October 18th Apple Event - Unleashed - Apple Silicon, MacBook Pro upgrades, HomePod mini, AirPods 3rd Generation

[leadeater]

7 minutes ago, gjsman said:

Maybe your point that you were arguing about was such a minute detail that, to be frank, not many people care because it's not an obvious or useful point to make. 

Physical screen size is more important than the resolution of it, especially when the resolutions are that high (for both). A physically larger screen is easier to see, no amount of resolution increase can change that.

 

People legitimately buy larger laptop screens on purpose because they want the larger screen, far more so than picking the 4K option over the 1080p option. I would go for a larger screen over a large resolution, I have a 14" laptop and I don't like it all that much for a lot of things. It's fine and it's perfectly usable however a larger screen would have been better.

 

Like if screen size was not a significant factor Apple wouldn't have a 14" and 16" model, there would only be a 14" model.

[jimmy3189]

2 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

Again, I'm talking about physical screen size. The largest available in 2015 was 15". The largest available today is 16". It's clear to me that nobody understands it, so I guess I'm done. 

The screens aren't the same dimensions, screen size is a roughly arbitrary naming convention to differentiate different computers as soon as you change the aspect ratio or anything else it begins to be a vague point, even more so if you change an aspect ratio and a pixel density at the same time.

I'm talking about how much useful information you can display on the screen at once. I get that maybe you want that additional .8 of an inch back in physical size but it really isn't as important as you might think.

Just now, gjsman said:

Maybe your point that you were arguing about was such a minute detail that, to be frank, not many people care because it's not an obvious or useful point to make. 

Indeed, usability is what's important not the listing of roughly the diagonal screen size, when the new macs are even closer to 3:2 than toehold 16:10 I know not quite but the screen real estate is what's important. 

Apple discontinued the 17" monstrous MacBook Pro around the same time that they introduced retina screens for very similar reasons. The use cases for the higher resolutions were easily catered for with resolution scaling on a retina and not enough people were willing to pay for that extra inch.

[gjsman]

1 minute ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

Apple supports video and audio production. Software development? Eh, they have Xcode, which is meh at best.

You have no idea about Mac users then. Mac has way more than Xcode. You've got the entire range of Jetbrains applications (all compatible), some industry-specific stacks like Laravel Valet, and many stacks that even though they can run on Windows they are much harder to set up there than on a Mac (such as Expose), and there's Homebrew which beats Windows hands-down on package management of Unix-style applications. 

 

3 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

LG gram webcam.

720p, not 1080p. 

[jimmy3189]

Just now, leadeater said:

Physical screen size is more important than the resolution of it, especially when the resolutions are that high (for both). A physically larger screen is easier to see, no amount of resolution increase can change that.

 

People legitimately buy larger laptop screens on purpose because they want the larger screen, far more son than picking the 4K option over the 1080p option. I would go for a larger screen over a large resolution, I have a 14" laptop and I don't like it all that much for a lot of things. It's fine and it's perfectly usable however a larger screen would have been better.

Change the scaling in the display settings.

[igormp]

3 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

Apple supports video and audio production. Software development? Eh, they have Xcode, which is meh at best.
They are not for gaming: just lost a huge chunk of the market of people who spends a lot on notebooks.

Software dev is well supported on MacOS, only some niche stuff might be hard, such as ML (which apple seems to be working on a lot now).

 

I'd dare to say that expensive laptops are mostly bought by large companies and people who want a premium laptop, and not gamers. It might by significant, but I believe it's far from the majority, although I do lack the numbers to back that.

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, jimmy3189 said:

Change the scaling in the display settings.

Scaling is not physical size. You can't scale your way out of that problem. Yea you can increase the scale and make everything look larger, defeating the purpose of having the higher resolution in the first place and even then if you have used many devices and screen of difference size you'll know there is no replacement for screen size.

[Forbidden Wafer]

1 minute ago, gjsman said:

You have no idea about Mac users then. 

You said supported BY Apple. These are not supported by apple.

 

4 minutes ago, gjsman said:

720p, not 1080p. 

 iPhone front-face camera...

[BondiBlue]

5 minutes ago, jimmy3189 said:

snip

Again, I'm well aware of the fact that you can fit more on the smaller displays now. That does nothing for physical size, and is not relevant to my point. 

 

1 minute ago, leadeater said:

Scaling is not physical size. You can't scale your way out of that problem. Yea you can increase the scale and make everything look larger, defeating the purpose of having the higher resolution in the first place and even then if you have used many devices and screen of difference size you'll know there is no replacement for screen size.

Exactly. Do you understand the point I've been trying to make here? How it now costs $500 more to get the largest MBP (regardless of how much can actually fit on screen) than it did in 2015? 

[gjsman]

3 minutes ago, igormp said:

I'd dare to say that expensive laptops are mostly bought by large companies and people who want a premium laptop, and not gamers. It might by significant, but I believe it's far from the majority, although I do lack the numbers to back that.

I'm a software developer. Consider what a software developer makes - 25th percentile salary (the lower 25%) is $80K a year in my area. Average is over $100K. Considering that everyone's working from home, splurging $5K on a laptop that you use every day to make money is completely reasonable.

[n0stalghia]

3 minutes ago, igormp said:

Software dev is well supported on MacOS, only some niche stuff might be hard, such as ML (which apple seems to be working on a lot now).

 

I'd dare to say that expensive laptops are mostly bought by large companies and people who want a premium laptop, and not gamers. It might by significant, but I believe it's far from the majority, although I do lack the numbers to back that.

10 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

Apple supports video and audio production. Software development? Eh, they have Xcode, which is meh at best.
They are not for gaming: just lost a huge chunk of the market of people who spends a lot on notebooks.

Google's ML team (the one that created AlphaGo) has been using exclusively MacOS for this. OpenAI might also do this, but not entirely sure. ML and software development on macOS is just fine.

 

Visual Studio Code, JetBrains products, Matlab run on it. It can do everything Windows and Linux can, most things better than Windows thanks to it's Unix-like structure.

Sincerely, a software developer and data analyst on macOS (who uses Windows for gaming and software dev in the pastime)

[gjsman]

1 minute ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

You said supported BY Apple. These are not supported by apple.

Then to compare to Windows, I guess we only consider Visual Studio with no plugins. I guess if you wanted to write .NET web apps or (for some reason) desktop apps that'd be more useful than Xcode, which can write mobile and desktop apps only, but not a real major advantage there. Except you can run the same .NET web app system using Visual Studio for Mac, so that's not even a Windows-exclusive feature.

 

3 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

iPhone front-face camera...

That's a weird one. Yes it's 1080p, but if we're going by sensor size, the 1080p camera in the MacBook appears to be much physically larger than the iPhone camera, and the notch was partly necessary to accommodate the much more massive sensor. We'll see what that's about.

[saltycaramel]

I have just realized the bottom corners of the screen are right angles (not rounded). So it’s round corners at the top and square corners at the bottom, but the real top is delimited by either the menu bar (in normal desktop usage) or the black bar (in fullscreen usage, unless the developer updated that specific app to leverage that area), so the actual top corners of the working area are square as well. Fears of round corners dispelled. 

[leadeater]

6 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

Do you understand the point I've been trying to make here?

Nope, not really..

 

Spoiler

 

6 minutes ago, BondiBlue said:

How it now costs $500 more to get the largest MBP (regardless of how much can actually fit on screen) than it did in 2015? 

I guess just be thankful the difference isn't the same as GPUs pre 2019 and post 2020. I guess the problem is since the SoC packages are different the mainboard couldn't be reused for the M1 Pro so the 16" would of had to have two board designs and I guess Apple just didn't think that was warranted.

[Forbidden Wafer]

6 minutes ago, gjsman said:

Then to compare to Windows, I guess we only consider Visual Studio with no plugins. I guess if you wanted to write .NET web apps or (for some reason) desktop apps that'd be more useful than Xcode, which can write mobile and desktop apps only, but not a real major advantage there. Except you can run the same .NET web app system using Visual Studio for Mac, so that's not even a Windows-exclusive feature.

I'm not talking about exclusivity. I was answering you saying that Apple supports some segments, and mentioned their tools for them.
Xcode for software development is a joke when compared to Visual Studio (C/C++, web, Java, F#, C#, VB, CMake, local toolchains, remote, WSL, databases, etc), and even Visual Code.

[n0stalghia]

Just now, Forbidden Wafer said:

I'm not talking about exclusivity. I was answering you saying that Apple supports some segments, and mentioned their tools for them.
Xcode for software development is a joke when compared to Visual Studio (C/C++, web, Java, F#, C#, VB, CMake), and even Visual Code.

Both VS and VS Code run on macOS, so this entire discussion is sorta pointless

[Forbidden Wafer]

1 minute ago, n0stalghia said:

Both VS and VS Code run on macOS, so this entire discussion is sorta pointless

Yeah, but I was addressing his point, not mine...

[leadeater]

1 minute ago, n0stalghia said:

Both VS and VS Code run on macOS, so this entire discussion is sorta pointless

 

Just now, Forbidden Wafer said:

Yeah, but it was his point, not mine...

 

Sorry couldn't help myself the setup was just too good.

 

Also today I learned Visual Studio was on Mac OS.

[Forbidden Wafer]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Also today I learned Visual Studio was on Mac OS.

Its not the real Visual Studio though, but a rebranded MonoDevelop (they "bought it" and transformed Mono into the .NET Core instead of continuing the crazy .NET Framework). Or at least it was years ago...

[leadeater]

2 minutes ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

Its not the real Visual Studio though, but a rebranded MonoDevelop (they bought it and transformed Mono into the .NET Core instead of continuing the crazy .NET Framework). Or at least it was years ago...

Sounds like VS 2022 for Mac OS is a complete rewrite so that should maybe solve that. Preview is already out for those that are interested in checking that out.

[igormp]

14 minutes ago, gjsman said:

I'm a software developer. Consider what a software developer makes - 25th percentile salary (the lower 25%) is $80K a year in my area. Average is over $100K. Considering that everyone's working from home, splurging $5K on a laptop that you use every day to make money is completely reasonable.

I'm also a software dev, and I don't even need to worry about that because I can just ask my employer for a new laptop and not worry about costs 

Yeah, the price for those machines is pretty reasonable and most companies/workers won't bat an eye about that.

 

12 minutes ago, n0stalghia said:

Google's ML team (the one that created AlphaGo) has been using exclusively MacOS for this. OpenAI might also do this, but not entirely sure. ML and software development on macOS is just fine.

Using a MacOS as your base device and actually training models on it are entirely different things. You just use the laptop as a dumb terminal then run all of your stuff on clusters of GPU-equipped servers, in the same way I can use my shitty chromebook to run jobs over 100+ machines using spark.

 

14 minutes ago, n0stalghia said:

software developer and data analyst on macOS

You might be able to do everything on your macOS setup if all you use is pandas and the likes on small datasets, but once you go over a couple TB of data and need things like hadoop or spark, then your PC instantly turns into a simple remote terminal (you could even get away with your phone).

[gjsman]

6 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Also today I learned Visual Studio was on Mac OS.

Yep - it's rebranded MonoDevelop though, not full Visual Studio like Windows. However, .NET Core is completely replacing .NET Framework, and that runs on MacOS so unless you need an old .NET Framework project or Windows Desktop project, you're missing very little from the MacOS version now.

[suicidalfranco]

so far my impression on the new macbook pro:

1. Design: amazing, about freaking time. The best thing to happen to the macbook ever since the introduction of the retina mac back in 2012. And if it's a result of Ive leaving, why didn't he just left sooner. As for the notch on the 14": is it ugly? yes, definitely. does break functionality? no. Should you care? no.

2. Return of the ports: take that fanboys! now do the usual 180 while i sip on those salty tears /jk . It's good but not good enough, to bring it up there perfect it just needs a ethernet port and even just one single USB-A port would make it leap frog over good.

3. M1 Pro/Max: since it's based on the M1, the great performance, low power consumption, long battery life, all great. Shows how intel have been draging their feet for the last six years, or seven.

 

So if I had to toss away repairability would i pick it to replace my now nine, going for ten, year old non-retina macbook pro? no.

and the reason is Apple Silicon.

Simply put: AS literally kills 90% of the things i do on my mac. remaining 10% being web browsing and checking the mail.

What's the 90% ?

since i use my own laptop for work, cause the laptop my company issues are complete garbage, work requires the use of key programs: TIA portal, Step 7, WinCC, FactoryTalk and Ignition. Now none of these app work on macOS, except Ignition probably cause it's a java app, but my luck to make my personal macbook also my work laptop was that the company where i work has one policy: every client has a VM setup with all the required applications installed to service, comission their plants. A god send of a policy, which means all i need on my mac is a VM manager, in this case Fusion, and i'm off to go.

And it's been great, not having to with the awful 1366x768 resolution of the company issued work laptop, 16:10 aspect ration meant more vertical space for TIA when it came out (was ready for it before it ever existed ), non flappy ethernet port that insta-breaks the moment you look at it wrong, and when work is done, i always have the better display to watch shows when stuck in a hotel or worse a container converted into a room. can still play games. even if the 650m it's showing it's age, with bootcamp and natively on macOS (main reason why i'm not upgrading to high sierra and above, tried it, killed support to vast majority of my osx compatible steam library).

What does AS have to with all this you might ask, it's so fast. Well with AS i loose the ability to run those VMs, all windows based, i lose bootcamp, and in the process i lose more than half of my osx compatible steam library.

It'd be like shooting myself in the foot and go back to the company and beg them to give me one of their craptops.

 

So yeah, great laptops, amazing one i'd say compared to the garbage they've released from mid 2012 to 2020. But Apple's decision to ditch intel and not give an alternative solution that would allow x86 VM to run on AS completely kills the mac for me. Even if i wasn't on the right to repair team.

 

So yay for FrameWork, just start shipping to Italy already.

[maplepants]

1 hour ago, Forbidden Wafer said:

If it doesn't run what you need (e.g. games, work tools, etc) it's pretty much useless. If you're going to remote into the cloud/desktop that can run the stuff you need, it's way cheaper to get a random Chromebook.

Cheap Chromebooks are fine for casual YouTube/Netflix and handling personal email, but I would never recommend anyone try to do real work on a cheap Chromebook. 

 

Any Chromebook with even a halfway decent CPU is going to be in the iPad price range and if it’s for work you’re better of just buying an iPad. The iPad can do anything a Chromebook can and much more. 
 

Though the main thing is that if you need it for work, you should never cheap out on it. Have your company buy you what you need to get your work done. 

[LAwLz]

24 minutes ago, maplepants said:

Cheap Chromebooks are fine for casual YouTube/Netflix and handling personal email, but I would never recommend anyone try to do real work on a cheap Chromebook. 

Whenever someone talks about "real work" I always roll my eyes. Because "real work" always seems to be a moving target that includes whatever platform the person talking needs, but that won't work on some competing product. 

 

I know a lot of people who do "real work" that would be just fine with Chromebooks. Hell, I'd probably do just fine with a chromebook (assuming I can get a terminal emulator working). I need to RDP into a jumphost or login through a system like BeyondTrust at most customers so it's not like my device is running many programs anyway. Would you say I don't do "real work" as a networking consultant? 

[Forbidden Wafer]

9 minutes ago, maplepants said:

Cheap Chromebooks are fine for casual YouTube/Netflix and handling personal email, but I would never recommend anyone try to do real work on a cheap Chromebook. 

Just remoting into a VM to work? What you are running on doesn't really matter.

9 minutes ago, maplepants said:

The iPad can do anything a Chromebook can and much more. 

Don't know how hard it is to manage iPads, but I know managing chromebooks is a breeze, so I'd always pick them if it was up to me.

9 minutes ago, maplepants said:

Have your company buy you what you need to get your work done. 

Well, if need something that can be managed remotely and gets connected to a remote VM for work, I'd say a chromebook is the ideal option.
If you do local work, yeah, a Windows or a Mac are probably a better option, depending on the tools used by the company.