931–940 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a reason that the old saying is "reduce, reuse, recycle". The effectiveness is in that order: reduce consumption, reuse what you have, and recycle what you can no longer use. There is a very straightforward opportunity here for Apple to enable "reuse". They absolutely should be doing that.
Can you name an example of an AIO (or laptop) usable as a display?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My uncle is on his third iMac. He owns them for a decade at a time. When he sends emails, the subject is always "From " because he shared an email account with my aunt years ago and even though he no longer does, he still puts his name in the subject. That's the target buyer.
glorified e-mail client for $1200. Nice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Huh, is that a step backwards for them? iMacs from over 6 years ago were upgradeable to 64
The M-series is a little more complicated. The M1 was max 16GB, with the Pro and Max going up to ... 64, I think? The latest models can go higher, but we're still a long ways off from the old Mac Pro's 1.5TB max.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's simple. I have a old iMac w a 5K screen. I would like to just but a now Mac Mini and keep using my iMac as a monitor. Instead my 5K iMac will end up in a landfill. Which is less green.
You could put Linux on it and use it as a sort of jukebox, or any multitude of other things. You could also send it to me if you aren't interested in doing any of that :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Waterproofing. It really is that simple. The math would never work out trading that for easy replaceability. And every average user can get a shop to replace their battery.
The old Samsung Galaxy S5 was waterproof and had a user-replaceable battery, so your argument doesn't hold water.
Right now, the Apple computer lineup is totally out of alignment for me. The iMac is too small and the laptops are too big. I'd like a minimum 27" display for the iMac, maybe 31". For a laptop, give me something more portable, like the old 2 pound, 12" MacBook.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm confused about how Europe didn't have anything to do with the timing. Apple switched exactly when Europe mandated it and criticized the mandate.
They switched a year earlier than mandated. There’s a very good chance it was actually already in the works.
Timing probably matters: when most of the market already agrees you can't wait for the last group, you have to strike before everyone defuses again.
And while I can imagine that apple had a plan here, the part that doesn't fit is that they protested the mandate. If this had no effect on their plans, why bother?
Serious question, is gaming relevant on iMac outside of Steam? My subjective view is that it’s all concentrated there.
>Gamers can enjoy incredibly smooth gameplay, with up to 2x higher frame rates5 than on iMac with M1. Serious question, is gaming relevant on iMac outside of Steam? My subjective view is that it’s all concentrated there.
I'm surprised they are still shipping these with 256GB of storage base. I had a Macbook with a ~500GB SSD in 2012 (I installed it), and a 500GB spinning disk in like 2008 (also user installed). A 500GB SSD can be had for <$50 these days, and a 1TB for <$100. Still plenty of profit for Apple, even if they bump up the base storage to 512GB and make 1TB a $200 upgrade...
Do regular users use more than 250GB or so of local storage? Large media collections are likely stored on a NAS or external HDDs and the local disk is more for the OS, apps, and scratch space. Nowadays many files are on the cloud as well. Developers, video editors, and other people who actually handle large amounts of data locally will likely purchase an upgrade. While they're Linux systems pretty much all my desktop…
Video games now take up 50-100GB too.