut and the only warning light on the console would say "Return to factory for service". When then car needed an oil change, it would have to be trucked back to Apple, taking a week while the owner experienced the joys of public transportation. The car would cost twice as much as a comparable non-Apple car and official support would last no longer than the loan payments.

Thermonuclear · Jul 12, 2014

pcd109 said:
As for the iMac since it's an all-in-one i guess you could argue that the hdd need not to be user replaceable. For RAM though is hard not to see that apple is forcing to purchase from them. In Eu the prices for BTO(as well as standard configurations) are very high. The bottom line iMac(not the new one) it's almost 1800$. To sell a 1.8k machine without user replaceable RAM and HDD it's outrageous, and the reason why Apple is still a niche player. Just my opinion on this.

There are two kinds of hard drives:

1. Those which have failed
2. Those which will fail, usually unpredictably and catastrophically

I have one old 3.5 inch 120 GB IDE drive from IBM which reports over 37,000 hours of usage. Still works great and with no bad sectors; I've transplanted into an old G3 iMac. But I've had another drive made by a different company which failed with less than 500 hours on the clock. You just can't tell and that's one reason why ease of replacement is a very good idea.

JohnGrey · Jul 12, 2014

I usually stay out of these sorts of discussions because it's ultimately futile when, short of voting with one's wallet, it amounts to nothing. However, to me, there is a very real problem with the mentality that Apple should continue to keep one foot firmly in the past with legacy support of older technologies.

I'm very certain that in the days of the PDP-10 and other mainframe-class architectures, to many the personal computer seemed underpowered and lacking in extensibility, especially given how little computing power could be housed in a basic pizza-box or tower configuration, but that style of computing died and personal computing became the norm. It did so not because it was more powerful or provided a greater ability for future expansion, but because it allowed the class of product to be purchased by a larger number of people. Now the wheel has turned and the days of hobby kit-style and Frankenstein PCs is now largely over, and should've been probably a decade earlier than it was. As far as Apple is concerned, Steve Jobs' vision of the Apple computer as being an appliance, regularly replaced instead of being a steel-and-silicon heirloom, is now fully being realized. Twenty years ago, because of their rarity and great expense, computers were generally owned by people that knew and understood them, could service them, and in most cases needed the opportunity to expand because buying whole new systems was reserved for every five or ten years, but times were already changing; computers were moving from the office to the home. Despite this, the models for PCs retained the construction trappings and swiss army knife hardware mentality that was, for perhaps 95% of computer owners, neither needed nor helpful. They really needed, and now want, prepackaged, functional machines at competitive prices, though competitive being commensurate with what is provided in the exchange. Inflation adjusted to 1994, a $1000 MBA in 2014 costs a mere $622, roughly the same cost as the Newton MessagePad 115 during the same year. Does anyone here, that was an active and buying computer user during that time, ever remember any computer, power equivalently regressed, for less than $1500 with all accompanying equipment? I certainly don't. I do remember a solitary $3000+ Christmas present with a colorful apple on the box under the tree that year.

Even as a software developer, I'm personally gratified by the direction that Apple is taking with their products and their adoption of the post-PC paradigm. Apple still offers, to one degree or another, the sort of power computing experience that some assert they no longer do, it just has a dollar figure attached to it that most people either can't or won't meet. They realized, probably before most, that the average user, the one that caused family, neighbors and tech support so many headaches, does not need a computer to do what they need or want, and the content consumption devices they need are relatively cheap to replace on short-term schedules. Those that do need power computing can still get it, machines of power and build quality inconceivable even a decade ago, they just have to pay heftily for the privilege.

What will disappear next?

macrumors 65816

macrumors Westmere

macrumors G3

Suspended

Suspended

macrumors 65816

macrumors 65816

macrumors 6502

Suspended

macrumors 604

macrumors 604

Suspended

macrumors 6502

macrumors 604

macrumors 604

macrumors 65816

Suspended

Suspended

macrumors 65816

macrumors 68030

macrumors regular

Suspended

macrumors 6502

macrumors 6502

macrumors 6502

Our Staff