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

The new MacBook

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

661–670 of 1001 posts

Re: The new MacBook

#661

Post by nigelsampson »

nickysielicki wrote: post #423
Finbarr wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like there are some new $79 adapters to split out the USB-C port into power, usb and av[1]/vga[2]. [1] http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1K2AM/A/usb-c-digital-av... [2] http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1L2AM/A/usb-c-vga-multip...

I'm sorry but when you ship a machine with ONE PORT for the purposes of charging and peripherals, this absolutely needs to be in the box. Nickel and $80'ering me on a $1400 computer is ridiculous. I'll stick with my thinkpad.

The Surface Pro's come with only one USB port on the device, they make it up for it with having one on the power brick which I think is an awesome idea.

Re: The new MacBook

#662

Post by Doctor_Fegg »

nostrademons wrote: post #634
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

I'm a big fan of the Finder of System 7. It seemed to hit the sweet spot where you could do just about everything you needed to easily (it had collapsible tree views, folders, computed folder sizes, drag & drop, copy & paste, labels, etc.), but it didn't try to hide things from you or restrict what you could do, it didn't get too fancy and guess at your common tasks, it actually showed your filesystem instead of Appl…

A thousand times this. I loved the "spatial Finder" of System 7. It was such a 1:1 mapping onto the filesystem that even my DOS-using friends realised that this wasn't a GUI abstraction over something cruder, this was the Mac and this was how it worked.

23 years later and I still can't consistently switch off "browser view" in the OS X Finder. Cmd-option-T works for windows on my local disks, but then I'll insert a USB stick or similar, and they appear as standard in browser view. Ah well.

Re: The new MacBook

#663

Post by _puk »

nmridul wrote: post #604
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

I wish I was able to right click a folder and get an option "open terminal here" and then terminal opens and directory changes to the current selected folder. Is this available currently that I'm not aware of ? Else, make it easy to copy the path.... Just like the windows explorer does.

I use this feature a lot..

System Preferences > Keyboard > Keyboard Shortcuts > Services > Enable New Terminal at Folder [0]

Not sure if this works in Yosemite.. 10.8.5 works fine for me currently, so not risked / bothered upgrading.

0: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/420456/open-terminal-here...

Re: The new MacBook

#664

Post by bsilvereagle »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #570
hcayless wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, no kidding. And not just children. I've had adults walk through it too. I hope this doesn't ever make it to the pro line. It's fine I suppose if you really only plug the device in to charge it once a day, like a phone, but I don't expect the battery to last all day if I'm doing really processor-intensive things, which I often do.

Don't expect to do anything processor-intensive on that fanless Mac.

I thought this was really odd. A lot of engineering went into getting 30% more battery storage inside the laptop, but then you trap all the heat in there! You'll easily lose that 30% extra storage to loss of battery performance due to the latent heat.

Re: The new MacBook

#665

Post by [deleted] »

nmridul wrote: post #604
nsxwolf wrote: post #561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

I wish I was able to right click a folder and get an option "open terminal here" and then terminal opens and directory changes to the current selected folder. Is this available currently that I'm not aware of ? Else, make it easy to copy the path.... Just like the windows explorer does.

[deleted]

Re: The new MacBook

#666

Post by [deleted] »

nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

[deleted]

Re: The new MacBook

#667

Post by on_and_off »

Throwaway90283 wrote: post #571
nkoren wrote: post #261

This is a beautiful machine. Once again, Apple excels at hardware. But what the living hell is going wrong with Apple's desktop software? OS X and Apple's applications suite have been getting steadily worse with every release. Look at the App store: the latest releases of OS X, iPhoto, iMovie, Pages, and Numbers are (in stark contrast to earlier versins) all rated at 2.5/5 stars, with the plurality being 1-star revie…

Random story from last week, and my experience with Apple software. I don't use Apple products too often, but I was downloading some apps for a family members ipod touch 4g (latest model being 5g). The 4g only supports up to iOS 6, and nearly every app I tried downloading on the device gave an error saying it required iOS 7 and it couldn't be installed. I thought that was strange, I used most of these apps before on…

holly hell ! How can this be an official solution ? Ok, Android devices upgrade cycle could use improvements, but as far as back compatibility goes, it gets it right. You can publish different versions of your app, so even if you drop an old OS version with 1% of marketshare, you can still let users download the last version of the app for their OS. From an user point of view, it is transparent, you click install and get the last compatible version, period.

Re: The new MacBook

#668

Post by mrbabbage »

nsxwolf wrote: post #561
SiVal wrote: post #509

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because you can't really tell how well software is working when looking at the device edge-on, and that's apparently the way Apple looks at them most of the time. I mean this more metaphorically than literally, but I'm so tired of complaints about the ridiculously primitive Finder being met with, "the edge of the iMac now appears even thinner, now that we've repositioned formerly convenient connectors and such into a…

Curious - what do Finder complainers consider the gold standard of file browsers that Finder should aspire to be? I do most of my file management at the command line so I don't experience the pain of Finder very often, and I've generally been able to get Finder to do what I want without much fuss. Windows Explorer is, to me, a painful experience (but its 1980s DOS command line is so much worse) I've found the various…

Have you tried Dolphin on Linux? It's absolutely the best graphical file shell I've ever used:

- integrated command line whose PWD matches the directory shown in the graphic view. This is killer.

- automatic numbering if you rename a bunch of files.

- a tab-completeable navigation bar.

- integrated context menu items (e.g. send via email, compress, encrypt, convert file type).

- pretty, Apple-style image previews.

I really think it has it all.

" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dolphin_%28file_manager%29>

Re: The new MacBook

#669

Post by MAGZine »

Turing_Machine wrote: post #514
ssijak wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

i5 is faster and better than core m.

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/benchmarks/two-in-one...

You do realize that

a) that marketing page compares against a processor that is 4 years old, i.e. the processor in the 2011 MBA?

b) Intel has made new core i5's in the last 4 years (or even 3 years, 2 years, last year...)

c) we're not at a point where physics allows us to make hardware that consumes < 1/3 the power, but performs better, using the same manufacturing processes.

Re: The new MacBook

#670

Post by nickysielicki »

nigelsampson wrote: post #661
nickysielicki wrote: post #423

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry but when you ship a machine with ONE PORT for the purposes of charging and peripherals, this absolutely needs to be in the box. Nickel and $80'ering me on a $1400 computer is ridiculous. I'll stick with my thinkpad.

The Surface Pro's come with only one USB port on the device, they make it up for it with having one on the power brick which I think is an awesome idea.

The surface pro also has a separate charging port.

With this new macbook, one cannot charge and use a mouse at the same time without an $80 addon.

Post reply on HN