Apple Is Listening • Hacker News Board

Re: Apple Is Listening

#131

Post by steveharman » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:51 AM UTC

Building a Hackintosh is no fun any more.

It used to be a challenge but with the right hardware choices (plenty of lists) it's only really one extra step than installing macOS on genuine Apple hardware

In the immortal word of Monty Python; there's no pleasing some people :-)

Re: Apple Is Listening

#132

Post by vinay_ys » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:51 AM UTC

It is quite plain that Apple never really listens to the user feedback in a traditional way (and rightly so). Their business strategy for Mac hardware and MacOS (specifically, pricing strategy) may not align with what most early and advanced users of Mac want. But this post seems to be sugarcoating it.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#133

Post by aiyodev » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:52 AM UTC

linguae wrote: post #28

I’m glad that Apple is finally updating their Macs again, but at the same time Apple has doubled-down on its refusal to sell user-serviceable, upgradeable, and expandable hardware at prices that are within reach for most customers. The laptops have soldered RAM and soldered storage. The Mac Mini and iMac Pro thankfully have DIMMs, but in order to keep the warranty, you have to visit an Apple-approved repair center to…

> you have to visit an Apple-approved repair center to have a specialist perform the upgrade, which costs more than doing it yourself

That has not been my experience. The Apple store just refreshed my 2015 Macbook pro: new screen, new bottom case, new fan, etc. Did not charge me anything.

Apple products last much longer than others and are much cheaper to maintain.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#134

Post by leoc » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:53 AM UTC

atemerev wrote: post #80

leoc wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lack of function keys is not unprecedented, though. Well into the '90s Macs generally didn't have any. What do you use them for?

Quite a lot of shortcuts in IDEs like IntelliJ IDEA and many others depend on them.

Are there modifier-key-based alternatives to the F-key shortcuts? If so then one should be using those instead; in fact one should be using those instead of the F keys anyway, since they're (by all accounts; not an expert) faster and more convenient for touch-typing. (They may be slightly less discoverable than the function-key versions, but that's no longer a problem once you've gone ahead and discovered them.) If there's no modifier-based alternative to some important shortcut, then that's certainly pretty dreadful. It is more the ISV's fault than Apple's, but obviously that's cold comfort to users. What Apple should do, though, is map keys on the right-hand side of the mechanical keyboard to the F keys while the Fn button is held down —so, like a typical laptop numlock, only with a momentary rather than a latching modifier —instead of only changing the Touch Bar display.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#135

Post by holy_city » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:55 AM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #65

kjhughes wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm neither interested in nor discussing here "normal non pro computer[s]". It was you who suggested a "$2100 5K iMac - 6 Core I5 3Ghz" to me. I merely explained why it doesn't, IMO, demonstrate that Apple is Listening.

Because Intel hasn’t created a consumer processor that is significantly faster than what they did in 2013 that means Apple isn’t listening? What hardware (besides a reliable keyboard) could Apple ship in a laptop in 2019 that would make it a worthy upgrade?

9th gen Intel processors perform significantly better in benchmarks than 4th gen Intels that were available in 2013. Not to mention, benchmarks are half the story - modern Intel mobile processors are significantly more efficient.

As to what Apple could do with the hardware, the 2019 MBP outperforms 2018 MBPs in real world benchmarks due to its better cooling and some under the hood stuff in Mojave that is unclear. There was a good review posted today on Linus Tech Tips.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#136

Post by kilburn » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:55 AM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #65

kjhughes wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm neither interested in nor discussing here "normal non pro computer[s]". It was you who suggested a "$2100 5K iMac - 6 Core I5 3Ghz" to me. I merely explained why it doesn't, IMO, demonstrate that Apple is Listening.

Because Intel hasn’t created a consumer processor that is significantly faster than what they did in 2013 that means Apple isn’t listening? What hardware (besides a reliable keyboard) could Apple ship in a laptop in 2019 that would make it a worthy upgrade?

I'm probably not a good target, but my wishlist for a laptop (that I cannot buy anywhere right now) is:

- Great touchpad (Apple are the only ones ticking that box)

- Good keyboard (Old apple and thinkpads are fine. New apples are terrible, just like the Asus UX430 I got at work).

- Great thermals (I want to be able to use my laptop as a laptop. Most of them nowadays burn during summer in hot areas).

- Good battery life (replaceable without power tools / health risks).

- Good-enough screen (so I can use it outdoors)

- Good connectivity (USB-C is good, but a couple regular USBs wouldn't hurt). Ethernet without dongle, please?

- Repairable / expandable (no soldered shit please, easy to open and clean).

- Affordable (as in - Either MacOS or Linux support (sorry but I quit Windows a long long time ago and I'm not coming back with all the telemetry and forced-update stuff).

I couldn't care less for 20% more/less cpu power, it being 5mm thicker than most laptops today, or it weighting even an extra pound more than usual.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#137

Post by xenospn » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:56 AM UTC

newscracker wrote: post #129

linguae wrote: post #28

I’m glad that Apple is finally updating their Macs again, but at the same time Apple has doubled-down on its refusal to sell user-serviceable, upgradeable, and expandable hardware at prices that are within reach for most customers. The laptops have soldered RAM and soldered storage. The Mac Mini and iMac Pro thankfully have DIMMs, but in order to keep the warranty, you have to visit an Apple-approved repair center to…

I feel the same way. Macs have become more expensive and less friendly for upgrading RAM and storage, the two most important things that need to be user upgradeable for longevity and reducing e-waste (I don’t care much about CPU/GPU upgrades). Even the new Mac mini is quite expensive compared to its predecessors. Mac mini used to be the cheap and beginner level entry into Macs/macOS. The current hardware may be worth…

I’ve been using my 2013 MBP every day since it came out, through my previous startup, an acquisition, and now my new startup. It’s been perfect, except for the fact that it only has 8GB of ram, and cannot be upgraded.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#138

Post by dijit » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:57 AM UTC

la_barba wrote: post #104

mseidl wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, about the cost. This Mac Pro is for editing 8k raw video. Which is Hollywood stuff, shot on cameras that cost 10s of thousands of dollars, on top of 100s of thousands of dollars of lenses and budgets 10s to 100s of millions.

You will not be editing raw 8K video using the tiny 8 core CPU and 256GB storage space of the base model which the parent was referring to ($6000). Its true that for Hollywood projects, the price of this might not be a huge deal, even with the baller fully speced out model. Heck in my own industry (pharma) we're paying thousands and thousands of dollars for software that doesn't do much except have the magical 21CFR…

I wouldn’t put much emphasis on the storage. Most places that are doing video editing at this level are using all flash based SAN networking over 10/100GB Ethernet/fibre.

As for the CPU, I agree. However I’m not 100% sure on how much can be offloaded to the GPU these days, 5-ish years ago when I was working with video editors a lot, it wasn’t much that could be offloaded.

Maybe it’s improved a lot.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#139

Post by vinay_ys » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 6:58 AM UTC

imagetic wrote: post #117

mseidl wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, about the cost. This Mac Pro is for editing 8k raw video. Which is Hollywood stuff, shot on cameras that cost 10s of thousands of dollars, on top of 100s of thousands of dollars of lenses and budgets 10s to 100s of millions.

I don't work in Hollywood, but I work heavily in production engineering for television productions that work on A LOT of 8K RAW video and multicam where time is critical, we have days to edit where hollywood has months and multicam is pretty damn taxing vs how a lot of movies operate. Our budgets are a fraction of a hollywood production though. The base model Mac Pro isn't going to be doing much at all. The higher en…

Do you have your production software for Windows/Linux or is it only for MacOS? If you do, then you can very likely get the same specs for much lower cost from Taiwan based ODM builders like AIC, Gigabyte etc. They have these server-class motherboards in datacenter class mechanical/thermal chassis. After that, you can ask them to slap on whatever Intel CPU with how much ever RAM and how much ever PCI-E cards (GPUs, NVMe SSDs, custom ASIC accelerators, 50Gbps NIC etc) you want.

Re: Apple Is Listening

#140

Post by michaelmrose » Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:10 AM UTC

scarface74 wrote: post #72

analognoise wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FPGA developer here. Access to a Linux cluster at work, everyone has 96GB ECC ram, dual Xeon on win 10 as a backup in case of any issues or if they prefer running locally. Our badass computers were a hair over 10k a piece. I have no idea why anyone would pay what Apple is asking. I remember when it was "counterculture" to give people more compute, for less money - do real work, on machines that made financial sense -…

What point are you trying to make? You said your computers are a hair over $10K a piece. The base price of the Mac Pro is $6000. Unless you think that Apple is going to charge $4000 to upgrade from 32GB to 96GB.

On the iMac pro 32 to 128 costs 2k, there is no 96. Then there is storage, display, gpu and the fact that the referenced machine was purchased months or years in the past vs months in the future.

Assuming the user can do basic numeric comparison I'm assuming that his 10k includes substantial extras beyond ram that would also have to be added to the equivalent Mac.