Sure... unless they discontinue it [non touchbar version]. Which is highly likely.
They hopefully learned a lesson with the mac pro. I'm willing to bet a larger proportion of the user base than Apple thinks is really attached to those keys.
My old macbook pro is also still in daily use (2010ish)... but a big part of its longevity is is because I was able to add ram and replace the original 5400rpm drive with an SSD. That's a big part of the longevity proposition, and apple's newer stuff doesn't have that. If the new units are long lived its going to be in spite of apple not thanks to them.
The newer stuff is already using hardware that is as fast and maxed out as possible. LPDDR3 is maxed out at 16GB, which is what the MBPs come with. Newer technology for bigger memory will require hardware support that will need a new logic board, at the least. I'm surprised Apple decided to solder the NVMe chips directly to the board. Hopefully that is a decision they'll reverse, or add a NVMe slot internally (ROFL - although Apple's mac pro admission shows there's a glimmer of hope when a bad decision is made).
And in general all computers are lasting a long time now. My sisters laptop, is from 2009 and its perfectly fine, and it's a dell.
She's lucky, given the lack of quality in Dell laptops. My IT guy at a previous job was seriously windows biased and had tons of Dells and quite a few Lenovos. One of the requirements I had joining was that I have a Mac. You'd think I'd asked for his first born. Within 2 years with a couple more guys coming on using macs like me, as Dells failed left and right and our work being primarily Unix based which also caused him lots of support issues on windows, but 0 on macs, he decided to try a mac. Within a week, he grudgingly admitted "it's not all bad". Within a month, he was positive enough about them to recommend we switch. Those Dells were circa 2008-2011, and the problems with them ranged across the board - memory going bad, a CPU burning up, hard disks crapping out, but the most common was batteries. Batteries lasted about 1.5 years. Yes, they're replaceable, but if you have to buy a new $100 battery at least twice in 4 years, that becomes an issue in this environment.
Wifi is pretty ubiquitous, but its not universal, and wired is often **much** higher speed.
Wireless is ALWAYS much slower, if you're not the sole device on the network.
Mine at least has full size hdmi... which i have used in hotels, board rooms, executive lounges, private offices... the new ones dropped that too. So that would be another dongle to carry around. And no USB A... seriously apple?? WTF. Those aren't niche requirements. Maybe in 2025 or 2030 they will be like needing analog VGA, but I have to use my laptop in 2017 and in 2017 those aren't niche requirements.
I agree, the USB-C only thing is a painful at this time because USB-A is ubiquitous. They could have left one.... HDMI I have never used. Everything I've needed to connect to is T-Bolt, DV, VGA or DVI.
Then buy the non touchbar version. I fully concur I have no desire to get a touchbar version. I also need function keys and the ESC key is an especially fond key for me. I touch-type, a touchbar isn't going to lend itself well to what I need. So I do hope they continue offering a non-touchbar version. If they don't, I'll likely hang onto the last model that does offer normal keys and then start looking for an alternative 5 years down the road. My shortest lifespan of a mac laptop has been 5 years, I still have a 2006 MBP running and in daily use, although it's about to be replaced, not because it's broken, but because as of this year it no longer is supported by the main software used on it. Sad really, but understandable given the technical limitations of the hardware in the machine.
For ethernet, I got the T-bolt->ethernet adapter. Is it a hassle? Well, certainly more than not needing one but nothing notable. Does it work? Haven't had an issue with it in the several years I've had it, and I wish I hadn't bought the second one I keep in my bag just in case because I've never needed it. At least I got them cheap, about $15 each.
Actually - I chose the the only screen with reasonable resolution. If Dell would sell a 2K screen, I would have chosen that. The base 1080 screen is just... unusable.
It's $1000 LESS than your MacBook and nearly matches specs...
It didn't come close.
It does NOT however, outclass laptops spec for spec. Period. Quit moving the goalposts.
Actually, it appears it does except for gaming laptops. That is not a reason anyone ever buys a mac today. But, you keep on trying to move the goalposts. Since the top end MBP has a faster CPU than Alienware's top end gaming rig, I'd say CPUs are at least on par with anything else out there today. Memory is limited, but that's directly due to battery life. It is a laptop, and that's one thing I've always needed in a laptop - longer battery life. SSDs in macs are absolutely top end. Laptops not running NVMe SSDs are in the buggy whip group.
The specs to match are in no particular order (and you're free to disagree, which may mean that this particular set of Apple hardware doesn't match your needs, don't buy it):
CPU performance
Battery life
disk performance
screen resolution min 2k as less is noticeable.
Memory should be mentioned only as requiring a min of 16GB. Why not more? Because I've yet to run into swapping as a problem with 16GB. It is quite possible that windows requires more than 16GB, but if running windows is a requirement for you, then Apple is obviously not your first vendor of choice.
Just simply say, "Hey, wow, looks I was incorrect with regards to Apple's pricing compared to equivalent specs from its competitors' laptop hardware offerings."
As countered throughout this thread's offered comparisons there's just not that major of a difference with equivalent hardware. You get differences if you chop 40% of the performance by selecting a much lesser or older CPU, less ram, or cheaper and much slower SSDs. That wasn't the argument - the argument was that like for like, or as close as you can get, Apple hardware is quite competitive. They just don't offer the range of budget options others do, but that's not what we're comparing here. Budget options will always win on price, they'll get clobbered in performance, but that's like complaining that your 1.6L Kia should accelerate like a Ferrari, much less more common high end vehicles. Which brings us back to comparing like with like.
It's okay to be wrong - even on in the internet. Doubling down on it is what makes you a twat.
I don't need to double down. Show me an equivalent system that's significantly cheaper, and I'll agree. The Dell is the closest by far, given the other options in the thread, and it is cheaper by a couple of hundred even though it falls short in a couple of areas and exceeds in 1. The Alienware system was the last one I just compared, and that one even didn't wind up being a slam dunk for an outright better performer since the CPU is 1 step down from the best available in the MBP, weighs twice as much and, per previous experience given the rest of the hardware specs, probably has less than 1/6th the battery life. I didn't bother double checking that.
Wrong. An Alienware laptop shits all over even the highest end Macbook Pro and it cost the same
...
So the Alienware has a faster CPU
Wrong - Alienware has the 7820HQ, the MBP has the 7920 HQ. You'd have to step down to a 7820HQ.
double the RAM with newer DDR4 technology
It's DDR4 vs LPDDR3. Guess what that DDR4 does to battery life? And then double that effect in this case.
an infinitely more powerful GPU, a bigger and much higher resolution display
Yep, sucking down that battery life, and wow - double the weight! I guess I can stop going to the gym! And can you actually see the difference in that higher resolution? At least on the MBP, all apps scale seamlessly, so everything looks right on a 2K vs 4K vs 5K screen. I know Windows can't, yet. I'll give you the extra roughly 8 sq in in screen real estate, that is definitely better except when it's not, like on an airplane.
What you're comparing is a semi-portable desktop vs a laptop. I had an Alienware laptop. Couldn't get rid of it soon enough. High weight, crap battery life, and complimentary sterilization aren't things that appeal to me.
To keep up battery life, they have to use slower CPUs and GPUs, sub-4k displays, and LPDDR (that last one I don't really have a problem with, except that it limits the amount of RAM as well)
Well, learned something new there - LPDDR is why we do not yet have more than 16GB of RAM on MBPs. Should JEDEC ever get around to extending or creating a new standard that supports 24/32GB, it'd be nice. And since LPDDR seems to be a significant contributor to the longer battery life (note all the other laptops with standard replaceable RAM having 50% or less battery life) I'd say that's a trade-off I'm willing to live with. As for GPUs, Apple has seriously tweaked the discrete vs integrated GPU usage so well that I don't see that as being a major issue for battery life. Also, those 4K laptops all use pretty much equivalent discrete GPUs to the one in my MBP, but having a 4K vs 2K 15" screen doesn't really bother me that much. I'd rather have a nice 30-40" 4K external monitor so I can actually use that increased resolution.
Then you don't need what Apple's selling, and that's fine. I do need near top CPU performance and disk performance, the 2 biggest things negatively impacting my work. So for me, topping Apple's offerings pre touchbar wasn't worthwhile, especially since I wanted a UNIX based OS.
I picked the system that came closest to meeting my needs a little over a year ago. No cherry picking at all. The MSI rigs didn't cut it then, so I didn't review them again.
Disk performance - didn't bother confirming but I'll bet it is significantly slower.
Also, more expensive comparable PC laptops that are still priced lower than the 15" MBP only get better and make the (still using outdated DDR3 for some reason...) MBP look like a joke.
I checked the MSI series out when I purchased my last one a little over a year ago - they weren't ready for prime time then, and I'll bet that still holds true today. You will be making tradeoffs with those laptops, either in weight, CPU speed, disk speed and always battery life over a comparable Apple laptop. BTW, one requirement I have is to run UNIX under the covers. I'm 100% fine running Linux or BSD on a laptop, provided they're 1) supported and 2) usable. Battery life is also important to me.
But please, feel free to find another way to support your baseless assertion that "on a like for like comparison as much as possible, Apple laptops cost about the same or even less than their competition." I just did a like-for-like comparison and a 15" Apple laptop you could buy right now gives you drastically lower specs for more than double the price than a PC laptop you also buy right now.
Every single laptop you referenced offers significantly diminished battery life, and all use at least some slower components that matter, namely SSDs and CPUs. DDR4 doesn't help you for squat if the CPU is 10% slower to begin with, and if the CPU is as fast or faster, then disk I/O becomes an issue, at least for my workloads. But hey, you lug that heavy half-life laptop along and enjoy your "savings". You'll be spending it on that extra software you'll need that I don't.;)
I bought my last laptop a year and a half ago, and it was true then. So I just looked, it appears that Dell's XPS 15" 4K system w/ 1 year premium support comes in at $2188 vs a similarly configured base 15" MBP at $2299 now. (I only bothered with Dell as it was the first thing that looked close spec wise and the pricing hadn't changed all that much from There's a few differences, of course, the 4K touchscreen vs a 2K non touch screen, but the 4K system with any version of windows still has scaling problems that don't exist for OSX, so I'm not sure that a 4K (or even 2K if they offered it) W10 system really gains you much.
While Dell does appear to have finally leapfrogged the screen resolution of a MBP, unfortunately neither the underlying OS nor the supposedly better GPU can do it justice. Battery life, well, it's still a Dell, i.e., terrible at less than half the battery life of an MBP, which only lugging an extra couple of pounds in the form of external battery packs will address. Then there's the trackpad, which is still not a touchpad.
All those substandard things really add up when you're looking at a system for working on, as I do, and I may need to run for 7+ hours on battery, while traveling. Nothing so counterproductive and interrupting as being in a multi-hour design and presentation session where the note taking Dell/HP/Lenova users all have to interrupt between 2 and 4 hours to plug in their laptops and share outlets while you're still running on battery power running videos, slideshows, and a live demo.
Tell me what's worth ~$120 there? I haven't even added the software packages you need to be as effective and at least pretend to be safe on windows as you can be out of the box on OSX, because that's highly dependent on your needs and environment and may require at least some similar expenditures on OSX based systems.
Sure, OSX does all that too, but then I'd have to pay twice as much for half the performance because of the Apple hardware.
I don't know what you're going on about. On a like for like comparison as much as possible, Apple laptops cost about the same or even less than their competition, over the past 8 years when I've bought laptops. Now, you can rightfully argue that the laptop you are happy with costs less than Apple, but if you're needing Apple hardware specs or better, you're not looking any cheaper as far as laptops go. I wish I could say the same about their desktops, hopefully they'll get it right with the desktop (mac pro and hopefully mini) revamp they've announced.
You asserted, not explained. Same with racism, as you apparently view the world through a racist leaning lens. Quit being so sensitive and open up your mind. Sorry for the delay, I was busy.
The simple reason is that systemd generates consulting dollars for those selling certain distros and maintenance contracts. When you first start, it seems simpler. When you run into trouble, you're screwed. You're going to need someone well-versed in systemd (consultant) or spend the effort to learn that monumental pile of shit yourself. Conceptually, systemd's proposal is sound. Everyone would love a simple one stop shop to simple start their services with an easy to understand model. The reality is a convoluted and over engineered and complex system that's not really setup to do just what it promised, instead doing a whole slew of extra crap that it really didn't need to deal with.
Who continued ranting down the racist path? I know, I know, talking about how bad minorities were treated means you're not racist, except when it is. I'll skip over how you can't admit you're wrong either, since you've side-stepped and contorted around that conclusion several times. Then again, you've clearly shown how wrong you've been on multiple topics in this thread starting with your racist slant on poor people. It takes a special kind of stubbornness to continue to piss into the wind, it reminds me a lot of Trump.
Seriously? 15GB? Holy crap, I wonder how much junk mail is in my gmail account. I guess one of these days I'll have to login with a browser again, and wipe the all mail folder, just for grins.
You aren't the original, you responded to me which is your first post in this thread and shouldn't overlook my original post for the context of where I'm coming from. That's where you inserted racism!!!!, from which you still haven't gotten the hint. My comment was only that a certain set of factors related to the category of "poor" people likely eligible to move into the type of housing from TFS, and that they made what in some folks opinions are bad choices which is why they cannot live in "better" neighborhoods. No more, no less.
No, they self identify due to marketing and yes there is a blossoming "Redneck Culture". We're arguing about a historical "Redneck Culture". It does not exist. You can't claim that Rednecks were any more persecuted then any other group of poor people.
I think you still don't understand the concept of culture. These people had certain behaviors and beliefs (the actual definition of culture) which were different from, for example, hillbillies, although those two groups admittedly share more than they differ. But they do differ, and that's what defines the differences in culture.
My original statement was merely to point out that that poster's comment about newer cars in poor neighborhoods only being associated with a persecuted ethnic minority was essentially viewing the world through a racist lens. I am not sure where you're going, but you sure seem to be hell-bent on a persecution complex.
But being called a “redneck,” now, especially when you know in your genes and in the dirty back roads of your mind that you are one—despite having spent years trying not to be—well, that just don’t constitute fair fighting. I do not cherish Rednecks, which means I dislike certain persistent old parts of myself.
Note a) this was written in 74, and b) his wife passed away already and the event occurred prior to that and c) he's talking bout trying to avoid being a redneck for years. Now any rational mind would equate all that to redneck having existed, given that he was born in 1929 and the implication that he was one by birth, as being relevant information to establish that yes, rednecks as we know them existed all the way back to his birth. This is even solidified by the next line:
Of late the Redneck has been wildly romanticized; somehow he threatens to become a cultural hero.
Which again, for the slow, directly states that the redneck definition has existed for some time and has been elevated just recently, as of 1974. If you can't understand that means rednecks as a group, and a maligned group, has existed since at least the early 1900s, well, I'm done.
No, but it's easy enough to add taxes to make up for environmentally damaging and inhumane practices. Should that tax be high enough, demand will fall for these practices, because there's no benefit to engaging in them.
I moved nothing. Redneck is a late 20th century innovation. More about marketing then culture.
And I was hoping we'd made progress. You're still myopically viewing it under the lens of the chic redneck culture of the mid 70s onward. I can assure you that rednecks existed as an identity long before that period, with long being defined as decades at a minimum. The current definition of redneck already existed at least in the 1940s. Here is a little article from 74 that discusses rednecks written by a self-professed redneck who was born in the late 1920s, which also documents the rough time of the "romanticized" notion of a redneck.
It's not Geronimo's land, he took it. Figuratively speaking, poor innocent Geronimo murdered or ran off the previous tenants, who may also have done the same and so on down to the original actual tenants, none of whom, for sake of argument, are left.
I've probably read more history in the last year then you have in the last decade, and I'm a bit old for a millennial.
You have no idea what I have or have not read - this is typical of a millennial self-centered viewpoint although by no means only limited to millennials, as apparently you're revealing now. Also, you've now moved your statement from late 20th century to beginning of the 20th century for the redneck term. With just a little more research, I'm sure you'll go all the way back to the end of the 18th/beginning of the 19th century. You'll also be shocked to discover the groups termed rednecks are still considered rednecks today - poor southern whites, appalachian whites, etc. As for being absorbed into higher classes that does sometimes happen, and sometimes they're the butt of jokes and backstabbing.
Slashdot Mirror
Sure... unless they discontinue it [non touchbar version]. Which is highly likely.
They hopefully learned a lesson with the mac pro. I'm willing to bet a larger proportion of the user base than Apple thinks is really attached to those keys.
My old macbook pro is also still in daily use (2010ish)... but a big part of its longevity is is because I was able to add ram and replace the original 5400rpm drive with an SSD. That's a big part of the longevity proposition, and apple's newer stuff doesn't have that. If the new units are long lived its going to be in spite of apple not thanks to them.
The newer stuff is already using hardware that is as fast and maxed out as possible. LPDDR3 is maxed out at 16GB, which is what the MBPs come with. Newer technology for bigger memory will require hardware support that will need a new logic board, at the least. I'm surprised Apple decided to solder the NVMe chips directly to the board. Hopefully that is a decision they'll reverse, or add a NVMe slot internally (ROFL - although Apple's mac pro admission shows there's a glimmer of hope when a bad decision is made).
And in general all computers are lasting a long time now. My sisters laptop, is from 2009 and its perfectly fine, and it's a dell.
She's lucky, given the lack of quality in Dell laptops. My IT guy at a previous job was seriously windows biased and had tons of Dells and quite a few Lenovos. One of the requirements I had joining was that I have a Mac. You'd think I'd asked for his first born. Within 2 years with a couple more guys coming on using macs like me, as Dells failed left and right and our work being primarily Unix based which also caused him lots of support issues on windows, but 0 on macs, he decided to try a mac. Within a week, he grudgingly admitted "it's not all bad". Within a month, he was positive enough about them to recommend we switch. Those Dells were circa 2008-2011, and the problems with them ranged across the board - memory going bad, a CPU burning up, hard disks crapping out, but the most common was batteries. Batteries lasted about 1.5 years. Yes, they're replaceable, but if you have to buy a new $100 battery at least twice in 4 years, that becomes an issue in this environment.
Wifi is pretty ubiquitous, but its not universal, and wired is often **much** higher speed.
Wireless is ALWAYS much slower, if you're not the sole device on the network.
Mine at least has full size hdmi... which i have used in hotels, board rooms, executive lounges, private offices... the new ones dropped that too. So that would be another dongle to carry around. And no USB A... seriously apple?? WTF. Those aren't niche requirements. Maybe in 2025 or 2030 they will be like needing analog VGA, but I have to use my laptop in 2017 and in 2017 those aren't niche requirements.
I agree, the USB-C only thing is a painful at this time because USB-A is ubiquitous. They could have left one.... HDMI I have never used. Everything I've needed to connect to is T-Bolt, DV, VGA or DVI.
Then buy the non touchbar version. I fully concur I have no desire to get a touchbar version. I also need function keys and the ESC key is an especially fond key for me. I touch-type, a touchbar isn't going to lend itself well to what I need. So I do hope they continue offering a non-touchbar version. If they don't, I'll likely hang onto the last model that does offer normal keys and then start looking for an alternative 5 years down the road. My shortest lifespan of a mac laptop has been 5 years, I still have a 2006 MBP running and in daily use, although it's about to be replaced, not because it's broken, but because as of this year it no longer is supported by the main software used on it. Sad really, but understandable given the technical limitations of the hardware in the machine.
For ethernet, I got the T-bolt->ethernet adapter. Is it a hassle? Well, certainly more than not needing one but nothing notable. Does it work? Haven't had an issue with it in the several years I've had it, and I wish I hadn't bought the second one I keep in my bag just in case because I've never needed it. At least I got them cheap, about $15 each.
Actually - I chose the the only screen with reasonable resolution. If Dell would sell a 2K screen, I would have chosen that. The base 1080 screen is just... unusable.
It's $1000 LESS than your MacBook and nearly matches specs...
It didn't come close.
It does NOT however, outclass laptops spec for spec. Period. Quit moving the goalposts.
Actually, it appears it does except for gaming laptops. That is not a reason anyone ever buys a mac today. But, you keep on trying to move the goalposts. Since the top end MBP has a faster CPU than Alienware's top end gaming rig, I'd say CPUs are at least on par with anything else out there today. Memory is limited, but that's directly due to battery life. It is a laptop, and that's one thing I've always needed in a laptop - longer battery life. SSDs in macs are absolutely top end. Laptops not running NVMe SSDs are in the buggy whip group.
The specs to match are in no particular order (and you're free to disagree, which may mean that this particular set of Apple hardware doesn't match your needs, don't buy it):
Memory should be mentioned only as requiring a min of 16GB. Why not more? Because I've yet to run into swapping as a problem with 16GB. It is quite possible that windows requires more than 16GB, but if running windows is a requirement for you, then Apple is obviously not your first vendor of choice.
Just simply say, "Hey, wow, looks I was incorrect with regards to Apple's pricing compared to equivalent specs from its competitors' laptop hardware offerings."
As countered throughout this thread's offered comparisons there's just not that major of a difference with equivalent hardware. You get differences if you chop 40% of the performance by selecting a much lesser or older CPU, less ram, or cheaper and much slower SSDs. That wasn't the argument - the argument was that like for like, or as close as you can get, Apple hardware is quite competitive. They just don't offer the range of budget options others do, but that's not what we're comparing here. Budget options will always win on price, they'll get clobbered in performance, but that's like complaining that your 1.6L Kia should accelerate like a Ferrari, much less more common high end vehicles. Which brings us back to comparing like with like.
It's okay to be wrong - even on in the internet. Doubling down on it is what makes you a twat.
I don't need to double down. Show me an equivalent system that's significantly cheaper, and I'll agree. The Dell is the closest by far, given the other options in the thread, and it is cheaper by a couple of hundred even though it falls short in a couple of areas and exceeds in 1. The Alienware system was the last one I just compared, and that one even didn't wind up being a slam dunk for an outright better performer since the CPU is 1 step down from the best available in the MBP, weighs twice as much and, per previous experience given the rest of the hardware specs, probably has less than 1/6th the battery life. I didn't bother double checking that.
Wrong. An Alienware laptop shits all over even the highest end Macbook Pro and it cost the same
So the Alienware has a faster CPU
Wrong - Alienware has the 7820HQ, the MBP has the 7920 HQ. You'd have to step down to a 7820HQ.
double the RAM with newer DDR4 technology
It's DDR4 vs LPDDR3. Guess what that DDR4 does to battery life? And then double that effect in this case.
an infinitely more powerful GPU, a bigger and much higher resolution display
Yep, sucking down that battery life, and wow - double the weight! I guess I can stop going to the gym! And can you actually see the difference in that higher resolution? At least on the MBP, all apps scale seamlessly, so everything looks right on a 2K vs 4K vs 5K screen. I know Windows can't, yet. I'll give you the extra roughly 8 sq in in screen real estate, that is definitely better except when it's not, like on an airplane.
What you're comparing is a semi-portable desktop vs a laptop. I had an Alienware laptop. Couldn't get rid of it soon enough. High weight, crap battery life, and complimentary sterilization aren't things that appeal to me.
To keep up battery life, they have to use slower CPUs and GPUs, sub-4k displays, and LPDDR (that last one I don't really have a problem with, except that it limits the amount of RAM as well)
Well, learned something new there - LPDDR is why we do not yet have more than 16GB of RAM on MBPs. Should JEDEC ever get around to extending or creating a new standard that supports 24/32GB, it'd be nice. And since LPDDR seems to be a significant contributor to the longer battery life (note all the other laptops with standard replaceable RAM having 50% or less battery life) I'd say that's a trade-off I'm willing to live with. As for GPUs, Apple has seriously tweaked the discrete vs integrated GPU usage so well that I don't see that as being a major issue for battery life. Also, those 4K laptops all use pretty much equivalent discrete GPUs to the one in my MBP, but having a 4K vs 2K 15" screen doesn't really bother me that much. I'd rather have a nice 30-40" 4K external monitor so I can actually use that increased resolution.
Then you don't need what Apple's selling, and that's fine. I do need near top CPU performance and disk performance, the 2 biggest things negatively impacting my work. So for me, topping Apple's offerings pre touchbar wasn't worthwhile, especially since I wanted a UNIX based OS.
Actually, I'd like to see a "better" overall laptop than Apple's pre touch-bar. At least as of last year, it was all trade-offs.
You cherry picked "a" Dell to make your case.
I picked the system that came closest to meeting my needs a little over a year ago. No cherry picking at all. The MSI rigs didn't cut it then, so I didn't review them again.
Oh, and let me know when the 15" MBP with the Core i7 doesn't cost $2399.
Apple 15" MBP no touch pad, upgraded to 512 SSD and the mid-level CPU (100MHz slower peak, but 1 step up would put it several hundred higher)
$2299 - already upgraded
This Asus UX501VW laptop with a Core i7-6700HQ, 4K IPS touchscreen, 512GB PCIe SSD, 16GB DDR4 RAM, is $1079 and has VASTLY better specs than the $2399 MBP in practically all categories.
Also, more expensive comparable PC laptops that are still priced lower than the 15" MBP only get better and make the (still using outdated DDR3 for some reason...) MBP look like a joke.
I checked the MSI series out when I purchased my last one a little over a year ago - they weren't ready for prime time then, and I'll bet that still holds true today. You will be making tradeoffs with those laptops, either in weight, CPU speed, disk speed and always battery life over a comparable Apple laptop. BTW, one requirement I have is to run UNIX under the covers. I'm 100% fine running Linux or BSD on a laptop, provided they're 1) supported and 2) usable. Battery life is also important to me.
But please, feel free to find another way to support your baseless assertion that "on a like for like comparison as much as possible, Apple laptops cost about the same or even less than their competition." I just did a like-for-like comparison and a 15" Apple laptop you could buy right now gives you drastically lower specs for more than double the price than a PC laptop you also buy right now.
It's not baseless.
Every single laptop you referenced offers significantly diminished battery life, and all use at least some slower components that matter, namely SSDs and CPUs. DDR4 doesn't help you for squat if the CPU is 10% slower to begin with, and if the CPU is as fast or faster, then disk I/O becomes an issue, at least for my workloads. But hey, you lug that heavy half-life laptop along and enjoy your "savings". You'll be spending it on that extra software you'll need that I don't. ;)
Dell XPS 15 with 4K screen, 16GB ram, 512 SSD (which will be slower than the included Apple SSD, but I'll trade that for the 4K resolution).
Apple 15" MBP no touch pad, upgraded to 512 SSD and the mid-level CPU (100MHz slower peak, but 1 step up would put it several hundred higher)
Dell: $2188
Apple: $2299
I bought my last laptop a year and a half ago, and it was true then. So I just looked, it appears that Dell's XPS 15" 4K system w/ 1 year premium support comes in at $2188 vs a similarly configured base 15" MBP at $2299 now. (I only bothered with Dell as it was the first thing that looked close spec wise and the pricing hadn't changed all that much from There's a few differences, of course, the 4K touchscreen vs a 2K non touch screen, but the 4K system with any version of windows still has scaling problems that don't exist for OSX, so I'm not sure that a 4K (or even 2K if they offered it) W10 system really gains you much.
While Dell does appear to have finally leapfrogged the screen resolution of a MBP, unfortunately neither the underlying OS nor the supposedly better GPU can do it justice. Battery life, well, it's still a Dell, i.e., terrible at less than half the battery life of an MBP, which only lugging an extra couple of pounds in the form of external battery packs will address. Then there's the trackpad, which is still not a touchpad.
All those substandard things really add up when you're looking at a system for working on, as I do, and I may need to run for 7+ hours on battery, while traveling. Nothing so counterproductive and interrupting as being in a multi-hour design and presentation session where the note taking Dell/HP/Lenova users all have to interrupt between 2 and 4 hours to plug in their laptops and share outlets while you're still running on battery power running videos, slideshows, and a live demo.
Tell me what's worth ~$120 there? I haven't even added the software packages you need to be as effective and at least pretend to be safe on windows as you can be out of the box on OSX, because that's highly dependent on your needs and environment and may require at least some similar expenditures on OSX based systems.
Sure, OSX does all that too, but then I'd have to pay twice as much for half the performance because of the Apple hardware.
I don't know what you're going on about. On a like for like comparison as much as possible, Apple laptops cost about the same or even less than their competition, over the past 8 years when I've bought laptops. Now, you can rightfully argue that the laptop you are happy with costs less than Apple, but if you're needing Apple hardware specs or better, you're not looking any cheaper as far as laptops go. I wish I could say the same about their desktops, hopefully they'll get it right with the desktop (mac pro and hopefully mini) revamp they've announced.
I explained, you refused to listen.
You asserted, not explained. Same with racism, as you apparently view the world through a racist leaning lens. Quit being so sensitive and open up your mind. Sorry for the delay, I was busy.
The simple reason is that systemd generates consulting dollars for those selling certain distros and maintenance contracts. When you first start, it seems simpler. When you run into trouble, you're screwed. You're going to need someone well-versed in systemd (consultant) or spend the effort to learn that monumental pile of shit yourself. Conceptually, systemd's proposal is sound. Everyone would love a simple one stop shop to simple start their services with an easy to understand model. The reality is a convoluted and over engineered and complex system that's not really setup to do just what it promised, instead doing a whole slew of extra crap that it really didn't need to deal with.
The poor people with newer cars thing is a rooted in racism.
Who brought up racism?
While the poor have always been discriminated against, poor non-whites have an additional historic burden.
Who continued ranting down the racist path? I know, I know, talking about how bad minorities were treated means you're not racist, except when it is. I'll skip over how you can't admit you're wrong either, since you've side-stepped and contorted around that conclusion several times. Then again, you've clearly shown how wrong you've been on multiple topics in this thread starting with your racist slant on poor people. It takes a special kind of stubbornness to continue to piss into the wind, it reminds me a lot of Trump.
Seriously? 15GB? Holy crap, I wonder how much junk mail is in my gmail account. I guess one of these days I'll have to login with a browser again, and wipe the all mail folder, just for grins.
I'm the original poster.
You aren't the original, you responded to me which is your first post in this thread and shouldn't overlook my original post for the context of where I'm coming from. That's where you inserted racism!!!!, from which you still haven't gotten the hint. My comment was only that a certain set of factors related to the category of "poor" people likely eligible to move into the type of housing from TFS, and that they made what in some folks opinions are bad choices which is why they cannot live in "better" neighborhoods. No more, no less.
No, they self identify due to marketing and yes there is a blossoming "Redneck Culture". We're arguing about a historical "Redneck Culture". It does not exist. You can't claim that Rednecks were any more persecuted then any other group of poor people.
I think you still don't understand the concept of culture. These people had certain behaviors and beliefs (the actual definition of culture) which were different from, for example, hillbillies, although those two groups admittedly share more than they differ. But they do differ, and that's what defines the differences in culture.
My original statement was merely to point out that that poster's comment about newer cars in poor neighborhoods only being associated with a persecuted ethnic minority was essentially viewing the world through a racist lens. I am not sure where you're going, but you sure seem to be hell-bent on a persecution complex.
Reading comprehension: 0.
I'll give you just a few quotes:
Note a) this was written in 74, and b) his wife passed away already and the event occurred prior to that and c) he's talking bout trying to avoid being a redneck for years. Now any rational mind would equate all that to redneck having existed, given that he was born in 1929 and the implication that he was one by birth, as being relevant information to establish that yes, rednecks as we know them existed all the way back to his birth. This is even solidified by the next line:
Which again, for the slow, directly states that the redneck definition has existed for some time and has been elevated just recently, as of 1974. If you can't understand that means rednecks as a group, and a maligned group, has existed since at least the early 1900s, well, I'm done.
No, but it's easy enough to add taxes to make up for environmentally damaging and inhumane practices. Should that tax be high enough, demand will fall for these practices, because there's no benefit to engaging in them.
I moved nothing. Redneck is a late 20th century innovation. More about marketing then culture.
And I was hoping we'd made progress. You're still myopically viewing it under the lens of the chic redneck culture of the mid 70s onward. I can assure you that rednecks existed as an identity long before that period, with long being defined as decades at a minimum. The current definition of redneck already existed at least in the 1940s. Here is a little article from 74 that discusses rednecks written by a self-professed redneck who was born in the late 1920s, which also documents the rough time of the "romanticized" notion of a redneck.
Egads.
It's not Geronimo's land, he took it. Figuratively speaking, poor innocent Geronimo murdered or ran off the previous tenants, who may also have done the same and so on down to the original actual tenants, none of whom, for sake of argument, are left.
I've probably read more history in the last year then you have in the last decade, and I'm a bit old for a millennial.
You have no idea what I have or have not read - this is typical of a millennial self-centered viewpoint although by no means only limited to millennials, as apparently you're revealing now. Also, you've now moved your statement from late 20th century to beginning of the 20th century for the redneck term. With just a little more research, I'm sure you'll go all the way back to the end of the 18th/beginning of the 19th century. You'll also be shocked to discover the groups termed rednecks are still considered rednecks today - poor southern whites, appalachian whites, etc. As for being absorbed into higher classes that does sometimes happen, and sometimes they're the butt of jokes and backstabbing.