They didn't take anything away - it's a new laptop. You never had it on that machine.
I'm not defending them, I'm just saying it loosely fits the definition of what you asked for.
It has nothing to do with the laptop, per se.
They took their ripoff of Apple's Gatekeeper out of the OS. And after the end of the year, it will cost you 50 bucks to get back something they TOOK OUT of the OS.
Is that hard to understand? One is hardware, the other is software.
Nothing new here, Microsoft is just being Microsoft. Remember that Windows 95/98 did not support USB because Microsoft was trying to kill the standard. Microsoft eventually gave this idea up and added native USB support in Win98 OSR2.
Which is hilarious; because MS was on the USB "Committee", while Apple was not.
MS doesn't think USB-C "isn't ready", they are just trying to do two things:
1. Spread FUD about USB-C, and in so doing, about the new MBPs.
2. Engage in a little good-old-fashioned Vendor Lock-In with their proprietary connector (which sounds suspiciously like it hooks to a TB3 chip on the inside...
You have that completely ass backwards. For Apple, courage means being unafraid of changing to a new standard before the rest of the world. Clearly not Microsoft's definition.
Apple took the High Road when it comes to USB-C/TB3. They have more I/O bandwidth than any other laptop on the planet.
And yes, it did take Courage to release a Laptop with all USB-C/TB3 connectors.
Just like it took Courage to release the original iMac with only USB-A Connectors, when the rest of the world still wanted you to figure out whether it was pin 2 or pin 3, and pins 4 and 5, or 6, 8 and 20. Or use a printer with a 3 inch long, 34-pin "Centronics" connector, to carry an 8 bit wide data-path.
Two years later, you'd be hard-pressed to find a printer with anything BUT a USB connector.
Now it's USB-C's turn. Just like with the internet, Microsoft is dead-wrong on this one.
I'm sat here with various adapters and a couple of hubs. And ok, it seems like a costly kludge, but bandwidth and throughput are king, and that feels quite liberating, because on this laptop I can get to use an old Thunderbolt display and a bunch of Firewire drives and some eSATA drives and USB3 drives and a Thunderbolt enclosure, and so on. The point is, there's no bottleneck on account of the ports. Plus I stopped missing MagSafe when I realised I get to my desk and I plug in just ONE cable (either way up).
And you forgot to mention that, because the MacBook Pro uses REAL USB-C/TB3, and not this hinky "Microsoft Expansion Connector", you get to choose among about a Googolplex of Hubs and Adapters, depending on your needs. And since there are FOUR identical USB-C/TB3 Ports on the MacBook Pro (except the non-touchbar 13", which has two ports, and the touchbar 13" which has four ports, but two of them are essentially USB-C/TB2), you can mix-and-match hubs for a myriad of I/O expansion configurations; but with the MS BS, you get to enjoy whatever MS has decided you need.
With USB-C/TB3, Apple has firmly left that "limited I/O" issue firmly in the past.
Good reason: a unified jack / plug that lets you charge, do video output, Thunderbird & USB from any port, and allows for thinner devices
Aside from Thunderbolt (which is pointless with USB 3.1), micro USB already does all of that. The only benefit USB-C has is that it can be connected upside down, which isn't enough to outweigh the benefits of micro USB.
Um, Thunderbolt 3 is NOT pointless with USB 3.1.
USB 3.1 10 Gbps max. TB 3 20 Gbps, and is inherently multifunctional.
Micro USB is an abomination and should go away forthwith.
I have zero issue with my nexus devices and my MacBook - both use USB-C and I have yet to find a cable or device that doesn't perform as intended on any of the devices.
The various flavors of USB are enough to drive someone to drink. USB-C is a welcome change that actually fulfills the promise of the word "Universal" in USB.
I think Microsoft is just chickening out here.
No. THey are deliberately spreading FUD about USB-C because of the MacBook Pro.
Reading the other comments, it looks like there are cheap USB-C cables that don't identify themselves correctly (USB-C cables have electronics to tell you how much current they can carry etc). These will then catch fire if you try to draw more power through them than is safe.
For new proprietary connectors, you're confused. Microsoft isn't, nor has ever been the one to use those. The XBox 360 famously used USB while PS used a proprietary connector. No, for the god of proprietary connectors, you have to go to Apple.
You're statement is factually untrue and wreaks of irrational hatred of Microsoft. If you want to make fun of them, stick to things they've actually done wrong, they've given plenty of ammunition for that. Making things up just makes you look intellectually lazy and hurts your arguments.
While it used to be true that Apple used some proprietary connectors, the lastest MacBook Pro, for example, has none. USB-C/TB3 for all I/O and Power, 3.5mm for headphones.
This time, yes. I like USB C and all. Features looked really cool, so I got a laptop that I can charge over USB C. But I ran into the same "early adopter" issues as I did when I got a USB 3.0 mobo around 2010. Bugs weren't all worked out and I ended up with errors causing the motherboard to reject the device or "unplug" it and it would randomly power back up hours later or if I swapped ports. Having the same problem now with USB C power supply. Give it another six months and it will be straightened out.
So even by random chance, Microsoft is going to get one right every now and then. Don't be a hater, AC.
--Beau
Need to check out Apple's 2016 MacBook Pro. It has all that USB-C stuff ALL worked-out.
In fact, I'd be somewhat surprised if that Microsoft Expansion Connector wasn't just a USB-C/Thunderbolt3 port with a proprietary connector. Sure sounds like it to me...
MS already has 'gatekeeper' in the latest windows 10. Start>Settings>Apps and features. The top option is to choose to restrict to store apps or not.
Well, other than the fact that I'm not surprised they would copy (yet another) macOS feature, I guess the problem is that they have taken that "GateKeeper" Application away in W10S.
With their GateKeeper feature, they restrict Installations to "Mac App Store and Registerred Developers", but users can override that (after receiving an appropriate warning).
If MS would make it so a "Policy" could force the "Windows Store Only", but if not, then Users could override that restriction if NOT set as a policy, then that would be much better than their true Walled Trash-Heap approach.
Considering that every time I browse something on Amazon, it appears magically in banner ads EVERYWHERE I browse, and yet, every time I browse something on Apple's site, it, er doesn't, I'd say I trust Apple to actually produce a device that doesn't spy on you.
But this "Leak", coming in the heels of the Schiller interview earlier this week, is no accident, or lapse of security.
And if it is, remember this is the same company that's handling your "overheard" Alexa audio...
They make a single high end desktop which will only ever sell in very low volumes, which isn't reflected in year old sales numbers. And now we're comparing how many years of iPad sales? This is so far beyond a tortured comparison I can't even take you seriously.
I can't believe I'm even arguing this side, I own a Macbook Air and carry an iPhone SE. But you're just completely off the deep end.
Um, the Apple sales figures were from ONE QUARTER (Q1 2017). The Surface figures were for whatever they call their most recent QUARTER, too. Look again, carefully. Unbelievable as it may seem, because the numbers are soooo disparate, It truly IS an Apples to Apples financial comparison!
Did you read about what happened to that sapphire glass company a couple years back? Apple made them sign a deal that they couldn't sell their glass to other customers.
Apple is quickly building a reputation with other tech companies that they are not to be trusted. The company I work for is developing a smaller version of what we already make, with the original intention of getting them into iPhones, that view has shifted in the last year or so. Now we are avoiding interaction with Apple like the plague.
Then your management isn't very smart.
If you know the game going-in, then you can certainly reap the rewards of selling to a company with huge sales, but not get so reliant on that one customer that you over-expand, and then collapse when the party's over.
And BTW, every single company even in the same ballpark as Apple is going to be exactly the same way. Afterall, that's what they teach in $FAMOUS_MBA_SCHOOL$".
I actually have no problem at all with the government trying to get the information, heck even compelling a third party to crack the phone. I do have a problem with them compelling someone to provide information against themselves or provide information they could have forgotten.
How about rewriting the headline? "Company with 250 billion in cash assets decides to invest 0.4% in an automated manufacturing facility."
Big. fucking. deal.
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Apple is doing this. But as a proportion of Apple's resources, this is so small that it's like Walmart announcing that they're opening another store. It's not notable or praiseworthy, and further I'm 99.44% sure the decision has nothing to do with which pinhead is in the White House.
Just look at it as an experiment. A toe in the water. In that regard, it's enough to make a reasonable go at it. If it doesn't pan-out, then the money lost is low enough that the shareholders won't want to lynch upper management. If it does work, then they can always "up" the investment.
Slashdot Mirror
See that bit that's underlined? It's what's called a hyperlink. Click on it in your browser, and you'll find your entire comment is a non-sequitur.
No.
It is your linked article that is the non-sequitur.
They didn't take anything away - it's a new laptop. You never had it on that machine.
I'm not defending them, I'm just saying it loosely fits the definition of what you asked for.
It has nothing to do with the laptop, per se.
They took their ripoff of Apple's Gatekeeper out of the OS. And after the end of the year, it will cost you 50 bucks to get back something they TOOK OUT of the OS.
Is that hard to understand? One is hardware, the other is software.
I think Microsoft is just chickening out here.
Nothing new here, Microsoft is just being Microsoft. Remember that Windows 95/98 did not support USB because Microsoft was trying to kill the standard. Microsoft eventually gave this idea up and added native USB support in Win98 OSR2.
Which is hilarious; because MS was on the USB "Committee", while Apple was not.
MS doesn't think USB-C "isn't ready", they are just trying to do two things:
1. Spread FUD about USB-C, and in so doing, about the new MBPs.
2. Engage in a little good-old-fashioned Vendor Lock-In with their proprietary connector (which sounds suspiciously like it hooks to a TB3 chip on the inside...
You have that completely ass backwards. For Apple, courage means being unafraid of changing to a new standard before the rest of the world. Clearly not Microsoft's definition.
Exactly!
You: "I think Microsoft is just chickening out here."
Microsoft: "Industry standardized interfaces are too confusing for people, they should use our proprietary, device specific one."
I don't think that counts as "chickening out," it's Apple-like courage.
Wrong.
Apple took the High Road when it comes to USB-C/TB3. They have more I/O bandwidth than any other laptop on the planet.
And yes, it did take Courage to release a Laptop with all USB-C/TB3 connectors.
Just like it took Courage to release the original iMac with only USB-A Connectors, when the rest of the world still wanted you to figure out whether it was pin 2 or pin 3, and pins 4 and 5, or 6, 8 and 20. Or use a printer with a 3 inch long, 34-pin "Centronics" connector, to carry an 8 bit wide data-path.
Two years later, you'd be hard-pressed to find a printer with anything BUT a USB connector.
Now it's USB-C's turn. Just like with the internet, Microsoft is dead-wrong on this one.
Yes, very true.
I'm sat here with various adapters and a couple of hubs. And ok, it seems like a costly kludge, but bandwidth and throughput are king, and that feels quite liberating, because on this laptop I can get to use an old Thunderbolt display and a bunch of Firewire drives and some eSATA drives and USB3 drives and a Thunderbolt enclosure, and so on. The point is, there's no bottleneck on account of the ports. Plus I stopped missing MagSafe when I realised I get to my desk and I plug in just ONE cable (either way up).
And you forgot to mention that, because the MacBook Pro uses REAL USB-C/TB3, and not this hinky "Microsoft Expansion Connector", you get to choose among about a Googolplex of Hubs and Adapters, depending on your needs. And since there are FOUR identical USB-C/TB3 Ports on the MacBook Pro (except the non-touchbar 13", which has two ports, and the touchbar 13" which has four ports, but two of them are essentially USB-C/TB2), you can mix-and-match hubs for a myriad of I/O expansion configurations; but with the MS BS, you get to enjoy whatever MS has decided you need.
With USB-C/TB3, Apple has firmly left that "limited I/O" issue firmly in the past.
Is NIH == Not In-house?
Close.
It's "Not Invented Here".
Good reason: a unified jack / plug that lets you charge, do video output, Thunderbird & USB from any port, and allows for thinner devices
Aside from Thunderbolt (which is pointless with USB 3.1), micro USB already does all of that. The only benefit USB-C has is that it can be connected upside down, which isn't enough to outweigh the benefits of micro USB.
Um, Thunderbolt 3 is NOT pointless with USB 3.1.
USB 3.1 10 Gbps max.
TB 3 20 Gbps, and is inherently multifunctional.
Micro USB is an abomination and should go away forthwith.
You're an idiot.
I have zero issue with my nexus devices and my MacBook - both use USB-C and I have yet to find a cable or device that doesn't perform as intended on any of the devices.
The various flavors of USB are enough to drive someone to drink. USB-C is a welcome change that actually fulfills the promise of the word "Universal" in USB.
I think Microsoft is just chickening out here.
No. THey are deliberately spreading FUD about USB-C because of the MacBook Pro.
Seriously.
Reading the other comments, it looks like there are cheap USB-C cables that don't identify themselves correctly (USB-C cables have electronics to tell you how much current they can carry etc). These will then catch fire if you try to draw more power through them than is safe.
USB-C cables are Passive. No electronics.
For new proprietary connectors, you're confused. Microsoft isn't, nor has ever been the one to use those. The XBox 360 famously used USB while PS used a proprietary connector. No, for the god of proprietary connectors, you have to go to Apple.
You're statement is factually untrue and wreaks of irrational hatred of Microsoft. If you want to make fun of them, stick to things they've actually done wrong, they've given plenty of ammunition for that. Making things up just makes you look intellectually lazy and hurts your arguments.
While it used to be true that Apple used some proprietary connectors, the lastest MacBook Pro, for example, has none. USB-C/TB3 for all I/O and Power, 3.5mm for headphones.
It would be nice if that worked. There's someone at Google who has been testing a load of cables. There isn't a correlation between price and quality.
Apple tried buying "genuine" Apple cables and chargers on eBay and didn't find even _one_ "genuine" Apple product that was made by Apple.
That doesn't surprise me on bit.
This time, yes. I like USB C and all. Features looked really cool, so I got a laptop that I can charge over USB C. But I ran into the same "early adopter" issues as I did when I got a USB 3.0 mobo around 2010. Bugs weren't all worked out and I ended up with errors causing the motherboard to reject the device or "unplug" it and it would randomly power back up hours later or if I swapped ports. Having the same problem now with USB C power supply. Give it another six months and it will be straightened out.
So even by random chance, Microsoft is going to get one right every now and then. Don't be a hater, AC.
--Beau
Need to check out Apple's 2016 MacBook Pro. It has all that USB-C stuff ALL worked-out.
In fact, I'd be somewhat surprised if that Microsoft Expansion Connector wasn't just a USB-C/Thunderbolt3 port with a proprietary connector. Sure sounds like it to me...
If MS would make it so a "Policy" could force the "Windows Store Only", but if not, then Users could override that restriction
They did. It's free until December 31, and then it costs $50.
So, after Dec. 10 you get to purchase what it is they TOOK AWAY in W10S.
Wotta Deal!!! [rolls eyes]
MS already has 'gatekeeper' in the latest windows 10. Start>Settings>Apps and features. The top option is to choose to restrict to store apps or not.
Well, other than the fact that I'm not surprised they would copy (yet another) macOS feature, I guess the problem is that they have taken that "GateKeeper" Application away in W10S.
They should do what Apple does with macOS.
With their GateKeeper feature, they restrict Installations to "Mac App Store and Registerred Developers", but users can override that (after receiving an appropriate warning).
If MS would make it so a "Policy" could force the "Windows Store Only", but if not, then Users could override that restriction if NOT set as a policy, then that would be much better than their true Walled Trash-Heap approach.
This is counter-PR pushed out BY Amazon to counter Apple's Phil Schiller participating in an interview where he said that a "Voice Activated Smart Speaker could benefit from a Screen".
Considering that every time I browse something on Amazon, it appears magically in banner ads EVERYWHERE I browse, and yet, every time I browse something on Apple's site, it, er doesn't, I'd say I trust Apple to actually produce a device that doesn't spy on you.
But this "Leak", coming in the heels of the Schiller interview earlier this week, is no accident, or lapse of security.
And if it is, remember this is the same company that's handling your "overheard" Alexa audio...
They make a single high end desktop which will only ever sell in very low volumes, which isn't reflected in year old sales numbers. And now we're comparing how many years of iPad sales? This is so far beyond a tortured comparison I can't even take you seriously.
I can't believe I'm even arguing this side, I own a Macbook Air and carry an iPhone SE. But you're just completely off the deep end.
Um, the Apple sales figures were from ONE QUARTER (Q1 2017). The Surface figures were for whatever they call their most recent QUARTER, too. Look again, carefully. Unbelievable as it may seem, because the numbers are soooo disparate, It truly IS an Apples to Apples financial comparison!
Reading (comprehension) is FUNdamental.
Did you read about what happened to that sapphire glass company a couple years back? Apple made them sign a deal that they couldn't sell their glass to other customers.
Apple didn't make them do anything.
Apple is quickly building a reputation with other tech companies that they are not to be trusted. The company I work for is developing a smaller version of what we already make, with the original intention of getting them into iPhones, that view has shifted in the last year or so. Now we are avoiding interaction with Apple like the plague.
Then your management isn't very smart.
If you know the game going-in, then you can certainly reap the rewards of selling to a company with huge sales, but not get so reliant on that one customer that you over-expand, and then collapse when the party's over.
And BTW, every single company even in the same ballpark as Apple is going to be exactly the same way. Afterall, that's what they teach in $FAMOUS_MBA_SCHOOL$".
I actually have no problem at all with the government trying to get the information, heck even compelling a third party to crack the phone. I do have a problem with them compelling someone to provide information against themselves or provide information they could have forgotten.
Exactly.
How about rewriting the headline? "Company with 250 billion in cash assets decides to invest 0.4% in an automated manufacturing facility."
Big. fucking. deal.
Don't get me wrong. I'm glad Apple is doing this. But as a proportion of Apple's resources, this is so small that it's like Walmart announcing that they're opening another store. It's not notable or praiseworthy, and further I'm 99.44% sure the decision has nothing to do with which pinhead is in the White House.
Just look at it as an experiment. A toe in the water. In that regard, it's enough to make a reasonable go at it. If it doesn't pan-out, then the money lost is low enough that the shareholders won't want to lynch upper management. If it does work, then they can always "up" the investment.
I don't mind if manufacturing comes back to the US in the form of automated factories.
Those factories still need bodies to keep them going. Someone has to build the factory, network it, install the machines, and keep them going.
Also, someone is delivering raw materials to the factory, and someone is shipping finished goods away from the factory.
Those factories are also tax ratables that help offset the cost of police, fire, and public education.
If automation is an unavoidable trend, I'd rather it be here than there.
PRECISELY!
I wonder how many dozens of American manufacturing workers are required to operate a $1 billion automated factory.
More than if that factory was in another country.
Come off it:
The Sales Figures seemed to combine the ENTIRE "Surface" brand of Products. That includes Laptops, Franken-Tablets, and even a Desktop.
Most of those products COMPLETELY overlap Apple target markets; in fact, they are CALCULATED to do JUST THAT.
Holy shit, you're repetitive. Why do you care so much? You're worried people might think something bad about Apple?
Can't be bothered reading anymore comments on this article as I know about 20% of it is you with your fucking sales figures.
Actually, only about 3 posts that weren't the result of some back-and-forth.