/linked/2016/10/31/apples-vs-oranges

Comments

gruber circlejerk:
> But the price you pay for the MacBook Pro isn’t about the sum of the components. It’s about getting them into that sleek, lightweight form factor, too. In a word, Apple is optimizing the MacBook lineup for niceness.

And they already had an Air line on the low end that optimized for thinness and affordability (though when launched, it was not the latter). They already have a regular MacBook line that optimizes lightweight form factors. The anger is because there was no need to drag the Pro line into this, too.
2:49 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
Yes, John, it's thin. But it's not the thinnest notebook. Yes, it's light. But it's far from the lightest. It's certainly not the most powerful. It's not the highest-resolution.

So what is it the leader in?

Niceness.

Well done.
2:57 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
If I wanted a thin laptop, I'd get a fucking Macbook or Macbook Air.

Problem is that Apple's PRO-line of laptops are fucking garbage.

But who knows... maybe Apple has a different definition of "pro". Maybe Facebook and Twitter shitposters are Pros? Considering that emoji touchbar, that could be true. Or maybe writers who just use MS Word are "pros" that Apple's after?

Man, fuck Apple. I'm done with Macs. I'm sick just sick of Cook and Schiller.
3:02 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
"In other words, the System76 machine with much better specs is less expensive than Apple’s."

I'm always amazed that some specs are are configured to be "better" and then it's decided that every component has better specs as a result. Portability and longevity of use while using the battery are important specifications for the typical notebook user.
3:36 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
>Portability and longevity of use while using the battery are important specifications for the typical notebook user.

No, you stupid shithead, we're talking about PRO USERS. Not juts laptop users! Pro users think of their laptops are portable desktops. Most plug in an external monitor and keyboard into it as well. And majority of them are plugged into the wall socket for majority of time.

>I guess Apple thinks of the MBP15 as a mortifyingly-huge portable device, doesn’t realize its customers think of it as desktop that travels.


Laptop users you're thinking of use Macbooks, Airs and other ultraportables.

Just quit posting.
3:49 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
> Pro users think of their laptops are portable desktops.

then pro users are idiots.
4:33 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
>then pro users are idiots.



shut the fuck up. majority of regular Mac users use their computers for FB posting and browsing and watchign videos.

Pros need computers to get shit done and make money.

BTW, there isn't a single Mac computer that's VR-ready. So if you're making games, you can't even use a Mac for that anymore.

It's a fucking disaster.
4:39 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
To Be Fair:
>Apple’s revolutionary Touch Bar.

WTF? Revolutionary? I don't think so.
6:22 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
@TBF: True. Lenovo had it first but their users hated it so much that Lenovo discontinued it.

Apple, of course, ripped that off because they ran out of ideas years ago.
6:57 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
Q*Bert:
I'm not taking advice from a fat dude who wears bright green sleeveless t-shirts, is still into LAN parties, and says "expecially".
6:59 am — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
> BTW, there isn't a single Mac computer that's VR-ready.

oh, lots of pro users making their living with VR?

> majority of regular Mac users use their computers for FB posting and browsing and watchign videos.

well no shit. that's why apple is targeting them.

hey, i know of one very successful company that makes a shit ton of cash and uses exclusively macs... apple.
2:20 pm — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous carptard:
Normal companies would make a double-stuffed machine.

Would you trade 1/2 of an inch and 1/2 a pound for a MBP with 32GB of RAM and a battery that lasted for 24 hours?

Maybe they can't because their tooling is all custom.

I'm not sure I would be interested in a machine the size of the old unibody MBPs that could be double-stuffed.

5:46 pm — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
Q*Bert:
> Would you trade 1/2 of an inch and 1/2 a pound for a MBP with 32GB of RAM and a battery that lasted for 24 hours?

The notion that an extra 16 GB of RAM requires more than a sliver of extra space, weight, or battery is absurd.
9:38 pm — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
Going Going Gone!:
@Q*Bert where were you when Apple was designing hardware?
9:44 pm — Tuesday, 1 November 2016
anonymous:
>The notion that an extra 16 GB of RAM requires more than a sliver of extra space, weight, or battery is absurd.

The notion that that moving away from LP RAM would only require room for more RAM or better thermals all while getting the same 10 hours of battery life, but that it would allow you to increase the battery life by 240% is absurd.

No, a half pound of extra weight wouldn't do it. About a half an inch thicker would suffice, but we're talking about a good 2 pounds just to get back up to 10 hours, and many more to get to the 24 hours you quoted.
12:16 pm — Wednesday, 2 November 2016
Leave a Comment
To leave a comment, install the Safari extension!