artfossil
macrumors 68000
All these years as a Mac user and I still don’t know how to use a potato to Photoshop. This explains a lot.
Microsoft Says Its New Surface Book 2 is Twice as Powerful as Latest MacBook Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Jack Burton
macrumors 6502a
Then I still don't get your point. The surface book is well balanced as a laptop.
That's the surface book, all right: lighter screen and heavier base. The surface pro has weaknesses. But the weight of the screen vs the base and/or balance while in laptop mode is not one.
Last edited:
Nuno Lopes
macrumors 65816
Has I've said I'm fairly experienced with the surface computing approach to the modern personal computing model.
What you described did not work that well for me with Surface for several reasons.
1. I have the original Surface dock. Well, in that dock the Surface its fixes in an horizontal position which is not good to write on.
2. Ok. Don't use the dock, just connect Surface to display. Here having two cables, one cable to connect the device to the screen, and another to power limits the way I can position it on the table. I don't draw, I write and in school I've learn to write on a sheet of paper flat on top of the table with one or two hand on top of it, not like e painter in a canvas. So studio mode its un-natural to me when writing. Ok, I could put flat, but has I said, the cables limit my ability to position on the table for comfort note taking ... So it was cumbersome to me. Clearly the system was not designed with this use case in mind.
3. With the iPad with iOS 11 paired with Apple OS High Sierra In can step away from the laptop take the iPad, go to the kitchen as you have said and take everything with me too. So its not a particular Surface centric advantage.
By experience I find useful both visions. The one surface for everything and multiple surfaces per set of use cases. Both overlap at some point but both offer distinct clear advantages in practice. You don't have to think hard to see this. Have a look at the multiple tables in your kitchen, why do you gave multiple tables? Its not just a question of space, but also organisation. Imagine you a table stacked on top of each other, click a button and one table would come up and the other go down, that its basically what MS Surface does. But if you have space to have two tables or more side by side its just more natural and convenient.
What I don't have in the iPad its a PC experience when you have no other option, that is all. The iPad experience its close to match a PC for general productivity but still no cigar yet Apple has to close the gap in terms of interaction language with no reservations to achieve this, people want it rightfully. I think allowing the use of a trackpad on mouse in the iPad its inevitable considering that the display its quite often parallel to the body of the user in this context, and touch in this position its not as practical ... period!! Apple needs to understand this and support at least a trackpad.
Finally, the iPad Pro performance surprised me greatly. Granted, I cannot develop software on it. The only more demanding use case I have from graphical design apps its for my amateur photography activities. I can assure you that its way faster than any other integrated graphics system I've seen, it does not make a noise neither warms up, does not stutter. Unlike other devices that are for some reason or another considered more powerful. I've used both Photoshop and Lightroom, and the iPad Pro counter parts was just way faster, immediate even for my use cases.
Robustness and reliability apart value both approaches greatly. I cannot say that one its better than the other. In that regard, I cannot say that MS its innovating more than Apple at any level. They are following different innovation paths that is all. Each with their own challenges and benefits.
MS its pumping its vision. But if you look at it it’s a vision constrained by their own situation in tech. There is little integration between Windows 10 devices apart from the usual stuff in apps and login, ... uninspiring. Its up to the user to use its brains and be truthful to his experience rather then tangled it with fireworks and potential that has not yet been met.
Personally I find the level of integration that Apple achieved across devices, watch, smartphone, tablet and its PC unparalleled in the industry. A level that you feel information and flows across all this devices as well as use cases. Granted there are some glitches still, but its surprising how well it actually works. I answer and make both GSM calls and messages in any device without even thinking, almost organic. They seam to aim the same kind of organic integration with any medium splashed across these devices. Still there is a lot of space to improve, and this is were I get a bit frustrated with Apple amongst other things. Some glitches are beyond my understanding arriving to the conclusion that sometimes its just lack of care. And in that regard reminds me of MS, with is unexpected, not in a good way. Maybe they are getting too fat and big, ... and greedy.
For instance in the Mac paired with the iPhone when I say to Siri, Call X (using GSM), its not working properly. In order for it to work I need to go to the contacts and start the call there, than it works. But this use case its working on all other devices. Its just an example of glitches I find that cuts the flow, the organic appeal, amongst all others. Mind you, one cannot do this in any other platform, but that should not be an excuse for lack of care.
Cheers.
Last edited:
SeattleMoose
macrumors 68000
But the OS is 2 x 0 = 0 (but they do get a participation award)
)
PowerMac G4 MDD
macrumors 68000
I don't agree with the new MacBook Pro's design having been centered around thinness; however, I do agree that a professional, needing a professional-grade laptop / desktop setup, benefits from the fact that this machine includes USB-C ports. Novice users still use flash drives and SD cards; advanced users prefer a single USB-C cable which can carry video, audio, sound, data, and power.
[doublepost=1508632070][/doublepost]Why is it that only Apple limits you? Have you ever tried disassembling the crappy laptops that other manufacturers shoot out of their factories? You have to basically take apart the whole computer from the inside-out. It even requires removal of the keyboard assembly and top case.
When my 2009 MacBook Pro needed an upgrade, I removed a few screws and popped in two SSDs and set them in RAID 0. I also had blatant access to the RAM.
When my Mac Pro needed more RAM, newer CPUs, a better GPU, and more / faster storage, I was able to do all that easily. I still can't find a company who can put together a better Xeon tower.
Specs aren't everything, even though powerful computers are nice. Imagine if someone took a stock car and pimped it out totally. Would it suddenly be as nice to drive as a Maserati is? Well, it could perhaps outrun it if it's lighter, but it would still be a crappy car all around. If I threw a motherboard, 6-core i7, 32GB of DDR4 memory, and a GTX 1080Ti into a cardboard box, it would still be the fastest computer in my house... but it would run Windows (which ruins productivity) and it would provide a very lame user experience. What good is it that it's fast if it isn't built well? Far too many people tell me that their Windows PC is fast, when it's actually fast + unreliable/ugly/horribly-built/difficult to repair.
[doublepost=1508632070][/doublepost]Why is it that only Apple limits you? Have you ever tried disassembling the crappy laptops that other manufacturers shoot out of their factories? You have to basically take apart the whole computer from the inside-out. It even requires removal of the keyboard assembly and top case.
When my 2009 MacBook Pro needed an upgrade, I removed a few screws and popped in two SSDs and set them in RAID 0. I also had blatant access to the RAM.
When my Mac Pro needed more RAM, newer CPUs, a better GPU, and more / faster storage, I was able to do all that easily. I still can't find a company who can put together a better Xeon tower.
Specs aren't everything, even though powerful computers are nice. Imagine if someone took a stock car and pimped it out totally. Would it suddenly be as nice to drive as a Maserati is? Well, it could perhaps outrun it if it's lighter, but it would still be a crappy car all around. If I threw a motherboard, 6-core i7, 32GB of DDR4 memory, and a GTX 1080Ti into a cardboard box, it would still be the fastest computer in my house... but it would run Windows (which ruins productivity) and it would provide a very lame user experience. What good is it that it's fast if it isn't built well? Far too many people tell me that their Windows PC is fast, when it's actually fast + unreliable/ugly/horribly-built/difficult to repair.
Last edited:
curtvaughan
macrumors 65816
Why not have all of those ports available? Why must ports be reduced to an either/or proposition? Wouldn't a "professional" laptop offer several options? This is my beef with the iPhones with no phone jack. Why must we have either a phone jack or no jack at all? Why not both a phone jack and a wireless option? I'm using a PC laptop right now with SD slot, USB C slot, and two USB 3 slots, as well as a phone jack. Why can't the MBP come with that? I'll tell you why - thin. Functionality has been sacrificed to the Jony Ive thin aesthetic.
PowerMac G4 MDD
macrumors 68000
A professional can plug in a display through a single USB-C port, then attach daisy-chained external storage through another. His peripherals can use BT. His camera? It can remotely send images to his computer.
A novice user still transfers files with a flash drive, removes an SD card from his camera, and uses VGA for video. He would be upset about the MacBook Pro for sure. Then again, it's not his kind of computer.
The one port I'd really miss in such a low-profile machine is Ethernet.
A novice user still transfers files with a flash drive, removes an SD card from his camera, and uses VGA for video. He would be upset about the MacBook Pro for sure. Then again, it's not his kind of computer.
The one port I'd really miss in such a low-profile machine is Ethernet.
Regime2008
Suspended
This guy has no idea that PC cases are much more modular, than the most user replaceable computer Apple has ever created. What computer is hard to access the ram or ssd's. I understand you dislike Microsoft @PowerMac G4 MDD , but no need to blatantly make things up.
curtvaughan
macrumors 65816
Microsoft is irrelevant in my case - I use Linux on both my PC laptops and my 12 year old MBP. I like a laptop, being portable for travelling, to have the convenience of multiple port options, without the necessity of dongles, daisy chained peripheral connections, etc. I can stuff a USB pen drive, an SD card (easily swapped from a GoPro or other digital camera) into a PC bag, and also plug in either an iPhone or V20 phone (with USB C) to my PC laptop. I also forgot to mention that my current PC here has an ethernet port, which though I rarely use, is at least available. It is probably twice the width of the current MBPs, but I will accept that, as, in similar fashion, I don't mind a slightly wider phone with a wired phone jack available.
Last edited:
throAU
macrumors G4
It exists on the Mac. Surface pro? No.
Regime2008
Suspended
While that would be a nice selling point, the better model wouldn't really need it as it has a 1060 in there already. But I agree that it probably should have came with it.
[doublepost=1508634226][/doublepost]
I think you meant to quote the other guy, but I agree with your statement 100%. Why not have options in ports? They always say "Better to have, and not need, than to need, and not have"
random: You look like my Uncle! I bet your a really cool guy
PickUrPoison
macrumors G3
Though it uses a USB-C connector, it’s more accurate to refer to the ports on the MacBook Pro as Thunderbolt 3. Each port is capable of 40Gbps; it’s basically an external PCIe bus connection.
The 12” MacBook also has a (single) USB-C port, but it’s limited to 5Gbps, the maximum of the USB 3.1 Gen 1 protocol that this MacBook supports over its USB-C port.
USB-C refers to the physical connector, but doesn’t tell you anything about the speed or protocol or power delivery that a given port supports. It’s pretty confusing because there are quite a few permutations possible, and cable length and passive vs. active circuitry affect the maximum attainable data rate. It’s actually kind of a mess.
In any case, the MacBook Pro’s TB3 ports allow for a ton of external bandwidth and also convenience—it’s great to have a dock both at home and work, and just being able to plug in one cable when moving your MB between them.
Last edited:
SteveJUAE
macrumors 601
You seem to be under some serious misconception here
There are many different types of professionals who may use SD and flash drives etc hence the uproar when the new MBP debuted with only USB-C
One of the primary goals of the USB-C port was to enable OEM's to make thinner devices
By Apple own metrics the MBP is 85% premium consumer device and only has a 15% "Pro" user base
USB-C may well be the future but for many professionals and others it's not universal enough yet to be reliable for connectivity in many scenarios without the addition of add-ons ie MBP is natively sub-standard for many
Last edited:
OPUSDigitalAudio
macrumors newbie
Mac users use Mac because of the OS and integration. It does not matter what superior products any company comes out with - if it doesn't have MacOS - it is irrelevant - with exception of the very legitimate fact that Apple has gone from way a company that innovated to a company that is last in line of follow the leader. Removing things is not innovation, it's making more money for less. The Surface Book 2 would be my go to if I went with Windows. I am a recent convert from a lifetime Windows user since 1995 until I went Mac 2016. The Surface is a great experience. What I think both devices need to do - because it is getting really old and dated is bezels. There is no reason for bezels - especially this thick. An argument could be made for bezels on a tablet, anything else - no. And these super glossy displays are for what purpose on laptops? Totally unnecessary and fatigues the eyes. Matte finish. And finally, we are in a video content creation world - why are there no 17" laptops? And yes, I am typing all of this on a Late 2011 MacBook Pro 17" Anti-Glare maxed out with every port and drive updated including BluRay, 4.1 bluetooth, 16gb and 1 TB SSD. Best laptop created. Retina is dim and reflective. Oh, and my Apple still glows. Not that it matters. I digress - until Tim Cook gets replaced, they won't innovate. Their hardware is junk, their software is 2nd rate and that's debatable, it's the integration and a simple experience. Still may go back to Microsoft and Google. Google needs hardware. Microsoft needs a phone. Apple needs to get rid of sitting on Steve Jobs creations and their dismantling and disrespect of it.
LordVic
Cancelled
Sorry buddy. But your comparison is backwards.
the people who can usually get by with just using a single USB-C device for storage, or are mostly ok with having a single dock at their desk with only USB-C to daisy chain dongles aren't the people doing "Real work" with a portable pro laptop.
Your'e talking about a very small subsection of users. As someone who has spent his life in IT and database administration, NONE of those are "pro" for me. I NEED versatility. When I go to a client site and I need to do database maintenance or testing. They're not transferring it via a USB-C memory stick. First of all, you will NOT find USB-C on any enterprise grade server hardware. You will also NOT be transferring or doing work over WiFi due to extremely large data throughput requirements. you're on ethernet, or you're transfering with standard USB-A. When you're going around presenting, you're plugging in with HDMI or in worse cases, VGA still.
for MY type of "pro", a USB-C only laptop is completely a headache causing experience. And I bet you can find a wide variety of real pro situations that are identical.
PowerMac G4 MDD
macrumors 68000
There are also plenty of people who have nice desktop setups at work and would like to carry their laptop out with them and bring it home. It takes a mere few cables for EVERYTHING.
Perhaps this machine is either extremely convenient for some, yet, by contrast, awfully inconvenient for others. That being said, it's not for a novice user (unless the fact that such a user never plugs anything in makes him a novice), because novice users still use dated techniques to transfer files and such.
[doublepost=1508707050][/doublepost]
If professionals don't think USB-C is ubiquitous enough yet, they can just continue using their old laptops. Why would that be a problem? I know professionals who still use Apple Thunderbolt displays with 2012 rMBPs.
Let me know why someone would want to pick his finger nail at an SD card slot, remove the card, and stick it into his computer. What's wrong with remotely sending image files or connecting a cable to the computer, from the camera? On new, expensive cameras (i.e. Sony a6000 mirrorless), SD card slots are very well-hidden and not so easy to access. The point is that the manufacturers are encouraging people to plug their cameras in (which charges them at the same time) or use wireless technology for file-transferring.
Perhaps this machine is either extremely convenient for some, yet, by contrast, awfully inconvenient for others. That being said, it's not for a novice user (unless the fact that such a user never plugs anything in makes him a novice), because novice users still use dated techniques to transfer files and such.
[doublepost=1508707050][/doublepost]
If professionals don't think USB-C is ubiquitous enough yet, they can just continue using their old laptops. Why would that be a problem? I know professionals who still use Apple Thunderbolt displays with 2012 rMBPs.
Let me know why someone would want to pick his finger nail at an SD card slot, remove the card, and stick it into his computer. What's wrong with remotely sending image files or connecting a cable to the computer, from the camera? On new, expensive cameras (i.e. Sony a6000 mirrorless), SD card slots are very well-hidden and not so easy to access. The point is that the manufacturers are encouraging people to plug their cameras in (which charges them at the same time) or use wireless technology for file-transferring.
Last edited:
All these years as a Mac user and I still don’t know how to use a potato to Photoshop. This explains a lot.
lol...outstanding.... while I *still* can't believe its not butter. You'd think after all this time, i'd learn by now. (and no i'm not saying that because its off Family Guy either)
SteveJUAE
macrumors 601
Seriously ..... I think your just playing clickbait with these types of replies and I'm not playing
[doublepost=1508746039][/doublepost]
Are you joking?
For studio work, most pro photographers will use tethered shooting via usb-cable. For field work, a memory card will be the way to transfer pictures. Either a sd card or a QXD-card (and the occasional CF-card).
Wireless transfer will surely be too slow for hundreds of large files, and only a small subset of (studio) photographers will use it. Why would you return home from the field to transfer 30-50-70 GB (yes, GB) of data wirelessly instead of pulling out a card, putting it into your computer and being done with it in a couple of minutes? Yet Apple has chosen not to include a sd card slot in the MBP.
Nikon's professional cameras are, most would agree, class-leading in picture quality, autofocus et cetera. The Nikon D850 and D5 are arguably the best digital cameras ever produced. Yet renowned for having practically non-working wireless transfer options.
The Sony A6000, while surely used by some professionals, is not a professional camera. And frankly, not a very expensive camera.
Are you joking?
For studio work, most pro photographers will use tethered shooting via usb-cable. For field work, a memory card will be the way to transfer pictures. Either a sd card or a QXD-card (and the occasional CF-card).
Wireless transfer will surely be too slow for hundreds of large files, and only a small subset of (studio) photographers will use it. Why would you return home from the field to transfer 30-50-70 GB (yes, GB) of data wirelessly instead of pulling out a card, putting it into your computer and being done with it in a couple of minutes? Yet Apple has chosen not to include a sd card slot in the MBP.
Nikon's professional cameras are, most would agree, class-leading in picture quality, autofocus et cetera. The Nikon D850 and D5 are arguably the best digital cameras ever produced. Yet renowned for having practically non-working wireless transfer options.
The Sony A6000, while surely used by some professionals, is not a professional camera. And frankly, not a very expensive camera.
Seriously, it only takes $5-10 to get an SD card reader on these new computers. Single-use ports are dead. Guess what? I have 8 USB-A connections available on my 2016 MacBook Pro. It only was $25 on sale too.
Of course you can get a dongle or a separate card reader. But I fail to understand why it should be necessary in a "pro" product. In the Macbook, sure. In the Macbook Pro, I'm at a loss.
Because these new ports can do everything. Why is it "pro" to be locked in to specific use-case ports? I need VGA. Actually, there are times when I need two VGA ports. Does everyone need to suffer because my job has outdated equipment? Just a simple cable gets the job done. And that same port can be used later as SD card reader, Ethernet, DVI, HDMI, DisplayPort, 8-port USB-A hub, and many many more options.
This is exactly what a pro system should be doing. Adapting to the user. I RARELY use HDMI, why do I need a dedicated HDMI port on my system? I rarely use an SD card, why should there always be a dedicated SD card reader on my laptop? These USB-C / TB3 ports are the entire definition of what a pro system should be. User A does needs port X, and User B needs port Y. Both can be achieved with these standardized ports. The laptop does not need dozens of ports on it.
[doublepost=1508767662][/doublepost]
But if only having usb-c ports helps you doing your profession, fine with me.
This discussion has been going on for almost a year now. Let's not go into it once more; suffice to say I disagree. I've had way too many occurences where I was at a client, computer ready, but hdmi dongle forgotten at home/in the office/somewhere. Or with a memory card full of pictures but no card reader in sight. In my opinion, a pro machine should make doing your profession easier, not the opposite.
But if only having usb-c ports helps you doing your profession, fine with me.
convergent
macrumors 68040
I agree with you. I want to travel light and I surely don't want to have a huge bag of dongles and hubs because my computer only has a single port that connects to zero things I need to connect to. As it is, I need a couple, but most things connect to the ports on my machine. Maybe in 5 years when everything has native USB-C cables it will make sense, and if/when that happens I'll by a new machine with only USB-C ports.