Nah, they sell garbage $2000 plus machines to people who have no idea what they're buying.
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.
Research Firms Paint Contrasting Pictures of Apple's Mac Shipments in Q2 2019
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Nah, they sell garbage $2000 plus machines to people who have no idea what they're buying.
Are you referring to the new cheese grater Mac Pro? It'd be hard for an as yet unreleased machine to contribute, positively or negatively, to market share. Actually, given the niche that high end workstations occupy, I doubt they move the needle for units shipped (and therefore market share, which is the topic of the article) for any manufacturer anyway.
Ugg.. I use that ALL the time, too.
Right. If you're familiar with various virtual machines, Hyper-V is like VirtualBox/QEMU/KVM-style: A completely isolated environment simulating hardware. Windows Sandbox is like LXC/Proxmox-style: A container that isolates a section of the file system, etc. and simulates what it needs to get the job done. The former dedicates more resources to the guest machine, the latter shares more. The Windows Sandbox takes very little space because it leverages the host's core OS files by mounting them read-only. Then the only space taken up is a bit here or there for user files.
Agreed. Even before I switched back to Windows I was watching the direction he's taking Microsoft and liking it. He has a completely different approach then Ballmer and I think it's the right one.
They're also rebuilding their Edge browser to use the Chromium engine. I haven't tried it, yet, but I think it's another positive.
No Apple wants to sell $2000 notebooks to people who have no idea what they are buying, that are riddled with problems due to cutting corners and poor design.
Q-6
Ugg.. I use that ALL the time, too.
Right. If you're familiar with various virtual machines, Hyper-V is like VirtualBox/QEMU/KVM-style: A completely isolated environment simulating hardware. Windows Sandbox is like LXC/Proxmox-style: A container that isolates a section of the file system, etc. and simulates what it needs to get the job done. The former dedicates more resources to the guest machine, the latter shares more. The Windows Sandbox takes very little space because it leverages the host's core OS files by mounting them read-only. Then the only space taken up is a bit here or there for user files.
Agreed. Even before I switched back to Windows I was watching the direction he's taking Microsoft and liking it. He has a completely different approach then Ballmer and I think it's the right one.
They're also rebuilding their Edge browser to use the Chromium engine. I haven't tried it, yet, but I think it's another positive.
I am very much aware of the levels of virtualization and very much in transition from a VMware L-1 world to a docker/kubernetes one and genuinely had no idea MS had a container type solution. I now have bedtime reading
The story of KHTML -> WebKit -> Blink is an interesting one. Apple went looking for a small, clean engine and found it in KDE's KHTML, fleshed it out and made it suitable for a new generation of mobile browsers but kept it open. Very much in contrast to many people's ideas of how Apple operate.
I understand entirely why I use Macs. If your best argument is "it's because you're stupid", it's probably best kept to yourself.
I have a feeling a lot of people here haven't used a Windows OS in about 20 years and compare current macOS to Win 99...
Really? I've lived through Windows from 3.x and I don't remember a version so viscerally hated as Windows 8, not even ME.
I still use Mac's myself, equally that doesn't excuse Apple for churning out garbage with inflated price tags. What it does do is kill your profeshinals audience...
Q-6
Which would certainly be relevant if: -
A) Apple were turning actually turning out garbage
and
B) "inflated price tags" was not something being thrown at apple, often but not always justifiably, for 30 years
IF someone gives you a golden egg and it lays golden eggs, is the new master the genius? What if that new masters squeezes it and beats it and only gets 700 eggs. Is he still a genius?
And that brings me to this rant; 700B added was mostly from Chinese expansion. A baboon could have been in charge of Apple and added that market value. 3x as many phones, and how many did android sell? How much market share was lost around the world to andriod? Why is the Iphone only dominate in USA and Japan? Why is everywhere else android? When I go to Asian or Europe, i don't see Apple watches or apple phones.
But the Apple watch and Airpod are great products I give you that other than the 10k Apple watch. That was a bad move. Same with homepod (puke)
To be honest, I think shareholders should be screaming as Jobs would have added MUCH MUCH more.
While I kinda agree here, as I have been using Windows 10 on a daily basis in the office for the past half year, I am sometimes still shocked how dated and unnecessarily complicated some things in Windows are, which are much better implemented in macOS. For me, Windows 10 is perfectly usable on a day to day basis, but when I have the choice, I would grab for macOS without a second thought.
No, that one is merely hilariously overpriced.
I'm referring to the majority of the product line including every portable they make.
[doublepost=1562914328][/doublepost]
Their spec is objectively garbage and 1.5-2x the price for equivalent in the PC market. They don't have the monopoly on high-dpi or lightweight design any more.
Apple have a history of being expensive, however between say 2005-2015 this was nowhere near as bad and at least somewhat justifiable based on the competition quality level and macOS. Apple was significantly ahead in both areas. i.e., the VALUE was there to justify the price.
Time and technology has moved on. The PC market has caught up, Apple have removed expansion ability from their machines and are now (still) charging about 3x the cost for equivalent speed/capacity SSDs (or more), are being super stingy with RAM (as always to be honest) and have spent the past *4 years* pushing a flawed keyboard design on end users with no fix in sight.
A price premium of 30% or so - fine. For a premium product.
That is not the reality we are seeing at the moment.
[doublepost=1562914558][/doublepost]
I agree, and to be honest, right now macOS is one of the few assets Apple have in the computing market.
The hardware designs are simply not competitive at the moment, unless you're talking extreme high end with the cheese grater, and are actually loading that machine up to an extremely high spec (otherwise you can get better performance for less money in PC land). Which is eye-wateringly expensive and arguably suitable for a very small niche userbase.
The rest of us are better farming that sort of workload out to a compute cluster.
Last edited:
I'm not sure you understand the meaning of the word "objective". Your viewpoint is entirely subjective from the things that you value. I'm not asking you not to value you the things that you do, just don't try to put it on others.
No. I am saying that OBJECTIVELY you can buy superior spec for 30-50% of the price (outside of the fringe extreme high end in the case of the cheese grater - which almost no one will actually buy). Which will run workloads much faster.
Is windows annoying? Sure; but not enough to make the difference in getting work done.
Objectively (i.e., without subjective emotional attachment to shiny hardware or macOS) - you get far more performance per dollar elsewhere for the vast majority of the performance segments, and better reliability, to boot.
"spec". Again, don't put the things you value on others. People's experiences and preferences are not a spreadsheet. When even you characterize Windows as "annoying" you should understand that making "annoying" go away is an easy decision for many people.
What are we talking here? A few hundred bucks? A thousand? Over the 3-5 year lifetime of a machine? Yeah, I'm going to go with not annoying because that's throwaway.
Do you understand the difference between "subjective" and "objective" yourself?
Because those things you mention are subjective.
If you like macOS and paying a premium to use it is a thing for you - go nuts.
But don't go trying to claim that my objective comparison based on how fast a machine can get "pro" work done for a given dollar figure is not objective, and in the same breath bring up things like experiences and paying to make annoying go away...
I can (and did) make Windows go away by running Linux anyhow...
Apple is churning out garbage MBP is a disaster, even after 5 years the keyboards are not proven to be reliable, let alone logic boards, batteries, display cables, throttling. Apple has zero excuses as it hardly ever updates it's notebooks, has all the time in the world and full control of the hardware & software environments...
Pricing I could care less, as long as the value exists as my hardware pays for itself, however that value has been eroded to the point where the MBP is a hinderance. Often said I've never seen so many drop the platform and that's a factual observation.
Downtime costs even with backup systems, personally I want to be confident in the hardware that makes my living. Apple's already lost a lot of profeshinals custom for it's vanity, and I'm talking about people with decades on the Mac..
Q-6
Last edited:
I didn't "mention" anything other than you saying right up there that current macs are "objectively garbage" and pointing out that such an evaluation is, inherently, subjective. Try again.
If you read the article you would know that one company estimates a 0.2 decline but the other a very big increase...but why we should know the stuff we want to express our opinion about?
5 years? So the 2014 MacBooks had bad keyboards? I had heard right here on the forum that everything up to 2015 was brought down by the wings of angels, perfect and flawless.
Exactly. Previously, Apple had value to justify the price. Now? Outside of the extreme high end grater (and even then, i'm sure you could likely build a quad titan V (or Vega 20) PC for less - that would out-perform it).... not so much.
Especially if you consider that you could upgrade the GPUs in the PC next year. And the next. And the next...
Well.. from my experience working in diverse design and dev teams across the EMEA for the last 3 years, they only get a new Mac if 1) it's issued as a company device 2) they really need one because their previous Mac broke down and they depend on the OSX ecosystem. Nobody I met (myself included) actually wants to buy a new Mac out of their own budget, and I reckon things like forced touchbar, T2 chip, butterfly keyboard, heatsink problems, astronomical pricing and living the dongle life have something to do with it.
[doublepost=1562915500][/doublepost]
If you factor in the 12" MacBooks, yes. The MacBook Pro's were still fine and spiffy.
[doublepost=1562915500][/doublepost]
If you factor in the 12" MacBooks, yes. The MacBook Pro's were still fine and spiffy.
