What I was trying to say was that it a senseless argument and besides the point. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to recognize that corporations are set up to generate profit for it's investors. The power lies with the shareholders, they appoint temporary representatives in the form of the board of directors that manage the company. Another major issue is that the vast majority of shares in the private sector are owned by an extremely small minority of people, and these people by in large pursue short term financial gain at the expense of everything else, whether it is the environment, or some other externality of significant unaccounted consequence. So yes, technically if for some odd reason a minority of shareholders tried to get their way against the management for not having their best interest at heart, they would have a hard case to sell unless they have enough support but make no mistake about it, the vast majority of corporations are obsessive about short term profit maximization. This is why you see firms spending more cash on advertising superficial changes every iteration rather than actual R&D all the time.
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 Skylake MBP thread
- Thread starter adildacoolset
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
What I was trying to say was that it a senseless argument and besides the point. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to recognize that corporations are set up to generate profit for it's investors. The power lies with the shareholders, they appoint temporary representatives in the form of the board of directors that manage the company. Another major issue is that the vast majority of shares in the private sector are owned by an extremely small minority of people, and these people by in large pursue short term financial gain at the expense of everything else, whether it is the environment, or some other externality of significant unaccounted consequence. So yes, technically if for some odd reason a minority of shareholders tried to get their way against the management for not having their best interest at heart, they would have a hard case to sell unless they have enough support but make no mistake about it, the vast majority of corporations are obsessive about short term profit maximization. This is why you see firms spending more cash on advertising superficial changes every iteration rather than actual R&D all the time.
I could live with a new rMB if it gets another port and the performance specs are respectable. I don't need a workhorse, I just need something that is future proof for a while as far as features go. With all of that said I really want a Pro and I will most likely buy a Pro. Lol
This is the truly sad thing: re: apple.
I work in 'short term advertising' ..I make short term advertising...
I'm probably going to have to switch to Windows sooner or later because I need power over form....I find it a little sad because, so far, apple has served me well...
I know exactly what I'm talking about. And you? Well it's clear you can't read.
How is that? In your imagination?New macbook didn't even appear so we don't know if there will be or not version with dGPU and competition (Asus, Dell) have dGpu options.
Nope, just logic. Apple has dropped dGPUs in the base MBP's (13" and 15") and has only decided to keep it on the top 15". They might keep a dGPU in the top model with this year's Macs, but if Intel finally manages to catch nvidia/amd higher-end movile gpus (which has already done with the middle-end), there's no reason to keep dGPU and they will finally ditch it.
Second reason: eGPUs on Thunderbolt 3. That reason is enought not to keep an average/low performing dGPU. Apple is not the one to put top-end dGPUs on their Macbooks, but the lower end gamma, and they usually perform quite bad compared to its competence. That's it, it seems that Apple doesn't matter about their computer competitors.
And as a third reason, for Apple a dGPU means: more heat, less thermal headroom (thus more CPU throttling), adding a point of failure, less benefits than just sticking with an iGPU, and just a small boost on performance, since Apple won't go for a GTX980m or whatever comes next, but for the mid-low end gamma which is already on par with Skylake iGPUs as we start to see in benchmarks.
Seriously, don't take it personal. I know that if you love having a dGPU for whatever reason, seeing Apple dropping them is not funny, but you'll get used to it (like Mac users got used to work without CD's, floppy discs, etc). Anyway, if you want graphic computing power to do some calculations, the Intel iGPUs are much better performing (OpenCL, etc) and have more brute force that the gaming nVidias. And if you want graphic power to move games, there are better options than a Mac dGPU.
That said, I think it's quite clear the reasons why Apple might drop them, so now it's up to you to see it or ignore it, but please if you answer again do it with some arguments to justify it, not with wishes.
I doubt it. The fact that iPhones are their major income (by huge margin) doesn't mean they are not delighted to make hundreds of millions from computers (their 3rd income). Otherwise they wouldn't be neither doing Apple TVs, mouses, keyboards, music services, etc. Because all these, don't give a fraction of the benefits iPhones give.
If that affirmation was in the sense of "iPhones/iPads will replace computers as devices with computing cappabilities able to be connected to a display/keyboard", I neither think so. iPad sells stagnate year after year, so Apple just needs to see how these new iPad Pros won't save this situation, to keep focussing on their Macs which are stable or slightly increasing year after year. They won't give up on this niche and the millions of benefits they get from it.
This, or they will come up with some hybrid device similar to Surface, but I guess (and hope) they are clever enough to make it based in OSX or whatever desktop OS comes next, instead of iOS. Otherwise they won't do it better than iPads on sells, but even worse. This means a Mac with a tactile display, not an iPad. But seeing how they can sell now 2 products instead of one (thus much more benefits), I highly doubt they'll take this path.
And what would everyone code ios apps on? You think they will say go code on windows 10? Relax their EULA to allow virtualisation?
I think not.
Xamarin just got open sourced... So yes you can code on Windows 10, and for free now.
Totally...
But seriously, Apple is a company which makes computer. Period. An iPhone IS a computer. An iPad IS a computer. So is an Apple Watch, and an Apple TV, and an iPod Shuffle for that matter.
What it really comes down to is: computers are tools for living in a digital age. Apple makes those tools and the accessories to go with them. But not every customer has the same needs. My grandmother-in-law doesn't need a laptop; all she needs is an iPad. My wife, who is a hospital administrator and uses desktops and laptops at work, only needs a phone at home for all her computing needs.
So who honestly and truly needs a laptop computer with a deeper operating system, more versatile software, a better interface and higher performance processors than an iPad Pro? Not that many people, but enough.
Graphic artists (how many of these are there, honestly?), writers (that's me!), software coders (so not me it's not even funny), engineers who don't have a company computer (startup?), web designers... The list goes on and on. But the population who NEEDS these tools is, and always has been, small... niche, even. It just so happened that the people who needed iPads didn't have another option.
Now, there are some smaller niches than the subset of people who need a laptop. Heavy processing users... And gamers. Apparently Apple has decided these groups are too small to justify creating mammoth machines with desktop internals and two hour battery life. Apple has never catered to those markets. But I don't see Apple giving up on the general laptop market any time soon. We're highly profitable, maybe not in the way iPhones are profitable, but certainly a chunk of people large enough that shareholders would have a fit if Apple abandoned us to Microsoft (full disclosure: I still have never used an OSX machine outside an Apple Store... Yet).
I know it's easy to get upset on the internet about someone saying iPads can replace laptops, but let's be perfectly honest: for most people, they most certainly can. But nowhere in that statement do I see Apple abandoning traditional laptop and desktop computers. Ford still makes trucks, even though most people drive cars and SUVs. Canon still makes professional cameras despite most people moving away from DSLRs, and Hollywood still makes movies despite YouTube's growing popularity. Apple makes computers, and though the Mac might not be the computer for everyone, it will remain important to Apple as long as there is a large enough need for those devices.
Actually today shareholder wealth has little to do with it. That is just the bull the C suite pedals. It really is all about enriching the corporate Execs especially the CEO. They all sit on each others boards and perpetuate the fraud. There are few exceptions notably the CEO of CostCo and a few others.
http://www.amazon.com/Intel-Compone...8&qid=1459634644&sr=1-2&keywords=skull+canyon
Benchmarks are coming by the end of this month
Benchmarks are coming by the end of this month
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Now that I feel like we are getting closer to what's inevitable, I would like to humbly share my Wish list, and some thoughts. I think we can all agree that Apple likes to leap frog the market. At this point, most brands have caught up with the rMBP.. And in a lot of cases, there are nicer options around.. (Just talking hardware). While it's hard to compare a mac to a Lenovo because of the OS limitations.. I know Apple does not like to be outshone. The current rMBP is pretty old. If you guys remember the first Air, it was dog slow, but beautiful and pointed us in the direction Apple was going in and they did. I think the air line is peaked and needs to merge with the new MacBook which is a fantastic machine. The 11 inch air becomes the 12 and the 13, a 14. And like some of you have keenly mentioned, Apple does not like to have products at the same size.. But I think it's bound to happen at the 14 range which is a very popular size for all brands. So the 13/15 pros become 14/16? Who knows... Just fun to speculate and think about. Was at an Apple Store in LA and even the genius said he heard a 17 inch or Pro was coming back, maybe special order.. Maybe it's just the 16? I hope so.. That extra screen while doing my photography will be a big help. I can see Apple making a big marketing point that they put a bigger screen into the same size form factor and how they are finally going Bezel free (and it's about time because the bezel is history)
What else can Apple do? Like the air, the MacBook points us where they are going.. Same trackpad, new keyboard, and I love the idea of a integrated finger scanner borrowed from the iOS devices. Maybe they can integrate that into the trackpad?
16-32GB Ram (realistic)
2TB Flash (realistic)
16 inch display bezel free (like Dell XPS)
Quad Core HT Mobile Xeon and or i7 pro (realistic)
Dedicated strongest possible GPU
Strong thermodynamics (realistic)
Finger reader to unlock, and usable throughout the OS like iOS.
MacBook keyboard (realistic)
MagSafe (hopefully)
USB-C (realistic)
Thunderbolt 3
Dedicated USB port (realistic)
SD card reader (worried this will be removed)
(Don't know how they will organize all these ports... Ideas?)
Color options, give me space grey (realistic)
20 hour battery life, is this possible with a larger battery and skylake??
Major facelift to the form factor (realistic)
[doublepost=1459658130][/doublepost]
Pretty cool box!!
What else can Apple do? Like the air, the MacBook points us where they are going.. Same trackpad, new keyboard, and I love the idea of a integrated finger scanner borrowed from the iOS devices. Maybe they can integrate that into the trackpad?
16-32GB Ram (realistic)
2TB Flash (realistic)
16 inch display bezel free (like Dell XPS)
Quad Core HT Mobile Xeon and or i7 pro (realistic)
Dedicated strongest possible GPU
Strong thermodynamics (realistic)
Finger reader to unlock, and usable throughout the OS like iOS.
MacBook keyboard (realistic)
MagSafe (hopefully)
USB-C (realistic)
Thunderbolt 3
Dedicated USB port (realistic)
SD card reader (worried this will be removed)
(Don't know how they will organize all these ports... Ideas?)
Color options, give me space grey (realistic)
20 hour battery life, is this possible with a larger battery and skylake??
Major facelift to the form factor (realistic)
[doublepost=1459658130][/doublepost]
Pretty cool box!!
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
Sure an iPad can replace an OSX machine for the majority of tasks. It's just that it makes it more of a pain in the ass to accomplish said tasks.
Apple Desktops and Laptops are not going away anytime soon. They're the foundation of Apple's products, and have a vital part in their Eco system.
Apple Desktops and Laptops are not going away anytime soon. They're the foundation of Apple's products, and have a vital part in their Eco system.
How did you find such a deal?
I would purchase the old version right now if I was given a price point near that.
Honest question for all of you people needing a super slimmer-thinner-portable laptop: why don't you refer to the MacBook Air? Or even the MacBook?
I don't understand.
If your needs are the portability rather than performance, isn't better a computer that's actually lighter and cheaper?
I don't understand.
If your needs are the portability rather than performance, isn't better a computer that's actually lighter and cheaper?
I have done my time, but now I am back! It was sooooooo worth it, though.
On a better note, I am looking forward to another couple of months of healthy discussion about what people want or don't want from the new rMBP (without anyone in particular having personal digs at people in their posts).
Bring on WWDC!
It was sooooooo worth it, though.On a better note, I am looking forward to another couple of months of healthy discussion about what people want or don't want from the new rMBP (without anyone in particular having personal digs at people in their posts).
Bring on WWDC!
I have done my time, but now I am back!
On a better note, I am looking forward to another couple of months of healthy discussion about what people want or don't want from the new rMBP (without anyone in particular having personal digs at people in their posts).
Bring on WWDC!
What did you go down for?
Because I don't need portability, I need efficiency.
Currently rMBP 15" without dGPU is inefficient because it's designed with CPU+dGPU TDP constraints in mind. Removing dGPU from the constraints will allow to shrink the size, increase battery life, throttle less and/or maybe even remove the fan and add heatsink making rMBP fanless (doubt the last one very much as it will also increase the weight drastically).
I would very much like if Apple throw away the dGPU and install much more powerful 65-75W TDP CPU without shrinking the size at all but unfortunately Apple would never do it for "fashion" reasons and also Intel does not provide such mobile parts (though this can be changed for such a big partner Apple is IMHO; current Intel architectures are made highly customizable).
It's not quite terminologically right, but I think you'd understand what I'm trying to say: Air is not more portable, it's just less powerful thus inherently smaller.
Last edited:
I don't take it personal
I just think you are wrong."but if Intel finally manages to catch nvidia/amd higher-end movile gpus" - probably never happen as new gpus on 14/16nm will arrive this year
"(which has already done with the middle-end)" - if middle-end is 940m ddr3 then yes but for me middle end is 960m and highend are 970m and 980m (comparing iris 550 to 950m ddr5 we can be sure that iris 580 will be deffinitly slower than 950m ddr5)
"the Intel iGPUs are much better performing (OpenCL, etc) and have more brute force that the gaming nVidias" - thats new for me, can you give me some links to benchmarks?
- Status