MacBook Pro Razer Core compatibility in MacOS Sierra

[JoseGuya]

7 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

You know for a fact that's nonsense. The large majority of Apples users don't ever realise they have a choice in what services they use. Unless they are tech savvy they don't realise they can get a free one drive account, use Skype instead of Facetime etc. They'll go with what's included and once they do their stuck using Apple hardware.

 

From the second you turn your device on your immediately asked to sign up to iCloud but your never told there are alternatives which work across all devices, heck they don't even make it totally clear that you have a choice in signing up or not.

 

Need I remind you that in Europe MS are LEGALLY obligated to include an app that runs before IE or Edge to inform users there are other browsers available.

 

Remember I never said they force people to use their devices, I said they design their services to force people to stay on their platform once they're on it.

That's like saying you only buy coke because you don't know Pepsi. If that happens, its Pepsi's fault for not adversing enough. And Coca Cola has no obligation (and shouldn't) to tell you that Pepsi exists. 

[Master Disaster]

35 minutes ago, JoseGuya said:

That's like saying you only buy coke because you don't know Pepsi. If that happens, its Pepsi's fault for not adversing enough. And Coca Cola has no obligation (and shouldn't) to tell you that Pepsi exists. 

Nope, not even close.

 

Expanding your analogy, let's say that both Pepsi & Coke REQUIRE users to have a straw to drink from their cans (Cans are hardware while straws are services). Now let's say Coke sell a straw that fits every single can no matter what brand while Pepsi sell a straw that only fits Pepsi cans.

 

Would you not say Pepsi designed their straws to keep users buying Pepsi?

 

To be clear, I'm certainly not saying Apple are doing anything wrong in doing that (at least not legally), just that what they're doing is designed purely to keep users on their platform for as long as possible.

 

Plus brand exclusivity certainly does help boost sales so saying we've got all these cool things that all work together seamlessly looks great to buyers. Thing is though, none of it works with anything except Apple hardware and that's anti consumer.

[Master Disaster]

55 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

That's not true though..... Most people don't care enough about iCloud for it to be the reason to stay with apple and most people know that Skype is an option. And that's true with a lot of the services apple offers. 

 

I have plenty of non tech savvy friends, and not one has ever mentioned iCloud or FaceTime as a reason they wouldn't switch. The only apple service I've been given (and is the reason I wouldn't switch is iMessage/text/call/FaceTime syncing between my phone and my Mac and it's not apples fault that there are no good alternatives.

Other options existing doesn't negate the fact Apples services only work on Apple devices though.

 

And trust me, a large chunk of Apples target demographic wouldn't know they could use Dropbox/Onedrive/Skype (a large chunk of them wouldn't even know what most of those things are) on their Apple hardware. They buy their virgin device, boot it up, see what its got installed and just go with that.

 

And so far I've not even touched on Face time being an Apple to Apple platform only. Your mates got an Apple device and uses facetime? Wanna vid chat with him? Guess what? You NEED an Apple device to do that because the alternative (despite having a Mac compatible client) can't connect with Facetime. Again forcing users into their ecosystem by imposing artificial restrictions.

[79wjd]

On 12/21/2016 at 10:18 AM, Master Disaster said:

Other options existing doesn't negate the fact Apples services only work on Apple devices though.

 

And trust me, a large chunk of Apples target demographic wouldn't know they could use Dropbox/Onedrive/Skype (a large chunk of them wouldn't even know what most of those things are) on their Apple hardware. They buy their virgin device, boot it up, see what its got installed and just go with that.

 

And so far I've not even touched on Face time being an Apple to Apple platform only. Your mates got an Apple device and uses facetime? Wanna vid chat with him? Guess what? You NEED an Apple device to do that because the alternative (despite having a Mac compatible client) can't connect with Facetime. Again forcing users into their ecosystem by imposing artificial restrictions.

You're delusional if you think something like Skype is unknown to most people who use FaceTime (old grandma's excluded).

[Master Disaster]

2 hours ago, djdwosk97 said:

You're delusional if you think something like Skype is unknown to most people who use FaceTime (old grandma's excluded).

And your delusional if you think the vast majority of a few hundred million people are all tech savvy.

 

With the number of units Apple sell each year the very large majority of people buying them are totally tech illiterate and buy them because they've heard of the brand, its what their friends/family use or what's recommended by the man at the shop.

[79wjd]

4 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

And your delusional if you think the vast majority of a few hundred million people are all tech savvy.

 

With the number of units Apple sell each year the very large majority of people buying them are totally tech illiterate and buy them because they've heard of the brand, its what their friends/family use or what's recommended by the man at the shop.

Yes and that's something else entirely. But people don't stay with apple because of FaceTime. If they choose to stay with apple then either they prefer the hardware, the software, or are resistant to change. None of that is apple specific nor does it make them anti consumeristic.

[Master Disaster]

6 minutes ago, djdwosk97 said:

Yes and that's something else entirely. But people don't stay with apple because of FaceTime. If they choose to stay with apple then either they prefer the hardware, the software, or are resistant to change. None of that is apple specific nor does it make some anti consumeristic.

You've got this backwards.

 

I never said people stay because of the services, I said the services are designed to make people stay.

 

2 very different things.

 

And ftr yes, saying we will sell you something but you can only use it with our device is anti consumer.

[tccki]

Yet another Apple thread that has eventually degraded into "Apple is terrible", "no it's not", "yes it is".

 

Instead of arguing about business decisions that we simply cannot prove the motive for, why don't we agree that different people, at the very least, have different tastes, and that's the #1 reason why someone is going to choose for or against an Apple product?

 

We are getting nowhere with these debates, they show up every time Linus posts about Apple on YouTube or Facebook, or news comes out about related developments. It's amazing how passionate people get over another persons' technology decisions. It's a religious cult on both ends of the spectrum.

 

Here's my use case, and why I'm excited about the new MBP and possible eGPU compatibility:

 

I currently own a mid-2012 MBP non-retina with a 650M, I've upgraded the RAM to 16 GB (still plently on macOS, even with VMs) and the drive to a 1TB 840 Evo. I run macOS to do my daily work (web browsing, development, the odd photo or video edit) and Windows 10 for my filthy casual gaming (Kerbal Space Program, Screeps, GTAV on medium). So it's been over 3 and a half years since I bought it and I'm looking at getting the 15" touchbar with the 460 GPU in it next year, may wait if there's more word on Kaby Lake. But, with this eGPU setup I might be able to scale it down to the base 256GB/integrated model and run Bootcamp on an external SSD. This means I've got a system that can drive my daily work wherever I travel, and when I plop it down on my desk at home I'm gaming in 4K on an ultrawide! Desktop gaming performance and a mobile Mac in a single system as a single cost-of-ownership. Would love to hear if anyone else is looking at a similar setup.

[CtrlAltELITE]

Hm, provided the Core works with Quadro's a lad at my work is going to have a nerdgasm over this.

[Arri]

On 12/20/2016 at 4:51 PM, djdwosk97 said:

Okay, so apple offers their own set of services to be used exclusively with their own devices..... That doesn't force anyone to use an apple product. If an individual CHOOSES to use an apple product to use that service then that is there CHOICE and one they made because that Apple only service is superior for their specific use.

Hush hush. None of that logic here!

[sftgunner]

On 27/12/2016 at 10:54 AM, tccki said:

Yet another Apple thread that has eventually degraded into "Apple is terrible", "no it's not", "yes it is".

 

Instead of arguing about business decisions that we simply cannot prove the motive for, why don't we agree that different people, at the very least, have different tastes, and that's the #1 reason why someone is going to choose for or against an Apple product?

 

We are getting nowhere with these debates, they show up every time Linus posts about Apple on YouTube or Facebook, or news comes out about related developments. It's amazing how passionate people get over another persons' technology decisions. It's a religious cult on both ends of the spectrum.

 

Here's my use case, and why I'm excited about the new MBP and possible eGPU compatibility:

 

I currently own a mid-2012 MBP non-retina with a 650M, I've upgraded the RAM to 16 GB (still plently on macOS, even with VMs) and the drive to a 1TB 840 Evo. I run macOS to do my daily work (web browsing, development, the odd photo or video edit) and Windows 10 for my filthy casual gaming (Kerbal Space Program, Screeps, GTAV on medium). So it's been over 3 and a half years since I bought it and I'm looking at getting the 15" touchbar with the 460 GPU in it next year, may wait if there's more word on Kaby Lake. But, with this eGPU setup I might be able to scale it down to the base 256GB/integrated model and run Bootcamp on an external SSD. This means I've got a system that can drive my daily work wherever I travel, and when I plop it down on my desk at home I'm gaming in 4K on an ultrawide! Desktop gaming performance and a mobile Mac in a single system as a single cost-of-ownership. Would love to hear if anyone else is looking at a similar setup.

Same thoughts exactly, except I'd love to see it working on my Present MBP (13" iGPU). I'm in the fortunate position of having a decent gaming rig alongside my MBP, but it does my head in trying to sort out my files, and I would much rather run everything off my MBP with an eGPU for gaming like you. The only downside is that I would probably be throttled by my CPU, as its a dual-core...

 

Also, thanks for bringing the thread back to where it was originally!

[patrickjp93]

On 12/22/2016 at 0:58 AM, Master Disaster said:

Nope, not even close.

 

Expanding your analogy, let's say that both Pepsi & Coke REQUIRE users to have a straw to drink from their cans (Cans are hardware while straws are services). Now let's say Coke sell a straw that fits every single can no matter what brand while Pepsi sell a straw that only fits Pepsi cans.

 

Would you not say Pepsi designed their straws to keep users buying Pepsi?

 

To be clear, I'm certainly not saying Apple are doing anything wrong in doing that (at least not legally), just that what they're doing is designed purely to keep users on their platform for as long as possible.

 

Plus brand exclusivity certainly does help boost sales so saying we've got all these cool things that all work together seamlessly looks great to buyers. Thing is though, none of it works with anything except Apple hardware and that's anti consumer.

Except that analogy doesn't fit with IE because there existed many well-known cross-platform and platform-specific browsers besides IE and IE didn't block any knowledge of other browsers. This community loves to harp on judges' technical knowledge until it comes time to render judgment against Microsoft, Intel, or Nvidia.

[Master Disaster]

4 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

Except that analogy doesn't fit with IE because there existed many well-known cross-platform and platform-specific browsers besides IE and IE didn't block any knowledge of other browsers. This community loves to harp on judges' technical knowledge until it comes time to render judgment against Microsoft, Intel, or Nvidia.

????

 

No one mentioned IE?