Having a 5 year lifespan doesn't mean selling 5 year old hardware, as new, with a premium price tag.
If you buy one brand new for full price in 2017, you already have a 5 year old computer. That's dismal considering the price Apple charges.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Continues Twitter-Based iPad Pro Ad Campaign With Three New Videos
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Having a 5 year lifespan doesn't mean selling 5 year old hardware, as new, with a premium price tag.
If you buy one brand new for full price in 2017, you already have a 5 year old computer. That's dismal considering the price Apple charges.
Two years ago I bought an 11" Air because there was no way in hell I could do much work on an iPad. It felt that even simple things, like writing and publishing a blog post, were beyond what iOS could really handle. Two years later, I'm able to do about 90% of my tasks on an iPad. Whether that 10% ever gets filled in remains to be seen.
I suppose but Apple isn't going to change it so what's the point of complaining anymore
Sorry but you are just wrong here. As wrong as our computer science professor at University long ago when he was trying to debunk the "myth". How would he know anyway, he was a MacOS classic user (when everyone else only knew Windows/DOS) and I was an Amiga user. Multitasking is not about writing/reading/giving orders at the same time as Julius Caesar or writing with both hands like Leonardo DaVinci. It's about being able to have open projects/tasks at the same time and being able to work with them by switching between them fast enough. It's not parallel execution. And, believe it or not, many people can do it, you just have to try it and train your brain/body appropriately. I am not going to go as far as suggesting that all these (pseudo)scientific studies are part of a conspiracy but they (and their interpretations in the mainstream media) have done more damage than good, typically suggesting that multitasking hinders productivity, is even bad for health/brain, etc. Personally, I doubt I have not been able to stay productive by using multiple screens etc. Actually, I am replying in a forum right now, reading a sports web site, having more than 20 applications/windows/tabs open, writing an email, working on a paper, AND cooking. And don't worry, I am not about to burn the food.
I think the reason many people think the mac is "dead" is because of the extreme infrequency of the updates. Even silent refreshes to some of the products to keep them up to date with modern internals would go a long way to quiet this illusion that Apple is abandoning the Mac
The only two products updated in the last 365 days:
Macbook: 349 days since last update
MacBook Pro: 156 Days since last update
All other Mac's?
Macbook Air: 756 Days, still on Broadwell
iMac 27" 538 Days (at least o Skylake!)
iMac 21" ??? even longer ( still on Broadwell)
Mac Mini: 900 Days, Still on Haswell
Mac Pro: 1201 Days, still on Ivy Bridge
if you're a Computer fan, and you're looking at Apple computers, it's very VERY easy to get confused and believe Apple is ignoring / killing off the Mac
The only one of those that's true multi-tasking is cooking. The cooking is happening while you are typing. However, if you stop typing to go stir the sauce, then no, you're not multi-tasking.
Now, if you are typing this post while your eyes are reading the current sports scores, then you are multitasking. But, I doubt it, the window is in the background while you type. Therefore, you are only doing one active task at a time. I reference this wikipedia page.
if I'm on a conference call while typing an email, my ability to do both tasks well suffers. Now, in some conference calls my brain is more of in a "hello, siri" moment. Last week I was on a conference call and I was just listening to see if something came up that I needed to address. So, I was working on the email waiting to hear a few key words. Is that multitasking, maybe? But there's no way I remember anything about that call other than the specific thing I was listening for and took a note on that. Microwaving my lunch while running off a copy is multitasking.
To keep your example going, having multiple apps, windows etc. open is akin to have 20 paper books on your desk with a bookmark with your last read position. But only the book that's physically open is the one you are actively reading.
That's why what some people consider to be multitasking isn't. A computer is able to execute several tasks at the exact same time. When people say "I'm always multitasking" what they really mean is, "my attention is always split between different tasks."
The Mac book Air shouldn't be refreshed it should be killed. The iMac should remain on Skylake as Kabylake provides little if no performance increase and the 21 inch refreshed with Kaby Lake as broad well is a tad dated. Mac Mini is either needs a refresh or to kill it, I bet it has dismal sales so killing it probably would be for the better. Mac Pro does need a refresh probably this fall, but honestly I don't see a issue with it having a 4 year refresh cycle as the people buying them aren't buying new ones every year they have no reason to be refreshed that frequently.
but does it have dismal sales because of the computer and it's components, or vice versa
chicken and egg thing here. People aren't going to buy a computer that is "crippled". so with no sales, Apple further cripples it to keep margins up? either way, sitting stagnant with zero updates is indicating a lack of care in the PC industryAs for updating to modern CPU's. It's not just pure raw horsepower. it's also a lot of other efficiencies and functionality that comes with new CPUs and revisions.
For example, Kaby Lake brings hardware H265 decode. it also brings more performance per watt. better support for DDR4 memory, and far better thermals than previous.
Since the iMac, especially the i7 variant suffers from thermal throttling, getting the Kaby Lake CPU into the iMac's revision should b #1 priority. Especially in th 21" model where they're using mobile chips for thermals as well.
Apple has had legitimate update paths' for all of their hardware if they chose to do so. They haven't. They have chosen to let the Mac take a back seat instead.
I do agree, the mac Air is EOL. the new MacBook Pro SHOULD have been the new Mac Air, and should be far cheaper than the $3000 price tag.
the linup should essentially look like this, and be kept up to date (even with silent refreshes)
Mac Mini
iMac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
I agree with what you say except keeping a Mac Minibut does it have dismal sales because of the computer and it's components, or vice versa
As for updating to modern CPU's. It's not just pure raw horsepower. it's also a lot of other efficiencies and functionality that comes with new CPUs and revisions.
For example, Kaby Lake brings hardware H265 decode. it also brings more performance per watt. better support for DDR4 memory, and far better thermals than previous.
Since the iMac, especially the i7 variant suffers from thermal throttling, getting the Kaby Lake CPU into the iMac's revision should b #1 priority. Especially in th 21" model where they're using mobile chips for thermals as well.
Apple has had legitimate update paths' for all of their hardware if they chose to do so. They haven't. They have chosen to let the Mac take a back seat instead.
I do agree, the mac Air is EOL. the new MacBook Pro SHOULD have been the new Mac Air, and should be far cheaper than the $3000 price tag.
the linup should essentially look like this, and be kept up to date (even with silent refreshes)
Mac Mini
iMac
Mac Pro
MacBook
MacBook Pro
Mac Mini is a hot topic
There are many people (like myself) who have no intention of buying an All in one. Ever. I much prefer my own monitor choices, and once my computer is EOL, that the display can be kept around.
The Mac Mini WAS a fantastic, affordable, little Mac Computer for the everyday user. Killing it Killing it would be akin to killing the X-Serve for me. a Sign that Apple is no longer interested in PC industry as a whole and only interested in selling "Appliances"
I understand were your concern lies but honestly I prefer Apple as a Appliance company, I mean that's how I view my computers, they are a utility that serve a set purpose, Lord knows they're very expensive being Apple. So I want to buy them maybe 1 time every 5 years. I suppose it's all personal preference.Mac Mini is a hot topic
There are many people (like myself) who have no intention of buying an All in one. Ever. I much prefer my own monitor choices, and once my computer is EOL, that the display can be kept around.
The Mac Mini WAS a fantastic, affordable, little Mac Computer for the everyday user. Killing it Killing it would be akin to killing the X-Serve for me. a Sign that Apple is no longer interested in PC industry as a whole and only interested in selling "Appliances"
Yes. But your 1 time in 5 years might not line up with my 1 time in 5 years. Hence the need for continuous refresh.
If I buy an Apple computer in 2017, and you bought the same one in 2015, they should not have the same internal components. And they should not be charged the same price.
I don't like the pure Appliance mentality though. But that's because i'm a hippy liberal tree lover and believe that the simple commodification and appliance lifestyle of Computers has wound up with us replacing and throwing out far more electronics than need be. MOST people would be fine with a simple hard drive, RAM, or GPU performance upgrade to extend the life of their hardware. The move to Appliance based computing, soldered all the things, and a need to do a full hardware replacement everytime you need a slight update is just an overall bad direction for the computer industry. I get the need for some of this depending on mobility and size? But a desktop class computer shouldn't need to trade off expansion or thermals for "thinness"
Ahhh thinnnessssssss sexy
I do wish some basic things were upgradable, for example my MacBook Pro I threw in 16gb of ram and a ssd, and the computer remains more than quick enough for the rare web browsing or email checking. With those simple upgrade my 5 year old Mac continues to operate perfectly and there is 0 reason to put $1500-2000 into a new one. The new ones though with the quick storage and faster memory sorta negates the need to replace things like that so it's sorta like a compromise.Because you want to cite Wikipedia, here is what it says for Computer multitasking:
Also for Human multitasking, you just ignored the first line for human multitasking:
Now, if the definition of "short period" is 1 ns then maybe you are correct, but I doubt it.
And by the way, when I said cooking, I didn't mean waiting for the water to boil. If you really think that "feeding the baby" is an activity/task that involves 100% of a human's effort then your logic is just wrong, otherwise there will not be any tasks at all. Hint: the baby is not going to be fed every 1 ns.
Also for Human multitasking, you just ignored the first line for human multitasking:
Now, if the definition of "short period" is 1 ns then maybe you are correct, but I doubt it.
And by the way, when I said cooking, I didn't mean waiting for the water to boil. If you really think that "feeding the baby" is an activity/task that involves 100% of a human's effort then your logic is just wrong, otherwise there will not be any tasks at all. Hint: the baby is not going to be fed every 1 ns.
Apparent has two different meanings (aside: you have to love English): clearly revealed to the mind or the senses or judgment, or, appearing as such but not necessarily so. I interpreted the Wiki entry to be the latter.
First, off I don't think we are too far off, but the details are different. Some of it is efficiencies: if I'm working on creating three documents at the same time, is working on all three better than taking the time to finish one? Well, naturally that's situational but assuming you have all the information necessary to complete all 3 documents, you are better off finishing one, then starting and finishing the other. If you know it's going to be two weeks before you get the required information to finish Document A, then obviously you start working on Document B while you wait. But I don't consider that multitasking: one task is on pause while you wait for a prompt.
"Feeding the baby" is an interesting example. If you mean giving the baby a bottle while you type and email, no it will not consume all your time. Having to spoon feed a baby, or deal with a recalcitrant baby then yes, close to 100% of a human's effort will be consumed.
What I'm saying is, while you may have several tasks in progress, you're only advancing one of them at a time.
I guess it depends on the baby ;-) But I agree that it comes to how we define terms, e.g. a task, an activity, a project, etc for either humans or for computers, never mind the "short period", the "pause" etc.
Now, regarding the Document A,B example, you hardly ever have a task that you have to work 100% of the time. And that doesn't have to do just with prompt. I know people that hate any interruption because it takes them practically hours to refocus. I am not anything like that, and I am not alone.
It is no true that you are less productive when working with multiple documents or projects. Nevertheless, if these are also related (and there are many cases where they are) multitasking is a must. It depends on the documents (and the person/user). If someone has in mind that the default computer job in this world is working with Excel spreadsheets just typing numbers, then you probably need to focus on a single thing. If on the other hand, you have a scientific paper to write using your computer, you might have to need all the resources and real estate available to you. And when you have trained yourself from a young age you can do it efficiently and fast, believe me.
It's also how you read and interpret the Web or the books. While it's hard to read 2 novels at the same "short period", sometimes it's rather inefficient to study or do research with just one book open. Optimally, you need to be able to go both ways if needed, depending on the task(s).
And I am not Generation Y or Z. I am actually old school. And old school doesn't mean I hate "multitasking", on the contrary. I am not against tablets. I love iPad and I wish Apple made it a first citizen. Poor sales for the 12.9 model is only an excuse. You can not buy something that is not available anywhere, and nobody should be tricked into buying a 32GB model either. What I can't stand is iMacs (not for me) and laptops (too small screen). I do have a laptop because it is a necessity when on the run. I don't enjoy it. I prefer my multi-cpu, multi-screen workstation monster in my office, my HackMini in my living room, and my iPad on my couch/bed.
This week is a fairly typical week for me. There are two main things I need to be working on: two documents so unrelated to each other the only commonality is I'll be using Word to create them. I'm honestly not sure how to measure "progress" on them. In my perfect world I'd rather not work on one until I have a draft copy out of the other. Sadly, both document owners want to see progress faster so I'm forced to do what most people do: send out more updates that might only reflect changes to a section instead of the entire document. On one document, I feel like the Calvin and Hobbs comic where he's asked if he has started his homework. "I've almost started," I tell the other document owner.
Also like most people I have multiple tabs, documents and apps open all day. I just don't feel like I'm "multitasking" as much as I feel like I'm trying to stop a tsunami.
At one point I used to have multiple computers running multiple documents, windows, and apps, and man, that was not a happy mindset to be in.
I have the iPad Pro 9.7" with Apple Pencil and Smart Keyboard and can say that for me, it works only for minor edits of documents. I continue to use my MacBook Air 85% of the time and iPad Pro 15%. My main use cases in my line of work are document editing such as Word, Excel, Powerpoint documents as well as note taking for which I use OneNote. For the most part, I use the iPad Pro as a note taker because whilst it is true that I *can* edit documents on the iPad Pro with the MS apps, the experience is far inferior to that of a laptop with the same apps.
For productivity with the iPad Pro, my wishes are as follows:
1. Bluetooth Mouse support - likely not going to happen, but in my workflows with the iPad Pro, I really miss mouse input. As many others have already noted, reaching up to touch the screen instead of moving a mouse just feels a lot less efficient when working on a large document. I wouldn't mind if its just Apple Magic Mouse / Magic Trackpad support, especially if they provided an easy way to switch devices the mouse is paired with similar to AirPods ability to pair with any iCloud enabled device;
2. Some better form of windowing / side by side / multi document support
3. Improved copy/paste - as already noted above, copying and pasting between documents from the same app - e.g. word to word doc or excel to excel is a poor substitute.
The filesystem problem i think has largely been addressed through iCloud Drive and MS One Drive so is less of a concern than the above.
For productivity with the iPad Pro, my wishes are as follows:
1. Bluetooth Mouse support - likely not going to happen, but in my workflows with the iPad Pro, I really miss mouse input. As many others have already noted, reaching up to touch the screen instead of moving a mouse just feels a lot less efficient when working on a large document. I wouldn't mind if its just Apple Magic Mouse / Magic Trackpad support, especially if they provided an easy way to switch devices the mouse is paired with similar to AirPods ability to pair with any iCloud enabled device;
2. Some better form of windowing / side by side / multi document support
3. Improved copy/paste - as already noted above, copying and pasting between documents from the same app - e.g. word to word doc or excel to excel is a poor substitute.
The filesystem problem i think has largely been addressed through iCloud Drive and MS One Drive so is less of a concern than the above.
I agree the current multi window view on iPad needs to be rethough and I should be able to open multiple instances of a application side by side. Sadly mouse support is proabably never going to happen.