Waiting for Skylake MBP thread

[tofagerl]

Self moving mouse pointer...?
Is that the problem description, or is that a new Dell feature that isn't working right?

"With the new Dell Self Moving Mouse Pointer, you don't even have to use the computer! We hire small 8 year old children from third world countries to browse Facebook, Twitter and Instagram for you!"

 

[nollic]

Front page rumors

 

[Loge]

Note that Apple no longer calls it "Best for Display"; it is just default, more space or larger text. The implication is that they no longer want you to regard the scaled modes as inferior, in particular since these are now defaults on the iPhone Plus and new MB. If the DPI is high enough it should not matter (though I appreciate the current MBP resolution may not be high enough for those with good vision).

 

[heeloliver]

https://www.macrumors.com/2016/08/24/macos-sierra-code-thunderbolt-3/

 

[WRONG]

i hope you're wrong

Yes sir?

https://www.macrumors.com/2016/08/24/macos-sierra-code-thunderbolt-3/

YES! YES! Some interesting rumors about Mac.
Nothing really surprising I must say, but it's always nice to have some kind of confirm...

 

[ChinkyBob]

Guys! The new macbook pro has been leaked online

I love that clip, first time I saw it.
'I will buy anything if it's a shiny and has an Apple logo on it ' said with a straight face had me laughing all day.
Lots of little gems in there too.

 

[ManhattanProject]

Yes sir?



YES! YES! Some interesting rumors about Mac.
Nothing really surprising I must say, but it's always nice to have some kind of confirm...

Meh. That's old news actually, dont know why it's on the front page today. Code hints were uncovered way back in June, they were even posted on this thread. So basically nothing exciting today. We have the invitations to look foward to though.

 

[x-evil-x]

Meh. That's old news actually, dont know why it's on the front page today. Code hints were uncovered way back in June, they were even posted on this thread. So basically nothing exciting today. We have the invitations to look foward too though.

I thought the recent leak back in june was just the polaris information not what was found today

 

[ChinkyBob]

Wouldn't hold my breath for the September event. Here's what I think we'll get:

- iPhone 7 and 7 Plus. Tim Describing how they are the best iPhones ever released. Crowd goes crazy, up until the point where they mention they ditched the headphone jack and an awkward silence forms.

- Apple Watch 2. Yes, they will bring out that guy Kevin again. You know, the one who will be stuttering on stage while presenting his new Mickey Mouse watchfaces for the Apple Watch 2. This is the time where I will flip out and throw my Apple TV remote through the glass of my TV.

- Speaking of Apple TV, they will demo all the new software for the ATV, iPhone and iPad.

- Last but not least, one more thing! Forget about MBPs, here is the upgraded iPad Pro 12.9". It looks exactly the same as the one we introduced last year, but now it has the same display technology we introduced on the 9.7" back in March. Also, you can now pair it with the new international keyboard layouts which we released a month ago! What's a computer?!

Finally, Tim will be back on stage and wrap up the event.

They better wheel out Steve Jobs himself if they don't have announcement of Macbook Pro at September event.

 

[Samtb]

They better wheel out Steve Jobs himself if they don't have announcement of Macbook Pro at September event.

Wouldn't surprise me if we don't see a new MacBook Pro until early 2017.

 

[ChinkyBob]

reply: Dang.

on a side note: the only thing that would depress me about getting a cheaper 2015 vs a costly 2016 would be if the 2016 had a 4K screen, yes I would cry and be sad, very sad...

 

[Starlock]

Some more silly Apple related videos to distract yourself from the infinite skylake wait:

The Mactini

The iToilet

 

[fastasleep]

Sod it. I'm buying a MacBook and one of these: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/thewolfe/the-wolfe-supercharge-your-laptop

Might want to get a Mac that has Thunderbolt — the MacBook does not.

 

[ManhattanProject]

I thought the recent leak back in june was just the polaris information not what was found today

Here:

https://twitter.com/felix_schwarz/status/742609033903910912/photo/1

If you scroll down he also found references to USB 3.1 Gen 2, and that was way back in June 13. Also why the hell is MR reporting that Thunderbolt 3 support has been found?! No such thing has been found...yet. This site's quality has been slowly deteriorating.
Link: https://pikeralpha.wordpress.com

 

[fastasleep]

What am I missing exactly? The only scaling available in OS X is to render everything at double the resolution and downscale or upscale to match the screen. OS X doesn't even have a system wide font size setting. The original point was that UI elements will become smaller if you increase the display resolution. The only way to make them bigger again is to use a larger scaling which negates any advantage of having a higher resolution display.

Wait, why do you think it negates having a higher resolution? It's still going to be just as sharp, but the UI elements will be larger proportionally on screen. It sounds like you think you'd be like, rasterizing the entire screen as a lower res image using less pixels than what's available on screen and then scaling that up to fit, which is not how this works at all. You're always using all the pixels in your display.

 

[Schranke]

You mean these?

The only setting relevant for me is More Space. loves to have a big work space

 

[curmudgeonette]

You mean these?

Switching scaling this way is like using a channel 3 RF modulator to connect your VCR to your TV.

Where's the option to shrink/enlarge UI elements while allowing your photo editing software access to exactly every (no more no less) pixel on the screen? Just how good is Apple's downsampling? Lets say your photo software rendered a photo at what it thought was 1 image pixel to 1 screen pixel - and it really turns out that it is 1 image pixel to 1 virtual framebuffer pixel. Lets say you photo is almost all white with a few random solitary black pixels. In more space mode, will Apple's algorithm preserve all the black pixels? What if it is a black photo with a few white pixels? What if (a zillion other special cases that are difficult to downsample)? What if your software tries to game the downsampling by scaling it's image to 150% - will Apple's shrink to 66.7% algorithm result in every original pixel getting onto one screen pixel?

 

[richinaus]

The funny thing about this wait is I know it will make virtually 0 difference to my life but I can't wait for them to be released and am likely to spend a fortune.

I don't get it. Must be an addiction and you guys feeding me rumours / chit chat are not helping

also to give some opinion on scaling - I have never had a problem with OSX scaling and always max out the resolution.

 

[fastasleep]

Switching scaling this way is like using a channel 3 RF modulator to connect your VCR to your TV.

Where's the option to shrink/enlarge UI elements while allowing your photo editing software access to exactly every (no more no less) pixel on the screen? Just how good is Apple's downsampling? Lets say your photo software rendered a photo at what it thought was 1 image pixel to 1 screen pixel - and it really turns out that it is 1 image pixel to 1 virtual framebuffer pixel. Lets say you photo is almost all white with a few random solitary black pixels. In more space mode, will Apple's algorithm preserve all the black pixels? What if it is a black photo with a few white pixels? What if (a zillion other special cases that are difficult to downsample)? What if your software tries to game the downsampling by scaling it's image to 150% - will Apple's shrink to 66.7% algorithm result in every original pixel getting onto one screen pixel?

For pixel-accurate rendering and editing of any stuff you're working on, you always zoom to 100% to the corresponding display, no? If you're concerned about pixel accuracy, why would you do anything different?

 

[fatboyhouston]

The funny thing about this wait is I know it will make virtually 0 difference to my life but I can't wait for them to be released and am likely to spend a fortune.

Same here, I obsessed about this for months and convinced myself I HAD to have a MBP. Then I got bored of waiting and bought a used 2015 model. Which I hardly use. But still I keep coming back to this thread.

Maybe it's like mountain climbing. The pain and the anticipation are more gratifying than the view at the top.

Or maybe I'm just an idiot.

 

[GubbyMan]

Wait, why do you think it negates having a higher resolution? It's still going to be just as sharp, but the UI elements will be larger proportionally on screen. It sounds like you think you'd be like, rasterizing the entire screen as a lower res image using less pixels than what's available on screen and then scaling that up to fit, which is not how this works at all. You're always using all the pixels in your display.

This Wikipedia page mentions the problem with Apples approach.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_independence

On June 11, 2012, Apple introduced the 2012 MacBook Pro with a resolution of 2880×1800 or 5.2 megapixels - doubling the pixel density in both dimensions.[2] The laptop shipped with a version of OS X that provided support to scale the user interface twice as big as it has been previously been. This feature is called HighDPI mode in OS X and it uses a fixed scaling factor of 2 to increase the size of the user interface for high-DPI screens. Apple also introduced support for scaling the UI by rendering the user interface on higher or smaller resolution that the laptop's built-in native resolution and scaling the output to the laptop screen. One obvious downside of this approach is either a decreased performance on rendering the UI on a higher than native resolution or increased blurriness when rendering lower than native resolution. Thus, while the OS X's user interface can be scaled using this approach, the UI itself is not resolution-independent.

So UI elements can't become sharper than the 2x size that is used in HiDPI which means that the 2 first options in the image that I posted will look as blurry as the lower resolution screen that they are trying to look like. There is no advantage in having a higher resolution display unless the UI elements become smaller.

 

[vatter69]

Every time i read stuff like self moving mouse curser (we all agree that sophisticated cutting edge technology as a mouse curser takes some time to mature right?) - i cringe.

While the specs read awesome (32GB ram, NVME SDD etc) - it reminds me of the Android phones. They all come with quad or sometimes octa cores, 4 or even 6 gig of rams etc and routinely get blown away by Apple Hardware using half as strong hardware. (http://bgr.com/2016/08/22/galaxy-note-7-vs-iphone-6-speed-test/)

There is just no substitute for a polished and hand optimized HW and SW compared to this rushed nonsense that Dell & Co and especially Microsoft has been throwing at us.

I'll continue to wait, no doubt about that.

 

[Arthur75]

Switching scaling this way is like using a channel 3 RF modulator to connect your VCR to your TV.

Where's the option to shrink/enlarge UI elements while allowing your photo editing software access to exactly every (no more no less) pixel on the screen? Just how good is Apple's downsampling? Lets say your photo software rendered a photo at what it thought was 1 image pixel to 1 screen pixel - and it really turns out that it is 1 image pixel to 1 virtual framebuffer pixel. Lets say you photo is almost all white with a few random solitary black pixels. In more space mode, will Apple's algorithm preserve all the black pixels? What if it is a black photo with a few white pixels? What if (a zillion other special cases that are difficult to downsample)? What if your software tries to game the downsampling by scaling it's image to 150% - will Apple's shrink to 66.7% algorithm result in every original pixel getting onto one screen pixel?

The scaling does not work at the pixel level!
UI elements and text are scaled in a "vector" way (or using the stored larger descriptions), and raster images are still using all the pixel on the screen

 

[metalisticpain]

While the specs read awesome (32GB ram, NVME SDD etc) - it reminds me of the Android phones. They all come with quad or sometimes octa cores, 4 or even 6 gig of rams etc and routinely get blown away by Apple Hardware using half as strong hardware. (http://bgr.com/2016/08/22/galaxy-note-7-vs-iphone-6-speed-test/)

There is just no substitute for a polished and hand optimized HW and SW compared to this rushed nonsense that Dell & Co and especially Microsoft has been throwing at us.

Yet on the other hand you can set any audio file as your ring and text tones and its no hack job...

 

[Arthur75]

This Wikipedia page mentions the problem with Apples approach.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Resolution_independence


So UI elements can't become sharper than the 2x size that is used in HiDPI which means that the 2 first options in the image that I posted will look as blurry as the lower resolution screen that they are trying to look like. There is no advantage in having a higher resolution display unless the UI elements become smaller.

No!
Is the text more blurry when you select a font size of say 20 instead of 12 in a word processing software?
no
Exactly the same here, osX uses bigger font size when you select bigger UI elements, but still uses the native resolution to its best.
Again, the scaling does not work at pixel level.