If you don't like criticism, you don't have to read it

[Banquo's Ghost]

His comment makes perfect sense. You're just blatantly modifying the definition of professional to suit your argument.

And no offense, but if the basis of your argument on Apple making design decisions, is to reference a man who uses a machine from the 80's to do his "professional" work, then you've pretty much helped me make my argument that "new" is not always "innovative".

My issue is that what constituted "professional" before 2012, is not what Apple constitutes it now. They believed that the type of professional who would need a MacBook "Pro", was someone who needed a discrete GPU, the ability to upgrade their ram and hard drive and lots of port accessibility. You say that you know professionals using DOS.

That's fine. I'm an engineer and I don't. My friends develop software, games, edit photographs. They like power and mobility but they like those to be equally inclusive. If you want an emphasis on mobility, why would you pay $2000 for a 15" laptop? You wouldn't. You would be a 13" Pro, or the 13" Air if you wanted even lighter and now the 12" MBr if you want EVEN lighter with a better screen.

A person who values mobility has FOUR choices for MacBook models that are lighter, more battery life, more mobile, thinner and sleeker than the 15". And yet, the owner of the 15" who LIKES discrete GPU's, who likes more memory, who likes to be able to "buy now, fix up later". Who only needs battery life maybe one day out of the week or even two days out of the week. The one who likes their MacBook PRO to be a professional grade notebook that they can take with them as a desktop replacement/mobile workstation. That person is having their notebook turned into some Frankenstein 15" MacBook Air.

THAT is what bothers me. I no longer own a 15" Retina because I hated how compromised it was. I loved the screen. I loved the colors and the feel of the keyboard. I loved everything about that machine except that it wasn't a 15" to me. It felt like an oversized MacBook Air with a higher resolution screen.

What bothers me is that Apple is changing these notebooks despite the fact that they don't have to. And you're all fanning their fires.

I understand what you are trying to say, but I think you have made some fundamental errors in your assumptions.

First off, your continuing mis-use of the word 'professional' as a stick with which to beat Apple. You seem (in this post) to be associating its meaning with Apple's own branding - i.e. the 2012 reference. There are only two meanings for 'professional', one now somewhat archaic. A professional used to mean someone with certain qualifications and credentials that were recognised by the state and within those designated professions. That tended to mean medical doctors, lawyers, accountants, teachers, priests - and yes, engineers. In many countries, these were the only people permitted to sign one's passport application (for example) as a recognised member of the community. This meaning still has connotations, and Apple used that 'memory' as part of their marketing of a 'pro' line.

For many years however, 'professional' has returned to its original meaning of someone who earns a living at what they do. In other words, not an amateur. This applies to all activities, if working at that activity is paid. Sport is now largely 'professional' whereas pre-war, a professional sportsman was considered rather infra dig. In marketing, 'professional' has acquired a link with this latter meaning as a differentiator, in the same manner as 'executive'. It's even more meaningless as a definition of capability or quality.

Terminology is important if one wishes to establish an argument based on a particular word use. As others have noted, your argument is reaching for conclusions based on a fairly narrow use of 'professional' biased towards your own perspective.

Lastly, you make the same error as many who rail against Apple for its decisions. You seem to think that one of the most successful marketing companies ever seen does not conduct comprehensive market testing of every product long before it reaches production. I find it really quite odd that you think they haven't covered every single one of your objections a long time ago, subjecting the product to all manner of tests in the marketplace. The reasons I know that they do this is a) any business that survives more than a month, even a local window cleaner, does market research; and b) Apple is the most profitable company on the planet, so the market rather rewards their research with money (in a highly competitive marketplace with a huge amount of choice).

I completely understand that the MacBook is not for you and does not suit many others. It is good to read others' more skeptical views, but in relation to their own case need, not as some sort of admonition to Apple. I am in two minds myself - because I run a very substantial organisation, and whilst I need the portability (international loci) and I know the computer will run the Excel spreadsheets and allow me to write and research - my two key requirements of any computer - I am not yet sure of how the keyboard will suit my needs. The screen (big plus, I expect) and the keyboard (don't yet know) will determine my decision to change from my 11" Air.

My needs are not other people's needs. Had I been part of the market research programme for Apple's MacBook, I would probably have given it positive feedback. I'm a professional in both senses of the word referenced above. I don't need my computer to have the word Pro written on it to achieve my own goals.

 

[leman]

H And yet, the owner of the 15" who LIKES discrete GPU's, who likes more memory, who likes to be able to "buy now, fix up later". Who only needs battery life maybe one day out of the week or even two days out of the week. The one who likes their MacBook PRO to be a professional grade notebook that they can take with them as a desktop replacement/mobile workstation. That person is having their notebook turned into some Frankenstein 15" MacBook Air.

THAT is what bothers me. I no longer own a 15" Retina because I hated how compromised it was. I loved the screen. I loved the colors and the feel of the keyboard. I loved everything about that machine except that it wasn't a 15" to me. It felt like an oversized MacBook Air with a higher resolution screen.

What bothers me is that Apple is changing these notebooks despite the fact that they don't have to. And you're all fanning their fires.

What a twisted logic. The 15" rMBP class-wise has the fastest CPU, RAM, storage and GPU out of all Apple laptops ever build. Not to mention that they come with the absolute maximum of RAM that the machine can theoretically support, making the upgradeability arguments total moot. And they managed to pack it into an incredibly compact package. But you dismiss it because it 'feels like a MacBook Air?'. Does it absolutely have to be a bulky brick for you to call it a 'professional grade machine'?

Besides, Apple is not changing anything about those notebooks. They are as powerful as they ever were (actually getting more powerful in relative terms). They are just making them more practical.

 

[Nermal]

Apple chooses "We've managed to make it our thinnest... yet." Why? Why does thin always matter?

I wish I knew. My biggest complaint about the iPhone 6 (coming from a 4S) is that it's too thin; I physically have difficulty with picking it up. I hope that the 7 will be thicker, but this is Apple that we're talking about...

 

[crsh1976]

I'm in no shortage of criticism, towards Apple and pretty much all computer manufacturers these days. There are business trends that leave someone like me, who is shopping for a notebook with with some criteria in mind and a decent budget to fund it (it's not unlimited, however).

What annoys me the most? I can't find what I'm looking for. As in, I want to buy something, but there's nothing to throw my money at. That's stupidly irritating.

Why on Earth can't I find a 13-inch laptop with a discrete GPU that doesn't weight a ton/look like a tank? Apple's notebook matrix is screwed up, all designed to push the consumer towards more expensive models as criteria pile up.

The MBA doesn't have a great screen? Get a rMB or rMBP. Want a discrete GPU? Get a 15-inch rMBP.

I'm not on a strict budget, but there's no way I'm spending $3k on a 15-inch rMBP just to get an outdated discrete GPU on a personal/home machine (side note, I have a work-issued 15-inch rMBP and it's great for work stuff).

Want to spend less for a Mac with dedicated graphics? Get an iMac. But I want a notebook..

I understand there are some trends in business and computing that Apple both drives and works with, namely the quest for the thinnest notebooks with the longest battery life results in using lighter processors and integrated graphics everywhere.

That's fine, there's definitely a big market for mainstream/business laptops that are light and can hold more than 5 hours of autonomy, but what about power users? People who need computers with more processing power and richer graphics because they do more than just surf Youtube and Facebook all day? Those guys don't necessarily want to lug around a 15-inch notebook around all day either, no matter how great the screen is.

It's still beyond me why they can't or won't slap a midrange GPU in the 13-inch rMBP.

 

[nickmac]

Essenar -
Bringing uncompromising arguments to a discussion about what the right balance of compromises is for a particular product is a sure way to lose that argument, because it demonstrates you can't participate meaningfully.

If you want the notebook form factor to remain the same forever, you're on the wrong platform. Computing is always evolving, and it won't stop until the physical manifestation of it is both ubiquitous and invisible. People in 2030 watching a video of us today will probably giggle seeing us hauling around and plugging in these heavy silver boxes.

I was overjoyed to see the DVD drive die, and I think 1 USB-C is better than 2, because it has a demand shaping effect on consumers toward cloud and wireless and away from physical media and excess cables. No other company can have that effect on the market except Apple.

The MacBook meets the needs of some, and will grow into its form factor to meet the needs of many. Not getting one myself til v2 or v3, but I see why others want one now.

Peace.

 

[maflynn]

For me the criticisms on the rMB are as follows.

• Why in the world did they resurrect the old Macbook line when its very design, shape and target audience is that of the MacBook Air? Makes no sense to me.
• Price point, its nearly the same price of a 13" rMBP
• Battery, for its design, the battery performance is no better then a current MBA.
• Performance, Apple made too many sacrifices to make this laptop thin and performance is probably my biggest complaint. Its no faster then a 4 year old computer and apple is charging a premium. I get a lot of counter points that performance isn't the only metric, true, but the other metrics are being covered by the MBA, i.e., thinness, battery life etc.

I love my 2012 rMB, I've said this many times, its the best laptop I've ever owned.

As with other people in the thread, I don't get apple's obsession with thinness. I was critical of the the iMac design when they made the display razor thin. You have to ask why, when that computer is sitting on a desk. I think the iPhone 6 is too thin, even though I own one, and its a great phone. I think the sweet spot for overall dimensions and shape was the iPhone 5.

I seriously question the direction apple is going in on their products. Yes, the argument holds true that if I don't like it, I don't have to buy it and I'll not be buying a rMB. That doesn't mean I can't share my opinion and my concern over the direction that apple chooses to take.

 

[AdonisSMU]

But don't tell people not to voice their complaints either. Wall of text, sort of, incoming, but I'll highlight the main points:

1) People have criticisms about the single USB-C port and the price because it's viewed as planned obsolescence.

2) People think that this is a step backwards because it has a Core M processor but is being priced the same as a Retina Pro 13".

3) People feel that it was being speculated to be a Retina MacBook Air, which they were willing to pay for and actually wanted, but it's not.

The most common counter argument I see from Retina Macbook apologists seems to be, "If you don't like it, you don't have to buy it."

That's a good point! But you also cannot tell those same people, not to comment in threads discussing its shortcomings or tell them that the machine isn't meant to replace *insert full time machine*.

What you need to understand is, US, the people complaining, are doing YOU a favor. Forcing Apple to implement more USB ports or cheapen the USB-C adapters or add a Thunderbolt port does NOT hurt you in any way. In fact, it helps you. Because despite the fact that you're playing devil's advocate just for the sake of defending Apple, none of you can say with a straight face that you PREFER to have a bunch of adapters versus having an extra port.

What we worry about is the fact that Apple ALWAYS trickles down their design decisions to their other laptops, thereby forcing these "innovations" onto people who wanted no part of them.

Let's look at history, and for the sake of argument, let's focus on the DVD drive:

1) First non-DVD Mac of relevance (please read the part "of relevance" like 100 times or however many necessary for you to realize I'm not saying the first, period, but the first, "of relevance") was the MacBook Air. People cried bloody murder at it not having a DVD drive and the common argument was, "It's not a Pro, if you don't like it, just buy the Pro". I recall even Apple saying it. Now, how many models have a DVD drive? Oh, just the Classic.

2) Soldered memory - Again, implemented on the Air and people commonly argued "Well, it's to save space and if you don't like it, it's not a Pro, you can just buy the Pro." That argument held a lot of salt, I guess. I'll tell you this- I would personally prefer upgradeable ram on my 13" Pro at the cost of an hour or two of battery use, which is literally all it would take. They're not FORCED to add more battery life at the expense of expansion, they're ACTIVELY CHOOSING it. They literally walk into a meeting and say, "Add as much battery volume as you can, and make the logic board as small as possible." It's gotten to the point where the battery makes up most of the mass underneath the keyboard.

3) Proprietary SSD's - AGAIN, implemented on the Air and people, AGAIN, argued that you could just buy the Pro and to not buy it if you don't like it.
Now, we don't have a MacBook model that does NOT have proprietary SSD's and OFC cannot produce/manufacture their aftermarket solutions fast enough to beat Apple on refreshes. They're literally changing the form factor and port EVERY year despite the shell and board staying almost exactly the same.

4) Lack of discrete graphics - First, they had a "non Pro" MacBook back in the day that came with integrated graphics. People constantly asked for discrete graphics and the common argument was, "Well it's not a Pro. If you want discrete graphics you can buy the Pro..." And then Apple decided to fit the 13" with a Unibody aluminum shell and call it a "Pro". People's argument to the complaints about the 13" being called a Pro without discrete graphics? "The real pro is the 15" and that always has discrete graphics". Does it, now? Thanks to manipulation of media from sponsorships and advertising power, no one gives bad reviews anymore so people blatantly ignored the fact that the 15" Pro with Iris Pro, despite having better processing power and battery life, was about 20~30% slower in GPU power than the previous generation. Some reviewers even blatantly IGNORED a GPU test and focused only on the CPU test, or compared the GPU power to the HD4000 or only compared it to other laptops using integrated graphics. And everyone just "accepted" it. I even bought a 15" 650M specifically because the new 15" Pro was no longer a "Pro".

Apple used to design from the top. Design implementations used to trickle "down", and now they're trickling up. And if we don't universally voice our concerns, it WILL trickle up. What does this mean? One USB-C port or rather, a complete lack of ports on the higher end "Pro" models. Why? So they can be thinner, have more battery life, be sleeker. Apple has gotten accustomed to throwing words at us that don't mean as much to us as other words.

Apple chooses "We've managed to make it our thinnest... yet." Why? Why does thin always matter? Why does battery life always matter?

A 15" MacBook is not supposed to be the thinnest, lightest notebook ever. That's what the Air is. But they developed this "good product" matrix and they apply it to EVERY PRODUCT on their shelf. Power users mean nothing anymore and apologists and blind loyalists are just sitting at the dinner table swallowing it all. I'll say it:
The 15" MacBook Pro is inferior to its prior revisions. If they built a 15" Classic, with the same components as the 15" Retina, but chose to make it slightly thicker and heavier, but also able to be upgraded and with a 750m standard (it should have an 860M at this point. Past 15" MacBook's had a 6 series GPU and in early 2012 they switched to 5 series which is literally high low-range or bottom mid-range), it wouldn't affect them negatively. No one would complain that it's too heavy or that it's not light because power users don't give a crap about that. And it would sell.

But they won't... Because the community, rather than holding them accountable, universally stands by their side. Literally a community of Stockholm Syndrome.

*Get off my lawn rant rant rant I think I know more about what power users need than Apple rant rant rant*

Just because Apple makes something for varying segments of the market doesnt mean they dont care about their "power users". The 15" rMBP came first btw...

 

[iRun26.2]

I wish I knew. My biggest complaint about the iPhone 6 (coming from a 4S) is that it's too thin; I physically have difficulty with picking it up. I hope that the 7 will be thicker, but this is Apple that we're talking about...

iPhones will continue to thinner, never thicker.

 

[nickmac]

[*]Why in the world did they resurrect the old Macbook line when its very design, shape and target audience is that of the MacBook Air? Makes no sense to me.

Its actually not aimed at the same audience. MacBook Air is no longer a premium ultraportable, its a computer for people who want Apple products and are practical. Good battery life, good performance, lots of ports, pretty inexpensive, lots of options. The MacBook is none of those things, it's a 1st gen halo product for a set of people who like what it has to offer, and its a way for Apple to get the market comfortable with a different way of computing. This is the reason why it sits aside the MBA in the product lineup right now, instead of replacing it.

As with other people in the thread, I don't get apple's obsession with thinness. I was critical of the the iMac design when they made the display razor thin. You have to ask why, when that computer is sitting on a desk. I think the iPhone 6 is too thin, even though I own one, and its a great phone. I think the sweet spot for overall dimensions and shape was the iPhone 5.

Agree iMac design was kinda unnecessary purely from 'how would I optimize this machine' perspective. From the perspective of 'how would I optimize my lineup of products', I see the value in standardizing design language and cues, and the iMac's edges bring it in line with Macbooks. Everything Apple does tries to standardize the overall user experience across products, including the aesthetics.

Disagree about the phone. Every big design decision is going to result in some improvement that comes at the expense of something else. Good design decisions are those that make that ratio as palatable as possible, often by finding ways to minimize those side effects. In this case, the fact that people are used to phone cases is a way to minimize the side effects of a thin phone - namely the ergonomics of holding it and overall durability. Perhaps in this generation its better for people to have phone cases than in iPhone 5/5S generation (I believe that, I used to have no case on my 5S but definitely bought one for my 6).

How people choose to use devices is actually a variable you can design for and not a hard constraint, and when I see people discussing these things I think that point is not often fully appreciated. As the only major vertically integrated computer manufacturer, Apple is in a unique position to change user behavior and expectations. People's computer needs aren't how we use computers at any given time (sitting at a desk typing or clicking), but what we ultimately get out of them (human connection, intellectual stimulation, 'bicycle of the mind'). Apple's positioned themselves to focus on the latter, not the former.

The design methodology for this as it pertains to the phone is something like setting a few hard constraints like target runtime / battery, operating on principles like lowering weight and add thinness, and working through the various design constraints to get there. If I were designing a mass market premium phone, this would be both the process I'd use and the constraints I'd select for.

I seriously question the direction apple is going in on their products. Yes, the argument holds true that if I don't like it, I don't have to buy it and I'll not be buying a rMB. That doesn't mean I can't share my opinion and my concern over the direction that apple chooses to take.

I think its perfectly reasonable to be unsatisfied with what's available to us. After all, as individual consumers we experience these decisions at the level of the single device and the current moment in time, not at the level of 'how to run a computer company'. Almost 100% of the time we won't be satisfied what whats available. Personally, I'm shopping to replace my MBP now and find the selection not great [1]. Conversations that seek to understand why things are going in a certain direction, like yours, are constructive and helpful. But I think complaints that are unreasonable, mean, or repetitive don't add anything, because they don't demonstrate an attempt to understand what's going on. They're just 'me me me'. And that's OP.


[1] mainly because Intel Skylake chips are just around the corner with TB3, 5K support, and much better performance/watt. Hard to justify $1500 for incremental improvements from Ivybridge, and Broadwell MacBook isn't performant enough for me even though I love its form factor.

 

[super chimp]

For me the criticisms on the rMB are as follows.

• Why in the world did they resurrect the old Macbook line when its very design, shape and target audience is that of the MacBook Air? Makes no sense to me.
  
• Price point, its nearly the same price of a 13" rMBP
  
• Battery, for its design, the battery performance is no better then a current MBA.
  
• Performance, Apple made too many sacrifices to make this laptop thin and performance is probably my biggest complaint. Its no faster then a 4 year old computer and apple is charging a premium. I get a lot of counter points that performance isn't the only metric, true, but the other metrics are being covered by the MBA, i.e., thinness, battery life etc.
  

I love my 2012 rMB, I've said this many times, its the best laptop I've ever owned.



As with other people in the thread, I don't get apple's obsession with thinness. I was critical of the the iMac design when they made the display razor thin. You have to ask why, when that computer is sitting on a desk. I think the iPhone 6 is too thin, even though I own one, and its a great phone. I think the sweet spot for overall dimensions and shape was the iPhone 5.



I seriously question the direction apple is going in on their products. Yes, the argument holds true that if I don't like it, I don't have to buy it and I'll not be buying a rMB. That doesn't mean I can't share my opinion and my concern over the direction that apple chooses to take.

No one says you can't express your opinion but don't expect everyone to agree with you.

I really don't think certain people get this product or who it's aimed at or certainly give the impression that they don't.

This is not aimed at the techie niche users or power users but the general market for whom this will probably fit their requirements very well.

I get that some don't like it but really people moaning on about it isn't going to change many if any minds of those who are intending to buy it.