[HN Gopher] MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch
___________________________________________________________________
MacBook Pro 14-inch and MacBook Pro 16-inch
Author : 0xedb
Score : 1594 points
Date : 2021-10-18 17:51 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.apple.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.apple.com)
| beaner wrote:
| Unpopular opinion: I am surprised by how much people like
| MagSafe. Charging over usb-c seems so ideal: one cable for all of
| my devices. And in a decade, the number of times I've tripped or
| banged on the cable in a way that having MagSafe would have made
| a difference is zero. Just trying to understand others I guess...
| What makes it so appealing, given you have to carry around more
| stuff to use it?
| judge2020 wrote:
| USB-C locks into place - not ideal for when someone trips on
| your cable and brings your laptop crashing into the hard floor.
| beaner wrote:
| Yes... I understand. My questions was why this seems so
| desirable to have when it requires carrying more equipment,
| and seems like an unlikely scenario most of the time.
| dont__panic wrote:
| Different strokes for different folks. I personally already
| have to bring micro USB, usb c, lightning, and a couple of
| proprietary chargers wherever I go, plus Magsafe 2 when I
| bring my personal laptop... so it's not like I'm going from
| an all USB-C world just because of magsafe. And I have
| tripped over my cables many times and been saved by
| magsafe. My work laptop has come crashing to the ground a
| couple of times so far because a family member's dog pushed
| on the cable... I don't want to have to deal with that risk
| profile for my personal laptop!
| lavp wrote:
| I just bought a new Air like 3 days ago...
| cocoggu wrote:
| I know it will be an unpopular opinion here, but bringing back
| the HDMI and SD card port is making the macbook much thicker and
| will eat up some space than can be used by battery instead, all
| that for ports I will never use. I wish there was another option
| without these ports.
| humanistbot wrote:
| Then get an Air.
| macintux wrote:
| Given the power efficiency of the M1, I'm not sure it matters
| all that much.
| [deleted]
| asdff wrote:
| The 16" is already built to maximum battery capacity by law
| nfoz wrote:
| Some laptops have two batteries, one of which can be hot-
| swapped or removed and charged while the other keeps running
| in the meantime. Would love to see that on Macbooks and could
| be a fair compromise for the airplane problem, though
| obviously it will not happen. (The battery was user-removable
| on early Macbooks but that was long ago)
| gimmeThaBeet wrote:
| Interesting, honestly didn't know that was a thing.
|
| Is this the first macbook that's hit the 100WHr limit, or has
| this been a barrier previously? But I mean like, that's it?
| No doubt there are gains to be made with a better battery,
| charging, cycling, cost and so forth. But without changing
| the regulations, a better battery can only get you more
| space, not higher capacity. Wild to consider.
| MVorlm wrote:
| It's not. There's _no_ law that dictates battery size.
| 100Whr is the largest size you can take on airlines.
| Economically, no laptop manufacturer is going to make a
| laptop you can't take on a plane.
| meepmorp wrote:
| I agree. I don't want in-laptop HDMI or an SD reader - I can
| use an adapter for the half dozen times I'll ever need them.
|
| But, I also want the high end processor and memory, so alas,
| here we are.
| gorgoiler wrote:
| Apology accepted, but way to drag your heels.
|
| You couldn't just say sorry could you, Apple? You had to throw in
| a little barb at the same time. That's ok: you wouldn't be you if
| you weren't overly prideful.
|
| Escape keys are 1U.
| js2 wrote:
| Weird that only the 13" Pro retains the touchbar. The 13" Pro is
| in a really weird place now. I don't know who it's for at this
| point. I can't think of any reason I'd choose it. I'd either get
| the Air or the 14" Pro. I suspect it won't remain in the lineup
| for long.
| mrstumpy wrote:
| These all look amazing. Interesting to see them drop the popular
| 15.4" size. All my accessories that are sized for that form
| factor will have to be purchased again. I'm thinking especially
| of the vertical dock I have.
| fishywang wrote:
| Does anyone know why would it need 140w power adapter? I thought
| the M1 chips are supposed to be more power efficient than the
| Intel ones, and they never needed >100w power adapter in the
| Intel days.
|
| The new USB-C spec to support >100w power delivery was just out,
| I really hope they are following that spec in their new 140w
| USB-C power adapter.
| Joeri wrote:
| It's for the fast charging feature, where it charges 50% in 30
| minutes.
| nouveaux wrote:
| Fast charging possibly?
| ReC757 wrote:
| READ BEFORE PURCHASE: There is a NOTCH at the TOP CENTER of
| screen.
| mustachionut wrote:
| Ooh they're shipping the 16-inch with a 140w power adapter:
| https://www.apple.com/shop/product/MLYU3AM/A/
|
| Sadly looks like its still not GaN, this thing is a beast...
| eric_b wrote:
| HDMI and magsafe are back!
| Etheryte wrote:
| Honestly, both of those combined with physical function keys
| matters more to me than any processor update they could've
| delivered. All around this is just a very solid machine that's
| completely worthy of the pro title.
| guilhermetk wrote:
| I really hope the magsafe cable is not fixed to the power
| brick, it is the only bad memory I have from magsafe 2
| seumars wrote:
| Luckily it's not, the cable is a 2m magsafe to usb-c.
| oblio wrote:
| The insides look great, the connectivity seems decent, but notch
| and chin, really? Like cheap Android phones? :-))
| elzbardico wrote:
| Looks like news of MacBook Pro death have been greatly
| exaggerated
| eloisant wrote:
| Well, Apple decided to stop digging their grave and finally
| recognized that the 2016 MBP was just a big mistake. No port
| other than USB-C, no magsafe, touchbar, crappy keyboard...
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| These look great, but why bother continuing to sell the 13" or
| the Air? Or said another way - if the Air and the 13" are
| basically your "loss leader" then why continue to sell _both_.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| 64Gb RAM, 400Gb/s! Ports! No touchbar! But 64GB RAM on a mac
| book, finally! Sold! Mine arrives next week!!!! And it is less
| than $4000!
| potas wrote:
| Seems like a great improvement over the latest models (since
| 2015). Still, I'll wait until they fix issues with
| virtualization. I don't know how virtual machines will perform on
| the M1 but I doubt it will match performance on PC Linux
| machines.
| jcun4128 wrote:
| I don't miss front end work but Apple always has that fancy
| scroll effects going on ha.
| tmellon2 wrote:
| Does anyone have a handle on how the new M1X is expected to
| perform on Deep Learning training runs vs a NVIDIA 1080Ti /
| 2080Ti. I think the 400 Gbps bandwidth and 64 GB unified memory
| will help - but can anyone extrapolate based on the M1 ?
| Eugeleo wrote:
| If you find out, let me know! I'd love to know this, too.
| syngrog66 wrote:
| ESC key still present!
| hiram112 wrote:
| And function keys!
| purple_ferret wrote:
| Disappointed they're not releasing a Max Pro. Guess I'm waiting
| for the next cycle.
| Doctor_Fegg wrote:
| Mac Pro M1 Max Pro(tm)
| KarlKemp wrote:
| I believe they were uncharacteristically open about the
| schedule from the beginning of the CPU transition, with the Mac
| Pro coming in 2022.
| tmaly wrote:
| IPhone 13 chips are on back order. I would love a Max Pro, but
| it I think it is going to take some time to reach market.
| humanistbot wrote:
| edit: this was wrong
|
| 16GB max RAM on the 14 inch model. No thanks.
| minimaxir wrote:
| You can configure to 32GB for an extra $400.
| amrox wrote:
| It can be configured up to 64gb with the M1 Max.
| EdwardMSmith wrote:
| This is not correct.
|
| 32GB on the M1 Pro and 64GB on the M1 Max in the 14".
| tfcata wrote:
| The notch is the most stupid feature. The stupid touch bar is
| gone but here you must swallow this. Apple just likes to screw
| you one way or the other.
| thefounder wrote:
| Still no OLED or MicroLed. New charger type...great!
| troupe wrote:
| The number of ports on a mac seem inversely related to how much
| Jony Ives was involved in its creation.
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| So which one? 14 or 16? As the main driver for a person who uses
| a desktop
| whatever1 wrote:
| I really wished for a 120hz 6k external monitor that does not
| have all the HDR / dimming zone fluff and does not cost $6000
| usd.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| Des anyone know if the faster internal drive is included on the
| base model? storage speed makes a huge difference for practical
| use.
| binkHN wrote:
| As someone who loves ThinkPads, I want to cry. Apple is, finally,
| wiping the floor with them.
| tantony wrote:
| I have a Framework laptop on order. But I must say that I am
| _very_ tempted. If my attempt at daily driving linux doesn 't
| work out, I will probably get the M1 Max 14'' MBP.
| rrradical wrote:
| At least there's good choices all around these days. Very
| recently it was 'everything sucks'.
| buildbot wrote:
| 64GB of 512bit unified memory is REALLY fast/huge This will be
| better than many training GPUs for ML...
|
| Better than dual socket servers...
|
| I wonder if the mac pro will be dual proc...
| humanistbot wrote:
| Yeah, but can it run CUDA pipelines?
| anko wrote:
| Any idea how the neural engine does vs the gpu?
| par wrote:
| doubt it
| djxfade wrote:
| Considering that CUDA is a proprietary technology from
| Nvidia, how could they?
| wmf wrote:
| There are a bunch of CUDA translation shims being worked
| on.
| nikisweeting wrote:
| Not holding my breath, it's been almost 5 years without a
| working CUDA shim. Hopefully this will push that work
| over the edge though. If I had the relevant skills I'd
| contribute...
| avaku wrote:
| I think they want everyone to move to Metal Performance
| Shaders. I've done some stuff on them, but not nearly as
| developed as CUDA.
| baybal2 wrote:
| So, now we know that LPDDR5 will be coming with at least 16GB
| per die stack. A doubling from LPDDR4. One package = 128 bit, a
| double of regular DIMM I/O width.
|
| I see, it's not too much behind even HBM2, of which we may
| never see a mobile variant.
|
| I was long pointing to people making laptops that LPDDR4 is
| much cheaper than DIMMs in overall, despite nominal per-GB cost
| being higher.
|
| The elimination of manual assembly, termination, extra through
| hole parts, along with LPDDR actually taking less PCB area,
| less layers, and being less demanding of the PCB material
| easily compensates for higher chip cost.
| vzaliva wrote:
| The hardware is amazing, but I could not see myself going back to
| proprietary closed source OS. I would like to chose the distro
| (hey some people want NIX some OK with Ubuntu), X11 vs Wayland,
| pick the display manager, decide if I want to run LTS or
| beelding-edge, etc. My only hope is that some day Linux support
| all MBP hardware well enough to use this a Linux laptop.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| This was a "Shut up and take my money" day for me.
|
| I've been running on a 3-year-old machine, straining at the
| leash, and it's time to change.
|
| I made my order about a minute after the store went live, and I
| won't get it until next month. I suspect part of that, is because
| I'm getting the M1 Max processor.
|
| They'll make a lot of money, this week.
| reaperducer wrote:
| _I 've been running on a 3-year-old machine, straining at the
| leash, and it's time to change._
|
| My daily driver MacBook Air is very close to ten years old. I
| wonder if I'll get ten years out of this one, too.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Xcode is getting so damn big, that I'm actually running out
| of disk space. It's insane.
|
| I develop on the computer, so I tend to keep it busy.
|
| My computers are always in great shape, aesthetically, but I
| run them hard. The fans are generally going from about 6AM to
| 9PM.
| smoldesu wrote:
| It would sure be nice if they used any of that spare space
| inside to let us load up our machine with M.2 drives. Maybe
| that technology is too futuristic though, much like
| function keys or magnetic chargers.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Not much extra height. They are barely thicker than the
| last generation.
| smoldesu wrote:
| Sure, but there's obviously extra space inside because of
| the SOC. M.2 drives are miniscule, if Valve could fit one
| in the Steam Deck, Apple has no excuse.
| Jaygles wrote:
| Same, I'm replacing my 2016 13" MBP. Thought about getting the
| 13" M1 but decided to wait for this refresh and I'm glad I did.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| Priced out the one I would buy and it is $4300. Seems the value
| isn't quite there. Hard to say though without playing with it for
| a while. So clearly I need to go back to work for some tech
| company that will buy one for me :-).
|
| It is more interesting to me to reflect on the comments from
| about 5 years ago that "ARM will never be in laptops, its a
| 'phone' processor."
|
| That statement was both true and ignored the reality that if you
| _wanted_ to put an ARM processor in a laptop you could add
| features and design it to work that way. Chip design is expensive
| of course, and so being a company like Apple really makes it
| possible to do this sort of thing as a 'risk' venture, but what
| surprises me is that Apple spent maybe $10B over the years
| developing an in house ARM design capability (after buying PA
| Semi) and here it is paying them some huge dividends.
|
| If you compare that to Microsoft's efforts trying to use off the
| shelf ARM chips in the original Surface and now the Surface RT
| and you can really see the advantage of having the chip designers
| and the software designers depending on each other. That was true
| in the "WinTel" era when Intel and Microsoft were joined at the
| hip, but it was never the case for ARM CPU vendors who were more
| concerned about being in the next flagship phone than what ever
| it was that Microsoft was doing.
|
| What an interesting alternate history if Microsoft decided to
| develop an in house production chip capability at the same time
| they decided to get into the hardware business for "real." [1]
|
| [1] Yes, I'm aware they have done custom chips, the pixel/pen
| processor in the Surface is one such but they haven't really
| jumped in with both feet like Apple did, and certainly haven't
| had it front and center as long as Apple has.
| alienalp wrote:
| First gen of m1 mac was first Apple product that i bought. I
| can't say i like Apple ecosystem or macos. I am opposite of
| Apple fanboy. I don't like Apple and this price they made me
| pay another reason for it but simply anybody who want and who
| can afford will buy it. There aren't any alternatives.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| > Priced out the one I would buy and it is $4300. Seems the
| value isn't quite there.
|
| I was also surprised at how high the maxed out laptops can go
| in price. From memory, around the 2015 model line the top end
| would be at around $3000 without the crazy disk options.
|
| There was a rule of the thumb that Apple priced their product
| at a rough ratio of $2 / day. That would give 4 year for my
| 2014 laptop, and it mostly did. That would be 5.5 years for the
| top end 16" laptop, I guess that's reasonable ?
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| FWIW, while I'm disappointed by the pricing I bought a 2019
| 16":
|
| - Mid CPU
|
| - Lowest available discrete GPU
|
| - Max RAM
|
| - 2 TB SSD
|
| RAM was my absolute must have, and to get the same on today's
| MBP:
|
| - I would have to at least max the CPU
|
| - That's substantially better GPU than I'd buy otherwise
|
| For the same RAM and storage, the price is almost identical
| (in fact it might be identical but I don't feel like digging
| up my old order to compare such a small difference).
|
| I am disappointed they didn't move the price down more. And
| I'm disappointed I have to buy more compute than I care about
| to get the other specs I want. But it's clear at least to me
| this is more value for my money than I paid 2 years ago.
| bredren wrote:
| It's worse if you bought a recent Intel based MacBook Air.
| I have a 2018 and it's bad performance and battery compared
| to the M1.
| makeitdouble wrote:
| Consolation would be that you still have full backward
| compatibility with all the Intel ecosystem.
|
| I like the M1, but I could have chosen the 16" intel at
| the time I bought it, even if it's to switch to the M1
| Pro/Max next year for instance.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| I mean I paid probably 3-4x what you did for a similarly
| outclassed computer so IDK if it's worse.
| bredren wrote:
| Ah I thought I read you had a 2016.
|
| I realize I haven't looked at the exact price /
| performance jumps between the releases across MBA and MBP
| for Intel to Apple Silicon.
|
| I'm curious just how big of a change there was across
| common metrics.
| itsdsmurrell wrote:
| Money printer go brr.
| solarmist wrote:
| Apple has always been a hardware company though. Software has
| just been for the purpose of selling their hardware.
|
| MSFT is the opposite. So it makes sense it be much
| slower/harder to get going in this area.
| mcovalt wrote:
| > Apple has always been a hardware company though. Software
| has just been for the purpose of selling their hardware.
|
| I'm not sure that's the right perspective. Steve Jobs said in
| an interview [0] that "Apple views itself as a software
| company."
|
| [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dEeyaAUCyZs
| solarmist wrote:
| They definitely don't behave like a hardware company. And
| arguably much (most?) of their value comes from their
| software.
|
| But at their core selling hardware is where the money comes
| from.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| I completely agree with that, Microsoft's foundation was
| software. What is intriguing is that when they decided to "go
| hardware" (which started with Mice and Keyboards and later
| game consoles, tablets, phones, and laptops) their execution
| strategy didn't evolve to making their own silicon until much
| much later. Apple was much more aggressive here with the
| PowerPC alliance after Motorola let them down followed by
| later moves into chip design.
|
| I am always fascinated by seeing how the "core competency" of
| a company constrains its execution options later in its
| existence. Sun, for example, really was a 'sales' company
| first and it couldn't "sell its way" out of the wave of Linux
| clusters that started displacing its servers. Now as a
| hardware company it too was let down by Motorola and that was
| some of the genesis for SPARC much like Apple's move. But as
| a sales company Sun kept shooting anyone who used their
| "open" architecture CPU by ruthlessly out selling them.
| jamesfmilne wrote:
| You'll get a solid 4-5 years use out of such a device. I did
| out of my 2016 MacBook Pro.
|
| Even if you depreciate at $1000k/year, that's not too bad for a
| professional tool. It's not worth $0 after 4 years either.
| TillE wrote:
| Heck I was still using my 2012 Macbook Air until pretty
| recently, a decent machine if you don't mind that it gets
| really hot under load.
|
| Barring any major fiascos (like past keyboard issues), the
| 2021 MBP does look built to last. We're in a good spot now in
| terms of stuff like a great screen (if you don't need
| constant 120Hz), low-power video decoding, a solid 8-core
| CPU, and probably even a passable gaming GPU. Should remain
| very usable even as it's outclassed in subsequent
| generations.
| genghisjahn wrote:
| Same with my MBA 2012. Works great. Will get an M1
| something or other and pass the MBA on to my daughter. If I
| get approx 10 years out of the M1?, I'm happy.
| fastball wrote:
| If you get the M1 Max with 32 core GPU, I bet that's
| actually well above "passable" for most gaming needs.
| NetOpWibby wrote:
| This is the model I'm getting.
|
| Now if only I could get Deus Ex: Human Revolution to work
| on it.
| killtimeatwork wrote:
| How many games run well on ARM?
| addandsubtract wrote:
| The Steam Deck is about to find out!
| iotku wrote:
| The Steam Deck does not use an ARM CPU.
| Ivoah wrote:
| Steam Deck is running an x86 AMD processor, not ARM.
| busymom0 wrote:
| My MacBook Pro from 2012 (the one without Retina display
| and had an optical drive too which I replaced with a
| secondary SSD) lasted me over 8 years. It finally
| overheated during summer (my house was very hot and fans
| were probably clogged). I do iOS and Android app
| development, so that $1000 device made me tons of money in
| return.
| reducesuffering wrote:
| Yep. Still running a 2013 MBP here
| elboru wrote:
| Same here, for the first time in 8 years I'm considering
| to upgrade.
| bredren wrote:
| > Seems the value isn't quite there.
|
| The MBPs are astonishingly good machines, but I agree the price
| is always forces tough questions about value and fit.
|
| I suspect the lack of a Mini update was in part to buffet
| purchases of these more expensive laptops. So many people are
| traveling and commuting less now, cheaper Mini's would have
| undermined sales of the MBP.
|
| I'm running an XDR Pro Display off a 2018 Intel mini with an
| eGPU, and going to wait out for presumably a 2022 M2 Mini.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| I don't think so. The iMac sure. The Mac pro, may be. These
| machines don't compete with the mini.
|
| I like the mini in theory but I'd never shell out to buy one.
| I almost never work just from a desk. With WFH, the average
| person is likely to lie in bed or couch or work from the
| kitchen counter and dining table, than they are to work from
| a proper desktop.
|
| (Not even to mention the fact that you'd need to have/buy a
| good display and keyboard setup to go with it.)
| malshe wrote:
| My experience matches this. I have converted a guest
| bedroom upstairs into my office but I can't sit there all
| day and work. I go down to the living room after lunch and
| also work from the back porch whenever I can. I have a
| desktop PC but I barely touch it.
| reacharavindh wrote:
| I wish the non-Apple ecosystem gave a clear alternative that
| allows us to choose specs like this :-(
|
| I look at Lenovo Thinkpad with Ryzen 5000 CPUs, they are stuck
| with crappy displays.
|
| Dell has better displays but not the Ryzens CPUs I wanted.
|
| Framework is modular but no Ryzen.
|
| Nothing makes me want to open my wallet.
|
| I'd love almost exactly a MacBook Pro spec with M1Max replaced
| by Ryzen 5000 series CPU and 64 GiB of memory, and an excellent
| display. May be that unicorn of achieve will cost as much as
| your configured MacBook Pro :-(
| dna_polymerase wrote:
| Eventually the Ryzen Framework will come and then the whole
| discussion is over for me. I won't buy a >$2000 device that
| isn't upgradeable, repairable and has a poor Linux story.
| ChuckMcM wrote:
| I would buy that in a femptosecond.
| weystrom wrote:
| So I was looking for an alternative and bought Lenovo Yoga
| Slim 7. Ryzen 5800H with 90Hz 1440p screen.
|
| It runs loud af, fan is constantly pulsing, but it's an
| alright machine for ~1200eu.
|
| It's now going on ebay to fund the mbp purchase, I want
| better thermals out of my laptop.
| smoldesu wrote:
| I expect to be surrounded by pitchforks and torches for saying
| this, but I genuinely believe that Linux is the true winner of
| today's presentation.
|
| The last few months have been watershed times for both Apple
| and Microsoft. Starting with Apple, their developer relations
| are starting to crumble in a major way. Not only have
| developers stood up against their highway robbery, but other
| companies like Microsoft have one-upped them just for the hell
| of it. Today's presentation was almost completely devoid of any
| software discussion, which is really what puts the nail in the
| coffin for me. A 5nm laptop chip will _always_ be more powerful
| than the 14nm one I 've got, but at least _my_ chip runs the
| software I want. Without a commitment to replacing 32-bit
| libraries, updating their coreutils or making a package manager
| developers actually _want_ to use, I think Apple 's message is
| clear: We're pivoting away from the 'Pro' market and heading
| straight into 'Prosumer'. To their credit, it seems like
| they've made a fine prosumer laptop.
|
| Microsoft, on the other hand, has usurped their enthusiast
| community with Windows 11. The strict CPU requirement in
| particular was a bad move on their behalf, and it's going to
| leave a lot of their install base out in the cold. While I
| don't expect a whole lot of consumers to pivot to Linux, I can
| imagine a _lot_ of developers making the switch. Many devs
| already use WSL, so they 're pretty familiar with Unix systems
| as-is. The Windows-to-Linux onboarding experience is getting
| better and better as Wine is continuing to close the gap in
| compatibility. Especially for the gamer/enthusiast market
| Microsoft traditionally caters to, the value proposition of
| using Windows is diminishing by the day. Windows 11 does
| nothing to change that, and _actively impedes_ your workflow if
| you 're on a Ryzen CPU.
|
| I think for a lot of people's workflow, Linux will be the only
| thing left that "just works" in a few years time.
| Joeri wrote:
| I don't know if you've been following marcan & co on their
| work on bringing linux to M1 macs, but it's moving along
| nicely. Pretty soon there will be an interesting conundrum
| for believers in open systems: buy high performance mac
| hardware but run an open OS on it, or take the high road and
| buy a "worse" laptop from a more open vendor.
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| One could view Marcan's work on Asahi Linux as "making M1
| open".
|
| Going out on a limb here, but as a firm believer in open
| systems I think it's fine to buy an M1 Mac to the extent
| it's guaranteed to run Linux (or OpenBSD, or whatever)
| without any problems.
|
| System that _can 't_ do that are the ones to really avoid.
| pram wrote:
| "Today's presentation was almost completely devoid of any
| software discussion, which is really what puts the nail in
| the coffin for me."
|
| Literally what? This isn't WWDC. It was an event for
| presenting new hardware. There was zero chance of it being
| software or (especially) developer focused.
| fastball wrote:
| Though ironically the macOS Monterrey RC actually came out
| the same day as this event.
| krrrh wrote:
| It's not ironic, new releases of MacOS always coincide
| with the release of new hardware.
|
| And it _always_ follows the _announcement_ of the release
| at WWDC around July.
| fastball wrote:
| I don't mean ironic from Apple's perspective, I mean
| ironic given the comment complaining about "only new
| hardware".
| jmull wrote:
| This is a pretty bad take.
|
| I don't see anything particularly wrong with Apple's
| developer relations. You certainly might hope they would give
| us more than they do, but you always hope for that. Bottom
| line is, Apple gives us what we really need -- a market.
|
| Today's presentation was almost devoid of discussions of
| software... because it was about hardware. It's not like WWDC
| doesn't exist. You can hear about Apple's software as much as
| you would care to.
|
| "Apple doesn't care about pros anymore" is a perpetual
| refrain, but it seems to go through phases of being more true
| and less true (there are many kinds of pros, so it's never
| going to be all true or all false.) We're in a middle state
| at the moment, IMO, mainly due to the uncertainly about what
| the higher end pro Apple silicon story will be. Still, these
| current laptops look awfully good for many "pros".
|
| Linux has a lot of nice points and some pretty good distos
| that are improving all the time, but that's not near enough
| to displace Windows or MacOS.
| [deleted]
| thinkloop wrote:
| And yet I still have to hard reboot after closing the lid on
| a fresh ubuntu install on a 7 year-old lenovo in 2021.
| wlll wrote:
| Don't worry, 2022 will be the year of Linux on the desktop!
| [deleted]
| packetlost wrote:
| I use Linux daily. "Just works" is a stretch as soon as you
| throw any GUI + desktop environment into the equation. Even
| more hairy if you add an _nvidia GPU_ in.
|
| The average consumer is more likely to switch to ChromeOS
| (which I _guess_ is Linux underneath, for now) than to any
| Linux distro.
| kube-system wrote:
| I tried to install Ubuntu on an older desktop this past
| weekend, because that's a solid choice to revive any aging
| system, right? ... nope, it wouldn't boot because Canonical
| decided to drop BIOS boot support on their installers.
| zekica wrote:
| This is not true. Ubuntu supports BIOS boot without any
| issues. I booted 21.10 yesterday on a Core i5-540M and it
| worked without any issues.
| kube-system wrote:
| I reproduced this last week: https://bugs.launchpad.net/u
| buntu/+source/casper/+bug/190549...
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| > Even more hairy if you add an nvidia GPU in.
|
| You're also describing Mac with that one. But worse.
| fastball wrote:
| Macs haven't had nvidia GPUs for a while now, so not
| surprising they're unsupported.
| JohnTHaller wrote:
| Unsupported by Apple is one thing. Not allowing Nvidia to
| release a driver for MacOS 10.14 and later is another
| thing.
| thathndude wrote:
| This is the one I bought!
| swat535 wrote:
| > Seems the value isn't quite there
|
| I'm curious, what exactly is this machine missing in your
| opinion and given the choice, what would you go with other than
| the recently introduced MacbookPro ?
| skohan wrote:
| I can't speak for the other commenter, but for me the M1 air
| is so good I wouldn't feel the need to pay several times more
| for a "pro" machine.
| shrimpx wrote:
| Yeah. The M1 Air is also fanless and thinner and lighter.
| The prospect of fan noise in particular is a turnoff.
| manmal wrote:
| > Seems the value isn't quite there
|
| Looks like you are not in the target audience for those
| machines. The value is absolutely there if you need the CPU to
| do as much work as possible. As someone who spends a big chunk
| of my day compiling, a speedup by x2 means I need to wait half
| as long. And it won't even toast my lap. The 1K nits screen
| means I can finally work outside in summer. This is _exactly_
| the machine the disgruntled ecosystem has been calling for, for
| at least 5 years now.
|
| While the 5nm process will certainly yield good AMD CPUs, the
| iOS/macOS optimizations built into Apple Silicon are hard to
| match for general-purpose CPUs. And the GPU story looks bad for
| Nvidia - the Max 32 core GPU uses half the power envelope for
| almost the same output as the mobile RTX 3080. And afaik the
| 3080 is already produced on 7nm, so there will be some
| engineering to do to get there.
| R6 wrote:
| People are comparing Apples and Oranges. (Ha)
|
| Look at a Mobile Workstation class laptop and those are
| easily 5k+. Those are the ones to compare with the high end
| MBPs. Not your USD 1500 Windows laptops.
| kube-system wrote:
| And mobile workstations will keep you tethered to the wall
| and you can only tote them in an XL backpack.
| sytelus wrote:
| I've RTX discrete card maxed out laptop with 64GB RAM, dual
| SSDs, 4K OLED and what not. It was priced at around $4500.
| The battery life is about 2 hours and fan runs so fast that
| it almost sounds like a siren. I'd to do hours worth to
| tweaking to force run its CPU and other components run at
| very low speed to make it usable in untethered mode. It
| needs so much power when charging that plugs in airplane
| charger refuse to charge it.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| How did you even open the lid more than 60 degrees?
| soheil wrote:
| Why does the notch have to be so big if it's only used for a
| camera unlike iPhone where it hosts a multitude of sensors?
| roody15 wrote:
| Simply too pricey... my two cents. Like to see the return of
| useful ports but 2,000$ a bit high here
| amelius wrote:
| The article reads like an ad.
| tashmahalic wrote:
| Did anyone catch how many external monitors these can drive, and
| at what resolutions and refresh rates?
| syspec wrote:
| Up to two external displays with up to 6K resolution at 60Hz at
| over a billion colors (M1 Pro) or Up to three external displays
| with up to 6K resolution and one external display with up to 4K
| resolution at 60Hz at over a billion colors (M1 Max)
| faldore wrote:
| next they will be bringing back the headphone jack to the iphone
| bingohbangoh wrote:
| what's the general need for microSD?
|
| My XPS-13 has one but I've never understood why its such a big
| deal. I almost never use it.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Wish SD cards were better supported by stereo equipment.
| Recently realized that USB flash drives are kinda clumsy for
| that.
| chromatin wrote:
| Besides photo/video which was already mentioned, SD is commonly
| used in 3D printing (to transfer STL to printer)
| kristjansson wrote:
| AV/Photo import?
| nazgulnarsil wrote:
| photo/video people use those ports constantly, like all day
| every day.
| geerlingguy wrote:
| Can confirm. Outside of the higher-end cameras (photo and
| video), EVERYthing still uses SD cards.
|
| And it's easy to adapt microSD cards to it for Raspberry Pis,
| drones, dash cams, phones, audio recorders, etc.
| krzyk wrote:
| OK, but there are dongles for that, I use one (the same one)
| for 10 years, since I got my first camera.
|
| Used it before laptops had sd port, and now use it when they
| don't have it again. No issues with that.
|
| In case of cameras there are sdcards that are wifi enabled,
| and also newer cameras should support wireless transfer -
| isn't that easier and faster instead of pulling out the card?
| NovaS1X wrote:
| >In case of cameras there are sdcards that are wifi
| enabled, and also newer cameras should support wireless
| transfer - isn't that easier and faster instead of pulling
| out the card?
|
| No, because transferring 1TB+ of data from your camera over
| the crappy built in wifi chip is a much worse user
| experience than just plugging in an SD card. Lots of
| cameras also require you to connect to the camera's hot-
| spot, which means while transferring that data you are not
| on wifi. If you're just sending a few jpegs over, fine,
| wifi is great, but for people to whom the "Pro" moniker
| actually matters, it's a big deal.
|
| Dongles are fine for sure, but having a slot built in is
| better, and there's no real reason not to have one other
| than "aesthetics"
| krzyk wrote:
| > No, because transferring 1TB+ of data from your camera
| over the crappy built in wifi chip is a much worse user
| experience than just plugging in an SD card.
|
| I didn't thought that pro cameras that support 1TB sd
| cards have crappy wifi chips, I stand corrected.
|
| But usually sdcards are not the fastest storage mediums.
|
| > there's no real reason not to have one other than
| "aesthetics"
|
| There is a reason - they take up space inside the laptop
| that could be used for something else.
|
| Not sure if that applies to macbook, but additional ports
| are not a free lunch.
| romwell wrote:
| >OK, but there are dongles for that
|
| Well, why have any ports at all? A single USB-C suffices;
| For everything else, there's a dongle.
|
| No need to stop at ports either. If the SD Card reader can
| go through USB-C, so can webcam, audio, and the
| peripherals.
|
| Surface and iPad have shown us that a portable device
| doesn't need a keyboard/touchpad, and those who want them
| can connect via bluetooth.
|
| Of course, even having bluetooth built-in is superfluous
| when perfectly fine Bluetooth dongles are available.
|
| Finally, there are great USB-C portable monitors out there.
| Why limit the users to something built-in, especially when
| not everyone has a need for it?
|
| The same goes for the battery; given the abundance of USB-C
| power banks.
|
| Once we get rid of all these unnecessary bells and
| whistles, we'll end up with peak MacBook: a shiny, metal
| square with a single USB-C port, an Apple logo on top, and
| all the dongles one can dream of (available separately).
| beermonster wrote:
| Import your days photoshoot to review your work, reformat the
| card and most importantly to back it up to TimeMachine.
|
| Wonder how many people just now shoot on their iPhone 12/13 at
| least for snaps.
| martpie wrote:
| microSD none, but SDCard readers (the one here) are extremely
| useful to photographers.
| NovaS1X wrote:
| Photo/video import mostly. I don't feel like transferring 1TB
| of data over crappy built-in wifi chip on my camera or having
| to plug the camera in and have it act as a fancy card reader.
| nuerow wrote:
| > _what 's the general need for microSD?_
|
| I use a USB pendrive formatted with a case-sensitive partition
| to cache data for an app I use, because it's far better to
| spend 20$ on a pendrive than 200$ for a SSD upgrade.
|
| Given the choice, I'd prefer to use a SD card for that than a
| USB pendrive, as the USB pendrive requires either a USB hub or
| a USB pen always sticking out of the chassis.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Given how much Apple charges for storage, and the fact that it
| is not expandable, SD card slots offer a reasonable way to get
| more storage. With a starting price at $2000, this may not make
| sense for people who don't need a pro level machine but were
| looking forward to features like this
| musicale wrote:
| That's exactly what I did - for previous Macbook Pro models
| with SD card slots you can find flush sd cards or adapters
| with an aluminum end that blends right into the case (you can
| still remove it fairly easily but I hardly ever do.)
| destitude wrote:
| SD cards are not a reliable medium term storage mechanism.
| They wear out much faster then SSD drives.
| zmmmmm wrote:
| Yep. But there are huge types of cases where that's still
| useful. For example, I have all my docker images on a
| removable SD card. It's all cached so it doesn't matter but
| its hundreds of GB I don't need on my main storage.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Yup, I'd just use it for storing my iTunes library and one
| of my iPhone backups. I currently use an external drive,
| which I don't take everywhere. SD would make it trivial to
| have both of these with me at all times. I'd also be able
| to keep all my photos and downloaded videos for travel,
| without having to worry about filling up my internal
| storage.
| scheme271 wrote:
| Probably for the photography workflows where you grab the card
| out of your camera and then process and edit your RAWs.
| entropie wrote:
| Photos. Photo journalists need often to send pictures they just
| took to their agencies to be in the first places in the race
| who brings the content first on their web page.
|
| I actually use my microSD slot on my xps quite often for camera
| related stuff.
| audunw wrote:
| There are a lot of different use-cases for SDcard/microSD. It's
| not useful to everyone, but I think it's definitely useful
| enough to have built in. Same with HDMI.. I'd probably use
| SDcard more than HDMI (like for setting up Raspberry PI,
| accessing videos from dash cam or using my old camera, which is
| still better than iPhone for some types of pictures). I think
| those ports are aimed at the professionals in certain sector,
| but lots of regular people use them too.
|
| Recently I've also used microSD with USB-microSD adapter
| instead of USB sticks (like for music in the car).. last time I
| wanted to buy USB memory stick it was the cheaper option, and
| the adapter isn't much bigger than a typical USB memory stick
| anyway.
| ghaff wrote:
| As someone who presents a lot, primarily at events. It's nice
| to have HDMI built in given that HDMI is the standard for
| projector connectors and I expect it to be so for a long
| time. (VGA stuck around forever.)
| GreenWatermelon wrote:
| VGA is still around in my college, and the projectors are
| what I could call utter trash.
| ericd wrote:
| Even without presenting a lot, being able to impromptu
| throw my screen up onto whatever random TV/projector is
| around via HDMI has come in handy surprisingly often on my
| 2013 MBP. If I had been limited to DisplayPort, I would've
| been able to do that <5% of the time.
| ghaff wrote:
| True. At a conference, I _should_ have all my dongles
| with me. But I don 't in a random conference room--not
| that I've spent much time in my local office for years.
| aaroninsf wrote:
| I am happy to get it, I still shoot with a large-sensor digital
| PAS camera and bought a hyperdrive just so I could rip the
| cards and have an HDMI port.
|
| Excited to leave that thing behind.
| DocG wrote:
| Importing pictures videos from camera, car DVR, just storage,
| gopros, drones, raspberry pi etc.
|
| Much faster to pop the SD card than to connect via USB to
| transfer files. Much more convenient not at desk.
| newfonewhodis wrote:
| I hate the notch. I wish I could get the 14inch body with the M1
| (not pro/max) chip in it for <$1200. All I want are ports in last
| year's MBP but don't feel the need to spend $2k on a laptop I
| infrequently use.
| darkwater wrote:
| > HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet
| inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back
| because the future is USB-C.
|
| Gonna be downvoted for the snark but... I'd like to hear now how
| the "a usb-c dongle fixes everything and it's perfect" Apple
| crowd will backpedal on this.
| ericmay wrote:
| I'm that crowd and while I think MagSafe is a good addition
| back to the lineup (single-purpose and the other end is still
| USB-C) I just don't see the point of adding back HDMI and SD
| cards. Now we get to go back to the era of jeez I sure hope
| there's a dongle somewhere instead of moving to a future of
| just one cable.
|
| Maybe we should keep Lightning too instead of USB-C for the
| iPhone.
| 1-more wrote:
| I think everyone thought that was just over the horizon for a
| long time, and it never quite got there. My monitor is my
| dongle for everything, but I'm lucky in that I didn't have a
| monitor before the USB-C everything era.
| darkwater wrote:
| Don't get me wrong, I'm on that camp myself, I have a Dell
| XPS with 2 usb-c and my LG monitor is my dongle when at home
| and I love it. And if I were the traveling consultant type I
| would just use a dongle, until everything is usb-c. I was
| totally on Apple side also when they removed the dvd drive
| when optical disks where still being used widely. It was the
| right tradeoff to have slimmer laptops.
|
| I was just being snarky at the Apple fanbase that cheers
| every Apple decision, no matter what. Especially when Apple
| itself backpedals on something.
| throwaway20875 wrote:
| No greater example of the decline of our society: the contrast
| between HN's focus and attention to this product announcement and
| the NSA leaks.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| Not a detachable or a 2-in-1? Pass
| mizzack wrote:
| Wow looks like Apple has abandoned every bad decision on the MBP
| for the past 5 years in one swoop. No touchbar, increased key
| travel, added back hdmi/sd/headphone/power jacks.
|
| Plus bumped up RAM limit, M1, new displays, 120Hz... Wow.
| seviu wrote:
| I just scrolled through the posts and I felt they were laggy. I
| think I am already biased to 120hz even without having
| experienced it myself.
| Sephr wrote:
| Bringing back a dedicated HDMI port is a downgrade. This port
| can only do 4K 60Hz HDR (implying HDMI 2.0), which is inferior
| to previously-supported standards in addition to taking up
| space as a single-purpose port.
|
| The Intel MacBook Pro 16 supports DisplayPort 1.4 over USB-C,
| which can do 4K 98Hz HDR, and doesn't take up dedicated single-
| purpose ports.
| fomine3 wrote:
| Theoretically Apple could implement HDMI 2.1 that supports
| 4K/120Hz and above with DSC. Maybe they think HDMI is just
| for a compatibility.
| Sephr wrote:
| The tech specs page only says 4K 60Hz HDR
| fomine3 wrote:
| Yes. The point is that HDMI itself is more advanced than
| Apple implemented.
| timmg wrote:
| Can't you still use the USB-C ports for the higher bandwidth
| if you want to (and have the dongle?)
| mvid wrote:
| But you can't use the HDMI port as a USB-C. I would much
| rather another USB C to an HDMI, which never gets used
| bombcar wrote:
| I doubt there's another USB C bus available to be used so
| it's not really stealing away one(or if it is it's shared
| with other peripherals built in).
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| True, but you also have a dedicated power port, when
| before if you wanted to plug in that had to be one of the
| USB-C's too.
| Fiahil wrote:
| Not a dowgrade as many conference rooms are still equiped
| with HDMI and it's still more practical to use when you are
| unsure about the setup.
| Bud wrote:
| Nope! Not a downgrade. Distinct upgrade. You are aware this
| machine has THREE Thunderbolt 4/USB-C ports, yes?
| rattray wrote:
| How many 4K monitors can it drive at once?
| frankchn wrote:
| The maxed out configuration officially supports 3
| ProDisplay XDRs (6K), one 4K screen via HDMI and the
| built-in screen.
| robocat wrote:
| "Connect up to three Pro Display XDRs and a 4K TV with M1
| Max. Or connect up to two Pro Display XDRs with M1 Pro."
| rattray wrote:
| Thank you!
|
| Edit: but I wonder how many Hz the M1 Pro can drive a
| pair of 4K displays at...
| xanaxagoras wrote:
| > Wow looks like Apple has abandoned every bad decision on the
| MBP for the past 5 years in one swoop.
|
| Not unless they disabled all of the spying in MacOS. Doesn't
| matter if you bought it, it still isn't yours. Hard pass.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25078034&p=2
| trebor wrote:
| Actually, they kept one of the oldest mistakes: overcharging.
| $400 to upgrade from 16GB RAM to 32GB. $200 to upgrade to 1TB
| SSD. These guys control the whole supply chain without
| middlemen like WD, Samsung, Crucial, etc -- and they charge
| basically double what anyone else charges.
|
| I'm not paying $2k for a laptop below what I need as a
| developer, when <$2k from literally anyone else will get what I
| need.
|
| Apple is ridiculous. Inflation is murder right now, and they
| JACK the prices without delivering more value.
| chrjxnandns wrote:
| I'm in the market for a great development laptop. Do you have
| any links to ones that are comparable to this for under $2k
|
| I need 32-64gb of ram, a 1tb ssd, processor as fast as the M1
| pro, and all day battery life.
| amelius wrote:
| Get used to it. Apple will likely bust their competition at
| some point.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| > I'm not paying $2k for a laptop below what I need as a
| developer, when <$2k from literally anyone else will get what
| I need.
|
| That's perfectly fine, you don't have to use a MacBook if the
| value isn't there for you.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| Are they also not allowed to comment about it?
| spacedcowboy wrote:
| Just seems a bit pointless, that's all.
|
| I'm never going to buy a Bugatti Chiron, but you won't
| find me going to their forums and bleating on about how
| the gas mileage isn't as good as my Ford Focus...
| trebor wrote:
| I have used Apple products because if you calculate how
| long they last and the original cost, they cost less over
| a longer period of time.
|
| Or at least they did. This loss in value is what I'm
| complaining about.
|
| And this isn't Apple's forums, now is it?
| Aperocky wrote:
| Here's the deal. I don't care if I can get something workable
| for $1000 less. When I'm making many times that with the
| laptop as my primary interface for work, I'd rather spend
| more just to make me feel that tiny bit better each day.
|
| The touchpad alone is probably worth it.
| eugeniub wrote:
| This is literally what they have always done and they don't
| see a reason to stop
| silverlake wrote:
| Lenovo X1 Extreme charges $340 to go from 16GB to 32GB. Then
| $680 from 32 to 64GB. (regular price, there's a clearance
| sale now). $300 to upgrade SSD from 512GB to 1TB. It's $2400
| for an X1E (at sale price. Regular is $4.3k!!) roughly at par
| to $2k 14" pro.
|
| Surface Laptop Studio with similar specs at $2100. Costs
| +$600 to go to 32GB and 1TB (which == $400 + $200 upgrade you
| mentioned).
|
| Dell XPS 15" is $2400.
|
| If you were even dimly aware of current prices for high-end
| laptops you'd know the Mac is priced in the same expensive
| range. If you prefer $1K plastic crap that's fine. Some
| people like Velveeta and Canned Spam too.
| slownews45 wrote:
| What's interesting is Dell is shipping machines at top end
| with chips from generally older / slower nodes. Somehow
| Apple has some kind of lock on a lot of capacity at TSMC at
| the top end of the node range.
|
| That XPS 15" is probably running a comet lake chip.
|
| https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/intel/microarchitectures/comet
| _...
|
| Ie, 14mm, launched in 2019
|
| That node size (less the ++'s) goes back to Skylake (when
| it was amazing actually) which is from 2015.
| macNchz wrote:
| I've been a Mac user since the 90s and a long time apologist
| for the Apple premium... I understand and have generally been
| totally fine paying for design, fit and finish, longevity,
| and attention to detail that's hard to come by elsewhere.
| That said, the absurd markups on storage and memory have
| always been REALLY aggravating to me, and were a factor in my
| decision to build a desktop machine instead of getting
| another Mac last year. It's not even a question of
| affordability, it just rubs me the wrong way. $400 for +16GB
| of RAM in 2021?? Nonsense.
| fastball wrote:
| What do you normally pay for 16GB of LPDDR5 RAM?
| macNchz wrote:
| Supply chain issues complicate things a bit, but if I'm
| searching correctly the list price for Micron modules is
| ~$50 or less per 16GB.
|
| Ultimately, though, my beef with their pricing is not
| really about this specific release which obviously uses
| cutting-edge components, but about Apple's general
| approach to pricing these upgrades. They'll happily sell
| you old tech with the same crazy markups. You can still
| buy a new 27" Intel iMac with 8GB of RAM and the option
| to upgrade to 16 for $200. That's just a normal 8GB DDR4
| SODIMM, which you could instead order for $29, and it
| installs in about 15 seconds.
|
| I get that businesses need margins to survive, but
| Apple's stinginess and customer unfriendly price
| structure with storage and memory has been going on for a
| long time and just really bothers me.
|
| I like their products! Just let me spec it such that it
| deserves the "Pro" label without feeling like a chump.
| r00fus wrote:
| Did you hackintosh? Because I sure as hell am not running
| Windows and Linux is great for VMs/containers/servers but
| doesn't run all my local software.
|
| If you don't mind Windows, lots and lots of cheaper
| options. But you already knew that.
| macNchz wrote:
| I installed Ubuntu and Windows, and set up a Mac VM in
| case I needed it, but haven't really used Windows or the
| Mac VM. I do use a lot more VMs than I used to-having
| lots of cores, RAM, and fast NVMe drives it has opened my
| eyes to a different way of using the computer.
| city41 wrote:
| Before all the touchbar and butterfly keyboard nonsense,
| MacBooks were the best laptops on the market, hands down. It
| looks like they may have reclaimed that spot with this
| update. I'd argue worth the premium if that is the case.
| dunco wrote:
| I'll admit up front I haven't done the math on this MBP, but
| are the prices really so bad on a laptop$$/year basis?
|
| If you look at a feature comparison, sure, macs have always
| looked like a bad deal, but that evaporates when you bring a
| time calculation into it. The surveys I have seen all seem to
| place macs at about half the failure rate of other devices,
| and they seem to last twice as long. everyone seems to have a
| shocking story from Lenovo/Dell et. al. about shoddy hardware
| and incompetent support for anyone without a $10mil+ PO. If
| you pay more up front, you can make it back by using the same
| device for longer.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| They charge what the customer would pay. As long as people
| keep buying, the prices will keep increasing.
| slownews45 wrote:
| Don't buy them?
|
| Acer sells MUCH cheaper machines all day:
|
| $1.6K for a Predator here:
|
| https://www.walmart.com/ip/2021-Flagship-Acer-Predator-
| Trito...
|
| Apple has been told that their products (watch, airpods,
| iphones etc) have been too costly for decades now. And still
| makes money selling them.
|
| What I don't get - Apple's stuff seems to last forever. My
| dell's just crap out (battery, drivers, updates etc). My wife
| on a mac -> she just goes and goes. I'd love to see the
| support histories on old ACER's and Dell's vs Apple.
| squeaky-clean wrote:
| I don't understand comments like this. They're not buying
| it and they're explaining why.
| slownews45 wrote:
| No, they are saying apple is making a mistake and that
| "Apple is ridiculous."
|
| What they don't value is that apple, in the midst of chip
| shortage, is going to be doing delivery within ONE WEEK
| of announcement of an absolutely bleeding edge node
| solution.
|
| I get it, your Dell Intel whatever is better and/or
| cheaper. I used to be on dell and now am on lenovo. But
| there is a reason apple charges what they do, a totally
| integrated solution, that just works, battery life for
| miles, not too hot on the lap etc etc. and available in
| seemingly insane quantities.
|
| Seriously, ford parks cash cow F-150's and apple is
| turning out millions and millions of phones (100 million
| phones alone per year)?
| hparadiz wrote:
| You're being hilarious.
|
| No one is using Dell or Acer here. We're just holding on
| to our old MBPs.
|
| I wouldn't care about the notch for a 2k laptop but I do
| care for a 3500 laptop. Ontop of that I'll absolutely
| need more storage and ram so it's 4k laptop. But the
| notch. So ugly. Welp guess no 2021 MBP for me.
| jodrellblank wrote:
| 90 million iPhones in Q1 this year, 55M in Q2. Closer to
| 200M/year.
| trebor wrote:
| Eh, I'm still using a ~4 year old iMac. One of those that
| are painfully difficult to upgrade RAM. (And I keep
| repeatedly hitting the limit right now.) And I'm trying
| to keep it in sync with an even older MBP.
|
| And you're right: I don't appreciate that Apple can
| deliver a week later. That's not valuable when my
| machines still work. Not paying a premium for that.
|
| I've been chafing at the upgrade cost of Apple laptops
| for more than a decade of using their products. The
| reason customers keep paying is for the reputation, and
| because of their short memories. The keyboard debacle,
| the screen issues, MacBook Air early gen laptops burning
| people's laps... and those are just the laptop issues.
|
| I'm upset because this is just another instance where
| Apple's profit margin goes up substantially. Their markup
| is basically 4x higher than MSRP off the aftermarket
| RAM/SSD.
| sircastor wrote:
| I'm running (admitting reluctantly) fine on my 2014 MBP. It
| works for everything I need it to. It can be slow for some
| tasks, but I still get all the updates.
|
| I'm interested in the disparity between Apple and others
| with enterprise support programs. Virtually any other
| company will send you a loaner or replacement laptop under
| warranty and repair yours. Apple seems to just say "That
| sucks" and might fix your laptop.
| xoac wrote:
| > What I don't get - Apple's stuff seems to last forever.
|
| Especially the keyboards, and the speakers in recent years.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| I own MBP 2012.
|
| It has:
|
| * dead SSD, replaced on warranty
|
| * dead battery
|
| * dead keyboard
|
| * dead audio
|
| * some hardware issues, I think related to GPU (it panics
| sometimes)
|
| * replaced charger, second charger is in bad condition,
| probably time to think about replacing it as well
|
| It's the most terrible laptop I've ever owned. I owned
| plenty of laptops and I never had any issue with any of
| them. Macbook really set the bar.
|
| That said, it kind of works... I use USB keyboard, USB
| headset, always plugged in, don't push it too far, as it
| starts to throttle very fast. But it loads some ancient
| macOS version, constantly nags me about updating it.
|
| I'll buy new Macbook. Because of macOS. Reliability-wise I
| don't have any expectations from Apple. I bought plenty of
| Apple devices and I had plenty of issues with many of those
| devices. They definitely don't last forever. Apple software
| - that's what hooked me.
| killtimeatwork wrote:
| As far as anecdotes go, I'm 100% opposite I guess.
|
| I have 2013 MBP, but have removed OSX and use it solely
| as a Windows machine. Nothing ever broke on it, and I use
| it solely for build quality and reliability.
| can16358p wrote:
| Did they ever remove the headphone jack?
| bismark wrote:
| No but they _did_ move it back to the left side, which
| matches the location of the wire in most wired headphones. No
| more need to wrap the wire around the back of the machine...
| simonbarker87 wrote:
| No but a lot of people seem to think they removed it, they
| didn't
| masklinn wrote:
| They did remove the _input_ jack with G3 (2012-2015), and S
| /PDIF (digital line out) with G4 (touchbar) though.
| schrijver wrote:
| There's optical digital line out up until the 2015
| Macbook Pro, sending light out of the headphone jack. You
| need to add a little plastic adapter compared to standard
| TOSLINK cables, which I presume were getting too big.
| petercooper wrote:
| It's interesting how silently they dropped the optical
| line out, I never saw it mentioned. I needed it for
| something on my iMac Pro the other week and was boggled
| that it didn't support it. The argument I read about it
| was the DAC is so high quality now, digital out is simply
| not needed.
| kefabean wrote:
| I'm still slightly bemused as to why they dropped optical
| out from the Apple TV too. It's not like it's supposed to
| be a media hub at the centre of your house or they run a
| music streaming service or anything!
| relaxing wrote:
| All the home audio stuff supports audio over hdmi now.
| One less fragile cable to worry about, it's great.
|
| For legacy equipment you can get a box that takes hdmi in
| and spits out spdif.
| astrange wrote:
| SPDIF has less bandwidth than HDMI and doesn't support
| formats like lossless surround or Atmos.
| reubenmorais wrote:
| I assume because modern HDMI supersedes it. Sucks if you
| have an old receiver/amp tho.
| onecommentman wrote:
| Optical out was a real blessing back when electrical
| connections (iMacs to amps) were noticeably noisy.
|
| To go from optical _back_ to electrical just seemed wrong
| from a tech evolution standpoint. Not hearing a lot of
| call to rip out multimode fiber in backbone networks and
| replace it with a shinier coax. But HDMI seems to be
| meeting the need, and there is always the aftermarket for
| fully annealed 99.999% oxygen-free HDMI cables to
| consider.
| bombcar wrote:
| I specifically got a device to split audio out of the
| HDMI stream (technically it just copies it out) to RCA so
| I can pipe it back into the stereo in zone 2. Annoyingly
| complex but it works.
| masklinn wrote:
| > There's optical digital line out up until the 2015
| Macbook Pro, sending light out of the headphone jack.
|
| Yes, that's what I wrote was dropped in G4.
| 1ibsq wrote:
| I don't think Apple has, but people might have had a fear
| they would do. Now by adding those additional ports it's
| clear what route they're going and the jack is safe. I guess
| that's what he meant...
| alwillis wrote:
| No; it's still there.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| It's still there, now with better support for high impedance
| headphones which is great for music producers.
| minimaxir wrote:
| Wouldn't music producers use a dedicated DAC though?
| andy_ppp wrote:
| It depends if they want to test how things sound through
| a Mac and happen to have high impedance headphones lying
| around. Seriously though the DAC in the Mac is very good,
| you're talking $300+ to get something better and for my
| money it sounds nearly as good as a Topping D90 for
| example.
| astrange wrote:
| The $9 iPhone headphone dongle is a better DAC than most
| audiophile products, and has a bigger R&D budget than the
| entire industry. Headphone amps are real for electrical
| reasons, headphone DACs are a scam by the gold plated
| cable people.
|
| (The Google equivalent dongle is also good.)
| can16358p wrote:
| Don't think the same. I remember when they removed the
| jack I was using iPhone with a pair of wired CX 880i's.
| On old iPhone they sounded great (of course not a true
| audiophile setup, just a comparison). After I got my
| iPhone 7 which removed the jack and gave the dongle
| instead, they sounded absolutely terrible through that
| DAC. The change might not be noticeable for average
| EarPods user, but those Sennheisers which were great
| earbuds for its time was literally sounding worse than
| back-then-not-so-good Bluetooth headphones through that
| DAC. With all the world moving to Bluetooth/wireless
| (speaking of casual use, not pro setups), I doubt this
| will ever change.
| astrange wrote:
| https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?thread
| s/q...
|
| You certainly shouldn't be able to hear DAC differences
| through earbuds, but they shouldn't have issues being
| driven either unless they're really exotic. If I had to
| guess, I'd say the plug wasn't seated properly, or there
| was an issue with the in-line microphone.
| Someone1234 wrote:
| In a studio: Sure. But on the go it could be a nice
| asset.
| beepbooptheory wrote:
| Music producers are using an external interface regardless,
| and if they are on the go and just using headphone jack, it
| doesn't much matter because they know they arent getting a
| true monitor grade signal to judge the mix with.
|
| This is just great for headphone nerds, audiophiles.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Fair-ish points. For on the go, they can still take their
| dedicated over-ear monitors though, thus reducing the
| compromises. Sure it's not the same but better than the
| alternative.
| krzyk wrote:
| > headphone
|
| Did they remove it? I checked my wifes Macbook Air (the one
| with 2 USB-C ports) and it has headphone jack, did they remove
| it only in MacBooks Pro?
|
| > increased key travel
|
| Is that good? I prefer smaller key travel, makes typing faster.
| madeofpalk wrote:
| No they never removed the headphone jack.
| ksec wrote:
| >increased key travel
|
| I hope that is true. But they only state and quote
|
| >For the first time, Magic Keyboard brings a full-height
| function key row to MacBook Pro -- with the tactile feel of
| mechanical keys that pros love.
|
| Nothing really concrete about Key travel.
| robertoandred wrote:
| And they made a new bad decision: a notch.
| aqme28 wrote:
| Would you prefer a larger bezel?
| newsclues wrote:
| For content consumption yes, creation maybe not.
| Hamuko wrote:
| What content are you consuming? Because if you remove the
| screen area next to the notch, it's 16:10, and if you're
| watching videos, you're probably doing it at 16:9, and
| games at 16:9 or 16:10.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| I would prefer something like the Dell XPS laptops, very
| minimal bezel with a camera and screen that still looks
| edge to edge. I'm talking about the new XPS ones, not the
| old ones with the camera at the bottom of the screen.
| KoftaBob wrote:
| That approach leads to a webcam that's garbage. Apple
| chose the notch approach to allow thin bezels on most of
| the screen while still having a 1080p webcam with good
| low light performance.
| slownews45 wrote:
| for folks following this the 2020 Dell XPS camera's have
| absolute TERRIBLE quality.
|
| https://www.dell.com/community/XPS/XPS13-9300-2020-versio
| n-w...
|
| The Apple camera solution here, while it doesn't make you
| happy, may make others happy.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| It's unlikely the reason for that on the dell is the
| design of the bezel, most likely they just cheaped out or
| got a discount on several year-old parts.
| slownews45 wrote:
| Sure, but when people say ie, Dell does this better -
| every time I go look at the Acer or Dell product - they
| haven't actually focused on what users want.
|
| My guess - looking good on a zoom call for your work or
| your soririty or your dating videos is going to matter a
| TON more to folks than whether or not something is
| integrated into a fat bezel, or is in a notch.
|
| This debate has already occured BTW with the phones, and
| despite various claims that the notch would destroy
| iphone sales it did not.
|
| That said, I build my own PCs (talk about driver issues
| long term) and do purchasing of Lenovo and Dell for
| business (and a dell "server" costs a mint even though
| what is inside is also not THAT amazing) and don't use a
| mac personally, but my family does, and so I'm not
| totally blind to the value offering they have.
| mixmastamyk wrote:
| Yep, and the notch was a lot smaller than I expected from
| the discussion when looking at the apple site.
| bduerst wrote:
| Hardware performance and design don't seem to be the same
| here though - XPS could have gone with a better camera in
| their smaller bezel and GP's point still stands.
| philosopher1234 wrote:
| Then buy a Dell XPS laptop? Why do macbooks need to be
| perfect for everyone?
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Is a company not beyond reproach? Can't I like the
| product but still criticize its flaws?
| philosopher1234 wrote:
| But it's not a flaw. There's nothing objective here. The
| notch is preferable for many, and annoying to some.
| hu3 wrote:
| What kind of comment is this? Your parent expressed a
| valid criticism followed by a reasonable solution.
|
| It's not like Apple can't do the same as Dell.
| ianai wrote:
| I have to think Dell and others could have put in a notch
| if they wanted to make that compromise. They clearly felt
| it better to either do it right (and find a way to nestle
| the camera stuff into the bezel) than to go full notch.
| Joeri wrote:
| The XPS has a 720p camera and people complain on forums
| it has terrible picture quality. It also has thicker
| bezels than these new macbooks.
|
| I think apple made the right trade-off. Thin bezels and a
| good camera at the top of the display. Sadly you cannot
| have both in a laptop without a notched design.
| Oddskar wrote:
| Yes. Yes I would.
|
| I would rather take a bezel and reduce the amount of
| e-waste this custom garbage has on the world. Add to that
| this will most likely make screen replacements
| significantly harder and more expensive.
| aqme28 wrote:
| I think the e-waste angle is mostly unrelated.
|
| Can you explain why you like a larger bezel? It seems
| like a hands-down negative to me.
| Oddskar wrote:
| _I think the e-waste angle is mostly unrelated._
|
| Is it though? I was able to replace a broken Macbook
| screen a couple of generations ago. It was hard and took
| a while, but I managed. I'm very sure I would not be able
| to do this given this kind of screen.
|
| I guess we'll see when the first tear-down comes out. I
| wouldn't be surprised to find out that the only way to
| fix the screen is to replace it together with the webcam.
| aqme28 wrote:
| There will be 3rd-party screens that fit this, just as
| there were 3rd party screens that fit every other
| macbook.
| raihansaputra wrote:
| I'm pretty sure there hasn't been any "3rd-party screens"
| for macbooks since Retina displays came along. It's all
| sold as the display + case, lcd bonded to the glass.
| aqme28 wrote:
| Probably true. I haven't looked into this since I did a
| screen replacement on a MacBook in like 2013
| GreenWatermelon wrote:
| For me, notches are just ugly. The main purchasing
| decisions behind my current phone is its lack of notch. I
| hate the feeling of something interrupting my screen.
| dmitriid wrote:
| Apple fits a camera, a lidar, and god knows what other
| sensors on the front of a _phone_ in a notch that 's _three
| times thinner_ than the one on its own laptops.
|
| So yeah. They could have a thin bezel. They deliberately
| chose not to, even if it eats into the precious little
| space of the top menu bar.
| sobani wrote:
| It looks like the iPhone is about 2-3 times _thicker_
| than a MacBook lid. I 'm not sure they actually have the
| space to put iPhone equivalent hardware above the MacBook
| screen.
| dmitriid wrote:
| The module itself is very thin: https://www.ifixit.com/Te
| ardown/iPhone+12+and+12+Pro+Teardow...
|
| I believe they could've quite easily reduced the bezel
| width.
| robertoandred wrote:
| I would prefer the menubar to not be messed up.
| aqme28 wrote:
| I would be surprised if the new OS didn't handle that
| pxc wrote:
| > Would you prefer a larger bezel?
|
| I would, if only along the bottom!
|
| tl;dr: a thicker bottom bezel allows the necessary space
| for a better keyboard layout without shrinking the
| touchpad, and makes the laptop more usable when your eyes
| are at heights closer to that of the screen rather than
| looking down on it from above
|
| Because I have poor eyesight but I like to keep a lot of
| text on my screen, I often work partially or fully reclined
| with my laptop lying on my chest or my stomach. When I do
| this, the height of my fingers as they rest on the keyboard
| tends to obscure the bottom part of the screen on 'modern'
| laptops with super-thin bezels all around, so I have to
| reduce the height of my full-screen terminal.
|
| On older laptops, where the bottom bezel may be a full inch
| or more tall, I don't need this. Additionally, I prefer a
| full, standard, IBM style keyboard layout: a dedicated row
| of F keys, spaced out in the standard way, and with full-
| sized arrow keys. One problem with such keyboards is that
| they compromise the size of the trackpad, because of th
| space they take up on the bottom of the laptop. On
| keyboards without trackpoints, or with designs centered on
| large, excellent trackpads like MacBooks, this cannot work
| well.
|
| So for me, an ideal hardware setup for input on a laptop
| might well be something like a MBP, but with a 3:2 display
| and a bottom bezel 1-2 inches tall, which would allow for a
| full-size keyboard alongside a spacious, Mac-like trackpad.
| hamstergene wrote:
| macOS has grey menu bar where the notch is, that stays unused
| 100% of the time.
| dmitriid wrote:
| I routinely don't have enough space there. Any professional
| app (and these laptops are squarely aimed at professionals)
| will eat into this "unused gray space".
|
| Add a few apps that add ions to the menu bar, and suddenly
| you already have no space even without the notch.
| bluescrn wrote:
| The XCode menus on my 2015 MBP 15" go well into the 'notch
| zone'.
| sings wrote:
| Yeah I wonder how this will be resolved. The screenshots
| of Photoshop on the Apple store page show a menu that
| runs quite close to the notch. Will menu items be
| truncated or pop up randomly on the other side? How will
| it work for less terse languages like German?
| backoncemore wrote:
| I don't have any issues with the notch.
| spullara wrote:
| This isn't a bad decision. They are literally adding more
| space on the screen that would normally be useless.
| shbooms wrote:
| The new Dell XPS's managed to squeeze their camera/mic up
| above without needing a notch[0]. I'm guessing Apple had
| the ability to do so too but decided not to either because
| a.) they're planning on adding FaceID at some point in new
| models and/or b.) because they're trying to "unify" the
| design aestethics on macOS and iOS
|
| [0] https://m.media-
| amazon.com/images/I/81FV+91am5L._AC_SL1500_....
| spullara wrote:
| Very easy to squeeze a shitty camera wherever you feel
| like it. Maybe Dell should move the FN key to the left of
| the CTRL key instead so their keyboard was tenable.
| eugeniub wrote:
| Dell XPS webcams are generally really inferior to MacBook
| Pro webcams.
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgFd_w2n1es&t=193s shows
| a good comparison between the M1 MacBook Pro from last
| year and the 13" Dell XPS. The difference is night and
| day, even though the M1 MacBook Pro has a 720p
| resolution. I imagine the difference is similar with the
| larger 1080p webcam on the new MacBook Pros that, as
| mentioned in the announcement, has a larger aperture to
| let in more light and a larger image sensor.
| ghostly_s wrote:
| There is a generous bezel remaining below the screen. They
| could simply shift the display downward and have the same
| size display in the exact same footprint without the notch.
| It's a purely aesthetic choice.
| lovelyviking wrote:
| >"This isn't a bad decision."
|
| Of course it's not a bad decision. It's idiotic decision.
| They literally added something to spoil what was needed.
| They could just fix their previous idiocy but no .. they
| had to add another one. Even the fact of it presence is
| annoying enough to avoid buying such model.
|
| It is "uuugly" (with S.Jobs intonation) and that should be
| enough.
|
| It's also invitation for more SW bugs and unnecessary
| complications. My Menubar is set to autohide and even that
| is not working properly because some windows from time to
| time stuck in a mode when they fail to extend themselves to
| occupy space where MenuBar was. They stuck in size
| FullScreenSize.Height-MenuBar.Height and you cannot change
| it unless you reboot the machine. It's obviously a bug.
| They cannot fix it for many OS versions already. Imagine
| adding to this bug another complication with notch ...
| Goodness.
|
| Let's not forget that other idiots are going to copy it
| everywhere without too much thinking too.
|
| "Ugly" argument should be enough. But there are more: How
| about mouse pointer. Should it be stuck once you reach this
| notch or it should pass through? Both ways it is idiotic.
| How about full screenshot - it will be with notch now? How
| about those apps that would fail to hide it? I am pretty
| sure you'll stuck with this status bar spoiling the whole
| picture here and there. How about multiple screens and
| complications with moving windows from one screen to
| another with keeping their size or complications with
| screeenshots when multiple screens are connected? What if
| you have a lot of menu items in your app? Some of them will
| be after the notch?
|
| And all of this for what? To solve something that was
| already solved long time ago by "autohiding" MenuBar?
|
| For my taste adding this absolutely useless "notch" is
| really idiotic decision . The very presence of this ugly
| notch is spoiling the feeling.
|
| Even knowing that this device was made by people who find
| this idiotic notch aesthetically pleasing spoils everything
| because you know it's not the first idiocy and not the last
| idiocy you'll find there when you dig deeper. At least this
| is my expectation now. I was correct about ports, I was
| correct about keyboard, I was correct about idiocy of touch
| bar, lack of magsafe and I think I am not mistaken here
| too. They could've ask me, would save them a lot of
| redundant efforts in production. I use laptop to it's
| maximum and described my usage in details somewhere in
| comments. I really use laptop as laptop and I use each and
| every feature of it.
| lewisflude wrote:
| So you would rather have a thick bezel containing the
| camera, as before?
| cruano wrote:
| The bad decision is not adding face id to the notch
| stevetursi wrote:
| pure speculation, but I reckon this is due to security
| concerns. the camera on a laptop is off by default,
| including when the laptop opens. i for one have always
| been a little concerned that most phones (android and
| ios) don't have a "camera on" indicator.
| spullara wrote:
| Hey, I can agree with this and who knows if they aren't
| planning on doing it.
| destitude wrote:
| Why would I want face id when I can just touch a key?
| Rebelgecko wrote:
| Not everyone has the same abilities
| mperham wrote:
| If one can't use a keyboard, maybe the laptop form factor
| is not the right one to choose.
| leviathant wrote:
| I'm not who you are replying to, but as someone with a
| condition that leads to dry, cracked skin on my
| fingertips, it's not that I can't use a keyboard, it's
| that fingerprint scanning doesn't work for me. Thankfully
| it's not the only way to unlock a MBP.
| dijit wrote:
| This is going to sound awfully like shilling. But I'm a
| large fan of the "unlock with Apple Watch" feature of the
| Mac; and I've tried to reverse engineer it for Linux.
| eugeniub wrote:
| My problem with it is it only works 75% of the time.
| Another 15% of the time it just hangs indefinitely. And
| 10% it just doesn't even try.
| reificator wrote:
| Look into KDE Connect which has a similar feature. Not
| proximity based as far as I know, but it handles the hard
| part of unlocking the device.
| wingerlang wrote:
| This makes me curious wether you have used a FaceID
| device or not. I remember saying the same thing but now I
| kind of "hate" using a TouchID device.
| Hammershaft wrote:
| I'd take a touch sensor on the back of the phone like is
| common on android devices over face id any day of the
| week, by the time the phone is level with your face it's
| already opened.
| wingerlang wrote:
| Then you'd have to pick it up each time (or use PIN).
| FaceID works pretty well even when the phone is lying in
| front of you.
|
| I also think that with FaceID my phone is generally
| unlocked when I pick it up as well.
| swiftcoder wrote:
| Apparently you haven't been wearing facemasks for the
| last year like the rest of us...
| zippergz wrote:
| Because with Face ID the computer would be unlocked
| before your finger even reaches the key.
| ksec wrote:
| They cant fit FaceID within the thickness of the lid on
| MBP.
| dzhiurgis wrote:
| or using hole punch camera
| gregoriol wrote:
| Maybe they are going to remove Face ID from iPhones
| instead, which would be a good decision?
| majjam wrote:
| I would like that but I assumed I was in the minority -
| have you heard thats planned?
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| I've never heard a rumor of anything approaching "Apple
| plans to get rid of Face ID". I don't see how it's
| possible, at least until fingerprint readers under the
| screen are 100% reliable, and even then. The only time
| I've seen people complaining about Face ID is when
| wearing masks (though pairing it with an Apple Watch
| fixes that).
| sumedh wrote:
| > at least until fingerprint readers under the screen are
| 100% reliable
|
| I am using a $200 Oppo with screen fingerprint reader,
| never had any issues.
| dmart wrote:
| I don't see Face ID ever fully going away, even if Touch
| ID returns as an option. The depth-sensing camera is used
| for other purposes, too, like Animojis.
| sekai wrote:
| It's not useless, remember that full-screen is thing?
| Hamuko wrote:
| Now you get the same amount of window space without
| losing the menu bar.
| ninkendo wrote:
| If somebody wrote a plugin that simply moved the menubar
| (and the maximum top of fullscreen apps) $height_of_notch
| pixels lower and drew nothing but black above it, would
| you be happy? Because that would give you parity with
| existing macbooks.
| jwitthuhn wrote:
| I would be incredibly happy with this but I'm not sure it
| is possible. I certainly hope so!
| aqme28 wrote:
| I can almost guarantee there's going to be something like
| this built into the OS.
| manmal wrote:
| I read that hiding the notch with a black bar is actually
| a built-in feature they just briefly brushed on in the
| keynote.
| emoII wrote:
| Didn't they just say that it looked "really good in dark
| mode"?
| manmal wrote:
| I rewatched it and have to confirm what you wrote,
| unfortunately. It was just a rumor, sorry.
| jmull wrote:
| No problem there. "Full" screen can just start below the
| notch. (Don't know if they'll do that, but they should.)
| acdha wrote:
| If you're curious, this just posted: the result full
| screen mode renders below the notch (which is still more
| pixels than the previous models) and developers can
| customize it to render in the rectangles they call
| auxiliary spaces.
|
| https://developer.apple.com/design/human-interface-
| guideline...
| mjparrott wrote:
| Ah, the classic "glass is half full" discussion
| aeharding wrote:
| Not to mention, with the mini led display, letterboxing
| will be indistinguishable from the bezel.
| acdha wrote:
| Looking at the videos, that appears to be exactly what
| they did. That makes total sense for not breaking
| existing apps but now I'm curious whether developers can
| opt-in to use the space around the notch in full screen
| mode.
| dtjb wrote:
| Yes - https://www.apple.com/v/macbook-
| pro/ac/images/overview/hero_...
| ericsoderstrom wrote:
| Think you misunderstood the parent comment. Full screen
| doesn't somehow add pixels into a bezel
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Full screen doesn't extend to the sides of the camera on
| current laptops. All that's there is the bezel.
| mohanmcgeek wrote:
| I'm afraid other manufacturers are going to copy it.
| [deleted]
| bodyfour wrote:
| I guess we'll see. It obviously fits OS/X most cleanly
| since the notch just effectively becomes part of the menu
| bar.
| fomine3 wrote:
| It's hard because of Windows.
| Spivak wrote:
| I mean I have a 2019 MBP and right now the space next to
| the camera module is black bezel. What possible harm could
| be done buy adding pixels to those areas?
| bmitc wrote:
| But of what use are they? It saves you like a dozen or so
| pixels when apps aren't in full screen, and they don't do
| anything in full screen mode. Wouldn't hiding the menu
| bar save the same amount of pixels without the notch?
|
| I personally find notches to be very distracting
| visually, and I just don't like them from a design
| standpoint.
|
| I think Apple recognizes this even. Looking at their
| marketing material. You have to scroll pretty far down to
| ever be shown the notch, as it seems they're
| intentionally hiding it with apps in full screen mode.
| hparadiz wrote:
| The notch issue can probably be fixed though just by
| turning it off and that area will just be black space. I
| hate the notch too so I'll probably just do that.
| ianai wrote:
| The notch is awful. But the prices are worse. I really
| wanted to buy something today but those two factors are
| very off-putting.
| [deleted]
| ashtonkem wrote:
| I think it's really funny how they undid _every_ single
| complaint this crowd had, and rather than focusing on that,
| people are complaining about the notch.
| wayneftw wrote:
| Well, it's kinda like if someone made a really nice meal
| for you but left a booger on the top of the plate.
|
| You'd complain about that booger, right?
| mvid wrote:
| No, it is like if you ordered 15 donuts, got 2 free ones,
| and are mad because 17 donuts don't line up neatly when
| put in 3 lines
| [deleted]
| ashtonkem wrote:
| How unnecessarily dramatic. They fixed so many things, on
| the balance this seems like a good deal for those of us
| that use MBPs. Implying that you'd reject all those
| changes over the notch seems quite silly to me.
|
| Personally I think everyone will forget the notch in a
| few weeks. We got over it for phones, which have much
| less screen real estate to spare. If the extra space
| enables a permanently visible status bar in OSX, even
| when full screen with apps, then I personally will be
| _thrilled_ with this change.
| hparadiz wrote:
| Nah I'm not gonna spend 3500 on this.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Assuming you're willing to buy a MBP personally, skipping
| it over the notch seems inexplicable to me. In every
| other way this seems like the best MBP delivered in a
| literal decade, assuming they didn't mess up the
| keyboard. Much faster processor, faster display, better
| keyboard, better peripherals, and finally removing the
| 16GB memory cap. They even maintained compatibility for
| people like me who prefer single cable docks.
|
| Of course if price is the reason, then that makes more
| sense. Apple seems to be returning to a wider (and more
| reasonable imho) price and performance gap between the
| pro and the air. If I was in the market for a laptop, and
| I'm not because I think laptops are silly in general[0],
| I'd go for an air. The pro is very much in the "work will
| buy one for me" price, and it offers performance I don't
| really need out of a personal machine.
|
| 0 - As I've said before, laptops generally compromise too
| much for my tastes. Like many others I work entirely from
| a desk, so my personal mac is and always will be a mini.
| But since work will inevitably give me one of these, I'm
| thrilled that they've made it so much better, even if I
| wouldn't buy one myself.
| hparadiz wrote:
| I wanted to get one personally cause I'm still on a 2014
| but the design puts me off. It looks like one of those
| old school 2008 models. The notch is just ugly.
|
| I'd get one but I need it to look premium if I'm dropping
| 4k and right now it looks like it's from 2008
| ashtonkem wrote:
| It's your money, but this mode of thinking is utterly
| alien to me.
|
| The point of the MBP is that it's for professionals. It's
| a tool, not a fashion statement. The idea that it's not
| worth the money because it looks outdated is utterly
| baffling to me; it's worth the money because they've
| stuffed it full of the most performant components apple
| has ever put into a laptop ever. I _want_ it to be a
| function over form machine, and worrying about its looks
| as part of the buying decision genuinely never crossed my
| mind.
|
| If you want a fashion statement laptop and don't need the
| performance, then don't get a MBP. Again, your money; I
| don't get it, but you do you. But the issue here isn't
| that the laptop is bad per se, the issue is that that
| laptop wasn't made for your use case.
| wayneftw wrote:
| > It's a tool, not a fashion statement.
|
| Pffft, as if Apple didn't market _every. single. one._ of
| their products as a fashion statement.
|
| Apple clearly has always chosen form over function and
| being different over function. That's the only reason why
| the ridiculously useless Dock exists at all - marketing
| loved it since it embodies both of those traits.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| > Pffft, as if Apple didn't market every. single. one. of
| their products as a fashion statement.
|
| Nonsense. The Mac Pro is clearly marketed as a
| professional took for professional use, always has been.
| Ditto with their high end displays. I don't even think
| they had these objects in the last Apple Store I went
| into, actually.
|
| Furthermore, every single ad I've ever seen for the MBP
| has been about artists, creatives, and programmers using
| it to make things. They have always presented it as the
| professional's tool for creating stuff, even if at times
| that's been a bit of a farce.
|
| Now compare how they presented the MacBook, a laptop that
| they sold in gold color. _That_ is a laptop they
| presented as a fashion choice, and interestingly it's
| also the laptop they abandoned first.
|
| > Apple clearly has always chosen form over function and
| being different over function
|
| It's only "always" been this way if you're relatively
| young. In fact Apple's turn towards form over function
| sometime after Job's death caused quite a bit of angst
| here, both in terms of their hardware and software
| design. I'm old enough to remember when the MBP was
| unquestionably the best laptop a developer could buy, and
| I was very sad to watch it slowly lose ground to other
| laptops as Apple pursued thinness over user experience,
| hardware specs, upgradability, or durability.
|
| If anything else, what I'm seeing today seems like a
| return to Apple from earlier in my career, when they made
| professional grade laptops that lead the pack. There are
| still some changes I'd love to see, such as more upgrade
| ability, but an Apple that's willing to make its devices
| thicker if it improves user experience is very much a
| "function over form" move.
| wayneftw wrote:
| It's a plain analogy, any drama would be created by the
| reader's reaction.
|
| People also stop complaining simply because they've
| complained enough. It's definitely not always the case
| that they "get over it". People that need a Mac will
| certainly rationalize since they have no choice.
|
| But given a choice, people would absolutely not buy a
| laptop with a turd like this notch front and center.
|
| As usual though - Apple gives you no choice.
| rimliu wrote:
| I have a suspicion that most vocal notch haters are not
| even users of Apple products. Notch on iPhone? It is in the
| status bar anyway, so mostly does not matter. Notch on a
| mac? Same. Right now I have just an empty space in the
| center of the menu bar. I could not care less if notch
| takes a bit of that space.
| [deleted]
| incanus77 wrote:
| Don't forget that the older power bricks can be used on
| this thanks to the MagSafe-to-USB-C charging wire.
| prvc wrote:
| Is the cable necessary? Can they no longer charge through
| the USB ports?
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Looks like it'll charge via mag-safe or USB-C, but mag
| safe will go faster on the larger models due to it
| exceeding 100W.
| behnamoh wrote:
| We don't owe Apple anything. Apple is a company. It's
| supposed to satisfy customers, not the other way around.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| Huh? Who said you owe anything to apple? What a weird
| suggestion.
| seumars wrote:
| Switching to fullscreen keeps everything below the notch,
| judging from the screenshots. I'm betting they'll add an
| accessibility option to keep the UI below the notch as well.
| dirkg wrote:
| touchbar was actually nice
| ofou wrote:
| please, ban this guy ahahah
| a-dub wrote:
| it seems the "one last thing" this time, is, well, a notch, at
| the top of the screen, on a proprietary system that makes heavy
| use of the top of the screen as part of the ui.
|
| the whole value proposition of the apple ecosystem is that it
| is all beautifully designed, integrated and pleasing such that
| it inspires you to go forth and design beautiful things.
|
| but now they've gone and stuck a webcam in the middle of the
| menu bar. jobs is probably rolling over in his grave.
| a-dub wrote:
| actually, just watched their video. it doesn't look too
| terrible.
|
| i suppose the only way to know if it's annoying is to try it.
| krono wrote:
| The menubar is 60% taller, that's a lot for something
| that's supposed to be subtle and out of your way.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| > Plus bumped up RAM limit, M1, new displays, 120Hz... Wow.
|
| They couldn't use LPDDR5 RAM with Intel chips. They wanted to
| bump up the RAM years ago, but couldn't do it until now.
| fastball wrote:
| 2019 16" maxed out at 64GB, which is the same as the M1 Max.
| yurishimo wrote:
| They specifically mentioned the speed. DDR4 is used in 99%
| of PCs right now. Apple can use faster memory on the die
| directly.
| fastball wrote:
| Ah true, there might be a bit of crossed wires here. It
| seems like @mizzack was using "bumped up" to mean the
| amount of RAM, while @Alex3917 used the same phrase but
| this time to mean LPDDR5/speed, but obviously I
| interpreted the latter as amount (because that was the
| context).
| Alex3917 wrote:
| I was also talking about the amount of RAM. The reason
| they didn't allow people to increase the RAM at all for a
| couple years as because of the power consumption. After
| people freaked out they eventually added an option, but
| kind of discouraged it. I had forgotten that they even
| added that option though.
| mFixman wrote:
| Damn, I liked the touchbar :-(
|
| I think that Apple's biggest mistake is not making it more
| obvious that the bar is editable in all programs. It becomes
| pretty useful when you can keep only the functions that you use
| the most.
| whydoyoucare wrote:
| It was buggy as hell, good riddance. For me the biggest
| annoyance was when volume buttons would freeze the touchbar,
| and the only way was to reset the audio system! Ugh!!
|
| (Make it inherently safe - physical keys, so less chances of
| programmers ruining it).
| kolinko wrote:
| Yeah, me too - used it only for sound and video controls
| though.
|
| I think they gave way too few APIs to devs for it to be truly
| functional.
|
| The only time I was missing it was some emulators that didn't
| display function keys even though the keys were needed for
| them.
| amelius wrote:
| > Damn, I liked the touchbar :-(
|
| Yep, that's the downside of a quasi-monopolist. Limited
| choice.
| ant6n wrote:
| Function keys should be usable in many programs as well...
| TheJoeMan wrote:
| Since the non-touchbar folks across the internet are more
| vocal, I love the Touch Bar.
|
| What's sad is by killing it on the new MBP, they essentially
| kill it on my laptop as less and less developers will care to
| implement it. I wonder how long Apple software like Xcode
| will support the Touch Bar.
|
| Edit: times it's superior to buttons: scrubbing videos,
| changing Safari tabs
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| I can't imagine having so few Safari tabs open that
| changing tabs with the touchbar would be useful ...
|
| Honestly, I'm on the side of "the touchbar is inoffensive".
| Never bothered me one bit, but I don't use it anyway so I
| don't care that they're removing it*. I'm sympathetic,
| though. I always liked the butterfly keyboard, and the
| general opinion on _that_ has been made patently obvious.
|
| * I wonder if this has to do with the fact that I never
| look at the keyboard, so it just doesn't occur to me to use
| the touchbar, same as I never saw the point of keyboard
| backlighting.
| zarzavat wrote:
| It's not that people are _against_ the Touch Bar. People
| are _for_ physical function keys.
|
| If they had added the Touch Bar in addition to physical
| function keys then there would have been less resistance to
| it.
| Aperocky wrote:
| Less? That's like 1.5 additional browser bars sitting
| there doing nothing. And we all know how much we hated
| additional browser bars (Remember the old times when we
| still had those? lolol).
|
| As of now, it's 0.5 additional bars. The whole row after
| ESC is pretty much useless.
| tomtheelder wrote:
| I also just cannot stop hitting it by accident. It's been
| a year and I'm still doing it constantly. I don't know
| what's wrong with me.
| mithr wrote:
| You and everybody else :) I think its combination of
| placement and behavior/sensitivity contributed to its
| demise.
| djur wrote:
| I am against the Touch Bar and would rather have a
| keyboard without function keys than a keyboard with a
| touch-sensitive area that I can easily brush with my
| hands while typing.
| krrrh wrote:
| I'm against the touchbar, and haven't used it at all for
| 5 years. It seems like it could be useful for casual
| users, but it offers almost nothing to pro users who
| already have keyboard shortcuts memorized.
| elcomet wrote:
| So you never changed volume or luminosity ?
| Closi wrote:
| They could have easily changed volume on their display -
| I had the touchbar but never liked the fact that you had
| to look away from your screen just to change the volume.
|
| Changing volume is definitely one of those use cases
| where the physical function keys were much better IMO -
| It's one physical button press rather than touch the
| button, look down at the slider, and try to drag it into
| the right position.
|
| I also use my laptop in a dock about 50% of the time, so
| end up just using the on-screen volume adjustment and
| keyboard shortcuts anyway... If Apple really believed in
| the concept they would have put the touchbar into their
| keyboards too.
| merrywhether wrote:
| They definitely could've made this more discoverable, but
| you can touch and immediately drag to change any of the
| sliders. No need to lift your finger or have a 2 step
| process
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| It offers a lot to pro users who want to have more
| shortcuts than are practical to memorize.
| JCharante wrote:
| than are practical to memorize? How many could you fit on
| the touchbar? 20?
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| Around 60 I think. About six that were perpetually
| visible, then a dozen that were revealed via a "folder"
| that appeared when one of those was tapped. The remainder
| swapped out per-app (like, one set for Safari, another
| for XCode, etc.).
| djur wrote:
| I would rather have those shortcuts visible on the
| screen, where I am already looking, rather than having to
| peer down at the keyboard to find them. And I'd also
| rather use the methods I already have for issuing
| commands to my computer, the keyboard and pointing
| device, rather than using a third method for some random
| subset of commands.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| At that point I might prefer a touch screen that can be
| disabled. The extra real estate for touchbar with the
| minimal functionality didn't make sense to me
| tinco wrote:
| I also love the touchbar, the only button it's not superior
| to is the escape button. Who touch types the function keys
| anyway? Love it for the volume and screen brightness
| controls.
|
| Not too worried about my laptop being killed though, they
| screwed the keyboard up so hard it's essentially dead
| anyway. Have to take it to the Apple Care center to have it
| revived again sometime soon because I've got 3 sticky keys
| that won't unstick.
| manmal wrote:
| I touch-type volume and brightness keys all the time.
| Back in the olden days I touch-typed function keys for
| debugging (F5 = continue, F6 = step over, etc).
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Volume and brightness are probably the main reason why I
| absolutely hate the touchbar. It's clumsy to adjust, they
| never respond quite as fast, and sometimes take 2 or 3
| touches to actually acutate, despite the button on the
| LCD changing the background - which means physically it
| actually registered my finger but decided to ignore it.
|
| Second gripe is precisely its main selling point - that
| it can change based on context. I don't want my keyboard
| changing. I don't want to have to look down to operate my
| laptop, it breaks the flow and slows me down. I had 2
| laptops with the Touch Bar. I tried every software for
| customising it. BTT, MTBMR (or whatever it's called), and
| at least one other. I always eventually fix them with the
| few buttons I use (no sliders): volume/mute, screen
| brightness, keyboard backlight.
|
| Then, there's also the fact that you can't adjust its
| brightness or turn it off, and it's always emitting the
| full spectrum of light, which I find uncomfortable in the
| dark or late in the day. Granted, this is a smaller thing
| which is why it's at the bottom but it builds up the list
| of annoyances.
|
| Edit: just remembered another one - it can freeze. Most
| of the time it can be fixed by killing a process. Other
| times, you need to reboot the computer.
| TheRealDunkirk wrote:
| As someone who bought a new MBP 2 years ago, and never wanted
| a TB, why do you like it? What's the use case? In my
| situation, I run in clamshell mode, connected to a large 4K
| monitor 90% of the time, so I can't even touch it most of the
| time, but I never found a use for it that wasn't inferior
| than the function keys it replaced.
| mFixman wrote:
| In my particular case:
|
| * Top row of physical buttons wasn't a big deal since I map
| Caps Lock to Esc.
|
| * Changing volume and brightness is better in the touchbar:
| the buttons are large enough to get them by touch, and
| sliding the finger is faster and more granular than
| repeatly pressing buttons.
|
| * Here's a tip: you don't have to move your finger from the
| button to the slider. You can just slide from the volume
| button.
|
| * BetterTouchTool allowed me to have any shortcut in the
| touchbar.
| Eric_WVGG wrote:
| I mapped out loads of complex shortcuts and automations to
| various apps on both a per-app and global basis.
|
| - Instead of cmd-ctrl-opt-D in Safari, I'd hit the touch
| bar button that looked like an iPhone.
|
| - instead of hunting and pecking for XScope screen
| calipers, I would touch the bar button that looked like
| calipers.
|
| Etc. I had several dozen per-app automations and shortcuts
| mapped to easily visible and understandable buttons, now
| I'm back to wondering if it was F3 or F4 that meant "hide
| the sidebar" in XCode.
|
| This is a huge step backward. The Mac community has decided
| that it wants to stay in the past; Apple is saying, "fine,
| you dinosaurs want the ultimate 2015 MacBook Pro? Here it
| is. We will leave our engineers who think about the future
| to the iPad."
| soheil wrote:
| Touchbar was awful. Making it editable in all programs was a
| nice gimmick, but in the end who wants to look down on their
| keyboard to see which key they need to press next? There is
| also no mechanical feedback breaking the symmetry between the
| touchbar keys and any other key.
| IshKebab wrote:
| Ha is this going to be like Google's blob emojis where
| everyone hated them when they were in use and as soon as they
| _finally_ removed them loads of blob-lovers came out of the
| woodwork...
| ubermonkey wrote:
| Because I work at home and never travel anymore, I've been
| using a late 2019 15" for 2 years and I'm not sure I've had
| it in "laptop mode" often enough to have a real opinion about
| the touchbar.
|
| I use an external keyboard and a pair of 4K screens with it,
| so it runs closed at the back of my desk. :)
| suzzer99 wrote:
| So you're the one.
| beezischillin wrote:
| I loved the idea of it but in practice I found that I barely
| if ever used it and the bugs and issues were plain annoying.
| Stuff like it getting stuck in 'volume control' mode after
| engaging the slider and being unable to close it or
| persistent touchbar apps not being so persistent. At one
| point I attempted to use one of those dock to touchbar apps
| which worked great and I assumed would help my productivity
| since I use the dock in a hover to show mode but I found that
| it often just disappeared to be taken over by default
| functionality. Which might've been an app bug, I don't know.
| The promise of it was really cool but it never really ended
| up being all that useful for me so I sort of forget it even
| exists.
| TMWNN wrote:
| >Damn, I liked the touchbar :-(
|
| If Apple had released computers with the touch bar above the
| existing physical function keys, everyone would love it and
| other companies would provide a similar feature, the same way
| that they have all converged on the same industrial design as
| what Apple pioneered 20 years ago.
|
| Instead, Jony Ive insisted on the touch bar replacing the
| function keys, and here we are. At least the butterfly
| switches are finally dead. (It only took years of worldwide
| embarrassment and Ive's departure to make it happen!)
| soheil wrote:
| Headphone jack never went away. Increase key travel was also
| fixed a few years ago. What do you mean by power jack? USB-C
| ports function as power jacks. Magsafe is incredible and I'm so
| glad it's back.
| shortstuffsushi wrote:
| As someone who bought a mid-2018 with the escape key on the
| touchbar, then watched the next model have it's own key, then
| watched all these ports get added back... I'm extremely
| frustrated to say the least. Trade in is valued at $840. If I
| had known either of these two updates would have gone "
| _backwards_ " like this, I would have waited to purchase
| dmt0 wrote:
| Back in 2018 I chose to buy a refurbished mid-2015
| specifically to avoid dealing with those issues. And feeling
| no frustration whatsoever :)
|
| I guess when you take a stand and refuse to hand over your
| money for anti-features, you do get rewarded sometimes.
| jjri wrote:
| The early-2015 model has been working wonders for me over
| these past years. Now the hard part is between the new MBP
| or Framework, hard choices.
| sangnoir wrote:
| Having had to send in my early-2015 for repairs after
| accidental liquid damage, my next purchase will be a
| Framework. Mac repair costs are _insane,_ I would have
| tried the repairs myself (thank $DIETY for YouTube repair
| videos), but it was going to be a multi-hour-process
| fraught with risk, so I sort-of get why Mac repairs are
| costly.
|
| Since I had no AppleCare as I chose to "self-insure"
| (it's a 6-year old laptop), and the Apple Genius
| helpfully informed me the repair costs were the same as
| the price of a brand new Apple laptop (what a
| coincidence!), a 3rd party handled my repairs, and it was
| still pricey. I'm comfortable with DIY repairs, so I see
| Framework laptop when I decide my Mac bites the dust, or
| needs more costly repairs.
| mshroyer wrote:
| The Framework laptop is a good choice--I'm typing this
| reply from one.
|
| My least-favorite thing about the older MacBook Pro I
| migrated from was that (even when it was covered by
| AppleCare+) both times its battery failed I needed to
| wipe its SSD, hand it over to Apple for a week, and then
| restore it from a backup when it was returned.
|
| If my Framework's battery ever fails I can order a
| replacement for $59 and replace it myself in minutes.
|
| I see a lot to salivate over in the new MBP. But as long
| as I can avoid it, or until batteries become radically
| more reliable, I'll never again rely on a main laptop
| without a user-replaceable battery.
| walteweiss wrote:
| Why couldn't you change the battery of MacBook yourself?
| mshroyer wrote:
| Both times that the battery swelled up previously, the
| laptop was still under warranty. Apple wasn't going to
| hand me a new battery to install myself; I had no choice
| but to let them install it if I were to have it covered.
|
| Now the laptop is out of warranty. If it were to fail
| now, I could in theory buy a battery replacement kit from
| iFixit, and muck around with adhesive removers and many
| delicate parts and hope I don't break anything else in
| the hours-long process: https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/MacB
| ook+Pro+13-Inch+Function+Ke...
|
| That's a fairly user-hostile situation, though. There's a
| reason Apple doesn't advertise the battery as user-
| serviceable, in contrast to some other manufacturers.
| csomar wrote:
| Same here. I bought the mid-2018 for $3.5k (full spec). It
| had battery issues and now I think it's mostly just junk
| especially that it's quite slow with the new macOS.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| Use the keyboard service program[1]. A full keyboard
| replacement includes a new battery as well.
|
| https://support.apple.com/keyboard-service-program-for-
| mac-n...
| behnamoh wrote:
| You should never upgrade to the latest macOS due to
| performance loss issues.
| aiisjustanif wrote:
| You definitely should because of so many of the hacks
| that have come out.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| It depends. Sometimes macOS upgrades are worth it for new
| features.
|
| For me personally, I installed Big Sur for the ability to
| use Stereo HomePods as an AirPlay output (previously you
| could only choose one, but not both in stereo).
|
| It made my movie/tv/video watching experience so much
| better that it's worth the downside of slightly lowered
| performance.
|
| That said, because macOS is not a fully sandboxed system
| like iOS, it's probably worth doing an erase install
| every 3-4 years, especially if performance has dropped
| noticeably. I did this with the 11.4 mid-cycle update
| earlier this year and it was helpful on my 2014 machine.
| WhompingWindows wrote:
| Seems Apple loves to Think Different every couple of years.
| They make these paradigm shifts so quickly, it's a blessing
| and a curse.
| 1-more wrote:
| Funny you say backwards: this 2016 review predicted this (in
| its way) https://blog.pinboard.in/2016/10/benjamin_button_rev
| iews_the...
| rrreese wrote:
| This is amazing as having only vaguely followed the
| announcements I thought it's was published today until the
| very end.
| evolve2k wrote:
| I've been sitting on my 2015 MCP considering it good
| enough for my needs until now. I'm sure I'm not the only
| one.
| iscrewyou wrote:
| Team 2015 MacBook Pro here. This thing still works so
| very well and only turns into a pavement grinder when it
| comes to the fan sound when I play Civ6.
| rukuu001 wrote:
| After the 2016 models came out I felt like I'd won the
| lottery when I found a 2015 model going cheap-ish.
|
| It's been a long wait to upgrade
| numbsafari wrote:
| You aren't. Very ready for this upgrade.
|
| ps... 6 years for a laptop that... works very well to
| this day is why I have no qualms about the price of this
| thing.
| chrisweekly wrote:
| Yeah, my (maxed out at the time) 2012 mbp15r is amazingly
| still usable -- and there's finally a suitable
| replacement.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Same! Still have the 2015.
|
| Really the only thing that doesn't work well on it to
| this day is the dreaded Microsoft Teams, which brings the
| thing to a screeching halt.
|
| Well, plus trying to do more than minimal VM/container
| use, to be honest.
| sgt wrote:
| We have a lot of people at work with 2015 models - and
| they are SUPER happy. I have the 2018 model with i7 and I
| can't really see any difference in performance. I love
| the display, but mostly I use a 27 inch high DPI external
| screen along with an Apple magic keyboard.
|
| One thing I strongly dislike about the i7 is how hot it
| can get with long compiles and such. So I think it's time
| to upgrade to the M1 Pro or Max.
| FridgeSeal wrote:
| I'm fairly sure that is a ms teams issue, it runs like
| trash despite how much hardware you throw at it.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Of course it's an MS Teams issue, but I am required to
| use MS Teams for work, so it's problematic to be using a
| machine that has trouble running it!
|
| Unless you're saying even a new M1 mac has just as much
| trouble running it!
| JohnBooty wrote:
| Got the same life out of mine, although the battery
| swelled up this year. :-/
|
| Didn't bother to look into the cost of replacement as my
| initial research indicated that they'd want/need to
| replace the keyboard and upper chassis as well, so
| probably a $600+ repair. So I opted for a company laptop
| instead.
| foobar1962 wrote:
| Yep. I have a Mac mini, a 13 inch MBPR an 11 inch Air all
| from around 2013 and they just dropped off the MacOS
| update path in the last few months. All are more than
| adequate for general office work including software dev.
| [deleted]
| Bud wrote:
| Ignore the "trade-in" value. Your machine has excellent
| resale value, because it's a Mac. Take advantage of it.
| throwdecro wrote:
| > Your machine has excellent resale value, because it's a
| Mac.
|
| If the laptop is from Apple's garbage era of 2016-2019 who
| would pay good money for it? Macs don't unconditionally
| have excellent resale value, the resale value depends on
| the quality of the item.
| foobar1962 wrote:
| Put it on eBay with an auction starting at 99c and see
| where it ends up, you'll be surprised.
| wetpaws wrote:
| This is a price you have to pay for being an apple customer.
| Bud wrote:
| Some of this had been previously fixed but not noticed by some:
| keyboard was fixed on the last Intel MBP models. Headphone jack
| was never gone to begin with. RAM had already been boosted.
| black3r wrote:
| bumped up RAM limit but the RAM price is now more than triple
| the consumer price Top-Tier 32GB RAM costs 150EUR and the Apple
| 32GB RAM costs 460EUR.
| andai wrote:
| 3X is standard Apple tax for many years (also for storage).
| TMWNN wrote:
| >Wow looks like Apple has abandoned every bad decision on the
| MBP for the past 5 years in one swoop. No touchbar, increased
| key travel, added back hdmi/sd/headphone/power jacks.
|
| It's taken two years to fully undo Jonathan Ive's obsessions.
| whydoyoucare wrote:
| This ^^^^. Absolutely!
| 1-more wrote:
| In terms of the outsides, this matches up almost exactly with
| Benjamin Button reviews the late 2016 MacBook Pro
| https://blog.pinboard.in/2016/10/benjamin_button_reviews_the...
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| The only thing I'm disappointed on is that I was really hoping
| for Ethernet-over-MagSafe like the iMac power adapter.
| smoovb wrote:
| Kills the touch bar, the light touch keyboard, adds back weight,
| card reader, ports and the mag safe.
|
| Feels like an apology for prior design decisions. My 2011 MBP is
| new again!
| [deleted]
| pivo wrote:
| I know I'm in the minority regarding the keyboard, but on my
| 2019 model it's been flawless and I really have come to like it
| quite a bit, more than the one on my 2014 even (except for the
| vertical arrow keys that is. Seems like nobody at Apple
| actually tested their usability)
| hbn wrote:
| Is it the late-2019 16" MBP?
|
| If so, that's not the keyboard everyone hates. They were
| already backtracking the butterfly switches by that point
| pivo wrote:
| No, it's the 13" with butterfly switches. The only thing I
| worried about was dependability but they added the extra
| rubber membranes that year (I think) and anyway, the
| keyboard has caused me zero issues, and made every other
| keyboard feel clunky to me, including my previous favorite
| keyboard on my 2013 15" MBP.
| soheil wrote:
| Not really, the performance will make your 2011 mbp feel an
| extra 10x older now.
| paxys wrote:
| I was laughing when every single one of these changes was
| presented as "revolutionary" in the keynote. No, you just had
| to revert everything because your previous revolution was
| universally hated by users.
| defaultname wrote:
| Ignoring that none of the changes was presented as
| "revolutionary" (the touchbar wasn't mentioned, magsafe was
| referred to as "Brought back", and the ports were simply
| noted for convenience), for some small but very loud subset
| of HN users, an Apple event is all a giant lie if it
| apparently isn't hosted by some sneering Apple detractor.
|
| It's an Apple product launch. Like _every_ product launch
| ever in the history of ever, they point out the features of
| the thing they launch.
| ben-schaaf wrote:
| They've certainly called the touchbar revolutionary:
|
| https://twitter.com/apple/status/791704819811573760
| neogodless wrote:
| They said "function keys, replacing the touchbar." So they
| did _mention_ it.
|
| But yes, I don't care how they market it. They'd be dumb to
| pause and say "oh yeah we were stupid, here's your old toys
| back."
| mywittyname wrote:
| > "oh yeah we were stupid, here's your old toys back."
|
| "We heard your feedback and we listened."
| kelnos wrote:
| > _They 'd be dumb to pause and say "oh yeah we were
| stupid, here's your old toys back."_
|
| Maybe I'm weird, but my respect for a company that did
| that would go way up, not down.
|
| Obviously they wouldn't say "we were stupid", but I'd
| absolutely appreciate an admission along the lines of,
| "during our design journey over the past X years, we've
| realized our customers prefer having a full function key
| row on their keyboard / more ports / MagSafe / etc., so
| we've listened and are bringing them back!" To me, that
| signals a group of folks who know they are fallible,
| listen to customers, and do their best to meet customer
| needs.
|
| But of course admitting those sorts of things wouldn't be
| consistent with Apple's brand. Apple is all about "we
| know better than you know what you want and can do no
| wrong". Which is fine, and seems to have created a lot of
| success for them, but it's always turned me off.
| jackson1442 wrote:
| > Maybe I'm weird, but my respect for a company that did
| that would go way up, not down.
|
| I think technically-minded people would take that well,
| but the business/management types don't like doing stuff
| like this, likely because it has a chance of making the
| stock fall (or even just not rise as much as they wanted
| it to).
| [deleted]
| stonecharioteer wrote:
| I wonder how much of the mechanical keyboard community
| increased sheerly because of the fact that many MacBook
| owners hated their laptop keeps.
| kayoone wrote:
| they listened to customers and reverted a lot of bad
| decisions from the past. What else do you want? That they
| admit they made bad decisions in what is essentially a sales
| event/pitch? This is more than anyone could have hoped for
| imo.
| tpush wrote:
| > I was laughing when every single one of these changes was
| presented as "revolutionary" in the keynote.
|
| Exactly none of these changes were presented as
| "revolutionary", that's just in your head.
| thevardanian wrote:
| The more hilarious thing was the hate for it.
|
| I would much rather have more usb-c ports that can do
| anything and add dongles, than have ports that are
| functionally limited.
| [deleted]
| enraged_camel wrote:
| >> because your previous revolution was universally hated by
| users.
|
| Nah. It was hated by a small but vocal minority of users, of
| which HN has a lot of.
| GeekyBear wrote:
| Power users forget that function keys and even command
| shortcuts are pretty much useless for normal users.
|
| >About 90 per cent of computer users don't use CTRL-F to
| search for a word - as they don't know such a keyboard
| shortcut exists, a Google survey found.
|
| The results stunned Google's Uber Tech Lead for Search
| Quality and User Happiness, Dan Russell.
|
| I think we just all assume that we all know it, but no one
| actually does."
|
| https://www.smh.com.au/technology/only-one-in-10-know-
| what-c...
| nicoburns wrote:
| To be fair, the Macbook Pro is aimed squarely at power
| users. The majority of normal users are better off with
| the Air.
| nolok wrote:
| You're provably wrong : if it was a minority, they wouldn't
| have reversed. See headphone jack on iPhone.
| enraged_camel wrote:
| "Provably wrong"? On the contrary, if it _wasn 't_ a
| small minority, Apple wouldn't have continued to break
| sales records with each iteration they release.
|
| I posit that "hate" is too strong a word. I would
| describe the changes as merely unpopular.
| kristiandupont wrote:
| >small
|
| Do you have a source for that? Because if that was the
| case, it would seem silly for them to undo.
| audunw wrote:
| I think he meant "hate" is too strong of a word. My
| impression is it just didn't serve much of a purpose for
| most people. I almost never use the function keys for
| anything but volume control anyway, and probably wouldn't
| have used the touch bar for anything but that either. It
| was just a waste. I probably wouldn't have hated it if I
| got one, maybe even found some nice uses for it, but I
| still think it was the right choice to get rid of it.
| moonchrome wrote:
| >Nah. It was hated by a small but vocal minority of users,
| of which HN has a lot of.
|
| I have not met a pro user that wasn't annoyed by not being
| able to plug in HDMI at some point without a dongle...
| rimliu wrote:
| Nice to meet you. I could not care less. If I need to
| plug something with a cable, it may have a dongle as
| well.
| Joeri wrote:
| It was even worse. Those macbook owners would cause the
| others in the meeting to be annoyed when they couldn't
| plug in and had to send their slides to someone else with
| a hdmi port and keep repeating the words "next slide". It
| was viral annoyance.
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| My employer issues a dongle with a type A, type C, and
| HDMI port on it with every MacBook. That only helps if
| you actually have the dongle with you. One popular option
| was to just keep the dongle attached at all times.
| Personally, I found an adhesive pouch and attached that
| to the back of the monitor, and carried the dongle around
| that way.
|
| I wonder when I'll be able to get one of these new Macs
| at work ...
| Joeri wrote:
| At my office they just gave up and replaced the HDMI
| connectors with USB-C connectors in every meeting room.
| Now it's the people with the older windows laptops who
| need a dongle.
| TheGRS wrote:
| I personally think if it was just a vocal minority, Apple
| would not have relented. They play the long game, so they
| probably saw a decrease in their user base somewhere, or at
| least a trend there.
| 1ibsq wrote:
| I had the feeling they owned it. Like, the woman said
| something about "no need for adapters" and you could have
| maybe seen a little smirk on her face while saying that - but
| I don't know...
| dcdc123 wrote:
| And then they added a notch hahaha
| Onewildgamer wrote:
| I have owned macbooks only since 2017 and found the older (2011
| era) aesthetic design to be bulky and not too appealing. I own
| a 2020 model, which looks sharp and professional. I don't like
| them going back to this rounded edges on the bottom. I love
| everything else, except this simple gripe over aesthetics.
| laumars wrote:
| > _I have owned macbooks only since 2017 and found the older
| (2011 era) aesthetic design to be bulky and not too
| appealing. I own a 2020 model, which looks sharp and
| professional._
|
| There used to be a time when what people considered
| "professional hardware" was versatility and durability over
| pure aesthetics. I'm not saying we can't have both form and
| function with professional grade hardware but with the later
| iterations of the MBP Apple have put form _ahead_ of function
| and then trained an entire generation of developers to look
| at hardware superficially. I honestly weep for the industry
| if this is the path we are destined to continue down.
| Onewildgamer wrote:
| I see this is the time any company can do both ground
| breaking performance and a solid design let alone Apple. I
| don't want them to go back to the intel with discrete gpus
| and remove extra ports. I want a sharper design is all.
| It's not much to ask both, Apple after all cares a lot
| about design, I don't know how they came up with such a
| design while their all their iPads lineup (bar basic iPad)
| and iPhone lineup has a boxy design but this MBP is
| rounded.
| laumars wrote:
| "Rounded" is a common design element throughout the
| history of Apple -- including iPhones and iPads. It also
| has zero baring on the function of the device so who
| cares if it's a little more boxy or rounded? It's
| supposed to be a "Pro" device not some piece of art.
| Onewildgamer wrote:
| I suppose I'm the only one who cares and at the same time
| I never claimed it affects the functioning of the device.
| Like I mentioned it in another comment, it is a very
| minor and a picky thing, but Apple takes such a great
| pride in the uniformity and design. With all of their
| current generation iPhones and iPads having a boxy
| design, it is strange they resorted to such a design
| choice that too in their top of the line macbook pros
| urthor wrote:
| I think there's a lot I agree with there.
|
| But I will say, the aluminium body is genius in terms of
| form and function. That's not an aesthetic compromise, it's
| the right thing.
| newsclues wrote:
| I think many owners of the old machines like them for how
| they worked.
|
| Function over form.
| moralestapia wrote:
| >Function over form.
|
| All the time. The Macbook pro is meant to be for pros, pros
| care about other things like having physical function keys
| over it having a "light blue color that matches my shirt
| :)".
|
| I haven't bought a Macbook since 2016 bc of all the trash
| they've been doing. A laptop without magsafe would last ~2
| weeks in my household, so just that thing makes it for me.
|
| Also, best battery, best screen, best trackpad, ports.
| Assuming nothing weird comes out later (screen or thermal
| issues) this will be the best laptop on the market for the
| next 10 years.
|
| Great decision to have fired Jony Ive back then.
| jillesvangurp wrote:
| I miss the 2012 model every time I use the 2018 model I own
| now. One was peak Apple design everything worked, was
| robust, and just genuinely pleasant to use. The other rock
| bottom form over function with a disastrous keyboard that I
| never got used to with it's crap layout, lack of essential
| keys, shitty cheap feel, etc. And that was before it
| started having the well publicized issues.
|
| I like that they are going back to basics with the new
| models. Not crazy about the notch but otherwise it is all
| good. Decent screen, memory and ssd are super expensive but
| at least there's plenty of it now.
|
| I'll wait a few months to see if their quality levels are
| back where they should be. Because I'm beyond taking their
| word for it after my last experience. I'm particularly
| curious to see if it delivers on the performance hype and
| thermal behavior when actually using it for doing work. If
| that's even close to what they are promising, it's going to
| be a bad year for Intel.
|
| Does anyone know if those neural processors do anything
| useful or is that only for people that use specialist stuff
| like video editing tools? I run docker, intellij, vs code,
| etc.
| Onewildgamer wrote:
| Oh I totally get that, I like functionality and the
| 2017-2020 MBP barely qualified as Pro laptops. I have a
| huge windows desktop for my actual pro work, MBP was just a
| mobile device and for some freelance work. A sharp design
| would be nicer is all I'm saying
| hbOY5ENiZloUfnZ wrote:
| The 2015 15" Macbook Pro was 1.8 cm thick. The 2019 16"
| Macbook Pro was 1.6 cm thick. The mew 2021 16" Macbook Pro is
| 1.68 cm thick. So the 16" got slightly thicker than the old
| one but not as thick as the old 15".
|
| The 2020 13" Macbook Pro was 1.5 cm thick. The new 2021 14"
| Macbook pro is 1.55 cm thick. So that is only 0.5 mm
| difference.
| csomar wrote:
| Yeah, the design suck. But these are machine that are going
| to be used 8-10 hours a day. Better be functional than
| trendy.
| titzer wrote:
| I've owned Macbooks since 2003. Typing this on a 2020 Macbook
| Pro 13". It's just been a long evolution of getting thinner.
| IMO, and as others have stated, going all-in on thinness
| drove a series of design mistakes that seem to be reversed
| here. Rounding out the thinner leading edge gives a bit more
| space, and would guess makes it feel more solid. I don't like
| the thinner front end being a little suspended above the
| surface of the table, it makes me worry about it bending.
|
| The 2003 12-inch Macbook with the aluminum keys was like a
| textbook made out of solid metal. That keyboard felt great.
|
| This looks like a great machine to me and I am a little sad I
| bought in Feb!
| jonnycomputer wrote:
| Well, perceptions change. In 2012, the aesthetic and design
| was state of the art. Felt I looked good every time I pull it
| out.
|
| But I still use a 2012 MBP. Doesn't look sharp anymore, and
| its always been pretty heavy, but they keys work sooooo well,
| the touchpad is a miracle of engineering, 9 years of daily
| use and everything still works beautifully. And frankly, I
| mostly don't notice any lag still (though I might if I was
| doing video editing). And the port selection meant that I
| could hook up to just about anything with no hassle ...
| including ethernet. Wifi is still inferior to an ethernet
| port.
| Onewildgamer wrote:
| I understand the perceptions in fashion and design will
| keep changing. But it is only recently Apple adopted boxy
| design in all their iPads and iPhones except the basic iPad
| and iPhone SE II. Why not follow that, the trend is set
| across the board. This top of the line macbooks have a
| design similar to the basic $329 iPad, I can't wrap my head
| around such a decision.
|
| I know it's a very minor and a picky thing, but Apple takes
| such a great pride in the uniformity and design, it's
| strange they resort to this.
| interestica wrote:
| I recently got a new M1/MBP and really love the utility of a
| customized TouchBar (using BetterTouchTool). I'm sad it'll be
| gone! It's actually great - but certain functions are missed
| (like a dedicated volume buttons).
| simonebrunozzi wrote:
| Wondering how videogames will play on a specced-out MB pro, and
| whether this insane amount of GPU power will drive some
| developers who also are gamers to this machine.
| astlouis44 wrote:
| Apple has done it again.
| resters wrote:
| The pricing suggests that the M1 mini was priced aggressively as
| a marketing strategy, and that now that the dust is settling the
| cost of the M1 powered macs is going to be less of a value win
| than I'd initially hoped.
|
| Looking forward to actual use benchmarks for the things I'd use
| it for.
| zlsa wrote:
| On paper, the M1 Pro 10-core CPUs are faster multicore than any
| Mac ever except for the Mac Pro and iMac Pro. They're faster
| than the i9-11900k.
|
| It remains to be seen if they are as fast in practice as they
| are in theory, but if they are, I don't think they're
| overpriced.
| techpression wrote:
| I'm curios as to why these much more energy efficient chips
| require a significant upgrade of the power brick, now at 140W
| that's more than 40W higher than the Intel chips (and only for
| the 16" model).
|
| Not a big deal, but can't see what would require the massive
| upgrade (and I'm a bit frustrated that all my cables are only
| rated for 100W)
| rubyist5eva wrote:
| When are the 27" iMacs coming?
| ssijak wrote:
| This is literally a dream laptop. Improved in every area and
| lacking in none I can think of right now. And the price is crazy
| cheap for this performance if you ask me.
| sdan wrote:
| Yeah I ordered two maxxed out macs for my dad and I. Price not
| an issue when you factor in opportunity cost.
|
| Everything and more I need. Otherwise would need to fork up
| $20k for a mac pro
| moron4hire wrote:
| I can think of a huge area in which it's lacking: GPU
| performance.
| strangecyan wrote:
| Apple were making direct comparisons to the GE76 Raider
| 11UH-053 which has a RTX 3080 in it, indicating that it had
| the same performance for 100W less power consumption. That
| seems pretty competitive to me!
| moron4hire wrote:
| Where are you seeing that? The only comparisons I've seen
| were labeled as being against Intel and AMD integrated
| graphics.
| rnjesus wrote:
| https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=22m04s&v=exM1uajp--
| A&feature=y...
|
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/10/introducing-m1-pro
| -an...
| ubercow13 wrote:
| It's in the presentation.
| moron4hire wrote:
| Everything in the OP page that talks about GPU perf has a
| footnote on it that is comparing speeds to Intel Irix or
| Radeon Pro 5600 (which is about the same).
| ubercow13 wrote:
| Yes it's in the presentation. The video. Skip to the
| graphs. They have tiny footnotes giving the models
| they're comparing to, the highest one is a mobile 3080.
| [deleted]
| mywittyname wrote:
| In what way is it competitive? Like, are there any big
| titles that I can fire up and have it perform like a
| desktop gaming PC?
|
| Or is it merely competitive in specs or in applications
| like Illustrator?
| Gigachad wrote:
| They do not market these as gaming devices. The GPU is
| intended for rendering content for pro use cases. It is
| competitive if this is your use case.
| hraedon wrote:
| Really? The M1 is a bit slower than a 1650, so 4x that
| performance gets you solidly into 3000 series range. There
| might be a handful of PC laptops that can outpace the M1 Max,
| but none in remotely comparable a package.
| moron4hire wrote:
| There is no way a SoC is running in the same range as an
| NVideo 3000 series GPU.
|
| The GPU performance of my M1 Mac Mini is roughly comparable
| to that of my Pixel 5 and Quest 2--both of which are
| running the Qualcomm Adreno 650 GPU.
| Tsiklon wrote:
| If (Big if) the provided graphs on apple's M1 Pro & M1
| Max article are to be believed you're getting 90% the
| performance of a RTX 3080 Mobile (A 3070 with a
| clockspeed cut) but at a quarter of the power draw. This
| seems to be quite a development.
| moron4hire wrote:
| For all the other claims on GPU performance, they call
| out that they are comparing to the integrated graphics,
| and they name the GPU specifically. With this one claim,
| they name a computer, but not the GPU. "Compared to a
| computer that has a laptop 3080 in it" is not the same
| thing as "compared to a 3080."
|
| And they don't define "performance". Is it fill rate? Is
| it TFLOPs? Is it memory bandwidth? The M1 Max has 64 GPU
| cores. That sounds like a lot! It's not! The NVidia
| Laptop 3080 has 6,144 cores. That's NINETY SIX TIMES as
| many cores. I'm sorry, but supposedly achieving 90% of
| the "performance" of a GPU that has 2 orders of magnitude
| more cores is just not in the realm of believable. They
| are being intentionally evasive here.
| ArgyleSound wrote:
| They very much put some numbers on performance in the
| keynote, you can go back and watch it.
|
| The Max:
|
| 10.4 tflops
|
| 327 gtexels/sec
|
| 164 gpixels/sec
| tcskeptic wrote:
| What I see on _desktop_ 3080 is:
|
| 465 Gtexels/s
|
| 164.2 Gpixels/s
|
| if those numbers from Apple are real -- that's bonkers
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| Wouldn't the 3080's core count you mentioned be more
| comparable to the 'Execution Unit' quoted on Apple's
| slides: 4096 EUs on the 32-core variant?
|
| https://images.anandtech.com/doci/17016/2021-10-18%2019_2
| 1_1...
| Toutouxc wrote:
| > performance of my M1 Mac Mini is roughly comparable to
| ... the Qualcomm Adreno 650 GPU
|
| I find it hard to believe and benchmarks [0][1] don't
| seem to support that.
|
| [0] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Qualcomm-
| Adreno-650-GPU-Benchm...
|
| [1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Apple-M1-GPU-GPU-
| Benchmarks-an...
| jurmous wrote:
| Did you check what they were saying about the M1 Max? It is
| comparable to the fastest GPU in a notebook they could find
| while using 100w less energy. We have to wait for the reviews
| next week what it actually means though.
| masklinn wrote:
| You can't really trust Apple's claims on GPU performances
| though, we'll have to see how that really pans out on
| actual benches.
| [deleted]
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| Also you can't compare GPUs _exactly_ since apple ignoring
| everything except their own Metal thing
| moron4hire wrote:
| If you care about GPU performance, you don't care about
| 100W of power.
| Nevermark wrote:
| If someone is buying a laptop they are typically going to
| care about what 100W savings means in a laptop: less heat
| and noise, longer battery life or less weight, longer
| component life, ...
|
| Regardless of whether GPU speed is a top priority or not.
| tmp_anon_22 wrote:
| Its not crazy cheap, a lot of people overvalue mobility when
| 90% of white collar work is done at home or in an office.
| binkHN wrote:
| Cheap compared to what you get in similarly spec-ed non-Apple
| hardware. This will blow the pants off a similarly priced
| ThinkPad.
| csomar wrote:
| If they can (really) deliver Desktop performance, then they
| are (really) cheap. There is nothing on the market that can
| deliver such performance that isn't desktop. But the jury is
| still early on that one, I'd wait for the reviews.
| kube-system wrote:
| I work 90% at home... but my job requires a computer 100% of
| the time.
|
| If you make 120k, travel once per month, and you waste ~3
| hours of productivity each time you can't take your desktop
| with you... you would have made up for the difference between
| a $2k desktop and $4k laptop just in wasted labor.
| jackson1442 wrote:
| Especially now, I'd assume more people are doing work at home
| _and_ at the office. Sure, you could get two desktops and
| probably for cheaper, but then you have the cost of time
| wasted switching contexts and messing up file sync, etc.
|
| I personally work from home but go to a coffee shop as my
| "office" for a bit every day. Mobility is crucial to my, and
| many others', workflows.
| golergka wrote:
| Or on the bench in the park, at the beach, on a boat,
| camping out of an RV. Remote work opened so many
| opportunities to work in awesome places all over the world,
| why wouldn't you take advantage of it?
| sgspace wrote:
| when you work on computers your whole life its nice to be
| able to get outside every once in a while
| defaultname wrote:
| Even when mobility just means from the office to the kitchen
| to the couch, that's a pretty big benefit.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Even when mobility just means flying to another state for a
| week, a laptop is still worth it. I would never switch to
| developing from a desktop now that laptops are so capable.
| vmception wrote:
| Yeah I just scooped one up, already just a few hours after this
| announcement and shipping is no longer oct 26 but instead dec
| 10
|
| From what I can tell this is very high demand. Obviously we
| didnt know enough about Apple's launch planning and inventory
| but it _seems_ like this only happens when there is very high
| demand.
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| It was at December 10th within 30 minutes of the keynote.
| vmception wrote:
| Maybe its certain customizations that needed that much lead
| time, whereas a base model did not
| fotta wrote:
| they brought back the t-shaped arrows too!
| geerlingguy wrote:
| That's been a thing for a couple Intel generations now. I
| think only the 2016-2017 laptops had those horrible
| hodgepodge of arrow keys.
| [deleted]
| onion2k wrote:
| There is one area where the M1 is lacking - software support.
| There are still areas (eg Docker) that don't work well. It's
| definitely coming but it isn't here yet.
|
| If you work outside of those areas though, an Apple Arm CPU is
| amazing.
| thirdlamp wrote:
| What issues with Docker do you have? I use it every day and
| have no issues
| baq wrote:
| It's a vm
| Joeri wrote:
| It was also a vm on intel. It has always been a vm on any
| OS that's not linux.
| [deleted]
| ArchOversight wrote:
| This is always going to be the case though. Linux is not
| macOS and there is no way to do containers on macOS like
| Linux does.
| Gigachad wrote:
| You also wouldn't want native mac containers. The idea is
| to run everywhere. Bundling linux in is an improvement
| for portability when the production for these containers
| will be linux.
| acchow wrote:
| I fully expect Docker M1 support will match Intel shortly
| after this new macbook starts shipping
| dirkg wrote:
| why? its the exact same cpu arch they've had since M1 was
| announced. Things are better but not 100% and there's no
| reason to assume they will magically get fixed
| Gigachad wrote:
| Docker has worked almost flawlessly for me. I had a single
| container which did not run properly but I just rebuilt the
| image on my M1 mac and it worked fine.
| asdff wrote:
| The lack of bootcamp imo is a mistake too given the nature of
| enterprise software. I know people that are beholden to
| Autodesk software that doesn't even have a mac version and
| recommends mac users install via bootcamp, which you can't
| even do anymore despite there being arm builds of windows.
| hiram112 wrote:
| This is what I'm afraid of, too. Maybe things are working
| well and seamless, but the last thing I want to do is have to
| worry about being the first dev on my team using non-X86, and
| pushing Arm versions of Docker images all over the place or
| having to modify my Dockerfiles to use Arm versions instead
| of X86.
|
| One of the reasons Mac was so nice was that everything worked
| the same locally as it did on Linux prod machines, whereas
| even today there are subtle bugs with naive Java or Python
| code that doesn't deal with paths or line endings correctly.
| On big multi-team projects, there are always some junior devs
| on Windows that just don't get it right.
|
| This seems like another problem waiting to happen as more
| devs start using Arm, while the majority of developers and
| environments still use X86.
| tetious wrote:
| It isn't too bad in my experience, having been using an m1
| Air since release.
|
| For images with an Arm version available, and that's
| seemingly quite a lot, it mostly just works(TM). No
| Dockerfile changes needed.
|
| If you have no other options, you can even run x64 stuff
| with a bit of low impact futzing. Docker Desktop will use
| QEMU to do this for you, nearly seamlessly. (though rather
| slowly)
|
| The biggest gripe I have is the local volume perf, which is
| "tolerable." This is a problem for Intel Macs too, although
| to a lesser extent.
|
| (edit for typo)
| ArchOversight wrote:
| I've been using x86_64 docker containers with the QEMU
| emulation just fine, and most open source available docker
| containers are ARM compatible these days.
|
| I don't push containers from my laptop to anywhere, instead
| those are built on CI/CD... and we are building both x86_64
| and ARM containers these days as we are launching new
| workloads on Amazon's Graviton because it is cheaper and
| more cost effective.
|
| The eco-system is not just x86 anymore.
| Joeri wrote:
| I have an m1 air and I've used it for angular and node web
| dev including docker. Docker support for me was rough back in
| march, but it is flawless now. There is no difference to
| using docker on my intel imac and my m1 air. The rest of the
| ecosytem has also caught up. Nvm and older node versions were
| a challenge for a while, but now it works well and I can
| install old intel builds of node without a problem and use
| nvm to switch to them.
|
| I was worried about software compatibility on m1 and was glad
| to have my intel imac for those things it couldn't do, but in
| practice it now does everything. Some things require a bit of
| googling, but that's par for the course for developer tools.
| And on the upside, the m1 runs rings around the 9600K in my
| iMac and it does this without a fan.
| caleb-allen wrote:
| I was surprised at the price point as well
| gunshai wrote:
| Maybe, I am missing something but the price seems high.
|
| Possibly this is reflected in my general consumer use case,
| but all of my high computation oriented use cases are
| offloaded to a desktop.
|
| Where are you deriving the majority of the value for this
| offering?
| fastball wrote:
| I don't have a desktop.
|
| I think a lot of pros these days don't.
| hbOY5ENiZloUfnZ wrote:
| The previous "high end" 13" Macbook Pro started at $1800 so
| this is a $200 increase for larger higher resolution 120Hz
| screen, much faster performance, and all the ports they
| took out years ago.
| ghaff wrote:
| >my high computation oriented use cases are offloaded to a
| desktop
|
| That used to be pretty common. But I'll almost certainly
| use one of these to replace ~2015 vintage iMac and MacBook
| Pro. Unless you want to keep the contents on a laptop and a
| desktop separate or have very high-end multimedia workload
| requirements, it probably doesn't make a lot of sense to
| pay for and manage two separate devices at this point.
| javajosh wrote:
| In general, the people here will use the perf to run
| webpack faster.
| cuddlecake wrote:
| webpack is usually fast enough, jest is where I need CPU
| & RAM.
|
| If I were to write tests, that is.
| Oddskar wrote:
| Pro tip: if you can switch some tests from using JSDOM to
| Node as the test environment they will run significantly
| faster.
| cuddlecake wrote:
| Ah, thanks for the tip. It will probably not change much
| for the project I currently work on, with tests using
| react-testing-library, so JSDOM is required in nearly all
| test files.
|
| But at least now I know :D
| kgermino wrote:
| >all of my high computation oriented use cases are
| offloaded to a desktop.
|
| That's very unusual. If you want a laptop for the easy
| stuff you're usually looking at a MacBook Air or iPad in
| the Apple ecosystem. These laptops are focused on people
| who want to be able to do "everything" on a portable
| computer.
| schleck8 wrote:
| > These laptops are focused on people who want to be able
| to do "everything" on a portable computer
|
| Like 3D rendering? Or deep learning training?
| kgermino wrote:
| I suspect there are people who want to do 3D rendering on
| a laptop, and these devices are probably a good option
| for them.
|
| More broadly, that's why I put 'everything' in quotes.
| There will always be cutting edge workflows that require
| the power and cooling you can only get on a desktop or
| server, but that's a minority of a minority.
|
| There are plenty of people who want to run multiple VMs,
| edit/render 4k+ videos, edit large audio projects, do
| semi-complex data analysis, or any of 100 other tasks
| without needing to choose power vs portability, or manage
| multiple devices.
| asdff wrote:
| I've always wondered who is buying these super fast apple
| laptops? Freelancers with that much cash to throw around
| on a laptop, who wouldn't be buying an imac or mac pro
| instead for nearly as much? If you are doing this sort of
| stuff for work, you probably already have a server you
| connect to or at least a beefy workstation under your
| desk you are using for the heavy lifting. A lot of people
| in this space just use an i7 dell workstation from their
| employer that's probably cheap and thats that. Especially
| in the age of aws there is no reason anymore to run a lot
| of data analysis stuff locally anymore when you can get
| compute power for seconds at a time. I feel like they
| must sell so few of the top spec macbooks.
| timeon wrote:
| I have always used MBP for rendering. Usually not for
| final renders. I'm not always connected to high-speed
| internet so it is handy for work-in progress renders
| especially if you are not in the office.
|
| Or even if you are working on model that is on the server
| you still need to have good specs in order work with it.
| asdff wrote:
| You can remote into the server and use that horsepower
| from anywhere, no?
| sumedh wrote:
| > I've always wondered who is buying these super fast
| apple laptops?
|
| Employers for their employees?
| asdff wrote:
| Usually they do a bulk order of the base model.
| prawn wrote:
| Freelancers who work from home and an office or on the
| road. I edit photos and video and haven't had a desktop
| machine for almost 20 years.
| asdff wrote:
| I'm sure a few people are doing this but it seems like
| such a teensy market compared to freelancers who
| generally work in one place in front of a massive imac
| screen.
| rewgs wrote:
| Why do you think that freelancers "generally work in
| front of a massive iMac screen?" That's anecdotally very
| wrong, especially depending on what type of freelancer
| you're talking about (the term alone is too broad to be
| useful).
| gunshai wrote:
| >These laptops are focused on people who want to be able
| to do "everything" on a portable computer.
|
| At some point when you are "doing everything" you start
| to be tied to a physical location anyway. Multiple
| screens, hook ups to external equipment. So it just
| doesn't make much sense to me to actually need to do
| everything in a portable manner.
|
| Edit: Apologies, I didn't address the part about the Mac
| OS ecosystem.
| zarzavat wrote:
| This is for people who require portability epsilon
| percent of the time.
|
| If you never require portability then a desktop is
| sufficient.
|
| If you frequently require portability then it's worth
| getting an air and building your workflow (if possible)
| around offloading heavy computation to the network, e.g.
| heavy use of build servers, SSH, syncing.
|
| But many people spend _most_ of their time at a desk, but
| sometimes require portability. For example in a meeting,
| visiting a client, working from home occasionally, etc.
| For these people a heavy duty laptop is the best
| solution.
| dirkg wrote:
| strange definition of crazy cheap. esp since we dont know how
| well it compares yet
| Yaina wrote:
| I guess I'm pretty much alone here, but I don't really like these
| new MacBooks.
|
| The things I'm happy about: - Function keys are
| back! - They kept touchID - Chips are probably pretty
| good - Headphone jack, yay!
|
| But what I really dislike: - The case-design
| looks kind of outdated. I'm getting MacBook Pro 2006 vibes here.
| - The base price starts at 2.000$ (2250EUR) ! - The
| notch... On the iPhone the notch was justified with a whole
| sensor array for FaceID, now we have something similar sized here
| for one 1080p camera. With a hole-punch I wouldn't have said
| anything; but here I'd rather have 2-3cm of bezels than a big
| notch. - I really bought into the USB-C future! I know
| that's not the case for everyone, and the addition of the SD-Card
| reader is welcome. But the HDMI port seems a bit...strange to me.
| It doesn't really cry "future of connectivity". I charge my
| MacBook with USB-C I connect my screens with USB-C (to display
| port) and for my occasional USB-A and HDMI needs I get out my one
| dongle. This actually seems like a step backwards for me.
|
| I know lots of these are highly opinionated, but...yeah: Bummer
| for me.
| efuquen wrote:
| You loose one usb-c port to get all the others. I've never
| needed 4 usb-c ports at a time, but definitely have needed all
| the others. And one usb-c port is replaced by power, which many
| times I have had to use one for anyway. So whether you bought
| into full usb-c future or not I don't see the extra ports
| hurting you. Maybe a 'whatever', but don't see it as a reason
| to dislike it.
| Yaina wrote:
| I guess my line of thinking is that Apple going full USB-C
| was one major reason that the port took off for computers
| (USB-Sticks, Drives, Monitors, etc.). It feels like they
| surrender after winning.
|
| I never really cared for MagSafe but I'm also not super
| annoyed about it being there (just a old/new proprietary
| charging port), but the HDMI port...that creates the same
| feeling for me as if they had added a USB-A or VGA port
| honestly.
| thatswrong0 wrote:
| I don't really see it as surrendering at all. The vast
| majority of consumers don't need the power the Macbook Pros
| offer. I see this more as an (IMO overdue) acknowledgement
| of the target audience. The M1 iMac and the M1 Macbook only
| have USB-C ports.
| gigatexal wrote:
| Holy smokes. I was impressed. I can't understand how some folks
| here are underwhelmed. Who is buying and what did you buy??
| culopatin wrote:
| Now I just wait for the 14in air? All I want is a 16/32gb air
| with this 14in screen. I feel like I'm always in the lineup gaps
| of apple.
| dirkg wrote:
| Am I the only one who like the TouchBar? It was fast, useful and
| configurable and I rarely use Fn keys anyway, nothing in MacOS
| uses them.
| [deleted]
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| For me, think about that memory bandwidth. No other CPU comes
| even close. A Ryzen 5950X can only transfer about 43GB/s. This
| thing promises _400GB /s_ on the highest-end model.
| aqme28 wrote:
| I'm curious about all the distaste people have of the notch. It's
| more screen space. Would people prefer a larger bezel? My guess
| is you'll have the option for a virtual bezel on apps that don't
| properly account for the notch.
| salamandersauce wrote:
| When competitors like the XPS 13 have like 1mm extra bezel
| across yes.
| aqme28 wrote:
| I still don't understand. Why is a larger bezel something to
| be desired?
| prewett wrote:
| You get a nice, perfect rectangle. It goes nicely with all
| the other rectangles in the product (case, keyboard,
| trackpad). Two lines of symmetry everywhere. Now the main
| rectangle has a big chunk out of it marring it and removing
| the horizontal symmetry. The larger bezel keeps everything
| looking nice. It's not like an extra 1/2 inch on the top is
| going to let me put my laptop anywhere easier. (Except on a
| plane while the person in front of me is reclining. Which
| happens a couple times a year, I can live with that,
| compared to staring at the gash every day.)
| beltsazar wrote:
| I prefer a larger bezel because the notch takes the menu bar
| space, which is already scarce even without the notch. Some
| people may have many app icons and "widgets" (e.g. iStat Menus)
| on the menu bar.
| intrasight wrote:
| I hope they'll make a Mini soon
| bart_spoon wrote:
| Its amusing that a lot of the features being hyped are simply
| Apple giving up on terrible design features they've been forcing
| for years and just providing what every other laptop does (normal
| keyboard, no touch bar and physical function keys, ports for HDMI
| cables, headphones, SD cards).
| g42gregory wrote:
| What happens if you plug-in an external display? With
| 3456-by-2234 non-standard ratio (neither 16:9 nor 16:10), will
| there be black bars on the sides when you mirror screens? If you
| don't mirror screens, the MacOS still does not rescale DPIs
| properly (unless it's Apple's own $4,999 retina monitor).
| adam_arthur wrote:
| Is there a reason Apple couldn't just implement magsafe using a
| USB-C port?
|
| Prong is too long/deep to be workable?
| srvmshr wrote:
| I have a feeling that if they had released an updated Mac Mini
| with the new chips, it would have appreciably dented the sales of
| new MacBook Pros.
|
| Too many people don't agree with the notch aesthetic and probably
| pair a discrete unit with their preferred display. Right now
| Apple doesn't want their race horse being outrun by an underdog.
| rsync wrote:
| Will we ever get another 11" MBA ?
|
| Best laptop form factor of all time. _Of all time_.
| awiesenhofer wrote:
| That's the 13" M1 MBA now, it has basically the same dimensions
| (+-5mm)...
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| This notch looks like it'll be fine. The notch I'm worried about
| is the one all the PC makers are gonna decide they need now but
| with zero integration or standardization with Windows.
| usui wrote:
| I really enjoy the way that they admitted their design mistakes
| of the past by having the speaker mention that users love tactile
| function keys and made it come back. They tried their best to say
| it was a mistake without explicitly stating it. It's almost like
| they did real design and usability studies, and then acted on it!
|
| I find it so surprising that in this day, a big tech company is
| actually listening to its pro user segment (at least more than
| before).
|
| Fingers crossed for lightning port switching to USB-C, Touch ID
| making a return to mobile devices (does not have to replace Face
| ID although I wouldn't care if it did), and the screen notch
| going away over time.
| Oddskar wrote:
| It's laughable incompetence and hubris, honestly. If you read
| any material from the original UXers of Apple they would have
| said the same. "Fingers on glass" can never beat the tactility
| of having actual keys. The versatility it affords mobile
| devices in terms of gestures and such is inappropriate for
| professional devices where we need speed and accuracy.
| sumedh wrote:
| > (at least more than before).
|
| I think this happened because Jonny Ive left Apple.
| m0zg wrote:
| It's the "Fuck you Jony" edition. Ports (including HDMI!),
| MagSafe, and no touchbar. Would be a fine laptop if it didn't
| have government spyware baked in that I can't turn off even if I
| power it down.
| tytrdev wrote:
| Now if I could just get one with an ortho keyboard layout...
|
| The 14 inch max with 64 gb ram looks fucking T A S T Y. If only
| my hands could laptop keyboard ={
| whywhywhywhy wrote:
| Feels a return to form, finally approaching this machine from the
| needs of the users rather than what's compelling for the
| industrial design team.
|
| Every bad decision of the atrocious 2017+ era laptops reverted.
| concinds wrote:
| I don't know if I'm allowed to swear on here, but thank fuck
| for this. It literally doesn't impose on Apple to do this
| stuff; they can keep their 28% margin, keep things soldered if
| they want, but making _functional_ laptops that aren 't made to
| be stared at or look good in pictures is a bare minimum.
| ellyagg wrote:
| How many external monitors does it support? I got an M1 mini only
| to find out it could only drive 2 4K monitor. And the M1
| notebooks can only use 1 external 4K monitor. I'm not getting one
| of these until I can run 3 external 4K monitors like I'm doing on
| my 2019 Macbook 16-inch right now.
| terramex wrote:
| 2 or 4 external 4K monitors, depending on whether you choose
| Pro or Max.
|
| M1 Pro - 2x 6K monitors plus built-in display
|
| M1 Max - 3x 6K display plus additional 4K display plus built-in
| display
|
| External displays are 60Hz only.
| edot wrote:
| Even if only one external display is run? That's a bummer.
| Having a high refresh rate laptop screen with a 60hz monitor
| is not good.
| tiffanyh wrote:
| No FaceID. Interesting.
| wiz21c wrote:
| Dancers ? How much of the $1999 go into advertisement ?
| cletus wrote:
| And so ends the last of the Dark Days of Johnny Ive. Don't get me
| wrong: he innovated a lot. My theory is when Jobs died, he lost
| his counterbalance and his designs suddenly became without
| compromise (no that isn't a good thing).
|
| It's when we saw the 12" Macbook as the crusade for thinness at
| all costs (terrible performance, only one port, a terrible
| version of the macbook Air), the end of the Macbook Air (before
| getting resurrected a few years later), the butterfly keyboard
| (allegedly to save 0.5mm in thickness), the Touch Bar (primarily
| there to boost Average Selling Price) and the loss of MagSafe.
|
| I was surprised last year how good the M1 was. The second
| generation looks even better. This thing has function keys back,
| no Touch Bar, MagSafe!!!, some non-TB ports and up to 64GB of
| RAM.
|
| Shut up and take my money!
| rsynnott wrote:
| > It's when we saw the 12" Macbook as the crusade for thinness
| at all costs (terrible performance, only one port, a terrible
| version of the macbook Air)
|
| Honestly, I'm kind of surprised they haven't brought this back
| with an M1 in it. It was mostly terrible due to compromises
| forced by the terrible chip it used; an M1 would be within its
| power envelope.
| apozem wrote:
| And the thing is, I don't mind they put a weird, shallow
| keyboard and one USB C port on that 12" MacBook. They were
| trying to make the lightest laptop they could. Those
| compromises made sense.
|
| The same compromises made no sense on high-end pro machines.
| simonh wrote:
| The 12" wasn't for everyone, but I know 2 people who had one
| and they both thought they were just fantastic.
| orobinson wrote:
| I have the first (2015) version of the 12", it's still my
| main laptop. It's powerful enough for light coding and
| music production which is all I need. I love the form
| factor and if they brought a new one out with an M1 chip
| I'd buy it in a flash.
| fredsted wrote:
| The 12" was a truly awesome machine, and it would've been
| even more great with the M1.
| berberous wrote:
| The 12" MacBook was beloved by my elderly parents, who liked
| the low weight design and didn't need to do anything other than
| check email and the web. Horses for courses. It was a great
| machine for the right audience.
| yarcob wrote:
| My girlfriend also loved her 11" Macbook Air and was
| disappointed that the smallest option is now a 13" Air.
| Joeri wrote:
| The 13 inch m1 air is barely bigger than the 11 inch thanks
| to smaller bezels. I have both, they don't feel much
| different in practice.
| cletus wrote:
| Genuinely curious: what could you do on this that you
| couldn't do on iPad?
|
| I am perhaps biased on this issue because I'm still mad about
| what happened with the Macbook Air (13" in particular). I
| bought one in 2011 and it was an amazing laptop. It was a
| sweet spot of compromise on power and portability.
|
| But the best feature was the price: there is a world of
| difference between a $1300 laptop and a $3500 laptop. Both
| are reasonable sums of money but the first is infinitely more
| "replaceable". You don't feel as bad about losing it or
| having it break.
|
| What came after were much more expensive for features
| literally nobody wanted (eg loss of ports, loss of MagSafe, a
| significantly worse keyboard, more expensive repairs, Touch
| Bar) at a higher price. The 13" MBA languished for years just
| needing a display upgrade and that's it.
|
| I knew it was the nail in the coffin when the 12" Macbook
| came out because Apple wouldn't have 11", 12" and 13" SKUs
| (they also had the 13" MBP by this point) and I was right.
|
| So for me the 12" MBP was everything bad about the new
| Macbooks with worse performance and a higher price. I didn't
| (and still don't) really understand who the 12" Macbook
| solves a problem for.
| icoder wrote:
| I've been extending the life of my MacBook Pro 2012 (13") all
| throughout those Dark Days (with 8GB RAM from the start an SSD
| added later). As a software dev using it day in day out. It's
| really at its end now, runs only on AC and the only reason I
| can still run (yet not debug) the apps I build is with a bit of
| a hack.
|
| I skipped the crappy keyboard, and loud, hot running versions.
| The M1 was a bit new and low on mem for me (wrt the future),
| but I just ordered the M1 Pro 32GB.
|
| Only hesitation I had concerns ARM support. It sure is getting
| better and better, but if they would have added one more superb
| Intel model right before introducing the M1's I'd have gone for
| that. But that might have hampered M1 adoption so I can see why
| they didn't.
| jurmous wrote:
| I have a MacBook Pro M1 since last year. With Rosetta and the
| added performance you will not notice any issues running any
| normal Intel app. Most apps have now even a universal
| version. Only a very few edge case apps are unavailable. So I
| am happy and really love the power and longevity that M1
| brings.
|
| You can always check if apps work normally through:
| https://isapplesiliconready.com/
| _ph_ wrote:
| I think the 12" MacBook was a great design. The ultimate
| compact laptop - I even would have bought one if that day the
| Apple Store had one in stock. But it didn't work out
| technically. Maybe it had, if the Intel 10nm process had been
| right on schedule. With the 14 nm parts, it was just too much
| of a compromise. With the M2, Apple might consider bringing
| back that form factor, that should work nicely. And move the
| Air to 14", tiny bezels. That would be the outer form factor of
| todays 13".
| yarcob wrote:
| Who do you think is responsible for the new iMacs?
|
| They took a very versatile all-in-one, removed almost all of
| the ports and added an external power brick -- just to make it
| a bit thinner. Which is even more ridiculous considering it's a
| desktop.
| greedo wrote:
| The iMacs have almost always been just laptop components in a
| display case (I'm obviously excluding the iMac Pro). I think
| getting rid of the USB-A ports is fine, and the SD card slot
| was always in a weird, hard to reach spot.
| cletus wrote:
| Ok, these I find a little weird, honestly.
|
| I guess they fill a niche for some? My best guess is that
| these were a compromise with what the M1 could then do. It's
| kind of the same reason we didn't have M1 MBPs last year.
| That's just a guess though.
|
| I hope to see less-compromised M1 iMacs in the future though.
| silverlake wrote:
| I liked the 12". It was an iPad that runs macOS. Rob Pike
| (golang) once said: "my two-year-old 11" MacBook Air is the
| only piece of computing hardware to make me happy since I can't
| remember when." (https://usesthis.com/interviews/rob.pike/)
| TazeTSchnitzel wrote:
| I love my 12" MacBook and will be sad when I have to replace
| it. Its single port is not a big problem for me, and I really
| appreciate how light it is. If I replaced it with an M1 MacBook
| Air I'd be bothered by how much heavier it is.
|
| If they had made an M1 version of the Retina MacBook, there
| would've been no complaints about the performance.
| wly_cdgr wrote:
| MBPs are irrelevant in the age of Surface Book and Framework
| [deleted]
| buu700 wrote:
| I can live without HDMI, but it never made sense to me to put SD
| on the chopping block. In what sense was USB-C ever supposed to
| be an alternative to SD card slots?
|
| Edit: For clarity, read my reply to anamexis before responding to
| this.
| closeparen wrote:
| I stopped using SD cards around the time that my iPhone
| replaced my DSLR. And when I worked in more advanced settings
| (photojournalism, film school) it was CompactFlash anyway.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| > In what sense was USB-C ever supposed to be an alternative to
| SD card slots?
|
| You use a USB-C dongle.
|
| 99% of people never use SD cards so don't care. The people who
| do care can use a dongle.
| emptyparadise wrote:
| Apple put the SD card slot back in, we can stop pretending
| now.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Yeah I think it's an unfortunate step backwards. Now I have
| to carry around a SD card reader that I'll never use, hard-
| connected to my system.
| VectorLock wrote:
| If you never use it... why do you have to carry it
| around?
| chrisseaton wrote:
| Because it's built-in. I can't leave it behind. That's
| the whole point. It's also e-waste - a whole slot most
| people never use.
| lucideer wrote:
| The point is that people who do care want an always-in
| solution.
|
| I have two low-profile always-in peripherals in my 2017 Air:
| SD & yubi. I have the same on my modern Dell Precision (which
| is otherwise a MBP-esque all-usbc chassis). These can be
| taken out, but rarely need to be & are always available. That
| setup isn't possible with any current Apple devices (until
| now).
| ksec wrote:
| I am pretty sure 99% of MacBook _Air_ user may not care.
|
| But MacBook Pro has a different audience. Lots ( if not all )
| of media professionals needs it. And I am willing to bet it
| is more than 1% of the MBP user base.
| chrisseaton wrote:
| What % of people are media professionals? Tiny.
| ksec wrote:
| I seriously doubt Adobe would bother maintaining
| Photoshop. Lightroom and Premiere Pro on Mac platform if
| it was tiny. I would not be surprised if it is a decent
| double digit percentage or something like 30%+.
|
| Before Web Development and iOS Programming was a thing.
| They were the majority of professional Mac users.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| Ahh, Apple, always looking out for the 1% of users!
| anamexis wrote:
| Opposite for me - I almost never used the SD slot, so a dongle
| was no problem for me, but I used HDMI all the time.
| buu700 wrote:
| I'm not commenting on whether storage expansion or video
| output is more important. That obviously depends on the
| person.
|
| I'm saying that while USB-C is an effective solution for
| video output, and therefore can conceivably overtake HDMI at
| some point in the future, it doesn't address the same use
| case as SD at all.
|
| I can use an SD card slot for permanent expandable storage. I
| can stick a terabyte card in there and forget about it until
| I need to move it into a new device. USB-C doesn't help with
| that use case at all. It's actually worse than USB-A, because
| at least the latter has decent slim fit drives available that
| will stay in without sticking out too much.
| ksec wrote:
| >and therefore can conceivably overtake HDMI at some point
| in the future,
|
| HDMI will live on forever in the TV space and professional
| equipment. USB-C / DisplayPort was only ever an effective
| solution in the computing industry, not consumer /
| professional electronics.
|
| Same to SD Card, both are targeting to Video / Graphics
| professionals.
| buu700 wrote:
| Does USB-C have some fundamental limitation or downside
| compared to HDMI? As a non-expert in HDMI or the needs of
| professional TV equipment, that isn't clear to me. The
| only thing that comes to mind is possibly increased
| attack surface (BadUSB-type attacks).
|
| I'm of course speaking without consideration for whatever
| momentum the two solutions may or may not have in the
| current marketplace.
| [deleted]
| concinds wrote:
| You can't run 10 meter USB-C cables for video, unlike
| HDMI
| TheGRS wrote:
| Hidden in your comment is the intent, Apple was selling the
| MBP with iPhone marketing intentions. You can put more of a
| $$ premium on storage if the micro SD card slot does not
| exist, much like an iPhone.
| CarelessExpert wrote:
| And this debate is why Framework's approach to port
| modularity makes so much sense and why it's not just a
| gimmick, despite what early critics were saying around here.
| Spivak wrote:
| Even for users who want the default ports, having the
| ability to swap out ports that have worn out without having
| to replace the entire logic board would be a huge win.
| nuerow wrote:
| > _I can live without HDMI, but it never made sense to me to
| put SD on the chopping block._
|
| HDMI means external monitor. For some (most?) an external
| monitor is a must-have.
| buu700 wrote:
| USB-C supports video out.
| adrian_b wrote:
| But only on much shorter cables (up to 1 m) than normal
| size DisplayPort or HDMI.
|
| In my home, I use 2 monitors. One of them is close enough
| to the laptop so that an USB-C cable can be used. The
| second is too far away. If the laptop had no DisplayPort or
| HDMI, I would have needed a dongle.
| zlsa wrote:
| There is a large selection of 2m+ USB-C to HDMI cables.
| adrian_b wrote:
| Those include the USB-C to HDMI converter in the
| connector, instead of in a separate dongle.
|
| It is more convenient than the separate dongle, but not
| as convenient as having a HDMI connector on the laptop.
|
| If you have HDMI on the laptop, you might find a HDMI
| cable wherever you go. With only USB-C, your only chance
| is to always carry with you the USB-C to HDMI converting
| cable.
| handrous wrote:
| In an average city block, I'd expect that ~99% of displays
| --TVs, monitors, projectors--would support HDMI-in. Plus
| A/V receivers, for that matter.
|
| Maybe, _maybe_ 5% would support DisplayPort over USB-C (or
| anything else that lets you use USB-C for video in), and
| that 's after a few years of Apple pushing it as The Next
| Big Thing. I fully expect HDMI will be more common than
| DP+USB-C in five more years, and quite likely in ten. For
| one thing, it's really nice to install in offices and
| houses because you can have long runs of it (50+ feet),
| with relatively cheap cable (compared to video-capable
| USB-C, certainly) and it'll still work. If something
| replaces it, I think it'll either be wireless or some other
| cable, not USB-C.
| buu700 wrote:
| To be clear, I'm explicitly not commenting on market
| penetration of either solution, but rather their inherent
| capabilities. I don't see USB-to-HDMI cables or adapters
| as particularly cumbersome, whereas there isn't a way to
| just cram a storage module fully inside a USB-C port as
| though it were an SD slot.
|
| As far as the cost of HDMI vs USB-C for long runs, that's
| a good point. I could see similarly cheap/efficient
| video-only USB-C cables potentially addressing that use
| case, but I don't know enough about the internals of
| USB-C to comment on whether that's viable. I could also
| see HDMI being used only behind the scenes in the future
| (like how computers don't typically have fiber optic or
| coaxial ports).
|
| At the end of the day, it's not like I'm suggesting that
| HDMI should be removed from computers. My point is that
| the _argument_ for removing it (whether or not you agree
| with that argument) never applied to SD ports in the
| first place.
| musicale wrote:
| USB-C monitors aren't particularly common and it can be
| hard to find good ones. I don't think LG makes their 5K
| Ultrafine anymore, but they still make 4K monitors with
| USB-C video. It's pretty convenient because one cable
| connects to the monitor and provides power to the laptop.
| [deleted]
| Toutouxc wrote:
| HDMI => external monitor, but external monitor !=> HDMI
| emsy wrote:
| HDMI makes more sense imo. You can hook up an SD card with
| adapter, connect the camera via USB-C or wireless. With
| Displays you aren't as flexible.
| evgen wrote:
| There is no display that accepts HDMI that would not work
| with a USB-C -> HDMI adapter. Add in the fact that HDMI is
| generally inferior to connectors like DisplayPort and you
| have a wasted slot. I can almost understand the SD card, but
| the inclusion of HDMI is just a waste of port space.
| zsmi wrote:
| I'm guessing it's mostly for people connecting to
| projectors in conference rooms.
| orangecat wrote:
| Maybe I'm just unlucky, but I've had consistently bad
| results with USB->HDMI adapters. From not working at all,
| to random CPU spikes, to my current situation of the
| external monitor intermittently flashing blue. This is with
| both Apple and third-party dongles.
|
| _the inclusion of HDMI is just a waste of port space_
|
| This is Apple; they'd have zero ports if they could get
| away with it. Clearly they've done research and found that
| it's important to a significant portion of the target
| market.
| mywittyname wrote:
| Lots of people use SD cards as basically "permanent"
| extendable storage. And this is something that's much more
| necessary on lesser Macbooks because they come with such
| limited standard storage. A 256GB SD card is under $40, while
| adding that much storage to the SSD in the Macbook is
| hundreds.
|
| HDMI is just one of the many display ports around, and the
| people using it are probably tied to a desk or something, so
| having a dongle for it is really no big deal.
|
| I don't mind using my Anker for HDMI, but it sucks that I
| have to use it for SD.
| emsy wrote:
| I had a SD for extended storage in my MacBook (until I
| upgraded the SSD, those were the times), but if we're being
| honest this is an issue created by the ridiculous storage
| prices Apple charges. Otherwise you'd just buy a large
| enough SSD without bargaining if you'd even need it.
| buu700 wrote:
| That's part of the problem, but it's also convenient to
| have a storage card that you can easily move between
| machines as needed.
| bogwog wrote:
| > Designed with the earth in mind.
|
| Lol
| yodsanklai wrote:
| > magsafe
|
| can we still use an usb-c port for charging?
| macintux wrote:
| Yes.
| Program_Install wrote:
| Beast machines for sure, Apple is doing a good job with their M
| Series chips. I can't wait for the next Intel commercial,
| complete meltdown.
| nbzso wrote:
| Nice. Ports are back. Very nice. Prices are up. Not nice. The
| deal breaker is the notch. Sorry Apple I am a designer. I cannot
| watch this 24/7. Even if the top bar is black the notch will be
| visible enough to distract my visual line. The more I look at
| this, the more I like the Framework laptop.
|
| P.S. Happy down-voting, have a nice day and stay safe.
| josephg wrote:
| Can you help me understand that? I have an iPhone with a notch
| and I find it's totally fine. Day to day I don't notice it. It
| just kind of blends in to the design of the phone. And I assume
| the situation here will be the same. Most software doesn't use
| the whole menu bar anyway. It wont be on top of anything except
| if you use that space to watch full screen video.
|
| I'm not excited about the price, but I'd totally take tiny
| bezels and an upgraded webcam in exchange for the notch. This
| looks like an excellent upgrade.
| kps wrote:
| What happens when you try to move the pointer 'into' the
| notch? I can think of several ways to handle this, none of
| them good.
| enjoy-your-stay wrote:
| Or if your menu bar has so many items it can't all fit to
| the left of the notch? Would probably have to straddle the
| notch, but would still look pretty weird.
| dbbk wrote:
| There's a screenshot that shows this happening
| mthoms wrote:
| And what happens in split screen mode (hidden menu)?
| srvmshr wrote:
| One of the things I dread is using two program windows side-
| by-side when doing code reviews.
|
| Most of the arguments are in the full screen hiding the notch
| with a black title bar. What if you don't use it FS all the
| time? The notch would be right where two windows overlap,
| unless you manually resize both windows every time. Every day
| for 8 hours+ for everytime you open a code editor
|
| Extra screen real estate is great, but I am sure they didn't
| have to go all the way to top. The point is getting moot
| because now the chins are unusable space as well all the
| time.
| nbzso wrote:
| I up-voted your comment, you ask reasonable question and I
| will try to answer it honestly.
|
| It is a use case.
|
| There are different levels of design craft. The more you, as
| a designer, train your mind and eyes, the more you see
| invisible things for regular people.
|
| I can spend days in clearing the white space between
| glyph/kerning of typography and this notch will distract my
| eyes constantly. Call it OCD or professional deformation, the
| notch will drive me crazy.:)
|
| When designing you want every visual distraction to be absent
| from your screen, for example I use 50% gray for wallpaper to
| have middle gray reference etc.
|
| You cannot compare iPhone UX with Design process UX. When you
| use your phone, you have a legitimate reason for compromise.
| When you use Pro labeled hardware you expect all Pro use
| cases and Pro UX to be respected.
|
| Don't get me wrong, I like the overall design (even the
| redesign of the shape of the keys), and there is no doubt
| that this are top-notch monsters. But for my use-case this is
| no go.
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| > When you use Pro labeled hardware you expect all Pro use
| cases and Pro UX to be respected.
|
| This can't possibly be the case, though. There are infinite
| Pro use cases and trying to respect them all would result
| in a confused and inferior product.
|
| I'm not saying that your reasons for disliking the notch
| are wrong, or that they _should_ have the notch. But they
| 're working within certain constraints -- there's just no
| way to fit a decent webcam into a laptop screen without
| making space. As someone who's recently been trying to help
| his fiancee pick out a laptop, where said fiancee's primary
| criterion is that the laptop webcam shouldn't suck, I
| empathize with the decision.
| nbzso wrote:
| I disagree, respectfully.
|
| The main target audience of MacBook Pro started with
| designers, writers and musicians (just looking on the
| shelf towards my old Titanium PowerBook G4).
|
| There are not so much professional use cases which will
| agree on removing screen estate and adding visual
| distraction. Screen estate is the main difference in
| professional UX.
|
| One of the reasons that I mentioned the Framework laptop
| is that a small company can get super-close to
| professional audience when searching pro solutions with
| common sense.
|
| The Mighty Apple with trillions in bank cannot come-up
| with something "innovative" and chooses the "trade off"
| approach?
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| > The Mighty Apple with trillions in bank cannot come-up
| with something "innovative" and chooses the "trade off"
| approach?
|
| Do you think having money means Apple never has to make
| tradeoffs? There are _always_ tradeoffs. It 's just not
| possible to make a good webcam that exists in the tiny
| space at the top of an ultra-thin screen with ultra-thin
| bezels. Most manufacturers just make terrible webcams,
| including the Framework that you've brought up as a good
| alternative (which has much thicker bezels besides).
|
| That's one way to go. Another way is to make space for
| the webcam. Apple can't magically throw money at every
| conceivable problem until it disappears.
|
| _You_ don 't have to buy one of the new MacBooks. I
| suspect that most designers aren't going to have as much
| of a problem with it as you're suggesting, though.
| Outside of full screen most folks won't notice it after a
| while, and when you go to full screen Apple adds a black
| bezel anyway.
| yellowapple wrote:
| > It's just not possible to make a good webcam that
| exists in the tiny space at the top of an ultra-thin
| screen with ultra-thin bezels.
|
| Maybe they could consider, you know, not dogmatically
| pursuing ultra-thin bezels for their own sake?
|
| > and when you go to full screen Apple adds a black bezel
| anyway.
|
| That's good to hear, but that then entails entirely
| removing a chunk of vertical screen real estate - which
| is already at a premium (relative to horizontal) with
| widescreen aspect ratios. Contrast with the Framework
| (or, similarly, the Pixelbook), which doesn't need to do
| that _and_ boasts a 3:2 aspect ratio to improve upon that
| vertical real estate.
| josephg wrote:
| A laptop with thick bezels and no notch is the same as a
| laptop with no bezels, a notch and those pixels disabled
| in software. It sounds like you want it both ways - you
| don't want to lose your vertical real estate ("which is
| already at a premium"). And you don't want the notch. In
| the same paragraph talking about how important vertical
| real estate is, you hold up other laptops like the
| framework as ideal even though they lose vertical real
| estate via the chunky bezel.
|
| I'm confused. Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)?
| Or do you want more vertical real estate (less bezels + a
| notch)? Having both would be the best. But given we can't
| have that, if you were in charge of the MacBook Pro
| design, what would you choose?
| yellowapple wrote:
| > you hold up other laptops like the framework as ideal
| even though they lose vertical real estate via the chunky
| bezel.
|
| Because they more than make up for it with the 3:2 aspect
| ratio.
|
| > Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)?
|
| Don't care about aesthetics.
|
| > But given we can't have that, if you were in charge of
| the MacBook Pro design, what would you choose?
|
| Bigger top bezel and - ideally - a 3:2 aspect ratio.
| josephg wrote:
| I still don't understand. Lets say we have two machines:
|
| - Machine 1 has a large top bezel and no notch
|
| - Machine 2 has a tiny top bezel and a notch, but the
| pixels to either side of the notch are disabled in
| software (and never used). The part of the display thats
| enabled has identical geometry to machine 1.
|
| Aesthetics aside, aren't these machines identical in
| every way? You have a strong preference for machine 1.
| Why?
| yellowapple wrote:
| > You have a strong preference for machine 1. Why?
|
| Because Machine 2 offers nothing of value over Machine 1
| - only more complexity and more opportunities for
| hardware and software issues.
| ctvo wrote:
| > _There are not so much professional use cases which
| will agree on removing screen estate and adding visual
| distraction. Screen estate is the main difference in
| professional UX._
|
| You seem to have a misunderstanding of the new screen?
| Apple is reducing the bezel around the screen to provide
| you _more_ screen space. How do you handle front-facing
| utilities like a webcam when you use up all available
| space? Their solution is to surround that area with a
| small boundary (the dreaded notch).
|
| You can see that the Framework Laptop you cite has a
| large bezel around it to provide that top bar. You have
| _less_ screen area here.
|
| From the screenshots, it looks like programs running in
| full screen mode are pushed down to leave that top area,
| to give you your distraction free experience:
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/
| nbzso wrote:
| Yes, I clearly see in the first frame a wallpaper with
| black background that hides the notch.:) So they give me
| a real estate by removing the bezel and remove the
| vertical display space to hide the notch. Nice solution,
| but as I sad, not for my use-case.
| foldr wrote:
| Why does it not work for your use case? When the areas
| either side of the notch are unused (as in full screen
| mode) you just have a regular 16:10 screen with a top
| bezel. If previous MacBook screens worked for you then
| this one will too.
| breuleux wrote:
| The stated resolution of the screen is 3024x1964. If you
| do the math, this basically amounts to a 3024x1890 16:10
| display, with a 3024x74 extra display on top that is
| interrupted in the middle. Considering that the menu bar
| usually has empty space in the middle, isn't it a strict
| screen estate gain to move the menu to this extra
| display?
|
| I mean, what would you have preferred, exactly? If they
| had stuck to a 3024x1890 display, no one would have had
| the slightest complain, but it would be unequivocally
| less than what we're getting. Again: the notch is located
| _outside_ of the same 16:10 screen every other MBP has.
| tshaddox wrote:
| If it's about deliberately training your mind and eyes in
| order to use tools efficiently as a professional designer,
| then surely one could apply that training to focus on
| relevant parts of the screen and not the notch. Sure, if
| all else is equal between a laptop with a notch and one
| without, choose the one without the notch, but it's odd for
| the presence of a notch to be a dealbreaker for a computer
| that one otherwise would have chosen.
| ctvo wrote:
| Idea: Write a utility to add in a software bezel for folks
| like this. We can call it distraction free mode. We'll take
| the extra space back and replace it with a black bezel. The
| webcam and front facing utilities are now within that
| space. You can toggle it on and off.
|
| > _I can spend days in clearing the white space between
| glyph /kerning of typography and this notch will distract
| my eyes constantly. Call it OCD or professional
| deformation, the notch will drive me crazy.:)_
|
| As an aside, most designers I know use external monitors.
| Do you find yourself doing this type of work on your laptop
| display?
| behnamoh wrote:
| The notch is not just a blow to the aesthetics, but it
| actually is annoying when it comes to software with long
| menu bars. Also, what happens when you install many
| plugins in the menu? The notch is literally taking up
| good space that could be used for menu apps.
| yellowapple wrote:
| It absolutely should be an option, but it'd also suck to
| lose that portion of the screen's vertical real estate in
| its entirety - especially when 16:9 / 16:10 aspect ratios
| already make said vertical real estate scarce as-is.
| breuleux wrote:
| The aspect ratio of the new MBP seems to come out to
| 16:10.4. I assume that the 0.4 is the notch zone, and the
| part of the screen below it is 16:10. So it's really just
| a standard 16:10 with some extra pixels, which sounds
| good to me.
| nbzso wrote:
| > As an aside, most designers I know use external
| monitors. Do you find yourself doing this type of work on
| your laptop display?
|
| Guilty as charged (Two Eizos), but I work outside the
| office regularly, or in the weekends when "inspiration"
| strikes.
|
| What is the point of Pro laptop when I cannot perform my
| work at a maximum UX comfort.
|
| Another use-case is that I develop my photos on the go,
| so on, so on.:)
|
| I am still partially in the Apple Ecosystem (mainly due
| to C1) so by the looks of it I will have to transition to
| something different.
|
| > Idea: Write a utility to add in a software bezel for
| folks like this. We can call it distraction free mode.
| We'll take the extra space back and replace it with a
| black bezel. The webcam and front facing utilities are
| now within that space. You can toggle it on and off.
|
| My first reaction was this idea also. I am sure that as
| we speak someone is firing up Xcode and it will be
| available if Apple approves it:)
| VectorLock wrote:
| >Idea: Write a utility to add in a software bezel for
| folks like this.
|
| I'd be surprised if this isn't an OS level option.
| ctvo wrote:
| How I would bet anything I own that there isn't, and
| won't ever be one, knowing Apple. This would admit
| there's a problem and some users may not like the new
| innovation allowing for more screen space.
| shantara wrote:
| It is an option, at least in full screen mode.
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/macos-hides-notch-
| on-ne...
| VectorLock wrote:
| Thats really when it would matter. MacOS has an ever
| present menu bar at the top of the screen. A notch would
| be entirely unintrusive - and practically invisible in
| Dark Mode.
| luke2m wrote:
| Knowing apple, there won't be. iPhones don't have this
| option, but my OnePlus does for the camera hole.
| egypturnash wrote:
| > Most software doesn't use the whole menu bar anyway.
|
| No, but all those little things you've installed that put up
| a menu bar item on the right add up - I'm sitting at a cafe
| on my laptop right now, and the menu widgets come to pretty
| much the center. If I unhide the less-frequently-used ones
| that I hide with Bartender then they're covering 5/6 of the
| width of the screen.
|
| I am an artist and spend a lot of time with Illustrator in
| fullscreen mode, with no visible menus. It'll be pretty
| annoying to have this thing jamming into the middle of my
| work area. Especially given that I think I could probably
| count on one hand the number of times I've used the cameras
| hiding in the frame of my previous Macs. Anyone playing games
| will be annoyed by it too.
|
| Hopefully they will not make this same move in the next round
| of Airs, as that's what my next computer's probably going to
| be.
| mbreese wrote:
| _> spend a lot of time with Illustrator in fullscreen mode,
| with no visible menus _
|
| My guess is that for these situations and for full screen
| games, you'll see the screen size reduced by the notch
| height. And if not, I'm sure there will be an extension
| that makes the menubar a black rectangle.
|
| Not optimal, but there are ways around the notch, if it
| bothers you too much.
| banana_giraffe wrote:
| Yep:
|
| They hinted at this with some of the screen shots they
| showed:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/McNBTHY
|
| I don't know enough about MacOS GUI development, but I'm
| guessing if an app requests a full screen display, it
| gets told the resolution is the resolution minus the top,
| and that's just blacked out.
| egypturnash wrote:
| I guess sometime next year I'll get to find out if
| Illustrator actually requests Full Screen Display or if
| it just throws up a window with no chrome that covers the
| menu bar!
|
| I am pretty sure it does the latter.
| josephg wrote:
| Sounds easy enough to fix in software if its a problem.
|
| Mind you, if it is a problem, who knows how long it'll
| take adobe to actually fix it.
| saiya-jin wrote:
| Well if you are also exposed to notch-less experience
| elsewhere, ie work, it can become quite annoying. If that's
| your whole world, I can imagine you just learn ignoring it
| yellowapple wrote:
| > I have an iPhone with a notch and I find it's totally fine.
|
| I have a Motorola with a notch and I find it's mildly
| noticeable and annoying. It's tolerable because it's a phone
| and I don't necessarily care about screen real estate
| maximization for a media consumption device (and because this
| phone is a temporary daily driver while I wait for my Astro
| Slide to finally ship), so I'm slightly more forgiving of
| e.g. the constraints on visible notification icons or the
| fact that Android's network traffic indicator is dead-smack
| in the middle and therefore "under" the notch (i.e. entirely
| useless unless the phone's in landscape mode).
|
| For a laptop, it's different; judging by my workflow at my
| previous job (wherein I used a Mac), that'll almost certainly
| do funky things with either long lists of menu bar options or
| long lists of status bar widgets, and will almost certainly
| do funky things with full-screen apps that have buttons at
| the top of the screen. It's telling that all of Apple's full-
| screen productivity app screenshots on that page are on the
| 16-inch, which doesn't have the notch (EDIT: or maybe it
| does; hard to tell from the renderings); all the renderings
| of the 14-inch either have stuff like Zoom or show the apps
| as windowed. The one rendering of the 14-inch running
| Photoshop demonstrates pretty plainly that PS' menu bar items
| are right up to the notch; if a program uses more than that,
| what's the behavior? All items get squished? Items at the end
| go to the other side of the notch? Items get hidden entirely
| "under" the notch and become inaccessible?
|
| GP's right, on all counts. The fact that said GP got
| downvoted into oblivion for daring to express a totally
| reasonable and legitimate opinion is disappointing, to say
| the least. And meanwhile, I've been overwhelmingly happy with
| my Framework, which doesn't resort to such gimmicks like
| notches and even boasts a superior 3:2 aspect ratio for yet
| more effective screen real estate. The M1 in these Macbooks
| is interesting and tempting, but a Mac Mini would readily
| scratch that itch just fine at a fraction of the price -
| especially if I'd have to use an external monitor _anyway_ to
| prevent any interference with applications by that notch.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| Isn't the notch strictly an improvement? The alternative is to
| lose that top area to a bezel. This feels like extra screen for
| free.
| grishka wrote:
| Probably can be fixed in software by filling the areas on the
| sides of the notch with black and moving the menu bar below
| the notch. Since this is a mini-LED display, the black is
| supposed to be pitch-black.
| 00deadbeef wrote:
| I think it depends where the dimming zones are. If they're
| behind the relocated menu then you might see blooming above
| it.
| yellowapple wrote:
| It's extra screen, but with limited utility due to that notch
| being there. Having that extra screen _without_ the notch
| would 've been even better.
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| I agree with you on paper but I don't like how the notch just
| looks out of place. I don't see any way around it here,
| though; to get decent laptop cameras something has to give.
| 00deadbeef wrote:
| It is and it isn't. You are getting extra space for free, but
| some people like me have a very full menu bar and it's going
| to get very awkward with the notch.
| freeplay wrote:
| Bartender is a game changer. One of the first things I
| install on a new Mac.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| Very cool. Are there any other such tools you would
| recommend as a must-install?
| soheil wrote:
| I don't like the notch either but you can compare this to the
| Framework laptop? This is literally a monster in performance
| compare to some of the most high end laptops on the market.
| dont__panic wrote:
| Agreed. Icing on the cake: an incredibly specced Framework
| laptop is less than the starting price of the 14" MBP. And it
| has a 4:3 display ratio. And I can choose my ports!
|
| I'm confused why so many people seem hellbent on convincing me
| that a notch is a good thing, suddenly. Can't y'all understand
| that I have a personal preference towards rectangular screens
| without any holes in them? I admit that it doesn't make the
| laptop unusable, but IMO it's an unacceptable compromise in a
| $2k+ machine (that if I specced out, I'd end up paying close to
| $4k for)
| awill wrote:
| I think everyone would agree the notch isn't good. But it's a
| tradeoff. Do you want a decent webcam? That's apparently the
| price we have to pay.
| t0mbstone wrote:
| That's absolutely bonkers. I can think of 20 different ways
| to provide a decent web cam without having a notch in the
| screen. I would have preferred for them to leave the webcam
| off entirely before I would have ever settled on such an
| absurd solution.
| saagarjha wrote:
| I'd love to hear some of them...
| kevingadd wrote:
| There was nothing wrong with how it was done before.
| yellowapple wrote:
| - Thicker top bezel
|
| - Have the camera portion of the lid stick out a bit
|
| - External webcam
|
| - Move the "notch" into a corner where it's less
| obtrusive
|
| - Put the webcam in the laptop base instead
| ziml77 wrote:
| Thicker top bezel is the only viable one. But just at a
| glance it looks like the bezel + notch height is about
| the same height as the current bezels. I don't really see
| either option as necessarily being better given that.
|
| Having it stick out is a no-go because things sticking
| out of a laptop are at risk of breaking off.
|
| External webcam is something extra to carry around and
| mount. That's even worse than a dongle.
|
| I don't agree that a notch in the corner would be less
| obtrusive. And the lack of symmetry wouldn't do the
| appearance of it any favors.
|
| Cameras at the bottom have been done before and they
| suck. They're called nose cams for a reason.
| cvak wrote:
| My 3y old samsung has 3mm hole in display for camera that
| is better then this one.
|
| *Citation needed, but it's vastly better then current gen
| MBP, and good enough for Video calls.
|
| Disclaimer: I don't care about the notch one bit, already
| order one, but saying that it's needed for good camera is
| imo stupid. Imo they eanted to add faceid, but didn't
| have the time, or enough chips to do it in this
| iteration.
| vultour wrote:
| Then go buy a laptop without a notch, I'll happily take
| the extra screen space that's usually wasted by the menu
| bar anyway.
| konart wrote:
| >I'm confused why so many people seem hellbent on convincing
| me that a notch is a good thing
|
| Most people. I assume, don't care about the notch.
|
| Also - many people use their macbooks without opening them
| most of the time.
| 00deadbeef wrote:
| Yeah the prices are up but you're getting _so much more_
| computer for your money. Just the new screen alone is worth the
| extra.
| gnicholas wrote:
| Glad there're back, but these are not Pro features and should not
| be limited to the Pro line (starting at $2,000). These are basic
| features that should be on consumer machines. I shouldn't have to
| pay 80% more just to get HDMI, SD, and other features that were
| on Apple laptops 6 years ago.
| chomp wrote:
| > I shouldn't have to pay 80% more just to get HDMI, SD, and
| other features
|
| Pedantic nitpick, but a USB-C hub costs ~$40, or about 4% more
| than the base price of a Macbook Air.
| yarcob wrote:
| My girlfriend bought 100EUR worth of adaptors for her Macbook
| Air and can never find them when she needs them.
|
| For a desktop it doesn't matter, but for a portable device
| that you need to carry around every extra thing that you need
| to carry around is just something you are going to misplace.
| danlugo92 wrote:
| I'm a hardcore apple fan (from before the iphone) and this
| hub situation is just pathetic, they should have put in an
| USB-A in there and call it a day.
|
| You can run into some VGA projectors but most have HDMI now
| though.
| Terretta wrote:
| Get her this:
| https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B0872V4LFP/
| thehappypm wrote:
| Woof. That thing is ugly
| xNeil wrote:
| Really? Looks very cool to me. Matter of opinion, I guess
| :)
| foobarian wrote:
| Yikes. My 2017 MBP is bent and it's always on a flat
| surface. I shudder to think about keeping it on something
| like those blocks :-)
| Terretta wrote:
| I like that it also raises the keyboard at an angle.
| Remember typewriters? (Dangerous question these days,
| sorry. ;-)
| reaperducer wrote:
| Your girlfriend may be disorganized and a poor shopper.
|
| I have a single USB-C dongle in front of me that's the size
| of a large cigarette lighter that has 2 USB-A ports, 2
| USB-C ports, an ethernet port, an HDMI port, and can charge
| a 15" MacBook Pro. It cost $40.
|
| Because your girlfriend bought a bunch of different items
| instead of a single solution, and can't keep track of them,
| doesn't mean that Apple screwed up.
| ngcazz wrote:
| Nasty much? We like jumping on to blame `lusers` here on
| HN, but this is a design problem. It's a fact of life
| people lose things, and Apple conveniently forgot about
| this to push the dongle ecosystem.
| handrous wrote:
| The magic that originally brought me into the Mac
| ecosystem, after a decade and a half of Windows and
| Linux, was that the work MacBook I received was the first
| time I had an _actual_ portable computer. The battery
| life ( "you mean it still has a useful amount of charge
| after 3 hours? WTF is this sorcery!?"), good-enough
| trackpad (which makes it like 5x better than the best
| trackpad I'd used before, all of which had me considering
| an external mouse a must-have for more than 5 minutes of
| work), and port selection meant I could pick up my laptop
| --just my laptop--and go, and be fine for most or all of
| the day, doing almost anything.
|
| The dongle bullshit (and the USB-C "well yes it can do
| that but only if you have _exactly_ the right cable, so
| you 'd better bring a couple with you" thing) broke that
| simplicity, and put me back to having to make sure I had
| other crap with me, which was a shame.
|
| Dragging their feet on moving iPad and iPhone over to
| USB-C, so they could at least share dongles & charging
| cables with Mac laptops, was/is salt the wound.
| Terretta wrote:
| Try Baseus USB C Hub Adapter for MacBook Pro
| 2020/2019/2018/2017, a 9-in-1 USB Type C Hub dongle with
| 2 Thunderbolt 3 ports (40Gbps), 4K HDMI (60hz on USB-C,
| 30hz on HDMI), RJ45 Ethernet, USB-C data port, 3x USB
| 3.0, and audio:
|
| https://smile.amazon.com/gp/product/B0872V4LFP/
|
| Unlike single pigtail all-in-one dongles, this two piece
| no pigtail thingy supports 2x TB3 or 2x USB-C/DisplayPort
| displays since it is tapping both sides of laptop.
| (Incidentally this also lets you charge on the right to
| prevent potential issues with charging from left.)
| jes wrote:
| +1 for a helpful recommendation. Much appreciated.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| > push the dongle ecosystem
|
| Out of all the complaints about moving to USB-C, the idea
| that it is a conspiracy on Apple's part to sell dongles
| is the one that makes me roll my eyes the hardest. Say
| what you will about the USB-C-only MacBooks we've had in
| the last six years or so, but I'm fairly sure they were
| the first portable computers Apple ever shipped that had
| _no proprietary connectors._ No ADB, no MagSafe, no
| FireWire (not technically proprietary but largely DOA
| anywhere but Apple in the early 2000s).
|
| I suspect if Apple had a magic wand (and/or even more of
| their money), they wouldn't have you buy dongles at all,
| they would have you buy _new cables._ Which is what I did
| years ago -- USB-C to Lightning, USB-C to mini-USB, USB-C
| to USB-A, even one USB-C to USB-B kicking around
| somewhere. And, because USB-C is not a proprietary
| standard, I don 't think any of those cables are from
| Apple.
|
| (Yes, I do have an Apple brand USB-C to USB-A dongle that
| I bought when I got my first USB-C laptop, because
| everyone was screaming how important they were. I almost
| never use it: if I find myself using it more than a few
| times for "dongle + cable", then I buy the correct
| cable.)
| enjoy-your-stay wrote:
| >people lose things, and Apple conveniently forgot about
| this to push the dongle ecosystem.
|
| I think it's a bit unfair to say that Apple deliberately
| change interfaces in order to push their adapters.
|
| They've got 2 different problems to address, firstly they
| want to update and be in control of the interfaces to
| their hardware, Firewire,Thunderbolt,USB-C but, at the
| same time their machines seem to last quite a long time,
| so at any time there's a pretty significant number of
| users stuck on older interfaces and with hardware that
| uses older interfaces too (e.g. I have an older Firewire
| external hd that I now dongle to Thunderbolt, have noooo
| idea how I'm going to get that to work when I get this
| new machine).
|
| So in order to allow all that to work they need to
| support a multitude of interfaces because getting a new
| laptop shouldn't mean throwing everything else out.
| pdpi wrote:
| Apple isn't trying to push a dongle ecosystem. they're
| trying to push a "thunderbolt/usb-c for everything"
| ecosystem. In typical Apple fashion, they're willing to
| be pretty radical about it on the computers themselves,
| and let donglepocalypse be a side effect.
| gnicholas wrote:
| And at the same time, their non-pro machines come with
| only one spare (not for power) USB-C port. If they loaded
| up their machines with them across the board, this would
| be less of an issue.
| dec0dedab0de wrote:
| You can use the power port to connect a dongle too. I
| have two dongles that have multiple interfaces, as well
| as a power passthrough so I could connect my power to
| either one of them. Though I don't use either because my
| usb-c monitor powers the MacBook.
| cronix wrote:
| Hah, go back and watch Steve Jobs making fun of computing
| devices that use a stylus. He agreed with you on the
| losing things angle.
|
| > Who wants a stylus? You have to get them and put them
| away and lose them. Yuck! Nobody wants a stylus.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ELZK-Pow6fs
|
| > Handwriting is probably the slowest input method ever
| invented. ... We reimagined it and what we're doing is
| completely different than what they (Microsoft) did. ...
| And what we said at the very beginning is if you need a
| stylus, you've failed.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w2xPt8txgGs
|
| Apple now uses styluses on their iPad Pro's.
| mcculley wrote:
| I think Jobs had a point about designs that require a
| stylus. There were many portable computers before the
| iPhone that required a stylus. iOS was designed with
| fingers in mind and then added a stylus for some kinds of
| work. This is similar to how the original Macintosh had
| no arrow keys and forced developers to design for the
| mouse. Later designs then added arrow keys.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| This was for devices that only worked with a stylus, so
| if you lost the stylus you couldn't use most features of
| the device anymore.
|
| Modern styluses like the Surface Tablet Pen or Apple
| Pencil are for drawing and note-taking, in addition to
| still being able to use fingers on the touchscreen.
| FireBeyond wrote:
| This is revisionist history.
|
| In the keynote, he never mentions "devices that require a
| stylus".
|
| He says "who wants a stylus? Yuck!" and "if you see a
| stylus, someone did something wrong".
|
| This spin into "well _obviously_ Steve meant X" is purely
| personality worship, not borne of his words.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| > In the keynote, he never mentions "devices that require
| a stylus".
|
| Back in 2007, if something came with a stylus, it was
| overwhelmingly the case that the stylus was required.
| pdmccormick wrote:
| Steve Jobs passed away 3666 days ago.
| wainage wrote:
| Which one? Looking for a solid recommendation.
| vultour wrote:
| Not one by Verbatim, mine broke after a month. Granted, I
| was going for the cheapest one I could find just so I
| could get a HDMI port.
| greggman3 wrote:
| I'm not going to deny that having them built in is better
| but I had a tiny case that fit my MBA power adapter, USB-C
| cable pocket wifi, and hub. Since I always needed the power
| adaptor and it's cable it wasn't hard to keep the hub with
| me.
| TYPE_FASTER wrote:
| This is a single device that I can plug MBP power adapter,
| mouse, and keyboard USB dongles into: https://www.amazon.co
| m/gp/product/B07QXMNF1X/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b...
| nwsm wrote:
| You're being obtuse, not pedantic
| ngcazz wrote:
| Now you're being pedantic!
| Macha wrote:
| However, it does take away from Apple's "just works"
| marketing if you need to research compatible adapters and
| half of them just don't work properly for anything beyond
| 1080p60.
| snicky wrote:
| Yeah and it interferes with wifi (on MBP 13" from 2019).
| oblio wrote:
| But you'd have to carry that around separately and not forget
| it, lose it, etc. OP is asking for those ports to be on the
| laptop itself.
| [deleted]
| philwelch wrote:
| FWIW I've had nothing but trouble with USB-C hubs. I use my
| most recent one exclusively as an Ethernet adapter.
| ethbr0 wrote:
| For a MBP hub, the most reliable solution I found was "buy
| a hub with two USB-C ports."
|
| I think between the higher price point & dual ports, they
| had enough to put a proper microcontroller in there, which
| seemed to make everything happier.
| philwelch wrote:
| If I'm ever in the market for a USB-C hub again, I'll
| keep that in mind!
| gnicholas wrote:
| I have one of these, and it works fine except when it gets
| jostled and all my peripherals are disconnected.
|
| Also it's not powered (those are closer to $200), which means
| it can't charge my iPhone or anything else.
| moonchrome wrote:
| Does it support 4k@60hz ?
| ofou wrote:
| HDMI, yes. USB-C ones are another story though.
| mdasen wrote:
| It looks like Apple is trending back to ports and I think that
| will continue in the future.
|
| It looks like the 13" MacBook Pro will be phased out in the
| near future (over the next 6-12 months) and I'd guess that the
| next MacBook Air will become the replacement. There wasn't a
| lot of difference between the M1 MacBook Air and MacBook Pro
| before. I think Apple can nicely introduce a replacement
| MacBook Air with an M1 processor (or M1 Air) with an HDMI port
| and SD Card slot and it will be quite differentiated from the
| MacBook Pro with its M1 Pro/Max processors, miniLED displays,
| additional memory bandwidth, additional CPU cores, additional
| graphics capabilities, etc.
|
| While this announcement doesn't introduce the product you're
| looking for, it does signal that Apple is going in the
| direction you're interested in and it shows that Apple can
| offer so much for pro users that it doesn't have to worry about
| a consumer machine cannibalizing their pro line. Apple can
| literally offer twice the number of performance cores to give
| pro users a huge incentive to pay $2,000+ instead of $1,000.
| Apple has miniLED displays with 1,000 nits of brightness
| (compared to 500 nits on the old MBP and 400 nits on the Air).
| With their own silicon, they're able to really differentiate
| the Air/Pro lineup (which didn't really happy last year) and
| offer compelling reasons to pay more without withholding basic
| features.
|
| Yes, a MacBook Air with HDMI and SD Card slot doesn't exist
| yet. However, given how many bells and whistles Apple has given
| the MacBook Pro lineup, they can give a redesigned MacBook Air
| those ports and not have to worry that pro users won't buy
| their pro versions. I'm hopeful that a new MacBook Air will
| arrive in the Spring with the ports you're seeking.
| raydev wrote:
| > It looks like the 13" MacBook Pro will be phased out in the
| near future (over the next 6-12 months)
|
| Knowing Apple, they will keep it around for a couple years
| just to have the price point with the Pro name. They love
| keeping around older models for price anchoring/upsell.
| nextos wrote:
| What can we expect from the new Air? Will this model replace
| the current Air or will it be an additional more expensive
| offering?
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| Probably MagSafe 3 , a notch at 1080p with a screen with
| thinner bezels, SD card reader, faster SSD, LPDDR5 but
| still up to 16gb , maybe a hdmi port and Thunderbolt 4.
| billyhoffman wrote:
| Apple does like to keep models at certain price points. Just
| look at the 2nd generation MacBook Air, which stayed with us,
| un-retina screen and all, from years after the MBP and
| MacBook, to hit to $999 price point.
|
| A 13" M1 MBP allows them to hit a $1299 price point and say
| "starting at $1299" when speaking about their pro laptop
| line.
| justincormack wrote:
| I don't think the Air is thick enough for HDMI. The Air now
| is more like the old MacBook, the cheap fanless ultra
| portable, and wouldn't be surprised if it stays like that,
| previously it was much less differntiated from the MacBook
| Pro lines.
| fomine3 wrote:
| The thin MacBook(2015-2019) is latest "MacBook" so it's not
| old but latest.
| bduerst wrote:
| You can still do mini- and micro-hdmi, but by that point
| you may as well do more usb-c.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Mini and micro hdmi are almost non existent in the wild.
| USB-C is the correct choice for the airs.
| blowfish721 wrote:
| Wouldn't be all surprised if at least some of those ports will
| make it back whenever they release the redesigned 13 inch
| MacBook Pro and MacBook Air. Probably time constraints that
| made them release them with the old design. Just my guess.
| jeffdn wrote:
| Do you think there will actually be a redesigned 13" MacBook
| Pro? My assumption was that it was being replaced with the
| 14", but maybe I'm mistaken!
| babypuncher wrote:
| I would guess we might see new 13" and Air devices next
| year
| barelysapient wrote:
| Hopefully they bring back a 12" model.
| babypuncher wrote:
| Don't their current 13" models have about the same
| footprint as the old 12" laptops from way back when?
| musicale wrote:
| 12" models were about an inch narrower.
|
| According to everymac.com, the 12" PowerBook G4 (2004)
| had an amazing 10.9"x8.6" footprint (and the 12" MacBook
| (2017) was 11.04"x7.74" - and 2.03 pounds.)
| aaroninsf wrote:
| I would be surprised if there are lower-end MBP (smaller
| than the 14") but a 12" might be better differentiation
| than 13" vs 14".
|
| I just want a pastel orange MBA though.
| gnicholas wrote:
| That would be amazing. Still miss my 12" PowerBook...
| blowfish721 wrote:
| Personally I think they will keep the 13" MacBook Pro as
| the entry level one with a lower tier cpu compared to 14"
| and 16". Their old line up had an entry level 13" while the
| 15" was more capable so that's what I'm basing it on but my
| guess is as good as any.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| Air will replace the 13" in all likelihood. The
| difference between the two were minimal to begin with. If
| the Touch Bar is going away, there'll be virtually no
| difference at all.
| natch wrote:
| Can't see an advantage for them in updating to a new 13"
| design. 14" is pretty much the same size physically, no?
| 1/3 inch difference. I guess they're only keeping it now so
| they have a starter offering at a low price point.
|
| To get the low price point in a year or two they can just
| have the low end 14" be the starting Pro machine. Only
| advantage to the 13 now is the touch bar, if you like that.
| walteweiss wrote:
| Why not consider a used one previous model with ports if you
| need them so much, but unwilling to pay extra for overpowered
| machine?
| Joeri wrote:
| Built-in SD would allow for cheap permanent storage upgrades to
| the cheaper macbooks. Apple may be listening to what people
| want in laptops, but I don't see them cutting into their own
| upsells by that much.
| bartvk wrote:
| Could be nice for a permanently mounted disk for Time Machine
| backups.
| acomjean wrote:
| Oddly I have an "half sd card" that I can use for extra
| storage in my old 15 inch work MacBook. Its like an SD card
| with a food that fits perfectly (almost flush) when iserted
| into the sd slot. It has a lip so you can remove it easily.
|
| I though I'd have a mountable extra storage.. But ultimately
| it would sometimes unmount on sleep (you could unplug and
| replug..) and it was a little slow. If I wanted to use the SD
| card from my camera, I had to remove it. I replaced it with
| an external ssd. which is bulkier and corded...
|
| this wasn't the exact thing, but it gives an idea what its
| like: https://www.amazon.com/Transcend-JetDrive-Storage-
| Expansion-...
| mdasen wrote:
| In a certain way, yes. A quick search on Amazon shows I can
| get a 1TB SD Card for $150-300. However, the rated speeds are
| in the 100-200 MB/s range rather than the over 2GB/s for
| Apple's 2020 MacBook Air (never mind the faster speeds of
| their new MacBook Pros which is 7.4GB/s).
|
| Yes, the $400 that Apple charges to upgrade from 256GB to 1TB
| is high compared to the $200 for an SD Card. At the same
| time, the storage is 10-20x faster. I think the storage is
| different enough that Apple doesn't have to worry too much.
| Sure, some people might try that strategy and walk around
| with a laptop with a card sticking out a bit and some third
| party will make a microSD adapter that doesn't stick out, but
| I think most users will probably opt to pay for the storage
| and Apple can ignore the small number that buy niche
| products.
|
| I think between saving money on their Apple Silicon
| processors and being in a great place to have serious
| differentiation between the Air and Pro line, Apple doesn't
| have to worry.
| devmunchies wrote:
| found a (new) 1 TB usb-c flash drive that does up to 1000
| MB/s read and 900 MB/s write.
|
| https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1655140-REG/kingston
| _...
| have_faith wrote:
| Can't believe they did so many positive changes with the MBP only
| to add the notch from the phone in too. Almost the perfect
| update. Does this mean every app in full screen has to be updated
| to account for it?
| wmf wrote:
| I wonder if the OS just presents a virtual lower screen
| resolution in full screen mode?
| TheGRS wrote:
| I'd hope MacOS can account for it
| dkonofalski wrote:
| No. It looks like the notch only cuts into the menu bar area
| and letterboxes fullscreen apps.
| dmonitor wrote:
| If it works like the iPhone, it'll be alright. It doesn't
| really cut into screen real estate. You just get a little
| extra notification area
| clolege wrote:
| Well the iPhone has a touchscreen whereas this will be used
| with a mouse.
|
| I'm wondering what the behavior will be to run the mouse
| across the top of the screen?
| dkonofalski wrote:
| On the contrary...you get _more_ screen real estate.
| have_faith wrote:
| > letterboxes fullscreen apps.
|
| Sounds odd but I'll see what it's like in practice
| dkonofalski wrote:
| Look at the old Macbook pros. The bezel at the top was
| thick. All they did was cut into the bezel so, in
| letterboxed mode, the display is the same size as the now
| previous gen of Macbooks.
| paxys wrote:
| I don't think it will be that bad on Macbooks, because the
| notch will be embedded in the top menu bar.
| Svetlitski wrote:
| Killer specs, better keyboard (no touchbar), more ports, and yet
| the most frequent comment here is about the notch. HN is a tough
| crowd to say the least, in this instance IMO to the point of it
| being comical.
| tiffanyh wrote:
| No FaceID. Interesting.
| troupe wrote:
| Yes that is interesting. Maybe it would have made the notch
| bigger? :)
| Tade0 wrote:
| The iris is superior to other biometric modalities in so many
| ways that they appear to be almost toys in comparison.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| FaceID isn't iris-based.
| Tade0 wrote:
| Yes and I assume that's why it didn't survive.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| It's in the latest iPhones.
|
| It was never in the Macbooks.
| bengale wrote:
| I'm so disappointed to trade a multifunction thunderbolt port for
| a single use hdmi port when the same thing can be done with a PS5
| cable. I wish I could get that M1 pro max chip in my current
| MacBook Pro.
| macintux wrote:
| I have to admit, that was frustrating. I've been in one
| meeting, once, where I needed HDMI but didn't have any dongles.
| dcdevito wrote:
| No M1 Pro/Max Mini announced and my conspiracy theory on that is:
| they couldn't justify a high price tag for it and instead are
| pushing pro users to the MacBook Pro and eventually Mac Pro and
| maybe iMac Pro. If they did an M1 Pro Mini would cannibalize
| these MacBook pros.
|
| I'm glad I pulled the trigger two weeks ago and I just received
| my M1 mini last week, I am relieved and will be continuing to
| enjoy it
| satoshiiii wrote:
| And here I am with my Lenovo S10-3 still doing fine in 2021. My
| use case is if I can produce something fast with this machine
| then half of the battle has already been won because by default I
| need to optimize for the lowest possible spec of my target
| market.
|
| Obviously, I know this won't apply to everyone but anyway I hope
| this will continue for me a couple more years.
| atommclain wrote:
| The idea pad? Is it your main computer? I have an S10-2 I
| bought for installing a transflective display, and I can't
| imagine using it for much more than noodling around with. I
| just wish it was just slightly larger to accommodate a decent
| keyboard and a slim battery.
| qolop wrote:
| I'm using a 6 year old ThinkPad X250 with 4GB of RAM.
|
| The benefit of using it is that I have zero tolerance for
| bloated software because it just won't run on my machine. This
| includes the software I make.
|
| And you're right, developers SHOULD be using the lowest
| possible spec of the target market. Whenever I visit some
| bloated SPA that crashes my browser I always imagine the
| developer being some smug chap with a fully specced MacBook Pro
| patting themselves on the back for what a smooth website
| they've built.
| didip wrote:
| I am so excited that the new MacBook Pro contains so many things
| that customers had been yearning.
|
| Couple that with 64GB RAM and M1 Max, if I am going to spend >
| $3000 for a laptop, this MBP is basically the only game in town
| for me.
| mushufasa wrote:
| We've passed 1337 comments
| partiallypro wrote:
| A big notch and all of that for no FaceID? Only Apple could get
| away with that.
| Joeri wrote:
| It's weird how now the only touch bar mac is that weird m1
| macbook pro which now nobody will be buying when the 14 inch is
| so much better for not much more money, and the macbook air is
| almost as good for a lot less money. They went from all pro
| macbooks sold having touch bars to effectively none of them.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| I won't be getting one, because the M1 Air is currently more than
| enough for comfortable webdev, but I'm genuinely happy for people
| who will be getting one, because those things are incredible!
| H12 wrote:
| My first hope is that the Pro line leads to more ubiquitous ARM
| support for professional software tools.
|
| I'm lucky that most of my WebDev workflow works fine on M1, but
| there are those rare instances I bump into something that
| doesn't work quite right. And unfortunately, these instances
| tend to be pretty frustrating.
|
| My second hope is that more ubiquitous ARM support lights a
| fire under other CPU designers to build better high-performance
| ARM chips for other desktop operating systems. I've been
| interested in switching to Linux for some time, but the
| hardware/performance of my M1 Air simply has no real
| competition at the moment.
|
| An ARM-powered Framework laptop running Arch is my dream.
| agandy wrote:
| Are there any recent examples of web development things that
| haven't worked right on the M1? I'm looking to upgrade but am
| worried about this.
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| Node 14 won't compile natively on arm64 right now. Though I
| do understand it's installable with Rosetta.
| francislata wrote:
| This is me too! I'm content with the M1 chip for mobile and ML
| development. I know this machine of mine will last a few years
| before it needs an upgrade!
| aaaaaaaaaaab wrote:
| Don't worry, webdevs around the world will do their best to
| hasten it as much as possible!
| laurent92 wrote:
| I think every React component should be a docker vm.
| jmkni wrote:
| Same, I have the 13" M1 Pro and I don't regret it.
|
| I don't.
|
| I don't regret it...
| comeonseriously wrote:
| So true. Maybe the refreshed Air in a few months will have more
| ports and be an even better value (relatively speaking).
| crubier wrote:
| The 1000nits display (1600nits "peak", whatever that means), is a
| major selling point for me!
| Griffinsauce wrote:
| Pretty bummed about magsafe.
|
| No more taking one charger for 5 devices and another single
| purpose cable that isn't so easy to get a workable
| backup/replacement for.
| gchokov wrote:
| You can still charge via thunderbolt / usb-c!! :)
| Vadoff wrote:
| How come when you upgrade to the 24 core M1 max, it adds +$600
| when the upgrade lists it as +$200. After you try to remove the
| upgrade the price only drops by only -$200.
|
| Is this a bug?
| huy-nguyen wrote:
| I think the reason is that the upgraded CPU ($200 extra)
| automatically triggers an upgrade of the memory config from
| 16GB to 32GB ($400 extra). That explains the $600 increase.
| Vadoff wrote:
| Ah, that makes sense.
| mihaaly wrote:
| That notch thing will put me off! Ugliest impractical thing
| causing additional efforts and potential troubles unnecessarily.
| Avoiding iPhones with that, will do the same with laptops.
|
| And that magsafe -> no magsafe -> magsafe again disarray! Come
| on, make up your f mind. I held off buying new computer looong,
| did not want to leave MagSafe, it recently died so was forced
| into USB-C charging, which I did not want at all, ok, reshaped my
| practice and now this?! A never existed incompatible magsafe
| again?! I don't want to switch yet again, the magsafe 1 to 2 was
| a pain alone, then USB-C is a torture, I fn not do that again! Ok
| it presumably charges through thunderbolt 4 ports too with USB-C
| (theoretically, one never knows as I heard) but you spread your
| new magsafe after killing it proudly and loudly!? Jesus!
|
| How come Apple can ruin and confuse things so effortlessly, do
| they have a mandatory training in that or what?! It is big kudos
| to remove touchbar, have (have?) proper keyboard after the
| pathetic stumble series of trying to reinvent the wheel and f up
| the life of millions (the Air M1 is flawed still, repeats keys
| frequently), hallelujah for having HDMI again, finally paying
| attention of practicaliities in a consumer product not just the
| appearances and show-off but come on! Now this idiotic notch
| thing and the zillionth way of charging again? Very off putting,
| again, continuouusly now. Actually not interested to buy.
| (luckily I do not need a power plannt only a decent performing
| one so I can live with my advanced Air M1 for long long long time
| - assuming the keybard holds off -, when my wife's old Air dies
| we will stick to that or turning back to some serious
| manufacturer making laptops for use not for show)
| gnrlst wrote:
| You know it still supports USB-C charging right?
|
| Rather than confusion, I would see it as Apple finally turning
| things around and getting back on a road that is less "design
| above all else"
| oreilles wrote:
| You can blame Apple for having made dumb decisions in the past,
| but you can't blame them for fixing them now. Also, what
| additional efforts and problems with the notch are you talking
| about ?
| darkcha0s wrote:
| No matter what changes apples implements (even if its reverting
| to things people wanted back), people like you will always find
| a way to complain. Having used an iphone for a while, the notch
| really isn't noticeable, and I'd trade it for having a thick
| black border at the top any day.
| brailsafe wrote:
| I'm happy to magsafe back. Even though I usually have mine
| sitting on a stand, I'm just lucky that I haven't yanked
| everything off my desk at this point. HDMI I couldn't care less
| about, but I suppose it provides another way to hook up to my
| display. I use a usb-c -> displayport connector most of the time
| though.
| killion wrote:
| I haven't been able to see if the DAC that powers the headphone
| port supports 24-bit/192 kHz yet. Being able to listen to
| Lossless audio without a USB DAC would be nice.
|
| It seems possible that Apple would add that since it's a feature
| of Apple Music Lossless.
| MetricExpansion wrote:
| During the video, they quickly mentioned that the jack supports
| high-impedance headphones and later specifically mention that
| you can connect "high-fidelity" headphones. Skip to about 33:30
| in the video. So while nothing shows up on the spec page on
| their website, I wonder if they're taking audio output more
| seriously.
| dreamer7 wrote:
| Have Macbook Pro sales been declining for the past few years? I
| can understand removing the touchbar as a bad experiment but I
| thought Apple was obstinate about the move to USB-C. Really did
| not expect this backpeddling.
|
| Edit - I'm definitely pleased with the move to add more ports.
| Just surprised.
| rackjack wrote:
| Do they have an escape key? (This is not a joke question.)
| zamadatix wrote:
| Yes, there are plenty of pictures of it on the page
| https://www.apple.com/v/macbook-pro-14-and-16/a/images/overv...
| tiffanyh wrote:
| No FaceID. Interesting.
| msie wrote:
| The touch-id is so fast, I don't mind.
| can16358p wrote:
| When I saw the notch I immediately thought of Face ID. But
| comparing how frequent we unlock our Macs vs phones, it makes
| sense not to put it.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| Windows Hello is widely praised as an excellent feature, I
| don't see why FaceID on Mac would somehow be different.
| dewiz wrote:
| could be "face ID ready" without telling us, and share it will
| be a coming with macOS 12 on M1 Pro+
| aaroninsf wrote:
| My thought as well. That's a software features as long as the
| requisite hardware is there. There is a track record of
| hardware sitting dormant on some Apple hardware, too.
| oefrha wrote:
| Don't fish for karma by making the exact same comment on four
| threads.
| valine wrote:
| They probably want developers to optimize around the notch
| shape. Would be dumb to change the shape next year when they
| add faceID.
| mgkimsal wrote:
| Not trying to be snarky here, but... it'll probably come across
| that way.
|
| Will we ever see the end of beach balls? I've got an m1 Mac mini,
| and ... I see far fewer, but I still see them. I don't understand
| what with so many core, so must 'fast' and 'powerful' stuff, that
| my computer will _still_ freeze and lag doing seemingly normal
| stuff.
| DantesKite wrote:
| That's less of an Apple problem and more of a developer
| problem.
| setpatchaddress wrote:
| The beachball isn't directly related to CPU speed. It indicates
| the main thread of the foreground app is busy for more than a
| few seconds. It may be, for example, blocked waiting for
| something from the network -- which is one reason it's
| important for macOS developers to move filesystem and network
| access to background threads as much as possible.
| jacobolus wrote:
| https://accidentallyquadratic.tumblr.com
| afandian wrote:
| It's been a while since I developed on Mac OS, but ISTR that
| beach balls happen when the main thread blocks and doesn't
| respond to events. If an application does that it's due to the
| developer putting too much on the main thread, as much as
| whatever the CPU's doing.
| wrs wrote:
| Based on long experience I suspect most beachballs nowadays are
| because of locks, not lack of CPU cycles. The UI thread is
| waiting for something to happen in the background that should
| have been fast, so the developer did it synchronously, but for
| some reason it isn't. Maybe a helper process failed, or there's
| a network glitch, or maybe the developer just didn't get
| multithread locking right and the wait will never end. In any
| case, a faster processor does nothing to help.
| Andys wrote:
| Good reason to support Linux port project.
| nitins_jakta wrote:
| Unfortunately it looks like Apple still has no option to disable
| temporal dithering or other sources of flicker (PWM, pixel
| inversion, etc).
|
| A minority of people have binocular vision dysfunctions (like
| convergence insufficiency) that give them severe eyestrain,
| headaches and migraines when this flicker occurs. Apple should
| treat this like an accessibility issue (like VoiceOver) but does
| not. The current treatment from behavioral optometrists is not
| always effective.
|
| I recently found a whole community on this:
| https://ledstrain.org.
|
| If you have expertise in displays, please join us on LED Strain!
| We were hoping Apple would address these accessibility issues and
| let people with vision problems use their products.
| buzzert wrote:
| Do you have to use laptops with cathode backlights instead?
| nitins_jakta wrote:
| Ah, so for most of us LED itself is not strictly the problem.
| Low quality ones with a low refresh rate, like in some
| department stores, are a problem.
|
| It is likely other sources of flicker like temporal dithering
| (FRC), you can see it here (it is on Windows too):
| https://youtu.be/0y-I3hqQgCQ
|
| The visual noise/dots you see is the dithering. The e-ink
| display is slow enough so we can see it.
|
| People with BVDs are strongly affected by that noise...and
| unfortunately simple pair of glasses does not help.
| tcoff91 wrote:
| Have you considered trying Neurolens?
| http://www.neurolenses.com/
|
| If you've already tried prism lenses to help address the
| convergence insufficiency then these won't help. These are
| basically prism lenses but they're a progressive prism so the
| prism is strongest at the bottom and nonexistent at the top so
| you can wear one pair of glasses all day and have them help
| with devices but still have good distance vision through the
| top part of the lens.
| nitins_jakta wrote:
| Thanks for pointing this out.
|
| We actually have a discussion about Neurolens on LEDStrain:
| https://ledstrain.org/d/754-trigeminal-dysphoria-and-
| neurole...
|
| I plan to give them a try. But unfortunately it does not work
| for everyone.
|
| Have you had success with them? Many other members have
| convergence excess (esophoria) or vertical heterophoria.
| tcoff91 wrote:
| I have exophoria and myopia I am quite comfortable at the
| computer all day. Before I was diagnosed with exophoria and
| got these, I found my own way to cope which was to wear an
| old pair of glasses which were a much weaker prescription
| in terms of diopters. Whenever at the computer I would need
| to switch glasses to the weaker prescription or my eyes
| would bother me. With Neurolens wearing the same glasses
| all day whether or not I'm at the computer feels perfectly
| fine and I have zero eye strain at the computer.
| nitins_jakta wrote:
| Great to hear you found a solution. I believe Neurolens
| is focused on treating exophoria where the prism
| correction required is different at near vs. distance. In
| most patients, the correction required at near is
| greater.
|
| The Neurolens are also unfortunately very expensive and
| seems to not be covered by insurance. But I think most
| people would gladly pay out of pocket to get relief. I
| surely would.
| srvmshr wrote:
| I dread manually resizing tiled windows every single time now.
| This is especially true if others in my situation do code reviews
| on two side-by-side non-fullscreen windows.
|
| > Comment moved from other post.
| fflluuxx wrote:
| I really hate the feet. Just the bottom half of the form factor
| looks like they're going back to 2006 design.
| asdff wrote:
| Very ugly but luckily you don't look at that part much on a
| laptop. Especially on macs, the rubber feet just fall off and
| the case ends up scratched and marred up overtime.
| gimmeThaBeet wrote:
| Yeah I have a 2012(?) and one of the only things is that the
| feet have all worn flat and smooth, and feel like they are
| going to fall off. And if I want to overthink it, it's
| probably one of the cheapest feeling things about it.
|
| What do you mean the rubber feet don't stay on? They make
| millions of these, milled out of aluminum, they can't keep
| the feet on?
|
| Personally, I would trade a lot of design elegance for some
| hardy laptop feet.
| asdff wrote:
| I have two 2012 era macs and both are on their second or
| third set of rubber feet by now. The adhesive just gives
| out over time.
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| $2500 USD (PS1800 GBP) to buy in the US vs PS2500 GBP. Apple are
| a total rip off.
| thehappypm wrote:
| Tariffs must be part of this.
| flpp1 wrote:
| Nice hardware. It's a pity that I don't trust them with my data
| any more. What will they scan and report?
| karxxm wrote:
| Does someone know the implications of the new M1 chips for neural
| network training? If I get it right, we'll see upto 64GB GPU on
| the new M1 processors? The processing performance will not be the
| same as on a dedicated graphics card, but 64GB is a game changer,
| especially for large models, isn't it?
| wodenokoto wrote:
| Interested if the macsafe cable ends in a power adapter or ends
| in a usb-c plug.
|
| E.g can I attach a usb-c to usb-c cable to the accompanying power
| brick when traveling?
| chromatin wrote:
| It ends in USB-C =)
| soheil wrote:
| The notch is awful, it took Apple years to finally upgrade their
| crapy 720p camera to a mere 1080 and now they added an ugly notch
| around it that ruins the aesthetic of every program in
| fullscreen. Even in normal mode I have several menubar apps that
| show things like cpu load, bandwidth, etc that span almost the
| full width of the screen, the notch will certainly make it worse.
| mLuby wrote:
| Hooray for the return of MagSafe and the other ports! Thank you
| for listening, Apple.
|
| Just one mention of "games" and it's about the display
| resolution, so it sounds like Apple still doesn't care about
| getting more game developers on Mac.
|
| > thermal systems move 50 percent more air, even at lower fan
| speeds.
|
| Does that mean it's even louder than before?
| Justsignedup wrote:
| Yay magsafe is back.
|
| Boo magsafe is now a brand new one, incompatible with old
| chargers, and even usb-c chargers. YAY! Rejoice!
|
| Jesus I hate apple's policies on dongles and such.
|
| But at least they ackgnowledged that everyone wants an hdmi
| connection. Everyone.
| ksec wrote:
| HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet
| inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back
| because the future is USB-C.
|
| Now I just want to know if the new keyboard has more key travel
| distance back to the like of MacBook Pro 2015.
|
| In case anyone wants to know the thickness difference.
|
| MacBook Pro 13" 2015 - 1.8 cm
|
| MacBook Pro 13" 2016 - 1.49 / 1.55 cm
|
| MacBook Pro 14" / 16" 2021 - 1.55 / 1.66cm
|
| So basically even the new 16" is still thinner than the MacBook
| 2015 era. Which I think vast majority of people were happy with.
|
| Edit: Both 14" and 16" have 254 PPI, up from ~220. Apple tends to
| stick with same PPI for a very long time. So this is interesting.
| 3456-by-2234 or 3024-by-1964 is 14:9 Ratio. So somewhere in
| between the old 16:10 and 3:2 which is current trend of Lenovo
| and Surface Laptop.
| irae wrote:
| Some basic math makes believe the Monterey menu bar might be
| 74px height.
|
| (3456 * 10/16)-2234 = -74 (3024 * 10/16)-1964 = -74
|
| Which means both models have a 16:10 ratio + 74 extra pixels in
| heigh. Clearly they are adding stuff for the notch instead of
| clipping from useful area...
| Andrew_nenakhov wrote:
| It would still _feel_ like it is clipped, regardless of the
| actual gain in pixels.
| jonny_eh wrote:
| Sounds like you'd enjoy a pan & scan film :)
| [deleted]
| yarcob wrote:
| > Both 14" and 16" have 254 PPI, up from ~220.
|
| That is a very welcome improvement! I like scaling my display a
| bit so I have more real estate, but then the fonts get a bit
| blurry. 10% more resolution sounds great!
| krzyk wrote:
| Bummer, I hooe usbc can still be used for charging. Abd that
| will be the default charger. I love the fact that I can charge
| my phone laptoo (lenovo) and my wifes macbook air all with the
| same charger.
|
| Bummer 2, because now producers of tvs/monitors will have less
| drive to reolace old hdmi with usbc.
|
| sd cards? Are they that popular nowadays?
| frosted-flakes wrote:
| SD cards are still widely used in professional cameras, and
| they're not going away anytime soon.
| krzyk wrote:
| Yeah, I have one, but I use it so rarely since I had Pixel
| 4.
|
| I was also looking at wifi enabled sdcards, because I'm
| lazy and would like to get images sync themselves.
|
| I thought pros use wifi sd cards already.
| BuildTheRobots wrote:
| Wi-Fi SD cards are kinda cool, but I don't know any pro
| that uses them. The write speeds tend to be slow, which
| is noticeable even for still photography nevermind if
| you're recording 4k video on a prosumour drone or camera.
| Secondly, they're inside a device and have the antenna
| built in, so as well as draining battery it's slow to
| transfer files off. If you're shooting 3mb jpegs then it
| might be OK, but my 6 year old DSLR is producing 30mb
| files per exposure.
| Someone1234 wrote:
| > I hope usbc can still be used for charging
|
| They said it can.
| kainosnoema wrote:
| My guess is this change was brought about by all the poor
| quality USB-C cables, hubs, and chargers out there. I bricked
| my Macbook Pro M1 by trying to power it from a supposedly
| compatible hub but wasn't negotiating the power output
| properly. Had to send it in for repair and have heard many
| other similar reports... guessing they decided to bring back
| the Magsafe for fast charging to avoid this headache of
| cheap/improperly manufactured USB-C hardware.
| ErneX wrote:
| These new computers can also be charged over USB-C.
| handrous wrote:
| The place I worked when the USB-C MacBooks came out had a
| hell of a time with video output. This monitor only works
| with a DisplayPort dongle, this one won't work with a new
| MacBook _at all_ , this one works but only if you use _one
| specific_ cable, this one works but glitches in ways it
| never did with HDMI, et c. There came to be a whole level
| of cult knowledge about which laptop + cable + monitor
| combos would work and which wouldn 't.
|
| It was a _very dumb_ situation. If they really wanted to go
| to USB-C they should have had a transition period where
| they just replaced the thunderbolt and maybe the charging
| ports, until shit settled down--which it never really did,
| because the USB-C cable situation is insane, so here we
| are, with some ports added back.
|
| It's 2021, almost 2022, and I still wish one of the ports
| they'd put back was USB-A. I'll probably feel the same way
| in 2025. _Maybe_ by 2030, when almost none of these MBPs
| are still in use, I won 't still need a USB-A port way more
| than I need a USB-C port.
| apostacy wrote:
| I think that many people only decided that they didn't
| need these features because Apple removed them.
|
| It reminds me of this video from awhile ago by The Onion:
|
| Apple Introduces Revolutionary New Laptop With No
| Keyboard[1]
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9BnLbv6QYcA
| hbn wrote:
| Oh man, that's one of my favorite Onion videos. So many
| clever subtleties that make it a UX nightmare. Like how
| the first suggestion when you select T is the unicode TM
| symbol, the absurd sentence predictions that come up
| first when you type "the a", scrolling through an
| alphabetical list of every file on your hard drive.
|
| I also imagine they were making a joke with the $2600
| starting price, which is funny cause that's what I paid
| (albeit in Canadian dollars) for my base-model 14" MBP
| yesterday
| tw04 wrote:
| > My guess is this change was brought about by all the poor
| quality USB-C cables, hubs, and chargers out there.
|
| I doubt it, you can still plug the usb-c >> magsafe3 cable
| into a crappy hub.
|
| It's almost assuredly to bring back the "my idiot pet or
| rambunctious child just ran through my power cord"
| breakaway support.
| gnufied wrote:
| This is moot now right? Because even though magsafe point
| is back, they are still shiping with USBC charger by
| default.
| jonny_eh wrote:
| And you can still plug a sketchy USB-C charger into one
| of the 3 ports.
| kainosnoema wrote:
| The announcement implies that they no longer attempt fast
| charging over USB-C, so lower power requirement will
| improve reliability with 3rd party hardware.
| jhugo wrote:
| What? Where does it imply that?
| didibus wrote:
| Ya, for connecting to a hub it's awesome, just plug one cable
| in and you get power, monitor, keyboard and mouse. Hope that
| still works.
|
| Also, I like being able to charge on either side, it's
| annoying having the cable across when the plug is on the
| wrong side.
|
| So if the Thunderbolt 4 ports support all this, then it's
| amazing, just best of all worlds. Otherwise a bit of a
| bummer.
| philihp wrote:
| USB-C are more like adapters that let you plug in anything
| that isn't USB-C. There still does not exist a device for
| under 100 USD that will let you plug in the MBP's USB-C
| power, a USB-C (over thunderbolt 3) monitor, and also a
| USB-C to Lightning cable. I hope you didn't have a wired
| keyboard, too.
|
| There does exist a hub that has 2 USB-As and 2 USB-Cs for
| 50 USD, but it does not pass through video or power.
| cyberge99 wrote:
| Thunderbolt4, while more expensive, supports all of this
| and with a clearly marked cable. Usb-c is a mess. It's
| worth the extra $20 to have a cable that can do usb-c and
| thunderbolt.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| You can still use the thunderbolt/USBC ports (not sure if all
| three or just one) for charging. But I think only the new
| MagSafe 3 port gives you fast charge (50% battery life in 30
| minutes).
| skuhn wrote:
| You can still charge with the USB-C ports. The supplied power
| adapter is a USB-C charger with a detachable USB-C to Magsafe
| cord.
| TacticalCoder wrote:
| So it's now going to be possible to use magsafe for non
| Apple device but that are using USB-C charging?
| Slippery_John wrote:
| No. Magsafe is a different port. The magsafe cable is
| magsafe on one end, usb-c on the other. The magsafe end
| being the bit that pushes power out.
| Gigachad wrote:
| It's a USB-C brick with a USB-C to MagSafe cable. You can
| remove the magsafe part and use it with a C-C charger
| SiVal wrote:
| I wonder if you can still use the old magsafe power cords
| to charge the new machines, even if at a lower wattage.
| Those charger cables aren't cheap, and I still have a few
| from old MBPs.
| tw04 wrote:
| I highly doubt it, MagSafe 1 to 2 looks similar but are
| different physical dimensions. MagSafe 3 looks to be the
| same, the port looks significantly skinnier/shorter than
| 2 (about the same as the usb-c ports).
| Hackbraten wrote:
| You can keep using them with a Magsafe-to-USB-C adapter,
| for example from Elecjet [1]. I have a couple of those
| and they have worked just fine with my 2017 MBP.
|
| [1]: https://elecjet.com/products/anywatt-magsafe
| skuhn wrote:
| I'm guessing its not physically compatible, since they
| made a point of calling it MagSafe 3. But we won't know
| until a machine lands in the wild.
| dev_tty01 wrote:
| It is shaped differently and they said it was updated to
| support more current.
| andrei_says_ wrote:
| And the MagSafe cord retails for $50.
|
| For a power cable.
| girvo wrote:
| > sd cards? Are they that popular nowadays?
|
| For photographers, absolutely.
| abraxas wrote:
| >Now I just want to know if the new keyboard has more key
| travel distance back to the like of MacBook Pro 2015.
|
| If it's the same as the 2020 then no. It's better than the
| butterfly but not as good as the 2015
| lanna wrote:
| > 3456-by-2234 or 3024-by-1964 is 14:9 Ratio
|
| If we subtract 74 pixels from their heights, we get 3456 by
| 2160 and 3024 by 1890, both of which are 1.6. So I'm guessing
| the notch is 74 pixels high?
| rz2k wrote:
| I thought the 2016 MacBook Pro was an enormous improvement over
| the 2015 models, because 3 lbs is the sweet spot for me where I
| no longer had a hard time deciding between an Air or Pro model.
| The 14" model is 3.5 lbs like the 2015 13".
|
| Users' testimonials will probably make me happy that I waited
| for the second iteration of Apple silicon, but I do wish there
| was an option that had a combination of trade-offs like smaller
| battery, terrible speakers, or no magsafe to get it half a
| pound lighter.
| Aperocky wrote:
| > Users' testimonials will probably make me happy that I
| waited for the second iteration of Apple silicon
|
| Is there a reference? I had the first gen (air) as my
| personal driver and couldn't have been more happy. I thought
| most user were pretty happy too.
| adamking wrote:
| Add my vote as a satisfied user. The M1 Air is the best
| personal laptop I've ever used. The battery life is just
| impeccable, it has plenty of power for what I need, and I
| imagine the longevity of this thing will be great because
| of the lack of fan and entry points for dust.
| aidos wrote:
| We've had the M1s for quite a while now and they were already
| head and shoulders above the previous Intel MacBooks.
| nanook wrote:
| I think these still stick to 16:10.
|
| If you take 74px off the height for the notch/menubar area, you
| get 3024 x 1890 and 3456 x 2160 which are both 16:10.
| g42gregory wrote:
| What will happen if you mirror screen with a 16:10 monitor?
| Will it display black bars on the sides?
| [deleted]
| divbzero wrote:
| This sounds right to me. In full screen mode, the menu bar
| area will be replaced by an artificial black bezel that hides
| the notch. [1]
|
| [1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/macos-hides-notch-
| on-ne...
| necovek wrote:
| > HDMI, SD Card, and MagSafe. Things people on the internet
| inclusive but not limited to HN said they will never come back
| because the future is USB-C.
|
| They don't say it anywhere, but I hope HDMI inclusion is for
| the 2.1 version's increased bandwidth (even over TB4),
| potentially allowing for single-cable 8k at 60Hz.
| top_sigrid wrote:
| Citing the technical specs this [1] says it's only HDMI 2.0.
| The spec [2] only says "4K bei 60 Hz", so i guess that's
| right.
|
| [1] https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/macbook-pro-
| hdmi-2-0-po...
|
| [2] https://www.apple.com/de/macbook-pro-14-and-16/specs/
| busymom0 wrote:
| Is the increased thickness the reason for the much longer
| battery life?
| Bud wrote:
| It's part of it. ProMotion helps, by increasing efficiency
| for screen redraws. A new display architecture helps, due to
| more power efficiency. More thickness means room for a larger
| battery. And M1 helps by being vastly more power-efficient
| than Intel.
| 00deadbeef wrote:
| > So basically even the new 16" is still thinner than the
| MacBook 2015 era
|
| Oh wow. Apple's photos make it look so fat. I'm still using a
| 2013 15" MBP and am very happy with how thin it is.
| bartvk wrote:
| Yeah, that's what I didn't get either. From the side view
| pictures, I actually estimated that it got thicker.
| piokoch wrote:
| I am very curios about this laptop thickness topic. I
| understand that going from 3 cm laptop to 2 cm is a noticeable
| difference and might have some practical effects. I can believe
| that 3cm laptop does not fit the bag well, but 2cm does.
|
| But here we go from 1.8cm to 1.55 cm, does this make any
| practical, visible difference?
| ksec wrote:
| It does. If you have an old MacBook Pro 2015 and MacBook Pro
| 2016+ the difference is quite noticeable.
|
| But the trade off from 1.8cm to 1.55cm is subject of your
| personal opinion. In a perfect world we would want a 1.55cm
| laptop with the same heat removing capability as the 1.8cm.
| medstrom wrote:
| No. It's a matter of being used to something. When used to
| 1.8 cm, you go "wow" at 1.55, but going in the reverse
| direction is a shrugging matter. For weight it's the
| opposite. When used to a light laptop, you find a slightly
| heavier laptop to weigh a thousand tons, but going from heavy
| to light is a shrugging matter.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| Agree- I have been largely disappointed by USB-C. It's been
| okay as a smaller USB-A replacement for flash drives and mice,
| but in general the lesson of USB-C is: just because it fits,
| doesn't mean it works.
|
| My personal favorite annoyance is how chargers and cables are
| advertised with the wattage they support, but it's really the
| voltage and current that matters.
|
| If you have a device that wants 20W as 9V/2.22A , your 30W
| charger may not support that specific combination and will
| charge much slower than a 20W charger that does.
|
| Edit: Yes, I went to middle school and know that power is
| voltage times current. My point is: having an equal or higher
| wattage USB-C charger is not sufficient.
| r00fus wrote:
| > Agree- I have been largely disappointed by USB-C. It's been
| okay as a smaller USB-A replacement for flash drives and
| mice, but in general the lesson of USB-C is: just because it
| fits, doesn't mean it works.
|
| I think USB-C works fine (h/t Benson Leung) but the
| implementation is problematic. Partly because of the
| complexity of everything they've tried to shove in, also
| partly because USB-A still exists and is the biggest
| competitor USB-C needs to overcome.
|
| Give it 5 more years and we'll look at USB-A like serial
| ports. Till then, USB-A is legion.
| vanilla_nut wrote:
| Given that we're already 5+ years into Apple's USB-C
| revolution, I'm not so confident that this is going to
| happen. I'm going to keep using my USB-A peripherals for a
| long time, and more importantly, mice, yubikeys, keyboards,
| and a whole lot of other things are still largely sold with
| USB-A. Some of those have replaceable cables... but it's
| still a lot of effort to move away from that.
|
| Furthermore, ditching all of those USB-A accessories and
| cables that still work fine just feels wasteful. If the
| only thing you're throwing them away for is compatibility,
| and not some feature that's actually improving them, even
| more of a waste. It's just churn to push more tech company
| profits.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| This is a gradual transition. Most electronics last
| somewhere around 5-8 years, so we're looking at another 5
| years before we can truly ditch USB-A.
|
| The fundamental mistake Apple made was continuing to ship
| USB-A cables in the box with products, and expecting
| USB-C adopters to pay up for USB-C cables. This was good
| for Apple's short-term margins, but terrible for the
| transition.
|
| So, I blame Apple for keeping USB-A alive. They
| introduced the all USB-C Macbook Pros in late 2016. You'd
| have expected that over the next year they'd have phased
| out USB-A, so by 2017 or 2018 they'd have not shipped any
| USB-A cables or adapters in the box.
|
| But nope. Airpods 2 (released in 2019) still ship with a
| USB-A cable in the box. It's the same with the iPhone 11
| (2019), and the Magic accessories for MacBooks until
| 2021.
|
| > If the only thing you're throwing them away for is
| compatibility, and not some feature that's actually
| improving them, even more of a waste.
|
| Interestingly, this is also a good argument for why the
| EU shouldn't force iPhones to use USB-C. People have tons
| of lightning cables that would become e-waste overnight,
| and all the demand for USB-C to USB-C charging cables
| would be profits of (some) company - Apple, Anker, or
| random Amazon companies.
| hbn wrote:
| > The fundamental mistake Apple made was continuing to
| ship USB-A cables in the box with products, and expecting
| USB-C adopters to pay up for USB-C cables
|
| I remember hearing someone point out during that period
| that if you bought an iPhone and a MacBook, brand new,
| you couldn't plug the phone into the computer out of the
| box. Which seems like one of those things that would have
| been unacceptable to Jobs if he were still around.
| [deleted]
| bobthepanda wrote:
| USB-A also became so widespread that they became wall
| plugs in their own right, so at least those will stick
| around a lot longer unless people start hiring
| electricians to change their plugs.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| USB-A is alright for charging small electronics. It's 5V
| and somewhere between 0.5A and 2.1A (1A is very common).
|
| I have charging cables (with USB-A on the power side) in
| multiple places around the house, using the 5V/1A
| adapters that shipped with iPhones over the years. This
| works fine, though it is slower than the "fast charging"
| we've grown to expect these days.
|
| The device end of these cables are miniUSB (bicycle
| lights), microUSB (external battery pack), USB-C (my
| partner's noise cancelling headphones), and many of them
| are Lightning (Airpods, Airpods Max, iPhones, iPads,
| Apple TV Remote).
| lugged wrote:
| I suspect USBA isn't going away, it's far more robust
| than USBC, what I suspect will happen is devices that
| need smaller sockets will use USBC and everything else
| will stick with USBA. There is a reason I have one USBC
| port on my motherboard and 5 USBA ports.
| lamnk wrote:
| Guess I'm the opposite. I hate USB-A the connector with
| passion. I always have to try 2-3 times to be able to
| plug the USB-A connector in. Now I keep only 2 USB-A
| chargers in my home for legacy devices and advice my wife
| explitcitly not to buy new gadgets with USB-A connector,
| be it mini or micro.
| aceazzameen wrote:
| Here's a slightly helpful tip. USB-A connectors have a
| USB logo on them. Look at or feel for that logo on the
| connector and always have it face up when you plug it in.
| It should always work.
|
| There's a few exceptions. If the USB-A jack is rotated
| sideways on the device, then "up" could be left or right.
| And if it's a cheap off-brand sweat shop connector, then
| the logo may be on the opposite side. A sign that it
| could break quickly too.
| chromaton wrote:
| I've marked the top of all of my USB cables with
| contrasting paint.
| r00fus wrote:
| At some point in the future, USB-A will be phased out. If
| only because new devices will need the better profiles
| USB-C provides or because enough devices will no longer
| support USB-A.
|
| I'd say 3 more years will be the turning point. You must
| remember, before USB there was no universal port. So
| USB-A didn't have to replace it's predecessor.
| throw0101a wrote:
| > _Agree- I have been largely disappointed by USB-C._
|
| Also: the cockamamy version/naming convention(s) of the
| latest USB revisions.
| chx wrote:
| > If you have a device that wants 20W as 9V/2.22A , your 30W
| charger may not support that specific combination and will
| charge much slower than a 20W charger that does.
|
| Such a charger would be not specifications compliant. Don't
| blame the specs for what the manufacturers did with it.
|
| Oh and don't get me wrong: there _are_ a lot of problems with
| USB C mostly with the complete impossibility of knowing what
| the heck a USB C port is actually capable of. Is it
| Thunderbolt capable? if not, DisplayPort alternate mode
| capable? Can you charge the device over it? If yes, what 's
| the maximum wattage.
|
| This will ease finally because Microsoft will require PCIe
| tunneling on all C ports for the device to be Windows 11
| certified so there won't really be different USB 4 ports --
| except for charging wattage... https://docs.microsoft.com/en-
| us/windows-hardware/test/hlk/t...
| Kliment wrote:
| A charger does not have to support any particular
| voltage/current combination. If a device requests a
| specific config (9V/2A) but the charger only provides
| 12V/1.5A with 5V/1.5A fallback, then the best the two can
| negotiate is 5V at 1.5A. Even if the charger provides
| 9V/1.5A the device might be programmed to only accept 9V/2A
| with 5V fallback. This would be USB-compliant, but still
| frustrating to the user.
| dekhn wrote:
| I've been pretty impressed with USB-C. I've managed to add a
| GPU to a NUC and train/infer with tensorflow, no problems.
| Plug a computer into a monitor and power and keyboard/mouse
| at the same time, while also using same cable to pass through
| charge two lightning devices...
|
| I find it much harder to break a USB-C port then a micro USB
| port on all phones I've owned.
| nuker wrote:
| > Plug a computer into a monitor
|
| ... and get only 30Hz on 4k ;)
| rhysmorgan wrote:
| You can totally get 4K 60Hz, so long as the USB-C port
| supports DisplayPort 1.4a Alt-Mode.
|
| (which raises one of the problems with USB-C - it's
| impossible to tell how what features it supports)
| mrspuratic wrote:
| USB is meronymic morass.
|
| alt-mode was the "killer feature" for me, alt-mode MST
| with a bus-powered splitter to drive dual DP (or HDMI)
| QHD external screens from a single USB-C port. This makes
| a regular laptop a viable desktop replacement for me.
|
| Support for multiple external displays makes the billing,
| though these have 1x HDMI + 3x TB4 ports to play with.
| bb88 wrote:
| I've had headphones die because the connector came loose
| after around 500 insertion cycles.
|
| Several companies in China make a "mag safe"-style
| connector for micro usb that is really nice. Some of them
| only provide power/ground. Others provide the full 4-wire
| spec.
|
| I have a pair of Sony Headphones that annoyingly shut off
| the wireless when you charge them. So I didn't really care
| if it had the full four wire spec.
|
| There's some out there for USB-C, but I wouldn't trust them
| for high-speed data transfer.
| bradknowles wrote:
| All headphones and earphones I've tried will cut off
| everything else while they are being charged. Including
| Bose and Apple.
|
| Yes, this is a PITA. If you know of a maker of headphones
| and earphones that doesn't do this, please let me know.
| majormajor wrote:
| I've used my B&W PX over Bluetooth while charging over
| USB-C.
|
| They also support playback input over USB-C or 3.5mm.
| It's nice. Expensive, though. But not Apple Airpods Max
| expensive, at least!
| nl wrote:
| I also have the B&W PX and can confirm this.
|
| I don't love these headphones though. They clamp on my
| head way too hard for extended use.
| rejectfinite wrote:
| Weird, I can charge and listen to my Sennheiser Momentus
| Wireless 3 at the same time.
| brassattax wrote:
| I had (and lost, unforunately) a pair of Sennheiser MM400
| headphones... The charging jack was on the removable
| battery pack and you could charge it while using it (no
| effect at all on headphone operation)
| eitland wrote:
| I bought a used set of Bose QC (Quiet Comfort) and they
| came with two removable batteries and a charger, all
| packed nicely in a really small case.
|
| I replaced the foam for $7 at some point but they still
| worked nicely last time I checked despite being 7 or so
| years old now.
| ricardobeat wrote:
| Turtle Beach can charge while using. And play two inputs
| at once. The biggest downsides are how ugly they look and
| lack of NC.
| crummy wrote:
| Jabra 85h can charge over USB C and play over Bluetooth
| at the same time.
| DevoidSimo wrote:
| Adding another one, my Sennheiser PXC 550 (both original
| and II) will charge and do bluetooth or wired audio.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| > All headphones and earphones I've tried will cut off
| everything else while they are being charged. Including
| Bose and Apple.
|
| This has not been my experience with my AirPods Max. They
| work over Bluetooth just fine while being charged, unless
| they are completely depleted (0% battery).
|
| For reference, this is on firmware version 4A400 but this
| has been the case since I received them (months ago).
| dekhn wrote:
| I grew up using Walkman; I have decades of experience
| with 3.5mm headphones jacks breaking. Interestingly, it
| seems like nearly all devices with 3.5mm jacks are
| engineered a lot tougher because I haven't been able to
| break a jack in years.
| lupire wrote:
| 3.5m has 3 pins, and they are on a cylinder.
|
| USB-C has 24.
| crancher wrote:
| Wisdom accumulates!
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| There's a dead comment under here which points out that
| 3.5mm is three connections around a large-ish cylinder,
| while USB-C is 24 connections in a _tiny_ space.
|
| It's easy to make tough, lasting connections when you
| have space for decent-sized leaves of sprung metal.
|
| It's incredibly hard to make tough, lasting connections
| when each connection is on a 0.2mm pitch that is almost
| too small to see.
|
| Bottom line - USB-C is an optimistically designed
| standard. It's almost impossible to make a super-
| affordable USB-C connector which will stay reliable for
| thousands of insertions. Especially when it's also used
| for up to 100W of power.
|
| Plastics like Stanyl are supposed to be good for 10k
| cycles, but it's always tempting to cut corners and use
| something cheaper. And the physical design tends to
| collect dust and compact it inside the plug and the
| socket - which doesn't help.
| Psychlist wrote:
| I have magnetic connectors for USB-C in both varieties.
| The circular one I normally use just has two pins and is
| great because I put my phone down near the cable and it
| usually leaps across and connects. The multipin flat
| connector supports PD and data, I'm not sure exactly what
| its limits are but it does what I want.
|
| Both were cheap ebay purchases made because I'm willing
| to plug a $10 cable into a $600 phone despite the early
| USB-C cables occasionally frying devices.
| fsckboy wrote:
| > _much harder to break a USB-C port then a micro USB port
| on all phones I 've owned._
|
| phone context, yes. But in laptop/notebook context, USB-C
| is not durable, stuff gets very loose.
| sbuk wrote:
| Depends on the manufacturer. Lenovo x280 vs 2018 MBP. The
| Lenovo USB-C port is awful after 3 years of use, the port
| is loose and devices, including the woefully cheap
| charger, fall out. MBP, similar age (slightly older), and
| the ports still have a satisfying 'click' when plugged
| in. x280 cost more...
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| I find that port on the left here is decent, but the
| weird combined one is very bad:
|
| https://www.onmsft.com/wp-
| content/uploads/2020/09/ThinkPad-T...
| sbuk wrote:
| I don't know whether I over-use it, but the charger won't
| stay in of its own accord - same Lenovo brand charger
| works fine in the Mac. Pre lockdown, I commuted with both
| machines everyday. I've been disappointed with the build
| quality of the Lenovo laptop as a whole - the trackpad
| has the surface peeling off and the backlight is covered
| in bright spots which I can only assume happens because
| the back-panel doesn't have adequate protection.
| FractalParadigm wrote:
| What I personally hate is how cable type/speeds aren't
| usually advertised. I've got a dozen or so USB-C 2.0 cables
| that feel useless for anything but power, and only a couple
| 3.0 cables that continually get lost and need replacing. The
| connector itself is fantastic, USB-A and USB-B have needed
| replacing for a long time (especially since 3.0), but the
| implementation has been a disaster by any measurable margin.
| nerfhammer wrote:
| > chargers and cables are advertised with the wattage they
| support, but it's really the voltage and current that
| matters.
|
| watts = volts * current
| kccqzy wrote:
| GP's point is that although chargers are labeled with
| wattage, they can't output any combination of volts and
| currents as long as they multiply to the stated wattage.
| Can you take a normal 100W charger and ask it to output
| 100V and 1A? It can't.
|
| The Apple 29W charger supports two configurations only:
| 14.5V x 2A, or 5.2V x 2.4A
|
| The Apple 30W charger supports these four instead: 20V x
| 1.5A, 15V x 2A, 9V x 3A, 5V x 3A
|
| Do you see a problem here?
| nicbou wrote:
| I'm honestly really happy with USB-C. My phone, laptop and
| tablet charge the same way. I bring one charger and two
| cables, so I can pack much lighter than before. Each device
| can serve as a power bank for the others. My monitor serves
| as a powered hub, so there's only one cable connecting
| everything to my laptop. I use the same charger for
| everything from my camping lantern to my computer. I don't
| have a big box of cables anymore, nor do I pack 5 different
| cables when I'm on the move. It's very convenient.
|
| It only becomes a problem when I leave my bubble. I usually
| travel without my adapters, so I can't borrow someone's
| mouse, or plug something into their TV.
|
| Then there's the issue with cables and chargers. I have thick
| cables and 100W chargers, so it's never a bother, but it's
| not a trivial thing for the average user to make sense of.
| junon wrote:
| > chargers and cables are advertised with the wattage they
| support, but it's really the voltage and current that
| matters.
|
| Wattage is what you get when you multiply amps and volts. You
| just said the equivalent of "It's not about the ice cream,
| but about the ice and the cream".
|
| Also, it arguably _does_ have _everything_ to do with volts -
| if you put the too much voltage into a device, most likely
| you 're going to damage the device, its surroundings, or
| yourself (i.e. in a house fire).
| mlyle wrote:
| What he's saying is this:
|
| USB-PD on USB-C negotiates the highest voltage your device
| and charger will support.
|
| You can buy a 30W USB-PD charger that supports a smaller
| subset of voltages than a 20W USB-PD one, and in practice
| will deliver less power to your device because the voltages
| both like don't line up well.
|
| What actually is supported by each tends not to be
| specified/disclosed-- or if it is, it takes a lot of
| digging to figure it out.
| junon wrote:
| Yes and power negotiation does not protect against
| improper voltage whatsoever. This wasn't my point,
| despite me addressing negotiation in another comment.
| mlyle wrote:
| > Yes and power negotiation does not protect against
| improper voltage whatsoever.
|
| Oh? Everyone else seems to think the mechanisms are
| sufficient for safety.
|
| > This wasn't my point, despite me addressing negotiation
| in another comment.
|
| I still don't understand your point, unless it's a failed
| effort at pedantry.
| junon wrote:
| If I put 120 volts through to my MacBook directly over
| the cable it will invariably damage it. Voltage
| negotiation doesn't matter here.
|
| Also the original comment was unclear; they've edited to
| clarify. But of course, I'm the bad guy on HN for not
| being able to read minds.
|
| E: I realize my GP comment was also unclear. I should
| have said "excessive" voltage, not improper I suppose.
| "Improper" in my head meant outside the rated voltage for
| either end/the cable. I'm not the one being a pedant
| here.
| anamexis wrote:
| Voltage negotiation matters, because that what keeps a
| charger from putting 120 volts into your MacBook.
|
| Which is exactly what GP was saying in the very part that
| you quoted:
|
| > chargers and cables are advertised with the wattage
| they support, but it's really the voltage and current
| that matters.
|
| and what you agreed with in that very same comment:
|
| > Also, it arguably does have everything to do with volts
| anamexis wrote:
| USB-C power negotiation absolutely protects against
| improper voltage, assuming it is implemented correctly.
| can16358p wrote:
| Out of curuosity: is there any instance where it isn't
| implemented correctly that actually damaged/fried some
| electronics? What I've seen is that in the worst case it
| doesn't charge or negotiates at a very low voltage and
| charges slowly.
| jsjohnst wrote:
| Yes, I don't have a search term handy, but there's
| someone who maintains a website cataloging these.
| danachow wrote:
| What do you think USB power negotiation is for if not
| negotiating a mutually supported voltage? That's pretty
| much why it exists.
| u2c4m6 wrote:
| Your own analogy can be used to explain how you do not
| fully understand the situation. 10 cups of cream and 1 cup
| of ice does not make ice cream, even though that
| technically is ice and cream. Just like a 10V 5a charger is
| not the same as a 50V 1a charger.
| junon wrote:
| I think you've deliberately missed my point just to argue
| with me.
| stouset wrote:
| I don't think they did.
|
| The important part with regards to power delivery isn't
| simply wattage. If a hypothetical charger can put out 96W
| at 1V@96A, it's never going to deliver even close to that
| amount of power to a device that expects 96W at
| 20.5V@4.7A.
| u2c4m6 wrote:
| Exactly. I was not just trying to be a jerk. Their
| analogy was actually a good one, they just used it
| incorrectly. Ice cream is only ice cream in a certain
| range of ice to cream ratios, just like a charge needs a
| "close enough" mix of voltage and amps for it to reach
| useful wattage (depending on the device).
| parineum wrote:
| I'd say the same about your initial comment.
| awill wrote:
| I think what OP is saying is a cable might support 30W at
| 5V * 6A, but not 10V * 3A.
| junon wrote:
| They're not interchangeable. USB-C has power negotiation,
| but that doesn't mean the devices support those voltages.
| You still need to understand the voltage ratings on both
| ends of a cable.
| javawizard wrote:
| That's exactly what OP is saying - chargers are commonly
| advertised as being able to supply a particular wattage,
| but that particular wattage is only attainable _if_ the
| device being charged supports the maximum voltage the
| charger is capable of delivering.
|
| OP is complaining that that leaves the true wattage of a
| given device/charger pair unknowable from the charger's
| packaging alone without further information as to what
| voltages and at what currents it can supply on request
| from the device. It's certainly a valid frustration.
| junon wrote:
| This makes more sense and isn't how I parsed the original
| comment.
| parineum wrote:
| I found this comment that explains it well:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28911240
| anamexis wrote:
| That is precisely the point of the original comment that
| you responded to.
| jsjohnst wrote:
| The reverse situation would be the case (cable supports
| 3A, but not 6A). For the range of voltages supported by
| USB-PD, the _cable_ only cares about amperage. Copper
| wire doesn't care much if it's 5V, 50V, or 250V, it'll
| carry it the same. However, if the size of the wire isn't
| correct for the amperage, it'll over heat and potentially
| catch fire.
|
| It's the end device that cares about voltage and amperage
| both as the voltage steppers inside have to be ready to
| handle providing the right voltage to the chips and the
| amperage has to be right to handle the load.
| philliphaydon wrote:
| I'm dissappointed in USB in general, we have standards but it
| seems few follow standards. For example, I recently bought my
| wife an Asus ROG Falchion keyboard. Really tiny one with
| Zhuyin input.
|
| So the connection is USB-C, but if you connect ANY USB-C
| cable to the keyboard, it wont charge. Even the USB-C <>
| USB-C cable that comes with iPad Pro doesn't charge it. So
| far of the ~20 cables I own that I've tried, the only cable
| that will charge it is the Asus provided cable...
| can16358p wrote:
| Same with my Momentum 3 headset. It charges over any USB-C
| cable "that can also carry data". If the cable is power-
| only (and surprizingly, many are power-only, including
| Apple's cables that come with iPad/MacBook) it won't charge
| even though I just need to charge my headset and
| (obviously) no data transfer.
|
| It's stupid, but it is unfortunatelly the way it is.
| philliphaydon wrote:
| Oh! I wonder if it will work with my Wii cable then! I
| haven't tried that! It never occured to me that most of
| my cables are power only.
|
| Thanks!
| can16358p wrote:
| Yup, check if it can also carry data. If it can, it's
| probably that. Cheers!
| ksec wrote:
| Its time to tell the somewhat unpopular story again. (
| Because USB-C Supporters hate it )
|
| Trying to help a lawyer out and trying to explain why the
| $5.00 USB-C cable he'd bought from Amazon wasn't delivering
| 4K video to his expensive monitor AND powering his laptop
| too.
|
| Me: OK: so its a USB-C cable, but its not a high data rate
| USB-C cable.
|
| Him: But, its a USB-C Cable.
|
| Me: but, no, not all USB-C cables are high speed cables. And
| some of them can't do high speed and power delivery
|
| Him: but... its a USB-C cable: it plugs into the port.
|
| Me: Um... just because it plugs in, doesn't mean its going to
| work. You can have USB-C cables that are actually slower than
| the old USB ports.
|
| Him: but.... shouldn't it just work?
|
| And so on. For... 15? more minutes? maybe 30? I finally got
| him to buy a "proper" belkin USB-C cable . Which was bought
| from a company that should be anonymous, but lets just say
| that a "refurbished" cable was shipped, which, surprise,
| surprise ,didn't work, for ANYTHING. This basically sums up
| everything that is wrong with Tech thinking vs User Thinking.
| bastardoperator wrote:
| I have a USB-C monitor, so I just plug my macbook in with a
| single cable and I get power and video. How people aren't
| loving this I don't know. I use a display port dongle for
| two additional screens to make a triple display and I still
| have 2 USB-C ports available. I plug my keyboard/mouse into
| the monitor.
|
| If you're not loving USB-C, you're just not doing it right.
| antifa wrote:
| > This basically sums up everything that is wrong with Tech
| thinking vs User Thinking.
|
| Are the cables actually accurately describing themselves?
| I'm more concerned that products are obsfucating what
| corners they cut rather than that a lawyer should "know"
| the nuances of the USB-C industrial complex.
| robertlagrant wrote:
| > This basically sums up everything that is wrong with Tech
| thinking vs User Thinking.
|
| This is a pretend dichotomy. It's not "people who think
| about tech vs people who think about people." It's "some
| parts are cheaper than others because they don't do as
| much."
| hbn wrote:
| Maybe a road analogy would have helped him
|
| If you need to send 100 cars down a strip of road every 10
| seconds, you can't use any road. You'd need one with lots
| of lanes
|
| But that said, I'm not defending USB-C. It's true, I've had
| to do more research on cables than ever before in my life
| since it started becoming the new """standard"""
| farisjarrah wrote:
| Don't we have this problem with regular electrical cables,
| but instead of not working you blow a circuit breaker or
| just start an electrical fire? There is very little
| stopping me from going to a wall socket and hooking up a 20
| amp welder in a 15 amp plug and cranking it so the breaker
| trips or worse.
|
| edit: I wrote this but then realized other countries other
| then the US exist and handle electricity differently, my
| example only applies to the US
| abledon wrote:
| I was skeptical going from 2011 macbookpro keyboard to 2021
| MacbookAir M1... but the new keyboard is a _JOY_!
| ArlenBales wrote:
| Great specs, but since I already have an 2020 M1 MacBook Pro,
| I'll hold off for a few more years. I'm hoping by then Apple
| finally has an OLED (or equivalent) screen for their MacBooks.
| ErneX wrote:
| That'd be micro led, still some years for that.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| I am glad to see the return of magsafe (and having two USB
| ports _in addition to_ the power cord)... but if that 's the
| only reason I really prefer the new 14" macbook pro to the
| _much cheaper_ 13 " (that extra "inch" is $800!)
|
| The lower cost machines used to get power and HDMI as separate
| ports to two USBs.... I wonder if future lower-priced machines
| will again, if this is a trend...
|
| The extra ports are literally the only thing I want here that's
| not in the much cheaper 13" pro...
| ksec wrote:
| Probably need a few more days to let all the information sink
| in. But generally speaking Apple tends to simplify their
| product lineup over time. So I would not be surprised if
| there will be a 14" M1 Pro with 8GB Memory and 256GB Storage
| starting at $1499 in the future once they amortised some of
| the cost with higher price model. As mentioned in the post
| below, if you know BOM cost and list out things on the new
| 14/16" MBP the price is actually quite competitive.
|
| The more interesting question is what happen to the sub $1299
| price category. MacBook Air or MacBook? And how would it be
| designed?
| simondotau wrote:
| Jobs' Apple tended to simplify the product lineup. Cook's
| Apple tends to rationalise product lines based on
| manufacturing lines, which is why you still see vestiges of
| older SKUs stick around--because the tooling cost for the
| motherboards, chassis, etc has already been amortised and
| it's cheap to keep it going.
| jacurtis wrote:
| > that extra "inch" is $800!
|
| This is hardly an accurate conclusion. To start with, the
| screen on the 13" has 4M pixels (2560x1600). The screen on
| the 14" has 6M pixels (3024x1964). Technically speaking you
| are buying 50% more screen. The new screen is more dense, but
| the screen itself is pixels and you are getting 2M more (50%
| more) pixels. In addition to the actual better quality LED
| design which is the "Liquid Retina XDR". The new screen is
| also able to deliver 1000 nits of sustained brightness, with
| 1600 nits of peak brightness. That is compared to the 500
| nits offered on the cheaper model. So again this is double
| the brightness (even more than that considering peaks). If
| that weren't enough, the 14" comes with adaptive refresh up
| to 120Hz. Again, this is double the 60Hz of the 13".
|
| So that's a hell of a lot more than just 1" of screen.
|
| Furthermore, you are comparing the base model of the MacBook
| Pro 14" to the base model 13", which aren't comparable. The
| 14" base model comes with 16Gb of RAM and a 512Gb SSD. If you
| compare the equivalently spec'd 13" model with the 16Gb RAM
| and 512Gb SSD then you are looking at $1,699.
|
| So for equally spec'd machines, it is $1,699 for the 13" and
| $1,999 for the 14". This means the price difference is a mere
| $300.
|
| But even that isn't comparable. Because the $14" comes with
| the M1 Pro chip compared to the M1. I won't rehash that, but
| its a significant upgrade in CPU.
|
| So you aren't paying $800 for 1" of extra screen. You are
| only paying $300 for the difference which offers a major
| screen upgrade, in addition to port upgrades, keyboard
| upgrades, and a major CPU upgrade.
| Twisol wrote:
| Apple should hire you to upsell folks who are considering
| the 13" -- you just converted me, too.
| sobani wrote:
| If you are considering the 13", also take a good look at
| the air. The difference is $300 and you basically only
| lose an hour of battery life and the touch bar.
|
| https://www.apple.com/mac/compare/?modelList=MacBook-
| Pro-14,...
| gomox wrote:
| *win a lack of touchbar :)
| jonny_eh wrote:
| You could've just said that the 14" doesn't have the touch
| bar :D
| lukevp wrote:
| One minor note in case others aren't aware - the M1 to M1
| Pro is surely a big improvement, but the base 14" does not
| have the same M1 Pro as the base 16" - it has a lower-
| binned version of the M1 Pro that only has 8 cores instead
| of 10, and has a 14 core GPU instead of 16. The arrangement
| of the cores and the GPU core count is still an upgrade
| over the 13" MBP with M1, but it's not the full M1 Pro with
| 10 cores and 16 GPU cores.
| whimsicalism wrote:
| > really prefer the new 14" macbook pro to the much cheaper
| 13" (that extra "inch" is $800!)
|
| It's a $300 difference from the 13" with equivalent SSD &
| memory specs (nevermind you different CPU and screen size).
| deergomoo wrote:
| > Both 14" and 16" have 254 PPI, up from ~220
|
| Which also means they finally support more screen real estate
| at native 2x! Since 2016 the 13" MacBooks retained their
| 2560x1600 panels but shipped by default in a "looks like
| 1440x900" mode, which renders a 2880x1800 frame and does a non-
| integer scale down to the panel's native resolution, trading
| sharpness for extra space.
|
| I hate the slight fuzzy look so I run mine at native 2x (e.g.
| "looks like 1280x800"), but it makes things pretty cramped.
|
| These new screens can run native 2x at the "looks like
| 1440x900" res (other rather, "looks like 1512x982"). Very
| welcome improvement.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| I have always been utterly baffled by Apple's approach to
| high DPI. They ship some of the best panels around, and then
| they kneecap them by using the most idiotic scaling scheme
| imaginable that guarantees that it's worse than a low
| resolution panel for some tasks that want precision and
| uglier on things like single pixel lines which crop up a
| _lot_ in e.g. web content, because pixel precision is
| _impossible_. Microsoft managed to do it right (though mixed-
| DPI took a couple of attempts), despite having no real power
| over developers. Meanwhile, Apple, who are in a position to
| sternly tell their developers to do it right or their
| software will break (and do so far more frequently than
| Microsoft), ... caved and did it terribly? And do they even
| support real mixed DPI, or do they just fake it by rendering
| at the higher scale and downsampling to the other?
| modeless wrote:
| Microsoft's DPI scaling is terrible. So much stuff is ugly
| and/or broken. (My favorite example is DPI scaling bugs
| that used to exist in the DPI control panel itself:
| https://i.imgur.com/zi80IhG.png) Mixed DPI is a huge pain
| because windows change size when you drag them around. WPF
| was supposed to fix all this, way back when that was the
| future. Apple's approach is much simpler and generally
| works better though it certainly has its downsides too.
| mehrdada wrote:
| On most of my machines I switch to the integer scale mode,
| but realistically, the effect on sharpness is not too far
| from antialiasing in practice. I am not sure how they do
| compositing of media on macOS though. Theoretically they
| can render them on a distinct layer that corresponds to the
| output display pixels and directly composite that layer to
| avoid an additional resampling.
|
| Windows on the other hand, does the theoretically correct
| thing but messes up the ecosystem (unsupported apps,
| multiple monitors)
| vetinari wrote:
| They composite everything at nearest higher integer
| scale, with correspondingly large framebuffer (just make
| a screenshot of entire screen and check the dimensions).
| Then, during scan out, it is scaled down by output
| encoder.
|
| This method does not need GPU at all and also saves
| memory bandwidth; no need to save scaled down framebuffer
| and read it out again.
| dnissley wrote:
| Personally, I could care less if the UI elements themselves
| are fuzzy when using non-integer scaling. I love high-dpi
| screens mainly for reading text, and as far as I can tell
| non-integer scaling doesn't seem to make it fuzzy? Either
| way, it's way less "fuzzy" than standard-dpi displays where
| you can actually make out pixels very easily.
| stephen_g wrote:
| This doesn't gel with my experience at all. Yes, past
| MacBooks weren't necessarily integer scaling (with this new
| display the default setting and what most people use will
| be though as far as I understand), and non-integer scaling
| is not ideal. But on my last two MacBooks at least the
| screen is visually plenty sharp, and looks way, way, better
| than the regular-DPI external monitors I still have
| (whether the external monitor is connected to the Mac or a
| Windows PC). And above all, my experience with Mac is that
| high-DPI has actually worked from the beginning, whereas on
| Windows I still have some apps that break if the scaling is
| not set to 100%!
|
| Even right at the start, old apps would look a bit blurry
| but would still at least be in the correct proportions on
| macOS, whereas with the Windows scaling a lot of stuff just
| wouldn't work!
| chrismorgan wrote:
| I have no direct personal experience on high-DPI macOS.
| For Windows, I've only come across a couple of apps that
| claimed to support high DPI but severely mangled it, and
| they both got fixed before long; and a few others that
| had minor problems, e.g. opening windows at unscaled
| sizes so that you had to resize them, or rendering small
| icons. And to be sure there are various DPI-unaware apps,
| probably far more than on macOS (linked to why Apple was
| in the _perfect position_ to implement and impose proper
| fractional scaling), but that's not a serious problem
| either.
| je42 wrote:
| thats the issue with windows (and linux). highdpi
| displays are still rare (i did say: <10%), hence a lot of
| developers dont support it well in their applications. on
| mac however highdpi is the default.all apps i have used
| that is native macosx works fine.
| wlesieutre wrote:
| Mixed DPI still doesn't work reliably for me on Windows.
| Lately mine has been confused with dragging windows between
| monitors, they'll get stuck on the border when dragging
| even though I can move my cursor across fine when not
| dragging anything.
|
| It could be unrelated to the mixed DPI scaling, but that's
| what nearly all my display issues on Windows have been
| related to so that's my assumption.
| delecti wrote:
| Windows occasionally "stick" a bit when dragging between
| windows monitors even with the same scaling on both
| screens. There are a bunch of keyboard shortcuts that are
| very reliable though. Windows Key + Shift + Direction:
| left/right instantly moves windows between displays, up
| maximizes, down un-maximizes and then minimizes. Windows
| Key + left/right (so without shift) also docks windows to
| the left or right of the same screen, and this feature is
| what makes windows also "stick" when dragging them from
| one screen to another.
|
| I also recommend you check your display settings. If your
| windows aren't the same vertical size, then your overall
| desktop isn't a rectangle, it'll be some other polygon,
| and that means there are corners between the screens that
| your mouse can get stuck in.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| > which renders a 2880x1800 frame and does a non-integer
| scale down to the panel's native resolution, trading
| sharpness for extra space.
|
| This isn't how it really works. It doesn't render 2880x1800
| frame and scale down, it will just render at the resolution
| given for the size of the widgets desired. Any modern GPU can
| do that, the only time down scaling is needed is if you have
| a higher resolution bitmap that you want rendered at a lower
| resolution (or you can scale up, anyways, modern applications
| should not be rendering fixed sized bitmaps to ever need to
| do that).
|
| Edit: never mind, that is how it actually works. I never
| realized MacOS never got true resolution independence like
| WPF.
| kuschku wrote:
| Gnome actually always render a full framebuffer at integer
| scales and then downscale in GPU with bilinear scaling.
|
| 4K output, 1.5x scale means 6K framebuffer scaled to 4K.
|
| That's sadly how it works at least on Gnome, and Gnome says
| they've copied it 1:1 from MacOS.
| Joeri wrote:
| To my knowledge windows is the only OS which renders the
| widgets at fractional scales and doesn't scale the
| output, but it only does it for apps which implement DPI
| awareness correctly. Some apps advertise to the OS they
| support DPI awareness, but then render controls at the
| wrong size. Others are GDI-based and don't support DPI
| awareness at all, and those are rendered 1x and scaled
| fractionally, which looks like a blurry mess.
| pmarreck wrote:
| wow, I suddenly now understand why some of my Windows
| apps' UI's look so blurry
| kuschku wrote:
| Android and KDE use this method as well, which is very
| awesome as it provides the best performance and the best
| quality.
| ziml77 wrote:
| Just made a comment about this recently, but a few year
| ago Microsoft added an enhanced GDI scaling mode. It
| applies the scaling during the GDI calls so it can render
| elements sharply. Obviously this won't magically make
| low-res images look better and it can't do anything about
| UI elements not rendered through GDI, but it's much
| better than just scaling the whole window up after it's
| rendered.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| AKA the "Apple/Android/CSS was right" mode.
|
| Personally I think they should abandon/maintenance-mode
| the "manually scale the pixels to fit the screen" mode
| and make the "virtual pixels" mode capable of supporting
| DPI-aware apps.
| chrismorgan wrote:
| DPI awareness is generally supposed to be the domain of
| the lower levels of your GUI library, so that just about
| everything else above that level just works, and only a
| very few pieces in a very few apps need to concern
| themselves with scaling matters. The "System (enhanced)"
| scaling mode in question here is really just about doing
| that: patching GDI (the most common lowest level) to be
| as DPI-aware as possible if the app doesn't have
| something else taking care of it.
|
| Nothing about Windows' approach to DPI awareness needs to
| be abandoned. Your app code isn't _supposed_ to be DPI-
| aware, you're just supposed to use a GUI library that is.
| rsynnott wrote:
| Interestingly, early versions of MacOS 10 supported this
| as a hidden feature. It never really worked properly.
| Joeri wrote:
| It has never worked properly on windows either, but that
| hasn't prevented microsoft from shipping it. In fact, for
| a long time they didn't support per-monitor DPI awareness
| in the OS, so people with mixed DPI multi monitor setups
| had applications render at the wrong size or blurry when
| they moved them across. This was fixed in one of the
| windows 10 feature updates, and after that it was a
| patient wait for software to implement support for it. I
| believe MS Office 2019 was the version where it finally
| got correct support for it.
| danudey wrote:
| When the MMO Star Wars: The Old Republic launched, I
| tried the beta and kept having issues where it would
| launch to a black screen, wait, and then crash.
|
| Someone, somewhere, figured out that the game only runs
| properly if you have the text scaling at 100%; I had it
| at 150% because I was playing on a TV and the screen was
| unreadable at 100%.
|
| I have to wonder what Microsoft did with text scaling
| that it broke a DirectX game.
| kmeisthax wrote:
| Apple and GNOME do this to avoid rounding errors when
| working in scalable layouts defined as screen-width
| percentages. Web browsers have accumulated all sorts of
| tricks and hacks to ensure that, say, floating four 25%
| width columns always adds up to the same width as a 100%
| column. This isn't a particular failing of CSS or the web
| - though CSS floats absolutely make this so much of a
| problem that browsers have to actually correct for this
| when users scale pages.
|
| Exposing a 1x design to non-integer scale factors
| fundamentally runs the risk of breaking it - you will get
| odd pixel gaps or misalignments which would not occur at
| integer scales, because the virtual pixel coordinates no
| longer line up with actual screen pixels.
| kuschku wrote:
| Qt has done that for many years, so has Android, so has
| Windows.
|
| Only macOS and Gnome don't, because they value single-
| pixel alignment errors more than the massive performance
| issues and reduced sharpness their solutions cause.
| vetinari wrote:
| And Qt after all those years does not work correctly in
| HiDPI. Not even on Windows.
|
| Unlike macOS and Gnome, which do.
| vetinari wrote:
| For downvoters - exhibit A: https://imgur.com/a/Ad0ZkmX
|
| Problems like this are common, it is not app specific. If
| you call this a superior solution, then you haven't seen
| a really working one.
| Vogtinator wrote:
| Looks like that application explicitly uses (device)
| pixel sizes. That issue is common, but still application
| specific.
| vetinari wrote:
| In that case, it is still the problem of the approach
| that Qt has chosen.
|
| With macOS or Gnome, even apps from 90's that were newer
| updated, will have proper scale. They might be blurry
| (macOS upscales using nearest neighbor so it is
| pixelated, Gnome uses bilinear, so it is blurry instead),
| but they will be correct size.
|
| The Qt approach works only for apps, that do the special
| Qt dance.
| kuschku wrote:
| Gnome does NOT work correctly in HiDPI.
|
| I've got 3 systems with 1.5x scale, and Qt handles them
| perfectly fine (even with per-monitor separate scaling).
|
| While Gnome absolutely does not. Either I get absolutely
| unreadable tiny 1x, or I get absolutely unusable 2x with
| no space for anything.
|
| (That said, Qt on Windows handles per-screen scale
| factors very weirdly, especially with applications using
| pixel values)
| nextaccountic wrote:
| In my screen, 1x and 2x are both inadequate, but I'm
| using Gnome on Wayland on 1.25 scaling right now. Gnome
| can do fractional scaling. You just need to configure it
| with a gsettings command:
|
| https://www.linuxuprising.com/2019/04/how-to-enable-
| hidpi-fr...
|
| https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/HiDPI#Fractional_scaling
|
| Or using gnome-tweaks. Then, on display settings, it
| should show up the new scaling configs.
|
| And, in Gnome it's very sharp, with zero blurring! It was
| somehow sharper than whatever KDE was doing when I tested
| it some months ago.
| kuschku wrote:
| Eh, no. Gnome doesn't actually do fractional scaling - as
| said earlier in the thread, it'll render at the next
| integer resolution and scale down in GPU.
|
| Which I don't really have the performance for (I'm
| already using Budgie's option to do exactly that under
| X11 right now already, it's not exactly the most
| performant solution).
|
| And even under Wayland, Gnome still renders at the next
| integer scale.
|
| While KDE under X11 actually renders at the correct
| resolution, with proper scaling and perfect sharpness,
| which I really miss.
| vetinari wrote:
| > Gnome doesn't actually do fractional scaling
|
| Gnome actually does fractional scaling. It doesn't do
| fractional rendering. Two different things; you can do
| one without another.
|
| As I wrote elsewhere, you cannot do perfect sharpness at
| fractional resolutions. How are you going to render 1px
| wide line exactly?
| kuschku wrote:
| > As I wrote elsewhere, you cannot do perfect sharpness
| at fractional resolutions. How are you going to render
| 1px wide line exactly?
|
| With downscaling, I get a blurry mess. With fractional
| rendering, I get a line that may be a tiny bit too wide
| or too thin, and may be one pixel off, but it's going to
| be perfectly sharp and clear.
|
| At least render fonts at native resolution and only
| up/downscale the rest of the widgets. Scaling fonts can
| NOT be done by post-processing or it WILL be wrong.
| vetinari wrote:
| > At least render fonts at native resolution and only
| up/downscale the rest of the widgets. Scaling fonts can
| NOT be done by post-processing or it WILL be wrong.
|
| They are fine, but just cannot downscale to arbitrary
| sizes. Note that macOS doesn't do 125%, for example,
| because that's one of the worst cases - you have 5 pixels
| to do job of 8.
| kuschku wrote:
| If you do that, you throw out all the hinting and scaling
| code the font authors may have added.
|
| Many fonts intentionally change weight slightly at small
| sizes, by scaling it afterwards you break this
| functionality.
|
| Also, by scaling afterwards in compositor in sRGB space
| you create issues with brightness as the compositor (at
| least under Gnome) does not take gamma into account.
|
| The amount of tradeoffs is extreme, compared to a few UI
| widgets getting slightly shifted around.
|
| And I've already mentioned the performance issue in
| multiple other places in this thread.
| vetinari wrote:
| Hinting is not really used nowadays; it made sense on low
| res displays, but not in HiDPI. You are better off with
| autohinter now.
|
| Wrt weights, fonts are not defined in pixels; so
| adjusting for this is the easy part.
|
| Yes, ignoring gamma is a problem, and I'm not sure
| whether anyone in Gnome/Freetype/Harbuzz is working on
| this; probably not. But this is a problem for low dpi and
| integer scaled hidpi too, not just for fractional scales.
|
| Widgets slightly shifted also mean your mouse is going to
| be shifted, and quite possibly in different direction.
| Now, that's going to be a problem, that the users can
| clearly reproduce.
| md8z wrote:
| That is working as intended, and either you don't have a
| graphics card that is good enough to drive your monitor,
| or you're using CPU-rendered apps that will always be
| slow at higher resolutions. This is a problem with a lot
| of cheap hardware and older software. It worked for Apple
| because IIRC they've been porting all the low level
| drawing over to Metal. GNOME is a lot slower to do that
| unfortunately, you won't see everything being GPU
| accelerated until GTK4 becomes widely adopted.
| vetinari wrote:
| The Metal (Apple) or OpenGL/Vulkan (Gtk) renderers are
| not that important for apps that were fine with software
| rendering for years. The final composition of framebuffer
| is being done with hw anyway (for most cases, unless you
| have a really old hardware with non-working opengl 3 or
| so).
|
| The downscaling, when done properly, is being done with
| output encoder, not with GPU. It should be transparent
| for anything graphic card, that came with DP or HDMI
| port. Maybe except original rpi.
| md8z wrote:
| In my experience it becomes an issue if you do something
| like maximize the window on a 4K screen, GTK3 has
| noticeable slowdown there whereas GTK4 is faster.
| kuschku wrote:
| That's not what I, as mostly android/web/qt dev, want
| though. Why should I get 50% less performance just to fix
| some tiny single-pixel issues on a screen where I can't
| even see individual pixels?
| vetinari wrote:
| It is not 50% less performance; on hardware from the last
| 10+ years, it should not be noticeable. Neither in
| performance, nor in energy. If anything, it should be
| more performant and less buggy, becuase instead of
| complicating the software, you solve the problem with
| dedicated circuitry, that is already part of the output
| encoder anyway.
| kuschku wrote:
| Not noticeable is interesting.
|
| What hardware from the past 10 years are you using that
| rendering 3D games in browser or shader websites at 6K vs
| 4K resolution makes no difference?
|
| I'm already struggling to get enough fps at 4K, with
| Gnome rendering it at 6K and downscaling to 4K my
| performance is even worse. That's using an RX 5700XT, a
| GPU that in the current absurd market retails over $1000.
|
| And as Gnome ensured that neither GTK nor Wayland expose
| any non-integer scale factors, or support it, browsers on
| linux have no way to render at native resolutions and
| handle scaling themselves, which would improve my
| performance situation significantly.
| vetinari wrote:
| If you have games, run them fullscreen. Fullscreen
| surfaces will get removed from composited desktop, scaled
| independently and can run at arbitrary resolutions.
| kuschku wrote:
| How do I run https://www.shadertoy.com/ in native
| fullscreen?
|
| How do I actually multitask while doing that?
|
| At 1.5x even my Ryzen 9 3900X and RX 5700XT are
| stuttering to show many shadertoy examples at 4K, where
| the performance at 1x is more than acceptable.
|
| Simply: Gnome (and Wayland) is broken, and this API
| _must_ be changed.
|
| EDIT:
|
| For https://www.shadertoy.com/view/ss3SD8 the difference
| on my laptop for example is 1280x720 at 1.4fps (1.25x
| scale) or 850x450 at 17fps (1.0x scale).
|
| That's a massive difference, and enough to be the
| difference between usable and unusable.
| md8z wrote:
| "Gnome (and Wayland) is broken, and this API must be
| changed."
|
| Again I would say no, that's wrong, it's just not
| currently meant to run on your hardware. If you know how
| to change this API then please help. AFAIK there is no
| one working on this currently. To solve the problem, it
| really needs someone who is committed to getting it
| working on the type of hardware that you have and who can
| champion that use case. If that's not you then you'll
| have to wait (indefinitely) until that person shows up,
| if they do at all.
|
| Also, shadertoy is a really bad test case as those are
| more like demos, they aren't optimized and are just made
| to show how much you can do by computing things on the
| fly in a shader. A real program you'd see in production
| would make better use of GPU memory and wouldn't hammer
| the GPU cores so hard.
| kuschku wrote:
| What's so complicated about just copying Windows, Android
| or Qt 1:1?
|
| I've got all my time already full with jobs, projects,
| and other stuff I'm working on, if I'd find time, I'd
| love to help extending wayland, deprecating GTK3 and
| GTK4, and modifying the software accordingly.
|
| I've made custom patches for the same purpose in the past
| already, but I just don't have the time.
|
| Especially since with X11 it was at least somewhat
| possible to do it, but now with wayland it's sadly
| enforced in the protocol to only use 8-bit sRGB and
| integer scale factors.
|
| If I ever find the person responsible for that
| decision...
| md8z wrote:
| It's not hard to copy an API specification, but actually
| implementing the API and changing drawing in every app,
| toolkit and compositor to support floating point is what
| is going to be complicated and will take time.
|
| Edit: The decision to use integer coordinates I believe
| was made long ago in GTK1 because that's what X11 used,
| and it just hasn't been changed since.
|
| "Especially since with X11 it was at least somewhat
| possible to do it"
|
| X11 never actually supported this and also only uses
| integers for screen and input coordinates so I'm not sure
| what you're referring to. I think you are thinking of the
| app itself doing its own DPI scaling which will also work
| in wayland, but it will have the same problems where the
| DPI could mismatch with other apps and with the rest of
| the desktop.
|
| "I'd love to help extending wayland, deprecating GTK3 and
| GTK4"
|
| Well GTK3 is already in maintenance mode, and apps are
| currently in the process of being ported to GTK4, so
| first they'll probably want to finish that and get some
| feedback before starting on GTK5... it will probably be
| at least a few years before anything related to this
| could ship.
| kuschku wrote:
| GTK2 had an integer DPI variable. GTK3 now just has an
| integer scale variable.
|
| GTK2 could actually render at 144dpi, or 108dpi, just
| fine. Everything was slightly misaligned, not everything
| scaled perfectly, but it worked.
|
| X11 had an integer Xft.dpi variable. Wayland now just has
| an integer scale variable.
|
| _WHY_ was this downgrade made? If a protocol break could
| be made to remove this functionality, a protocol break to
| add it back should be just as justified.
|
| Break everything, apparently removing functionality was a
| good enough reason to do it, re-adding it should be just
| as well.
|
| Yes, I am extremely angry after having spent years
| yelling at the wayland-wg and gnome devs not to make
| these decisions, not to put these things into the
| protocol, and complaining that if an API break is
| necessary, it should be extensible for these use cases.
| I've been complaining for a decade now and all of the
| complaints got ignored and instead the mistakes I warned
| about were made.
| vetinari wrote:
| > GTK2 could actually render at 144dpi, or 108dpi, just
| fine.
|
| Your definition for _just fine_ must differ from everyone
| 's else. Most GTK2 shipped assets for 96 dpi and that's
| it. Just try running GIMP on 192 dpi display, with
| "properly set dpi", for example. You will see yourself
| that is was not _just fine_.
|
| > WHY was this downgrade made?
|
| Because it didn't work. That's why.
|
| > If a protocol break could be made to remove this
| functionality
|
| It wasn't protocol break. It was apps either ignoring the
| facilities (in better case) or being outright broken ->
| desktop locking on constant values, where everyone was
| able to test their wares.
|
| > protocol break to add it back should be just as
| justified.
|
| Not going to happen.
|
| > Break everything, apparently removing functionality was
| a good enough reason to do it, re-adding it should be
| just as well.
|
| You can start. _Show 'em_.
| kuschku wrote:
| > You can start. Show 'em.
|
| I _have_.
|
| I've made a custom build from source of my entire desktop
| environment, changing the scale factor back to a dpi
| value, and modifying Qt and Gtk2 apps to use that.
|
| And it _works_.
|
| You just need to break the wayland protocol and rebuild
| everything from source, but for over 2 years, I ran that
| as daily driver setup because I was so pissed off by this
| decision.
| vetinari wrote:
| > modifying Qt and Gtk2 apps
|
| You don't get to modify apps -- that's exactly part of
| the problem being solved; your solution has to work with
| whatever user throws at it; from Chrome to xeyes, sorry.
|
| Oh, and with staged updates too -- it might take some 2
| years to adopt your solution, if _everyone cooperates_
| (which is a big if); not all distros update at the same
| time and some do not bother updating for another cycle
| (see Ubuntu and Wayland).
| kuschku wrote:
| Just make it a required feature in Gtk4 and distros and
| apps will be forced to support it.
| md8z wrote:
| It's not going to happen in GTK4 because it would be an
| API break and GTK4 has already shipped. So that's why it
| will have to wait for GTK5 or greater.
|
| Edit: For further explanation see here for a longer
| description of GTK's release strategy.
| https://blog.gtk.org/2016/09/01/versioning-and-long-term-
| sta...
| kuschku wrote:
| See? I've complained to the Gtk devs since before the
| release of Gtk3 that this would be an issue, I've even
| made suggestions how to avoid it, and yet despite all
| that all I've got were "it's unnecessary" for years. And
| now the issue is baked in, I'm supposed to wait for even
| more years and spend lots of time to fix the issues other
| idiots made because they couldn't listen.
| md8z wrote:
| In my experience you can't really tell open source
| developers what to do, you can give suggestions, but if
| they don't agree with you then the most effective way to
| get your point across would be to write the code
| yourself. Also, if you want someone to listen to what you
| have to say, I would recommend against calling them
| idiots and other insults.
| kuschku wrote:
| If every day every single interaction with your computer
| becomes a pain purely because of some stubborn people who
| refuse to listen, it becomes very hard to stay calm.
| Especially after almost a decade.
| md8z wrote:
| I'm really not sure I understand, you don't have to use
| GNOME or Linux. Don't put yourself through any
| unnecessary pain. Also please remember that nobody is
| obligated to listen to you in open source, participation
| is entirely voluntary.
| vetinari wrote:
| Again, it is not a matter of new API! New API solves
| exactly nothing. It won't solve the
| libXaw/Motif/GTK2/GTK3/whatever apps. They still have to
| run correctly.
|
| Your new API won't be adopted by everyone overnight,
| that's why it is a dead end.
| md8z wrote:
| That DPI value AFAIK only changed the text scale, not the
| scale of widgets. You are thinking of two different
| things, the GTK3 integer scale actually affects widgets.
| The Xft.dpi setting also originally only meant text scale
| but has apparently been overloaded to apply to widgets in
| Qt? I'm not sure, I haven't tried this recently and I
| don't use X11. But it's right there in the name: Xft is
| the X freetype font rendering.
|
| I understand your frustration but from what I have seen,
| nothing has actually been removed. This is just a feature
| that was never implemented because nobody signed up to
| implement it. Wayland could be extended to support it
| eventually but somebody actually has to put in the work.
| I think the best bet for somebody working on this would
| be to get it fully working and stable in KDE first, since
| Qt apparently has the toolkit support for it, and then
| maybe it can be adapted to work for GTK.
| kuschku wrote:
| > I understand your frustration but from what I have
| seen, nothing has actually been removed. This is just a
| feature that was never implemented because nobody signed
| up to implement it. Wayland could be extended to support
| it eventually but somebody actually has to put in the
| work. I think the best bet for somebody working on this
| would be to get it fully working and stable in KDE first,
| since Qt apparently has the toolkit support for it, and
| then maybe it can be adapted to work for GTK.
|
| The issue with that is that first of all, the wayland
| protocol needs to be modified to add support for this,
| and the entire freedesktop/gnome community refuses to
| even consider adding support for anything like this
| because gnome doesn't need it/can't support it.
|
| I've talked with vendors of devices using Linux with
| Wayland, who've been trying to get the committee to add
| support for years.
|
| I've talked with KDE devs who've been frustrated without
| limits.
|
| There's a lot of people who are absolutely burnt out and
| angered by the constant stonewalling from Gnome,
| pretending for a decade that no one needs this and so it
| shouldn't even exist.
| md8z wrote:
| I really have no idea what you're talking about or what
| committee you're referring to. KDE can develop its own
| Wayland extensions and already has a lot of them. They
| don't need GNOME's approval. I believe they are housed in
| this git repository.
| https://invent.kde.org/libraries/plasma-wayland-protocols
|
| Once they become stabilized and if other desktops took an
| interest, then they could be proposed as standard. But
| KDE does not need to wait for GNOME to implement a
| feature in Wayland, or vice versa. If you could mention
| which KDE developer you were talking to then maybe we
| could help them get this implemented in KDE first? Then
| afterwards if they can offer some tips to offer GTK (or
| other toolkits) on how to implement this, that would be
| valuable to everyone.
| kuschku wrote:
| Honestly, you're right. I should just stop trying to
| discuss with the wayland wg and gnome devs and just
| create my own protocol extension without asking anyone,
| submit patches to Qt, Kwin, and certain webbrowsers, and
| then just use those myself.
|
| Sure, Gnome still won't adopt them ever because they're
| stubborn and think they know everything better, but at
| least I'd have a somewhat working solution.
|
| Maybe elementary OS would actually use it too, they've
| already got support for just scaling everything based on
| the font size.
|
| Thing is, I need this functionality yesterday. And it's
| been an absolute pain hearing that even if you spend an
| excessive amount of work today, in a community where all
| of gnome is against you, maybe someday in a decade it'll
| get better.
| md8z wrote:
| I think that sounds like a great idea. But I just don't
| understand why you were so invested in GNOME adopting
| them when it seems clear that they weren't really that
| interested, and now it seems like it actually doesn't
| even matter to you? I'm sure you know not to "put all
| your eggs in one basket" as it were.
| kuschku wrote:
| Honestly, the big issue is that Gtk is used as basis to
| obtain the scaling factors for all browsers, Java, and
| several other tools including everything based on
| electron.
|
| As long as Gtk refuses to support this, I can fix KDE,
| but I can't fix Java or browsers.
|
| Java, Firefox and Chrome reject patches, saying Gnome is
| responsible. Gnome says they don't care.
|
| And I don't want to run custom builds of Firefox and Java
| anymore. It was such a hassle constantly building them
| from source with my old patchset.
| md8z wrote:
| I think if KDE actually had a working implementation of
| this then that would go a really long way towards
| convincing those other things to support it. IIRC Chrome
| at least doesn't get the scale from GTK. But KDE's
| Wayland implementation is still unstable (in part because
| it seems to have a lot more features than GNOME's wayland
| implementation) so I think it will be a while before that
| happens too.
|
| If you are really committed to using Linux and don't want
| to wait then I said it before but I think a better use of
| your time would be to spend a few hundred dollars on some
| different monitors that can work at just 2x scale, and
| then let someone else deal with this.
| kuschku wrote:
| I've got a 27" 4K HDR10 DCI-P3 1000nits monitor with
| builtin KVM.
|
| Usual price point around $1600-$2200.
|
| Comparable 2x monitors start at around $4500, and the
| cheapest option only supports macOS and has a $1000
| monitor stand.
|
| A "few hundred dollars" won't be enough.
|
| At the moment, I just work all day at ~10-15fps using
| Budgie with fractional dpi on X11, but it's definitely
| not a great experience.
|
| I used to be 100% in on KDE, but as you mentioned,
| Wayland support is limited.
|
| Budgie is atm sadly the only option for multi-monitor
| hidpi that's not using gnome's broken top bar concept.
| md8z wrote:
| Ah okay. I think the work required to get this
| implemented across the stack will still cost a lot more
| than $11,000, just saying. Also in my opinion 4K monitors
| at that size are an unfortunate purchase because the PPI
| is not high enough to look crisp at that viewing
| distance. Apple upgraded theirs because you need to get
| above 200 PPI range in order to have it look comparable
| to print. For me personally, I couldn't justify spending
| my spare time working on that when other monitors exist
| that don't have that problem.
| vetinari wrote:
| > and changing drawing in every app
|
| Exactly. Nobody is going to update everything what's
| already out there. For many things, there's not even the
| source, even if there was a will. There's unbelievable
| dragging of the feet in the Linux community, so even that
| will is a big question.
|
| These compositors have to play with cards they were
| dealt, not with cards they wish they had.
| md8z wrote:
| Sadly I think you will have to accept some of those apps
| will just never have Windows-style DPI scaling, sorry.
| It's the same thing with various older apps on Windows
| that will just not get updated because they use Win32 API
| functions that are hardcoded to use integers. Maybe you
| could come up with some clever solution that tricks them
| into rendering at a different size? I'm really not sure,
| if you are an expert in this then please help.
| kuschku wrote:
| Windows actually modified the old-school Win32 APIs to
| support DPI scaling recently, so even most WinForms apps
| get proper DPI scaling.
|
| It's absolutely possible. And as mentioned, switching
| from dpi as int to scale-factor as int was reason enough
| to break all software, going back should be just as
| justified.
| md8z wrote:
| If you know the technical details of how that was done in
| Windows then please help get that implemented. AFAIK
| those win32 APIs were not changed to take floating point,
| so there is some other kind of heuristic or something
| going on there, and I expect it won't work in all cases
| e.g. if the application itself renders its own backing
| surfaces and never takes scale into account.
| kuschku wrote:
| AFAIK it's not much different from e.g. Qt. As the
| protocol between compositor and app includes a full dpi
| value the toolkit can just render everything at a larger
| scale, with the same rounding pattern used to ensure
| everything still fits. Sure, some parts will be slightly
| offset, and any widget that first renders, requests the
| rendered data, and post-processes that will be slightly
| blurry, but it works fine.
|
| The same can be done in any environment where the
| protocol between toolkit and compositor contains enough
| metadata and applications can tell the compositor that
| they're rendering at native scale.
|
| So, X11 works, Wayland won't work until the protocol gets
| significantly changed.
|
| I had a similar patch for my compositor, the protocol
| libs, and Qt where I just let windows specify that
| they're rendering at native scale, and I let Qt handle
| the scale factor as if QT_SCREEN_SCALE_FACTORS had been
| set accordingly.
| md8z wrote:
| If you have a working patch then I would suggest working
| with other developers to get a similar thing implemented
| elsewhere. Also I don't think this needs significant
| changes in the Wayland protocol at all so I'm really
| confused what you mean, it seems like all you need is one
| additional message to specify the DPI to the application.
| The hard part is getting this implemented everywhere.
| kuschku wrote:
| So at first you need a way to have the compositor notify
| the application which dpis it should render at (because
| it'd be multiple).
|
| And then you'd need a way for applications to tag each
| buffer it renders with the DPI it's rendered at, so the
| compositor can show the right buffer natively on the
| right screen.
|
| For performance improvements, it even makes sense to
| provide a clip mask telling which part of the window each
| DPI should be rendered for.
|
| Now, that's complicated, but doable. I did it.
|
| What's more complicated is handling situations where
| compositors don't support this, or only support parts of
| it.
|
| That whole backwards compatibility part is more work than
| getting the whole feature built and shipped, and it's
| entirely unnecessary.
| md8z wrote:
| Can you please publish this work somewhere so somebody
| else can use it? Or consider writing a blog about it? I
| think that would be a great way to help out. Also which
| compositor did you use? If it wasn't Weston then that
| could be a problem, if you want to have a chance for this
| to be stable in Wayland then usually you'd start with a
| working patch to Weston. If you don't want to do that
| work then maybe you can send your patches to someone who
| is able to modify them and get them working in Weston or
| KDE, or anything else really.
|
| Edit: Also I'd like to give some feedback.
|
| "a way to have the compositor notify the application
| which dpis it should render at (because it'd be
| multiple)."
|
| Right, so that's one additional message. I assume by
| multiple you mean the case when you have multiple
| monitors at different scales.
|
| "a way for applications to tag each buffer it renders
| with the DPI it's rendered at, so the compositor can show
| the right buffer natively on the right screen."
|
| I think this would be one or two additional messages. But
| I'm actually confused by why you would do this because it
| seems like it would still cause performance issues, if
| you're now rendering every program two or more times
| every frame. I think you may want to save this for an
| "accuracy mode" or something, and normally have it so
| only the max DPI applies.
|
| "it even makes sense to provide a clip mask telling which
| part of the window each DPI should be rendered for"
|
| This won't work in Wayland because the client never clips
| windows, it just redraws the whole window each time.
|
| "What's more complicated is handling situations where
| compositors don't support this, or only support parts of
| it. That whole backwards compatibility part is more work
| than getting the whole feature built and shipped, and
| it's entirely unnecessary. "
|
| I don't see how that's complicated or why it's more work,
| programs would just work as they do now, i.e. you just
| assume those programs always have a DPI of 96 *
| buffer_scale.
|
| Also depending on how you design this, you may have to
| consider how this would interact with OpenGL and Vulkan,
| and maybe consider the possibility of creating additional
| extensions there in order to handle this. But that may or
| may not be necessary, I'm not sure.
| vetinari wrote:
| Windows has one advantage: the display server api is
| private, so there's no app talking directly to window
| server, but everything goes through gdi32/user32. As a
| result, they could make some changes that Linux toolkits
| cannot make; and linking to gtk (or even
| libx11/libxcb/libwayland-client) is not mandatory in the
| Linux world, so they cannot fix things behind app backs.
|
| And the windows solution is not reliable either; the only
| reliable solution was macOS one.
| kuschku wrote:
| Why was it possible to break the world to _remove_ these
| things when switching from Gtk2 to Gtk3, but now it's not
| possible to _re-add_ them? Why was it possible to
| _remove_ it when switching from X11 to wayland, but now
| it's not possible to _re-add_ it?
|
| I've complained about this since before Gtk3 and Wayland
| were stable, constantly warning against making these
| decisions, and now that the bad decisions have been made,
| doing another protocol break to fix them is apparently
| out of the question?
| vetinari wrote:
| You don't understand.
|
| When GTK3 came, it didn't break GTK2 and GTK2 apps. They
| could work side-by-side, as they were before.
|
| What you suggest is either kicking out the world from
| beneath them, or having all of them updated, _at the same
| time_.
|
| That's not going to happen.
| vetinari wrote:
| Android started with it from the start and developers
| were aware of it.
|
| Windows and Qt were retrofitted and it shows. Both are
| buggy and unreliable.
| vetinari wrote:
| We can point out corner cases for both approaches till
| cows come home.
|
| Yes, both of them have advantages and disadvantages,
| engineering is about picking the right compromise. So
| yes, there will be cases where you would be better of
| with the other approach... for a while.
|
| But the approach is not being picked just for today and
| for the current state of tech. For the same reason, you
| won't lock yourself into unnecessarily complicated
| software that is going to be permanently buggy, and to be
| obsolete soon -- just like you would not appreciate being
| locked into Psion/Symbian-like memory management today,
| despite making sense, solving a problem and being more
| effective years ago.
|
| This is exactly the same case. That software is going to
| stay here for decades... you RX 5700XT is not.
| md8z wrote:
| I'm not sure how to answer that question, you don't have
| to do anything you don't want to do. GTK and its apps
| currently use integer coordinates, so in order to change
| that it needs to be changed to use floating point, and
| all the apps need to be changed to use it too. This is an
| API break and another thing that will take a long time to
| plumb through the whole stack and I doubt it will happen
| until at least GTK5. Maybe use KDE or Windows until then?
| Or get different hardware?
|
| Edit: comment from a GTK developer here that goes more
| into detail: https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/mutter/-/issu
| es/478#note_7939...
|
| I guess if you want to know why should things be this
| way, you could say it's because of technical limitations?
| Though that may not be a satisfying answer to you.
| kuschku wrote:
| GTK2 used float coordinates and supported fractional
| rendering.
|
| GTK3 breaking that is a bug, not a feature.
|
| Especially text should NEVER be scaled after rendering.
|
| And re: performance, that's great that you've got
| hardware that can run 3D in-browser shader sites or games
| at 6K resolution at 60fps just fine, mine can't. If it
| were running at 4K, as it's supposed to, I'd get
| significantly more fps. Especially at a time where GPUs
| are rare and Gnome still decides I should get 50% more
| performance just so they save some work.
| md8z wrote:
| I think you might be thinking of Cairo when used with one
| of the print backends, not GTK. GTK2 did not use float
| coordinates or support fractional rendering. See for
| example here:
|
| https://developer-
| old.gnome.org/gtk2/2.24/GtkWidget.html#gtk...
|
| https://developer-
| old.gnome.org/gtk2/2.24/GtkWidget.html#gtk...
|
| Those would need to be floats if you wanted to have a
| non-integer scale. Changing everything to use float
| coordinates is a large undertaking that touches the whole
| stack and will require a lot of work. It still hasn't
| been done yet as of GTK4. If you'd like to spend your
| time helping out then please do so. Please refer to the
| gitlab comment above for a description of some of the
| technical issues that you would have to solve. But it may
| be more cost effective for you to just get some new
| hardware with a better GPU, or use something else.
| vetinari wrote:
| The principial difference between how Mutter/Gnome and
| Plasma/ handles hidpi is, that for Mutter/Gnome it works
| for old apps without any modifications, while the
| Plasma/Qt approach works only for apps that were modified
| to use the new APIs.
|
| Yes, the old app on Mutter will be upscaled, but it will
| be right scale on each monitor in mixed-dpi environment.
| Yes, even that old wordperfect from 1998. While on
| Plasma, non-Qt apps will have hard time.
|
| Also, you won't be able to do perfecly fine anything on
| 150%. How are you going to do 1-pixel wide line? Exact
| cursor positions? You are not going to. With hw
| downscaling, yes, you pay the price for larger
| framebuffer and you get good approximations, but you also
| avoid a great deal of corner cases, that most software
| users are running is never going to solve.
| kuschku wrote:
| > Also, you won't be able to do perfecly fine anything on
| 150%. How are you going to do 1-pixel wide line? Exact
| cursor positions? You are not going to. With hw
| downscaling, yes, you pay the price for larger
| framebuffer and you get good approximations, but you also
| avoid a great deal of corner cases, that most software
| users are running is never going to solve.
|
| I care more about the performance loss of rendering at
| excessive resolution than about the 1-pixel
| imperfections.
|
| > that for Mutter/Gnome it works for old apps without any
| modifications, while the Plasma/Qt approach works only
| for apps that were modified to use the new APIs.
|
| You could do a hybrid approach and render old apps at
| 1x/2x and down/upscale them and let updated apps render
| at the native resolution.
|
| At least render fonts at native resolution and only
| up/downscale the rest of the widgets. Scaling fonts can
| NOT be done by post-processing or it WILL be wrong.
| (MacOS only scales widgets, images and fonts will always
| be rendered at native resolution)
| vetinari wrote:
| > MacOS only scales widgets, images and fonts will always
| be rendered at native resolution
|
| MacOS scales entire framebuffer. You can verify it by
| doing a screenshot and examining it.
| AzN1337c0d3r wrote:
| No he's right, it renders to a 2x resolution off screen
| with hidpi assets (2x resolution icons, double-size text,
| etc) and then does downsampling back to your screen
| resolution 2560x1600 for 13 inches, 2880x1800 for 15 inch,
| 3072x1092 for 16-inch MBPs.
| csande17 wrote:
| macOS does in fact do this kind of non-integer bitmap
| scaling. It's got nothing to do with what the GPU is
| capable of; Apple's _UI framework_ can 't do layout or text
| rendering at anything but "1x", "2x", or "3x" densities.
|
| This is also why the first Catalyst apps looked really
| blurry and bad on non-Retina displays; Apple applied a non-
| integer scale to the final rendered frames to work around
| UIKit not being able to draw the right size widgets.
| [deleted]
| bmitc wrote:
| The thickness argument (i.e., excuse) came from Apple, not
| users. They did the same with the 3.5mm audio jack on phones,
| claiming they needed the space to make things thinner.
| Meanwhile, phones like the LG V35 were thinner with the same IP
| rating but still had an audio jack.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| They didn't exactly say they needed the space "to make things
| thinner". They needed the space for other things like the new
| generation Taptic engine on iPhone 7 (which was the first
| phone without a headphone jack, and was also the same
| thickness as the 6 and 6s).
| SECProto wrote:
| > They needed the space for other things like the new
| generation Taptic engine on iPhone 7
|
| I mean, they didn't technically need the space - there was
| space for one guy to cram one into the bottom without
| removing the taptic thingy (although it did get shifted
| slightly) [1]
|
| [1] super long video and not practical for an individual to
| do it, but shows that there was space and it could've been
| included. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=utfbE3_uAMA
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| I'm not claiming they couldn't have made it work, but
| having the port so close to the edge (on the curved
| corner) would create issues for mass production.
| bmitc wrote:
| Exactly. There's no engineering reason, and if there was,
| it would be embarrassing. Apple is a marketing and
| advertising company at this point which makes hardware
| and software to support that mission. So they marketed
| that they wanted or needed to remove the jack because
| <reasons>, when the real reason was that they wanted to
| sell you overpriced bluetooth headphones and leave no
| option otherwise.
| modulusshift wrote:
| They added a more sensitive camera that year as well as a
| brighter display with more colors, found interference,
| moved the display circuitry and cabling to the other side
| of the phone to compensate, and then that interfered with
| the headphone jack instead. So they took the headphone
| jack out instead of compromising the quality of the audio
| output.
|
| If the guy who put the jack back in did any actual signal
| quality testing while playing video to stress the
| display, I'd be appreciative to have this theory put to
| rest, but I don't think he did.
| timmit wrote:
| Yeah, as a mac user, I could not believe it,
|
| I sold my pro (2015) Bought a pro (2019) with 4 usb-c, even I
| missed the megasafe.
|
| Now they changed back to 2015, feel cheated by Apple :(
| toyg wrote:
| Man, it's the usual game, they gotta sell 'em widgets: do a
| model with port A, everyone buys dongles and accessories,
| then a few years later change to port B, everyone gotta buy
| new dongles and accessories... Rinse and repeat.
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| IIRC most people on HN lamented the passing of magsafe. A lot
| of people did defend thunderbolt though. Guess they weren't
| heavy users of that god-awful plug form factor (it always
| stopped providing a good connection after about 100 pluggings).
| zuminator wrote:
| I have never owned a Mac anything but the addition of an SD
| card slot is making this seem very attractive to me. Conversely
| the latest Surface Pro eliminated its little hidden microSD
| card reader, seems inexcusable for a device marketed as "Pro"
| and has really put a damper on my desire to upgrade.
| Sharlin wrote:
| *restoration of the SD card slot.
| crazysim wrote:
| Who wants to take bets on the next Surface Pro restoring the
| reader?
| justinator wrote:
| A USB micro SD card reader is essentially pennies.
| apostacy wrote:
| What cost does an sdcard slot impose? What is the benefit
| of removing it?
|
| It is the size of a thumbnail, and most people won't even
| notice it if they aren't looking for it.
|
| I want to know who was cheering for it to be removed.
|
| And the few times I have needed it, it was so nice to have.
| Even if I only use it once in the lifetime of the product,
| it will be worth it.
|
| I haven't had to change a tire in years, but I think it is
| prudent to carry around a spare tire.
|
| Simply having access to a feature is itself a feature.
| can16358p wrote:
| SD card isn't the problem, having a dedicated port for
| everything is. I really loved the USB-C-only approach:
|
| Get whatever you need and plug. My camera has CF card, my
| drone has microSD card. So let's add them to the mix too.
| Also I never need the MagSafe port or never used HDMI
| port in my life. On the contrary, someone might need HDMI
| or SD slot everyday. My point is that they can't make
| everyone happy, and paying (not just by price but also
| the looks/simplicity) for ports that will never be used
| isn't the best thing to do.
|
| USB-C solved this exact problem and what they did on this
| version is a major step back IMO, including removing the
| Touch Bar which had great potential for improvement.
| strogonoff wrote:
| I suspect MBP battery life didn't look so great
| considering the thinness, new hungrier M1 processors,
| dramatically increased number of pixels on the main
| display, and possibly the extra ports to small degree.
| Perhaps dropping the second display is what helped them
| soften the hit a little. Rarely use touch bar myself
| other than for adjusting volume and brightness, but in
| those regards it's been incredibly convenient.
| can16358p wrote:
| Yeah, Mr. Ive went too much into "form over function"
| territory. While I love the thinness of my current 16" I
| also admit that I'd love to have more juice with a
| slightly ticker/heavier body.
|
| The Touch Bar had a great promise, but they couldn't
| improve it enough to make it better (uhm, haptic feedback
| and faster response). Don't know how much it really
| contributed to battery drain though.
| strogonoff wrote:
| From my understanding, any display is important
| contributor to battery drain, and touch bar is a pretty
| much always-on (while you work) high-DPI display.
|
| I dread returning to the old way of controlling screen
| brightness and volume, though.
| apostacy wrote:
| I used a Thinkpad for over a year without noticing the
| microsd slot on it. I think they are so inconspicuous
| that most people don't even notice them.
|
| And what is the alternative? USBA <-> USBC <-> SDCard
| adapter <-> MicroSD to SD adapter
|
| Is that convenience?
|
| Even if they gave away usb sdcard adapters for free, it
| would still be trouble to go out and get one. Or carry
| one around with me everywhere. Just another thing to
| lose. Another thing dangling out of my computer putting
| stress on the ports.
|
| If I'm completely honest, I think it is more emotional
| than practical. This craving for hyper-optimization.
|
| And even Apple now seems to be admitting that it was not
| a great idea.
|
| I can understand dongles for tablets, but this is
| supposed to be a laptop, a somewhat general purpose
| computer.
|
| > Also I never need the MagSafe port or never used HDMI
| port in my life
|
| I assure you you are in the minority on this. MagSafe by
| the way is amazing. It has saved my old Macbooks more
| times than I can count. I've already had to get my USBC
| power slot replaced from tripping on it.
|
| Having access to the ports is itself a feature. Having
| the peace of mind of knowing that you can go to the
| office or classroom and be able to use the projector or a
| jumpdrive, without having to worry about bringing the
| right adapters is a huge plus for me and I think most
| people.
| justinator wrote:
| An SD card reader is great, until you need a _micro_ SD
| card reader and then, oh well. And advances will march
| on; ports on whatever I use will become outdated. Using
| an OG M1 Macbook Pro, it 's not been a big problem. The
| dongle I have works great and has more useful ports than
| the Macbook it replaces.
| strogonoff wrote:
| I have a portable reader (SD/microSD) which I almost
| never need on the go, and a reader built into my dock
| (SD/microSD/CF). Another dust-and-small-object-collecting
| nook is actually a downside for me. Built-in SD reader in
| my old MBP stopped recognizing cards (unless you push it
| in pressing at just the right angle, there're a few posts
| on Apple discussions about this issue) after a couple of
| years anyway.
|
| I'm wondering how much bigger the battery could be
| without all those extra ports--a top-spec M1 Max laptop
| would probably rival the current king, the 13" M1 MBP.
| PostThisTooFast wrote:
| Tell that to the morons cheerleading for headphone jacks
| to be removed. And headphone jacks were FAR more
| universally useful than a full-sized SD slot.
|
| Speaking of which, you gotta love how Apple calls out the
| headphone jack on its COMPUTERS, after having removed it
| from its best-selling music player: the iPhone.
| kokekolo wrote:
| I thought the same when I upgraded from my 2013 13 inch
| (with SD slot) to 2020 M1. Turns out it's a lot less
| convenient. As a camera user, it's so simple to just pull
| the SD card out of the camera and plug it into the MacBook.
| But now I just plug the camera in with the cable, even
| though I have the usb SD reader.
| porknubbins wrote:
| And a lot of them break or I lose them. Built in hw seems
| more robust.
| lostlogin wrote:
| The dongle life is just so very shit. Is there anyone who
| prefers a dongle to a built in solution?
| endless1234 wrote:
| If using the laptop mostly in a stationary place, but
| occasionally taking it to meetings (or just around the
| house), the dongle life is okay - means just one cable to
| plug in when I come back. Of course it would still be
| better to have a few extra ports on the device itself,
| there's no getting around that.
| justinator wrote:
| It's pretty similar though - instead of SD card into
| computer, it's SD card into reader into computer. Have to
| do this for micro SD cards in some way/shape/form
| anyways.
|
| This may be a, "everything is amazing and no one is
| happy" sort of situation. I think all my cameras connect
| wirelessly to my Mac and my iPhone anyways. I can
| copy/paste text/images/whatever across the two as well
| and that's just magic when it comes to casual content
| creation.
| matwood wrote:
| Not sure about prefer, but indifferent at this point. The
| few places I might have needed to connect to HDMI (like a
| conference room) have all permanently attached a usb-c
| connector at this point. Adding the sdcard back is ok,
| but is superfluous at my desk because I have a dock
| (single cable connect at my desk is very nice). I also
| already carry a small usb-c -> sdcard reader so I can
| bring photos directly into LR on my iPad Pro.
|
| MagSafe looks like a great return at first, but having
| used the M1 MBA for a year I've learned that I almost
| never plug into power in random places anymore. It's a
| bit like the plug on the bottom of mouse doesn't matter
| when you do it so infrequently. My MBA ends up almost
| exclusively charged from the dock on my desk, so the big
| advantage of MagSafe isn't there anymore.
|
| And for these other ports, we lost a usb-c port. Probably
| not that big of deal since I've been living with 2 for a
| year, but it is a tradeoff to consider.
| [deleted]
| torstenvl wrote:
| Keyboard travel was fixed in 2020. I have the last Intel MBP,
| spec'd to last, with a physical escape key and Touch ID, and I
| love it.
| Joeri wrote:
| Key travel isn't back to what it used to be, but it's moving
| down everywhere so apple at least isn't far behind. I went
| from a T series thinkpad to an M1 air and the keyboard was a
| clear downgrade, but in practice I find it to be "good
| enough".
|
| Apple:
|
| .7 mm - butterfly keyboard
|
| 1 mm - current mac scissor keyboard
|
| 1.3 mm - old mac scissor keyboard
|
| Thinkpads:
|
| 1.8mm - T series thinkpads (aka the ones with the good
| keyboard)
|
| 1.5mm - last year's X1 carbon (the thin and light)
|
| 1.3mm - this year's X1 carbon
| jagger27 wrote:
| For added reference, the beloved 7-row ThinkPad keyboards
| found in laptops like the T410 and T420 have 2.5mm key
| travel.
|
| Kailh Choc (low profile) mechanical switches have a total
| travel of 3mm.
|
| Cherry MX switches (and most clones) have 4mm travel. Some
| clones are a little more or less.
| mpalczewski wrote:
| I miss the 0.7mm travel. Less work for the fingers. Faster
| typing. Too bad they couldn't make it reliable.
| jagger27 wrote:
| I certainly don't miss the feeling of typing on concrete.
| I suppose a very light fingered typist might appreciate
| the reduced travel though.
| QuercusMax wrote:
| Typing on concrete - that's exactly right. I got awful
| RSI from the butterfly keyboard on my 2018 15-inch MBP. I
| had used previous MacBooks for nearly a decade with no
| problems.
| joeberon wrote:
| I actually thought the old butterfly keys were fine back
| when I was using them, but after getting an M1 2020 mbp,
| going back is HORRIBLE
| pivo wrote:
| I love my 2019's keyboard. That's the year they added the
| extra membrane to prevent dust getting in. It's been
| flawless for me for the last two years.
| jsjohnst wrote:
| I feel like we are either odd ducks or else in a silent
| majority. I _love_ minimal key travel and find it a far
| superior typing experience.
| NovaS1X wrote:
| I know it's completely subjective, but I'm currently on a
| work provided 2018 mac with the 0.7mm travel and I
| despise it. I have far, far more typing errors on this
| keyboard than I do on pretty much anything else.
|
| I'm excited to try the new 1mm keyboard.
| nraf wrote:
| Same, I use a mechanical keyboard at my desk, and being
| forced to use the laptop keyboard would drive me insane.
| I spilt coffee on it and ended up upgrading to a 2020 Pro
| which (to me) is just barely bearable.
| bacro wrote:
| You spilt coffee on purpose for an upgrade? :)
| can16358p wrote:
| Yes! Thought I was the only one. It was slick, good-
| looking, and typing was a breeze on those.
|
| But it was super-problematic and had mine broken multiple
| times over the years. If they could make 0.7mm butterfly
| reliable, that would have been awesome.
| Aeolun wrote:
| I have it too, but to say I love it would be a stretch. It
| really doesn't feel like max spec machine most of the time.
| ksec wrote:
| Keyboard _reliability_ was fixed and switch back to scissors
| or what they called magic keyboard. But the Key travel
| distance is still not the 1.5mm used in the pre Butterfly
| era.
| rbates wrote:
| Reliability isn't as good for me as the 2015 MacBook Pro.
| My 2019 16" doesn't register presses that are near the edge
| of the keys like the 2015 model did. Perhaps it's related
| to the travel distance. It is my biggest issue with the
| 16".
| modulusshift wrote:
| This was the selling point for the butterfly keyboard
| when it was introduced, actually, that no matter where
| you hit on the key it would be equally responsive.
| endymi0n wrote:
| Having used all three of them, I'd say the fixed version is
| finally good enough. 2015 was one of the best laptop
| keyboards I've ever used, but the new one is 80% there.
| It's nowhere near close the disaster inbetween.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| Anecdata FWIW: I upgraded directly from a 2014 (same
| keyboard as 2015 that everyone praises) to the first 16". I
| did notice a difference at first but adjusted within less
| than a week, never had any complaints after that.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| My own anectada: I owned a 2015. It now belongs to my
| son. I also own a 16" with a Magic Keyboard. I had a
| butterfly along the way that was a total nightmare.
|
| Going from the butterfly to the Magic felt absolutely
| incredible. I now own an M1 MacBook Air (mainly for the
| better and quieter performace, and the lack of TouchBar),
| and its keyboard feels about the same as the 16", so
| pretty good.
|
| After a long time, I was helping my son with stuff on the
| computer, and as soon as I typed a couple words I was
| blown away by his keyboard. It's better in every aspect
| to the newer ones.
|
| Magic Keyboard ranges from good to very good. The 2015's
| is superb.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| I'll supplement my anecdata to say...
|
| I gifted my other old 2013 which had the same pre-
| butterfly keyboard, erased my data after I had already
| gotten used to the 2019. I did notice the difference in
| key travel then. But it didn't bother me when I went back
| to the 2019 after. I honestly couldn't say I'd prefer one
| over the other, besides current familiarity/muscle
| memory.
| allenu wrote:
| I have the 2020 Intel one as well. I think the key travel
| still isn't what it was in 2015 or earlier, though. They are
| still too shallow for me. It's minor, but I do feel I bottom
| out too quickly on them. It feels like tapping on glass after
| a while.
| nazgulnarsil wrote:
| It's insane to me that manufacturers still haven't figured
| this out. Reducing the travel by .1mm is extremely worth it
| if you can give a slightly squishy/springy bottoming out
| with a rubber gasket. It dramatically reduces typing
| fatigue.
| porknubbins wrote:
| Its kind of funny that while everything else has gotten
| better laptop keyboards have gotten so bad that the one
| thing we try to avoid on desktop keyboards (I can never
| go back to that squishy plastic dome feel after the crisp
| action of mechanical switches) would actually be an
| improvement.
| jacobolus wrote:
| If you need a rubber gasket at the bottom to avoid
| "fatigue", that means you are smashing your fingers down
| too hard and can plausibly injure yourself with or
| without the gasket. This feature of typing style can be
| improved with practice. Try to use a light springy touch
| with only slightly more force than minimally necessary to
| actuate the keys. Try to keep the palms floating in the
| air (rather than resting on any surface) while actively
| typing.
|
| More helpful in keyboard hardware would be greater key
| travel distance and a sharper tactile snap.
|
| (Trying to solve keyboard injuries with rubber at the
| bottom of the keyswitch is similar to wearing heavily
| padded running shoes then smashing heels into the ground
| on every step, relying on the shoe padding to absorb some
| of the shock. The better way to avoid ankle/knee/hip
| injury is to get a less padded shoe and fix the gait to
| have gentler steps and use the tendons/muscles to absorb
| the shock instead of cartilage etc.)
| nazgulnarsil wrote:
| Why should I spend time training myself when we could
| just design equipment to be more easily usable.
| Minimalist shoes fell out of fashion, and serious
| competitors mostly never used them.
| tw04 wrote:
| Because the lack of feedback on the shallow depth is
| extremely off-putting to most people. Me included.
|
| I can't say I've ever gotten typing fatigue from any
| keyboard I've used even when being stuck typing for 10+
| hours with very little downtime.
| GekkePrutser wrote:
| Indeed, that argument feels very much like "you're
| holding it wrong". Technology should adapt to us, not the
| other way around. Especially human interface devices like
| keyboards.
|
| Part of the issue with Apple's keyboards is that the
| activation point is so close to the bottom due to the
| short travel. Lenovo does this a lot better and it's
| really a joy to type on. Bottoming the keys out hard is
| instinctively reduced due to the earlier and clearer
| feedback.
| jacobolus wrote:
| I agree that technology should adapt to people's anatomy
| rather than vice versa. The improvements in that
| direction in switch design are a longer travel distance,
| sharper tactile snap at the actuation point, where
| possible audio feedback, and possibly lower force
| required for actuation.
|
| More importantly than keyswitch design, the keyboard is a
| pretty bad overall shape for human hands. Laptop
| keyboards could be improved dramatically with a different
| physical arrangement of keys. In particular the right
| half of the letter keys should be scooted an inch or more
| to the right, and arranged so the wrists can stay
| straight while typing, the right pinky should be given
| fewer keys to press, the thumbs and index fingers should
| have more keys, and in general finger reaching should be
| minimized.
|
| Training to safely and efficiently use tools is also
| important, however. Untrained typists have injuries at
| much higher rate than trained typists, because they
| develop habits poorly aligned with human anatomy. Same
| story for musicians, etc. Many people would benefit from
| more effective handwriting training.
|
| Telling people to sit with their backs straight instead
| of hunched over or slouching, keep their necks straight,
| keep their wrists straight while doing fine work with the
| fingers, (more generally avoid postures with high static
| strain on muscles/tendons,) change positions every once
| in a while to reduce/shift remaining static loads, get
| enough sleep and exercise, etc. is just generally good
| advice irrespective of equipment. RSI is no joke, and
| people who make heavy use of computers should make some
| effort not to cause themselves permanent injury.
| jacobolus wrote:
| You should spend time training yourself because the
| design that "feels" softer is still actually putting a
| ton of strain on your joints, which often leads to
| debilitating injury.
| Hamuko wrote:
| It was fixed but not brought back to its former glory.
| handrous wrote:
| Having briefly had to use an old Pro from when they still
| had DVD drives in them (which I used way-back-when but
| hadn't touched in a long time), I can authoritatively say
| that the "former glory" is a _solid_ two generations behind
| the very-flat newer keyboards. Even the one it replaced
| (2012?-2015?) wasn 't as good as those were. Felt _great_
| to type on. I don 't think nice-feeling keyboards are
| compatible with extreme thinness.
| Hamuko wrote:
| I have a 2011 MacBook Pro and a 2019 MacBook Pro, and the
| keyboard in the 2011 MacBook Pro still feels so good even
| after 10 years.
| Redsquare wrote:
| wow.....
| pivo wrote:
| I agree that they felt great to type on but at least for
| me typing speed was much slower. Going back to my 2010 (I
| think) MBP now, typing still feels great but it also
| feels like typing in molasses.
| duffyjp wrote:
| I own a 2011 Macbook Pro I still use daily. I have Apple
| laptops going all the way back to the PowerPC days and
| use current ones through work but that DVD equipped
| unibody generation has the very best keyboard. By far.
| asenna wrote:
| I have the 16" MBP (late-2019), really annoyed with the
| heating issues. Any time I do anything intensive, like edit
| raw images in Lightroom, at some point temperature rises
| which makes some "kernel process" pretty much hog up all the
| CPU and the machine starts lagging severely. Looked up online
| and this is quite common.
| eyelidlessness wrote:
| It's come up before but still not everyone knows: you may
| want to try plugging the power cable on the right side. It
| can drastically reduce this throttling.
| downWidOutaFite wrote:
| Yea it's especially common when running external monitors.
| The conspiracy-minded would say Apple wanted to leave a
| reason for MBP buyers to upgrade to M1 laptops.
| awill wrote:
| Using any external monitor requires turning on the
| discrete GPU. I'm sure that's a large part of the
| problem.
| muro wrote:
| Why would that be required? The embedded GPU should be
| good enough for many things.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Poor drivers. The same reason why the discrete GPU pulls
| around 20W just for being on with an external screen,
| even if the screen is black. Apparently not an issue:
| * in clamshell mode; * on Windows via BootCamp.
|
| According to some reports in the MacRumours forum [0]
| this is fixed in Monterey.
|
| [0] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/16-is-hot-noisy-
| with-an...
|
| Edit: Not quite a fix. Apparently they introduced a Low
| Power Mode that helps bring wattage and temps down by
| essentially preemptively throttling CPU and GPU or
| something like that.
| Aeolun wrote:
| > by essentially preemptively throttling CPU and GPU
|
| Not really a fix then. That may prevent hurting your
| machine but it's still not running at optimal
| performance.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Indeed. I disable turbo boost on my 16". It hurts peak
| performance but runs (slightly) cooler and quieter, and
| sustains for longer. This reads all kinds of wrong.
| lupire wrote:
| The GPU overheats because it runs at high clock (and 18W)
| even when doing 10% work.
| timdaub wrote:
| As someone that has felt many years stuck with his MBP mid 2014
| all I can say is: Shut up and take my money.
| icoder wrote:
| MBP late 2012 right there with you
| reaperducer wrote:
| 2012 MacBook Air here. Yep, I ordered a new 16" machine minutes
| ago.
|
| It's funny how people on the internet were crying, "16GB is
| completely unusable!" Ummm... I have 4GB, and it works fine for
| everything. I'm even running Catalina.
|
| Maybe it's not good for games? I don't play computer games.
| Maybe that's where all the teeth-gnashing and kiddie posturing
| comes from.
| Raminj95 wrote:
| Its not only games, but doing webdev with docker instances up
| and running and many tabs etc etc it eats through that ram so
| fast, so its nice to have alot of ram so that the dev
| experience still feels snappy. thats my 2 cents anyway.
| have_faith wrote:
| Can't believe they did so many positive changes with the MBP only
| to add the notch from the phone in too. Almost the perfect
| update. Does this mean every app in full screen has to be updated
| to account for it?
|
| > posted in wrong thread so copying here
| wodenokoto wrote:
| I can't believe they didn't color the menu-bar black to hide
| the notch.
|
| I suppose the notch is only in the way if you are watching 4:3
| video in full screen. For every other use case, the notch is
| hidden in either the menu bar or black, horizontal bars.
|
| I'm also wondering if the led backlighting is arranged so that
| backlight is completely turned off in the black horizontal bars
| shown when viewing 16:9 video in full screen.
| have_faith wrote:
| >I'm also wondering if the led backlighting is arranged so
| that backlight is completely turned off in the black
| horizontal bars shown when viewing 16:9 video in full screen.
|
| That would likely help a lot, very interested to see it in
| action.
| phyalow wrote:
| Not a huge deal for me, I dont notice it on my phone, I dont
| expect I will on my new Mac either.
| randyrand wrote:
| By default full screen apps do not use that space. It remains
| be black.
| bmitc wrote:
| I can't believe they've done that either. I'd honestly consider
| getting one, but I can't stand notches on any device.
|
| And I'm sure we'll see everyone else start to copy this
| "feature".
| playpause wrote:
| Maybe I've drunk the Apple Kool-Aid, but there's another way to
| look at this: it's a perfectly rectangular 16:10 display, plus
| they've added an extra (albeit imperfect) strip along the top,
| 74 pixels high, allowing them to push the macOS menu bar into
| the bezel, leaving you with a clean and unencumbered 16:10
| desktop area for your content.
| trenchgun wrote:
| This is a good framing.
|
| It is not a loss, it is a pure gain.
| prewett wrote:
| That makes me happier, but it's a deep gash into an otherwise
| perfect rectangle. It's a little like the buying a brand new
| table (or car) and the first thing you do is accidentally put
| deep gouge in it. Perfectly serviceable? Yes. But still
| needlessly marred for the life of the product.
| pb7 wrote:
| It's function over form. Exactly what people always say
| Apple should focus on.
| jmkni wrote:
| Speed holes? -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whnms4CLJys
| nickysielicki wrote:
| That portion of my screen on my Mac has been a solid grey
| square with no meaningful information for 99.9% of the time
| that the laptop has been powered on. The aspect ratio is 16:10
| so it's not going to get in the way of any 16:9 content. I feel
| like this is a pretty bad take. Would you prefer a solid black
| bezel?
| concinds wrote:
| The Apple Event showed that full-screen apps and videos have a
| black bar extending the whole notch height; which still leaves
| you with an Apple standard 16:10 screen area. Since it's mini-
| LED, it'll be just as black as the previous bezels, and since
| the non-notch area is still 16:10, you're not missing anything
| at all; and the menu bar in a sense "doesn't take any usable
| space" anymore.
| tylerhou wrote:
| Nit: mini-LED is not the same thing as micro-LED, so it
| remains to be seen whether the LEDs are small enough/aligned
| in such a way that the black bar at the top doesn't have any
| backlight bleed.
|
| (Maybe this was mentioned in the presentation...)
| concinds wrote:
| The funny thing is I checked the webpage to make sure I got
| it right, but still copied it wrong.
|
| Ha!
|
| Thanks for the correction
|
| They did announce a very high contrast ratio so hopefully
| it won't be too bad.
| zeitg3ist wrote:
| I wonder how it will work with a mouse. What happens when
| you're hovering the menu bar and go inside the dead area? Does
| the cursor disappear and return on the other side? Making the
| dead area unvisitable (so the cursor keeps following the
| border) seems the most logical solution probably, but it makes
| it very awkward to go from one menu item to the next if the
| notch is between them.
| foldr wrote:
| I suspect there'll be a setting to have the notch area ignored
| for full screen apps by default, or something like that.
| _kush wrote:
| > Does this mean every app in full screen has to be updated to
| account for it?
|
| A simple black bar in full screen apps would be sufficient I
| guess.
| etempleton wrote:
| I wonder. Maybe full screen will behave differently and the
| menu bar will never be hidden?
|
| Otherwise I am looking at my web browser in full screen and
| how do you design around that? You have to push the tabs down
| anyway, might as well just make the menu bar static.
| have_faith wrote:
| You could get clever and have apps program around it as a
| dead zone (tabs jump either side of it when moving them
| around) but sounds like a pain.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| No, remember that the notch extends the display upward, and
| does not expand downward into the display. Apple's reasoning is
| now you get a 16:10 display _without_ having the top menu bar
| enroaching within it.
|
| Which I'm perfectly fine with. Useless black area made useful.
| mohanmcgeek wrote:
| Is MacOS also going to restrict all apps that run full-screen
| to the 16:10 display area and not the strip?
|
| If they have done that, it's fine.
|
| But even then I can think of a bunch of people who buy
| MacBooks to run Linux.. it's going to be a showstopper for
| them.
| thebean11 wrote:
| Isn't that space just menu bar 99% of the time in Linux
| also?
| Slow_Hand wrote:
| I don't see much issue with having a notch on a laptop since it
| now lives in the middle of the menu bar now. That's typically
| negative space in most apps anyways.
| have_faith wrote:
| For my full screen web browser it's right where the tabs go.
| [deleted]
| vimy wrote:
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/macos-hides-notch-on-
| ne...
| Wowfunhappy wrote:
| I was going to answer "presumably this is why Safari has
| always put tabs below the address bar", but the most recent
| version finally changed that by default. :\
| dkonofalski wrote:
| No it's not. In previous iterations, your tabs went below
| the camera. This doesn't change that.
| have_faith wrote:
| Not sure I understand your distinction, the screen is
| taller now, if my browser wants to render to the top of
| the screen it has to contend with the notch.
| buu700 wrote:
| It sounds like they're saying the OS will automatically
| add a black bar to the top in fullscreen mode, which will
| look seamless thanks to the contrast rate of mini LED.
|
| If that is the case, it sounds like a pretty elegant
| solution and significantly reduces my concern about the
| notch. It also addresses my confusion about some of the
| images on Apple's website.
| dkonofalski wrote:
| If your browser changes nothing, the top bar will be
| blacked out and your tabs will display exactly as before.
| This only changes if your browser explicitly updates to
| handle the notched display.
| atlgator wrote:
| It seems like Apple purposely comes so close to offering the
| perfect laptop only to falter hard on one or two features. In
| this case, it's the battery life. Continuous web use time is down
| from 17 hours on the 2020 13" M1 to 11 hours on the new 14".
| That's "up to" time, mind you, and with real use as a developer I
| expect getting 75% of that at most. So 11 hours just isn't enough
| time. I buy a laptop for mobility. I shouldn't have to plug it in
| at all during my work day. Yes, it's better than competitors but
| still lacking.
|
| I would have been happier if they took the 13" M1 and added the
| ports.
| soylentnewsorg wrote:
| Ok, I believe you're being sarcastic, because this little
| paragraph is ridiculous, so I'll address it as if you are -
| because then you have a very good point.
|
| This is Apple's Pro line. There is no more performant laptop
| that they make. It's a portable workstation - a home tower that
| you can take with you. If people want battery life of 10+ hours
| or a light weight, they get the model optimized for that. Apple
| seems to not offer a real pro laptop (portable workstation) -
| period. People who use these pro laptops are either compiling
| code or doing heavy graphics.
|
| Work gives us Dell Precision laptops with 9 hours battery life
| during casual use, a pretty dang powerful discreet GPU, and oh
| - Xeon CPUs. No offense apple, but this "pro" laptop is a toy
| in comparison.
|
| So I don't get it - apple's plan. I couldn't seriously use
| their products for work unless I want to lose productivity. Why
| don't they make something that's actually "pro" instead of
| calling what everyone else calls mid-tier a "pro" and then
| completely excluding the actual pro target market all together.
| Do they just not want more money?
|
| As a developer, waiting less time for your device to finish an
| operation, while sitting there reading HN, makes you not need
| as much battery life. And the Dell seems designed for a full
| workday plus an hour. Now, I'm not a dev - did that for a year
| of my 20+ year career, too much sitting looking at code. I do
| however script a lot - with gigs of text output from data
| collection of logs and performance data, usually doing basic
| calculations or transformations. I look a lot at large datasets
| and graph them. I need a big GPU, I need fast CPUs. I mount up
| a 20G RAM drive because the disk is too slow.
|
| Now yeah - when compared to another Apple laptop w/ a Xeon, the
| M1 is faster for single threaded specialized workloads. Because
| Apple uses CPUs a generation behind everyone else, has worse
| cooling, and still loses on multicore. In real life, when I run
| a shell script on my laptop, and a coworker runs it on the same
| dataset on an M1, his is an all day run - he does it overnight.
| I do it over a long lunch - it's not even a real comparison.
|
| Now yes - My laptop gets hot, fans are blasting, and if my
| charge is at 80%, it literally won't charge while the script is
| running. But... that's what I want from a "pro." Now, his isn't
| a pro, and it stays barely warm. But we're talking the
| difference between 7 hours and 2 hours here. I don't think the
| "pro" is going to be all _that_ much better.
|
| So I get the apples to old apples comparison. However apples to
| flagships from others - I highly doubt apple a serious
| contender for the portable workstation. Which is what "pro"
| should be.
| thom wrote:
| Let's wait for some benchmarks, I see no reason not to have
| an open mind here. They seem to have taken a very serious
| shot at this, and even on paper, having up to 64GB of VRAM
| available opens up a lot of opportunities.
| soylentnewsorg wrote:
| The RTX 3090 - literally the top performing card available,
| that doubles as a space heater has 24GB of VRAM. Either
| you're wrong, or Apple built a Civic with a huge exhaust.
| Which will sound like a vacuum cleaner...
|
| Here are the top Dell specs to compare. 128GB ECC RAM. 6
| core Xeon. NVIDIA RTX a5k. Huge exhaust panel on the back
| (keep the CPU clocked high longterm instead of for burst).
| 120Hz 4k display (the 4k they've had for many years now).
| 14TB storage.
|
| And you know what? It's pretty thin. And very sturdy.
|
| Now, I'm not crapping on Apple's new laptop. I'm sure it's
| awesome, and can compete very well with the mid tier
| laptops from other vendors, at twice the price and half the
| durability. And it's always been that way. From keyboards
| that break from typing, to keyboards leaving key imprints
| on the screen. Can't expect much from a looks-first company
| that can't get a keyboard right, and builds their phones
| out of slippery fragile glass.
|
| My issue is with their constant misleading meaningless
| marketing garbage. They are the orange clown of computers.
| If they made an umbrella, they'd build it out of laser-
| drilled ice, in the shape of a beautiful swan, and melting
| would be the built-in cleaning feature.
| wetpaws wrote:
| >In this case, it's the battery life
|
| Pretty sure you are expected to go with Air if you want the
| battery life.
| kzrdude wrote:
| yes this is not an upgrade to the M1 at all - it is a parallel
| product! Seems like M1 can still be a very good deal.
| cpascal wrote:
| It seems the era of few ports, gimmicky keyboards, and thinness
| over function in MacBooks is over.
| msoad wrote:
| When I interviewed at Apple years ago there was a poster on the
| wall that had a picture of a MacBook with a MagSafe charger
| connected. A kid was crossing by the desk the laptop was sitting
| on it and it was about to cross the charging cable. Without
| MagSafe laptop could've fallen on this kid's head.
|
| The writing on the poster said: Come work with people who
| invented MagSafe to save children's lives. (or something similar)
|
| I really liked that poster. Never worked at Apple but I still
| remember that moment.
|
| MagSafe is great! What a shame they took it away for a few years!
| amelius wrote:
| In another commercial, a child walks near the edge of a cliff,
| loses balance and grabs the one thing in his reach: a laptop
| charger cable. Unfortunately, it's MagSafe, and the child falls
| into the abyss ...
| fnordsensei wrote:
| Because if it hadn't been magsafe, the child would be
| tethered to... a laptop? Presumably bolted on to whatever
| surface it was sitting on?
| amelius wrote:
| His dad was carrying the laptop.
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| And also his dad is Jony Ive
| phendrenad2 wrote:
| This really happened, I read about it on LinkedIn.
| wellthisisgreat wrote:
| Thank you, guys :))
| javajosh wrote:
| It's great Apple is changing course back to where they were in
| 2013. What sucks is that all those laptops built between 2013 and
| 2022 will be dogs on the used market.
|
| For my money, I'm getting the Framework latop and I'm going to
| bite the bullet and run (in order of preference) FreeBSD, NixOS,
| or some Linux (Ubuntu, probably). I'm tired of Apple's shit.
| Joeri wrote:
| _What sucks is that all those laptops built between 2013 and
| 2022 will be dogs on the used market._
|
| Prices will fall, and they have been falling, but they're not
| going to crater. The high end models will sell to people that
| have workloads that are intel only. The cheaper models will
| sell to people who want to pay less than the price of a new
| mac, or who don't understand what they're buying and think
| they're getting a good deal on a 3 year old pro mac priced
| above the m1 air.
| asdff wrote:
| Some people will still be needing an intel machine or a
| bootcamp machine for software compatibility reasons
| criddell wrote:
| > all those laptops built between 2013 and 2022 will be dogs on
| the used market
|
| In what sense? I'd bet they still sell for more than similar
| Windows laptops from those years.
| buu700 wrote:
| I assume they mean by comparison to what they would have gone
| for in an alternate timeline where Apple hadn't bungled the
| design in the first place.
|
| They could have released another five years of evolutionary
| updates to the MBPr line instead, and then everything
| released between 2015 and the first half of 2020 would have
| looked less obsolete by comparison. i.e. There would be more
| demand in the used market for those machines if they were
| more cosmetically similar, even if lacking Apple Silicon and
| mini LED screens.
| dmicah wrote:
| The touchbar Macbook Pros were released 2016 rather than 2013.
| trias wrote:
| what happened in 2013?
| wwweston wrote:
| 2013-2022 will probably still be in demand for anybody that's
| camping out on Mojave to keep 32 bit support or has Intel-
| related needs, though that demand profile will of course change
| over time.
|
| Framework + Linux sure seems compelling, though. I'm definitely
| tempted to try it.
| movedx wrote:
| > FreeBSD, NixOS, or some Linux (Ubuntu, probably). I'm tired
| of Apple's shit.
|
| You're tired of Apple's "shit", so you want to build a laptop
| on top of hardware that cannot be taken to a store and replaced
| the same day (Apple) and install an OS like FreeBSD which is
| going to be rock solid but supported by virtually no one?
|
| I'm all up for FreeBSD and Linux - love them and have ran them
| both on laptops and desktops for years - but given I want to
| get work done and collaborate with other people they're not
| good options.
|
| Personally I think you'll build a great machine that will blow
| the socks off of a MBP, but you'll be battling with
| interoperability with other people and businesses; and you'll
| be battling the OS itself to keep it working as a slight driver
| change breaks everything.
|
| And that doesn't even mention the hardware issue: what happens
| when something pops?
|
| Just some thoughts to consider.
| moondev wrote:
| Considering the framework laptop is the most user repairable
| laptop ever released, your comments are pretty confusing.
|
| https://frame.work/marketplace
| movedx wrote:
| I'm not convinced I'm going to be able to swap a USB-C port
| for a Display Port and FreeBSD is just going to be like,
| "OK! I can handle that!" It's more likely it's going to
| laugh in my face and simply not do anything at all. Worst
| case: it'll crash.
|
| And even after shutting down and swapping the components
| out, I'm not convinced drivers won't be an issue.
|
| Do you have more information on this?
| moondev wrote:
| There is nothing fancy or proprietary about this, it's a
| usb-c to displayport adaptor that is designed to fit
| flush into the body. You can use the same adaptor on a
| macbook if you wanted to, and certainly don't need to
| shutdown the machine to do so.
|
| https://frame.work/products/displayport-expansion-card
| javajosh wrote:
| Well, like so many people, I've not given much thought to
| what I'll do if my laptop "pops", because I've had this one
| for 8 years now, and it's been pretty solid all that time.
| Presumably if it blew up tomorrow I'd use my phone to pick up
| a used laptop of some kind and restore from backup. Right now
| that's an MBPr. In future I hope my FreeBSD Framework. As for
| sharing, I believe I can run what I need to be productive
| under FreeBSD. But time will tell. (It would be nice if a
| FreeBSD guru would volunteer to baby the Framework crowd with
| a guide. I would click the paypal donate button.)
| movedx wrote:
| I think you'll be fine, but I just wanted to point out the
| possibility that there could be interopability problems
| with other people, especially if that machine is something
| you take on site with you to clients, etc. That might not
| be a thing for you, though.
|
| Would love to see how you go because, and this is where I
| get honest: I want to move to FreeBSD on the desktop and
| basically just use a browser and VSCode with Remote-SSH.
| That's what I do now on a $3,000 MBP. It's something I can
| do, technically, on a $300 Chromebook.
| SpelingBeeChamp wrote:
| No one seems to be commenting on the 140 watt power adapter.
|
| With the caveat that I already dropped $7k (after tax) on a top-
| spec model, I am very interested in seeing how hot these get.
| Particularly in light of how cool the M1 runs.
|
| Prior to my current M1 MBP, my daily driver was a maxed-out 16"
| MBP. It's a very solid computer, but it functions just as well as
| a space heater.
|
| And its power brick is only 100 watts...
| clarkmo wrote:
| The 140w power adapter is for fast charging I believe.
| c7DJTLrn wrote:
| God I want Linux on these things. Apple have built some very sexy
| hardware, but I'm still not into the OS. It's just... sluggish
| (mostly in terms of productivity, not performance), too
| barebones, too basic and toy-like. I need a real OS to make my
| dream laptop.
| CephalopodMD wrote:
| Fixed everything they've broken in the past 5 years then added a
| notch... They haven't had a perfect machine in years, and the
| trend continues.
| sharmin123 wrote:
| How to Protect Your Privacy And Personal Data from Hackers?:
| https://www.hackerslist.co/how-to-protect-your-privacy-and-p...
| alexashka wrote:
| 2k USD for a laptop in 2021?
|
| Apple's goddamn genius. Oh, it has a newer processor that'll make
| awful software such as XCode and every internet browser a little
| faster? Well I'm in!
| Oddskar wrote:
| To be fair, a decked out i9 laptop can easily end up in the
| same price range. So I don't think it's that outlandish really.
| alexashka wrote:
| Sure. I'm making the argument that 2k for a laptop form
| factor is outlandish, not that there aren't products as
| bizarre as 'gaming laptops' that perhaps cost even more.
|
| I have yet to see a mass market use-case for a powerful
| laptop. Who are these people that need to regularly go from
| place to place _and_ need to do compute-intensive work in
| those various places?
|
| I've been given laptops at work - everyone would've been
| better off with a mac mini 100% of the time (assuming you can
| upgrade those?) - the only people who don't connect their
| laptop to a big monitor anyway are people asking for neck and
| shoulder problems within a decade.
| dirkg wrote:
| one more thing ... https://store.apple.com/xc/product/MM6F3AM/A
| Whitespace wrote:
| My iPhone 13 has an amazing front facing 1080p camera, FaceID
| scanner thing, speaker, and other stuff crammed into a small
| notch, but the notch on this is even larger and only has a
| camera? What gives? Why is the notch so wide?
|
| (I'm still getting one to replace my 2012 MacBook Pro)
| downWidOutaFite wrote:
| Your iphone is a lot thicker than a macbook's lid.
| BiteCode_dev wrote:
| And just like that, the outrage about the photo scanning malware
| Apple installed on their iPhone is forgotten.
|
| "The screeching voices of the minority" indeed.
| john_minsk wrote:
| I heard they reconsidered.
| thehappypm wrote:
| First of all, they never "installed" anything, it was a future
| feature. Second, they delayed it (possibly indefinitely) after
| the huge pushback.
| rowanG077 wrote:
| This is everything I wanted. But the notch... I can't really
| accept that.
| msie wrote:
| They increased display area with that notch and it only covers
| the menu bar.
| flareback wrote:
| I agree that in normal use it's only covering the menu bar
| and probably won't be much of a deal. What happens if an app
| has a lot of menu options? What will that do to the bar?
|
| What about gaming? is this something the developers will have
| to work around or will the game only be below the notch?
| pzo wrote:
| I think on iphone notch is more of a deal because you use if
| different orientation and between notch you couldnt squeeze
| much content like baterry percentage.
|
| On macos I think it's not a big deal for me considering I
| almost never maximize screen but extra 0.2'' of screen estate
| because of smaller frame is nice to have
| [deleted]
| belltaco wrote:
| If they'd only add touchscreens. Sigh.
|
| Edit: Ouch, so many downvotes just for asking for a feature.
| Weird.
| NovaS1X wrote:
| I'm very, very happy they haven't done this yet.
| belltaco wrote:
| Why? Just don't buy that model.
| NovaS1X wrote:
| Because it's a crap idea and design, I'll use a tablet if I
| want to poke at things. A touchscreen on a laptop is like
| driving a car with joysticks, it's not ergonomic.
|
| Also, Apple never does things half-assed, if they put a
| touchscreen in they're doing for all models just like they
| did the touchbar.
| yarcob wrote:
| Touchscreens are the big missing feature on macOS.
|
| It's not useful as a primary input method, but after using a
| Windows Surface computer for some time I'm surprised how often
| the touch display is useful.
|
| Lots of websites are optimized for touch / mobile first. Wether
| you are filling a form or watching Netflix or Disney plus,
| touching the screen is just much more convenient. Keyboard
| navigation is increasingly an afterthought on many websites.
|
| Macs now support running iOS apps. Using them without a touch
| screen is going to be a very poor experience.
|
| And finally, some things like annotating PDFs are things that
| are really cumbersome without a touch display -- when I need to
| do that on a Mac, I just print out the page because using the
| track pad or mouse for annotations is just not an option for
| me.
| dmt0 wrote:
| Steve said "no": https://www.businessinsider.com/steve-jobs-
| touch-screen-mac-...
| cjohnson318 wrote:
| Ooohf, I can't stand having fingerprints on my screen. Also,
| touchscreens are risky when you have toddlers around.
| sanderjd wrote:
| What for? I'm sure some people use them to draw and stuff but
| it seems pretty niche to me.
| MaxikCZ wrote:
| The laptop I bought for my dad have touchscreen "by
| accident", as neither of us recognized it as a feature to go
| for. Now he says its the best feature of the laptop, from
| pinching on maps to selecting checkboxes/radiobuttons. I dont
| know who was more surprised to find it useful.
| sanderjd wrote:
| Interesting anecdote!
| theshrike79 wrote:
| That's bad UX unless the whole of MacOS is redesigned to be
| used with fingers. Not happening soon.
|
| Not saying never though.
| yarcob wrote:
| > unless the whole of MacOS is redesigned to be used with
| fingers
|
| People use a lot of web apps that were designed mobile first,
| and using them without a touch screen sucks.
|
| You wouldn't use the touch screen as primary input, but it
| would make a lot of things much easier.
| theshrike79 wrote:
| It would also require the whole thing be designed
| differently.
|
| The hinge would need to be sturdy enough to not wobble when
| the user is dragging or tapping with a finger. The body
| would need to be heavier than the screen by a big enough
| margin to not topple the whole thing over when tapping.
| blhack wrote:
| I want to hate it because I _really_ wanted normal USB back, but
| I guess that ship has sailed.
|
| I love it. I want one. Gonna be tough not to hit that order
| button!
| ralmidani wrote:
| I'm seriously considering buying a middle-spec M1 MBP, and I also
| have a preorder for a DIY Edition Framework laptop[0]. I realize
| devices which give users more freedom to tinker, repair,
| customize, improve, etc. may never compete for market share with
| locked-down devices which are harder to repair, upgrade, and
| recycle, but my hope is that the former will at least remain a
| viable option. It's tempting to splurge on a top-of-the-line MBP,
| but I prefer to split my money so at least some of it goes toward
| sustainable and freedom-respecting computing.
|
| [0]https://frame.work/laptop-diy-edition
| kaladin_1 wrote:
| Well, you get to vote with your wallet.
|
| I'm also considering between the M1 Pro and Framework Laptop
| but not sure the Framework will be at par with what Apple
| delivers functions-wise.
|
| Regarding Framework using intel chip, I haven't really seen a
| strong argument comparing its specs with that of M1 other than
| the repairability. I'm not quite sure that's everyone's
| priority. Sure, if you've ever spent 2k repairing your Mac cos
| you don't have Apple Care, repairability becomes an important
| issue.
| hahajk wrote:
| It's not just repairability. It's that everyone in this
| thread says "Apple gave us hdmi! They got rid of the touch
| bar!" Maybe this falls under "upgradability" but the idea of
| Framework is that the user decides what to include. Like with
| FOSS vs proprietary software. If the developers remove a
| popular UI element, there's a good chance you can add a
| compiler flag or find a fork with what you're looking for.
| (This is the idea, but we'll see if it pans out in reality. I
| don't like Framework's smooshed arrow keys; the idea is that
| I can switch that out to a 3rd party I like. The reality is
| that there is so far no 3rd party keyboard.)
| vinay427 wrote:
| > the idea of Framework is that the user decides what to
| include.
|
| I agree that this is true, at least in theory. I also had a
| preorder for the Framework laptop. In practice, the problem
| is that modularity in this case seems to come at the cost
| of fewer ports, even if these ports are more flexible. The
| Framework has up to 3 available USB C ports after
| accommodating a charger. That matches the MBP in USB, but
| the Mac also adds HDMI and the SD card reader. One could
| even attempt this case with some other laptops like the X1
| Carbon (2 USB C, 2 USB A, HDMI) compared to the Framework,
| for those who would have otherwise equipped the Framework
| with a few USB A ports.
|
| Obviously, being able to change these ports has long-term
| benefits where the Framework shines, but personally I can't
| see my preferred ports changing enough to offset the cost
| of modularity.
| [deleted]
| Lamad123 wrote:
| Big sur = Big brother
| d3nj4l wrote:
| These look positively _insane_. 120Hz HDR displays. Can be
| specced with up to 64 GB of RAM and a GPU that (apparently)
| matches a 3070. All the ports you could ever want _and_ magsafe.
| I can 't wait to get my hands on one.
|
| The notch doesn't bother me because it's literally more room on
| the screen. Laptops with the camera below the screen tend to have
| an uncomfortable angle that look sup your nose, and the design
| suggests that they may be adding Face ID in a future iteration.
| shbooms wrote:
| > Laptops with the camera below the screen tend to have an
| uncomfortable angle that look sup your nose, and the design
| suggests that they may be adding Face ID in a future iteration.
|
| I agree it's probably designed with a future FaceID
| implementation in mind but if this isn't the case, Dell have
| managed to move their camera back up above the screen on the
| latest XPS's. In my opinion, this is the best looking option
| currently:
|
| https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/81FV+91am5L._AC_SL1500_....
| [deleted]
| shrimpx wrote:
| I have a bunch of questions about the notch:
|
| - When you go "fullscreen", does the fullscreen window stop at
| the bottom of the notch, or like can you see the notch in
| maximized Netflix videos? In the keynote I thought I saw a
| maximized video whose height stopped just under the notch.
|
| - So is the extra notch space used only for the menubar? What
| happens when you auto-hide the menubar (which I do)? Is that
| functionality disabled on this hardware?
| iSnow wrote:
| The "fullscreen" screen area is the 16:10 that results from
| subtracting the notch height. The area left and right of the
| notch is strictly for the menu bar and will be blanked out on
| video or full-screen apps.
|
| I guess that if you auto-hide the menu bar, a black strip
| will mask the area.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| > All the ports you could ever want
|
| Add 4xUSB-A and Ethernet please.
| schleck8 wrote:
| >that (apparently) matches a 3070
|
| I don't want to know the thermals on the laptop then.
|
| There is a reason for the 3070 being available with a minimum
| of 2 large fans and liquid cooling existing at all. How do you
| want to cool the same performance in a thin laptop? With
| passive airflow?
|
| For reference, this is what a laptop with the mobile (!)
| version of a 3070 looks like:
|
| https://gzhls.at/i/89/84/2618984-n1.jpg
|
| It's also 1199 euros, just saying.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| The thermals: https://live.arstechnica.com/apple-
| october-18-unleashed-even...
| schleck8 wrote:
| Passive airflow and a heatsink?
| mastax wrote:
| There's two fans so: not passive.
| jzymbaluk wrote:
| I noticed the feet on this laptop seem a lot more prominent
| than previous iterations, and I'm sure the reason is to allow
| better airflow
| JohnBooty wrote:
| They do seem more prominent.
|
| It's not clear to me that's a cooling win, though? Unless
| there are actually some kind of vents on the bottom?
| nicoburns wrote:
| That would make a lot of sense. I've noticed that my 2015
| MBP deals with heat a lot better if it's raised up off the
| surface it's sitting on.
| keymone wrote:
| given how m1 macs perform, thermals significantly better than
| any laptop with non-apple stuff inside.
|
| nvidia/amd just don't design with thermals in mind and that's
| exactly why you need to attach multiple helicopters to every
| piece of their hardware.
| arecurrence wrote:
| 3070 is Samsung 8nm vs what I believe they said was TSMC 5nm
| here? Being an all new architecture perhaps it also has more
| design thermal improvements.
| kolinko wrote:
| They claim m1 has 4x less power use when running at full
| speed, so thermal output will also be 4x less
| nine_k wrote:
| CPU is completely dwarfed by GPU here.
| xyst wrote:
| Personally, the investments in the camera and display are
| wasted for me. I run my mbps in "clam shell mode" and use
| external displays and cameras.
|
| The 64G of ram is huge though. It only took them half a decade
| to figure it out.
| 00deadbeef wrote:
| You should wait for the "Mac Mini Pro" which will have M1 Pro
| and Max options
| walteweiss wrote:
| For me that's not an option, because I use my MacBook with
| an external display all the time, but I also use it as a
| laptop from time to time. Mac mini is not a solution for
| me.
| JohnBooty wrote:
| Yeah, I'm kind of in that inconvenient spot as well. I
| use my laptop docked 99.99% of the time.
|
| That other 0.01% of the time is the killer.
| Ambroos wrote:
| 64GB RAM was available on the 2019 Intel 16" MBPs (at least).
| This comment was written from one of those with 64GB RAM.
| jacurtis wrote:
| I am a fellow full-time clamshell MBP user.
| kfprt wrote:
| I believe the 3070 uses a different die from the mobile 3070.
| The mobile and discrete parts have completely diverged so
| comparisons are meaningless. Laptop GPU performance is entirely
| a question of power and cooling.
| tdrdt wrote:
| A desktop RTX 3070 is 50-60% faster than a mobile RTX 3070.
| Which ofcourse is understandable.
| mixedCase wrote:
| > Which ofcourse is understandable
|
| It really isn't. Nvidia should be using clearly
| differentiated model numbers to represent two completely
| different lines. They did this to intentionally confuse
| customers.
| tdrdt wrote:
| Yes the naming is very confusing but it is understandable
| that a desktop GPU can be faster than a laptop GPU.
| ClumsyPilot wrote:
| "They did this to intentionally confuse customers."
|
| Same for intel, there is a huge number of people who were
| asking me why their laptop with a dual-core I7 is slower
| than a desktop with an I3
| Macha wrote:
| They even did for a generation, with the 10xx series.
|
| But their partners probably weren't happy that the
| highest end laptop sku was a xx60, so here we are again.
| brigade wrote:
| They're both GA104, but the desktop version does have 15%
| more cores enabled and 30% higher clocks.
| sarsway wrote:
| In their charts, they showed it's about even (in performance,
| with much lower power consumption) with a laptop using a RTX
| 3080 (Mobile), which performs about as well as an RTX 3060-Ti
| / 3070 (Desktop). So that's pretty wild. More and more games
| getting playable on macOS too through native ports or
| emulation, so in theory you wouldn't need a gaming PC
| anymore. These numbers are for the M1 MAX though, which is a
| bit more expensive.
| MetricExpansion wrote:
| Not sure where you're getting that from? This [1] appears
| to be the machine they compared with (assuming the part
| number actually refers to a unique spec), which only has a
| 3050 Ti?
|
| [1] https://psrefstuff.lenovo.com/Detail/Legion/Lenovo_Legi
| on_5_...
|
| EDIT: Nevermind, they mention other laptops in the other
| slides, some of which do have a 3080.
| sarsway wrote:
| It's here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exM1uajp--A
|
| @23:15 the high end laptop being a MSI GE76 Raider
| 11UH-053
| MetricExpansion wrote:
| Fascinating. I have pulled the trigger on an M1 Max to
| replace my i9 MBP, and wasn't hopeful for the GPU.
|
| But now I am VERY curious how well it will do at gaming
| using CrossOver Mac. I'd been eyeing a getting a 3080
| laptop as a secondary for being able to do mobile gaming,
| but an M1 Max + CrossOver Mac setup might scratch that
| itch with only a single laptop. A fun experiment for next
| Tuesday.
| ehsankia wrote:
| Note that it starts at $2500, and that's probably with the
| lowest cpu and 16gb of ram. Probably gonna be $5K+ when specced
| to what you mention above.
| SpelingBeeChamp wrote:
| I just paid $7,063.33. It should arrive in two months lol.
| balls187 wrote:
| What specs get it to $7k?
| stouset wrote:
| 64GB memory, 8TB SSD puts you at $6k, plus $500 in taxes.
| Add on 3 years of AppleCare coverage for $399 and you're
| basically there.
| balls187 wrote:
| Gotcha, I completely glossed over the SSD options.
|
| Since I replace my machine frequently enough for work,
| 32gb and 1TB is plenty for me for the work I do.
| DrammBA wrote:
| The M1 max with 64GB ram is $3,800, and the lowest M1 pro
| with 16GB ram is $2,000.
| throwaway675309 wrote:
| United States order for 16-inch 1tb ssd 64gb ram shows
| $3900. Brutal.
| dillondoyle wrote:
| the 1TB default HD, spend $400!!!!! to get up to 2TB drives
| me nuts. I know the 1tb is just a teaser but that's still a
| crazy jump.
| busymom0 wrote:
| Yep. Starts at $2500 CAD before the extra 13% tax :( and
| that's not even the spec I would want
| cactus2093 wrote:
| > All the ports you could ever want
|
| I agree with everything else you said and I think overall these
| machines will be awesome.
|
| I would disagree with you on the ports though, I think this is
| kind of a miss for Apple. They caved into some of the loudest
| complaints from several years ago which were already coming
| from a loud minority and that minority is now smaller than
| ever.
|
| And if they were set on changing the ports these certainly
| aren't all that you could ever want. A few USB-A ports as well
| as keeping at least the 4 USB-C ports from last year (instead
| of reducing to 3) would have been more useful for more people
| than the HDMI and especially the SD ports are.
|
| (HDMI used to be useful for plugging into a projector for
| presentations, that use-case is now nearly non-existent now
| that all meetings tend to happen over zoom, webex, teams,
| hangouts, etc. even when in-person. HDMI used to be useful for
| monitors but increasingly displayport over usb-c is supported
| by everything except the lowest end monitors. SD used to be
| important for stills and video footage, but increasingly
| cameras use CFExpress, CFast, output over hdmi to an atmos-
| style recorder, or even micro-SD for small GoPro style cameras,
| all of which will still need dongles. Devices like Raspberry
| Pis require micro SD not standard SD).
|
| They also could have added the nifty ethernet-over-magsafe via
| the powerbrick that the iMac has and they didn't do that.
|
| Edit: One additional thought - I'm seeing from the comments
| some reasonable situations where HDMI still comes in handy -
| cheap monitors, plugging into a tv to watch something, and I
| guess there are still lots of people physically plugging in at
| work for presentations. Fair enough, but in that case it's
| weird that this is a "Pro" feature. These are all very non-pro
| usecases and you'll still need dongles around for anybody with
| a non-pro machine (like a macbook air).
| jd3 wrote:
| i was also hoping that they would somehow be able to shoehorn
| an ethernet port inside of the power adapter, like on the M1
| iMac
|
| on my M1 MacBook Pro (which, throughout the pandemic, has
| rested on my desk in clamshell mode all day, like a desktop),
| I use a ethernet <=> ethernet to thunderbolt
| 2 <=> thunderbolt 2 to thunderbolt 3/usb-c
|
| adapter chain, which takes up an entire usb-c port since it
| doesn't work at all when I plug it into the usb-c pass-
| through on my other usb-c hub
|
| unfortunately, there seems to be some kind of hardware bug in
| the thunderbolt 2 ethernet adapter, so even when the machine
| is asleep or off, it runs hot
|
| it also seems weird that Apple doesn't manufacture a first
| party ethernet <=> usb-c adapter -- if i'm not mistaken, the
| only one on their website is made by Belkin and costs $30;
| moreover, I don't think anyone even manufactures a 10gbps
| ethernet adapter for the M1
| matthew-wegner wrote:
| There are Thunderbolt 3 10gbit adapters that work on M1. I
| use a QNAP QNA-T310G1S on an M1 Mini with no issues. It's
| SFP+, which I prefer--both due to existing hardware I
| already have, and for lighter power consumption compared to
| 10gbit over RJ45.
|
| QNA-T310G1T is the RJ45 model, but there are other makes
| available too.
|
| (I bought the Mini at launch, and they've since released a
| SKU with built-in 10gbit Ethernet)
| fomine3 wrote:
| > (HDMI used to be useful for plugging into a projector for
| presentations, that use-case is now nearly non-existent now
| that all meetings tend to happen over zoom, webex, teams,
| hangouts, etc. even when in-person. HDMI used to be useful
| for monitors but increasingly displayport over usb-c is
| supported by everything except the lowest end monitors.
|
| > the cheap $400 monitor market.
|
| I found your employer is great and you're rich.
| Diesel555 wrote:
| > HDMI used to be useful for plugging into a projector for
| presentations, that use-case is now nearly non-existent now
| that all meetings tend to happen over zoom, webex, teams,
| hangouts, etc. even when in-person.
|
| I'm not sure you have the information to make the claim that
| the use case for HDMI is nearly non-existent. We use HDMI all
| the time. Availability bias is a thing. I find that people
| drastically underestimate how much they don't know about a
| subject or use-case of a product.
| Bayart wrote:
| I _wish_ I could plug into HDMI all the time. I still get a
| lot of VGA projectors !
| TimTheTinker wrote:
| HDMI is ubiquitous. Any current projector, TV, or monitor
| (or any produced in the last 6 years) will have an HDMI
| port.
|
| For a static port set, I think the burden of proof lies on
| whoever wants to _remove_ the HDMI port.
|
| However, I think Apple ought to have considered a
| Framework-style approach to ports. Why have static ports
| when you can have dynamic ports?
| varenc wrote:
| > Why have static ports when you can have dynamic ports?
|
| The numerous USB-C dongles are basically dynamic
| ports..albeit with a lot more inconvenience. But internal
| swappable ports removes a lot of internal space.
| narism wrote:
| > Why have static ports when you can have dynamic ports?
|
| Because dynamic ports (basically internal dongles)
| reduces the amount of internal volume they have to work
| with. This would cause compromises in other areas like a
| thicker laptop, less battery life, noisier fan, etc.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Yep, I'm in Australia in a state that has been largely in
| office for most of the year and I used the HDMI port on my
| Dell XPS. Although because of the macbook users, every HDMI
| cable in the office has a usb-c dongle stuck on it so I
| wouldn't be too inconvenienced by the lack of the port
| either.
| [deleted]
| sails wrote:
| If the HDMI port supports 100% of whatever
| resolution/framerate possible for modern top end monitors
| then I'd be happy to see the end of fighting with
| DisplayPort. Getting Macbook Pro to work with modern monitors
| is a buggy mess, loads of hassles []
|
| I'd be happy to know that they made this choice deliberately
| to fix whatever issues where I guess plaguing the USB-C
| display connections.
|
| [] https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/some-users-having-
| exter...
| kruxigt wrote:
| Yeah you have a lot of good points! They timed the
| reintroduction of (especially) the SD card reader with its
| probable decline. In a year or two it might be as
| unappreciated as the touch bar - and of course also kept for
| 5 years?
| gruturo wrote:
| I strongly disagree. They didn't cave in to a minority, they
| gave Ive the boot and are finally putting back so many ports
| they know they should never have removed.
|
| Why they shouldn't have been removed?
|
| Because USB-C is awesome and _almost_ everywhere, but you
| need ONE important occasion where you need to connect a
| screen, plug in an SD card or even an external (pen|hard)
| drive, maybe in front of customers, and you get really
| infuriatingly frustrated, and regret buying this stupid trap
| which has half the ports of the one from 10 years ago, but
| costs 3x as much and just lost you a customer.
|
| The old one would have worked. Who's the idiot which came up
| with this contraption?
|
| Dongles are NOT the solution. They get lost or forgotten,
| they're messy.
|
| Reducing to 3 USB-C ports is perfectly fine as we regain the
| dedicated magsafe.
| djrogers wrote:
| > which has half the ports of the one from 10 years ago,
| but costs 3x as much
|
| I'm with you right up 'til that '3X as much' part - MacBook
| Pros have remained static or gone down in real prices over
| the last decade - not 3x higher.
| danudey wrote:
| Maybe they bought a Chromebook 10 years ago?
| gruturo wrote:
| Point taken, thank you.
| dev_tty01 wrote:
| >Fair enough, but in that case it's weird that this is a
| "Pro" feature.
|
| Doing presentations at work is a non-pro use case?
| atourgates wrote:
| For all the times Apple seems to be willing to "stick to its
| guns" and ignore consumer complaining, this seems like a
| weird time to give in.
|
| They basically made a line-in-the-sand on USB-C adoption, and
| it pretty much worked. I'd argue that an HDMI and SD card
| readers are less useful, and certainly far less versatile
| than additional USB-C ports.
|
| For all the dongle jokes of a few years ago, I don't really
| see a reason to go back to less versatile ports in laptops.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I imagine the air and base model pro will still retain
| USB-C only.
| rimliu wrote:
| Take one of the "pro" markets--photographers. They sure
| have to deal with SD cards, and they often shoot tethered,
| which almost always means HDMI connection.
| sbuk wrote:
| Tethering isn't done over HDMI. Invariably it's
| propietary, Micro USB-B or Micro-USB 3.1 to the camera
| and a plain old USB-A to the machine. Wireless tether is
| a thing to.
| danudey wrote:
| Anecdote, but... I rarely, but sometimes, need to read SD
| cards, for e.g. embedded systems, RPi, Nintendo Switch,
| etc. Not enough to go out and buy a brand new USB-C dongle
| which I would then lose somewhere in my house, but enough
| that it's annoying to not be able to use my primary laptop
| with it.
|
| Don't get me wrong, I would still buy a MacBook with no SD
| card slot, but I would occasionally run into cases where I
| wish I had that dongle that I lost somewhere.
| zeitg3ist wrote:
| Well these are all microSD cards, so you would still need
| an adapter :)
| JohnBooty wrote:
| The SD card slot is a weird duck.
|
| There's a single use case for which can't easily be
| replaced by a USB-C dongle: using it as makeshift
| additional "internal" storage.
|
| SD cards work pretty well for that, for most read-heavy use
| cases. On older Macbooks, with undersized internal storage,
| I'd keep an SD card in the slot. I'd keep downloaded media
| there, installers, even infrequently used applications.
| Assuming one's using a high quality SD card, performance
| was "plenty good enough."
|
| I wouldn't keep anything _crucial_ on an SD card, but
| everything on my local storage is backed up to the cloud
| anyway, so not really an issue.
| sintaxi wrote:
| Every monitor and TV manufactured within the last decade
| without exception has an HDMI input and monitors that
| support thunderbolt are nearly double the cost. Even if
| money is no object that HDMI port will prove to be useful.
| cactus2093 wrote:
| It's weird to sell the machine with a super high
| resolution 120hz mini LED screen though and then optimize
| the ports for the cheap $400 monitor market.
|
| You're right though the HDMI port might come in handy in
| random situations, better to include it than not. The SD
| port is the one I really don't get. And I still maintain
| that the continued lack of USB-A ports is a much bigger
| dongle problem than the lack of HDMI port was.
| bliteben wrote:
| USB-a dongle's make money and I'm sure the removal of
| magsafe cost them on applecare
| sintaxi wrote:
| The HDMI is for plugging into displays that are available
| to you when you are out of your office. Since they all
| have HDMI inputs this is a very sensible port.
| Bud wrote:
| They didn't optimize the ports for the cheap monitor
| market, at all. These machines support Apple's extremely
| expensive display and all the various 4K and 5K displays
| out there, admirably.
|
| And they ALSO have the single most needed and bitched
| about port if it's absent, by far, for nearly all
| business users, which is HDMI. Far and away the best
| thing they could have added.
|
| I personally will not use it often, but when I do, it
| will be invaluable, and for the users I support, it will
| be a tremendous increase in convenience and ease-of-use.
|
| If you need a lot of USB-A ports, get a CalDigit dock and
| be done with it. If you need just 1, there are
| extraordinarily tiny adapters.
|
| It's time to get over USB-A.
| girvo wrote:
| Which reminds me: I want more _USB-C_ ports; Caldigits
| latest Thunderbolt 4 dock finally added the ability (as I
| believe the chipsets available maxed out at 2 ports
| previously). One of those, plus a 14 " MacBook Pro with
| the M1X Max and I think I'll be set for computers +
| connectivity for a very long while.
| newbie2020 wrote:
| My company had to dongle up EVERY meeting room once
| developers switched to MacBook pros with USB-C. But we
| still have non Mac users who use HDMI. To this day, every
| meeting has the potential to be sixty seconds late while
| we navigate through dongle hell...
| addicted wrote:
| Because the cheap HDMI monitors might be the only ones
| available to you as your company calls people into the
| office but now with the added beauty of hoteling.
|
| /snark
| toyg wrote:
| SD is absolutely massive in Asia, on a level that I think
| cannot be gauged properly from the West. I reckon these
| ports have been added with an eye to the Asian market
| rather than California.
| cactus2093 wrote:
| That's interesting. Are you talking about microSD in
| smartphones, or standard SD?
|
| MicroSD support would have actually made more sense to me
| than standard SD. But from what it looks like micro cards
| will still require a dongle of sorts.
| bartvk wrote:
| Yeah, that's a bit weird actually. I looked at my
| country's most popular comparison site, and listed the
| top-10 best viewed memory cards. Of those 10: 9 microSD,
| 1 standard SD.
|
| https://tweakers.net/geheugenkaarten/vergelijken/#filter:
| q1Y...
| bpicolo wrote:
| You can get an SD case for a micro SD card for less than
| 5 bucks. Can't adapt the other way inside a slot.
| toyg wrote:
| It's actually coming free with most off-the-shelf
| microSDs. And exactly that - SD as a physical format is
| more flexible, nowadays it can be used even for non-
| storage cards.
| toyg wrote:
| SD and microSD nominally inhabit the same space, but
| microSD is effectively limited to storage whereas SD can
| be used for other things; it's just more flexible to
| provide an SD slot, if you can spare the lateral space.
| Among other things, microSDs are so tiny that it is often
| more practical to put them in an SD adapter whenever you
| need to handle them. That's why SD adapters are so
| widespread, and you'll likely find one in the package
| whenever you buy a consumer microSD.
| tbabb wrote:
| > SD is absolutely massive in Asia
|
| Why is that?
| bombcar wrote:
| I assume it took off instead of USB storage for reasons
| lost to time.
| alanbernstein wrote:
| It's not some great mystery, micro SD cards are tiny, USB
| storage isn't.
| eyko wrote:
| Cheap android phones with decent cameras and expandable
| storage (microSD).
|
| Edit: I'm obviously oversimplifying, but most of the
| world doesn't have always-on data connections (e.g. rural
| areas) and manufacturers outside of silicon valley do
| optimise for people that may want to download media so
| the can view/listen when they're not connected. Nothing
| beats a cheap phone replaceable battery and storage.
| btgeekboy wrote:
| If I had one of these machines, I would not be using that
| port at my desk.
|
| However, I would be using it in every conference room I
| use, multiple times daily. It's the difference between
| plugging in the cable vs. finding the right dongle that's
| security-cabled to the presenter cable, and connecting it
| in the middle.
| dharma1 wrote:
| SD cards are essential for anyone who does video or
| photography seriously - and that's a big part of the
| market this laptop sells to. I'm glad it's back
| can16358p wrote:
| Nope. I do them seriously. My Mavic 2 Pro has a microSD
| slot, my Canon EOS 5D Mark IV has a CF slot (it also does
| have a SD slot too, which is slower and I've never used
| it).
|
| SD card reader is a nice addition for a handful of pros,
| sure, but definitely not essential for everyone who does
| photo/video seriously.
| dharma1 wrote:
| yeah and my blackmagic cameras have SD/CF/SSD - but SD is
| super common, most cameras have it. New UHS-II SD cards
| are pretty fast - https://www.cameramemoryspeed.com/sd-
| memory-card-faq/fastest...
|
| MicroSD->SD is easy with a dummy adapter
| gnufied wrote:
| Depending on HDMI spec supported, an HDMI port can power
| pretty high specced display. I am not sure where this
| cheap monitor thing is coming from.
| soheil wrote:
| Well yeah putting the camera below the screen seems borderline
| insane, but the notch definitely takes away beauty from Apple
| laptops known for their incredible sense of design.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Personally I think the 2020 design looks bad because the top
| black bezel is thicker than the sides. While things like the
| ipad have it uniform around the whole display.
| ant6n wrote:
| Yes, it looks _really_ nice. Specced with the crazy graphics,
| and 64G ram and 2TB storage, it costs 4000$. Ouch! Is the Max
| CPU still fanless?
|
| (I really wish there was a matte screen option at the price
| point, my old macbook pro was a very expensive mirror and it
| puts a lot of strain on the eyes to try to concentrate on whats
| on screen, rather than behind it)
| dagw wrote:
| _it costs 4000$. Ouch!_
|
| A Windows laptop from HP or Lenovo with similar
| specs/performance won't be cheaper.
| throwaway675309 wrote:
| Oh c'mon... I'm not going to argue that battery/build
| quality is better on the apple, but that is some serious
| FUD.
|
| Literally just picked up an asus zephyrs g15 15.6" with
| 2560 x 1440QHD 165 hz refresh rate, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HS,
| 16GB Memory, NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070 and 1 Tb ssd for $1850
| at Best Buy, then picked up 2x16gb DDR4 3200 MHz for $150
| off Amazon to upgrade to 32gb.
|
| Weight is a little over 4 lbs. (4.1lbs)
|
| Total cost: $2000
| dagw wrote:
| _Total cost: $2000_
|
| What's your point. Of course you can get a laptop with
| lesser specs from a cheaper manufacturer for less,
| especially if you upgrade it yourself after the fact.
|
| But if you price a Thinkpad P series of HP ZBook with
| 64GB RAM, 2TB storage, and similar GPU/CPU performance,
| you are looking at $4000. I know because I have one.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| A 2TB SSD an 64 GB of RAM will cost around 800$, so that
| will be 2600$.
| dagw wrote:
| Have you been to Lenovo's or HP's homepage and seen what
| they charge for their high end ZBooks and P series
| laptops with those specs? No one is saying that you
| cannot get a Windows laptop with similar specs for
| cheaper if you buy from a cheaper brand and upgrade it
| yourself. But if you want a top of the line high end
| Windows laptop from someone like Lenovo or HP with
| matching specs then those companies charge basically the
| same as Apple.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| Yeah I have. Lenovo has a really high list price but it
| has a secret store and a lot of sales.
|
| Anyways that's the beauty of PCs, you don't have to pay
| the exorbitant prices or the OEM if you don't want to, a
| Lenovo P15 will allow you to swap the RAM and SSD however
| you want and it takes 5 minutes and like 9 screws.
| lwkl wrote:
| The device doesn't even have the same specs, the $4000 is
| for a MacBook with 2 TB SSD and 64 GB of RAM yours has a
| 1 TB SSD and 32 GB of RAM that's half.
|
| Other than that yes MacBooks are expensive. But so are HP
| EliteBooks or Lenovo ThinkPads.
| sudosysgen wrote:
| You can get comparable Thinkpads at ~2800$ if you use the
| secret store and/or wait for sales.
| kweks wrote:
| Can you elaborate on the "secret store" ?
| JohnBooty wrote:
| FWIW, similarly spec'd 16" MBP (32GB, 1TB) is about $3100
| though it will likely outperform the Asus in various
| measures that may or may not matter to a particular
| owner.
| fcurts wrote:
| You are comparing a high-end MacBook to a mid-range Asus.
| Build quality costs money.
| sofixa wrote:
| As someone who owns an Asus and a work-provided Dell XPS,
| and has extensively used a 2016 MBP... Yeah, no. Build
| quality differences are minimal, and at least on the Asus
| and to an extent the Dell not everything is
| glued/soldered on so it's maintainable. And it wasn't
| Dell or Asus who shipped faulty keyboards they refused to
| replace.
| fcurts wrote:
| I own both a MBP (2019) and an Asus Zephyrus G14 (2020).
| While the latter is good value for the money (I use it
| for gaming), chassis, screen, sound, touchpad,
| fingerprint sensor, and reliability are much inferior. If
| you want to compare the new MBP to PC laptops, at least
| compare apples to apples (ROG Strix, Legion 7, etc.).
| Otherwise you're just arguing that a high-end laptop
| isn't worth the money to you, which is fine but has
| nothing to do with Mac vs. PC.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| Can confirm. Currently using a P52 with 64 go ram and an
| Xeon processor, and a 4K screen. Probably cost my company
| 5-7k after all the enterprise support fees and such. Would
| much rather have a Mac, the thing is just way smaller and
| lighter.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Only the Air is fanless, every other M1 * Mac has fans.
| ofou wrote:
| I think is about the same if compared with a windows-based
| with the same specs (GeForce RTX 3070 Mobile) and so on.
| bartvk wrote:
| Tip, search online for "custom screen protector". Some
| companies will cut a screen protector to custom size. Just
| measure length and width of the screen. For my 2019 16" MBP,
| I ordered a matte one and it's glorious ever since.
|
| For Dutch people: https://www.smartfolie.com/
| agloeregrets wrote:
| None of it is fanless on these models. This is more of
| workstation Core i9 replacement.
| jonny_eh wrote:
| Can the notch be "hidden" with a black toolbar?
| arm wrote:
| Yep, it can be 'hidden' with the menu bar. They specifically
| mentioned and showed it in the keynote.
| muterad_murilax wrote:
| Also: Can the mouse pointer be "hidden" (moved) under the
| notch?
| peterb wrote:
| Yes. Tim said the notch looks great in dark mode.
| d3nj4l wrote:
| Probably - some of the marketing shots they showed in the
| event showed it being hidden with a black bar, but I couldn't
| find any that showed the toolbar itself being below the
| notch. At any rate, if it doesn't exist at launch, someone
| will make an app for it.
| wayneftw wrote:
| And if Apple doesn't provide that app, it will break after
| every update.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| The Pro is faster than a laptop 3050Ti [1]. The Max is slightly
| slower than a laptop 3080 (looks like 8%). [2] Relative
| performance is somewhat meaningless, and of course also depends
| on what features where being used. However, my M1 Air compared
| extremely favorably against similarly priced PC offerings, and
| I expect my 16" M1 Max will compare favorably with a 3070.
|
| [1] https://live.arstechnica.com/apple-october-18-unleashed-
| even...
|
| [2] https://live.arstechnica.com/apple-october-18-unleashed-
| even...
| throwawaysea wrote:
| We don't know what those tests are really measuring. Is it a
| game? Or some video production workflow? And what about
| features like ray tracing? Does the M1 Max support all the
| same technologies? Apple's benchmarks seem purposely
| obfuscated.
| mmis1000 wrote:
| Apple probably cares about thing like adobe softwares more.
| As it is their main consumer uses.
| t-writescode wrote:
| Where did you see the "matches the 3070" thing? When I was
| (admittedly) skimming the two articles, the performance metrics
| were all about "performance per watt" which ... doesn't mean
| anything for actual performance in a "how long will this scene
| take to render?" sort of meaning.
| resist_futility wrote:
| M1 Max GPU specs https://youtu.be/exM1uajp--A?t=1218
|
| Mobile 3080 specs https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-
| specs/geforce-rtx-3080-max-q...
|
| fewer teraflops but higher gigatexels, gigapixels
| SoylentYellow wrote:
| Here is another Mobile 3080 from the same site:
| https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-
| rtx-3080-mobil...
|
| That seems closer to the power consumption they had on
| their comparison chart.
| stunt wrote:
| Yeah, they also claim to have "studio quality microphones". I
| think specs are great, but comparisons are not always honest.
| Version467 wrote:
| They made a direct comparison to "the fastest laptop we could
| find". I think there was fine print that had the exact laptop
| they compared it to, but I noticed it too late to read. But
| presumably this means at least 3070 performance.
| trvr wrote:
| This is the laptop they compared: https://us-
| store.msi.com/index.php?route=product/product&pro...
| robterrell wrote:
| ...which has "NVIDIA(r) GeForce RTX(tm) 3080 Laptop GPU
| 16GB GDDR6" for its GPU.
| spartanatreyu wrote:
| Yeah, but the things that aren't clear from the
| comparisons are how under-clocked those gpus may be, and
| at what power usage did apple set them to before they ran
| their tests.
| scoopertrooper wrote:
| In at least one of the charts they had the M1 using 100 W
| less power than the top spec laptop. So they must have
| had that thing clocked pretty high.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| Wow, this is going to hopefully support VR experiences
| where you carry the laptop on your back or chest...
| kolinko wrote:
| No need for that with the new quest
| yellowapple wrote:
| Yeah, but then you'd have to settle for a Quest.
| balls187 wrote:
| The Quest 2 is a major upgrade.
| leppr wrote:
| Hardware-wise maybe, but it's still bogged down by
| Facebook. Supporting them by buying their products, when
| the window of opportunity for user-respecting
| alternatives is still wide open, is frankly unethical.
| wyre wrote:
| Fully immersive portable AR...
| tdrdt wrote:
| They only say 'pro laptop GPU' and everyone is assuming a
| mobile 3070.
|
| But we don't know what Apple is comparing.
| t-writescode wrote:
| If this is coming from this article:
| https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2021/10/introducing-m1-pro-
| an...
|
| In the picture titled "GPU performance vs. power", that is
| "relative performance" with lower power consumption, so it
| doesn't say anything about literal performance.
|
| Then there's this:
|
| > In addition, the GPU delivers performance comparable to a
| high-end GPU in a compact pro PC laptop while consuming up
| to 40 percent less power, and performance similar to that
| of the highest-end GPU in the largest PC laptops while
| using up to 100 watts less power.[2]
|
| Where that 2 points to:
|
| > ... Discrete PC laptop graphics performance data from
| testing Lenovo Legion 5 (82JW0012US). High-end discrete PC
| laptop graphics performance data from testing MSI GE76
| Raider (11UH-053). PC compact pro laptop performance data
| from testing Razer Blade 15 Advanced (RZ09-0409CE53-R3U1).
| Performance tests are conducted using specific computer
| systems and reflect the approximate performance of MacBook
| Pro. 82JW0012US on Amazon has a 3050Ti in
| it 11UH-053 has a 3080 in it RZ09-0409CE53-R3U1
| has a 3080 in it
|
| So there's some data. I've still got some real questions
| about why they're talking "relative performance" in their
| graphs, though.
|
| (edit: formatting)
| hbOY5ENiZloUfnZ wrote:
| It was written very small in grey text on the bottom right
| of the slide. I didn't notice it during the presentation
| but people posted screenshots on Twitter. The "Compact pro
| PC laptop" is Razer Blade 15 Advanced (rz09-0409ce53) and
| "High-end PC laptop" is MSI GE76 Raider (11UH-053). You can
| see if you pause at 22:46[0]. Both of these have RTX 3080s
| and in Apple's chart their chips are slightly slower but at
| much lower power. What we don't know if what benchmark they
| used for this comparison since 375 "relative performance"
| isn't a defined metric.
|
| [0] https://youtu.be/exM1uajp--A?t=1366
| croutonwagon wrote:
| What does the vertical axis mean in those graphs?
| "Relative performance" seems made up.
|
| Certainly there are tasks they can do to skew that one
| way or another.
| easton wrote:
| Probably covering their butts in case whatever benchmark
| they used works differently on ARM vs x86, or if there
| are weird macOS differences. If there were a bunch of
| performance patches made to the Mac version of Shadow of
| the Tomb Raider that made it faster on macOS, that's not
| because of a faster chip (just an example, I don't know
| how they benchmark).
| CSDude wrote:
| There was a link in the slides for the models but I missed
| it.
| throwawaysea wrote:
| I don't think we know. The Apple website shows GPU benchmarks
| for pro apps for the new MBPs, where there is a big
| performance leap relative to the top GPU from the last model.
| But I haven't seen comparisons on gaming against nvidia GPUs,
| which I think is what would be needed to make such a claim.
| Macha wrote:
| Part of the reason that nvidia GPU drivers are so large,
| and they've been so unwilling to open source them is a good
| amount of nvidia's secret sauce for gaming is in the
| software. They'll work with devs on optimisation before
| launch with might disproportionately benefit their
| hardware, sometimes the drivers will fix games for devs,
| e.g. swapping out shaders for visually equivalent but
| better performing ones, or the z-index issues cyberpunk had
| if you didn't update to the "game ready" drivers. e.g. look
| at the lows for Tomb Raider or anything for Red Dead 2:
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIwIeobQSnQ
|
| It's why when Intel moved from the GMA to Intel HD (i.e.
| "can just about render a desktop" to "can play indie
| games"), it took years before games even reliably worked on
| Intel GPUs, never mind performed. Of course once they did
| it pretty much killed off the budget GPU market.
|
| Even at the high end consumer market, it's why you often
| find AMD GPUs outperforming cost equivalent nVidia cards
| for compute use but then falling flat in games.
|
| Apple has the advantage that the big game engines like
| Unity/Unreal etc. have been targeting their hardware for
| the mobile support for the last while, so they have
| arguably a bit of a head start relative to Intel's entry,
| but I have to imagine they have a catch up to do before
| they run high end PC games comparably. Probably will run
| the entire iOS catalogue in 120hz though.
| rStar wrote:
| notch bothers me a lot. i was ready to buy, and i hope all you
| guys enjoy, but i'll be sitting the notch out. it was one thing
| on a phone. this is just dumb.
| Nevermark wrote:
| You are getting more screen, not less. Nothing dumb about
| that.
|
| I can see someone having an aesthetic issue with it, as a
| distraction perhaps.
|
| But having a fat bezel at the top, as all other bezels shrink
| toward zero, is also aesthetically non-optimal.
| xattt wrote:
| > I can see someone having an aesthetic issue with it, as a
| distraction perhaps.
|
| The person that can't get any work done because of the
| notch staring back at them has probably other bigger issues
| on the go.
| can16358p wrote:
| It's just an addition, it doesn't remove any real estate from
| existing screen. Have a dark/black background/strip around on
| top and it should solve the issue. Sure not ideal, but
| solvable.
| hammock wrote:
| Is 8GB more memory and an upgraded processor worth the $700 price
| difference from MacBook Pro M1 base model?
| mcculley wrote:
| Still no LTE modem. The Apple Watch can be configured with an LTE
| modem, but the highest-end MacBook Pro cannot. Is this because of
| Qualcomm royalties? Is there any technical reason why the market
| has failed?
| RandallBrown wrote:
| I imagine it's because tethering with your phone is good enough
| for the vast majority of people.
| mcculley wrote:
| Why does Dell ship with one?
| macintux wrote:
| I assume Dell still offers dozens of laptop configurations,
| so it's easier to find your preferred combination of
| features (if you don't mind researching).
|
| Apple keeps a much more streamlined lineup than any other
| major laptop manufacturer.
| mcculley wrote:
| I travel a lot. I hate having to babysit the tethering
| and to worry about using up my phone's battery when I am
| trying to get some work done. It would be awesome to have
| an Internet connection that works all the time, as with
| iPhones, iPads, Watches, and laptops from other
| companies.
|
| It is obviously not a significant engineering challenge
| to put another radio in the laptop if the Watch has it.
|
| I read somewhere that Apple has to pay Qualcomm a royalty
| based on the price of the device and that this is why
| MacBook Pro buyers cannot have an LTE modem. I don't
| understand how other vendors are able to ship an LTE
| modem if this is the case. Can anybody enlighten me?
| heartbreak wrote:
| You can plug your phone into your laptop, and then you
| don't have to worry about the battery. Why waste money
| and resources on duplicating something you're going to
| have on-hand whenever you're using your laptop anyway?
|
| Apple has made it a particularly seamless experience
| between macOS and iPhones, too. As long as you're on the
| same iCloud account (or iCloud family) as the phone, the
| phone will always show up in the WiFi list as a hotspot.
| You can work off your phone's internet without even
| pulling it out of your pocket to set anything up.
| mcculley wrote:
| I know exactly how much of a hassle it is. I use it
| several times a week.
|
| Edit: Someone brought this to my attention:
| https://www.pcmag.com/opinions/why-apples-macbook-pro-
| will-g...
| finalight wrote:
| the price diff between this and the previous model is huge
| salamandersauce wrote:
| If the M1 Max maxes out at 64GB does that pretty much imply no
| new Mac Pro until M2?
| nojito wrote:
| Yup. They will have 20/40 core arrangements as per Gurman
|
| https://9to5mac.com/2021/08/01/apple-silicon-roadmap-gurman-...
| simonh wrote:
| It looks like it, previously Apple have indicated Apple Silicon
| Mac Pros will come in 2022. That will be interesting to see.
| I'm wondering how the economics of a super high-end processor
| exclusively for the Mac Pro could work out. It seems unlikely a
| single chip aimed just at the mac Pro market could be
| economically viable. I wouldn't rule out a multi-CPU
| architecture with dual high end M2 processors.
| wmf wrote:
| The rumored 20-core M1 Extreme and 40-core M1 Plaid haven't
| been announced yet.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| The max memory isn't an indication of that, the M1's max of
| 64gb is limited by LPDDR5 module capacities.
|
| What would block a new Mac Pro would instead be DDR4 or DDR5
| support instead of LPDDR5, and also PCI-E lanes. Both of which
| would likely require yet another change in silicon design.
| comeonseriously wrote:
| Oof. I was hoping at least 1 version of the 14 would be closer to
| $1500. These are just too expensive for me. For that reason, I'm
| out...
| SalimoS wrote:
| Why no one is talking about the base 14" 8-Core CPU and 14-Core
| GPU but not a single mention in the presentation ?
|
| How the new M1 Pro 8 core compared the the M1 8 core ?
| lr1970 wrote:
| Just configured a MBP 16" with M1 Max, 64GB RAM and 2TB SSD.
| Delivery (USA) December 23-rd. WTF?
| vletal wrote:
| Come on! 140W adapter? I thought that the efficient M1 design
| will allow us to return to the 80W range for the 16".
| Waterluvian wrote:
| So close. But that camera notch would drive me nuts.
|
| Curious: does it cut into a normal resolution/ratio or is it
| giving you extra pixels at the sides of the camera?
| truculent wrote:
| Extra pixels on top of 16:10 iirc
| hmate9 wrote:
| The greatest improvement: no Touch Bar.
| neillyons wrote:
| The perfect laptop now
| jonny_eh wrote:
| Second greatest: Restoring popular ports that were previously
| removed. Such innovation :D
| can16358p wrote:
| TBH I'd love to have Touch Bar but improved with haptic
| feedback, making it much more useful.
|
| It helped me a lot while debugging and loved the customization
| it offered for the "static" keys on the right, but having no
| haptic feedback always caused me to miss the button unless I
| stared at it, killing the purpose greatly.
| epistasis wrote:
| Haptic feedback, and also elimination of the lag. It often
| takes >100ms for the bar to respond, which makes a quick
| adjustment to the sound slider impossible.
| azundo wrote:
| The lag truly makes it unusable. Trying to mute? Hit the
| mute button. Did it register and is just laggy? Or just
| missed the tap altogether? Why have an always-on touchbar
| that doesn't even respond to taps consistently.
| can16358p wrote:
| Yup, agreed. Those were solvable problems though, and
| really easy ones. The bar itself would have benefited
| from ProMotion for example: be super responsive while
| touching/dragging sliders, and stay at 10Hz or even less
| when static. Couple it with haptic feedback and I'm
| pretty much sure that many would love it. It had great
| potential but they killed it.
| nickpp wrote:
| I think they left in on the 13" MBP? But why?!
| justusthane wrote:
| Because there isn't a new 13" MBP. 14" and 16" are the new
| ones with the M1 chip.
| tunesmith wrote:
| I don't see the touchbar on the 13". (EDIT: Ah, 14")
| mclightning wrote:
| I love my touchbar.
| rednum wrote:
| I liked the concept when I first saw it but honestly it's
| more trouble than it's worth. On my old work laptop, it would
| sometimes bug out and stop registering touch. That's a
| problem when you are in the middle of a call and you need to
| adjust volume because one of the speakers is too loud or too
| quiet.
|
| I also don't like how it's harder to operate than physical
| buttons. Too many times I hit the wrong spot on the bar and
| for example ended up putting my laptop to sleep instead of
| adjusting brightness. I've also tried to configure Ableton
| Live to do something useful with it (maybe mute/unmute tracks
| or control their volumes); but with little success.
|
| Long story short: I'm happy to see it's gone.
| throwdecro wrote:
| I wish they'd offer to remove the touchbar from the laptop
| I have.
| [deleted]
| poo-yie wrote:
| Really impressed by the new MacBook Pro. Part of me would really
| like to order a 14" model with M1 Pro and 32GB RAM. However, I
| really don't like Apple's direction with macOS. I'm still running
| a 13" MacBook Pro from 2013.
|
| What's a little strange is that I first came to Mac with the
| introduction of OSX 10.0 although I wasn't overly keen of the
| hardware at the time. Now, I feel that the situation is reversed.
| I really like the hardware and am beginning to despise the
| software -- possibly to the point of abandoning the platform
| completely.
|
| Several years ago, I moved my music collection out of Apple's
| software and I use an Android phone. I use an old iPad for web
| browsing and Youtube. I purposefully transitioned to a point
| where I can leave the Mac platform without a huge effort. It
| makes me wonder.
| y7 wrote:
| I'm exactly the same. I was looking forward to leaving Apple's
| ecosystem and getting a Framework laptop or something similar
| (I'd prefer AMD and I'd like to run Qubes, which is rather
| picky with its hardware). But with this release Apple is making
| it hard to do.
| theodric wrote:
| Cool, the screen has a chunk taken out of it, great stuff. I'm
| sure everyone will consider this a feature, and next year you'll
| hardly be able to get a PC laptop without a third of the top of
| the screen devoted to a notch and hard radii ground off the top
| corners, as well.
|
| Glad I bought my M1 when I did. At least it's a normal laptop.
| lopis wrote:
| It has two extra chunks of screen where before it was just
| black bezel? I'm not a user of these machines, nor do I use
| iPhones, but I still don't understand why people hate notches
| so much.
| matthew-wegner wrote:
| It has a chunk _added_ to it. It 's a 16:10 area with an extra
| 74 pixels on top for the menu bar. It renders full black in
| fullscreen apps.
| [deleted]
| zitterbewegung wrote:
| The cool thing about these macs is that apple is starting to
| decouple the processor from the type of Mac. You can choose
| between a pro and a max . If they do this for it's whole product
| line it would be interesting.
| vvoaterr wrote:
| I came into these comments and one guy said "The machine I
| spec'ced out only costs $4300" and another guy said "They just
| put back the ports and features they should have kept in 2011"
| and I noped out of these comments. Your mileage may vary.
| Tpt wrote:
| I'm very curious to see how the 64GB of RAM GPU performs with
| deep learning models fine-tuning. It might be impressive.
| zsmi wrote:
| Wouldn't you use the Apple Neural Engine for that?
|
| https://www.infoq.com/news/2020/11/apple-tensorflow-accelera...
|
| "Recently Apple released the new M1 "system on a chip," which
| not only contains a built-in GPU, but also includes a 16-core
| "Neural Engine" which supports 11 trillion operations per
| second. Apple claims the Neural Engine will support up to 15x
| improvement in ML computation."
| Tpt wrote:
| The neural engine seems to be only about inference. For
| training it seems most systems rely on Metal like the Apple
| Tensorflow plugin [1]. But I have never tried to do ML on
| macs so I am maybe wrong.
|
| [1] https://developer.apple.com/metal/tensorflow-plugin/
| asdff wrote:
| Do people really train locally? I'd have thought the field
| moved to aws or some other hpc by now. Seems like a waste
| buying such a nice laptop to just melt and abuse it when you
| can abuse amazon's hardware instead. The battery won't be happy
| being discharged every day since it seems like in my experience
| macbooks don't bypass the battery when on ac power unless you
| start the computer up with the batty unplugged (not so easy on
| newer computers)
| jjcon wrote:
| Do any deep learning frameworks even have metal support? I
| could see inference working well on these laptops but they lack
| so much of the specialized hardware I'd be surprised if
| training was even possible for most useable models.
| muggermuch wrote:
| Tensorflow supports Metal AFAIK.
| Tpt wrote:
| Apple is maintaining a Tensorflow plugin:
| https://developer.apple.com/metal/tensorflow-plugin/
| cguess wrote:
| There's been work on PyTorch to move some over, but it's
| still all CPU (which still, on an M1 isn't HORRIBLE) last
| time I checked.
| aldanor wrote:
| Was so hoping for a Mini. Sigh.
| eof wrote:
| Same
| coldcode wrote:
| Soon I bet. Probably only so much they can ship right now
| with all the supply issues.
| holmium wrote:
| Yeah, some of the configs are already estimating December
| ship dates, and that's like 20 minutes after the store
| opened. They are not going to be able make enough Pro chips
| meepmorp wrote:
| If I could get my current M1 mini with the 64GB chip, it would
| be absolutely perfect.
| [deleted]
| eli wrote:
| Gotta be just a matter of time.
| PostThisTooFast wrote:
| They got rid of the shitty emoji bar, but their keyboards still
| don't have a real Delete key. What the fuck is Apple's peculiar
| retardation or petty stupidity on this issue?
|
| I don't backspace files, E-mails, or other items away when I want
| to delete them, Apple, you morons. And mislabeling a Backspace
| key "delete" DOES NOT CHANGE THE FACT THAT IT'S BACKSPACE.
| bengale wrote:
| Can anyone recommend a dock that does 140w charging? Right now I
| use a Caldigit one but it only puts out 90w I think so I'll need
| an upgrade.
| xvilka wrote:
| Hopefully, they didn't change much in terms of software interface
| so Asahi Linux would work [1] out of the box.
|
| [1] https://asahilinux.org/2021/10/progress-report-
| september-202...
| jhatax wrote:
| With all these computational capabilities and an upgraded camera,
| I'm surprised that Apple put a notch into their MacBook Pro line
| but left out FaceID. This seems like a bizarre omission.
| hintymad wrote:
| Darn! My current company has a 4-year replacement policy. Guess
| I'll have to switch company now to get a 2021 model.
| chrisBob wrote:
| I have been waiting on this announcement to buy a new Mac, but
| now that they are out, I don't think I will buy one.
|
| The prices are 2x a Macbook Air, but the utility for me doesn't
| match. If the 14" was closer to the previous 13" MBP price of
| $1500 I would be ordering one now, but I will be getting a
| Macbook Air instead.
|
| Note to Veterans: Apple gives a 10% Veterans discount on
| everything, including the refurbished store.
| xenonite wrote:
| In addition, the MBA's minimum power draw is much lower than
| with the new MBPs. The M1 chip has four high efficiency cores
| where the M1X have only two.
|
| However, mind that the screen brightness is much lower at 400
| nits vs. 1000 nits on the new MBPs. Hence, using the laptop in
| the sun might be less convenient in comparison.
| sim_card_map wrote:
| you get +8 GB of RAM, +256 GB SSD, a much faster CPU, and a 120
| hz display for the extra $1000
| arthurmorgan wrote:
| Is the CPU actually faster on the entry level? Both M1 and
| the M1 Pro have 8 cores.
| jzymbaluk wrote:
| Different kinds of cores. M1 has 4 performance (high power)
| cores and 4 efficiency (low power) cores. M1 pro base SKU
| has 6 high power and 2 efficiency, higher SKUs have many
| more performance cores
| mdorazio wrote:
| These things don't cost anywhere near $1000 combined. It's a
| "pro" tax with the standard Apple tax on top. That extra RAM
| costs, what $50? The extra SSD space is _maybe_ another $100?
| The display is the only wildcard here and you 'll have a hard
| time convincing me that's an $800+ component upgrade.
|
| If you want the M1 chip and/or want to be in the Apple
| ecosystem the price is probably reasonable, but in comparison
| to the price points of previous-gen MacBook Pros stacked
| against competitors, this one seems overpriced.
| Gigachad wrote:
| >That extra RAM costs, what $50? The extra SSD space is
| maybe another $100?
|
| I have had this told to me endlessly. And then I see the
| laptops these people buy and its the cheapest machine with
| the highest numbers on the sales page. The laptops are
| abysmal quality and fail in every single metric not
| directly listed on the spec sheet.
|
| There is so much more to an SSD than capacity. Along with
| every other component. Also take in to consideration that
| these components are all on the same chip which makes them
| significantly faster and harder to produce than the average
| m.2 drive as the more components on the same chip, the more
| likely there will be errors so those top spec chips are the
| top of the production batch.
| raihansaputra wrote:
| On top of the speaker and battery as mentioned, the extra
| RAM actually has better bandwith (the M1 probably has 16x1,
| M1P at 8x2). Still a hefty price tag, I agree. But not out
| of line from their previous "true" Pros (2 fan variety).
| MrRiddle wrote:
| Much better mic, much better camera, much better speakers,
| much better battery. There's a lot more in this 2k Pro
| compared to Air.
| chrisBob wrote:
| I agree that you get a lot, and that the new laptops are
| great. If I was going to be using this full time as my work
| computer I would get it, but as my personal/fun computer the
| upgrades don't make sense for me.
|
| I can't wait for my work to upgrade me to one of these :)
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| Hark to justify 2k for 512 GB of storage. I think I will go the
| macbook air route too. Just upgrade the storage. For the price
| difference I can get a mavic air 2s drone.
| hbOY5ENiZloUfnZ wrote:
| It was kind of confusing the way Apple did it but with the
| Intel 13" Macbook Pro. There was the "2 Thunderbolt 3 ports"
| which started at $1299 and the "4 Thunderbolt 3 ports" model
| which started at $1799. Other than the ports the 4 port model
| had an entirely different generation CPU and the Touchbar. When
| you compare it to the "4 Thunderbolt" model it is replacing it
| is a slightly more palatable $200 increase. They are keeping
| the 13" M1 Macbook available as an entry level Macbook pro.
| newfonewhodis wrote:
| Exactly this. I use cloud VMs for heavy lifting. But if I used
| a laptop for even an hour every day, I would snap this $2k
| machine.
|
| I just wish they had a $1000 M1 laptop with ports.
| Liron wrote:
| Well, the Macbook Air at $1.0k is still better than any Macbook
| Pro ever made before now
| reaperducer wrote:
| Different priorities for different people.
|
| 13" and 14" are unusable for me. They're just too small.
|
| I used to love that form factor when I was running through
| airports in a different country each month, which is why I'm
| typing this on an 11" Air. But in today's world, a bigger
| screen is more important.
|
| This one has 16.2 inches, which is almost as big as the old
| 17-inch Mac laptops, so I've ordered one.
|
| If I ever get back to traveling a lot, it'll be the 16" at the
| hotel, and then just take an iPad to the client. No need to
| drag a whole computer with me anymore.
| sf_rob wrote:
| I agree but coming from the perspective that the M1 Air is
| absolutely crazy value if you aren't constantly doing intensive
| tasks and if you don't mind paying less to have dongles.
| laurent92 wrote:
| I'd love to have it, but OSHA requires that we don't work too
| much on the laptop. So, I would need a keyboard, a large screen
| and a mouse...
|
| I must not be the right audience. But would a videographist
| really mount videos on his laptop?
| bombcar wrote:
| It's a desktop replacement. Someone does all their work on it
| and sometimes takes it with them - it's how I use mine.
|
| And this can drive my four monitors so it's a candidate for
| an upgrade.
| Joeri wrote:
| It was obvious for me when apple released the m1 13 inch pro
| next to the air that the 14 inch would land at the higher price
| point. That's why I immediately bought the air. If I were
| buying a new macbook today, I would be tempted by the 14 inch
| pro but I would probably still buy the m1 air.
|
| The air is still a very nice laptop. It is really fast, faster
| than the 9600K in my imac. And it has a beautiful screen with
| rich colors that I never use at max brightness indoors.
| elSidCampeador wrote:
| Same - I am quite glad I went for the Air
| itsokimbatman wrote:
| Honestly, same. I was afraid I'd regret purchasing my M1 Air
| last year, but my needs for a personal laptop have gotten
| simpler as time goes on. I want a small, thin, and light laptop
| that's easy to travel with. I've got a big gaming PC if I need
| power.
|
| My work will probably upgrade to these when it's time to
| refresh our work machines, but for my own personal use the M1
| Air just hits all the sweet spots.
| asdff wrote:
| Isn't the actual macbook pro always like $1800 or more? It's
| been confusing since they were selling two different computers
| both called the macbook pro for so long, but the workhouse with
| dual fans was always this much and that wouldn't even get you
| the RAM bumped up to 16" specs iirc.
| busymom0 wrote:
| The notch doesn't look annoying on the Mac as that area is used
| by the menu bar anyway. However, I don't understand the reason
| for it since it doesn't have faceid. Why not just go for a punch
| hole design? What else is in that notch??
| djhworld wrote:
| Really happy with my M1 air for home use, but would really like
| one of these for work!
| musesum wrote:
| I put off trip to Bali until this update. Last time, the screen
| cracked due to lid closed and heat buildup with fan trying cool
| in a positive feedback loop. Had to fly to Singapore to replace.
| This time, carrying (soon to be) old MBP as backup.
| spenvo wrote:
| the notch is a major design compromise and apple is not trying
| hard enough. i can not imagine paying six thousand dollars for a
| new laptop and literally staring into an unforced error every
| day. (See, Dell XPS bezel-less displays like this:
| https://twitter.com/SpencerDailey/status/1450170126360358914)
|
| I hide my menu bar for maximum space, and you can't do that here
| without eating into your main apps' vertical space. the notch
| also reminds people of iphone features, which makes a touch
| screen an even more obvious omission, as well as Face ID. (FaceID
| is trending on twitter b/c people assume this laptop ships with
| it: https://twitter.com/MKBHD/status/1450162489795170307 )
| spenvo wrote:
| Dell XPS laptops not only pull of a bezel-less design, but also
| fit a webcam with infrared component for Windows Hello face
| unlock in there too. Apple has a notch with no Face ID.
| dang wrote:
| All: to read all 1300 comments in this thread, click More at the
| bottom of the page, or like this:
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908383&p=2
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908383&p=3
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28908383&p=4
|
| (Comments like this will eventually go away - sorry for the
| annoyance.)
| santialbo wrote:
| Finally a decent camera
| soheil wrote:
| Maybe they added the notch so that when they remove it next year
| people will have to dish out another 2-5k to get the non-notch
| version. Specially given that there were a lot rumors that iPhone
| was going to get rid of its notch this year. Now it's likely to
| happen next year.
| lethologica wrote:
| These are pretty much everything I've been waiting to upgrade to
| from my Pro 2015 model which has gotten very long in the tooth
| now.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| I'm curious to know why they decided to keep the headphone jack.
| I thought the narrative was that users don't need it. it's
| obsolete and wireless audio is the new normal. Yet, it is still
| there. It seems slightly incoherent.
| purple_ferret wrote:
| So we're back to 4 macbook laptops again with 3 of them being
| called 'Pro'
|
| Hmm
| eberkund wrote:
| How do you count 4? The 13 and 16 will be phased out as old
| models and the 14/16 will remain. Then there's the MBA.
|
| So 3 models, with 2 of them being 'Pro'.
| mrbuttons454 wrote:
| 13" M1 Pro is staying
| doorcrasher wrote:
| The regular M1 13" Pro is still being offered, I would
| probably still count that as the 4th model.
| AquinasCoder wrote:
| Looks like they focused a lot more on utility this go around.
| Going to try out the 16 inch but hoping it can fit in my bags
| well and isn't a hassle for traveling.
| ModernMech wrote:
| Anyone else getting an old PowerBook vibe off of these?
| farmerstan wrote:
| Uhhhh can the MacBooks charge via USB-C? Because I've been
| investing heavily in usb-c chargers (they are $80 and I bought 5
| of them for traveling, different room etc). If they can't be used
| for charging anymore I'm going to lose my shit for real
| zlsa wrote:
| Yes.
| launchiterate wrote:
| These are some top notch MacBooks!
| unraveller wrote:
| They are a touch screeny if you ask me.
| modzu wrote:
| it has a notch
| miohtama wrote:
| Real keys and not touchbar, advertised as a feature in the
| presentation. What a leap of innovation. Though Apple makes the
| best hardware, they are arrogant as ever.
| screye wrote:
| So many of the 'features' are merely the return of a few
| features kept hostage for too long.
|
| Ports, a half decent webcam, scissor switches & mag-safe are
| exactly the 'features' that took zero effort from Apple's side
| to implement.
|
| I like that this seems like the first real 'pro' device Apple
| has produced since the 2015 Mac, but the reason it took as long
| has entirely to do with Hubris rather than technical
| constraints.
|
| The M1 series of processors are IMO the only new standout
| innovation in these current-gen devices. That being said, it is
| seriously impressive innovation and the other laptop
| manufacturers appear to be even more complacent. (Looking at
| Dell and Lenovo making the same device for 10 years with only
| the smallest of changes each time)
|
| I like what Microsoft is trying to do with their devices, but
| they don't seem to be too keen on competing against their 3rd
| party customers directly. So you get laptops with weird form
| factors or ones that try to go for value-for-money instead of
| top class performance.
| yarcob wrote:
| The new "feature" is that the function keys are full height.
| Apple laptops had half height function keys for as long as I
| can remember.
| allenu wrote:
| I didn't even notice that they were full height. There was
| something off aesthetically when I saw the pictures of the
| new keyboard and I figured it was just the missing touch bar.
|
| As a touch bar hater from the beginning, I'm super excited to
| be able to hit keys to play/pause/skip music, mute, and
| adjust brightness without having to look at the touch bar to
| do it.
| 1ibsq wrote:
| Sure, but did anyone had a serious use for them? Surely there
| are people, but I have the _feeling_ that the Touch Bar was a
| failure from the beginning. Also they brought back a magnetic
| snap cable for charging (the same my Air mid 2012 has that I'm
| typing on rn) and they added a HDMI and a SD card slot. It's
| all coming back ^^
| eli wrote:
| It's more amusing than anything. I'll take the correct product
| decisions over pitch-perfect PR any day.
| msie wrote:
| Wow! Apple just can't win with you, can they? I'm glad they
| aren't arrogant enough to revisit some of their design
| decisions.
| rileymat2 wrote:
| I suspect what the OP is reacting to is not revisiting a
| design decision but the presentation of it.
| miohtama wrote:
| Other companies say "We listened to your feedback and
| delivered."
| Toutouxc wrote:
| How exactly would you expect them to convey that information
| without sounding arrogant? We all know about the TouchBar. They
| know it was a mistake, we know it, so why mention it in what's
| essentially a sales pitch?
| ashtonkem wrote:
| M1 aside, it's pretty clear that Jony Ive was holding back
| Apple's designs here. While he worked at Apple it was thinness at
| all costs, right after he leaves the MBP suddenly gets a tiny bit
| thicker in order to return a huge chunk of the features that were
| previously removed. Probably the only thing on this new laptop
| that can't be pinned on his departure is the M1 series of chips.
| rafaelturk wrote:
| I was falling in love for this new macBook until I saw the notch.
| They had to add a notch to the screen. Why?!
| macintux wrote:
| Or they shrunk the existing "notch" from the full width of the
| display to the least-used real estate on the machine.
| handrous wrote:
| Looking at the empty space in the center of whatever they call
| the top menu bar in MacOS, on my machine, I can kinda see why
| they'd think it was OK to claim some territory there.
|
| Will probably be annoying to people who use programs in
| fullscreen mode, I guess, unless that mode just blacks out the
| whole section and treats it as bezel, which I assume is what
| all video players will do in fullscreen mode, regardless.
| dukeofdoom wrote:
| $1999 starting price. Even higher than predicted.
| lowbloodsugar wrote:
| On the other hand, the 16" max ram 64GB, is less than $4000,
| which is less than I paid for my 2018 32GB RAM i9 pro.
| kondro wrote:
| These prices all feel like standard MacBook Pro pricing to me.
| I just ordered one (M1 Max, 64GB, 2TB) and it cost as much as
| that tier always seems to cost me.
| valine wrote:
| Epic update. Crazy fast chips, 120hz, mini LED, more ports, 64
| gigs of ram. It's literally everything you could want in a new
| MacBook Pro.
| rstupek wrote:
| And they got rid of the touch bar which everyone dumped heavily
| on
| yellow_postit wrote:
| If you listen closely you can hear the IT procurement IOs
| being opened up en masse.
| awill wrote:
| I love how they boasted about bringing back the regular
| keyboard. Even though they're solving a problem them created.
| RandallBrown wrote:
| They were "boasting" about making the function keys taller.
| reaperducer wrote:
| Which makes sense because some of the earlier MacBook
| keyboards with physical keys, like the one I'm using
| right now, had half-height keys.
| rstupek wrote:
| Damned if they do, damned if they don't? Sounds to me like
| they listened and changed course.
| thuccess129 wrote:
| Still have not solved the tinytiny inverted Tee arrow
| keys arrangement. Need to improve on the former IBM's
| 6-key cluster below the right shift key, or arrange full
| keysized arrows in a cross pattern breaking out of the
| rectangle at the lower right corner.
| kelnos wrote:
| Yes, but instead of acting like bringing back the regular
| keyboard is an amazing achievement, they could instead
| just admit that the touch bar wasn't a good idea. But
| admitting errors is not the Apple Way.
| pb7 wrote:
| It was a fine idea, just like 3D Touch on iPhones, that
| just didn't get enough use for the complexity. It was a
| gamble and didn't pay off.
| fomine3 wrote:
| The difference to 3D touch is that they removed existing
| features. I wonder what if they keep physical F keys
| along with Touch Bar.
| airstrike wrote:
| I think the parent comment is taking issue with how they
| frame it, not with the actual decision
| pb7 wrote:
| What are they supposed to say? "We're sorry we tried
| something new and it didn't work out?"
| airstrike wrote:
| "We listened to you and brought back the functions keys-
| and made them full size!"
|
| That's just my half-assed stab at it. Presumably someone
| whose job is to write these things for a living can
| improve it meaningfully while maintaining the essence.
| pb7 wrote:
| They said pretty much this minus the "we listened to you"
| part. I don't know why you need a pat on the back. Are
| you going to send them a thank you card for every thing
| they do right?
|
| It's a company dude, Apple is not your buddy. They're not
| listening to you, they're listening to market research
| and usage analytics.
| brynjolf wrote:
| They are trying to sell Me a product though
| airstrike wrote:
| Listening to market research = listening to users.
| markdog12 wrote:
| Yes?
| pb7 wrote:
| Why?
| markdog12 wrote:
| Because it's the truth?
| Grustaf wrote:
| They didn't boast. Saying many people prefer hardware keys
| is closer to admitting a mistake than boasting.
| sxg wrote:
| How are they supposed to frame it? "Sorry we messed up the
| keyboard. We're putting a regular one back in." Doesn't
| seem like great phrasing for launching a new product.
| xdfgh1112 wrote:
| I'd prefer that. But I guess that's why I'm not an apple
| customer
| [deleted]
| markdog12 wrote:
| Seems fine to me.
| throwoutway wrote:
| Looks like they only "got rid" of the Touch Bar for the more
| expensive model. Really trolling their customers now
| 1270018080 wrote:
| No they didn't? The 14 and 16 inch don't have the touchbar.
| out_of_protocol wrote:
| Exactly. No touch bar and cost more money
| cassianoleal wrote:
| The Air doesn't have a touch bar and costs less money.
| It's also a perfectly good -- no, sorry: an excellent
| laptop for most applications, including development.
|
| I suspect the 13" M1 Pro was probably just something to
| cater for those who were skeptical about a fanless laptop
| since no one really knew back then how well these
| machines would perform. Now that the M1s have been out
| for a while and no one seems to be complaining about the
| Air, they can drop the M1 Pro.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Well, the 13" Pro already has the M1 chip and will probably
| be gradually replaced by the 14", so there's no reason to
| update it. Where's the trolling?
| fomine3 wrote:
| I wish they offer non mini-LED display option since developer
| don't need such quality. Apple need to break down "Pro".
| hunterb123 wrote:
| Designers use MacBook pros too.
|
| Everyone likes to have mobile workstation.
| fomine3 wrote:
| Yes this is excellent for designers, but here's also many
| developers.
| ptmcc wrote:
| Au contraire, as a developer staring at screens all day I
| think it's very important to invest in high quality displays
| red2awn wrote:
| As a developer, I think we should invest in big external
| monitor, not looking at a tiny 14in display, however nice
| it is.
| fomine3 wrote:
| Agreed. Laptop form factor itself is also bad for
| ergonomics.
| fomine3 wrote:
| Generally agree to invest to avoid eye stain, but this is
| overkill.
| fastball wrote:
| How can you generally agree but then say this display is
| overkill? The previous displays were definitely not the
| peak of quality to avoid eye strain.
| fomine3 wrote:
| To reduce eye strain, reducing glare is important so
| using non-reflective screen by sacrificing quality is
| better (or ideally eInk). XDR displays (and previous
| displays from Apple) are great for quality, but not fully
| optimized for reducing eye strain.
|
| https://www.eizo.com/library/basics/10_ways_to_address_ey
| e_f...
| lwouis wrote:
| I would argue dynamic backlit screens are terrible for
| development actually. High contrast is intense on the
| eye.
|
| I bought a QLED TV 3 years ago, and tried to use it as an
| external display for my laptop. It's painful to look at.
| You switch from a white window to a black one and the TV
| adjusts backlight dynamically and blasts your eyes. I
| would react by putting my hand in front on my eyes like
| if i had looked outside from inside a cave after getting
| used to the cave.
|
| Something like e-ink would be best for office work
| indeed. Lighting is external so controlled by the user
| and in line with the rest of the room
| phil294 wrote:
| > High contrast is intense on the eye.
|
| Is it really the contrast though? No contrast is sharper
| than blank and white, and reading a book is fine.
| lwouis wrote:
| Sorry, I meant to say brightness contrast: high-end
| dynamic displays will turn off backlighting in black
| areas, and turn them all the way up in white areas.
|
| Let's say your movie shows a full moon in the night.
| Looking at that moon on the screen is now like looking at
| a torchlight in the night in real life. The moon section
| of the screen is blasting high brightness right at your
| eyes.
|
| This is what I meant. I tried doing office work on such a
| monitor, and quickly realize it's good for immersion, but
| terrible for office work, for which you want stable
| brightness.
| forsakenharmony wrote:
| mini LED, not micro LED
| valine wrote:
| Yup my bad
| kllrnohj wrote:
| But that notch is kind of a really ugly blight on the face of
| an otherwise good looking update. Especially since it's lacking
| faceid or something equivalent to windows hello
| acdha wrote:
| Go back to when the iPhone introduced the notch. There were
| so many comments just like yours but when was the last time
| you heard anyone say anything about it? It gets a lot of
| attention because it's quite visible -- literally right in
| front of your eyes -- but it's also in an area which is dead
| space most of the time and the most common scenario where it
| isn't is full screen video conferencing, when you'll be glad
| for the better quality.
| IkmoIkmo wrote:
| Agreed. In fact, I think I'll mind it less. On my iPhone
| the only time it looks funny is in landscape, otherwise it
| just sits in the top-bar. On a laptop that isn't an issue.
|
| I think for me it'll fade away, especially with a dark-mode
| UI.
| soheil wrote:
| > On my iPhone the only time it looks funny is in
| landscape,
|
| Laptops are effectively always in landscape.
| zlsa wrote:
| But the notch on the MacBook Pros is on top, not on the
| left.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| > but when was the last time you heard anyone say anything
| about it?
|
| Literally during the latest iPhone announcement where Apple
| was even timid about showing off the front of the display
| or talking about the smaller notch, as everyone mocked how
| dated the notch looked.
| acdha wrote:
| Was it really "everyone", or just a few very online
| people in your social media? The sold out pre-orders
| suggest this was not as universal as you're portraying it
| -- for example, looking at I see a note that it was
| smaller and you have to go 4 pages in before there's a
| single comment complaining about it, and that's in a
| community which loves to critique Apple designs!
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/09/apple-makes-the-
| ipho...
|
| Again, not saying this is nothing or that I love it, only
| that the buying public does not seem to feel anywhere
| near as strongly about it and I've never heard anyone
| complaining about it on a regular basis. Most people get
| used to it, if they're curious they probably understand
| that it's for the camera, and get on with life. I'd be
| quite surprised if this did not follow a very similar
| trajectory -- especially since the display is larger so
| you could black out the entire top of the screen in
| software and still have more screen real estate than the
| previous model.
| minusf wrote:
| have you noticed how screenshots and background images
| for iphones marketing material is chosen so that the
| notch is almost/totally invisible? it borders on false
| advertising. it's a design company, they know the most
| how ugly it is.
| acdha wrote:
| Do you have some examples? Looking at
| https://www.apple.com/iphone/ the notch is emphasized on
| the icons at the top of the page and the only images
| where it's not clearly visible are the ones showing the
| camera on the back of the phone.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| Why are you moving the goal posts? At first you asked
| whether "anyone" talked about it, the parent gave you a
| reasonable answer, and now you're talking about
| "everyone." Accept that some people do talk about the
| notch, however small the minority opinion is.
| acdha wrote:
| What I should have said is anyone talking about it
| unprompted -- there's always someone talking about any
| design decision but you see the average priorities based
| on when people talk about them unprompted. People
| complain about the Touch Bar or the old keyboards a lot,
| or the sided charging / performance issues, but the notch
| seems much rarer to hear unprompted complaints about.
|
| That doesn't mean it's zero but it suggests that the
| compromise was actually quite reasonable, even if there
| are a small number of people who vocally disagree.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| People buying a device doesn't mean they liked literally
| every aspect of the device and have no complaints about
| any aspect of it.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I like the notch. It makes the phone look different to
| every other glass slab on the market.
| acdha wrote:
| No, but it definitely means that it's not the big deal
| which overheated rhetoric in forums often implies.
| Experienced users are often extremely reactionary and
| wildly overstate the impact of highly visible changes but
| in most cases if you actually survey their usage later
| they've almost always gotten used to it.
|
| In this case, the 16" screen gained ~0.2" diagonally and
| 314px extra resolution. Those extra pixels mean that even
| with the notch you're going to see more on the screen
| than you could before and in my experience that's far
| more likely to be the part which shapes people's
| impression of a new device.
| wayneftw wrote:
| There are literally still so many comments just like that
| and plenty of people who simply won't buy a phone that has
| a notch. The comments never stopped.
|
| The screenshots showing application menus almost hitting
| the notch are ugly af. I'm sure that there are applications
| that have even more menus than Photoshop or Premiere.
| acdha wrote:
| > There are literally still so many comments just like
| that and plenty of people who simply won't buy a phone
| that has a notch. The comments never stopped.
|
| ... and yet, sales have continued to be extremely high,
| which suggests that is a self-selected group of extremely
| vocal opponents rather than a real market trend.
| wayneftw wrote:
| ...as if the notch is the only deciding factor.
|
| I hate the notch, but I'll still buy iPhones all day long
| if my only other choice is to buy products with
| questionable privacy from an advertising company versus
| dealing with Apple's shitty designs.
| aseipp wrote:
| That's their point, it's literally self selection: people
| who do not care about the notch are not going to write
| comments about it, and people who care are never going to
| shut up about it, giving an extremely poor window for
| understanding how much it actually matters or how it
| impacts real use. That complaints like this are self-
| selective is both well known and the OP's entire point;
| it's amazing how much effort all the replies seem to be
| going through to not understand this.
| jld wrote:
| I think the notch works ok on the iPhone as iOS is
| specifically designed with it in mind. The small spots
| abreast of the notch are fine for battery meter, clock, and
| reception bars.
|
| The Mac notch is right in the middle of the toolbar. I have
| lots of applications that use that space for menus and will
| be curious how cumbersome it will be now that we need to
| literally navigate around it.
|
| Will we need to move the mouse down to get around the
| notch, or will the cursor be allowed to go under the notch?
| BearOso wrote:
| My thought is that it's a pro laptop. Does it really need
| a built-in webcam? How many people never use them or even
| tape over them? I could live without it, and if it's
| actively providing a detriment, that's all the more
| reason to get rid of it.
| ghaff wrote:
| You mean like (I'm guessing but I think it's a safe
| guess) the vast majority of "pro" users who
| videoconference? The opinion that a laptop maker should
| take out a webcam in 2021 is... interesting.
| vbezhenar wrote:
| I never ever used webcam in my life and I'd gladly
| replaced it with proper display.
| acdha wrote:
| In the screenshots shown, most of the apps do not have
| menubars which extend to that space at that display
| resolution -- this could definitely be more of an issue
| for people who increase the size for accessibility
| reasons.
|
| From the full-screen screenshots, it appears that it's
| simply black across the top of the screen unless the
| application has been designed to support it. That looked
| like the regular Safari developer tools with an unbroken
| bar slightly lower down in the video.
| kcb wrote:
| Notches on cell phones are so 2018. Apple is really behind
| in that area.
| julienb_sea wrote:
| The notch is an explicit design choice, it's visible and
| iconic. It differentiates the new models and you can make a
| reasonable argument that space is always used by the status
| bar in macos currently, so this is a net improvement without
| question.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| You get more usable screen though. I am curious how legacy
| apps with way-too-many menus will display with the split.
| nowherebeen wrote:
| My only concern is if it will distract me from work with it
| always sticking out.
| thebean11 wrote:
| They'll display the same way they did on the smaller
| screens, or with lower DPI settings enabled I'm guessing.
| agloeregrets wrote:
| The split is in the global menu bar which is owned by Apple
| design wise. It will be interesting but I imagine it will
| work fine, also don't forget early OSX builds had a
| centered Apple Logo with logic to handle this.
| ssijak wrote:
| it is useful because it will be on the middle of the status
| bar. After 2 hours my guess nobody would notice anything
| weird. Like with the iphones, but this one actually makes
| sense.
| oblio wrote:
| People will get used to it... but they could have just
| shifted the screen down, using that chin. For example there
| are plenty Windows laptops with 3:2 aspect rations, where
| they use up all the vertical space.
|
| They could have just moved everything down for IMO a
| slightly better design.
| jlokier wrote:
| It won't be in the middle of the status bar when running
| anything full screen.
|
| Some people run applications full screen most of the time.
| For example the browser, text editor, chat, etc.
|
| I wonder if it automatically inserts a black bar in those
| situations.
| BluSyn wrote:
| It does.
| threatofrain wrote:
| It conflicts with existing Apple design decisions, such as
| Safari in full-screen with the compact tabs, or Apple
| Calendar in full screen mode. I wonder how that will work.
| alexandrius wrote:
| Full Screen apps do not use notch space as seen in their
| full screen demos
| dont__panic wrote:
| So they're not really "full screen" any more? Why even
| bother with the feature, and just switch it to "maximize"
| instead?
| Gigachad wrote:
| They are as big as pre notch. It's just now the toolbar
| has moved in to a space which was once black bezel. Full
| screen is still useful for hiding the toolbar for a
| distraction free view.
| threatofrain wrote:
| Except for purposes of immersion in games and movies, I
| might just always have the top menu bar visible if the
| treatment for many full screen apps is just to have an
| opaque black bar with no content.
| airstrike wrote:
| I don't think Apple really designed Safari to be
| ordinarily used in full-screen with compact tabs.
| [deleted]
| awill wrote:
| sure. But with video conferencing being a new part of the
| job, it's likely a good tradeoff
| kllrnohj wrote:
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/
|
| Looking at the product photos it looks like they black-bar
| the entire top of the display when anything is full-screen?
| So that seems to make the notch even more intrusive as you
| lose out on all the screen real-estate next to it when
| something is fullscreen.
|
| Or rather, the menu bar is now a permanent bezel that
| nothing else can occupy?
| JumpCrisscross wrote:
| > _you lose out on all the screen real-estate next to it
| when something is fullscreen_
|
| That would have been bezel in a notchless design.
| kllrnohj wrote:
| The bezel wouldn't have been as big. The resulting "fake
| bezel" is larger than necessary to house the camera, as
| it needs to shift where the camera is relative to the
| physical dimensions of the display and the border that it
| needs.
|
| Just see literally any other laptop that has both a
| fairly small bezel and fits a webcam in it, like the Dell
| XPS 13. The camera in the macbook may be better and
| require a larger lens assembly as a result, but it's
| surely not as big as the bezel + notch itself requires.
| Gigachad wrote:
| From the picture, it looks about the same. The top bezel
| is huge on the 2020 macbook.
| ilikehurdles wrote:
| As someone who always hides the menu bar, though, having
| a notch is going to kill being able to switch tabs in
| Chrome, search in Outlook, or broadly, use any controls
| at the top of a window in maximized mode. I'm guessing
| the hidden menu bar is going away on this machine because
| it would break usability of all other apps.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| Someone will write an app that blacks this bit out for
| you and you can carry with your life like an Englishman
| in a Parisian restaurant...
| cmckn wrote:
| I agree that the notch is a bit large to just be a 1080p
| webcam. I don't hate it though, aesthetically. If the next
| iteration doesn't have Face ID, I'll be a bit annoyed.
| Seriously considering trading in my M1 MacBook Air for the
| 14". Tim Cook really knows how to drain my accounts!
| stavros wrote:
| I guess we always have the option of showing black on that
| part of the screen and effectively getting the old display
| back (ie a huge bezel).
| actusual wrote:
| Took away the ports just to bring 'em back and play the hero.
| Apple playing 5d chess.
| nfriedly wrote:
| Maybe next year's refresh will have USB-A ports again!
| ghaff wrote:
| It would be nice if they could have squeezed one in again
| so you don't need to pull out a dongle/hub every time you
| want to connect a "legacy" USB device when traveling. But
| not really a realistic wish and wouldn't have wished they
| took anything out to accommodate it.
| fastball wrote:
| What legacy USB devices are you plugging in while
| traveling?
|
| Traveling is when I'm _least_ likely to do that. And
| regardless, I travel with this[1] anyway, so no problemo.
|
| [1] https://www.amazon.com/Purgo-
| Adapter-2018-2016-Delivery-Thun...
| nfriedly wrote:
| I'm not the one you asked, but heres a few things that I
| might need to use a USB-A port for when traveling:
|
| * My yubikey to perform 2-factor auth
|
| * The checkra1n jailbreak for my work iPhone (I do some
| iOS dev and occasionally need a jailbroken device. For
| whatever reason, it doesn't work with a USB-C-to-
| lightning cable, it has to use a USB-A-to-lightning cable
| + a dongle.)
|
| * A USB flash drive for transferring a presentation or
| whatever. (I know these come in USB-C variants, but I
| don't have one.)
|
| * Charging all the random things that charge from USB-A
| ports.
| thallium205 wrote:
| Yubikey has a USB-C version with NFC now.
| fastball wrote:
| Gotcha. Well except for the weird checkra1n thing,
| everything else is easily migrated to USB-C. To help with
| that migration, I highly recommend this[1] cable (or one
| similar to it) as a technological Swiss Army Knife.
|
| I made the transition at the beginning of the year to
| "USB-C everything I can" and it's very liberating.
| Ironically the only devices I have left that are _not_
| USB-C are my iPhone and AirPods (and my Kindle, but they
| just released a USB-C model which I will soon use to
| replace my current one).
|
| [1] https://www.amazon.com/SDBAUX-USB-Compatible-
| Electronic-Tabl...
| nfriedly wrote:
| Yea, fair enough. I am generally migrating in that
| direction, but probably a bit slower than you.
|
| Looks like a handy cable.
| ghaff wrote:
| As I said not something I could reasonably expect or that
| Apple should reasonably have done. Just another set of
| changes to make/stuff to buy.
|
| In practice I'll probably mostly just deal with for a
| while by carrying a hub with me.
|
| Of course I have a ton of other things I'll home but
| that's easier dealt with using various usb hubs.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Apple, according to the rumors, considered even bringing
| back USB-A but decided against it.
| colinmhayes wrote:
| Would USB-A fit in a macbook? No way for the air right?
| elzbardico wrote:
| I am happy if USB-A dies.
| nfriedly wrote:
| I mean, Apple gets to decide how thick the laptop is, so
| they could make it work if they wanted to. Didn't the
| original Macbook Air have a USB-A port?
|
| Also, HDMI ports are approximately the same height as USB
| Type-A ports, so presumably it would fit in this design.
| bart_spoon wrote:
| > Didn't the original Macbook Air have a USB-A port?
|
| It did
| barelysapient wrote:
| I'm guessing this has to do with Johnny Ive's departure. He
| was notorious for design over function.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| Him and Steve were a great combo keeping each in check. Ive
| should have left a long time ago.
|
| He is now designing at Ferrari:
| https://www.wsj.com/articles/ferrari-hires-former-apple-
| desi...
| bmitc wrote:
| As far as I understand, he was absent from about 2015 on.
| There was an article, which I can't find right now, that
| discussed the mess this left the design team in. He
| basically retired to his home, and he would require the
| design team to come present to him at some local place
| (he wouldn't go to Apple). Then he'd give zero feedback.
| (This is from my recollection of the article.)
|
| Pretty telling since that was sort of the heyday of
| Apple's devices having all sorts of conflicting designs.
|
| Edit: I think this is the article:
| https://www.wsj.com/articles/jony-ive-is-departing-apple-
| but...
|
| With a summary at:
| https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/07/01/jony-ives-
| departu...
|
| Furthermore, it's hard to imagine Ive and Ferrari
| gelling. Ive's style is about as diametrically opposed
| from Italian design as I can think of. I characterize his
| design as character-less, something Italian designers
| don't go for.
| bombcar wrote:
| He may have been hired to sit in his home and not design
| anything - for the name only.
| bmitc wrote:
| I get the feeling that it's part ego from Ive and part
| Cook actually not caring about design as Ive mentioned.
| corey_moncure wrote:
| The new and improved Ferrari design rumored to include:
|
| - Removal of the brake pedal since you should only need
| one input to control things
|
| - The gas inlet port relocated to a more aesthetically
| pleasing location in the very center of the undercarriage
|
| - Total width of the car down to a svelte and sexy 3.5
| feet because the thinner it looks the better it is
| R6 wrote:
| You joke but the new Ferrari has capacitive buttons
| everywhere. Even the rear view mirror adjustment buttons
| are capacitive. Whether this is Ive's doing, I don't
| know.
|
| https://dealerimages.dealereprocess.com/image/upload/v157
| 591...
| tezza wrote:
| There is no steering wheel, simply a flat panel where you
| swipe to steer.
|
| There is 3D Touch where a long press on the steering
| screen lets you set cruise control
| bduerst wrote:
| Steering wheels are available but sold separately.
|
| You have to attach them via dongle, but the only input
| port is in the trunk.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| > - The gas inlet port relocated to a more aesthetically
| pleasing location in the very center of the undercarriage
|
| It also requires the car to be on the front wheels, with
| the back awkwardly suspended by the fuel hose.
| strombofulous wrote:
| > The gas inlet port relocated to a more aesthetically
| pleasing location in the very center of the undercarriage
|
| Why is this a problem? You shouldn't be trying to drive
| it while it's fueling anyway
| nsriv wrote:
| You joke but the new Ferrari Roma has touch buttons on
| the steering wheel and the UX has been widely panned.
| notatoad wrote:
| i'm guessing it has to do with the new M1 chips and their
| great power efficiency. back with the intel chips, an SD
| card slot or HDMI port consumed valuable internal real
| estate that could have been filled with battery instead,
| and filling it with battery was a better trade-off for most
| people.
|
| with the new chips, they can comfortably sacrifice some
| battery size.
| brookside wrote:
| Apple isn't sacrificing any battery size on the 16" at
| least. 100-watt-hour is the standard max size for TSA.
| eugeniub wrote:
| Disagree. 2016 15" MBP was 4.0 pounds. 2019 16" MBP was
| 4.3 pounds. New 16" MBP is 4.5 pounds. Apple simply
| decided in 2016 to shrink the size and weight by removing
| ports and other things, and then to increase the size and
| weight by bringing them back.
|
| Personally I'm surprised they didn't decide to keep the
| same weight by shrinking the battery. Not that many
| people absolutely need a 21 hour battery life, though it
| is nice.
| martinald wrote:
| Pretty sure the batteries are bigger in the new ones vs
| the Intel ones, at least in capacity (6000mAh vs
| 5000mAh). I imagine they are the same physical size; if
| not bigger.
| BitwiseFool wrote:
| Johnny Ive wanted USB-C to be 'The One Port to Rule Them
| All'. That didn't work out for a number of reasons.
| fastball wrote:
| As someone that didn't like originally giving up my ports
| and thought Jony Ive was a bit too overzealous with
| thinness, I actually don't think he was wrong.
|
| USB-C is pretty great, and the sooner we shift things
| over the better. When I bough a MBP with only USB-C ports
| I just bought a little dongle thing that slots in to my
| two ports on the side and gives me USB-A, HDMI, SD and
| MicroSD. I've used the thing around 20 times and its
| never been a burden because I carry it with me in my
| laptops case.
|
| At this point I actually see adding the other ports back
| as a step backwards. HDMI is old and aggressively large
| in 2021. My 3 devices that use an SD card actually use a
| microSD card so I need to carry around an adapter anyway.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| I have never understood this push for light, and thin.
|
| Even twenty years ago I wanted just the best features in
| a laptop.
|
| Give me a quality machine, at a reasonable price; and I
| would drag around a boat anchor.
|
| I also wanted repairability, and room for future upgrades
| inside the laptop, but gave up on that one.
| Gigachad wrote:
| It almost has, it's just playing the long long game.
| People don't replace their monitors, tvs and projectors
| constantly but eventually they will all be bundled in
| with usb-c cables. Last time I was in an office, every
| cable had a usb-c dongle stuck to it permanently.
| vegai_ wrote:
| I totally loved USB-C being the only port(s) on the device
| and thoroughly miss it on my Thinkpads.
| kelnos wrote:
| > _Apple playing 5d chess._
|
| I think you're giving them too much credit. This is Apple's
| way of admitting they were wrong.
| xdfgh1112 wrote:
| 5d chess is usually only ever said in a sarcastic context,
| so the implication is that Apple didn't plan this at all
| Aperocky wrote:
| Well at least they admitted it. If they doubled down with
| the butterfly keyboard and touchbar crap they would rapidly
| die to a better designed linux capable book. or just become
| one of the many commercial vendors.
| ashtonkem wrote:
| More to the point, they now have someone else designing
| these laptops.
| jnwatson wrote:
| The worst part is that everybody copies them. Now, two USB-C
| ports, one of which is used for power, is standard.
| input_sh wrote:
| I far prefer just plugging in one USB hub than plugging in
| like five different cables. I have a Thinkpad with loads of
| ports, but I just use two (one for a wireless mouse that's
| always plugged in).
| w0m wrote:
| Issue with my rMBP is if i have too much on said single
| port; the laptop overheats and crashes. I end up with all
| 4 ports plugged in anyway to get decent performance.
| ccouzens wrote:
| I've got a reasonably cheap screen with USBC input. The
| screen is the hub.
|
| It's great, as I only need to plug in one cable and my
| laptop is powered, connected to both my external monitors
| (displayport mst) and USB peripherals.
|
| It's also a reason I asked not to have a Mac when I
| changed jobs. The Intel Macs and the older m1s don't
| support MST.
|
| I wonder if the new m1s finally support it?
| ascagnel_ wrote:
| MST would work correctly _in Windows_ on my last-gen MBP,
| so I think it may be a limitation of macOS. Apple has
| only ever officially supported MST over Thunderbolt,
| never over USB or DisplayPort.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| I like the hub/dock lifestyle as well but...
| USB-C/Thunderbolt is complex and there are many gotchas.
|
| As more folks returned to the office, we get lots of
| issues with shitty network and other drivers on docks.
| emerongi wrote:
| It's good to have multiple options. I lug my laptop
| around and (rarely) need to connect multiple devices to
| it and sometimes I run out of ports. At home, I use a
| dock and the ports are useless, but that doesn't mean
| that I don't like the option to have more ports on the
| machine.
| fotta wrote:
| the great thing with this update is that you can still do
| that :)
| kelnos wrote:
| I think the usefulness of a bunch of different ports/port
| types is for when you're on the go. A hub/dock is of
| course way more convenient when you're at your main
| workspace. But if you're traveling or even just on your
| couch, having extra ports makes things much more
| convenient.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| That doesn't mean that people are copying them. Thunderbolt
| 3 adopted the USB-C format. Until USB-C, USB wasn't capable
| of delivering the power required for charging. It made
| logical sense to switch charging to USB-C. If anything,
| Apple copied USB-C.
| pseudalopex wrote:
| I think the point was 2 ports is 1 port in practice. And
| so few ports used to be rare.
| cptskippy wrote:
| I prefer USB-C with PD to all of the vendor specific ports
| except maybe MagSafe.
| TulliusCicero wrote:
| Same, but there still usually aren't enough ports in
| total. Looks like the new Macbook Pros have 2 ports on
| one side, 1 port on the other. At least keeping 2 on each
| side would've been much better.
| masklinn wrote:
| I had the same thought, if you're charging on the right
| side you don't have a USB port left there.
| cptskippy wrote:
| That is the biggest problem with USB-C IMO. The ports can
| all have different capabilities and it's not always
| obvious what they can do.
|
| For the most part though it seems they've settled on
| Thunderbolt, Charge, and bog standard ports. Are there
| any that do Thunderbolt + Charge?
|
| It's a shame about the name because the Thunderbolt icon
| would be perfect to indicate a charge port. Instead we're
| stuck with a little plug icon that is usually isn't
| discernable.
| vegai_ wrote:
| Sadly no. My new Thinkpad has only one USB-C port and it's
| used for power. So I cannot use the USB-C port while
| charging. And it has three USB-As and a freaking HDMI.
| simonebrunozzi wrote:
| Yes, but let's see the price tag for an M1 Max with 64 GB is,
| and then we can rejoice. Or not.
| anamexis wrote:
| $3899.
| indemnity wrote:
| Same price as the i9 it replaced, no?
| johncalvinyoung wrote:
| 5600M SKUs were more expensive than equivalent M1 Max
| options.
| superfamicom wrote:
| $4,298.65 in WA after tax, free shipping.
| dymk wrote:
| Sounds like it's time to make a trip down to Oregon
| nico_h wrote:
| I'm so impressed by the screen but it's too un-ergonomic for me
| that I'm sad instead. Would have been so nice if they had
| released 27" desktop screens to connect with these finally
| wonderful laptops.
|
| It's not like a huge majority of office workers have been
| staying at home or working from the office for the last year
| and half or something. The coffee shop surfing, working in the
| plane / train must have taken a dive.
| wlll wrote:
| Just buy a non-apple screen? I run 3 Samsung 4K screens on my
| MBP.
| _the_inflator wrote:
| What a beast! I already feel sorry for my MacBook Pro 13 with
| M1. Left in the dust essentially.
| other_herbert wrote:
| same for my m1 air! :D... but then I remembered that apple
| does trade ins! :D
| vishnugupta wrote:
| I guess M1 Air is targeted towards execs, business crowd,
| marketers and such who's primary day job is not into
| creating, not something that'd require Pro level
| capabilities anyway.
| Aperocky wrote:
| Or programmer. We don't need that much juice really.
|
| If our stuff makes M1 runs slow ... It's probably poorly
| optimized code.
|
| Of course game dev is exempt from this.
| sharikous wrote:
| Many types of programming require big resources these
| day. Training machine learning model is the classical
| example.
|
| But also those who run multiple VMs at the same time.
| vishnugupta wrote:
| > But also those who run multiple VMs at the same time.
|
| I tried this route a few years ago but gave up out of
| sheer frustration. I wonder if it's improved now. At this
| point I'm more inclined to setup my local stack in AWS
| and be done with it. Like no local laptop testing at all.
| raihansaputra wrote:
| I already have an M1 Air, and I'm looking to buy the 14
| MBP just for the display (working outdoors yay), battery
| life, and RAM (16GB + higher bandwith). There's enough
| horsepower on the M1 for me, not even noticeable compared
| to the i7 MBP 16.
| als0 wrote:
| The 14" has several hours less of battery than the M1
| Air. Dealbreaker if I'm honest.
| https://www.apple.com/mac/compare/?modelList=MacBook-
| Air-M1,...
| tornato7 wrote:
| The M1 Air is the best laptop for the average casual
| laptop user (school, emails, photos, etc). The battery
| life alone makes it a huge upgrade over any Windows
| machine. I also love that it doesn't have any fans, side
| that's usually the first thing to go on any laptop. I
| expect to get years and years of good use out of the Air.
| Aperocky wrote:
| M1 air and not at all feeling this way.
|
| The original M1 pro had a touchbar, that alone make it
| suck. But the M1 is still thinner by a mile and _has no
| fan_!
|
| Many people overlook this but no fan means no dirt will get
| into the chasis. That is HUGE.
| Joeri wrote:
| The new models are a lot more expensive though. And the entry
| level model of the 14 inch has an 8 core variant of the m1
| pro, which probably will not perform that much higher than
| the 8 core m1 in the 13 inch.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| > It's literally everything you could want in a new MacBook
| Pro.
|
| If it doesn't run VirtualBox then I can't use it to write code,
| so why does it even matter if it's faster?
| nyadesu wrote:
| You can always use docker
| Alex3917 wrote:
| Docker doesn't really work on Mac. Like it technically
| runs, but just barely. Because it uses containerization
| inside virtualization, it pegs the CPU just to run a hello
| world app and completely drains the battery in 30 min. Oh
| and the fans sound like an airplane taking off.
| lkbm wrote:
| Docker is terrible on Macs, but I used to run
| Docker+vscode+Firefox+Brave+Slack+misc. I'd run into
| issues on my 2015 MBP from time to time, but on the 2019
| models it was fine.
|
| gulp.watch would often eat an entire core, and stuff in
| Docker ran slower than on Linux, but my laptop could keep
| up. vscode didn't lag and Firefox ran just fine--all with
| 5+ Docker containers running.
| Gigachad wrote:
| I have no idea what you are talking about. I have about 7
| containers running the full work app and I can't hear any
| fan noise and the laptop is running cold.
|
| This thing is running Rails, mysql, elastic search,
| redis, mongodb, and workers inside docker. As well as
| nodejs, vscode, a handful of electron apps all at the
| same time and the laptop is cold.
| cmckn wrote:
| I don't know anyone at work who would agree with this.
| Docker is fine on macOS, honestly always has been. Sure,
| it will show up in Activity Monitor, but so will any
| other software that is actually doing something. I have
| never seen my CPU peg because of Docker, and I regularly
| run large stacks, use Earthly for all my builds, etc. The
| overhead of the VM + containerd is truly not that large.
| astrange wrote:
| CPU % in top and similar tools isn't a great proxy for
| energy usage anyway, it's a lot more complicated than
| that.
| jordanthoms wrote:
| Not my experience at all, you must have something weird
| in your setup. For a full dev environment I'm running
| containers with postgres, cockroachdb, several ruby apps,
| kafka, some JVM based stuff, and clickhouse and it does
| hit battery life a bit but certainly not pegging the CPU,
| actually it's using less than Slack...
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Not my experience either on a fanless M1 Air. I can run
| lots of containers without it perceptibly heating up or
| slowing down. Battery life does suffer but I can still
| usually get at least 4-5h of solid programming like this.
| solarmist wrote:
| Parallels supports linux VMs. https://kb.parallels.com/128445
|
| You could use that now or wait for virtual box to catch up (I
| assume).
| idle_zealot wrote:
| You can run Linux with UTM.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| Can I keep my existing vagrant / Ansible setup? Or,
| basically, what would I need to use in order to provision
| the instances?
| ArchOversight wrote:
| You can keep your ansible. Does vagrant support alternate
| providers for running VM's? Then yes, you can keep your
| vagrant too.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| It looks like Vagrant doesn't work yet with UTM:
| https://github.com/hashicorp/vagrant/issues/12518
|
| Conceptually I'd love one of these machine, but
| realistically if I can't develop locally in an Ubuntu VM
| then I might as well just wait a year or two to buy one
| until that's possible. I'm not going to use Docker, and
| realistically I have zero interest in spending multiple
| weeks rewriting all of my provisioning scripts.
| cassianoleal wrote:
| Vagrant has a QEMU driver, which is what UTM uses anyway.
| I can't say it will do what you need the way you want but
| I suspect it's possible to get there.
|
| QEMU can virtualise arm and emulate x86.
| Alex3917 wrote:
| Thanks, I'll check this out! I just need to run Python on
| Ubuntu, so hopefully that isn't too crazy of a use case.
| fastball wrote:
| I'm writing this comment from Ubuntu running on my M1 Macbook
| Pro, so...?
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| How is the GPU performance?
| plandis wrote:
| > why does it even matter if it's faster?
|
| Have you considered that plenty of people don't need
| VirtualBox to write code?
| tornato7 wrote:
| Maybe you should be questioning why you need VirtualBox to
| write code
| krono wrote:
| Security, provisioning, dependency management, infosec,
| etc. the list of reasons for someone to develop in a VM is
| endless.
| minusf wrote:
| yes. also vbox is not the only way to run VMs
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| NexRebular wrote:
| Yet there still is no support for writing HFS (not plus)
| formatted floppies. Yeah, not really everything I could want...
| can16358p wrote:
| Yup. This was more than many of us demanded TBH.
| gjsman-1000 wrote:
| Did anyone miss the headphone jack now supports low-impedance
| headphones?
|
| No reason they had to do that - just pure icing on the cake.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| High-impedance headphones. Driving low-impedance headphones
| is easy.
| worrycue wrote:
| > micro LED
|
| Mini-LED backlighting. It's still an IPS panel. MicroLED is
| something else entirely. Had me excited for a second.
| riffic wrote:
| as beautiful as the hardware is, I just cannot stomach buying
| another machine I can not comfortably replace the battery in.
| Either Apple returns to its earliest roots of making machines
| that are easy to repair, or find me and many others buying
| machines from the likes of Frame.work instead.
| reustle wrote:
| Is it difficult to replace the battery in these new models? I
| changed the battery in my 2016-ish macbook air in about 5
| minutes, and it looks like my 2018 macbook pro is the same
| design.
| riffic wrote:
| iFixIt doesn't really agree with you about the MacBook Pro
| with the glued-in battery. The MacBook air however was
| ironically easier to fix:
|
| https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/MacBook+Pro+15-Inch+Touch+Bar+2.
| ..
|
| https://www.ifixit.com/Guide/MacBook+Air+13-Inch+Early+2017+.
| ..
| NotPractical wrote:
| It's extremely difficult (and risky) to replace the battery
| in any 2016+ MacBook Pro. In fact, it's so difficult, even
| Apple won't do it, so when you send a MBP in for a "battery
| replacement", they replace the entire top case instead of
| just the battery [1].
|
| The Air models have different designs. As the other commenter
| pointed out, you're probably referring to the early 2017 Air,
| for which battery replacement is a breeze. The 2018+ Air has
| adhesive pull strips, making replacement relatively easy: htt
| ps://www.ifixit.com/Guide/MacBook+Air+13%E2%80%9D+Retina+...
|
| If Apple hasn't switched to adhesive pull strips for these
| models, it's very disingenuous to advertise that they were
| "Designed with the earth in mind" like this website says. The
| battery is the only "consumable" component in the laptop, so
| it's completely unacceptable for it not to be designed for
| replacement.
|
| [1]
|
| https://www.macrumors.com/2018/11/07/2018-macbook-air-
| batter...
|
| > the battery can be individually replaced in the new MacBook
| Air [...] In all other MacBook and MacBook Pro models with a
| Retina display released since 2012, when a customer has
| required a battery replacement, Apple has replaced the entire
| top case enclosure, including the keyboard and trackpad.
|
| This implies that (at least from 2016-2019) they were
| replacing the entire top case assembly in MBP.
| astrange wrote:
| > The battery is the only "consumable" component in the
| laptop, so it's completely unacceptable for it not to be
| designed for replacement.
|
| Unfortunately, SSDs don't last forever either.
| hiram112 wrote:
| Can anyone comment on how well M1 chips work with X86 development
| workflows e.g. Brew, Docker, etc? I know there are still problems
| if you're heavily dependent on Virtualization software like
| VMWare and Virtual Box.
|
| For example, will I be able to just do the same "brew install x"
| for the majority of the *nix apps, libs, services, etc. that I
| use daily?
|
| How bout Docker Desktop and Docker images? For example, if all my
| teammates are using older Intel Macs, PCs, etc. and we deploy and
| develop using X86 images, will I need to be very careful that I
| don't end up pushing Arm based Docker images to our repo? Will I
| need to have modified Docker / Docker-Compose files that
| reference Arm versions of our images so they can run on my
| machine?
|
| This just seems like a pain if you're the only one using Arm,
| while the rest of the team and various environments are on
| X86-64. It took years before most Node, Python, Java, etc.
| incompatibilities between Unix and Windows were ironed out, and I
| still run into issues when, e.g., an inexperienced developer on
| Windows hardcodes some 'backslashed' path in their app or assumes
| Windows line endings instead of standard Unix.
| petercooper wrote:
| I don't plan to go back to MagSafe. I have multiport USB-C
| chargers all round my house and don't really want to buy lots of
| cables or proprietary chargers to add to the mix. I'm sticking
| with USB-C even if it's slower. SD cards I don't use. And HDMI I
| rarely use so dongles are fine, but it's nice to have I guess!
| spuz wrote:
| If I chose to buy the 14" model which comes with a 96W USB-C
| power adapter, does anyone who has experience of Apple products
| know if I could still use my existing 65W usb charger to power
| or charge the MacBook?
|
| My Dell XPS 15 does allow me to charge it with a 65W USB-C
| charger which is nice when I don't want to lug around the beefy
| 130W power adapter but I do have to be careful not to stress
| the CPU too much or it will start draining the battery. I
| wonder whether MacBooks have a similar "graceful fallback".
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| The new Macbook Pros support charging through the USB-C ports
| or the MagSafe port.
|
| You should be fine using the USB-C ports with your adapter.
|
| It's as of yet unclear how well the MagSafe cable would work
| with your adapter.
| krrrh wrote:
| My 2016 MacBook Pro came with an 87W charger and I always run
| it off a monitor that supplies 60W over thunderbolt and it
| never drains. I used to mostly run it off a 45W charger and
| would only see it slowly drain if I was really pushing it
| with compiles.
| spuz wrote:
| Thanks, that's just what I wanted to know.
| skohan wrote:
| Agree on the chargers. SD card is great if you do anything wit
| Raspberry Pi's and photos.
| dmt0 wrote:
| Or buy an adapter like this https://www.amazon.ca/BASEQI-
| aluminum-microSD-Adapter-MacBoo... and have yourself some
| extra storage expansion. Might be slow, but good for things
| you access rarely.
| thallium205 wrote:
| They said you can still charge it via USB-C as well as the
| magsafe. Your choice.
| manmal wrote:
| The other end of the new MagSafe cable is a USB-C plug, so that
| should be fine.
| phkahler wrote:
| I don't have any USB-C but I've got some MagSafe. Unfortunately
| this is MagSafe3 so I assume that means buying new chargers. I
| like the SD and HDMI, but IMHO they are still missing
| "standard" USB ports which are used by most flash storage
| devices. It's not even about the cost of buying new devices for
| me, it's about someone handing me an SD or a thumb drive with
| some data on it and being able to just use it. Apple is very
| very poor when it comes to that.
| Tsiklon wrote:
| Interestingly Apple now sell Magsafe3 -> USB-C Cables.
| yellowapple wrote:
| In a similar boat re: chargers. It's fantastic being able to
| grab any ol' USB-C charger (of sufficient power) and charge
| just about any modern laptop short of maybe the beefier gaming
| laptops / portable workstations (I haven't _tried_ charging my
| Dell G5 via USB-C, for example, so maybe it 'd work, but I
| ain't betting on it).
| beltsazar wrote:
| Yeah I don't even use any USB-C charger to power my MBP. My
| USB-C monitor delivers 90W to the MBP.
| DeathArrow wrote:
| I am not interested in Apple's ecosystem. While I stay with X86 I
| wonder if and when AMD and Intel will catch up. Or if another ARM
| chip maker will release a chip as good but without tying it to a
| proprietary system.
| yurishimo wrote:
| At this point, I think AMD and Intel are _at least_ 5 years
| away from being competitive if they shifted all R&D to ARM and
| started funneling insane amounts of money into it. Without that
| shift in focus though, it could be a decade? More?
|
| Apple has funneled all of their success from mobile straight to
| the desktop, and they are actively watching any competition for
| a sign of increased development. This is basically still the
| first generation of Apple Silicon arguably and it's absolutely
| bonkers. Let's say Intel tries to shift to ARM for some new
| product. Apple's first response is going to include releasing
| some crazy spec boost that makes Intel's attempt look like a
| joke, with the likely intention to discourage them from trying
| again.
|
| I think it's more likely at this point, that we see Apple
| assume a sort of leader role similar to what Intel has been
| losing since the release of Ryzen. Apple will hold the lead so
| long that they get complacent until someone can slowly sneak in
| a new product that leap frogs their technology.
|
| Intel held that top spot for how long though? Over a decade?
| Almost 2? I can easily see Apple taking a similar foothold if
| they can bring the price down over time similar to older iPhone
| models. Imagine buying a "new" $400 laptop in a few years with
| a M1 Pro/Max chip inside because they're just old tech at that
| point. Apple already does this sort of chip recycling with
| products like the Homepod and AppleTV. Both use the SoC from
| older iPhones that cost 5x as much when they launched.
|
| The fight between Intel and AMD was already interesting enough,
| but adding in Apple is going to make the next decade a roller
| coaster! Best of all, it's a win/win for consumers as these
| companies try and out compete each other.
|
| I'm excited for it!
| bkolobara wrote:
| I don't think that the red and blue teams are that much
| behind. A high end AMD mobile processor like the Ryzen 7
| 5800HS easily beats the current M1 in most CPU bound
| multithreaded workloads, like compile times. Even if the
| numbers are true and the M1 MAX is 75% faster than the
| current M1 it will just be slightly faster than the AMD chip
| produced on an inferior process node. And the 5800HS you can
| get in laptops that cost like $800.
|
| The next generation of Intel CPUs Alder Lake, that also has a
| split between performance and efficiency cores, showed some
| promising numbers in current leaks and should be competitive
| with the M1 Max in CPU bound workloads. Where Apple shines
| are all this proprietary additions to the CPU that are
| massively going to benefit content creators (video & audio),
| but I as a developer don't think I can profit much from it
| and prefer to stick to open standards and technologies.
|
| I'm also super excited and can't wait to see what the next
| years bring us. As you said it, we are going to be the
| biggest winners here.
| sergioisidoro wrote:
| A fair warning to developers: You're getting into an adventure
| with M1.
|
| From docker images not built for M1 with segmentation faults on
| qemu (eg. Liquibase for spring developers), to _significant_
| troubles trying to make React native apps build with the M1 and
| XCode.
|
| Don't get me wrong, I have a Macbook air M1 and I love it, but it
| hasn't been a love without pain.
|
| Also, the magsafe feels like it comes too late. Almost like a
| political feature in response to the EU measure of enforcing a
| single charging cable.
| harshitaneja wrote:
| React native issue is resolved in the 0.66[1] finally. It was
| walking on egg shells dealing with a weird combination of
| rosetta and arm configs. I have not faced docker issues except
| in the first few months but maybe that's just our workflow
| where we already had aws graviton instances.
|
| [1]
| https://reactnative.dev/blog/2021/10/01/version-066#better-s...
| adam_arthur wrote:
| Is there any reason Apple couldn't implement a magsafe type
| connector but using USB-C form factor? By that I mean, you
| could use any USB-C compatible cable in the same port (just
| without the magnetics)
|
| It seems like they could have gotten the best of both worlds
| that way.
|
| Am I taking crazy pills?
| jagger27 wrote:
| USB-C is already a friction fit. Somehow adding magnets to it
| would just make it attach more strongly, which isn't the
| point of MagSafe. I feel like making a slightly loose USB-C
| cable _but with magnets_ would be a bad user experience, and
| probably against the USB spec.
|
| I don't really get what you're suggesting.
| adam_arthur wrote:
| Surely an alcove could be created such that the usb c
| connector creates a firm fit once the magnets latch on.
|
| e.g. magnets pull retractable flaps open such that the
| magsafe USB-C can be retracted easily. When using regular
| USB-C the flaps are locked in place, so works in that case
| too.
|
| I'm sure it's possible, but perhaps not worth the effort.
| Not one of humanity's most difficult problems.
| jagger27 wrote:
| "Retractable flaps" sounds like it's begging for a -gate
| suffix. Flapgate just rolls off the tongue. Apple doesn't
| like moving parts, for obvious reasons.
|
| I think Apple did exactly the right thing here. If I have
| my MacBook hooked up to my desk monitor, I'll just use a
| single USB-C cable for power, video, mouse, and keyboard
| like I do today. That kind of desk setup isn't a tripping
| hazard.
|
| If I take my laptop to a coffee shop and need to charge
| it, I'll use MagSafe because it's more likely to be
| tripped over or yanked in that situation. What's key is
| that I only needed power at the coffee shop. What else
| would be going over the cable in that kind of setting?
| nomel wrote:
| You can find these on amazon, for example:
|
| https://www.amazon.com/Ansbell-Magnetic-Adapter-Transfer-
| Com...
| b15h0p wrote:
| Do you have more information about that Liquibase issue?
| buzzert wrote:
| What's the problem with building React Native apps?
| urthor wrote:
| It's very difficult to justify the purchase because ultimately
| I've switched to thin client for serious development long ago.
|
| I guess I'll use the unrivaled performance per watt to drive
| Jetbrains.
| PedroBatista wrote:
| > I guess I'll use the unrivaled performance per watt to
| drive Jetbrains.
|
| So you're advocating for nuclear power?
| zmmmmm wrote:
| I'm curious about the docker image situation.
|
| I had thought that the M1 could natively emulate x86
| instructions. So why then can you not run the native x86 docker
| images? Is it a virtualisation issue?
| bronson wrote:
| It does, which is slow, then the disk emulation makes it
| slower. Yes you can do it, but it's not much fun.
|
| Improvements are on the way.
| johndoe0815 wrote:
| The M1 does not emulate x86 instructions (in hardware).
| Emulation is provided by Rosetta 2, a combined ahead-of-time
| and just-in-time emulation that can run x86-64 macOS binaries
| on Aarch64. However, there is still some hardware support for
| Rosetta 2 in the M1, e.g. to support strong memory ordering.
|
| More details on Rosetta 2 internals can be found at
| https://ffri.github.io/ProjectChampollion/
| metabagel wrote:
| Apparently, it does work in most cases, but aarch64 images
| have better performance and are more stable.
|
| https://docs.docker.com/desktop/mac/apple-silicon/
| syspec wrote:
| You can still charge using USB-C
| sergioisidoro wrote:
| Yes, that is true. And I hope that would be the default (at
| least in Europe).
|
| But the timing of this launch (when all new machines were
| already using USB-C), with the decision of the European
| commission is quite a coincidence. Which makes the feature
| feel a bit out of place, or just a good upselling opportunity
| for Apple.
| vinay427 wrote:
| Honestly, I'm not sure I see this. They made the charging
| cable USB C at one end, shipping a standard USB C PD
| adapter and even mentioning that a USB C to C cable can be
| used with the same adapter to charge the same laptop. I
| don't think they could have done much more without
| compromising MagSafe, and this allows for the same
| portability of cables and adapters that people like about
| USB C PD.
| interestica wrote:
| Which has me wondering. The MagSafe brick is 140w and current
| USBC can only do 20vX5a (100w). New USBC version can do 240w
| apparently - but will the USBC on these laptops be able to
| pull 140w+ via the USBC?
|
| edit: more digging says that the MagSafe will be using USBC
| PD 3.1 spec - which presumably means 240w potential or at
| least as much the brick. I only wonder because I have stupid
| issues like the Microsoft Surface Book2 that tries to pull
| more power than the provide power brick can handle!
|
| https://usb.org/sites/default/files/2021-05/USB%20PG%20USB%2.
| ..
|
| edit 2: okay, while the Block will be PD3.1, the Thunderbolt
| 4 ports (USBC) only follow PD2.1, so they will likely be
| limited to 100w.
|
| https://www.theverge.com/2021/10/19/22734233/apple-140w-macb.
| ..
| wanderinghogan wrote:
| These laptops are very impressive, but until there is
| clarification on their CSAM scanning plans/their future
| intentions with that, it's going to make me wait. The thought of
| my OS being integrated with ANY government database with only the
| assurances of 'trust us, we will say no' still repels me.
| wyager wrote:
| It sucks that such brilliant hardware is effectively locked to
| such mediocre software and corporate policy.
| plg wrote:
| What is the closest thing to these that runs GNU/Linux?
| [deleted]
| ubermonkey wrote:
| These are the best Mac laptops in YEARS. I'm only 2 years into a
| usually-3-to-5-year replacement cycle, and I'm VERY tempted,
| especially with the trade-in offer on my 2019 model.
|
| I guess it was Jony Ive that was pushing the "thinness above
| everything else" mantra that gave us embarrassing keyboards and
| no ports other than USB-C. I'm very glad he's gone and that's
| over.
| tumblewit wrote:
| So basically apple just went back to the things they tried to fix
| that weren't broken and then messed up the aesthetics by making
| it a design from 2010 and added a notch. Why do they do this.
| Does the design team not understand how to design macbook pros ?
| planb wrote:
| If it disturbs you, there will sure be a software that moves
| the menu bar below and makes the top black. This is a Mac and
| not an iOS device after all. I'll take the extra pixels.
| LeoPanthera wrote:
| So, they were wrong when they removed those things, and they
| were wrong again when they put them back?
| tumblewit wrote:
| No i meant they were right to just put back what wasnt
| broken. I guess I have worded it wrong. I am just complaining
| about the design team putting the notch.
| darklion wrote:
| > So basically apple just went back to the things they tried to
| fix that weren't broken and then messed up the aesthetics by
| making it a design from 2010 and added a notch.
|
| "Apple corrected nearly everything about their laptop design
| that people complain about, used a design this is considered by
| some to be the best MBP design ever [1], and put a small
| intrusion on the screen in the least-used-possible spot in
| order to provide more overall screen real estate. Why does
| Apple hate us?"
|
| [1] https://marco.org/2017/11/14/best-laptop-ever
| theshrike79 wrote:
| Wait, what notch? Do the processors have notches now?
| hu3 wrote:
| https://twitter.com/MichaelBabich/status/1450154997858115587
| dreamer7 wrote:
| I don't really like the chassis design. It looks dated. But the
| rest of the Macbook Pro sounds really exciting!
|
| For those who missed the keynote, here are some laugh-inducing
| moments - "Our Pro users love to use physical function keys. So
| we have added them"
|
| "Our Pro users like to connect a lot of devices without using a
| lot of dongles"
| TheOtherHobbes wrote:
| I'd guess that's about thermals. Thin looks good but runs hot.
|
| Apple have de-Ived and gone for practicality over fashion-
| accessory style. I'm not convinced that's a bad move.
| dreamer7 wrote:
| I have nothing against being thick. The 2012 model was
| thicker but I like its design
| cassianoleal wrote:
| It's not really thick though. In fact, the 14" is 1mm
| thinner than the M1 13" Pro.
| concinds wrote:
| It looks like a PowerBook to me, and yeah, it looks a little
| dated, and the curves look strange. But Apple being willing to
| release a laptop that "looks strange" is to me a signal that
| they want to value function over form on Pro laptops, and that
| they care more about cooling and power than they do about
| thinness and "elegance". It's a great step in the right
| direction. They can make the MacBook Air as pretty and
| "elegant" as they want but anyone with a boiling-hot 16" MBP
| will sure tell you how elegant it is to have a laptop burn
| their lap and throttle all the time.
|
| It was time Apple valued pro users more than they valued their
| laptops looking good in hero pictures.
| Ancalagon wrote:
| I had the same thought. It looks like the 2011-2012 era chasis.
| Kind of funny but I imagine it's necessary for the added ports.
| Probably couldn't work with the slimmer form factor because of
| those, and scaling it would make it too big. Guess we can't
| have our cake and eat it too.
| dmart wrote:
| I think the move back to an older design language is
| purposeful, to remind people of the "good old days" before the
| 2016 design.
| systemvoltage wrote:
| I suggest thinking about design as not belonging to a 'date' or
| an era, but whether it solves a given problem.
|
| We've grown up in the era of designers that make us think that
| design is aesthetic and like fashion, it evolves. I think of it
| like an engineer - its job is to solve a problem.
| hardwaregeek wrote:
| Yeah it's surprisingly ugly. Maybe it'll grow on me but I can't
| help but think this is the first post-Ive laptop
| asdff wrote:
| How often are you looking at the bottom of you laptop?
| hardwaregeek wrote:
| Not often but an aspect I respect about Apple is how they
| get the details right even when you don't see them. A
| profile of Ive mentions how they've thought about stuff
| like the color of the internal chips:
|
| > One afternoon, Ive and Bart Andre removed the bottom
| panel of a MacBook laptop, revealing black and silver
| components arranged, with unnecessary orderliness, on a
| matte black circuit board. Ive looked down happily. "This
| is such an extraordinarily beautiful thing," he said. Andre
| noted that, in a competitor's computer, the board would be
| green. He sounded embarrassed on behalf of that other
| machine. On the same table was a plastic model of an
| existing Apple headphone--an EarPod--the size of a golf
| driver.
|
| Having ugly feet on a laptop does betray a slight change in
| values. And yes, it's minor but it's like the extraneous
| requests on a rock star's rider. If they're not getting
| this right, what else are they missing?
| sireat wrote:
| Really hard to tell if the $800 upgrade from 16GB RAM to 32GB RAM
| is worth it since you also get a mysterious 16GPU to 32GPU
| upgrade..
|
| 10-Core CPU 16-Core GPU 16GB Unified Memory 1TB SSD Storage1
| 16-core Neural Engine 16-inch Liquid Retina XDR display Three
| Thunderbolt 4 ports, HDMI port, SDXC card slot, MagSafe 3 port
| Magic Keyboard with Touch ID Force Touch trackpad 140W USB-C
| Power Adapter $2,699.00
|
| 10-Core CPU 32-Core GPU 32GB Unified Memory 1TB SSD Storage1
| 16-core Neural Engine 16-inch Liquid Retina XDR display Three
| Thunderbolt 4 ports, HDMI port, SDXC card slot, MagSafe 3 port
| Magic Keyboard with Touch ID Force Touch trackpad 140W USB-C
| Power Adapter $3,499.00
| NathanielK wrote:
| The M1 Max also has twice the memory channels to feed that GPU.
| Instead of a 256b wide "quad channel" memory controller, it has
| a 512b wide "octa channel" memory controller. That's an immense
| amount of bandwidth with LPDDR5.
|
| There's an in between 24-Core GPU for less money, but it's
| still quite the jump.
| hmate9 wrote:
| The greatest improvement: no touchbar.
| dang wrote:
| Please don't post duplicate comments to HN. It makes merging
| threads a pain.
| swozey wrote:
| The 16" has a 140w charger, the 14" has a 97w charger. Did the
| TSA stop limiting chargers to 97-100w? I priced both w/32core
| 32gb 512ssd and the 16" is only $299 more than the 14" .. I want
| the 14" though, I'd like that 140w charger..
|
| edit: I confused this with the battery maximums, nevermind!
| Thanks for letting me know!
| Ayesh wrote:
| Flight limit is on the battery, limiting it to 100 Wh. I have a
| laptop with a 230W power brick and never had any problems.
| RL_Quine wrote:
| The limit is on battery capacity at 100Wh, not charger wattage.
| tiffanyh wrote:
| TSA regulates the SIZE of the battery, not the charging
| mechanism.
|
| https://www.tsa.gov/travel/security-screening/whatcanibring/...
| gradys wrote:
| I would be extremely surprised if the TSA started checking the
| wattage on power supplies. I've never even done the separate
| liquids thing.
| swozey wrote:
| That's a good point. I've never had a bigger charger than the
| 97w so I've never had to think twice about it. I wonder if
| this will be obviously 140w, when I see bricks like that on
| gaming laptops they're usually meant to sit on the floor not
| plug into the wall directly.
| awill wrote:
| All laptop manufacturers have relied on Intel for years. That was
| fine when Intel was competitive. But now all those manufacturers
| are massively behind. They can either wait for Intel to catch up
| (unlikely), switch to AMD, which is better, but still behind, or
| they can try to move to ARM. Though that's really hard since
| they're relying on Windows.
|
| Really this is a massive miss from Microsoft and their partners
| that many saw coming years ago. It's obvious that this is
| precisely why Apple likes to bring tech in-house. To avoid
| depending on something that isn't competitive.
| gnicholas wrote:
| I was excited to replace my 2017 MBP with a new model that has a
| decent keyboard and old-school features like multiple kinds of
| ports and an SD card slot.
|
| With a starting price of $2000, I don't know that I'm going to
| pull the trigger right now. My guess is this is a sign of a
| supply chain crunch, and they are maximizing profit instead of
| revenue, which makes sense.
|
| Still disappointing that getting these basic-seeming features (I
| don't care about the performance) costs $600 more than my last
| MBP. The base Pro shouldn't jump in price by 50%.
| memco wrote:
| For me the price of RAM and SSD were the downers. I was hoping
| that after over 7 years I'd be able to buy a new computer with
| more RAM and drive space without paying that much more, but to
| upgrade I'd need to spend $600. The RAM is less important for
| me, but the fact that drive space hasn't grown much is a bummer
| since data accumulates every day and the kinds of data only
| seem to be growing in size.
| turtlebits wrote:
| They've made 16GB and a 512GB SSD the base spec.
|
| Maybe they're tired of the "only 8 GB ram" comments that always
| get posted. /s
| gnicholas wrote:
| Yeah they're basically forcing everyone to purchase a non-
| base amount of storage (and RAM, to a lesser extent) and
| charging them for the pleasure.
| vimy wrote:
| The 13" is the base Pro.
| tw04 wrote:
| It's refreshing to see them actually listening to customer
| feedback, I don't think this ever would've happened in a Jobs/Ive
| world. Would they have released "pro" focused M1 chips/laptops?
| Absolutely. Would they have gone back on the (IMO) trainwreck
| that was touchbar and removing everything but 2x USB-C ports? No
| way.
|
| ALSO, I'm actually kind of shocked they're supporting charging by
| both USB-C and magsafe. That is 100% the right thing to do and
| 100% the opposite of what Apple would normally do (namely lock
| you in to having to buy magsafe-3 and magsafe-3 only to charge
| the laptop).
| krrrh wrote:
| Obligatory reminder that Apple killed the miniDIN-8 and ADB
| ports on the original iMac before almost anyone had ever seen a
| USB cable in real life.
|
| They sold the notion of charging off your monitor cable pretty
| hard, there's no way they could go back on that.
| leokennis wrote:
| And to be honest, I use my laptop for home and office work.
| It's very nice to be able to have to just (un)plug one cable
| and have everything (charging, 4K100 video, keyboard, mouse,
| webcam) working.
|
| If Apple would have killed charging via USB-C PD, it'd have
| been a big regression for me.
| More-nitors wrote:
| when will they open up the laptop specs/pricing?
| [deleted]
| BitAstronaut wrote:
| https://www.apple.com/shop/buy-mac/macbook-pro/16-inch
| peterkelly wrote:
| Details available already on their online store, though it's
| unresponsive at the moment as everyone is trying to check it at
| once.
| pbalau wrote:
| They already did. On the UK store:
|
| 14"
|
| 1.8-Core CPU, 14-Core GPU, 16GB Unified Memory, 512GB SSD
| Storage - PS1,899.00
|
| 2. 10-Core CPU, 16-Core GPU, 16GB Unified Memory, 1TB SSD
| Storage - PS2,399.00
| e-clinton wrote:
| Apple is offering $1400 for my 16" 2019 Machine. Really tempted
| to take it and put an order in.
| sicromoft wrote:
| The maxed out 16-inch model comes in at a cool $6099.
| Zenbit_UX wrote:
| Yup, but no one needs 8TB of internal SSD space. ~$4000 maxed
| out with 1TB.
| [deleted]
| dandotway wrote:
| The worst thing about the NotchBook - this union of iPhone notch
| with MacBook - is that all the other laptop manufacturers have a
| way of copying Apple's decisions: non-replaceable batteries,
| soldered in RAM and SSD, fewer ports, near-zero key travel for
| keyboards, and now a notch. The Dell XPS line has had ultra-thin
| bezels for ages with no notch but now future XPSes might have a
| notch just because some Dell suits thought, "Look at how many of
| these NotchBooks Apple is selling. Consumers must _want_ the
| notch. " But correlations of sales are not causations of sales.
| nharada wrote:
| Happy to see they added Magsafe but ALSO still support charging
| via the USB3 ports.
| troupe wrote:
| This was my biggest concern. Having the option to use MagSafe
| is much better than always being required to carry around yet
| another charger.
| buu700 wrote:
| Same here. I want to use MagSafe at home and the office, not
| carry around a bulky bespoke charger just for one device
| while traveling.
| james33 wrote:
| From what I can tell, the charging brick is the same either
| way. The new MagSafe is just a different USB-C cable that
| has the MagSafe connector on the end.
| buu700 wrote:
| Ah, awesome, that was actually something I was hoping
| they would do (and probably suggested once or twice in
| some HN threads). If I can just plug the MagSafe cable
| into any old USB brick, that's way more convenient.
| purple_ferret wrote:
| EDIT: Never mind
| deergomoo wrote:
| It's listed as "in the box" on the product page.
| minimaxir wrote:
| The MagSafe Cable + relevant USB-C Adapter is present in the
| box, per the site.
| terramex wrote:
| It is shipped with USB-C -> Magsafe cable in every
| configuration I see.
| dkulchenko wrote:
| MagSafe cable does indeed ship standard - see
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/specs/.
| [deleted]
| fiznool wrote:
| This was my biggest concern too, that my PS300 dock would be
| rendered instantly obsolete. It's nice that I could still plug
| these new pros into a dock with a single usb-c cable and have
| charging, multiple displays and usb connectivity all with one
| cable.
| dntrkv wrote:
| Controversial opinion, but I think adding Magsafe back (along
| with the other ports) was a step backward for the industry.
|
| Apple pushed the whole industry to standardize on one connector
| for everything. If anyone really needed those other ports, a
| small $30 portable hub would add them all back.
|
| Magsafe 3 is just another connector that will add more e-waste
| and proprietary cables to the mix. It's nice that they kept the
| USB-C charging, but now non-2021+ Macbook users can't reuse the
| charging cables.
| [deleted]
| wetpaws wrote:
| You can still use your old type-c cable, I don't see any
| issues with it.
| [deleted]
| ksec wrote:
| >Apple pushed the whole industry to standardize on one
| connector for everything.
|
| Because people actually want one _cable_ for everything.
|
| USB-C only guarantee 60W charging. Instead of telling user to
| use USB-C PD 2.1 Cable with Thunderbolt 4 support and this
| logo with x. Apple now tells its user if you want it to work
| at maximum speed and charging please use Magsafe.
| slantyyz wrote:
| > Because people actually want one cable for everything.
|
| The problem is that the "industry" gave us one _port_ for
| everything while giving us a confusing mess of mixed
| capability cables that use that port.
| rx_tx wrote:
| > USB-C only guarantee 60W charging.
|
| The original PD 1.0 spec went up to 100W (20V/5A). Newest
| PD spec (3.1) can do up to 240W. And I think apple's
| magsafe cable terminates in a male usb type C, so it still
| uses PD internally at least.
| bloggie wrote:
| More than 3A on PD requires tagged cables, I'm not even
| sure I have any 5A capable cables here. I do have tagged
| cables as tagging is required for USB3 over USBC which is
| negotiated with the aid of PD. Magsafe does make it
| rather somewhat simpler for the end user and I never
| really liked that the main cable for a portable could be
| so easily damaged, I liked magsafe and the magnetic
| connector on the Surface laptops quite a bit.
| ksec wrote:
| Precisely. Not all USB-C Cable are PD cable. Telling the
| story again.
|
| I was trying to help a lawyer out and trying to explain
| why the $5.00 USB-C cable he'd bought from Amazon wasn't
| delivering 4K video to his expensive monitor AND powering
| his laptop too.
|
| Me: OK: so its a USB-C cable, but its not a high data
| rate USB-C cable.
|
| Him: But, its a USB-C Cable.
|
| Me: but, no, not all USB-C cables are high speed cables.
| And some of them can't do high speed and power delivery
|
| Him: but... its a USB-C cable: it plugs into the port.
|
| Me: Um... just because it plugs in, doesn't mean its
| going to work. You can have USB-C cables that are
| actually slower than the old USB ports.
|
| Him: but.... shouldn't it just work?
|
| And so on. For... 15? more minutes? maybe 30? I finally
| got him to buy a "proper" belkin USB-C cable . Which was
| bought from a company that should be anonymous, but lets
| just say that a "refurbished" cable was shipped, which,
| surprise, surprise ,didn't work, for ANYTHING. This
| basically sums up everything that is wrong with Tech
| thinking vs User Thinking.
| bengale wrote:
| It's tricky because the good part of that port is you can
| plug anything into it, thunderbolt, usb, etc. But the bad
| part of that port is that you can plug anything into it
| and its hard to tell why it might not be working as
| expected.
| adam_arthur wrote:
| Agreed. I'm a fan of function over form, but Apple
| standardizing on a single port pushed a lot of accessories
| and other manufacturers towards USB-C. I use my (USB-C) mac
| charger for my phone all the time, simply because it's there
| and the cable is longer.
|
| I didn't really find Magsafe that useful anyway, as I'm
| pretty much always hooked up to a monitor via USB-C (which
| charges as well).
|
| I guess it's nice for those that miss it, but we were
| starting to finally get to a world with a one-size-fits-all
| cable. Remember back in the day when old-style cell
| phones/laptops all had proprietary chargers?
|
| But it seems the momentum for USB-C is there, so hopefully
| consolidation continues. Anyway, the EU and maybe others seem
| to be moving towards legislation to consolidate I/O types
| anyway.
|
| I'm guessing the HDMI is partially due to bandwidth
| limitations of USB-C, though I forget the specifics.
| plandis wrote:
| > I didn't really find Magsafe that useful anyway, as I'm
| pretty much always hooked up to a monitor via USB-C (which
| charges as well).
|
| I'm the complete opposite. I have to buy USB-C cables
| solely for MacBook Pro since nothing else I have uses it. I
| have plenty of HDMI and DP cables but literally only use
| USB-C on my laptop because I was forced to. Reverting back
| is a welcome change. USB-C only works as the only standard
| if you're only buying relatively new tech products
| otherwise its the XKCD meme about an 11th standard.
|
| My tv doesn't have usbc, my monitors don't have usbc, my
| headphones and microphone still use a jack, my phone is no
| usbc, etc...
| adam_arthur wrote:
| Yeah, but mac standardization was pushing all of those
| devices towards USB-C. I'm sure we'll get there
| eventually anyway, but it's a nice push towards
| standardization.
|
| It does create more friction in the short term though.
|
| I don't see any reason we shouldn't move towards a single
| standard for all I/O, whether it's USB-C or otherwise.
| Maybe there are technical limitations to supporting so
| many things in one spec, I'm not that deep into the
| weeds.
|
| Otherwise it's just incredibly wasteful to have all these
| different connectors, and it's anti-consumer. I mean I
| used to have a bag with 100 different cord types I'd have
| to rummage through every once in awhile to find what I
| needed. That shouldn't have to be a thing.
|
| Fortunately we're down to like 4-5 standards now...
| Yaina wrote:
| I would need to look it up and and of course it depends on
| the version, but afaik HDMI usually lags behind DisplayPort
| in terms of bandwidth and features.
|
| The SD-Card slot I can understand; for Magsafe I feels the
| same as you that I didn't really care for it, but HDMI...
| they might as well could have put a VGA port on there haha
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| It is function over form though. The number of times I
| thought I plugged in the charger and didn't do it properly
| and the number of times I tripped on the cable when working
| on the couch alone makes it worth it. The simple indicator
| light on the magsafe makes it so much easier to see and
| confirm that it's charging or it's fully charged.
| krrrh wrote:
| It almost never gets commented on but you can sneeze on
| the usb-C ports on the MacBook Pro and they will unseat
| enough to stop charging. It's a shame the standard didn't
| get notches like lightning cable which can easily hold
| the weight of a dangling iPhone pro max.
| hellbannedguy wrote:
| I'm pretty much done with buying any new Apple product, but
| the magsafe was brilliant years ago, and now.
|
| Plus--Apple senior citizens loved it, and probally saved
| many laptops from hitting the floor.
|
| (I will buy Apple used computers because their isn't much
| competition. There's a big part of me that would love a
| truly Hackers/Tinkerers computer. Jobs knew what the masses
| would buy. Wos knew what the tinkerers/inventors wanted.
| Wos wanted more ports, and so do I. Could anyone imagine a
| computer you could plug into your car, and it would
| delightful tell you what's wrong? (propriety issues aside)
| Or, a dvom. Or, having having a $50 accessory that would
| turn your computer into a oscilloscope. And yes--I know the
| market would be small now, but who knows what the future
| would bring. Or, adding a ham radio. Or, wifi chip that
| security professionals could use. And yes--I know their are
| third parties that make some I just mentioned, but we all
| know they usually come with hassels on Apple. This mythical
| computer would be only for the few true tinkerers out
| there. That is at first. It would be big bulky, but meant
| for repairability, and function would be it's only purpose,
| along with a reasonable price. I would happily pay $3000
| for such a devise. Let Wos go crazy on a computer he really
| wanted, or wanted when he was in his 20's.)
| sumedh wrote:
| > I didn't really find Magsafe that useful anyway
|
| Its like insurance, you dont need to for most part but then
| when luck is not on your side that is when you need it the
| most.
| dymk wrote:
| The e-waste from chargers is a non-issue. Our oceans aren't
| filling up with dongles, nor are our landfills.
| Gigachad wrote:
| Also the whole point of magsafe was to save laptops from
| smashing when someone trips on the cable. They likely
| reduce ewaste in total.
| msie wrote:
| Reusing charging cables is only a big deal in online
| arguments.
| hbOY5ENiZloUfnZ wrote:
| At least it is a USB-C terminated on the charger end. That
| means you can reuse existing USB-PD chargers while only
| needing to replace the cable.
| wslack wrote:
| > Controversial opinion, but I think adding Magsafe back
| (along with the other ports) was a step backward for the
| industry.
|
| It's too useful not to add back. Every laptop should have
| something like this; it prevents accidents and damage.
| 8ytecoder wrote:
| And that tiny little light is so very useful when you're
| plugging it in just to charge it...
| wmeredith wrote:
| I agree with this. The mag connection should have been at the
| power brick and keep the USB-C on the device.
| jb1991 wrote:
| That doesn't prevent the kind of accidents that mag on
| machine does.
| _the_inflator wrote:
| Finally this dongle hell is over. It was so cringe worthy to
| see all Apple users carrying around a bag of dongles. Reminded
| me of the old LAN party cable fun...
| foldr wrote:
| If they were carrying around a bag full of dongles they'll
| still need most of them, as this just adds an HDMI port.
| [deleted]
| Tempest1981 wrote:
| And SD card, for photographers and 3D printers
| dntrkv wrote:
| Who was carrying around a bag of dongles? Any sane person
| would just get a tiny hub that fits in your pocket and has
| USB-A, HDMI, DP, SD, and whatever else you need.
|
| Which is honestly a much better solution than adding SD and
| HDMI back to the Macbook. I know it's a controversial opinion
| around these parts, but I never understood the dongle-gate
| fiasco. A $30 portable hub will add those parts back to
| anyone that needs them. I sure as hell don't.
| asdff wrote:
| It starts like that, then you have some ports fail on that
| $30 hub then you are buying more junk you wouldn't have
| needed in the first place if apple had more sense.
| Yaina wrote:
| I don't know. I have my MacBook Pro since 2016 along with
| it's HDMI/USB-A Dongle and while the macbook screen
| failed on me (twice!) I still have the same dongle.
|
| But to be honest I don't need it suuuper often. Just for
| my USB-A microphone and the occasional projector
| somewhere. I live in the USB-C future Apple is turning
| away from haha
| wl wrote:
| USB A. Ethernet. Dongles are here to stay.
| jackson1442 wrote:
| I can't remember the last time I've needed USB-A when not
| at my desk at home, except in the weird cases where I left
| my Yubikey 5C on my other laptop and needed to plug in my
| Yubikey A. Generally, when I actually need USB-A, I need a
| _lot_ of it, so hubs/dongles are a necessity regardless.
|
| And if I'm going to use a hub, I might as well get HDMI,
| Ethernet, charging, etc. out of it.
|
| The addition of HDMI has eliminated at least 90% of the
| cases where I've needed to take a dongle somewhere with me.
| benhurmarcel wrote:
| Mouse, external keyboard, headset... They all use USB A
| only.
| asdff wrote:
| I need to use usb-a every day to charge my 2020 iphone
| with the cable that came with it
| jackson1442 wrote:
| The iPhone 12? You must have gotten a bad shipment
| because they're supposed to include a USB-C to lightning
| cable.
| asdff wrote:
| Second gen iPhone SE.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| I bought a USB-C lightning cable for my older iPhone X,
| but went magnetic wireless charging after so hardly ever
| use it.
| asdff wrote:
| I have a wireless charger, but I will opt for the cable
| most of the time since its so much faster.
| seanmcdirmid wrote:
| It's a trade off: wired is faster at charging, wireless
| is faster at setting up the charging session. If you are
| going to bed anyways, wireless wins since you just plop
| the phone down and it is charged when you wake up in the
| morning.
| asdff wrote:
| Even then I take wired charging. It takes all of one
| second to plug in a lightning cable to the phone. I've
| plopped my phone down on my charging pad on the other
| hand, and walked back to find that I had just missed my
| mark, and the phone was sitting there for hours not
| charging at all. Happens pretty often and now I need to
| spend an extra second to confirm that the phone is
| getting charge while on the pad, vs with lightning when
| its obvious and just works.
| [deleted]
| arvinsim wrote:
| Both 14" and 16" can use the highest spec Pro processor. But the
| 14" only needs 96W while the 16" can go up to 140W.
|
| Does that mean that the 14" will be throttled on heavy workloads?
| therein wrote:
| Good question. Also has smaller battery. I initially ordered
| the 14" with M1 Max and 64GB of RAM but then switched to the
| 16" because of the 17hr vs 21hr battery life.
| Factorium wrote:
| I wish we could get a Macbook Air in these screen sizes. I don't
| need the extra power, just the bigger screen.
| neogodless wrote:
| You can order a Macbook Pro 14" with the M1 (not M1 Pro) for
| $2000.
|
| EDIT: My mistake, it's an 8-core M1 Pro with 14-core GPU (so
| neither the 8-core M1 with 8-core GPU, nor the 10-core M1 Pro
| with 16-core GPU) at that price.
| Factorium wrote:
| To be specific, 14" or 16" Macbook Air closer to the $999 of
| the 13".
|
| I guess that would cannibalise sales of the Macbook Pro, but
| the M1 Macbook Air is totally sufficient for regular browsing
| and officework.
| rhodysurf wrote:
| Wait the base price of the Macbook Pro isnt for M1 Pro? That
| is confusing as hell.
|
| EDIT: The base $2000 new Macbook pro does come with a M1 Pro
| on the US apple Store....
| dd444fgdfg wrote:
| I prefer my linux machine, but with hardware this good it feels
| kinda dumb to be on intel/amd...
| prvc wrote:
| The keybed now appears to be of a similar color to the keys. Does
| this indicate that the keyboards are now easily replaceable
| units?
| I_am_tiberius wrote:
| Unfortunately still no bitcoin payment option.
| thehappypm wrote:
| Huge vote of no confidence for the USB-C-only future, and I'm not
| sad about it.
| Wolfenstein98k wrote:
| The best features are backflips.
|
| Says a lot about recent Apple choices - the backflip says the
| most.
| seanhunter wrote:
| Well my desktop PC picked today to decide it just wasn't going to
| boot up any more, making this a pretty straightforward
| decision...
| kfprt wrote:
| Still no removable storage? How are you supposed to get your data
| off if it dies?
| Toutouxc wrote:
| You're kinda supposed to be doing that periodically BEFORE it
| dies.
| randyrand wrote:
| emphasis on periodically? you'll always lose data between now
| and the last daily or hourly backup. Not great.
| kfprt wrote:
| Or I could just remove the SSD and not have that tradeoff.
| kfprt wrote:
| So my options are either a constant network connection or
| always keeping an external drive plugged in assuming I want
| to maintain 0 loss. Great! That's totally easier than just
| being able to remove the SSD.
| easton wrote:
| What do you do if your laptop gets wet or lost? Or if
| someone runs it over? There's not a ton of instances where
| the system won't boot but somehow the SSD has survived.
|
| Besides, the recent storage Apple has used is all encrypted
| with the keys stored in the Secure Enclave. Data cannot be
| recovered if you don't have the board (even on the Mac Pro,
| IIRC).
| kfprt wrote:
| Of the 2 laptop failures I've experienced both of them
| wouldn't boot but the data was recoverable because the
| drive didn't fail. Only in a vanishingly small percent of
| cases is the computer so destroyed that the SSD is also
| destroyed. The secure enclave is just another failing on
| Apple's part. If I'm encrypting my data it should be with
| keys I control. Apple should have a backup plan for
| users. Not doing so is negligent.
| chromatin wrote:
| you should be using the cloud for everything, obviously
| /s
|
| More seriously, I had not considered the secure enclave
| angle, which is worrisome.
| kfprt wrote:
| Furthermore why bother encrypting anything if you then
| upload everything to the non E2EE cloud.
| ghaff wrote:
| Well, there is an SD slot so if you're really concerned
| about being able to back up your work at all times if
| you're not network connected, you can periodically copy to
| that. If your laptop dies, there's no guarantee your SSD
| drive won't be the cause of the failure and/or can fail
| based on the same external event--e.g. spilling something.
| NovaS1X wrote:
| Have backups like you're supposed to? Removable storage or not
| you should have backups of the device.
| dirkg wrote:
| why are the new models fatter, wider and heavier than the old
| ones?
|
| https://support.apple.com/kb/SP809?locale=en_US
| https://www.apple.com/macbook-pro-14-and-16/specs/
|
| shouldn't it be the other way around with the integrated chips,
| thinner screen etc etc?
| mandmandam wrote:
| People, including me, were pleading with them to stop trying to
| make things so thin over giving better batter life, thermals,
| cost effectiveness etc for the past 7 years or so.
|
| I am delighted with this change. If you want light and thin get
| an Air; I want thermals, power, and bang for my buck.
| noahtallen wrote:
| I'm guessing:
|
| 1. Ports need more space
|
| 3. Thermal solution probably needs more space. MBPs have had
| terrible thermal solutions in the past several years. Obviously
| M1X will be more power hungry than M1, and that requires better
| cooling
| emsy wrote:
| I feel like I'm alone with this opinion, but: I can't buy one of
| these, as much as I'd like to. I still have to use windows half
| of the time because of software that's missing on MacOS. So
| either I get to buy and maintain 2 laptops or settle for one and
| I think pragmatic wins over shiny, so I'll get a boring old
| windows machine.
| blunte wrote:
| Too bad Apple shows performance compared to intel cpus. I'd like
| to see it also compared to 8 core M1.
|
| Edit. Correction. The other link directly to the new processors
| does give comparisons to standard M1. It's really impressive! But
| it's also unnecessary unless you're doing some very heavy,
| specialized work. Normal modern full stack development probably
| won't be noticeably faster.
| bla3 wrote:
| For me personally, they hit it out of the park -- except for the
| notch, which seems like a complete showstopper to me at first
| sight. Maybe it's not so bad in practice if games and full-screen
| videos keep that whole strip solid black? But almost all the
| screenshots are of fullscreen apps, so it seems Apple thinks it
| looks a bit ungainly too.
| nohr wrote:
| I imagine most games and videos can be run in 16 by 9 aspect
| ratio and that'll draw black bars above and below thus hiding
| the notch anyway.
| dont__panic wrote:
| I hadn't even thought of gaming, but most games I play tend
| to use the entire screen. Though maybe with a ratio above
| 16:10 that will be different?
|
| Games have never showed awesome support for Apple's weird
| decisions, so I guess I would expect some issues there,
| unfortunately.
| cuddlecake wrote:
| Heh, if push comes to shove, I reckon games will have to
| add support for `safe-area-inset-top`
| quirino wrote:
| From my understanding the screen is 16:10 plus the extra
| space on both sides of the notch.
| buu700 wrote:
| I can live with the notch, but honestly I would pay more for an
| option to remove it along with the camera.
|
| For me, it really depends on how this camera compares with a
| standard Logitech C920. If it's as good or better then I'm fine
| with it, but if it's just a minor upgrade over the terrible
| pre-existing camera then I'm not sure why they would mar an
| otherwise fantastic product.
| rx_tx wrote:
| Apparently the camera in last year's M1 macbook was already a
| huge upgrade compared to previous ones, and the new macbook
| pros have a higher quality 1080p sensor, and both leverage
| some of the special IP blocks on the chip to make the image
| even better, so it should almost certainly do better than the
| C920 (especially around audio capture as well, if you use
| that)
| buu700 wrote:
| Interesting. I can't speak to the Pro, but my M1 MBA camera
| didn't* seem any different from the one in my 2013 MBP. If
| this camera is actually better than the C920, that's pretty
| cool.
|
| Does anyone know how an iPad Pro camera compares? I'm
| guessing that'll be a decent indicator of what the new
| MacBook hardware is like.
|
| *: I use the past tense because the camera lasted about a
| month before it randomly died. Now the camera light is
| always on (or at least it was before I taped over it) and
| the OS no longer recognizes it. (None of which I really
| mind, since I was planning to tape over it either way.)
| reayn wrote:
| The M1 cameras are _not_ a huge upgrade, they are the same
| as the ones macbooks have had for years now; they just now
| make use of the M1 's image processing hardware, and even
| then the improvement is nothing to write home about.
|
| I love my M1 Air but this is one area where it doesn't
| really shine.
|
| If the 1080p camera is anywhere near the one in the new
| iMac, it should be better than anything you need.
| dont__panic wrote:
| Same. I finally broke and bought a nice webcam. I'd rather
| just not have one on the laptop than a notch!
| thatswrong0 wrote:
| The notch gives us smaller bezels / more screen real-estate. It
| _kind of_ makes sense.
| Oddskar wrote:
| _smaller bezels_
|
| Not really, no. The Dell XPS for instance has just as small
| bezels but without a notch.
| satysin wrote:
| Having used many Dell XPS with the webcam in different
| locations they're all _terrible_. If a notch is the
| compromise needed for thinner bezel while retaining good
| webcam quality that is fine with me. You don 't _lose_ any
| screen space after all. It just means the menubar (which is
| a real waste of screen space) gets moved up and your
| "desktop area" is the true rectangular size of the display.
|
| Sure it looks odd but I can see it working very well due to
| macOS's menubar UI design. On Windows it wouldn't work
| nearly as well. Interestingly it would work very well on
| GNOME (with the clock moved to the right hand side) as
| well!
| mrtranscendence wrote:
| The Dell XPS has, hands down, no joking, the absolute most
| dogshit webcam I've ever seen. Maybe they _need_ a notch.
| Gigachad wrote:
| And for the longest time they put it in the bottom left
| corner for a good view up your nose. They also seem to
| mount the mic inside the fan bearings.
| thatswrong0 wrote:
| 720p webcam though, just like the old macbooks. Don't
| really know how thick the screen is though on either
| dont__panic wrote:
| I suppose it does boil down to how much they improved the
| webcam. If it's still crap like the old one, why bother
| with the notch? Just slap a 720p webcam on there in the
| bezel and ditch the notch.
|
| Sidenote: I think Apple could make a killing selling a
| $200 4k webcam. The market doesn't have many good options
| now, and I'm sure many Mac users would buy one.
| [deleted]
| johndoe0815 wrote:
| The original Apple iSight camera (640x480 resolution
| Firewire cam) was really nice for 2003. It retailed for
| US$149.
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISight
| leokennis wrote:
| Honest question, did you ever use an iPhone with a notch?
|
| In my experience, it kinda disappears within minutes. I barely
| notice it's there.
| threatofrain wrote:
| I wonder how this will work with Apple Calendar or Safari in
| full screen (with the new iOS 15 compact tabs). I wonder if
| they are moving to a concept of full screen where the top bar
| is always visible.
| dmart wrote:
| From the marketing images on the website, it looks like
| fullscreen apps will just have a black bar across the top.
| Kind of frustrating! The inaccessibility of the top menu bar
| is the main reason I never use the native full-screen mode on
| macOS. Since the menu bar is now within the extra added space
| on top, I hope we eventually get the option to leave it
| visible.
| threatofrain wrote:
| If for many apps the top part of the screen is just going
| to be opaque black with no content, then that might push me
| towards a kind of full screen where the top menu bar is
| always available.
| danielagos wrote:
| The new version of macOS allows to show the menu bar at all
| times, even if the app is in full-screen:
|
| > Full-screen menu bar. You have the option to display the
| menu bar at all times in full screen so you can easily view
| the app menu and other glanceable information anytime.
|
| Source: last feature in
| https://www.apple.com/macos/monterey/features/
| dmart wrote:
| Oh, nice! Thanks for pointing that out. Seems a little
| strange they didn't use that in the marketing shots to
| show off the extra screen real estate.
| PascLeRasc wrote:
| It'd be interesting to see a design like Safari 14 with the
| address bar to the left of the notch and buttons on the
| right.
| MrRiddle wrote:
| Complete show stopper? A notch?
| yoyohello13 wrote:
| I've got to say these M1 chips are very tempting. I've been a
| Linux guy for a long time now and these make me contemplate the
| switch. I really wish apple had a real competitor in the laptop
| space, but honestly no one seems to come close to apple's
| hardware quality. I'm really hoping to see some M1 style chips
| for non-apple hardware in the near future.
| schaefer wrote:
| intel 12th gen, alder lake, does mix high efficiency and
| performance cores, like the M1 series... but it's certainly not
| a total in-die solution like we see with the M1.
|
| And also, the wait time for alder lake to ship in actual
| laptops is unknown.
| honksillet wrote:
| Ok. Now make it repairable.
| tumblewit wrote:
| I cant believe none of the news websites aren't using the title :
| 'Apple turns its silicon up a notch'
| berberous wrote:
| Amazing update. I still wish the m1 air supported 2 external
| displays though, as I would still prefer the smaller form factor,
| lighter weight, fanless design, and cheaper price, as I don't
| need the pro power. Hopefully the refreshed air will get support
| for 2 external displays sooner rather than later as it is
| otherwise perfect.
| alwillis wrote:
| If you use DisplayPort, you can add as many as six external
| displays on an M1 Air [1].
|
| [1]: https://www.macrumors.com/2020/11/24/m1-macs-able-to-run-
| six...
| username190 wrote:
| DisplayPort != DisplayLink.
|
| DisplayLink hardware isn't known to be super stable - since
| it all runs through USB, things can get slow or laggy, and
| can sometimes be subjected to bandwidth limitations (at the
| port, the controller, etc).
|
| DisplayLink also uses software encoding, I believe -
| theoretically this shouldn't be an issue for the CPUs in this
| machine (they can handle something like that pretty easily),
| but there is a noticeable performance difference versus
| connecting them directly via HDMI or via a TB3 <->
| DisplayPort connector.
|
| You're also reliant on DisplayLink's drivers, which haven't
| always been the best on macOS. I've heard that this was fixed
| more recently, but haven't tested.
| culopatin wrote:
| I wonder what this means for the new M1 pro then. Can I have
| 2 external monitors AND the integrated screen on? I guess
| we'll have to try
| siva7 wrote:
| yes you can
| fnord77 wrote:
| I guess Moore's law is slowing down?
|
| the single-core benchmark for this is about 2x better than the
| score for my 2012 macbook pro. 2x in 10 years doesn't seem that
| great.
| agd wrote:
| For me these devices look incredible. Can anything come even
| close to the performance/energy usage of these? And with a great
| screen, sound, and good webcam?
|
| And as an iPhone user, the notch really isn't a big deal. In fact
| it's a positive because you get more usuable screen space.
|
| Yes they're expensive, but, for something we use every day for
| 8hours+, it seems worth it.
| viburnum wrote:
| All the processor options are really confusing.
| wyuenho wrote:
| Apple has finally put a braided cable in their charger. I hope we
| can say goodbye to 20 years of charger cable breakage.
| lefrenchy wrote:
| I'm so frustrated. I bought the 13inch M1 in July, and was bummed
| it only supports one external display and has only two USB-C
| ports. This makes it pretty frustrating to use at my workstation
| (can't use all my monitors, hard to connect my
| keyboard/mouse/peripherals). Not even 3 months later they release
| this? It feels like such a fucking gut punch, I would have
| returned my M1 had I known that this was coming...
| andyfleming wrote:
| If I recall correctly, I think they were up front about more
| processors/updates coming later. The M1 is still a good
| computer, but that 13in was never going to be the same as the
| fully new gen of MacBook Pros.
| thatswrong0 wrote:
| The October refresh timeframe was posted pretty much everywhere
| on the internet that mentioned an updated M1 Macbook Pro. The
| M1 was released last November. This didn't come out of nowhere.
| shantara wrote:
| Everything they've said about the new MacBook Pros is extremely
| promising, but they had to add a notch to the screen. Just why?
| All for the sake of reducing the top screen border by a couple of
| millimeters.
| jazzyjackson wrote:
| If I were to hazard a guess, it's more of a brand recognition
| thing - now you don't even have to see the apple on the back to
| know someone's using a macbook.
| KarlKemp wrote:
| Top-Center is among the most useless screen real estate. It
| takes just about the same amount of space as the keyboard
| language selector a bit to the right, or any one of the menu
| items to the left. And those two interface never fill up to the
| point where they need that center spot (or I'd be cleaning out
| those mostly annoying gadgets top-left).
| [deleted]
| shantara wrote:
| The vertical screen space they might have freed by adding a
| notch was immediately taken by increasing the top bar height.
| I don't see a purpose for such a trade off.
| pelmeni wrote:
| You still end up with more usable space since now the menu
| bar isn't taking up those pixels.
| moonchrome wrote:
| >Top-Center is among the most useless screen real estate.
|
| Especially on MacOS. 100% like this design - good camera,
| smaller bezels, useless space being cut out.
| java-man wrote:
| More smudges on the camera, since this is where the user
| grabs to open the lid, and the camera seems to be closer to
| the edge.
| serverholic wrote:
| The camera is pretty much in the same place?
| m4rtink wrote:
| Not to mention - how do you cover the camera to maintain
| privacy if its now part of the screen ?
| anyfoo wrote:
| I don't understand. Was your camera cover extra wide or
| why would this be different now?
| m4rtink wrote:
| My Thinpak P1 has a moveable mechanical shutter I can
| move to physically block the camera lense. I don't see
| how you could do that reasonably with a notch design.
|
| Before that on previous laptop models I used a post-it
| note or a piece of paper held in place with a clothes
| pin.
|
| With the notch design you can't do that either without
| blocking parts of the UI!
| runako wrote:
| > With the notch design you can't do that either without
| blocking parts of the UI!
|
| I thought I was following until this part. Why couldn't
| you just put a post-it or whatever over the camera
| itself? There are no pixels where the camera is (although
| I would be surprised if this is not something under
| active research).
| m4rtink wrote:
| Oh, looking more closely the notch is actually quite wide
| - yeah, that might be doable to fit a post it over it.
| Still a lot less maneuvering space for that than on a
| normal laptop.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| I'm sure someone will leap in to correct me if I'm wrong
| here, but I _think_ the LED "camera on" indicator is
| purely hardware on modern MacBook Pros -- you can't
| override it in software -- and I doubt that's changed
| with this one. So I'm not sure how big a deal this would
| actually be in practice.
|
| (I would probably go for a bit of black electrical tape
| if I were really worried about that, though.)
| m4rtink wrote:
| Top centre is where Gnome Shell on my Fedora install shows
| time, notification indicator and application notification
| icons (hexchat, Steam, etc.). Hardly an useless part of the
| screen!
| anyfoo wrote:
| Can you make Gnome Shell do something else, then? Or if you
| don't want the extra pixels, I'm sure you could arrange it
| so that your OS _does not use them_.
| m4rtink wrote:
| Sure, you can move the clock and indicators, but it's the
| default place for them. Also not sure about eq.
| fullscreen applications.
| Jtsummers wrote:
| MBPs are designed for macOS, if other OSes do other things
| with the hardware, that's on them. Why should Apple care
| when probably 99% of their users (if not more) are
| exclusively using macOS on the hardware with other OSes in
| VMs?
| serverholic wrote:
| But it doesn't work on my non-standard OS that wasn't
| designed for the hardware!
| asdff wrote:
| It's a macbook though. You can just write a program that moves
| your screen down a millimeter or however much and live your
| life notch free with peace of mind.
| MengerSponge wrote:
| Try this: Instead of thinking "Boo, they took away part of the
| screen with a notch" think "Yay! They extended the screen a few
| mm on either side of the camera"
|
| If you want to join us in the cult of Mac, learning little
| contortions like that will make you a lot happier.
| Nition wrote:
| I remember naively asking on the Mac forums once, whether
| there was any way to have the laptop lid closed in Mac OS
| without putting the laptop to sleep.
|
| Of course not, I was told. Apple's laptops use a superior
| thermal design, which could damage the laptop if the lid is
| closed while it's left running. Who would want to do that
| anyway? Better to have good cooling.
|
| I didn't even bother to reply and mention the fact that my
| Windows install on the same laptop allowed it without
| complaint.
| robertoandred wrote:
| What? Of course you can run the laptop with the lid closed,
| it's called clamshell mode.
| Nition wrote:
| This was in around 2012, maybe attitudes have changed.
| This isn't my thread, but shows what responses to the
| question were like at the time:
| https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2805582
| robertoandred wrote:
| Mac laptops have supported clamshell since at least 2000.
| wtallis wrote:
| You only have to go a few responses into that thread to
| get an explanation that the action of closing the lid
| will trigger sleep, but an external keyboard and mouse
| will wake it back up, allowing for the machine to be used
| while closed. You may not have originally intended to
| make the distinction between _having_ the lid closed vs.
| the process of closing the lid, but it 's clearly the
| former you were worried about, and that use case has
| always been supported.
| chipotle_coyote wrote:
| For whatever it's worth, I've run my MacBook Pros in
| "clamshell" mode (e.g., lid closed, connected to an
| external monitor and keyboard) all the time -- I did it
| with every work Mac laptop I've had and with my personal
| one back when I was using it as a desktop. I know there's
| lots of "never do this with a MacBook it will overheat!"
| advice out there, but it was just never an issue for me,
| and this was across enough different devices and
| generations that I don't think I was just consistently
| lucky. Are you describing something else, e.g., closing the
| laptop lid _without_ connecting an external display and
| preventing it from going to sleep?
|
| I never had an issue with that when I was using Windows
| work laptops, either, except that I recall both ThinkBooks
| that I had seemed to have about a 50% chance of a full
| kernel panic style crash when I unplugged the external
| display. This was back when ThinkBook was an IBM brand,
| though, and IIRC I was running Windows XP on both.
| Nition wrote:
| This was back around 2012, and it looks like not sleeping
| when the lid is closed is officially an option in the
| power settings now, so it sounds like things have
| changed. Although I don't think overheating was ever a
| real problem in the first place. With my 2012 MacBook Pro
| when the screen is closed, the air from the vents can
| still escape out behind the screen.
| vimy wrote:
| I remember clamshell mode working in 2006. Didn't use it
| much though, was afraid it would fry my Macbook Pro. You
| could boil an egg on the first Intel Macbook Pros.
| beltsazar wrote:
| But it takes the menu bar space, which is already scarce even
| without the notch. Some people may have many app icons and
| "widgets" (e.g. iStat Menus) on the menu bar.
| Ancapistani wrote:
| Why not?
|
| I hated the idea when it came around for the iPhone - but
| actually using one showed me that it just isn't an issue.
| There's a status bar at the top anyhow, and the center of it is
| unused.
|
| On a laptop, I see it as just extra pixels dedicated to the
| OS's status bar.
| eknkc wrote:
| I bet there will be software adding a black line, hiding the
| notch tomorrow so no big deal. Those are additional pixels
| anyway.
| TheGRS wrote:
| They basically showed that in some fullscreen images in the
| demo, so I think that's how it'll be.
| shantara wrote:
| Update:
|
| >macOS Hides the Notch on New MacBook Pro in Full-Screen Mode
|
| https://www.macrumors.com/2021/10/18/macos-hides-notch-on-ne...
|
| I take back what I said about the notch. It is not as bad, as
| it initially seemed to be
| zepto wrote:
| The notch occupies otherwise wasted space in the menu bar - how
| is that not purely positive?
| eecc wrote:
| Well, unless you're only ever using text edit, the menubar is
| there for er, menus? It's going to be interesting to see the
| gymnastics around this
| ascagnel_ wrote:
| There was at least one shot of it -- it'll be a gap in the
| menu, with top-level menus flowing around the notch if
| necessary.
| zepto wrote:
| It's not really clear what your point is. There is plenty
| of room in the menu bar for the camera to be in the middle.
| anonfunction wrote:
| Is there? Photoshop has a bunch of menus, not sure what
| they're planning to do. See this screenshot for example:
|
| https://i.imgur.com/hHEl3cN.png
| [deleted]
| banana_giraffe wrote:
| I did notice Xcode used up all the space before the
| notch:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/Qlxr7t2
|
| And apps that don't have a traditional Mac menu just have
| a black bar hiding the notch:
|
| https://imgur.com/a/McNBTHY
|
| I actually don't know what Mac OS does today when it runs
| out of room for menu items.
| zepto wrote:
| Menus are positioned by the OS, presumably they won't
| collide with the notch. There is no problem.
| throw03172019 wrote:
| It sits where the menu bar is anyway. Similar to the status bar
| on iOS.
| yepthatsreality wrote:
| I agree. I finally upgraded from a Iphone SE to a 12 Mini. The
| notch is horrible and I'm not sure why people wave it away with
| "I got used to it". I've had it for months. No idea what
| lunatic at Apple thought it would be nice for a laptop.
|
| Can't they come up with something a little more original than
| removing screen real estate to stand out?
|
| I will be switching back to an SE just based on how overall
| unwieldy the new phone is. The notch is just one of the nails
| in the coffin.
|
| The notch to me says, "now I know which products not to buy".
| katzgrau wrote:
| No touchbar, I'm sold
| soheil wrote:
| Using the m1 air for almost a year now I can't imagine going to
| another laptop with a fan. Doesn't matter what I ever do there is
| never any noise. I'm sure the fan in the Pro models almost never
| come on and you could also install something to limit max cpu
| frequency before fan is turned on, but having no fan is the next
| level.
| rStar wrote:
| theory: the notch is apples way to keep people from taping over
| the webcam, a few percentage points. who benefits from less tape,
| at population scale, on a little used but programmatically
| controllable camera?
| thecybernerd wrote:
| I was really hoping for wifi 6E and Bluetooth 5.2 but besides
| this i'm floored!
| codingclaws wrote:
| Wow, scrolling controls the animation frame by frame. Never seen
| that. Cool and frightening.
| exabrial wrote:
| This is beautiful... I'd pay $4k for a mac without a damned touch
| bar!
|
| Now if they can just get rid of the legacy lightning jack on the
| iPhone.
| nsxwolf wrote:
| Anyone else think the new cross section looks a bit odd? Very
| flat on top.
|
| I am glad they did not copy the rounded off corner keys from the
| new iMac keyboards, though.
| aj_nikhil wrote:
| Apple is becoming more and more like other brands. It's losing
| it's think different mojo.
| Ayesh wrote:
| As a PC user, I'm sold and looking to get one soon.
| swozey wrote:
| I know what you mean, my current PC laptop is a horrible
| experience, I used all mbps before this. Dell xps 13z 2n1. It's
| so, so cool and pretty but it throttles so much that it's
| absolutely useless for dev work. I got the full blown $2500ish
| 32gb/16core or whatever, too. Such a waste, sending it to my
| mom and getting a 14" whenever I can.
| Ayesh wrote:
| I recently shelled out a EUR1,200 ish on a new laptop too,
| and it already looks archaic compared to this.
|
| Dell XPS line up is horribly overpriced and has pretty worse
| performance, and the lack of Ryzen option kept me away from
| it.
|
| I love my Lenovo's keyboard though.
| andy_ppp wrote:
| I hope this lasts me 5 years like my 2016 MBP! Ordered and aside
| from the notch (they are adding Face ID later I take it? And
| minority report gestures?) I think it's PERFECT.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-10-19 23:02 UTC)