TR Forums

whm1974 wrote:

If memory serves, aren't these the folks that built the Mac brand? I remember back in the late 80's and early to mid 90's that if you wanted to do media creation and photo editing, the Mac was the platform to get. The only the thing that was remotely better was the Amiga and the more the way more costly SGI Unix workstations.

Yes, and I think a pretty good case could be made that it was the MacOS specifically which made that happen.  At that point a workstation was something different than a big PC, but I don't remember the capabilities of the Mac hardware actually being that much better at content creation.  It was the software that made the difference.

Vhalidictes wrote:

derFunkenstein wrote:

Yes, Apple has abandoned the very same people that rocketed it to stardom in the early 1980s and saved it from bankruptcy in the late 1990s

My prediction: In less than ten years, Apple will be a subsidiary of Foxconn/Hon Hai.

Apple has sure has fallen quite a bit since Steve Jobs died.

whm1974 wrote:

Vhalidictes wrote:

derFunkenstein wrote:

Yes, Apple has abandoned the very same people that rocketed it to stardom in the early 1980s and saved it from bankruptcy in the late 1990s

My prediction: In less than ten years, Apple will be a subsidiary of Foxconn/Hon Hai.

Apple has sure has fallen quite a bit since Steve Jobs died.

Can't tell how you meant that, but what I meant was that this is Research In Motion, Part 2. Or Nokia Part 2 if you prefer. Point is, we've seen this before. Industry-standard to nothing.

Tends to happen to companies with a small number of important products, like cell phone manufacturers.

Adding insult to injury, Consumer Reports doesn't recommend the new models.

http://www.consumerreports.org/laptops/ ... mendation/

derFunkenstein wrote:

Adding insult to injury, Consumer Reports doesn't recommend the new models.

http://www.consumerreports.org/laptops/ ... mendation/

Dear Apple,

WTF!

Sincerely,

A 15" MacBook Pro 2014 user who needs a bigger trackpad.

They must just be getting stuck in high gear or something. Consumer Reports is methodical to the point that the results should never vary like they did - 16 hours to less than four on the same test. Crazy.

derFunkenstein wrote:

Adding insult to injury, Consumer Reports doesn't recommend the new models.

http://www.consumerreports.org/laptops/ ... mendation/

That is pretty bad.

I still have my Macbook (Late 2009). It cost me $799 new. It has an Ethernet port, built in DVD burner, 2x USB 2.0 ports, headphone jack, replaceable RAM and replaceable HDD/SDD. 

Granted it is a Core 2 Duo at 2.23GHz...point it, why would I pay $1799 for no ports, no disc drive, and fixed ram/storage?

No thanks Apple.

The mackbook (late 2009): Ports

The latest macbook pro: Ports

ClickClick5 wrote:

I still have my Macbook (Late 2009). It cost me $799 new. It has an Ethernet port, built in DVD burner, 2x USB 2.0 ports, headphone jack, replaceable RAM and replaceable HDD/SDD. 

Granted it is a Core 2 Duo at 2.23GHz...point it, why would I pay $1799 for no ports, no disc drive, and fixed ram/storage?

No thanks Apple.

The mackbook (late 2009): Ports

The latest macbook pro: Ports

Holy smokes. You're complaining about the lack of a disc drive? That is nuts.

Oh, and BTW, the ports on the new MacBook Pro are its best feature.

chuckula wrote:

The fact that Apple has been neglecting Macs certainly isn't news. However, I didn't realize the depths to which Apple had gone organizationally to make sure that Mac development was thrown under the bus. The fact that there basically isn't a business unit with its own budget and direction that is devoted to either the Mac hardware or to making sure MacOS stays relevant is pretty startling. Basically it looks like a whole bunch of pigs competing for the sow's attention and the Mac unit has been made the runt of the litter.

It's basic math-
1.The minute no of apple customers that want to do anything more resource hungry than facebook are irrelevant to apple.
2.Also apple thinks you should all be using tablets instead.
3.To throw in a bit of humor-THIS IS NOW A DONGLE Co THAT ALSO MAKES COMPUTERS......................................................

HERETIC wrote:

chuckula wrote:

The fact that Apple has been neglecting Macs certainly isn't news. However, I didn't realize the depths to which Apple had gone organizationally to make sure that Mac development was thrown under the bus. The fact that there basically isn't a business unit with its own budget and direction that is devoted to either the Mac hardware or to making sure MacOS stays relevant is pretty startling. Basically it looks like a whole bunch of pigs competing for the sow's attention and the Mac unit has been made the runt of the litter.

It's basic math-
1.The minute no of apple customers that want to do anything more resource hungry than facebook are irrelevant to apple.
2.Also apple thinks you should all be using tablets instead.
3.To throw in a bit of humor-THIS IS NOW A DONGLE Co THAT ALSO MAKES COMPUTERS......................................................

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

HERETIC wrote:

lso apple thinks you should all be using tablets instead.

Mobile CPUs are getting very powerful. My 12.9" iPad Pro is a rather handy work device.

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

Yes, but can write a book or an essay using a phone? What about media creation?

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

Different people have different definitions of "real work". If we really want to quibble about semantics, there are an awful lot of "real work" tasks that don't require a computing device of any kind!

That said, with the move of so much to "The Cloud", all you really need is something that amounts to a fancy terminal, even for many computing-related tasks.

whm1974 wrote:

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

Yes, but can write a book or an essay using a phone? What about media creation?

It wouldn't be the ideal tool for the job, but you could definitely do it.

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

For my work, I require side-by-side full-page documents, either on paired monitors or one large one. I also require a proper keyboard to type (at about 60 wpm), and a sufficiently precise mouse input interface. No phone or tablet on Earth is going to cut it.

Chuckaluphagus wrote:

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

For my work, I require side-by-side full-page documents, either on paired monitors or one large one.  I also require a proper keyboard to type (at about 60 wpm), and a sufficiently precise mouse input interface.  No phone or tablet on Earth is going to cut it.

Thank you!!!

I really was playing devil's advocate there. If I'm doing more than surfing or composing terse 1- or 2-line responses to forum posts I'll generally haul the laptop out of the backpack and tether instead of using the phone. But blanket statements like "you can't do real work from a phone/tablet" are generally wrong...

Don't get me started on the current state of the Mac.

I'm a die hard Apple user. How die hard? I have 55 machines at home right now with Apple logos, 5 officially licensed Mac clones when Apple did such a thing, two NeXT cubes and a single NeXT slab.

My main system, a 2010 dual socket Xeon, 12 core Mac Pro, was purchased after Apple first shipped the 2013 Mac Pro. I knew Apple's direction was going to be one of neglect as they didn't get the idea of expansion or user serviceable parts. And three years later with Apple still offering the 2013 Mac Pro untouched in terms of specs or price, I was right. Case in point, my Mac Pro's CPU is just as fast bar any AVX enabled software. On the GPU side, I was able to put a faster video card into my 2010 Mac Pro the day I got than the faster single GPU offering Apple offers in the 2013 model. Oh, and I do have the option of adding a second GPU if I wanted. The GPU gap has only widened as I can put two RX 480's in there and get all the nice dual GPU OpenCL/OpenGL/CoreImage enabled software can use of the same price Apple charges to go from dual D300 to dual D700 GPUs. 5K resolution support is also better than what the 2013 model provides. If I go the nVidia route, I also get CUDA support and G-synce display support. Memory capacity on the dual socket 2010 model is also higher than the 2013 model: just to test I've put 128 GB of memory into it and it worked without issue. Memory bandwidth on the dual socket 2010 model is also slightly higher too. While the 2013 model should get praise for adopting PCIe based storage early on, it only uses a 2 lane PCIe 2.0 link. If I so desired, I can get a faster 8 lane PCIe 3.0 (which will only run at 2.0 in my Mac Pro) based NVMe card and quadruple storage speeds. Reportedly these NVMe cards are also bootable in the 2010 Mac Pro too.

Outside of AVX enabled software, Apple hasn't released anything decisively faster than what could be had with a 2010 model with a few upgrades. Considering the used prices for the 2010 model now and the cost of the upgrades, it is very likely cheaper too. Six years Apple, six years and you don't have a decisively better machine.

From what I heard MacOS is a pretty decent operating system. Isn't iOS based off of it?

End User wrote:

HERETIC wrote:

lso apple thinks you should all be using tablets instead.

Mobile CPUs are getting very powerful. My 12.9" iPad Pro is a rather handy work device.

"handy" being the key word there.
If I were to give a mouse 10/10 for speed,accuracy and usability-scratchpads and touch-screens would get 1/10

whm1974 wrote:

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

Yes, but can write a book or an essay using a phone? What about media creation?

Microsoft Word on a phone? Yes
Connect an external full-size keyboard to a phone? Yes
Photo taking on a phone? Yes
Photo editing on the phone? Yes
Video recording on a phone? Yes
Video editing on a phone? Yes

Chuckaluphagus wrote:

End User wrote:

whm1974 wrote:

And soon Apple will become irrelevant to those of who want real computers to do real work. Tablet while useful for some tasks can't replace a PC for doing work.

Anybody that says you need a PC to do real work should take their head out the sand. I can do network/server management from my phone for goodness sake.

For my work, I require side-by-side full-page documents, either on paired monitors or one large one. I also require a proper keyboard to type (at about 60 wpm), and a sufficiently precise mouse input interface. No phone or tablet on Earth is going to cut it.

I've got 4 27" 2560x1440 displays here on my desk at home so I am well aware of the benefits of multiple displays.

The beauty of my 12.9" iPad Pro is that I can run side-by-side full-page documents and pair it to a "proper keyboard".

HERETIC wrote:

If I were to give a mouse 10/10 for speed,accuracy and usability-scratchpads and touch-screens would get 1/10

I'd die if someone took away my Magic Trackpad 2. I suffer with mice on my Linux/Windows rigs.

Touch-screens on Windows devices are definitely 1/10.

End User wrote:

I'd die if someone took away my Magic Trackpad 2. I suffer with mice on my Linux/Windows rigs.

Touch-screens on Windows devices are definitely 1/10.

Both my sister and I have found that using the magic trackpad with one hand and the mouse with the other is surprisingly effective. For some stuff the trackpad is better, and other stuff the mouse wins at, so you get the best of both worlds this way.

whm1974 wrote:

From what I heard MacOS is a pretty decent operating system. Isn't iOS based off of it?

iOS is based on the core tech that is used by macOS:

Darwin:

Darwin forms the core set of components upon which macOS (previously OS X and Mac OS X), iOS, watchOS, and tvOS are based. It is mostly POSIX-compatible, but has never, by itself, been certified as compatible with any version of POSIX. Starting with Leopard, macOS has been certified as compatible with the Single UNIX Specification version 3.

History:

The heritage of Darwin began with NeXT's NeXTSTEP operating system (later, since version 4.0, known as OPENSTEP), first released in 1989. After Apple bought NeXT in 1997, it announced it would base its next operating system on OPENSTEP. This was developed into Rhapsody in 1997, Mac OS X Server 1.0 in 1999, Mac OS X Public Beta in 2000, and Mac OS X 10.0 in 2001.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)


Example of Media Layer core tech shared across platforms.

Arbiter Odie wrote:

End User wrote:

I'd die if someone took away my Magic Trackpad 2. I suffer with mice on my Linux/Windows rigs.

Touch-screens on Windows devices are definitely 1/10.

Both my sister and I have found that using the magic trackpad with one hand and the mouse with the other is surprisingly effective. For some stuff the trackpad is better, and other stuff the mouse wins at, so you get the best of both worlds this way.

Interesting.

whm1974 wrote:

From what I heard MacOS is a pretty decent operating system. Isn't iOS based off of it?

Yes and no.

The core of macOS (formerly OS X) has wisely evolved over time. There was both a 32 bit to 64 bit transition and a platform transition that cause next to no disruption for the end user. In fact, all the different platform versions can be hidden behind a single binary file from the user's perspective. It is straight forward for Apple to also include additional platform support as necessary. Random factoid here, while the PowerPC 970 was a 64 bit chip and ran 64 bit applications, the kernel for OS X 10.5 was only 32 bit but used a PAE-like scheme to support up to 32 GB of memory in real kernel mode. 64 bit PowerPC applications did manage to see the full 64 bit address space and larger 64 bit general purpose registers while using the 32 bit kernel. Apple designed OS X this way dating back to OS X 10.0 as all signs on the horizon pointed toward a 64 bit transition less than a decade away.

Design software right the first time taking into considering future trends. With this credo Apple will add some hidden new features for internal Apple usage before opening them up for general developers. This also means knowing how to hide a few mistakes Apple has made during the development of OS X. The kernel itself is a prime example. Apple inherited it from NeXTstep which itself inherited it from BSD. The last few years since Apple has made the 64 bit kernel the default, kernel extensions have been relegated behind a kernel interface API. This is ultimately a step toward Apple replacing the mach kernel with an alternative if they should choose to do so (for awhile it seems that Apple was flirting with L4).

Another big thing Apple has done with OS X development is planned depreciation of legacy APIs. Carbon is the most notable example which lead the Photoshop, often seen as a flagship Mac application, to ship its 64 bit version on Windows before OS X. Adobe's first attempt of a 64 bit Mac Photoshop used 64 bit Carbon APIs before Apple decided to not ship them OS X 10.5. Older APIs for graphics were also replaced with CoreImage with then spawned CoreAudio, CoreVideo and CoreAnimation to make developer's lives easier. It is my understanding that some the legacy APIs live on today as merely software shims that sit above these newer, more modern APIs.

The one area where Apple hasn't seen long term trends correctly is with their OpenGL and Vulkan support. Apple certainly lags behind in official OpenGL support (4.5 current vs. 4.1 from Apple) though vendor extensions make up for a good chunk of support. Apple should still update to remove reliance on those vendor extensions. Vulkan support does need to be added to gain feature parity with the other big name OS on the market. I'm actually surprised that it wasn't mentioned for macOS 10.12. Though Apple does have Metal and adding Vulkan support to macOS doesn't seem to mesh well with recent reports of how Apple is de-empahsizing the Mac internally.

Probably something that Apple should have dropped a long time ago has been its file system: HFS+. The initial release of HFS+ was 20 years ago and was designed around the concept of spinning discs. Well limitations of HFS+ clearly show its age as features have been bolted on with limited success (case sensitivity technically works but legacy applications hate it). Apple's first attempt to replace it was with ZFS but then Sun bought Oracle and Apple got cold feet as Oracle is one of the few companies whose legal department is larger than Apple's (or it was at the time). Basic ZFS support was put into OS X 10.6 for developers but it went no where. mac OS 10.12 has introduced a new file system based around the concept of SSDs with optimizations for NVMe enabled drives. This shows some real performance and reliability potential though it is still years away from becoming the default on Macs (Apple could get away with introducing it on iOS devices sooner rather than later due to a much more narrow scope of support).

Nowadays, macOS is a pretty well polished product that continues to evolved. With the current yearly update pace for features, it does make each revision seem smaller than the last but when looking at the aggregate whole over a decade they have changed a lot.