well i did go to a work meeting in the US once last year
so technically i have been there one time... but uh yeah no
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Verge: The MacBook Pro is a lie
- Thread starter tubeexperience
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
well i did go to a work meeting in the US once last year
so technically i have been there one time... but uh yeah no
Do you understand that you compare the lowest of three i7 Iris Pros with (presumably) the highest (or middle) of three mobile Iris Pro Xeons? And mobile Xeons are approx. +50$ more pricey than their i7 counterparts due to ECC RAM and a little better clock.
If Apple would go exactly to the same processors in Skylake it had in Haswell it wouldn't use only i7-6770HQ, it would use i7-6770HQ, i7-6870HQ and i7-6970HQ, two latter having 8 MB versus 6 MB cache in the first one. I. e. this is what Apple owed us at least.
The fact that these Xeon CPUs are readily available from Dell, HP and Lenovo (and they're not some niche vendor like VAIO, they sell in quantities even top mobile workstation) tells that Intel can produce some. One might speculate that Intel cannot produce that many so that Apple would have leverage to ask for a discount it regularly asks for. But Intel is capable in producing them in quantities.
And remember, mobile Iris Pro Xeons are very similar to i7 Iris Pros but slightly better so it's more likely that they come from the same bin, Xeons being the best instances, i7s being the regular ones. So if Intel can produce Xeons in quantities it's likely they can produce i7s in even more quantities.
Do you do professional work on your Macbook Pro? Yes? Then it's goddamn pro machine.
I hate these articles that conflate "my professional needs" with "all professional needs". I bet I need a lot of different things out of my computer than a dumbass Verge writer, but I'm not going to say they aren't professionals.
I hate these articles that conflate "my professional needs" with "all professional needs". I bet I need a lot of different things out of my computer than a dumbass Verge writer, but I'm not going to say they aren't professionals.
A point being the respondent asking for specific facts and the interviewer being unable to provide any and just blatantly saying factually untrue statement "all of them"? Good point.
[doublepost=1478559282][/doublepost]
Then sorry.
I would expect normal, factual answer from you.
Remember, this should not be just generational gains - of course new generation of laptop should be marginally better than the previous. This should be revolutionary gains that justify generational downgrade that happened e. g. with the battery, CPU, subjectively - ports (not interfaces).
I saw it the other way around - he obviously explained how he thinks the new MBP is better in every way. You could argue that is not the case, but there are strong arguments to confirm this: it is faster, lighter, better screen, better ports, etc. And he was literally asked "in what way" ("name a few").
Well, he told him - basically everything is better. That's why the video seemed appropriate.
You see, stating "it excels in every way" does not equal stating "it excels in way1 because of reason1, in way2 because of reason2, ..., in wayN because of reasonN and thus, as ways 1 to N are all the ways of this laptop, it excels in every way". Reasons 1 to N are what missing.
And my opponent said basically "it excels in every way" without stating any of the reasons 1 to N. Then he reaffirmed his statement with a video I explained what's wrong with earlier.
As for your claims: it's less than marginally faster than it should be considering generation over generation, it's lighter not with other things being equal but rather otherwise - battery significantly smaller, better screen - yes, but we are yet to decide from reviews if this is a revolutionary change or just a marginal generation over generation one, it was explained earlier why it does NOT have better ports etc.
Of course I was thinking of the highest end i7s when looking at the Xeons. I'm just using the 6770HQ as an example. I myself bought the 8MB cache 2.7GHz i7 for my 15". Point is, I looked up benchmarks on the Xeons after you pointed it out and they didn't exactly blow me away in performance gains over the best i7 chips. If Apple went Xeon without ECC RAM then I don't see the point, and if they went with ECC RAM (can they even do this with LPDDR3? Or do they need to step up to full DDR4?) then that's going to add to the cost as well. The vast majority of their users have no need for ECC RAM.
My point about the limited production was strictly regarding the i7 with Iris Pro. Like I said before, we were on different pages.
My point is not that Apple must've used Xeons in MBPs (although this would justify the price increase we got IMHO
).My point is that Xeons being from the same bin i7s are from and being used by major vendors says Intel can produce both in quantities. So IMHO Apple's problem was either final price of device (i. e. Iris Pro i7 would add at ~150$ to the final price no matter what and final price is quite high as it is now) or lack of leverage on Intel because they could produce them enough but could not produce them a lot to be able to give it to Apple with discount and to other vendors without as they did with Haswell.
Never. Apple is doomed and getting out of the computer business. There will never be a "Pro" laptop ever again.
Don't joke about this. They're already out of display business. We don't want this to happen with MBPs. Quite the opposite - we want Apple to succeed further on. They're just lost. They'll find their way. Right? Right?!Never. Apple is doomed and getting out of the computer business. There will never be a "Pro" laptop ever again.
I was (rather cleverly, I might add) making the point that this person is a troll no more sophisticated than a 2-bit political operative from New Jersey.
There just is no measure by which the laptop is inferior. Which places the onus of prosecution on the person making the blatantly preposterous claim – namely that this item cannot be used by professionals.
I'm not going to "name some". You are. Because you're the one talking proverbial silly talk.
I'll give you some breadcrumbs: choose any metric by which a computer's performance is measured.
Compare it between the different generations of laptop in question.
I'd say you'd be unpleasantly be surprised, however I do not actually think it would be any surprise at all, as every single person reading this is (sometimes begrudgingly) aware of the facts. The thing is better. You may not like it because emojis and $20 dongle and whatever. But it's better. In every way.
Polls. All of them.
Last edited:
Perhaps the new emoji-bar could help you in more efficiently adding all those emojis to your retort.
See, you're starting to name them. See, it's not so difficult even though you need to insult your opponent meanwhile. Not a problem, I'm a forgiving person. Please continue.
What's better in the new MBP apart from the "emoji-bar"?
"Not suitable for professional use"
Whatever you say, but i'll say that if a creative or whatever can't use this machine to make great work then it's probably them who are not suited for professional use.
Whatever you say, but i'll say that if a creative or whatever can't use this machine to make great work then it's probably them who are not suited for professional use.
I see nothing game-breaking about it, if i can make money on my 2005 Macs then am pretty sure i can make money with this one too.
So essentially a 12" Macbook is a Pro laptop too, right? What about a wooden stick? What if someone can make money with it? Is it a Pro laptop? No? Where is the boundary?
I've run VMs on my Intel Core 2 Duo 1GB RAM HDD GPUless barebone back in the days. So what?
There's a rumor that will happen in the second half of 2017. I would expect around WWDC would be about the time they would do it.