Touchscreen Windows 8 Notebooks vs MBP?

[Krazy Bill]

None of them hold a candle to the rMBP.

But I think you're not extending this experience into the mac realm. All of your examples (most) actually agree with Jobs insistence that a touch surface needs to be horizontal and those machines you cite do indeed find a way around that. But they aren't macs. Missing the build quality, ecosystem and of course the Apple "halo". Not to mention having to compete with the iPad juggernaut.

It would be quite easy for Apple to make 11" and even the 13" hybrids that do the same without the quirks. But herein lies the rub - Apple's arrogance doesn't allow it to do anything the "same" if it can't claim to have done it first.

 

[skaertus]

But I think you're not extending this experience into the mac realm. All of your examples (most) actually agree with Jobs insistence that a touch surface needs to be horizontal and those machines you cite do indeed find a way around that. But they aren't macs. Missing the build quality, ecosystem and of course the Apple "halo". Not to mention having to compete with the iPad juggernaut.

It would be quite easy for Apple to make 11" and even the 13" hybrids that do the same without the quirks. But herein lies the rub - Apple's arrogance doesn't allow it to do anything the "same" if it can't claim to have done it first.

I guess there are some things here to be considered.

The touch-screen laptops I have tested so far worked flawlessly. I think they provided a good experience, and the touch screen only added to it.

Apple could easily make a touch-screen Mac, and even a Mac which could convert itself into a beefed-up iPad, or a MacPac, or something of the genre.

But that doesn't mix well will Apple's purity.

A laptop is a laptop, and a tablet is a tablet. Apple's products don't convert themselves into another one. They're plain simple, and they tend to lack mechanical parts.

A convertible laptop is a laptop with a double personality. Windows 8 is an operating system with a double personality as well. The touch screen doesn't work so well on desktop mode, as it's not meant to; and the mouse and trackpad don't work so well on the Metro interface. It's like 2-in-1.

Apple's products are not like this. They have an indentity, and a clear function. A convertible laptop would be an aberration. A clumsy product. There would necessarily be compromises that would make it not a perfect laptop and not a perfect tablet either. There should be some mechanism enabling the conversion, and that would spoil everything. Apple's products don't have such mechanisms. The iPad is just one piece. The MacBook is made of one piece of aluminium. Apple is proud of these things, and any clunky mechanism would spoil this purity.

A touch screen, by itself, would be unnecessary. Laptops already have the trackpad. There's no need for two input devices with the same function. That, again, would spoil purity. Remember when the first Macintosh didn't even have the arrow buttons because they would not be necessary due to the existence of the mouse? Well, that's it.

Those things would just not fit into Apple's standards.

 

[printz]

Remember when the first Macintosh didn't even have the arrow buttons because they would not be necessary due to the existence of the mouse? Well, that's it.

Off topic, but did it use Emacs key bindings to move the cursor? Emacs also assumes you only have the ASCII and control characters at your disposal, no arrow or function keys. A few Emacs cursor bindings are used in OS X, that's why I'm asking.

 

[Krazy Bill]

But that doesn't mix well will Apple's purity. A laptop is a laptop, and a tablet is a tablet.

An iPod is an iPod and an iPhone is an iPhone. Oh, wait...

Apple's products don't convert themselves into another one. They're plain simple, and they tend to lack mechanical parts.

I think you're oversimplifying things. Everything, even a macbook has mechanical parts. Including a hinge on the lid. The difference though, is how Apple assembles those things.

Windows 8 is an operating system with a double personality as well. The touch screen doesn't work so well on desktop mode, as it's not meant to;

Nonsense. I use Win8 Daily. You're just a Key-press away from good old Windows 7 functionality. Or for that matter, $5 away from a 3rd party app that will let you ignore the metro interface altogether).

Apple's products are not like this. They have an indentity, and a clear function. A convertible laptop would be an aberration. A clumsy product.

Yet if Apple had done it first it would be hailed as the second coming.

There would necessarily be compromises that would make it not a perfect laptop and not a perfect tablet either.

Here we agree. But this is more so because Apple has boxed themselves into maintaining two distinct Operating Systems. One has to at least give MS credit for trying to merge the two in an attempt to cater to both touch and traditional inputs. Whether it's a success remains to be seen though.

Remember when the first Macintosh didn't even have the arrow buttons because they would not be necessary due to the existence of the mouse? Well, that's it.

There is no "they" about this. It's a documented fact that this was merely Jobs being childishly stubborn by refusing to adopt a PC attribute out of sheer spite - nothing more.

Those things would just not fit into Apple's standards.

You misspelled "arrogance".

 

[skaertus]

I think you're oversimplifying things. Everything, even a macbook has mechanical parts. Including a hinge on the lid. The difference though, is how Apple assembles those things.

Perhaps. But the idea is there. The MacBook has mechanical parts, but only because Apple didn't find a way to eliminate them.

Nonsense. I use Win8 Daily. You're just a Key-press away from good old Windows 7 functionality. Or for that matter, $5 away from a 3rd party app that will let you ignore the metro interface altogether).

I use Windows 8 daily as well. I have installed it in both my desktop and my laptop. And I also have Start8 installed on both my computers. I don't see a trace of the Metro interface if I choose not to. To tell you the truth, I like Windows 8, I think it's a great OS, and I think it's better than Windows 7.

I'm no blind Apple evangelist, and I don't hate Microsoft either.

However, it's not the point. The point is that there are two user interfaces in the same operating system. There are even two different Internet Explorers. I can handle that, but the Metro interface looks clunky and out of place. I can choose to ignore it, but it's there anyway.

I'm not saying it's good or bad. But that just doesn't fit with Apple's approach. Apple's approach is about minimalism, and not excess. It's just not how Apple handles it.

Yet if Apple had done it first it would be hailed as the second coming.

Perhaps. But then, again, it doesn't fit Apple's way.

Here we agree. But this is more so because Apple has boxed themselves into maintaining two distinct Operating Systems. One has to at least give MS credit for trying to merge the two in an attempt to cater to both touch and traditional inputs. Whether it's a success remains to be seen though.

I don't think Microsoft's approach is bad. When I first saw the Microsoft Surface RT, I thought "wow, this thing has potential". Everybody, including in this forum, thought it was a terrible mistake, but I've always found it to be a good approach.

However, one has to agree that an Intel-based tablet can never be thin and light as an iPad. Perhaps in the near future, but not now.

There is no "they" about this. It's a documented fact that this was merely Jobs being childishly stubborn by refusing to adopt a PC attribute out of sheer spite - nothing more.

Yes, that was. But it was an extreme example.

Steve Jobs once said that a touch screen wouldn't be ergonomical on a laptop. Later, Tim Cook said that a laptop/tablet hybrid would be something like a toaster-refrigerator.

These examples show that Apple has some aversion to laptops with touch screens. It may even change its mind, but it's too proud to admit it, and it won't follow the trend of other manufacturers.

You misspelled "arrogance".

I meant philosophy. But arrogance would fit too. And pride.