The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tim Cook on Mac Desktop commitment Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 24th December 2017
  #1321
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
As I suspect you know, but as clarification this article, as I read it, is not really about iOS and OSX becoming "one". Rather it is about tech that would allow devs to create apps that would run in both iOS and desktop (OSX).
I think they've said that they won't merge iOs and MacOS. But did they ever say that they'll never leave MacOs behind and make all their devices based on only one operating system?

Once they have made Logic Pro X, Final Cut X etc run on iOs devices... what would be most easy for them in the future? Why not make all their computers iOs based at some point, instead of maintaining two different operating systems?

Btw, "OS X" doesn't exist at the moment, it's called MacOs now. But maybe they'll call their next generation Macs "Mac Pro X" etc; they already call their flagship phone for iPhone X. And maybe they plan to stop both MacOs and iOs development, and reintroduce OS X as something which needs an X device (iPhone X, MacBook X etc) to run. That move may not be that difficult once they have ensured that all their apps run on both MacOS and iOs, especially if a reintroduced OsX is an advanced version of iOs.

Pure speculation, of course.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1322
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
Pure speculation, of course.
Very well put, Sir.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1323
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
That’s a customer point of view. Now think Apple leads a mass market, not a niche. They want to set industry’s standards. Smaller graphic cards was apparently their goal with the trash can. Now, is it a real fail ? Was it so bad ? It was an industrial fail, because the industry hasn’t followed their goal. It was the same story with FW vs USB 1, 2, 3... I won’t even talk about SCSI or Motorola chips.
I'm not so sure that's the right or only way to look at it though. The other way of looking at it is that because of Apple's fantastic marketing and visual design (of hardware and GUI) users were compelled to keep investing in new Apple products. Apple has succeeded in creating not only an eco-system for the user, but one in which users are compelled to upgrade regularly to new hardware to maintain their user experience.

More upgrades = more money.

I think the "evidence" of what I'm talking about is exactly what you point out combined with the fact that people still buy Apple computers.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1324
Lives for gear
 
stratology's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
The other way of looking at it is that because of Apple's fantastic marketing and visual design (of hardware and GUI) users were compelled to keep investing in new Apple products.

This is a - very common - myth. Users of Apple products buy gift wrapped crap, because they're idiots.


The only thing that repeating the myth over and over again shows is a fundamental lack of understanding of how users of Apple products make purchase decisions. Confusing 'design' with 'looks' does not help either.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1325
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
I'm not so sure that's the right or only way to look at it though. The other way of looking at it is that because of Apple's fantastic marketing and visual design (of hardware and GUI) users were compelled to keep investing in new Apple products. Apple has succeeded in creating not only an eco-system for the user, but one in which users are compelled to upgrade regularly to new hardware to maintain their user experience.
I think you're on thin ice here. As far as I can tell with pros —*those making real money from their use of Apple computers, or from activity supported by this use — buy Apple products mainly out of the "It just works" aspect of the optimal Mac experience. This slice of the market don't want to concern themselves with "computers". They want to work and have few or no issues. That's what the Apple Computer brand have stood for and to many of the recurring users this is what it still stands for, more often than not.

When these Pros upgrade has almost nothing to do with Apple marketing. These people upgrade when they feel their machine is "slow" or breaks down after 4 years or so. Which can be when the disk is full. So how can these people be Pro if they are ignorant with computers? Because, as I said, they make real money with their tool of choice. This also includes music producers and musicians. Not everyone, or even a majority, want to tinker.

Pair this with new Mac customers flowing in all the time. I know less of this type of Mac buyer and likely some of them have indeed been affected by Apple marketing.

So what does this have to with iMac Pro and Mac Pro? I think this market is very diverse. You either make more money you can spend even trying or you are well motivated to spend the $5,000-15,000 premium. I think music producers may be in the minority in this group. Though these price levels seem to be very much comparable to what (music) Pros I've known for 20+ years always spent on their Macs, like every third year or so. And as money has gotten cheaper, it's probably half price in buying power.

I do think it's a mistake to evaluate the computer markets according to your own preferences and speculations. If Apple start delivering I think they will have to work harder to make us music producers happy with their products. As a side-effect of their current and up and coming offerings, they might succeed. But even if they fail satisfying us, they will probably make a lot of money in their grand scheme of Macs even so.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1326
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stratology View Post
This is a - very common - myth. Users of Apple products buy gift wrapped crap, because they're idiots.
"idiots" is your choice of word.

I also didn't call Apple products "crap", because I think Apple products are really, really good.

Quote:
Originally Posted by stratology View Post
The only thing that repeating the myth over and over again shows is a fundamental lack of understanding of how users of Apple products make purchase decisions.
Ok, so educate me. Tell me "how users or Apple products make purchase decisions".

Quote:
Originally Posted by stratology View Post
Confusing 'design' with 'looks' does not help either.
I'm not confusing the two at all.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1327
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
I think you're on thin ice here. As far as I can tell with pros —*those making real money from their use of Apple computers, or from activity supported by this use — buy Apple products mainly out of the "It just works" aspect of the optimal Mac experience. This slice of the market don't want to concern themselves with "computers". They want to work and have few or no issues. That's what the Apple Computer brand have stood for and to many of the recurring users this is what it still stands for, more often than not.

When these Pros upgrade has almost nothing to do with Apple marketing. These people upgrade when they feel their machine is "slow" or breaks down after 4 years or so. Which can be when the disk is full. So how can these people be Pro if they are ignorant with computers? Because, as I said, they make real money with their tool of choice. This also includes music producers and musicians. Not everyone, or even a majority, want to tinker.
I think you're either misunderstanding me or inadvertently actually supporting my case. It's exactly because users don't want to "tinker" many upgrade. Let me give you a real-world example:

I was responsible for suggesting components for a two-room studio years ago. Budget was an issue. We selected two Mac Pros and then I built two (or three, I can't remember) Windows computers. One PC was for sample playback routed digitally into Pro Tools, the other was a dual CPU file server responsible for housing sound effect libraries as well as hosting a RAID 5 backup and a long term DVD (later blue ray) and tape data archival solution. All connected fine using SMB.

However, while the Windows platform remained essentially the same Mac OS X changed. And at one point I was simply no longer able and willing to keep up with messing around with software to get a) the workstations working and b) the server connecting properly. Again, the factor that changed here were the Macs, not the Windows machines. So over time, the decision to scrap the Windows machines was because it was a choice between either me spending more time figuring stuff out (wan't going to happen), or hiring a tech to do it (happened like once, and then not at all), or just scrapping all the Windows machines.

In other words, it was the desire not to tinker that led to streamlining the facility. But that really only highlights what I said; Apple created an eco-system of products in which they 'frequently' pull the plug on technologies - both hardware and software - and the need to support that increases unless
you 'follow' Apple's pace with upgrades.

And it really does snowball rapidly and expensively. The first Pro Tools stations had HD TDM PCI in them. Then Apple dropped PCI, so the facility was 'forced' to upgrade to PCIe cards ($). Then Apple dropped support of older Macs, and because of incompatibilities it was pretty much necessary to upgrade Pro Tools ($). And so on. With Windows, love it or hate it, for the longest time you could run quite a few versions of software on not that many upgrades of Windows. It's just not the same on Mac OS with Macs.

And lastly, I really do find the whole notion of "it just works" and "no tinkering" to be hugely overblown. A well built computer doesn't require tinkering. I've absolutely been in studios where there have been problems with workstations and they've been Mac computers. I don't think PC's are better, they're just different. But the point is that the perception is that there is less tinkering and that Macs "just work", and every time they don't it's an exception that proves the rule, whereas it's the opposite with PCs.

So again, I really do think that dropping technologies have actually helped apple retain consumers and getting them to spend more money.

Sorry for the long reply btw.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
I do think it's a mistake to evaluate the computer markets according to your own preferences and speculations.
If that was for me then I don't think I did. If that was a general note then I sort of agree.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1328
Gear Addict
 

Apple is committed to iOS devices and other developing technologies. The traditional computer market is still an important element of their business, sort of, but they probably don’t see much of a future in it. It’s not like there are research labs at Apple working on futuristic designs and mockups of Macs anymore. That’s taking place else where although the MacBooks are still getting get a little love even if Apple is marketing them as the iPhone side kick.

I don’t see this as much as Apple abandoning a market but more just allocating it’s resources for products that look to be the best bet. Apple dosen’t owe it’s traditional computer users anything.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1329
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fastlanephil View Post
Apple dosen’t owe it’s traditional computer users anything.
...and it's great we don't owe them anything either.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1330
Gear Maniac
 

That said Apple still makes the best computers today. If we define ´computer’ as a whole machine including the OS. And ´best’ as ´usable, stable and pretty on your desk’. Linux or Windows machines can be as good (at least), but require a very good hardware basis and a deep knowledge to be properly optimized, especially for audio.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1331
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
That said Apple still makes the best computers today. If we define ´computer’ as a whole machine including the OS. And ´best’ as ´usable, stable and pretty on your desk’. Linux or Windows machines can be as good (at least), but require a very good hardware basis and a deep knowledge to be properly optimized, especially for audio.
I disagree.
Old 24th December 2017
  #1332
Gear Maniac
 

You can.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1333
Most muso tech types (myself included - I’ve built PCs before) are far from ignorant with computers - they just, as you say, want to spend their time where it pays - on their job - rather than tinkering. Plus of course they need a machine that works right the first time.

Not saying you can’t get that with a specialist PC of course, but you don’t get it randomly by just sticking s bunch of cheap parts in a case - you have to do your research and spend the time on it (or have spent the time on it). Personally I’d rather pay someone to do that for me, and earn money to pay for it doing my job. I come out ahead in the long run (and spend more time doing what I enjoy).

I’d love to try building some DIY kit gear too - I just don’t have the time - so I buy pre assembled gear.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
I think you're on thin ice here. As far as I can tell with pros —*those making real money from their use of Apple computers, or from activity supported by this use — buy Apple products mainly out of the "It just works" aspect of the optimal Mac experience. This slice of the market don't want to concern themselves with "computers". They want to work and have few or no issues. That's what the Apple Computer brand have stood for and to many of the recurring users this is what it still stands for, more often than not.

When these Pros upgrade has almost nothing to do with Apple marketing. These people upgrade when they feel their machine is "slow" or breaks down after 4 years or so. Which can be when the disk is full. So how can these people be Pro if they are ignorant with computers? Because, as I said, they make real money with their tool of choice. This also includes music producers and musicians. Not everyone, or even a majority, want to tinker.

Pair this with new Mac customers flowing in all the time. I know less of this type of Mac buyer and likely some of them have indeed been affected by Apple marketing.

So what does this have to with iMac Pro and Mac Pro? I think this market is very diverse. You either make more money you can spend even trying or you are well motivated to spend the $5,000-15,000 premium. I think music producers may be in the minority in this group. Though these price levels seem to be very much comparable to what (music) Pros I've known for 20+ years always spent on their Macs, like every third year or so. And as money has gotten cheaper, it's probably half price in buying power.

I do think it's a mistake to evaluate the computer markets according to your own preferences and speculations. If Apple start delivering I think they will have to work harder to make us music producers happy with their products. As a side-effect of their current and up and coming offerings, they might succeed. But even if they fail satisfying us, they will probably make a lot of money in their grand scheme of Macs even so.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1334
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiasnyc View Post
In other words, it was the desire not to tinker that led to streamlining the facility. But that really only highlights what I said; Apple created an eco-system of products in which they 'frequently' pull the plug on technologies - both hardware and software - and the need to support that increases unless
you 'follow' Apple's pace with upgrades

.…

And lastly, I really do find the whole notion of "it just works" and "no tinkering" to be hugely overblown. A well built computer doesn't require tinkering. I've absolutely been in studios where there have been problems with workstations and they've been Mac computers. I don't think PC's are better, they're just different. But the point is that the perception is that there is less tinkering and that Macs "just work", and every time they don't it's an exception that proves the rule, whereas it's the opposite with PCs.



If that was for me then I don't think I did. If that was a general note then I sort of agree.
It wasn't for you, it was more general.

I don't think those "It just works" clients think like that. I also think Mac users don't view the Windows platform like that either. It's more like Windows machines don't even come up, except for specialist applications where are no Mac software alternatives exist. That notion of yours is more based on your own conclusions based on your experience with how people communicate. I don't share that experience.

But I get your point better now. Thank you for explaining. Very interesting to hear about your experiences.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1335
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastlanephil View Post
Apple is committed to iOS devices and other developing technologies. The traditional computer market is still an important element of their business, sort of, but they probably don’t see much of a future in it. It’s not like there are research labs at Apple working on futuristic designs and mockups of Macs anymore. That’s taking place else where although the MacBooks are still getting get a little love even if Apple is marketing them as the iPhone side kick.

I don’t see this as much as Apple abandoning a market but more just allocating it’s resources for products that look to be the best bet. Apple dosen’t owe it’s traditional computer users anything.
You are basing this on nothing. Certainly not on (factual) news or in-house "secret" knowledge.

What other computer makers make more than 5,000,000,000 a year in profits (not gross income) on computers? The Apple computer business is more likely to be spin off into its own company than being laid off. I'm not saying this is likely to happen.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1336
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
That said Apple still makes the best computers today. If we define ´computer’ as a whole machine including the OS. And ´best’ as ´usable, stable and pretty on your desk’. Linux or Windows machines can be as good (at least), but require a very good hardware basis and a deep knowledge to be properly optimized, especially for audio.
Traditionally, yes. In practice, they're not even delivering, you know, up-to-date desktops, the subject of this discussion.

Multiple generations of MBP with discrete graphic cards have had a tendency to blow some years before their natural EOL. Apple must up their game, time and time again.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1337
Gear Maniac
 

Apple’s desktops are not up-to-date ? They’re updated once a year, for most of the line. The iMac pro is really innovative with its two chips architecture and I can’t see any contender in the PC world. About the MBP, it’s nonsense to me to want a powerful computer in a small enclosure. Power needs a good dissipation and most of the issues with MBP are probably produced by heat. Now Apple has found a solution with eGPU. That’s also innovative.
Old 25th December 2017
  #1338
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
It wasn't for you, it was more general.

I don't think those "It just works" clients think like that. I also think Mac users don't view the Windows platform like that either. It's more like Windows machines don't even come up, except for specialist applications where are no Mac software alternatives exist. That notion of yours is more based on your own conclusions based on your experience with how people communicate. I don't share that experience.

But I get your point better now. Thank you for explaining. Very interesting to hear about your experiences.
Well, we're all subject to basing our views on not only data but personal experiences. You have a different experience than I do, so we're really stuck in the same place where neither can claim to know what users think.

I will say however that the view I have of many - not all - mac users is also frequently seen here in this forum, so I'd argue that it extends beyond my in-person experience over the years.

It doesn't really matter though....
Old 26th December 2017
  #1339
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
Apple’s desktops are not up-to-date ? They’re updated once a year, for most of the line. The iMac pro is really innovative with its two chips architecture and I can’t see any contender in the PC world. About the MBP, it’s nonsense to me to want a powerful computer in a small enclosure. Power needs a good dissipation and most of the issues with MBP are probably produced by heat. Now Apple has found a solution with eGPU. That’s also innovative.

In a few days Apple will be delivering the iMac Pro. Today they are not, to the best of my knowledge.

I don't regard the iMac non Pro more than a MacBook Pro with a bigger display. I know it's somewhat faster, but nevertheless.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1340
Lives for gear
 
Mike O's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
I think they've said that they won't merge iOs and MacOS. But did they ever say that they'll never leave MacOs behind and make all their devices based on only one operating system?

Once they have made Logic Pro X, Final Cut X etc run on iOs devices... what would be most easy for them in the future? Why not make all their computers iOs based at some point, instead of maintaining two different operating systems?

Btw, "OS X" doesn't exist at the moment, it's called MacOs now. But maybe they'll call their next generation Macs "Mac Pro X" etc; they already call their flagship phone for iPhone X. And maybe they plan to stop both MacOs and iOs development, and reintroduce OS X as something which needs an X device (iPhone X, MacBook X etc) to run. That move may not be that difficult once they have ensured that all their apps run on both MacOS and iOs, especially if a reintroduced OsX is an advanced version of iOs.

Pure speculation, of course.
The angle from which you approach the result of one operating system makes no functional difference. Technical difference , with respect to which code base you build out from, but not functional. The end result is one code base. I do believe that Apple has at least implied that a single code base does not make sense for them.

Quote:

“We did spend a great deal of time looking at this a number of years ago and came to the conclusion that to make the best personal computer, you can’t try to turn MacOS into an iPhone,” Schiller says. “Conversely, you can’t turn iOS into a Mac…. So each one is best at what they’re meant to be — and we take what makes sense to add from each, but without fundamentally changing them so they’re compromised.”

It sounds like you believe there should be, and Apple might be moving to one code base. If so, I agree. To ME, obviously not having any insight into their strategy or technical road maps, it make sense. Take the best iOS functionality and the best MacOs functionality and create one OS. I don't care or pretend to know which code base might be the best to start from technically.

But I believe the CNet article, via Cult of Mac, that I quoted above has Marketing chief Phil Schiller, software engineering lead Craig Federighi and top designer Jony Ive saying that is not what they believe is best for Apple.

Has something changed at Apple?

Perhaps they knew in October, 2016 that they were investigating technology (similar to Google Progressive Web Apps) that would allow the entirety of their iOS app store to run on MacOs at some point?

We'll all probably know this time next year or a little later. I'm betting (hoping) developments at Apple and the rest of the whole industry will be pretty exciting.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1341
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by fastlanephil View Post
Apple is committed to iOS devices and other developing technologies. The traditional computer market is still an important element of their business, sort of, but they probably don’t see much of a future in it. It’s not like there are research labs at Apple working on futuristic designs and mockups of Macs anymore. That’s taking place else where although the MacBooks are still getting get a little love even if Apple is marketing them as the iPhone side kick.

I don’t see this as much as Apple abandoning a market but more just allocating it’s resources for products that look to be the best bet. Apple dosen’t owe it’s traditional computer users anything.
Where are you coming up with this stuff? Of course the personal computer market is still an important part of their business. Do you have any idea how much money they make off of Macs? And of course there are research labs there working on Macs. to say otherwise is completely preposterous. And no offense...but how is anyone going to make software for iOS without Macs?
Old 26th December 2017
  #1342
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike O View Post
Quote:

“We did spend a great deal of time looking at this a number of years ago and came to the conclusion that to make the best personal computer, you can’t try to turn MacOS into an iPhone,” Schiller says. “Conversely, you can’t turn iOS into a Mac…. So each one is best at what they’re meant to be — and we take what makes sense to add from each, but without fundamentally changing them so they’re compromised.”
Another worrying quote by Schiller. The man has serious problems with fundamental logic. He equates software with hardware. No, you cannot turn an OS into a phone or a Mac, this goes without saying. What he wanted to say was, you can't turn an OS for mobile devices into an OS for computers. Unfortunately, he didn't say that.

Here's another quote, this time by Steve Jobs:

“One bozo gets another bozo. Soon, you’re surrounded by bozos. This is called a bozo explosion”.

Fight Off the Bozo Explosion; Hire for Attitude | marketing / social media / apple blog
Old 26th December 2017
  #1343
Gear Maniac
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
In a few days Apple will be delivering the iMac Pro. Today they are not, to the best of my knowledge.

I don't regard the iMac non Pro more than a MacBook Pro with a bigger display. I know it's somewhat faster, but nevertheless.
Today... tomorrow... you’re too picky. And I was not referring only to the iMac pro. The whole line is regularly updated. A 5k iMac has no contender in the PC world. An the iMac is not a large MBP, that’s a mistake. The iMac has a very large heat dissipation surface. A portable machine dies slowly, even a very expensive one. A desktop can last for years with decent performances.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1344
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
Today... tomorrow... you’re too picky. And I was not referring only to the iMac pro. The whole line is regularly updated. A 5k iMac has no contender in the PC world. An the iMac is not a large MBP, that’s a mistake. The iMac has a very large heat dissipation surface. A portable machine dies slowly, even a very expensive one. A desktop can last for years with decent performances.
I have a 7 year old MacBook Pro that would disagree with your last two sentences. A 2013 as well which is still my main computer.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1345
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
Another worrying quote by Schiller. The man has serious problems with fundamental logic. He equates software with hardware. No, you cannot turn an OS into a phone or a Mac, this goes without saying. What he wanted to say was, you can't turn an OS for mobile devices into an OS for computers. Unfortunately, he didn't say that.
You seem to have a real chip on your shoulder over Apple dont you?

Your interpretation of what he said is completely off-base. He was equating software and hardware correctly in the case of the Apple platforms, his point being they each have their own space in Apple’s line-up and they won’t attempt to do what Microsoft has done with Windows 10 trying to be the one and only OS for all hardware platforms. macOS is still a general purpose computing platform without a touch interface that runs on a hardware platform that doesn’t have a touch interface for its main interactions. iOS/iPhone/iPad are the exact opposite (though some will argue that the iPad is a general purpose computing platform).
Old 26th December 2017
  #1346
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mininoyz View Post
Today... tomorrow... you’re too picky. And I was not referring only to the iMac pro. The whole line is regularly updated. A 5k iMac has no contender in the PC world. An the iMac is not a large MBP, that’s a mistake. The iMac has a very large heat dissipation surface. A portable machine dies slowly, even a very expensive one. A desktop can last for years with decent performances.
Surface Studio

Like many MS products, you may not like the OS, but overall, it is far more flexible and useful than the Apple counterpart.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1347
Lives for gear
 
stratology's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by guitardom View Post
Surface Studio

Like many MS products, you may not like the OS, but overall, it is far more flexible and useful than the Apple counterpart.

You're comparing this to the iMac Pro??

Core i7 CPU instead of Xeon, maximum of 32GB memory, no Thunderbolt, max 128GB SSD. Seriously???
Old 26th December 2017
  #1348
Lives for gear
 
nativeaudio's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rezoneight View Post
Where are you coming up with this stuff? Of course the personal computer market is still an important part of their business. Do you have any idea how much money they make off of Macs? And of course there are research labs there working on Macs. to say otherwise is completely preposterous.
That wasn't to me, but - the criticism hasn't been against Apple not focusing and Mac Pros and MacBook Pros etc, but that the development has been very slow; that Mac Pros and MacBook Pros aren't as important for Apple as they used to be.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1349
Lives for gear
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stratology View Post
You're comparing this to the iMac Pro??

Core i7 CPU instead of Xeon, maximum of 32GB memory, no Thunderbolt, max 128GB SSD. Seriously???
You state you are talking about the "regular" Imacs and there "is no contender in the PC world". I am showing you that they are not the only game in town, nor are they the best.
Old 26th December 2017
  #1350
Gear Maniac
Quote:
Originally Posted by nativeaudio View Post
That wasn't to me, but - the criticism hasn't been against Apple not focusing and Mac Pros and MacBook Pros etc, but that the development has been very slow; that Mac Pros and MacBook Pros aren't as important for Apple as they used to be.
I'd agree with that statement on the desktop machine but not the laptop. That has been getting refreshed consistently year over year. I don't consider that slow. Major changes? No but why do they need to do that? The only beef I've got with the current MacBook Pro is the limit of 16GB of memory but that is due the architecture they chose because of battery life requirements (and the 2017 MacBook Pro gets fantastic battery life). DDR3 memory is limited to 16GB and they use very fast DDR3 for those models. Since I get along just fine with 16GB of RAM I'd rather have the battery life.
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump