There are is an important point you are missing and in one important aspect your post is factually wrong. This is one machine which is clearly intended as a direct competitor but there are more out there e.g. Dell XPS range which are strangely absent from the comparison. That was my point: so the MBP outsells the Surface Book (but not the new one because that is only out today) what about all the other competitors?
Your comparison is far from fair. You exclude the touch bar "to keep it fair" while ignoring the fact that the Surface has a touch screen: how is that even vaguely fair?
I see that you conveniently failed to notice that, later on in my post, I compared the Touch Bar version of the 13" MBP to the Surface Book. The MBP was STILL $300 cheaper.
Then you claim that that the 13" MBP has "faster graphics" when it has Intel Iris vs. the Surface's nVidia 965M which is factually wrong.
That was just a badly-worded sentence on my part, sorry. What I meant was that the Touch Bar version of the MBP that I used for my second comparison has Faster Graphics than the non-Touch Bar MBP that I used for my first comparison. Both MBPs have Intel Iris Graphics, just different "models" of it.
And yes, I would cautiously concede that the ONE place the Surface Book MAY have an advantage over the 13" MBP is in the Display and GPU world. But I would have to see some graphics benchmarks of the various machines to be sure.
As for the the other features I have never used the TB port on my existing MBP (other than as a miniDP) nor have I any use for USB-C since everything I have is USB-A and a GPU is really important.
And I would agree for the TB 1 port on my personal mid-2012 non-retina MBP. But times they are a change-in'; and with the fact that USB and TB now share a common connector, and the fact that USB-C/TB 3 is seeing WIDESPREAD adoption (FINALLY!!!) outside of Apple computers, I am fairly certain those "new times" are almost here. So from a "future-proof" standpoint, Apple's decision is a VERY wise one, even if it causes people some adapter requirements for now.
So for my uses when I compare a MBP to a Surface I'm looking at the 15" model where the cost rockets up to over $4k with the 1TB SSD and over $5k with the 2TB which is insane for a laptop with an old CPU and GPU
With the prices of the arguably inferior (in terms of I/O and SSD performance at the very least) Surface Book being HIGHER than the roughly-equivalent MBP, do you REALLY think that a theoretical 15" Surface Book would be any LESS expensive than the 15" MBP? Because I don't.
Oh, and from what I have read, the Nvidia GPUs in the Surface Book (and Surface Studio) is OLDER than the AMD Polaris GPUs in the 15" MBP, and the CPUs are the SAME VINTAGE; so why the hate on the MBP, when they are (just like EVERYBODY) at the mercy of Intel and their "release" schedules? Oh, I know: Because it's cool to hate on Apple on Slashdot...
. While the Surface is similarly expensive it has features I value far more: long battery life, touch screen, USB-A ports and tablet mode. However really I am waiting for the XPS 15 to get a refresh to Kaby Lake and hopefully a 10-series nVidia GPU and then, while I'll miss OS X, it's goodbye Apple.
I'm sure Apple will survive. Oh, and enjoy WIndows 10, mwuhahahahaha!!!!
Obviously the price difference depends on what you need the device for if USB-C an TB3 are important for you great - go get a new MBP. However no matter how you spin it there is no way you can claim that the MBP fulfills a similar market niche to the Dell Inspiron 2-in-1, a Chromebook or the cheap Lenovo model they were also comparing it against. The data do suggest it outsells the Surface but I suspect the real competitors are the Dell XPS series and the equivalent
It's really cool to care this much about a fucking laptop. I also like your tweaks to the spec for 'fairness' lol.
No "tweaks" to specs. The Surface Book's product page on the MS site simply isn't very specific about a lot of things. I just tried to match CPU, RAM and SSD, since that is all you can config in either laptop.
How, pray tell, would you have done the comparison to be more "fair", given the available information?
the new MacBook Pro accumulated more revenue from online orders
So the most expensicve laptop on the market generated more revenue than cheaper models. And this is news how exactly?
Most expensive laptop, eh?
One of the machines compared-with is the new Surface Book, which is DEFINITELY intended as DIRECT competition for the 13" MBP., uses the same Skylake-series CPU, has similar RAM and mass-storage options, and was introduced one day before the new MBP.
HOWEVER, When I configured a 13" non-TouchBar MBP (to keep it fair) and the Surface Book with the top i7 CPU (both are Skylake, but the Surface book specs don't specify speed or number of cores), 16 GB RAM, and 1 TB SSD, the MBP was $2599, but the Surface Book was $3199. And the Suface Book has no USB-C, and more importantly, no TB 3 (only MiniDP). IOW, the MBP has 40 Gbps of multifunctional I/O bandwidth, while the Surface Book has 10 Gbps of USB 3.0, plus a DisplayPort.
And yet, the MacBook Pro was STILL $600 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
In fact, you could get the top-end Touch Bar 13" MBP, configured with an even faster i7 CPU, faster 16 GB memory, 1 TB SSD, faster graphics, Touch Bar, and FOUR Multifunction USB-C/TB 3 Ports for $2899, which is STILL $300 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
So please update your meme; it seems to be a bit out-of-touch with FACTS.
If Apple is really doing that great why were Apple Employees told during appraisals weare not doing well and given miserable pay revisions and also told to cut budgets and reduce contractor spend by 20% with no employee backfill
No, the Macbook has only USB-C and an analog audio jack. The iPhone 7 has Lightning and no analog audio jack. That way you can ensure that you cannot use any common set of headphones without at least one adapter/dongle in the mix.
Also you can't connect your apple phone to your apple computer without another separate dongle. So you can charge your laptop with one dongled port, connect your phone with the other and listen to something through the computer. Then what? You're already out of connection on your "pro" computer. Time to go get your iHub for your iDongles so you can do something else with your extremely expensive iTunes/facebook browser.
You mean CABLE. I don't think you know what "dongle" means. And yes, you do have to have a USB-C to Lightning cable to charge your iPhone from your new MBP. Fortunately, Apple sells them for $9, of you can find non-MFi ones on Amazon for a few dollars less.
No, the Macbook has only USB-C and an analog audio jack. The iPhone 7 has Lightning and no analog audio jack. That way you can ensure that you cannot use any common set of headphones without at least one adapter/dongle in the mix.
Macrumors is making a claim that is not supported by the data they link to. If you click though to the data all these say is that it has generated more revenue that a random selection of four other laptops.
Given the prices that Apple charges for these things the revenue per laptop is going to be significantly higher than other manufacturers so there is nothing in the data which indicates they have outsold other machines given that the usual interpretation of that is "sold more units". In fact if you look at the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 a quick Google search suggests that the price of this is between $330-$1,000 in Canada compared to the cost of a MacBook Pro which is 5-10 times the price (of course this depends a lot on the configurations sold). Hence, in terms of sales volume, the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 may actually be comparable to the MacBook Pro although it is clearly in an entirely different class given those prices.
Thus given a cursory inspection of the data it seems that the claim that the MacBook Pro has 'out sold' all other Laptops is completely unfounded. For a start you would need to look at sales volume and then you would need to compare it to laptops similar to the MacBook Pro such as the Dell XPS etc. not the cheapest possible laptops you can find where the low price requires ~5 times or more the sales volume. To support this you'll note the the closest in the data to the MacBook Pro is the Surface Book which is also closest in price.
Apple *do* know their target markets after all!
Macrumors is making a claim that is not supported by the data they link to. If you click though to the data all these say is that it has generated more revenue that a random selection of four other laptops.
Given the prices that Apple charges for these things the revenue per laptop is going to be significantly higher than other manufacturers so there is nothing in the data which indicates they have outsold other machines given that the usual interpretation of that is "sold more units". In fact if you look at the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 a quick Google search suggests that the price of this is between $330-$1,000 in Canada compared to the cost of a MacBook Pro which is 5-10 times the price (of course this depends a lot on the configurations sold). Hence, in terms of sales volume, the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 may actually be comparable to the MacBook Pro although it is clearly in an entirely different class given those prices.
Thus given a cursory inspection of the data it seems that the claim that the MacBook Pro has 'out sold' all other Laptops is completely unfounded. For a start you would need to look at sales volume and then you would need to compare it to laptops similar to the MacBook Pro such as the Dell XPS etc. not the cheapest possible laptops you can find where the low price requires ~5 times or more the sales volume. To support this you'll note the the closest in the data to the MacBook Pro is the Surface Book which is also closest in price.
One of the machines compared-with is the new Surface Book, which is DEFINITELY intended as DIRECT competition for the 13" MBP. HOWEVER, When I configured a 13" non-TouchBar MBP (to keep it fair) and the Surface Book with the top i7 CPU (both are Skylake, but the Surface book specs don't specify speed or number of cores), 16 GB RAM, and 1 TB SSD, the MBP was $2599, but the Surface Book was $3199. And the Suface Book has no USB-C, and more importantly, no TB 3 (only MiniDP). IOW, the MBP has 40 Gbps of multifunctional I/O bandwidth, while the Surface Book has 10 Gbps of USB 3.0, plus a DisplayPort.
And yet, the MacBook Pro was STILL $600 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
In fact, you could get the top-end Touch Bar 13" MBP, co
They count in wholesale orders, even ones that are done for fulfillment in 6 months time and more.
Are they lying? No. Are they geniune with digits? No No No.
Apple is mostly direct sales to the final consumer/business/institution/agency, either through "corporate", or corporate-owned/operated retail, sources; so they can't gain much extra from counting sales through distro channels (Amazon, Fry's, Best Buy, etc) that are either sitting in warehouses, or are part of periodic "releases". Besides, Lead Time has already slipped, so obviously there's no supply glut; and also no need to "stuff" the channel like Samsung did with those Tablets, to gin-up high sales numbers!
These people have to be counting mostly pre-orders at this point, because, other than demo units at their Retail stores, the Touch Bar versions are JUST now getting ready to ship; BUT, for a very large part, those numbers ARE for real, retail-level, end-user sales, for people who are waiting to have their Charger Cards debited for the price of their NEW MBP, which means their machine is on its way. BTW, I read recently that that had just begun to happen. So we shall soon know for sure...
It's interesting how the full-page newspaper ad still holds so much gravitas. Doing it in these papers will apparently reach about 5 million people upper-middle-class and financial types. Not a bad move for damage control.
WSJ - 2,378,827
NYT - 1,865,318
WP - 474,767
Total 4,718,912 average circulation.
But they all use iPhones; so all they'll do is shrug and chuckle a bit.
I thought Apple checks the apps that go in their store? Silly me!
They do. And obviously, given the number of malware reports for Android vs. iOS, they are, to an extremely large extent, amazingly successful at preventing malware.
The difference between iOS and Android is that Apple charges significantly more per developer account and actually validates the business. A dev getting banned will have to do a lot more than just go from "abc inc" to "xyz inc" to get their stuff back in the Apple Store. $100/year doesn't sound like much, but it does keep the riffraff out for the most part.
$100/yr AND a verifiable Credit Card and Email addy.
Obviously not foolproof; but also demonstrably far more effective than whatever it is that Google does.
The Galaxy J5 is over a year old (June 2015). Had the problem been the same as the Note 7 (not S7), it'd have been widespread a looooong time ago. This is just an isolated incident (as it happens occasionally) that's getting larger media attention than usual because it's Samsung.
Perhaps isolated. But not all problems are of the infant mortality type. Don't know if you are familiar with the failing electrolytic frrom around 10 years ago. Seems a capacitor manufacturer left out a vial ingredient, and a lot of computers were hit hard when the electrolytics aged too quickly Apple iMacs and Dell were hit pretty hard with this one. Let's hope is is a one-off.
The way I heard it, it was actually a STOLEN electrolyte formula, and the thieving chemists didn't know that they didn't have the complete formula.
How about the iPhone 4 and its antenna issues then, "Super" Kendall? Touch screen death? You could go on and on
Then please do.
1. Antenna issues? Resulted in some dropped calls. Not one iPhone caught fire because of the unfortunate antenna design. But I will give you that that was likely an Engineering failure.
2. Touch screen "death". NOT an Engineering problem. Rather a Contract Manufacturing and/or Component Vendor problem.
Oh, and "Super Kendall" was a type of Motor Oil. The Scare Quotes around "Super" are entirely nonsensical.
And not everyone who has something positive to say about Apple is automatically a "Shill". It just shows how weak you believe your own argument is when you have to resort to ad hominem attacks, rather than facts like I just did.
Dongles dongles dongles. Do you think bandwidth in a laptop is that important?
I'd rather have convenience once I reach a threshold (USB 3 or Thunderbolt are that threshold, as most OTHER devices have bandwidths below... so why do I need more?).
Why has any Adapter, even if it is just a cable with one type of connector on one end, and another type of connector on the other, suddenly been mischaracterized as a "Dongle"?
Besides, true "pros", especially in the audio world, are VERY familiar with using various Adapters to interface between differing connector types, signal levels and other things such as balanced vs. unbalanced signal paths. This has been, and still is, the way of the (analog audio) world. So, most of those people are saying "What's all the fuss about"?
And yes, total I/O bandwidth IS important in a laptop; especially when that laptop comes off the road and becomes the center of something like a video/audio editing suite. And since many Pros have laptops that spend a significant time in such configurations, having a large number of identical ports means that there is less chance of "you can't get there from here", port-wise. And having massively multifunctional ports like TB 3 with more total I/O bandwidth means you actually have MANY more "virtual ports" available than would practically fit on ANY laptop! And to a much greater extent, the user is no longer limited to what the laptop OEM decided was all the ports of each type that you would ever need. You may need an adapter cable or widget, but at least that same adapter will work with ANY free port on your laptop; making each adapter cable or widget, and each port, much more useful.
And don't get me started on the whole ludicrous arguments Schiller is making about the SD slot. That is incovnenient because it is half sticking out? That is because YOU DESIGNED IT WRONG! It could have been a neat think that did not stick out, like even my SD adapters for arduinos costing $2 do.
Very few people outside of CASUAL photographers used the SD slot. True Pro photogs generally don't use cameras that use SD storage, because the write-speeds are too slow for RAW. So it really was much more of a "consumer" feature, rather than a "Pro" one. And as far as the card sticking out, I would imagine that Apple couldn't find a source for a RELIABLE spring-loaded SD socket, or one that would have been able to be mounted properly in the Unibody chassis.
So, when can I buy my Apple washing machine? I REALLY need it.
Gotta love these stupid stories.
Mmmmm.
The AppleWash(tm) is quite simply the most elegant and powerful washer we have ever designed.
When we set out to create the AppleWash(tm), we asked ourselves "How can we make something as simple as the Washing Machine better?" And I think you will agree that we have done it.
Milled from a solid block of aircraft al-u-MIN-ium, and polished nine times in a proprietary process to a mirror finish, the AppleWash(tm) blends in perfectly with any decor.
Rather than the noisy electromechanical valves that others use to control the water supply, we have designed a custom, proportional, dual-pump system with specially-designed low-speed impeller blades to fill the washer almost silently. And that advanced pump design also extends to the drain pump as well. The AppleWash(tm) is also the only Washer with a custom-designed, computer-controlled active suspension system for the Washtub, that corrects in real-time for vibration and uneven loading of the tub. As a result of these advances, the AppleWash(tm) is incredibly quiet, measuring just 12 decibels, even in the Spin Cycle. Literally more quiet than a whisper.
The advanced power of the A10 chip cleans your clothes accurately and up to 150% faster than other SmartWashers, and the washtub's first-in-industry P3 color gamut and 5k resolution assures your whites stay whiter and your colors more strikingly vivid and beautiful than ever before.
And with our revolutionary Touch Bar, you have unprecedented fingertip control over things like load size, wash and rinse temperature, and spin rate. There's never been anything like it on any SmartWasher before.
We are incredibly excited to see what our users will be able to clean with the incredible New AppleWash(tm).
I think Android counts for more than 85% of smartphone sales now, more like 99%. Which just goes to show what a price-gouger Apple is.
Apple does what any business would like to do: Sell a product to maximize profits. If they thought they could get more profit by selling iPhones for $1,000 apiece, they would. They're selling a premium item, not a necessity. There's plenty of cheap phones out there if you don't want to pay a premium.
And considering the fact that the Galaxy Note 7 costs MORE than a similar-memory-size iPhone 7 PLUS, it tells you a few things:
1. Apple and Samsung are competitively-priced
2. Since Samsung actually MANUFACTURES some of the most costly components in the product THEMSELVES (Display, SoC, Memory, Final Assembly(?)), and yet STILL charges MORE than Apple, either Apple isn't so "greedy" afterall; or Samsung is MORE GREEDY THAN APPLE (and yet, for some reason, no "Samsung Haters").
3. Maybe the gross profits on these high-priced phones aren't so big afterall...
Slashdot Mirror
There are is an important point you are missing and in one important aspect your post is factually wrong. This is one machine which is clearly intended as a direct competitor but there are more out there e.g. Dell XPS range which are strangely absent from the comparison. That was my point: so the MBP outsells the Surface Book (but not the new one because that is only out today) what about all the other competitors? Your comparison is far from fair. You exclude the touch bar "to keep it fair" while ignoring the fact that the Surface has a touch screen: how is that even vaguely fair?
I see that you conveniently failed to notice that, later on in my post, I compared the Touch Bar version of the 13" MBP to the Surface Book. The MBP was STILL $300 cheaper.
Then you claim that that the 13" MBP has "faster graphics" when it has Intel Iris vs. the Surface's nVidia 965M which is factually wrong.
That was just a badly-worded sentence on my part, sorry. What I meant was that the Touch Bar version of the MBP that I used for my second comparison has Faster Graphics than the non-Touch Bar MBP that I used for my first comparison. Both MBPs have Intel Iris Graphics, just different "models" of it.
And yes, I would cautiously concede that the ONE place the Surface Book MAY have an advantage over the 13" MBP is in the Display and GPU world. But I would have to see some graphics benchmarks of the various machines to be sure.
As for the the other features I have never used the TB port on my existing MBP (other than as a miniDP) nor have I any use for USB-C since everything I have is USB-A and a GPU is really important.
And I would agree for the TB 1 port on my personal mid-2012 non-retina MBP. But times they are a change-in'; and with the fact that USB and TB now share a common connector, and the fact that USB-C/TB 3 is seeing WIDESPREAD adoption (FINALLY!!!) outside of Apple computers, I am fairly certain those "new times" are almost here. So from a "future-proof" standpoint, Apple's decision is a VERY wise one, even if it causes people some adapter requirements for now.
So for my uses when I compare a MBP to a Surface I'm looking at the 15" model where the cost rockets up to over $4k with the 1TB SSD and over $5k with the 2TB which is insane for a laptop with an old CPU and GPU
With the prices of the arguably inferior (in terms of I/O and SSD performance at the very least) Surface Book being HIGHER than the roughly-equivalent MBP, do you REALLY think that a theoretical 15" Surface Book would be any LESS expensive than the 15" MBP? Because I don't.
Oh, and from what I have read, the Nvidia GPUs in the Surface Book (and Surface Studio) is OLDER than the AMD Polaris GPUs in the 15" MBP, and the CPUs are the SAME VINTAGE; so why the hate on the MBP, when they are (just like EVERYBODY) at the mercy of Intel and their "release" schedules? Oh, I know: Because it's cool to hate on Apple on Slashdot...
. While the Surface is similarly expensive it has features I value far more: long battery life, touch screen, USB-A ports and tablet mode. However really I am waiting for the XPS 15 to get a refresh to Kaby Lake and hopefully a 10-series nVidia GPU and then, while I'll miss OS X, it's goodbye Apple.
I'm sure Apple will survive. Oh, and enjoy WIndows 10, mwuhahahahaha!!!!
Obviously the price difference depends on what you need the device for if USB-C an TB3 are important for you great - go get a new MBP. However no matter how you spin it there is no way you can claim that the MBP fulfills a similar market niche to the Dell Inspiron 2-in-1, a Chromebook or the cheap Lenovo model they were also comparing it against. The data do suggest it outsells the Surface but I suspect the real competitors are the Dell XPS series and the equivalent
It's really cool to care this much about a fucking laptop. I also like your tweaks to the spec for 'fairness' lol.
No "tweaks" to specs. The Surface Book's product page on the MS site simply isn't very specific about a lot of things. I just tried to match CPU, RAM and SSD, since that is all you can config in either laptop.
How, pray tell, would you have done the comparison to be more "fair", given the available information?
the new MacBook Pro accumulated more revenue from online orders
So the most expensicve laptop on the market generated more revenue than cheaper models. And this is news how exactly?
Most expensive laptop, eh?
One of the machines compared-with is the new Surface Book, which is DEFINITELY intended as DIRECT competition for the 13" MBP., uses the same Skylake-series CPU, has similar RAM and mass-storage options, and was introduced one day before the new MBP.
HOWEVER, When I configured a 13" non-TouchBar MBP (to keep it fair) and the Surface Book with the top i7 CPU (both are Skylake, but the Surface book specs don't specify speed or number of cores), 16 GB RAM, and 1 TB SSD, the MBP was $2599, but the Surface Book was $3199. And the Suface Book has no USB-C, and more importantly, no TB 3 (only MiniDP). IOW, the MBP has 40 Gbps of multifunctional I/O bandwidth, while the Surface Book has 10 Gbps of USB 3.0, plus a DisplayPort.
And yet, the MacBook Pro was STILL $600 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
In fact, you could get the top-end Touch Bar 13" MBP, configured with an even faster i7 CPU, faster 16 GB memory, 1 TB SSD, faster graphics, Touch Bar, and FOUR Multifunction USB-C/TB 3 Ports for $2899, which is STILL $300 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
So please update your meme; it seems to be a bit out-of-touch with FACTS.
If Apple is really doing that great why were Apple Employees told during appraisals weare not doing well and given miserable pay revisions and also told to cut budgets and reduce contractor spend by 20% with no employee backfill
Citation?
No, the Macbook has only USB-C and an analog audio jack. The iPhone 7 has Lightning and no analog audio jack. That way you can ensure that you cannot use any common set of headphones without at least one adapter/dongle in the mix.
Also you can't connect your apple phone to your apple computer without another separate dongle. So you can charge your laptop with one dongled port, connect your phone with the other and listen to something through the computer. Then what? You're already out of connection on your "pro" computer. Time to go get your iHub for your iDongles so you can do something else with your extremely expensive iTunes/facebook browser.
You mean CABLE. I don't think you know what "dongle" means. And yes, you do have to have a USB-C to Lightning cable to charge your iPhone from your new MBP. Fortunately, Apple sells them for $9, of you can find non-MFi ones on Amazon for a few dollars less.
So now what?
No, the Macbook has only USB-C and an analog audio jack. The iPhone 7 has Lightning and no analog audio jack. That way you can ensure that you cannot use any common set of headphones without at least one adapter/dongle in the mix.
Give it a rest.,nobody bug you cares about this.
Apple *do* know their target markets after all!
Macrumors is making a claim that is not supported by the data they link to. If you click though to the data all these say is that it has generated more revenue that a random selection of four other laptops. Given the prices that Apple charges for these things the revenue per laptop is going to be significantly higher than other manufacturers so there is nothing in the data which indicates they have outsold other machines given that the usual interpretation of that is "sold more units". In fact if you look at the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 a quick Google search suggests that the price of this is between $330-$1,000 in Canada compared to the cost of a MacBook Pro which is 5-10 times the price (of course this depends a lot on the configurations sold). Hence, in terms of sales volume, the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 may actually be comparable to the MacBook Pro although it is clearly in an entirely different class given those prices. Thus given a cursory inspection of the data it seems that the claim that the MacBook Pro has 'out sold' all other Laptops is completely unfounded. For a start you would need to look at sales volume and then you would need to compare it to laptops similar to the MacBook Pro such as the Dell XPS etc. not the cheapest possible laptops you can find where the low price requires ~5 times or more the sales volume. To support this you'll note the the closest in the data to the MacBook Pro is the Surface Book which is also closest in price.
Apple *do* know their target markets after all!
Macrumors is making a claim that is not supported by the data they link to. If you click though to the data all these say is that it has generated more revenue that a random selection of four other laptops. Given the prices that Apple charges for these things the revenue per laptop is going to be significantly higher than other manufacturers so there is nothing in the data which indicates they have outsold other machines given that the usual interpretation of that is "sold more units". In fact if you look at the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 a quick Google search suggests that the price of this is between $330-$1,000 in Canada compared to the cost of a MacBook Pro which is 5-10 times the price (of course this depends a lot on the configurations sold). Hence, in terms of sales volume, the Dell Inspiron 2 in 1 may actually be comparable to the MacBook Pro although it is clearly in an entirely different class given those prices. Thus given a cursory inspection of the data it seems that the claim that the MacBook Pro has 'out sold' all other Laptops is completely unfounded. For a start you would need to look at sales volume and then you would need to compare it to laptops similar to the MacBook Pro such as the Dell XPS etc. not the cheapest possible laptops you can find where the low price requires ~5 times or more the sales volume. To support this you'll note the the closest in the data to the MacBook Pro is the Surface Book which is also closest in price.
One of the machines compared-with is the new Surface Book, which is DEFINITELY intended as DIRECT competition for the 13" MBP. HOWEVER, When I configured a 13" non-TouchBar MBP (to keep it fair) and the Surface Book with the top i7 CPU (both are Skylake, but the Surface book specs don't specify speed or number of cores), 16 GB RAM, and 1 TB SSD, the MBP was $2599, but the Surface Book was $3199. And the Suface Book has no USB-C, and more importantly, no TB 3 (only MiniDP). IOW, the MBP has 40 Gbps of multifunctional I/O bandwidth, while the Surface Book has 10 Gbps of USB 3.0, plus a DisplayPort.
And yet, the MacBook Pro was STILL $600 CHEAPER THAN THE SURFACE BOOK!
In fact, you could get the top-end Touch Bar 13" MBP, co
Exactly. Also Microsoft sells Surface direct.
Apple sells almost everything direct. What's your point?
I know how they pull these digits:
They count in wholesale orders, even ones that are done for fulfillment in 6 months time and more.
Are they lying? No. Are they geniune with digits? No No No.
Apple is mostly direct sales to the final consumer/business/institution/agency, either through "corporate", or corporate-owned/operated retail, sources; so they can't gain much extra from counting sales through distro channels (Amazon, Fry's, Best Buy, etc) that are either sitting in warehouses, or are part of periodic "releases". Besides, Lead Time has already slipped, so obviously there's no supply glut; and also no need to "stuff" the channel like Samsung did with those Tablets, to gin-up high sales numbers!
These people have to be counting mostly pre-orders at this point, because, other than demo units at their Retail stores, the Touch Bar versions are JUST now getting ready to ship; BUT, for a very large part, those numbers ARE for real, retail-level, end-user sales, for people who are waiting to have their Charger Cards debited for the price of their NEW MBP, which means their machine is on its way. BTW, I read recently that that had just begun to happen. So we shall soon know for sure...
The way I heard it, it was actually a STOLEN electrolyte formula, and the thieving chemists didn't know that they didn't have the complete formula.
Yeah - that's the story I heard as well. I just figured if there were any company shills around, I'd get modded to oblivion, os I left that part out.
But it's easy to spot the Shills: They're the people that are constantly accusing OTHERS of being Shills.... ;-)
Yeah, but they'll have to spend an ADDITIONAL roughly $500k to reach them.
Maybe next time they'll put that $500k to better use: Designing a battery charger that doesn't overheat their batteries!
It's interesting how the full-page newspaper ad still holds so much gravitas. Doing it in these papers will apparently reach about 5 million people upper-middle-class and financial types. Not a bad move for damage control.
WSJ - 2,378,827 NYT - 1,865,318 WP - 474,767
Total 4,718,912 average circulation.
But they all use iPhones; so all they'll do is shrug and chuckle a bit.
I thought Apple checks the apps that go in their store? Silly me!
They do. And obviously, given the number of malware reports for Android vs. iOS, they are, to an extremely large extent, amazingly successful at preventing malware.
Those who give up freedom for security ....
...Don't have to run A/V on their phones!
The difference between iOS and Android is that Apple charges significantly more per developer account and actually validates the business. A dev getting banned will have to do a lot more than just go from "abc inc" to "xyz inc" to get their stuff back in the Apple Store. $100/year doesn't sound like much, but it does keep the riffraff out for the most part.
$100/yr AND a verifiable Credit Card and Email addy.
Obviously not foolproof; but also demonstrably far more effective than whatever it is that Google does.
The Galaxy J5 is over a year old (June 2015). Had the problem been the same as the Note 7 (not S7), it'd have been widespread a looooong time ago. This is just an isolated incident (as it happens occasionally) that's getting larger media attention than usual because it's Samsung.
Perhaps isolated. But not all problems are of the infant mortality type. Don't know if you are familiar with the failing electrolytic frrom around 10 years ago. Seems a capacitor manufacturer left out a vial ingredient, and a lot of computers were hit hard when the electrolytics aged too quickly Apple iMacs and Dell were hit pretty hard with this one. Let's hope is is a one-off.
The way I heard it, it was actually a STOLEN electrolyte formula, and the thieving chemists didn't know that they didn't have the complete formula.
How about the iPhone 4 and its antenna issues then, "Super" Kendall? Touch screen death? You could go on and on
Then please do.
1. Antenna issues? Resulted in some dropped calls. Not one iPhone caught fire because of the unfortunate antenna design. But I will give you that that was likely an Engineering failure.
2. Touch screen "death". NOT an Engineering problem. Rather a Contract Manufacturing and/or Component Vendor problem.
Oh, and "Super Kendall" was a type of Motor Oil. The Scare Quotes around "Super" are entirely nonsensical.
And not everyone who has something positive to say about Apple is automatically a "Shill". It just shows how weak you believe your own argument is when you have to resort to ad hominem attacks, rather than facts like I just did.
Dongles dongles dongles. Do you think bandwidth in a laptop is that important?
I'd rather have convenience once I reach a threshold (USB 3 or Thunderbolt are that threshold, as most OTHER devices have bandwidths below... so why do I need more?).
Why has any Adapter, even if it is just a cable with one type of connector on one end, and another type of connector on the other, suddenly been mischaracterized as a "Dongle"?
Besides, true "pros", especially in the audio world, are VERY familiar with using various Adapters to interface between differing connector types, signal levels and other things such as balanced vs. unbalanced signal paths. This has been, and still is, the way of the (analog audio) world. So, most of those people are saying "What's all the fuss about"?
And yes, total I/O bandwidth IS important in a laptop; especially when that laptop comes off the road and becomes the center of something like a video/audio editing suite. And since many Pros have laptops that spend a significant time in such configurations, having a large number of identical ports means that there is less chance of "you can't get there from here", port-wise. And having massively multifunctional ports like TB 3 with more total I/O bandwidth means you actually have MANY more "virtual ports" available than would practically fit on ANY laptop! And to a much greater extent, the user is no longer limited to what the laptop OEM decided was all the ports of each type that you would ever need. You may need an adapter cable or widget, but at least that same adapter will work with ANY free port on your laptop; making each adapter cable or widget, and each port, much more useful.
And don't get me started on the whole ludicrous arguments Schiller is making about the SD slot. That is incovnenient because it is half sticking out? That is because YOU DESIGNED IT WRONG! It could have been a neat think that did not stick out, like even my SD adapters for arduinos costing $2 do.
Very few people outside of CASUAL photographers used the SD slot. True Pro photogs generally don't use cameras that use SD storage, because the write-speeds are too slow for RAW. So it really was much more of a "consumer" feature, rather than a "Pro" one. And as far as the card sticking out, I would imagine that Apple couldn't find a source for a RELIABLE spring-loaded SD socket, or one that would have been able to be mounted properly in the Unibody chassis.
To be a Fake Tim Cook, you need to lose your sense of humor.
Also, you can't be such a good writer.
Instead of being a Fake Tim Cook, you could accept the lower position of being a Madison Avenue advertising copywriter. Only $1200 per hour.
I think there was actually a compliment under all that, right? If so, thanks!
I tried my best to channel Jony Ive. Did I get the superlatives-choices right?
Lets drag whoever produced those numbers out into the parking lot and have them shot.
Actually, it was Samsung that "produced" those numbers, with their corporate greed and engineering arrogance.
Think about it.
are held captive in an ecosystem
I don't think that "held captive in" is the correct term here.
Or, maybe they are happy with what they have, and don't care about the additional stuff Android offers.
Oh, you mean like Viruses, Malware and Exploits, oh my!?!?
So, when can I buy my Apple washing machine? I REALLY need it. Gotta love these stupid stories.
Mmmmm.
The AppleWash(tm) is quite simply the most elegant and powerful washer we have ever designed.
When we set out to create the AppleWash(tm), we asked ourselves "How can we make something as simple as the Washing Machine better?" And I think you will agree that we have done it.
Milled from a solid block of aircraft al-u-MIN-ium, and polished nine times in a proprietary process to a mirror finish, the AppleWash(tm) blends in perfectly with any decor.
Rather than the noisy electromechanical valves that others use to control the water supply, we have designed a custom, proportional, dual-pump system with specially-designed low-speed impeller blades to fill the washer almost silently. And that advanced pump design also extends to the drain pump as well. The AppleWash(tm) is also the only Washer with a custom-designed, computer-controlled active suspension system for the Washtub, that corrects in real-time for vibration and uneven loading of the tub. As a result of these advances, the AppleWash(tm) is incredibly quiet, measuring just 12 decibels, even in the Spin Cycle. Literally more quiet than a whisper.
The advanced power of the A10 chip cleans your clothes accurately and up to 150% faster than other SmartWashers, and the washtub's first-in-industry P3 color gamut and 5k resolution assures your whites stay whiter and your colors more strikingly vivid and beautiful than ever before.
And with our revolutionary Touch Bar, you have unprecedented fingertip control over things like load size, wash and rinse temperature, and spin rate. There's never been anything like it on any SmartWasher before.
We are incredibly excited to see what our users will be able to clean with the incredible New AppleWash(tm).
Also, selling a high-priced item at a profit does not mean you're price gouging.
It does on Communist Slashdot!
I think Android counts for more than 85% of smartphone sales now, more like 99%. Which just goes to show what a price-gouger Apple is.
Apple does what any business would like to do: Sell a product to maximize profits. If they thought they could get more profit by selling iPhones for $1,000 apiece, they would. They're selling a premium item, not a necessity. There's plenty of cheap phones out there if you don't want to pay a premium.
And considering the fact that the Galaxy Note 7 costs MORE than a similar-memory-size iPhone 7 PLUS, it tells you a few things:
1. Apple and Samsung are competitively-priced
2. Since Samsung actually MANUFACTURES some of the most costly components in the product THEMSELVES (Display, SoC, Memory, Final Assembly(?)), and yet STILL charges MORE than Apple, either Apple isn't so "greedy" afterall; or Samsung is MORE GREEDY THAN APPLE (and yet, for some reason, no "Samsung Haters").
3. Maybe the gross profits on these high-priced phones aren't so big afterall...