Slashdot Mirror
Apple Should Stop Selling Four-Year-Old Computers (theverge.com)
It's been a while since Apple upgraded its MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Pro models. Four years, one month, and twenty-four days, to be exact, in case of the MacBook Pro. Apple is inexplicably still selling the exact same models for its Mac line that it introduced in 2012. Pretty much every Windows OEM has had an Intel Skylake-powered processor in its laptops for more than a year now, but Apple's computing lineup is still shipping with the three-to-four years old processor, and graphics card. Things have gotten so bad, that MacRumors' Buying Guide, which is considered to be an "online institution" among Apple nerds, has flagged all of Apple laptops as "Don't Buy" In a column, The Verge's Sam Byford says that Apple should stop selling the old laptops. He writes: Apple iterates quickly and consistently in mobile because the rate of technological progress is so much more dramatic in that arena. The company does amazing work to keep its iPhones and iPads ahead of competitors, performance-wise. Simple Intel processor upgrades are less important to laptops these days, however, and I'm finding this 2012 MacBook Pro fine to work from right now -- faster than my 2015 MacBook, at least, which is enough for my needs. But that doesn't mean it isn't unconscionable for Apple to continue to sell outdated products to people who may not know any better. Is the company really saving that much money by using 2012 processors and 4GB of RAM as standard? Even an update to Intel's Haswell chips from 2013 would have brought huge battery life improvements. Apple is bound by the whims of its suppliers to a certain extent, and it may not always make sense for the company to upgrade its products with every single new chip or GPU that comes out. But there's a certain point at which it just starts to look like absent-mindedness, and many Mac computers are well past that point now. [...] If Apple doesn't want to keep its products reasonably current, that's its prerogative. But if that truly is the case, maybe it shouldn't sell them at all.It's also ironic, coming from a company whose executive not long ago made fun of people who had five years old computer. Folks at Accidental Tech Podcast also discussed the same recently.
You should be buying a Mac as a fashion accessory. Gotta let everyone at the coffee shop know how hip and cool you are.
... are still good.
" Even an update to Intel's Haswell chips from 2013 would have brought huge battery life improvements" All MacBook Pro Retina has Haswell processors.
I agree, this is crazy. My work MacBook Pro has depreciated to $0, but if I want to replace it all I can get is the exact same computer. There is no reason to replace it.
Bring back the PowerBook!
Mac computers are very usable and nice. The problem isn't Apple is selling old hardware. The problem is Apple is selling old hardware at the same price it did on day 1.
The company does amazing work to keep its iPhones and iPads ahead of competitors, performance-wise.
Um....
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
I have the same computer I've had for the last 4 years, and except replacing my mirror RAID with SSD drives, it's been the same. I'm a developer who does a lot of contract work, but 70% of my work is creating pretty diagrams, documents, writing e-mails and browsing. Using Eclipse or Visual Studio doesn't require me to upgrade. last game I bought on the PC was New Order and that works fine.
So who needs a brand-new computer:
- gamers; a minority especially on a Mac
- folks doing audio/video stuff; a minority as well
- developers? Doubtful, I have an old Mac for the occasional app development and it works just fine with Xamarin
- hipsters or other people bragging about their gear? A minority
Most of the people I know with a Mac have the same machine humming along for 2-3 years as well. It's usually sales guys or "artistes" who tout the latest gear, but 90% of the time everyone gives them a blank look when they mention their new toy.
No one in the real world cares about the latest system.
The 2012 laptop is faster than the 2015 laptop but Apple should stop selling it ... why, exactly?
-=This sig has nothing to do with my comment. Move along now=-
I didn't realize Apple was selling computers specifically designed for four year olds. Where can I get one for my daughter?
lol. Apptops. This is actually funny.
"this is really sad"
Yeah, that's right, I got it in July of 2011 and it is still working fine! Is it maxed out on memory (16gb) and also was upgraded to have a flash drive. At this point I want to see how far I can take it - it's kind of a point of pride for me now although I really don't have any complaints about it. Even the battery works well enough to get me though a meeting.
There's still one in the "Buy" list: http://www.macrumors.com/roundup/retina-macbook-air/
Pretty much every Windows OEM has had an Intel Skylake-powered processor in its laptops for more than a year now, but Apple's computing lineup is still shipping with the three-to-four years old processor, and graphics card.
Ahem. That's a bald-faced lie. The 2016 MacBook now has a Skylake processor.
Exhibit A.
IOW, nothing but Clickbait. As usual.
OSX came out in the early 2000's and they still are using it as their operating system.
They seem to work just fine as they are! Shit, I still have a 2008 Macbook (original Al case) the works just fine too. Maybe a color change would make Sam happy.
Conservative, mod down for violating
then Apple should continue to take advantage of these extra-stupid buyers. Clearing inventory is almost always needed. Clearing inventory at first-day prices is genius. Steve Jobs still lives on at Apple!
Even a moderately-price Wintel PC packs a powerful 3d graphics card, but most Macs come with Intels HAHAHHHHA built-in graphics, and even those few insanely overpriced ones that have real graphics cards have weak-kneed ones. Hey this is a 4 year old post complaining about that, but that's the whole gist of TFA yes? https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/1528ix/for_2500_why_is_the_graphics_card_on_macbook_pros/ https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130923135444AA128Ry http://www.imore.com/will-apple-ever-get-its-gaming-act-together-state-mac-gaming-2014 http://9to5mac.com/2016/03/03/oculus-rift-mac-support/
Seriously Apple: Get your shit together. I love my iPhone and would love to ditch Microsoft's Windows 10 shrink-wrapped smega, but you're just not trying,
Archived and buried withing an hour
https://news.slashdot.org/stor...
This is a sensible strategy. Moores Law is over. Intels processor performance is only 30% better than it was 5 years ago. Computers aren't improving much year over year overall. The last jump in decent improvement was the introduction of SSD's. I am sorry to say it looks like digital computing is a dead end: we won't be seeing AI or the Singularity everyone wishes for with digital computers.
At this point it looks like that have decided to exit the computer market and are just taking the profits from the old tooling and work for as long as they can. With the presumably massive profits they are making on these at this point, keeping OS/X upgrades happening until people actually stop buying is probably still more the profitable enough.
The question now is if MS can get away with them exiting the market or if they might have to throw them another bribe to keep them in the business and the investigations away? At this point even that should raise serious questions as Apple are far from short of cash.
i still i own and use on a daily basis an iMac from 2011. It's still a great computer, and beyond a planned RAM upgrade, there isn't a thing i would change on it
"life is a joke, and someone is laughing at me"
A quick check of Wikipedia would tell you what most people who follow Apple already know: that Apple has a habit of quietly revving its current computers without much fanfare, upgrading their computers on a regular basis.
The current 13 inch and 15 inch MacBook Pros that Apple sell were last updated early 2015. (This correlates with Apple's own on-line store.)
It's not to suggest their current models aren't a little long in the tooth. And it's not to suggest that Apple may be a little behind in using the latest and greatest processors--though one problem Apple has is that they sell quite a bit of volume, so sometimes being on the bleeding edge may not permit them to get the volume of parts they need. But they most certainly are not selling a 4 year old computer.
This story is going to be 90% Apple fanboys defending their poor choices. It's amazing to me the mental gymnastics they use to justify paying twice as much for less.
Thunderbolt is kind of an bust & Intel low pci-e count does not really help. But at least with skylake they will get DMI 3.0 that moves the 2.0 X4 DMI link to 3.0 X4.
Also the big thin push hurts them more with cutting ports and only having 1 TB bus so that all ext stuff has to shear the TB link with DP data. Now if they do put some stuff like E-net and wifi on the DMI / chipset bus. Then in the laptops / mini they can switch the X16 to X8 video (if the system has an non Intel gpu) X4 TB 3.0 X4 pci-e storage or with out video X8 2 TB 3.0 buses X8 2 X4 storage.
Now the macpro is a real bust and with 1 cpu the pci-e lane count does not give them the room to do TB 3.0 without an lot of changes. Like switch the video to X8 X8 freeing up 3 X4 links for TB and 1 more X4 for the 2th pci-e storage card. or adding an 2rd cpu giving them room for 2-4 storage cards and 4-6 TB 3.0 buses + 10 GB e-net.
I mean, it's not like selling the same model for several years keeps support costs down or anything.
Oh, wait ...
Nope, no sig
Apple keeps these old machines for the education market in what is essentially a scam by any moral standards but is of course "just business" to all our lovely sociopathic business (and political) leaders. They keep certain products around to stay in that magical sub $1000 price bracket, or occasionally just above it (see current POS budget iMac, which comes in at $1049 with educational discount). It's either a "new" but completely shitty model (same iMac) or an antiquated model (budget MacBook "pro", which was a dog when released and is, of course, even more horrible to use with a modern OS on it, and yet it is still sold as a "new" model.) Amazingly, this model is so poorly designed it is even experiencing HDD CABLE!!! failures. Seriously. They are dying in droves. How the hell do you design a HDD cable that fails? It just has to fucking sit there. That's it. Dipshits of the highest degree.
At least do price cuts / ram / cpu and storage boosts to make them look like they are not ripping people off.
I am looking for a new laptop and one with "2012 processors and 4GB of RAM" is totally suitable for my needs.
As it happens, I am writing this on a 4-year old MacBook Pro. It is fast and reliable and I have yet to find any Mac software I want that I cannot run. If I lost this one, I would definitely want to buy a replacement, but I don't feel a need to upgrade just because. Now, I know that having the latest-greatest CPU is cool, but what exactly would that buy me if I bought it?
Create a Change.org petition for Apple to upgrade their hardware. [ I'm sure it will be as effective as the one to shutdown Rotten Tomatoes over their "Suicide Squad" reviews. :-) ]
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
One part of me agrees, but another part of me says If the stuff you need to do still runs OK then whats the problem?
Apple is completely a walled garden so they can also control the software bloat.
It seems most of the push for new consumer hardware is actually because Microsoft themselves are always shovelling more and more sloppy and pointless resource-gobbling crap into Windows, and that the culture that Windows itself follows and encourages is to write temporary files and other crap all over the C: drive without ever deleting it.
I've met enough non-technical people that somehow believe that the thing to do is to to buy a new PC every time they fill up their old one or when it slows to a crawl because they can't stop installing shit that runs in the background.
As for MacRumors, they seem to be of the opinion that a major update is on the way and it is worth waiting to see before buying. I agree with that sentiment if you do not absolutely need one now or want the free Beats...
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Rhymes with Craptops. Apple approved!
Crapple approved?
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
That Apple is just going to move the MacBook line to ARM eventually.
I guess it depends on how many they are still selling. I am confused about why the entire Mac line seems to be neglected, though. Presumably a company the size of Apple has some engineers working on coming up with some new Macs?
This entire suggestion is stupid unless consumers enjoy paying for obscenely priced factory memory and non-removable hard drives, which these components being replaceable are two great features that still exist in this "dinosaur" model they're still selling.
And yes, I'm still considering biting the bullet to buy one for those specific reasons, since Apple has gone the asinine route and forces you to buy their memory and hard drive upgrades at time of purchase for every other model they sell. I already own a late-2012 i7 Mac Mini (which is almost identical hardware to this model) that absolutely SCREAMS with 16GB RAM and SSD upgrade, so I'm already familiar with how this "ancient" laptop would likely perform with some minor replaceable components.
Once this model disappears, you will be forced to purchase damn near every hardware upgrade you might ever need up-front and all from Apple. Dunno about anyone else, but I won't be enjoying that stupidity at all.
Before Steve Jobs died Apple were completely creaming everyone in basically everything they did innovation and consumer experience wise. No one else made nearly as good laptops, the iPad was as big a revolution as they get in electronic devices, the iPhone was a complete revolution that bankrupted any company that didn't clone it virtually down to the appearance of every icon in GUI, the iPod, iTunes bankrupted all major record stores, etc -- every 2 years or so they would come out with something that blew everything else out of the water.
Now in the 5 years all we have is a stupid watch.
The difference between Apple with Jobs and Apple under Cook couldn't be starker. This is new to you people??
This is exactly why I'm going the Hackintosh route. Better hardware at a much better price.
HANDSOME so handsome these Apples. They are so HANDSOME in fact that all gay porn sites are FREE
FREE just like WINDOWS 10 Anniversary FREE
My wife is a Mac user and last year we bought her a new prior-year model from the store. She both insists on using a Mac and insists on having an internal DVD drive. The only offering that met her requirements was the prior model.
The whole article summary is cookoo flamebait. First Apple does have skylake processors in it's line up. https://apple.slashdot.org/sto...
They just don't use the intel model name "skylake" on their product descriptions.
The alleged website saying "dont buy" is not complaining about this. For example the macpro they list as "don't buy" is actually "can't buy". Apple doesn't list that model in it's store. And their reasoning for not buying it is because it's not a retina version, and there's not any price difference with the retina.
Finally like every single computer maker, mac does have a range of models and guess what the lower end ones have slower procesors. But they also get an hour longer battery life than the i7 models.
Guess what? the track pads don't have two buttons! Alert commissioner gordon!
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
The discussion was about performance, not price. You just moved the goal post.
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
Apple has a habit of quietly revving its current computers without much fanfare
Quite the opposite in fact. At a time when most manufacturers wouldn't even put a paid press release when they had a faster desktop, Steve Jobs was announcing each upgrade as if it was the next coming of Jesus Christ. As Apple got back into health they stopped doing this and moved in line with most other manufacturers who make no big announcement unless the new model is completely revolutionary, e.g. first laptop with QHD, first laptop with SSD/HD, first laptop with SSD only, etc.
Also what matters most is not when the last update was made, but whether it upgraded to the latest technology. So far Apple is lagging far behind in moving to the latest family of CPUs.
All this does is drive the price of used Macbooks and replacement batteries up. Thanks a lot,
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
But they most certainly are not selling a 4 year old computer.
They actually are. As of this writing, the non-retina Macbook Pro is still available for sale on Apple's site. Go to apple.com, click Mac -> Macbook Pro -> Buy and then scroll about halfway down the page. That model, which is being sold for $1099, hasn't been updated since June 2012, though it did have a $100 price cut in July 2014.
Intelligent responses welcome, flames will be met with marshmallows.
This is actually a huge problem. I'm the computer guru among my circle of friends, so they usually come to me for recommendations when buying a laptop. With the PC laptops it's pretty easy. Listen to what they need, find a model which fits their needs, and give them an exact model number(s) to go out and buy.
With the Macbooks... oh boy. You either need the serial number (which on some models required removing the battery to read it), or you need physical access to the machine while it's turned on and not locked down with some sales software so you can look up the model number via the Finder. It's gotten to the point where I either need to go with them to the store, or have to be on the phone with them while they read me the serial number before I can tell them if it's the right one for them to buy.
As for TFA, the gap is because Apple mostly skipped Broadwell, and they have this thing about keeping an older processor in their lineup as a "cheaper" option. Normally I'm pretty critical of Apple, but Skylake hasn't been that impressive compared to Haswell, both in terms of computing power and in terms of battery life (the Core M series excepted). I still see a lot of Haswell PC laptops for sale, and if the person doesn't need USB-C or 4k video output over HDMI 2.0, I don't really see a problem with Haswell laptops. (Though I should mention not all Skylake laptops can do 4k@60 Hz over HDMI.)
Make sure that it has a real Motorola 68000 or 68020 or 68040 processor.
Pretty much every Windows OEM has had an Intel Skylake-powered processor in its laptops for more than a year now
My Windows laptop is new and it says AMD on it.
Do you mean "Pretty much every Windows OEM has had an Intel Skylake-powered processor in one of its laptop models?"
... Apple didn't combine their stale hardware with an unfortunate tendency to orphan it. The biggest risk seems to be video GPU chipsets. http://www.cultofmac.com/14695... [cultofmac.com]
I imagine the discounts Apple are giving on that 2012 hardware are very tasty.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
This is a troll post against Mac which produces the best computers and software on the planet. There are no computers and there is no software like Mac and IOS. This is a vicious campaign against Apple which is THE industry standard. No other computer or operating system comes close, it is revolutionary. This libel and slander against Apple cannot be tolerated.
There are still suckers who buy them because they say Apple on the outside.
It's been a while since Apple upgraded its MacBook Air, MacBook Pro, and Mac Pro models. Four years, one month, and twenty-four days, to be exact, in case of the MacBook Pro.
Way to go with the half-truths.
The obsolete 2012 Macbook Pro is indeed still on Apple's books -but Its long been banished from the main MacBook Pro page on Apple's website and tucked away at the bottom of the "Buy" page. Presumably because some big customers still want a spinning rust hard drive and an optical drive. Nobody who has done 5 minutes of research would buy one unless that's what they wanted.
Meanwhile the flagship Retina Macbook Pro range got new processors and unique haptic touchpads just over a year ago, and the (probably to be discontinued) MacBook Air got a minor bump this spring. The MacBook got Skylake in the spring and the 27" iMac got Skylake last November.
Now, Apple do have a problem - 15-month old computers still aren't sexy - but its partly due to Intel's woes with the various configurations of Skylake chips which have been trickling out gradually over the last year. E.g. the 15" Retina Macbook Pro really needs the i7-6x70HQ chips with Iris Pro which weren't launched until Q1 this year, the i7 version of the 13" rMBP needs the i7-6567U which, according to Intels ARK site, hasn't been launched yet. The architectural speed-up with Skylake isn't that huge, so using a chip with lower TDP or inferior GPU just for the sake of "Skylake" can easily end up as a downgrade.
Dell, HP et. al. have a million models and are happy to build systems around whatever chips are available today - they have some pretty tempting MacBook-killers but you do have to look carefully at the power rating & GPU of the processor before declaring a winner. Meanwhile, Intel have started the hype for Kaby Lake before finishing the Skylake range - its possible that Apple will wait for that, since it has Thunderbolt3 on-chip and Apple are presumably going to standardise on TB3.
Not completely defending Apple here - the Mac Pro is nearly 3 years old, the Mac Mini 2 years. Both of those were also affected by Intel delays but there ought to be something Apple could have done to maintain interest. Chances are, the Mac Pro (basically a dedicated Final Cut X machine and a waste of money if you don't run OpenCL software) just isn't selling. The Intel delays aren't exactly new and its within Apple's power to maybe design some new Macs around available chips. Unfortunately, Tim Cook has been doing a very good impression of someone more interested in watch straps than full-featured computers, so people are worried.
But, no, folks: the flagship Retina MacBook Pro is not starting kindergarten this year, and the rumor sites are flagging them "don't buy" because they're expecting new models by the end of the year.
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
"Apple is inexplicably still selling the exact same models for its Mac line that it introduced in 2012...Apple's computing lineup is still shipping with the three-to-four years old processor..."
While I agree that Apple needs to seriously update their line. They last updated the MacBook Pro in mid 2014, with chips released Q3'14 (according to Intel). I7-4578U, i7-4980HQ, etc...
So, Chromebooks?
I don't own any Macs, but my next computer will be a Mac. It's more than a fashion statement.
Linux still doesn't "just work." If it does "just work," it's probably because you have old hardware. Linux will probably never be ready for the desktop unless hardware stops changing.
Microsoft? They've completely crossed the line with Windows 10. They're trying to make it like a big phone with invasion of privacy and telemetry. Microsoft has abandoned power users. I suppose gamers still need to use it, but they're giving up a lot.
Chromebooks aren't made for power users and are glorified web browsers.
What's left? Macs. They have good support, a desktop that works, and are based on BSD. Since it's not really a gaming platform, having the latest and greatest specs aren't that important, but generally they have solid specs. Expensive? They retain their resale value. I wish I could get rid of my 2014 Asus Zenbook even though it's really fast. Windows 10 is horrible and the drivers are constantly breaking when there are updates. I doubt I'd get a fair value on eBay or Craigslist, and I don't want to expose myself to fraud and/or idiots.
Is the company really saving that much money by using 2012 processors and 4GB of RAM as standard?
It seems that this is in reference to the non-Retina Macbook Pro, which means that the author is completely missing the point. Apple isn't selling those as a method of saving money. Apple doesn't put those models in their marketing. They aren't on display at Apple Stores. It's not remotely the model that Apple wants you to buy. It's a legacy model. No one at Apple is going to recommend that you buy that model, except in very specific circumstances.
Essentially, Apple continues to sell them only because they're still in demand. If you want an Apple laptop that has an Ethernet port or Firewire ports (without using a dongle), or without a Retina Display, or with a built-in DVD drive, that's the one model that Apple keeps around in order to cater to your needs.
If anything, this is a problem caused by Apple being too far ahead of the curve in their laptop designs. They were the first company to drop PS2 ports in favor of USB. They were the first company to drop all floppy and CD/DVD drives. They were the first company to implement high resolution displays. I'd expect that, in a few years, you might find that the only port to be found on any of their devices is the current iteration of Thunderbolt. When you keep moving ahead so quickly, you're going to find that you're leaving some of your customers behind. As a result, they have sometimes held onto legacy models to service people who can't use the newest designs, for whatever reason.
It's weird that Apple seems to be neglecting the desktop. They are known for a premium experience, more in software than hardware, but still. In order to maintain their price premiums they need to keep at least modestly current.
I don't use Macs myself but I value their role in the marketplace. Having Apple present and strong keeps the other players on their toes and competitive. I don't want Apple to slip like they did in the 90's (yeah, seems far-fetched now. Just remember, Apple was one of the hottest companies on the planet in the 80's, so I have a historical perspective).
the mac core2duo 2006 are UEFI 32 bit boot systems. So I am wondering how it's going to recognize and EFI or even if the path makes sense for this
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
Oh the old psychology trick here. You agree with ___ that Apple *seriously* needs to update their line.
Translation: some faggot wants to sell more Apple walled garden devices.
The reality is they used to be PPC. Power PC. It was so fucking bullshit that you had to be literally homosexual to buy one. Linux for Power PC was there just in case somebody bought one for $50 to use a a samba server or whatever. They only stopped their proprietary hardware when they were about to be where faggots all end up. Hell.
Even on Intel they got no better. They are always still way behind they just focus on what women would focus on.. makeup for their icons.
Same for faggots... do my shoes match my Finder icon?
You are all some real fucking homos using that shit. No supercomputer runs on Apple anything. Not on Windows either. You proprietary faggot fan bois lost your minds when your butt cherries got popped.
If you are not using Linux or BSD on AMD or Intel you are some huge punk bitch that should stay surrounded by girls.
Buy a GayMac it comes with free tampons. Fuck you all you are just gone.
Who the fuck do they think they are, Commodore Business Machines?
There was a rumor that Apple and Intel came up with a small set of requirements for SkyLake, Intel over-delivered in a multitude of features but not the features that Apple wanted, hence Apple has not bought into SkyLake because it didn't do what they initially requested.
Well, except for the MacBook, which it lists as "BUY NOW". But don't get confused by the facts manishs.
I am so sick of Slashdot posting bold-faced lies and FUD on their front page. You can buy Macbooks with Skylake, which is a CPU architecture that wasn't even released until about a year ago, and Macbook Pros with Broadwell, an architecture released in early 2015.
If you buy a 13" Macbook Pro (latest generation) on apple.com right now, it will come with a CPU and chipset released to market by Intel about a year and a half ago, not four years ago.
And if you're complaining about the physical chassis, well, maybe it's just that Apple has reached what they consider to be the optimal layout and dimensions for their chassis. I mean, IBM/Lenovo hardly ever changed their ThinkPad physical design characteristics for a number of years in the mid to late 2000s, until Lenovo started messing with a good thing, and ended up utterly ruining the ThinkPad brand and stopped providing the features that people who bought them wanted/needed.
I am not an Apple fanboy; I think the company is pretentious, greedy, anti-competitive, and significantly less visionary with the loss of Steve Jobs. The very little they do for open source is overshadowed by their aggressive litigiousness and the walled garden platform they created.
BUT -- and this is a big thing for me -- Apple can do *more* with 4 or 8 GB of RAM than Microsoft can do with 16 GB of RAM. Their software is extremely well-designed, optimized for fast, high-fidelity displays, and the font rendering is beautiful and second to none. They don't have a ton of old legacy code like Windows does; the legacy that does exist has easily been swept under the rug in favor of new designs. And being based on BSD is a huge plus for software dev.
The efficiency and responsiveness of Macbook Pro and iPhone has made me appreciate and admire these *products* that I own, even though I only started buying Apple products in 2015 after spending decades swearing I never would and preferring GNU/Linux or Windows-if-absolutely-necessary.
I'm tired of having to grossly over-spec my machines (and often end up paying even more than I paid for my Apple products) for trash software like Microsoft Windows and Android, two great examples of over-engineering plus bloat plus the worst parts of an open or semi-open platform (security vulnerabilities, malware, etc.) ... A $1800 MBP with a year-old processor and 8 gigs of RAM is faster, more enjoyable to use, lighter, and has better battery life than a $3000 13" Windows 10 "ultrabook". And my $1000 iPhone 6S Plus with 2 gigs of RAM is faster, far less buggy, completely free of bloat, and easier to use than any Android phone on the market.
Again, I'm not an Apple fanboy. I don't love the company and I have zero loyalty to them. I dare someone else to do better. For years I thought everyone else *did* do better, but it's clear to me now that I was actually deluding myself into thinking that having 4 gigs of memory wasted by background service bloat on Windows was "necessary".
I'm very satisfied with their products right now and extremely dissatisfied with their competition. I'd actually recommend to those in the market for a laptop to seriously consider the Macbook Pro. It's not ideal for gaming, of course, but it's great for anything from content creation to heavy web surfing to flash games and even does VMs extremely well in VirtualBox or VMware. And I also do some heavy C++ and Java dev on this box. It just never slows down no matter what I do. Love it.
"Even an update to Intel's Haswell chips from 2013 would have brought huge battery life improvements"
I couldn't agree more! How can apple expect me to get by with a measley 11 hour battery life on my MBP? At this rate I have to charge twice a week!
Perhaps it is flamebait, but it brings up an interesting (to me) question. At this stage of the game, Apple makes most of its money off of its mobile devices. Sure, it still sells Macs - and people still like and buy them. But Mac's aren't their core business any more - and their single-supplier model has kept that part of their business capped at a pretty modest volume.
Maybe now it would finally make sense for Apple to license OS/X to other OEM's. That way, they'd make some money off of the software (they could charge at least as much as Microsoft does), and possibly grow the ecosystem. I suppose there'd be a chance of HP or Samsung building devices could outsell Apple's, but Apple's certainly capable of competing with the best. And they don't have to license it to low end crap OEM's. And, of course, they wouldn't license iOS, but while OS/X is still relevant, they ought to consider taking a chance.
I'm not saying this because I want a Mac clone - I personally don't like OS/X much, and I use Linux at home. But it'd be interesting to see the market shaken up a bit.
Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
better research before posting incorrect information
They're just hoping to get back to the old Apple II glory days where they kept the same Apple //e on sale for 10 years!
Um...they do perform better. With lower specs. Android is bloated and buggy and requires more raw power to accomplish the same productivity. Yes, I'm going to give you a car analogy: In 1985, you could buy a car that produced around 160 horsepower from a 5.7-liter V8 engine. Today's V6 engines produce 260+ horsepower from small 3.5-liter V6 engines.
Dollar for dollar, Samsung or HTC devices run circles around iPhones.
The discussion was about performance, not price. You just moved the goal post.
The goal post wasn't moved.
Let me guess, cdrudge is a Gender studies major and Hillary supporter?
I've notice that Apple has really shit the bed when it comes to... well... everything. It's like since Jobs died, Cook pulled the rudder right off the boat and now he's just standing there, looking confusedly at the rudder in his hand.
But it's another thing entirely to be charging massive premiums for hardware so old that I'm surprised the parts are even still being manufactured. Where is Apple sourcing their parts at this point, Ebay?
I want a new Mac for work, and I want to give employees the option of using a Mac instead of Windows, given how brain-damaged Microsoft is being with respect to Windows 10, but I'll be damned if I'm going to drop 2-3k per machine on hardware whose PC equivalent can be purchased for peanuts on Craigslist.
As far as CPUs are concerned, they arn't really that big of a deal because lets face it, the past *several* generations of CPUs from Intel have only incremental differences in performance. Most of the differences have gone into power efficiency improvements, and support for newer accessory technologies like DDR RAM, USB, PCI, onboard GPU, etc. But there have been massive jumps in what GPUs can do, and currently available Macs are a joke by comparison. Right now, for example, there's not even any point in porting current AAA games to Mac because the hardware won't be able to run them.
There is something to be said about taking the conservative approach for some things, for example one thing I like about OSX is that Apple doesn't make massive fundamental changes the way Microsoft does. And Apple's support is still second to none. But Apple really needs to pull their thumb out and start refreshing their hardware.
Apple has a massive opportunity right now with the whole Windows 10 fiasco, very similar to how IBM had an opportunity with OS/2 during the turbulent switch between Windows 3.1 and Windows 95. Unfortunately, also like IBM, I'm expecting Apple to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory because they're management is too paralyzed by their own undeserved egos to do what needs to be done.
I'm late to the party here, but here's my opinion.
Even back when I worked as a Systems Engineer in the Apple ecosystem- their hardware was a generation behind, more expensive, and landlocked to their own OS.
That doesn't mean that weren't a great computing platform. But in today's ecosystem I'm not sure that business model works so well. And I'm pretty sure Apple doesn't care since the bulk of their profits come from elsewhere.
What Apple and other companies are missing, is that now is the time to *invest* in the desktop space. With VR coming into vogue, alternative OS availability, strong gaming, and the semi-demise of Microsoft- it's time to embrace the desktop rather than run from it. The platform is far from finished, still has incalculable advantages in performance, and has many uses not even dreamed of yet.
But Apple, in my historical opinion, stopped trying to lead shortly after the release of OS 10- which had great promise. I've still got the alpha and developer releases on CD- and yes it runs on generic x86.
So we'll see the death of the Apple platform unless they invest heavily in newer technologies. But they've been so engorged with cash from the iPhone that they will not see this vision. The smart move would be to move OS X onto commodity hardware.
But I do not think that will happen. Rather they will milk the desktop for whatever they perceive to be left- and when the desktop platform roars to live with a new killer app- they'll be left flatfooted.
And... um.... VR is kind of doing that now. It remains to be seen if that will be sustained.
Another consultant who stuck it out.
"We are the Priests, of the Temples of Syrinx..."
Parent's rambling nonsense
"Baseless apple apologizing" LOL
1. Not a fanboy, personally I've never purchased myself a mac. I've used many but I can never justify the cost.
2. Laptop weight can easily be considered a specification. If you like carrying around a 10lb brick then by all means ignore the build however don't assume everyone is as narrow minded as you.
3. That you're so incredibly focused on CPU/GPU upgrades shows how much you really know about what happens inside of your computer.
4. Yes, the Broadwell builds are a couple of years old but that's pretty normal for Apple's refresh schedule. They usually update their MacBook Pro lines about every 18 months. So they're due, and there is every indication that they will be doing so this fall, probably around October.
I suppose I should have made my first post more clear, my statement was meant to point out that TFS was flamebait, and likely the article as well. This kind of reporting in general, the kind that ignores facts and shapes the story to push an agenda, really irritates me and I do what I can to shine light on these instances when possible.
Personally I'd rather have my idiots at home glued to the TV than out doing idiotic things
TFA was made-up bullshit. Macbook Pros have been updated in the previous 4 years and do have available skylake processors.
Tesla most certainly does not lose $15K on each car. That's fucking absurd, and you're an idiot. Using that math then at one point Ford was also losing $15K on every Model T it made.
Tesla sells cars for more than the manufacturing cost of that car, they have healthy margins in that sense. However they then take that money and invest it in things like a giant battery factory, supercharger stations, designing the next car, and upgrading their ability to manufacture more cars quickly. On paper, this looks like a loss and to morons like you it looks like they are losing money on each sale.
But, that's the thing about morons, they see stupidity everywhere except in the mirror.
My four year old macbook still works better than most new PC's
While I am looking forward to the new Macbook Pro models, at the moment, my 3 year old, bought on Apples refurb website has worked nearly flawlessly. I use it for both Mac and Windows via VMWare's Fusion and while I wish for a larger hard drive, the SSD makes the machine super fast. I typically use an external keyboard and mouse so the only upgrade I was really concerned with was the retina display, which I have. All in all, I am not complaining. The machine was expensive but has earned it's keep.
I'm using a relatively old late 2011 Macbook Pro. I'd probably update to a lighter machine with good specs (USB 3 especially, and a retina display), if one were available. But I'm *not* going to buy that joke of a Macbook, with the yucky keyboard and the single USB C port, and a 12" screen. I'm amazed Apple is leaving this much money on the table. Do they not have any business sense? In any event, they should be putting denser memory in their current lineup. 8 GB is really a minimum for today's OS/X versions. This is basic stuff. Have they caught the Republican party's disease, and lost the ability to execute their basic functions?
i first read that as apple should stop selling computers to four year olds.
It's obvious to everyone, Tim needs to go.
The company is in turmoil. Nothing new in years.
Apple should be ashamed of themselves for selling computers to four-year-olds. I mean, they aren't even in kindergarten, for cryin' out loud. Kids should be outside playing in the mud and building up important immunity to diseases so they don't become allergic fragile snowflakes when they grow up.
Okay, let's clarify:
Apple is not only selling a four year old computer.
The article and this submission is clickbait. It's written to make the reader thing all of their computers haven't been updated in four years, which isn't the case.
If you want to take issue with the idea that Apple still sells a computer that was originally released four years ago, that's your problem. It obviously has enough demand to continue to be manufactured and sold. That speaks more to the success of the product than any supposed failure on Apple's part.
Its still shipping with a dual core processor and those came out in 2011. They haven't moved up to quad or eight cores yet.
Screens hit 720p around the same time and that's where Apple sat. 1080p came in 2013. qHD launched in 2014 ..
Apple has nothing close to qHD.
Apple builds crap computers and sits on old tech but continues to sell it at full price without lowering the price.
64GB of flash upgrade? They like to charge hundreds for it when it cost $15 bucks in other form factors and they never increase the amount or lower the cost.
http://www.obamasweapon.com/
Apple can do whatever it wants to. You don't have to buy their stuff. I don't get why people find it necessary to make a fuss about stuff like this.
-- Cheers!
Because it has never been actually formulated.
One popular interpretation was the about the increase of component density, which has resulted for a while in an increase in the processors performance.
Nowadays, the general interpretation in the semiconductor industry is that Moore's Law is about the decrease of the $/bit (and sometimes about the decrease of energy/operation), and in regards to this metric the industry is still on track and will stay so for another decade at least. The improvements for our laptops and probably also for our phones and tablets won't be as noticeable as they have been in the past, but the computer industry will continue to change our lives by being more and more ubiquitous as the price goes down, and as VR and AI become more widely available.
By the way, Moore's paper starts with:
With unit cost falling as the number of components per circuit rises, by 1975 economics may dictate squeezing as many as 65,000 components on a single silicon chip
. It has always been about economics.
Apple isn't a computer company. They are an electronics gadget (cell phone/tablet) company that happens to have a small line of laptops they sell as well.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
If you're so smart, start your own computer company, write your own OS, and do things the way you think they should be done.
Or, submit your resume to Apple and convince them that you could do a better job of product management.
I recently got into a debate with a clueless Apple store employee. They were trying to sell me on a 2016 MacBook and were baffled when I explained to them that my 2008 MacBook Pro upgraded with an SSD beat out the 2016 MacBook in every GeekBench test. Their argument was "but it's thinner, and gets better battery life." I said if I was going for thinness and battery life I would go with an Asus Chromebook 14', I need something with power...
What's a Mac?
Oh you mean the iphone, right?
Did you actually read the link you posted? Or did you stop at the top chart (which is javascript performance only)? Or are you implying that only javascript matters when it comes to mobile devices?
There's absolutely nothing in that article that supports your point. You could have simply replied "no" and that would have had the same value in this argument.
lucm, indeed.
I mentioned in an opinion piece back in April that while Apple still sells a single non-Retina MacBook Pro model, it does its best to tuck it away out of sight – not mentioned at all on the main MacBook Pro page, and hidden at the bottom of the ‘buy‘ page. It now appears that the company is doing the same thing in its retail stores to the last remaining product of an optical drive bygone era.
We’ve been hearing reports of the model being withdrawn from display in Apple Stores for a week or so now, and checks by both AI and TNW appear to confirm that this is official
So yes, Apple still sells it, if you specifically ask for it, and tell them to look in the back of the storage room.
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Should be Hillary Clinton's election slogan... :)
I read this article and the complaints section on my several-years old HP core 2 duo model. Who knows the computer's actual model name because as with most Windows pc's, it's completely forgettable.
Remember kids, if you're not paying for the service, YOU ARE THE PRODUCT THAT IS BEING SOLD.
Stupid post. Don't like Apple computers, then don't buy one. If you care what you are seen with in the 'coffee shop' you have BIGGER problems in your life. I like Macs, and have used them for years. The are well built, generally reliable, and not too expensive based on longer life.
Why do I like Mac? Mostly because I am use to them. Also, because every WinPC laptop I have owned (specialty use or company supplied) dies after about a year. Cheap construction, marginal components (capacitors, mostly), and poor heat flow planning kills them. My Macs have survived many rough and tumble foreign business trips. A 2 foot drop literally destroyed my last WinTel portable. It exploded into plastic in an airport lounge. Macbooks have all survived those issues, one cracked screen in 20 years, for several MacBooks I had.
Current MacBookAir is 5 years old, running fine. Limitations on performance are mostly base on internet connection these days anyway.
A Few Things:
1). Saying "I'm happy with my 5 year old computer, so it's OK that Apple sells 5 year old computers" is brain-dead. You are comparing a used computer to a new computer;
2). Moore's Law slowdown or no, there are very few people who are cool with buying yesterday's tech at today's prices. No slam at Apple's usual pricing here, this is strictly about perceived value versus getting ripped off;
3). This is Apple. They staked a huge amount of corporate prestige on slick, modern product offerings. What, no Mac Versus PC ads, boasting about how Apple is selling old technology?
4). It's not just the hardware. MacOS has kind of languished too. This is a tricky argument, because MacOS of course keeps getting new versions. However have you noticed that most of the best ideas in it come from iOS? And what's up with Metal, did Apple have a spat with the OpenGL folks?
Apple is still a great company and has nice products. However I suspect their stock is now overvalued for how the company is performing today. Apple stock is priced like Jobs was still around. Apple's new product lineup has slowed down and the new stuff, while competent, isn't hitting the ball out of the park anymore.
The reason why things are updated as quickly is that the PC era is over. It's not longer an economic priority and most (wintel) PC vendors are losing money on every sales. Apple is alone in continue to increase revenue on PCs but the Mac market is NOT the primary growth market. So instead priority goes to the growth market which makes Apple ~10x more money per year.
Yes, I would love to have newer tech in my Mac but it's not actually a priority - my MBP maxed out RAM & SSD only suffers when I'm doing massive FEM simulations. But when you look at Macs, you'll see it's 90% "conservative PC hardware" and 10% "bleeding edge hardware". This is how you have the margins that Apple consistently has had and it's NOT doing this that has partly caused the margin issues of Wintel vendors.
Apple probably has another Steve Jobs working for them. They're holding him back. The pointy haired boss types that work for Apple. Real shame.