91–100 of 245 posts
I interpreted that comment as a jab at the PC industry. The implication being that in the last 5+ years the PC industry has failed to offer 600 million users a compelling reason to upgrade. Isn't that the correct interpretation, considering the whole point of bringing that up is because they're positioning a new device intended to replace the PC? I seriously doubt it's intended to mean (to quote the article) "LOL poo…
I think I have a rusty, almost 5 year old PC lying around. It has an Intel i7-2600K overclocked to 4.6 GHz, 24 GB RAM, 240G SSD and a Radeon 6950 GPU that can run most games well in fHD. Most of the machines Apple sells are actually slower than this PC.
That's a great exception to the rule. The overwhelming majority of computers Apple is talking about, are probably shitty $400 PCs that were underpowered from day one, which are just barely chugging along. Because that is actually what most people buy.
Apple didn't think it was worth making Mountain Lion running on it.
Meanwhile, I installed the newest 64 bit version of Windows 10 on it as part of the Insider program, and it generally runs faster than my Lion install.
I interpreted that comment as a jab at the PC industry. The implication being that in the last 5+ years the PC industry has failed to offer 600 million users a compelling reason to upgrade. Isn't that the correct interpretation, considering the whole point of bringing that up is because they're positioning a new device intended to replace the PC? I seriously doubt it's intended to mean (to quote the article) "LOL poo…
I built my desktop from scratch (for the first time) in 2005, added a couple components from other computers as they died, and still use it with no issues. I've thought about upgrading components in it, but since they haven't died yet, and it still works just fine, there's just not much of a point.
Last Macbook Pro generation is from 2012... this is really sad, it really is.
The innards have been upgraded regularly since 2012, and the CPUs and GPUs in the latest 15" models are pretty competitive to everything else on the market not counting machines for gamers.
I swear, if a modern tech company went up and said 'We think you should buy our product", someone would start yelling about how its insulting how a company is endorising capitalism and materialism. We've gone from "Won't somebody think of the children" to "Won't somebody think of every single possible group that is possible to somehow offend in some way"
No. What apple is saying today is something that it has always said - but its only recently that people in america are too poor to buy american products. I grew up around windows and linux, and whenever I tell that in a job interview - people think I am not being serious since "real developers" use mac. In my first software job - I was told to abandon my personal cheap linux and use the company's brand new expensive…
How true is this? I have noticed the proliferation of Macs in the developer community and I was wondering how much it would hurt me professionally by not owning one. Do devs really make snap judgements based on your platform of choice and could this impact me professionally in the long term?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely true, phone hardware was quite 'limited' at first, unlike PC which were mostly capable of swallowing any task thrown at them (unless transcoding 1080p in real time or rebuilding LFS counts). On PC the main issue is: subpar and/or unsupported GPU (to avoid burning the main cpu for entertainment), absence of SSD, bad software stack.
>> Surely true, phone hardware was quite 'limited' at first Well here's my problem with that argument. The 3G, 4 and iPad 1 were quite fast until the bloated OS upgrades started coming out. The one thing that would keep me from being bitter is if Apple offered an easy way to downgrade to the original OS version of each one. I don't run a lot of apps. The most important apps to me are the ones that come with the phone…
The thing that saddens me is that, business will always do that, it's the survival gene by making profit. On the other hand we could have nice open source, legit good software layers but it just doesn't happen the right way on smartphones so we're stuck with android / ios and their tricks.
In times of climate change debate I think Apple is doing the wrong thing here, encouraging buy and throw away mentality increasing waste.
We definitely need a strong reduction in the introduction of new technology that replaces old, still working hardware. This is so wasteful. Along with this, we need centrally planned production of consumer goods to control the pace of change and prevent overproduction, and these goods need to be have government set prices to insure that everyone can afford them.
I interpreted that comment as a jab at the PC industry. The implication being that in the last 5+ years the PC industry has failed to offer 600 million users a compelling reason to upgrade. Isn't that the correct interpretation, considering the whole point of bringing that up is because they're positioning a new device intended to replace the PC? I seriously doubt it's intended to mean (to quote the article) "LOL poo…
In times of climate change debate I think Apple is doing the wrong thing here, encouraging buy and throw away mentality increasing waste.