Funny but cmon even the cellular network will be gone. All around you Lifi will be in every public and private space. Every lightbulb that exists will be a data transmitter. Very fast and massive coverage.
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.
Best mac pro ever
- Thread starter ctrlzone
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
OP is too young to realize that Apple tried this in the 90's and it's why they almost went bankrupt.
And anyone old enough to remember those days realizes that back then Apple was a computer hardware company, and PC sales were most of the bottom line.
Today Apple is a phone company, and PC sales are rounding error on the bottom line. Apple could rebrand select systems and sell them, or create an "Apple-approved" program to certify certain combinations of systems and options as officially supported. Apple could also charge a significant fee for the Apple OSX license on an "Apple-approved" system.
In other words, the 1996 licensing program's problems are mostly irrelevant for today's Apple. (Background: http://www.macworld.com/article/1133598/macclones.html Note, however, that the link is from spring 2008 and mostly predates Apple's transformation into a phone company.)
Question: How many people would pay Apple $500 for a license to run Apple OSX as a supported OS on a Z-series?
Last edited:
Apple should just legalize Hackintosh and allow macOS on any Hardware just like PCs
don't tell me its not possible, they just apply some "magic"
that would increase mac market share by a LARGE margin.
No. If you think the only reason they haven't done it because it's "difficult" you don't understand any of this at all.
how meany people would buy an apple workstation that looked like other workstations even if it needed loop back cables to feed video card out to an TB card?
What about an imac pro that did not look as cool but had an easy way to change ram / storage cards?
Also apple can sell an HP or dell by apple workstation / servers. Where apple does not needed to have looks and thin get in the way. The CMP was held back to much by it's size / cooling / as well an PSU that did not have the room to go full out on CPU + both video chips.
Thats not assuming people who want to buy them, but can't afford too. Cheap Macs are what people want, people want to justify their purchase for web browsing, Facebook & Youtube. If you want ease of use, an ecosystem of applications, content consumption from iTunes store, integration from its other devices, Macs are a great way of doing that. Apples a premium brand, focusing on premium branding.
[doublepost=1498153088][/doublepost]
A mistake Apples not willing to make again. They learned that lesson the first time.
The only "problem" is that Apple would lose money. It's not about the user experience. If it was, they wouldn't keep stuffing the so-called pro machines with obsolescent hardware and selling them at premium prices.
That's not what user experience means...lol. Apple often outperforms other machines using less hardware. The ability to edit 4K on three year old machines among other things.
I wish people would give up on this out-dated narrative. It was a completely different situation. At the time, Apple was trying to increase marketshare and market presense. Rather than Apple simply lowering their own prices to reach a broader market, they licensed clones to do that for them. There were a variety of reasons this was bound to backfire, but the most obvious was it simply cannibalized Apple's own directly competing offerings (though as I've pointed out in previous posts, the actual evidence of tanking sales is greatly exaggerated).
This is a completely different situation. What people here are suggesting is Apple license OS X for specific computer systems that Apple is not already offering themselves. If Apple doesn't want to offer a full-sized workstation class computer, why not let HP/Dell offer one... how is it going to cannibalize sales of a non-existent Mac? Apple could even set the terms of price, i.e. has to be at least $5K.
Initially it was in accordance with what the OP wrote about being put on any computer. But now that you brought it up on premium workstations...
I think that Apples take on the pro workstation market...They see no need to compete any further by licensing their MacOS to third parties. Considering the Pro market is quite small to begin with and have the headache and/or make very little money from this. Apple still sees the need to keep their Pro workstations, if only to have people who design apps for MacOS and content (Video /Music/Other ) for their ecosystem.
We will have that vocal third party minority who wants MacOS on the hardware of their choice, but I'm doubting that will happen.
I agree - don't get me wrong, I don't see this happening and I'm not championing for it to happen (well, a little bit if only to stop a lot of the the product bashing... though would it really stop even then?
). I only object to using these comparisons without context which ends up making the argument seem disingenuous. It doesn't make sense that Apple would do it for a number of other valid reasons, just as there are valid reasons for why it might make sense.
Apple should just legalize Hackintosh and allow macOS on any Hardware just like PCs
don't tell me its not possible, they just apply some "magic"
that would increase mac market share by a LARGE margin.
The MacBook air rocks! There is nothing like it, in terms of battery life on a mac computer. I think the question asked was which is the best MacBook ever made. This is a matter of opinion because each owner of an apple product thinks theirs is the best. End of the day the one that worked for you is the best of them all. To those with less money to spend the best is the 2015 MacBook pro and to those who love burning holes in their pockets because they can afford to, the 2017 MacBook pro is by far the best provided you don't get a defective one with a broken keyboard or clicky keys or with unresolved issues.
To the latter, its best to check your new 2017 MacBook pro properly the first two week so you can return it if there are any issues because apple with give you a hard time when it comes to the keyboard after your two weeks is over. To those buying the old 2015 MacBook, most of them still run perfectly with no issues and buying second hand is far safer than trying to buy a 2016 MacBook pro second hand.
9 times out of ten the 2016 and 2017 MacBook sold on eBay and other sites have keyboard issues and defects that have not or just could not be resolved so you will find yourself buying someone else’s problems unless you buy refurbished - certified refurbished - not user refurbished. Now it's a known fact that from 2012 to late 2015 99 % of buyers of used MacBook pros were very happy with their purchase but in 2017 those opting to buy used 2016 and 2017 MacBook pros are shocked to discover the inevitable outcome which for many has brought with it much heart break.
All said and done, from the above mentioned I would say the 2015 MacBook pro is by far the best MacBook ever made. Really now - what's the use of new tech in 2017 when you sitting with a defective machine - but there is a grand surprise on its way for 2018 as apple decides to scrap the new keyboard all together and to give their devoted fans an android like glass panel with keys under the glass that vibrate when your fingers find them. So, if you must have the last MacBook pro with actual keys you better go out and grab one because pretty soon the physical keys will be dinosaurs in the museum of apples past history.
Personally, I feel Apple made a grave error in the naming of the New MacBook Pro 2016 and 2017 - They should have named it the New Mac Ultrabook, that would have gone down much better because the real New MacBook Pro with the new battery giving use outstanding battery life and the new keys will only come out in mid 2018 and that should have been named the all new MacBook Pro but hey who am I - JUST SAYING! LATER Y'ALL...
Ar... we are talking about the desktop Mac Pro here. The real high performance one, if the MacBook Air can run a 12 cores Xeon, 128GB ECC RAM, and multiple GPU to 100% 24/7 without any thermal throttling. Then yes, may be it really rocks. We need performance here, not battery life.
If your MacBook Air can beat the Mac Pro, please let me know. I will seriously consider switch to your Machine.
http://barefeats.com/hard210.html
https://browser.geekbench.com/geekbench3/1907757
Last edited: