Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Introducing the next generation of Mac

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

891–900 of 1001 posts

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#891

Post by dvfjsdhgfv »

m12k wrote: post #876
BatteryMountain wrote: post #794

How are companies still releasing hardware with 8GB RAM? My MacBook Air from ~2016 has 8GB of RAM. My first PC which had 8GB of RAM was built in ~2010 if I remember correctly. My current machine has 32GB. In all honesty, 32GB is not even much, considering my motherboard can take 128GB (in the old days, if your motherboard could take max 8GB RAM, people would fill all the slots to capacity). Also, I have a Lenovo mach…

Lots and lots of people use their laptops in a way where there's little to no noticeable difference between 8GB and 16GB RAM. Why should those people pay extra for something they don't need? I think the HN crowd - with 4 docker VMs, 3 electron apps, 50 Chrome tabs, ML training, long compile times, etc - need to realize that their workloads and needs are not representative of the majority of users. It's ok for Apple t…

> It's ok for Apple to also make computers for people that are not you.

Yes, it's perfectly fine to sell machines like these with specs from 2012 but their efficiency should be reflected in the price. Honestly, what Apple is doing now seems like pushing power users buing new hardware towards non-macOS systems.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#892

Post by helsinkiandrew »

SifJar wrote: post #858
winrid wrote: post #809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit out of touch I think. All the midde age mothers I know personally buy $300 laptops from Walmart.

I think the point was that the people who buy the $999 laptops would be fine with the $300 laptops

Exactly - I'd guess the majority of Macbook Airs are used for surfing, email, writing a presentation etc. not developing.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#893

Post by Toutouxc »

jefftk wrote: post #699
crazygringo wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, are higher-quality cameras even available that fit into the thin lid? (At a reasonable price?) I was always under the impression that the built-in camera is so much worse than your phone's front-facing camera simply because the phone is thick and has room, while the MacBook lid is much thinner.

Instead of having a camera as thin as the lid, they could have the camera stick out a little bit and fit into a recess on the other side of the clamshell when closed.

I'm almost sure they couldn't. I can't quite put my finger on it, but that's just not how Apple does things.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#894

Post by callamdelaney »

Aloisius wrote: post #586
callamdelaney wrote: post #150

I'll be sticking with my 2015 Macbook Pro Retina 13". Great machine, not too thin, heavy enough, no stupid touch screen, usb ports, great keyboard. Everything apple has done since hasn't compared.

> not too thin, heavy enough Wait. What? I can honestly say that I've never thought to myself that a laptop was too thin or too light.

I think these super thin laptops are ugly, too hot and not ergonomic - also this sacrifices the keyboard. I actually think this model represents the perfect mix of all of these things - thickness (being the thinnest thing I can buy is not a feature for me) - weight (I really don't mind 1.3kg) and keyboard.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#895

Post by Toutouxc »

dkarl wrote: post #362
vmarsy wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They kept the touch bar but it seems that they added (back) a physical Esc key, isn't that the most criticized missing key? Which other key do you miss now that Esc is back?

Having bought a Macbook Pro with an Esc key earlier this year, lack of an Esc key was 90% of my issue with the touch bar. My biggest issue now is when I accidentally activate it. I didn't have an issue accidentally hitting the function keys on my 2013, so why not bring those back? Or invent something new. Forward or back, I don't care, just admit the touch bar was a dud and get it off my keyboard. EDIT: My mother als…

> I vaguely remember doing something to turn that off on mine, but she is terrified of Covid so I haven't had a chance to get at her laptop and fix it for her.

You can use Messages to easily initiate screen-sharing (with you controlling her Mac) to do that. No 3rd party software, no action on her side needed.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#896

Post by ship_it »

emsy wrote: post #883
tekkk wrote: post #880

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Uhm. Adding 16GB RAM instead of 8GB costs almost nothing and which by far and large, is useful to all users. The only reason why they ship 8 GBs is because they want to sell you upgrades, similar to why Apple products come with miniscule SSD hard drives. Certainly, only professionals would need something like 512GBs right?

Almost nothing if you buy a PC. Look at the markups for a RAM upgrade in Macs, it’s gut wrenchingly greedy.

Not an argument the parent was discussing. You still compare it to Macs which is not the point.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#897

Post by grishka »

dreamcompiler wrote: post #887
grishka wrote: post #884

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, just maybe, it shouldn't be a $1T company? Maybe it should once again become a company that puts its customers and their experience before profits? People are frustrated with technology lately. Even non-tech people. Apple has everything it would need to change that, but it decides to contribute to technology becoming ever more frustrating time and time again instead.

Agreed. But I can't think of an example of a company that ever voluntarily downsized. Downsizing usually happens because a new competitor arises that makes a product customers prefer. That's a very difficult proposition in the personal computer space.

If history is a lesson, any company that arises to compete with established players, gets acquired by them. And it's a shame no companies actually decline these acquisitions.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#898

Post by Toutouxc »

rsync wrote: post #248
dcchambers wrote: post #37

The 16GB RAM limit is unfortunate. Five years later and I still can't buy a new 13" laptop from Apple with more RAM than my 2015 MBP. Edit: Apparently you can configure a (Early 2020) Intel-based 13" MBP with 32GB of RAM - I was not aware of that. Hope they bring that option to the ARM versions ASAP, especially if the performance gains are as good as Apple claims.

"The 16GB RAM limit is unfortunate." This is a charitable characterization. More correct would be to term this limit "absurd" or "clownish". Even if Apple views the use-cases of these machines as primarily consumption devices and the users of these machines not as creators but as consumers, the bloat of the modern web is expensive and getting more expensive every day. The end user needs this memory even if they reall…

> The end user needs this memory even if they really are just using these as facebook machines.

I webdev (RoR) for a living on a Dell machine with Linux and 8 gigs of RAM. It works beautifully.

Sometimes I browse Facebook and it still works beautifully.

My GF uses my old 2013 MBP with 4 gigs of RAM for college and it works just fine for her. She, too, sometimes browses Facebook.

Re: Introducing the next generation of Mac

#900

Post by weystrom »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #885
weystrom wrote: post #868

I don't see people mentioning it here, but the Pro machine only supports one external display. People have called the sales rep to confirm and this is indeed the case. This is kind of bad news for the Pro machine.

Entry-level pro? Devaluing the "pro" moniker? The latter isn't new though, they've had to spend years in R&D to try and reinvent the Mac Pro for example.

Yeah, I guess. I just don't understand how my 2015 retina mbp can support up to 4 displays (including the internal one), but this state-of-the-art-3x-gpu-performance chip can't do more than one.

This might be tied to some I/O limitation.

Post reply on HN