If you have to read a lot on work and you want to directly mark something it is just convenient. I also guess for students it would be nice to read paper's and mark/scroll by hand.
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.
Waiting for Haswell MBP Mega Thread
- Thread starter thadoggfather
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
If you have to read a lot on work and you want to directly mark something it is just convenient. I also guess for students it would be nice to read paper's and mark/scroll by hand.
Someone give me a sanity check. The only reasons Apple did not release Haswell rMBPs in June was:
1) CPU production/availability
2) Retina production/availability
3) They wanted to unleash an epic surprise in October
4) They wanted to make us cry with epic mediocrity in October
1) CPU production/availability
2) Retina production/availability
3) They wanted to unleash an epic surprise in October
4) They wanted to make us cry with epic mediocrity in October
In this case, people switch to tablets. And then go back to using the laptop. A touch screen on a laptop is not convenient right now, and thus why Apple has not included it.
----------
I'm going to guess it's a combination of 1 and 2, but my personal vote is for...5) Tim Cook is a monster.
Don't forget about Thunderbolt 2 and the release of Mavericks. I hope the inclusion of IGZO is another one.
1 is plausible. 2 not so much. They already have production of retina displays ramped up (I am almost sure they'll use the same display), so unless they're doing a brand new display, that won't be a huge problem.
3 maybe/hopefully. 4 naaaah
Unfortunately I'm not convinced that Mavericks would delay a notebook release by 4 months.
Why would they release the MBA then? And they've never hold back a release for an OS.
I know you guys! The MBA was launched in June because most students don't need a MBP and they were about to launch BTS.
But as you've probably read or experienced rMBPs lag on ML. IMO a special build of 10.8 would have been a half-assed solution when everyone praises the improvement of Mavericks.
An OS release is the best time to release a new product that's why I think they won't release it next week but with Mavericks in October.
You can figure that if Mavericks was the only issue, it could have been late for WWDC and they decided to push it to October to not interfere with the iPhone releases in September. But my guess is Thunderbolt 2 and the Iris (Pro) CPU's.
It would if the adoption of Iris actually caused battery life to be shorter in current models and only Mavrix could bring those claims back to normal.
It would if the adoption of Iris actually caused battery life to be shorter in current models and only Mavrix could bring those claims back to normal.
The current model has a 35W TDP CPU and the 4258U is a 28W chip which includes the GPU AFAIK. So that seems unlikely.
Wow, are we really afraid of touch screens now? That's just silly. I'm not suggesting that Apple will do this, but if the next rMBP came with a touch screen it would have exactly zero impact on any of us. It's not going to impact your usage of the machine in any way if you don't actually use it. I can't imagine the power draw is relevant, and otherwise it's a feature that you can ignore or use as you wish.
Now I understand where the fear comes from... as actual computer users we're afraid of the tabletification of real computers. That's a software concern, and I suppose you could argue that when touch screen hardware exists the software will begin to change to accommodate it.
Maybe that's true to some degree, but I also kind of doubt Apple wants to follow in the footsteps of MS with the terrible reaction to Windows 8's amazingly bad new start menu (ironically the core of Win 8 is an improvement over Win 7 in terms of stability and performance). In other words, Apple isn't dumb enough to make use of a touch screen mandatory (or even a primary input method to begin with) even if they do implement them.
There will be a touch screen Macbook. Not today, probably not tomorrow, but it's coming and it's going to be completely ignorable if you don't find it useful.
Now I understand where the fear comes from... as actual computer users we're afraid of the tabletification of real computers. That's a software concern, and I suppose you could argue that when touch screen hardware exists the software will begin to change to accommodate it.
Maybe that's true to some degree, but I also kind of doubt Apple wants to follow in the footsteps of MS with the terrible reaction to Windows 8's amazingly bad new start menu (ironically the core of Win 8 is an improvement over Win 7 in terms of stability and performance). In other words, Apple isn't dumb enough to make use of a touch screen mandatory (or even a primary input method to begin with) even if they do implement them.
There will be a touch screen Macbook. Not today, probably not tomorrow, but it's coming and it's going to be completely ignorable if you don't find it useful.
An expensive, primary feature that is ignorable and not useful?
This is why there won't be a touch screen Macbook.
Touch screen tech isn't even particularly expensive now, and I'm talking about 2015-16. We're talking about a point in the future where not including a touch screen in your device's display would just be weird.
I would also argue that there is value in this functionality for the smaller laptops (13") simply because they're light enough to pick up and use in-hand. More importantly, use is determined by the user; a generation growing up with tablets is going to expect every device to have a touch screen. If you want your mobile product line to exist in the future, excluding touch interface because of some vague idea that it compromises power users is absurd.
I would pretty confidently bet that almost all displays will have touch interface in the near future (excluding TVs, though I'm sure someone, probably Samsung, will try it).
And I would simply argue that it's been tried and done. The only way touchscreens are useful are if a) it's a giant table, or b) you can hold it.
You don't hold laptops.
Also, why always assume that one thing replaces another. There is always room for a separate category if the distinction is large enough. Touch vs non-touch.
I'm with Atomic Walrus. Touch screens are going to keep going cheaper and cheaper, perhaps to a point where it won't be any significant price difference in touch vs nontouch panels. All displays everywhere will probably eventually be replaced by touch displays.
(And by cheaper I mean price AND battery consumption etc. Quick idle etc.)
Personally I think the barrier to a touch panel on a Mac isn't so much the cost of the hardware but the choices they would need to make about the user interface.
I think it could make sense if we are talking full screen apps with large UI elements but most of OS X is not like that and a finite pointing device like a mouse just works better.
If we look at Windows 8 Microsoft saw this problem as their tablets with a normal interface (2003-2011 era tablets running XP to Windows 7) did not sell well. So when they came to revisit this segment after Apple had broken through with the iPad they introduced Metro. Large UI elements, huge boxes for your fingers. But of course Windows users have largely rejected Metro they plainly hate it on Desktop systems and Laptops that lack touch screen input for the time being.
So the question becomes is Apple willing to follow Microsoft by adding a different interface to OS X or are they going to say we already have the iPad lets not waste energy trying to turn OS X in to iOS.
I think it could make sense if we are talking full screen apps with large UI elements but most of OS X is not like that and a finite pointing device like a mouse just works better.
If we look at Windows 8 Microsoft saw this problem as their tablets with a normal interface (2003-2011 era tablets running XP to Windows 7) did not sell well. So when they came to revisit this segment after Apple had broken through with the iPad they introduced Metro. Large UI elements, huge boxes for your fingers. But of course Windows users have largely rejected Metro they plainly hate it on Desktop systems and Laptops that lack touch screen input for the time being.
So the question becomes is Apple willing to follow Microsoft by adding a different interface to OS X or are they going to say we already have the iPad lets not waste energy trying to turn OS X in to iOS.
Well, I tend to disagree on the touchscreen bit. It's not about an iPad replacement but about an active digitizer available (have a look at the Modbook); we'll see how this one goes on with all other manufacturers jumping on that bandwagon (except for Apple, but then again, Nokia also ignored smartphones...).
Microsoft's mistake, IMHO, was that tried to shove the touch UI down desktop user's throats. I mean that makes zero sense to me. Save your metro crap for touch devices.
I thought Windows 7 was excellent. And I'm sure they have made a ton of improvements to win 8, but it doesn't matter to me. It's unusable.
In the near term, I hate that all laptops have to have a touchscreen because of microsoft. Not because that idea won't work, but because Microsoft's execution is bad.
A lot of people like it though, so I don't know.
Even the companies that make touch screen laptops also still make the non-touch screen versions. Check out Dell's current consumer line. A touch screen might make sense eventually for the MacBook Air. It's due for a screen improvement anyway. Perhaps there can be an option with the 13" rMBP eventually, but I won't be buying one. I'm a student and see no use for it on my laptop. I've had four years to master the trackpad pretty well. If I want a bigger touch screen than my iPhone I'll get an iPad.
I know plenty of Windows users who have recently purchased machines with Windows 7. Windows 8 is probably doing alright with the phones, but we know that the tablets and laptops aren't selling as many as Microsoft would like. I can imagine that the desktops hardly sell with Win 8. The features are useless as long as monitors aren't touch.
If Apple ever decides to actually merge iOS and OS X, then we might see touch in the computers. Until then I doubt we'll see any touch outside the trackpad.
I know plenty of Windows users who have recently purchased machines with Windows 7. Windows 8 is probably doing alright with the phones, but we know that the tablets and laptops aren't selling as many as Microsoft would like. I can imagine that the desktops hardly sell with Win 8. The features are useless as long as monitors aren't touch.
If Apple ever decides to actually merge iOS and OS X, then we might see touch in the computers. Until then I doubt we'll see any touch outside the trackpad.
It'll make the screen thicker and increase cost. It's cheaper, but it's far from non-zero, especially on a larger screen.
I don't need a computer to read some word file. If so, I would had bought an Ipad.
Just try to imagine myself the experience of trying to touch a tiny subscript or exponent in a long equation written using scientific workplace.
Or trying to select a single or few pixel to be modified using Adobe Lightroom or Adobe Photoshop. How bug should I make a single pixel to be able to select it in a retina disply using my finger?
And, uau, manage Stata using touch.
From a software point of view, the fact is that you cannot add touch to an OS not designed for that (see win7 for example) while designing an OS for touch means that you miss a lot of usability with a conventional (and much more effective and precise) mouse (ex win8, one of the reasons why I'm moving to apple).
From an hardware point of view, a touch monitor is less durable and requires much more care: I spend a lot of money to buy a retina display to have it always dirt, or to have to clean in advance my hands before using it?
Just try to imagine myself the experience of trying to touch a tiny subscript or exponent in a long equation written using scientific workplace.
Or trying to select a single or few pixel to be modified using Adobe Lightroom or Adobe Photoshop. How bug should I make a single pixel to be able to select it in a retina disply using my finger?
And, uau, manage Stata using touch.
From a software point of view, the fact is that you cannot add touch to an OS not designed for that (see win7 for example) while designing an OS for touch means that you miss a lot of usability with a conventional (and much more effective and precise) mouse (ex win8, one of the reasons why I'm moving to apple).
From an hardware point of view, a touch monitor is less durable and requires much more care: I spend a lot of money to buy a retina display to have it always dirt, or to have to clean in advance my hands before using it?
- Status