I'm a tad frustrated. I love Apple and the Mac OS, but sometimes it really gets to be that the Mac space is a one supplier game. Apple has decided for me that I like glossy screens. I was pretty sure I hated them, but I guess Apple must be right. I also hate real buttons I guess. I'm looking forward to when Apple replaces my keyboard with a pretty glass piece as well.
I really need a new laptop (PowerBook is ready to kick the bucket), but at a certain point Apple needs to understand that some of its users are decently traditional and just really, really like the Mac OS. I feel like if Apple had to compete with other Mac OS players, I'd get a better deal and better products. Apple is making great things right now, but they're also trying to force you into a corner by saying "if you want the good Mac OS stuff, you have to put up with everything else we want to push on you".
Maybe I'm the only one who feels like Apple is getting arrogant with their marketshare. Maybe this isn't parallel to how Apple previously got arrogant and lost nearly all its marketshare. Maybe I don't want to go back to the dark days when I was openly mocked for my Mac choice.
Maybe I'm the only one who feels like Apple is getting arrogant with their marketshare.
Methinks you have cause and effect backwards. Apple's willingness to simplify their product line is the reason they have a growing marketshare.
Apple's been making design decisions like this since Steve Jobs insisted on the one-button mouse. And left the floppy out of the original iMac. And released a notebook without a CD-ROM drive. You can't claim that this is something new. This is how Apple works. You can have any color so long as it's aluminum.
Having to pay a premium for Firewire is what makes me unhappy, since I just bought more Firewire peripherals, including a Firewire-based audio interface. But... oh well. The good news is my old Macbook is still working just fine. When it finally kicks the bucket, I might as well spend the extra money on a Macbook Pro and get my Firewire. It's not as if I'll save any money by migrating to Windows on a Dell, or by trying to figure out if there's a 1password equivalent on Ubuntu and whether I can transfer my 250 stored passwords to it without retyping them all.
Nice turn of phrase. The irony is that Ford made everything black because it was cheaper. Jobs is making everything aluminum because it acts as a distinguishing factor, so it lets him charge more... I imagine we're only a few years away from hardwood computers.
It is a real button. Did you not read the article/presentation etc?
You can just decide that the bottom 1/3rd of the trackpad is the old button and keep using it just as you did with a satisfying click and small movement as before.
AFAICT, that's not a real button. That's a configurable pseudo-button. In particular, there doesn't appear to be tactile feedback -- the most important part of button-pressing for those of us old-school types who like to press buttons.
The most important tactile feedback of a button is not the spring of depression but rather the shape of the button itself. It allows you to constantly reset your bearings. When you're typing on a keypad, for example, you feel whether your finger is hitting the button square in the middle, or slightly to the left or right and adjust accordingly. You can look at the screen and type because of that.
Hell, you can probably type whole paragraphs with your eyes shut without erring. Without the feel of physical buttons, you'll inevitably drift one direction or the other. That's why BlackBerry typing is really so much better than the iPhone. When you have both in broad daylight and are staring at the buttons as you type, the difference isn't as noticeable. But on a Berry, you can text one-handed while driving (though I don't recommend it) while on an iPhone you'd slip up pretty fast. Or, more importantly, you can look at the screen exclusively as you type, as you would on a computer.
I'm not sure if this is relevant here though. Perhaps it will cause your fingers to drift upward when not looking? I really don't know.
Every source I've seen -- including the linked article -- describes it as a "glass multi-touch trackpad". This does not imply that it has tactile feedback, beyond the clicky noises (which aren't tactile).
Yes, it's a glass trackpad. It's also a physical button. This was made clear in the presentation, in the description on Apple.com and in a video also on Apple.com. Here's the video, you can see the button go up and down:
"...and we actually don't hate the all-clicking trackpad much at all. (If your thumb muscle memory makes you click at the bottom where the button used to be, it works and feels pretty much the same.)"
It /feels/ the same as the old trackpad thus it has tactile feedback. The entire trackpad clicks.
IMHO, original comment (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=332526) should be modded to slightly negative, because it's false, even if it's an honest mistake. (I think you could stop the bleeding by acknowledging the error with an after-edit.)
Followup question about sources is fair, but still seems to advance an erroneous impression based on "every source I've seen". So slight downmodding (perhaps just to zero) doesn't seem clearly abusive to me.
(I've only downmodded the original false comment, while upmodding those providing true information and details.)
I did check the apple site, but hadn't seen the video. The linked article didn't really describe it, nor did any of the half-dozen other articles I've read.
The copy on the apple site is ambiguous -- saying that the trackpad "is the button" could mean a lot of things, including that the trackpad acts as the button (which is how I read it). It isn't an unreasonable interpretation.
I'm there with you on the lack of a matte display. I find it hard to believe that glare is not an issue to those with glossy screens. I think people simply deal with it because of our inherent draw towards that which is shiny...
My thoughts exactly. For me, a glossy display is really hard to use, functionality is ruined.
That's the way my brain is wired, I can't help it. I only hope that notebooks with matte displays don't disappear, and that I can install Linux on them.
You should borrow one from a friend and try it for a few hours.
I thought I'd hate it, but I absolutely love it. I've never had glare issues in an environment that wouldn't have totally washed out my old matte MacBookPro anyhow. For my use, the glossy screen has been an improvement 100% of the time.
I would guess that the glossy screen is necessary for the construction of the computer. Is glass-and-matte possible? (I'm not knowledgeable here; I might be wrong.)
My guess is that they could, at the very least they could just add a matte coating. Also, they claim that the track pad is glass, and it certainly isn't shiny, though how an LCD would look through it I'm not 100% sure.
The slides say that the screen overlay goes edge-to-edge and is glass. So I'd say that matte is not an option because the screen is behind a glass panel.
Ah. So matte is something that goes over a screen?
In that case, yeah: what you said makes sense. I like the glass-over-everything aesthetic: it unifies everything. And losing matte is a shame, but I'll reserve criticism until I see the new Macbooks in action. If the screen really is bright enough to cancel out overbearing glare, then I'll forgive Apple for this. If not... then I'll just hope they have some revolutionary anti-glare thingie coming out soon.
Why don't you buy the last generation of Macbook Pro which was the best machine until yesterday and it will have all the features you want(matte screen, real button, firewire) and you'll save a ton of cash if you go refurb.
What a shame Apple's releases today have stirred up a cauldron of disappointment and inconsistency. No significant spec upgrades, prices have gone up (in the UK, at least) - we've gained slightly better video, a glass trackpad, a new case, and an SSD option.
With computer prices falling (generally), it's remarkable that Apple hasn't responded to that at all. Even the old MacBook they're trying to pass off as the new entry level one is £20 more than the same machine was yesterday (yet $100 less in the US).
Apple has muddied the whole notebook range. The MacBook now comes in two totally different styles, as does the MacBook Pro (with the 17" now being a particularly poor deal, despite the increased standard res.) And what's with the new Cinema Display? Looks nice, but it's not workable for Mac Pro users (the market Cinema Displays were meant to be for) and it's heavily overpriced. It's really just an accessory for only the newest releases.
Apple was making good progress at bringing pro-level technology to the user at prosumer prices, but this whole update has sent them back into the stratosphere. The entry level "new" MacBook is over £200 ($400) more than the old entry level MacBook.. how can I recommend this to my PC-switching family now?
Apple goes through transitional phases, if it could have lopped off that white macbook completely it surely would have. And as with any good Apple faithful knows, you don't buy version 1. If you really want a laptop it's best you wait until next Feb when the specs are updated again and the kinks worked out.
This then brings into question what WILL get updated during MacWorld. I'm thinking SnowLeopard, Mac Pro/Mac mini, Apple TV, and iPhone.
Also, you can wait for a notebook with a mobile version of Core i7, when Intel finally catches up with everything AMD has to offer (eg integrated memory controller).
Apple is not trying to be a Porsche of the computer industry. Apple is a mass market company with growing marketshare - it's one of the biggest computer manufacturers in the world. Porsche's output is tiny compared to that of Ford.
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, especially when it makes no sense.
Are you kidding? Apple wants to eat its cake and have it, if they can. They want mass popularity and technical superiority. But above everything, they are a high-end technology producer. Remember their $600 phone? There's a reason their products debut at such a high price: it's because they want above all to have the best product.
Granted, $999 Macbooks aren't the best. I'd prefer it lower. But it's absolutely worth that price.
> Apple wants to eat its cake and have it, if they can.
I'd say that makes Apple more like a Merecedes-Benz of the computer world than Porsche. Porsche produces extremely high end cars for under 1% of the market. Mercedes-Benz produces high quality "prestige" cars but still wants large market share.
Given that Jobs even drives a Merc, I think there's something to this comparison ;-)
Apple does want to be the Porsche of the computer industry. The adoration and expanding market share is just incidental of them being the Porsche of the computer industry.
It's also quite small in the grand scheme things, 1/10 of the global market.
Worldwide dell has 14.9% market share vs 3.6% for Apple.
In the US Ford has 17% and Porsche has 0.2%.
So Porsche is around 10x as exclusive as Apple. If Apple want's to keep growing they need to keep putting out cheaper boxes to take an ever larger slice of the pie. However, Porsche is far more profitable than Ford so their are reasons Apple is not selling cheep boxes.
They are clearly a superior product to the others.
If you're after a low cost computer, don't buy Apple. Simple. Just like if you're after a low cost car, you don't buy Porsche.
Just think how often you use your laptop, and how important it is. When you think about it, all laptops are very very cheap considering how much we rely on them these days. So arguing about a couple of hundred dollars spread over maybe 2-3 years, to get you a significantly better laptop for all those years.....
I think both the new MacBook and the MacBook pro are great. Aesthetically Apple nailed it. The increased graphics capacity will no doubt be a hit with the graphic design and production crowd. The screen looks mint and the trackpad will no doubt probably become standard on all mac laptops from now on. Seems everyone is always wanting that "something more" but for someone who was holding out from buying a MacBook because I knew new ones were on the horizon, these are excellent.
For some reason it looks like an old circa 2004 dell laptop to me. It's the black keys with the silverish case. I haven't seen one in person but that is my immediate impression.
I'm a proud owner of a black macbook - which I love. And I think the previous macbook pros look good. Maybe I just need to see one in person, where I can see all the "detail".
That, plus the permanent glossy screen, is a deal breaker. I won't be upgrading anytime soon. Maybe the next revision will give it a new feel or look.
True. And I'd imagine that the drivers for Mac computers are all completely covered in Linux, considering there's not, ahem, too much variety to pick from. So that's an advantage.
it looks very pretty. the no-seams aluminum case looks cooler than i thought it would, and makes my four-month-old macbook pro look dated by comparison.
i think the glossy screen is a deal-breaker for me, though. i'm hoping the next round will add a matte option.
the Macbook keyboard takes some getting used to. it's a shame they moved away from the nicer keyboards on the old Macbook Pros. I use a bluetooth keyboard while at home with my Macbook as well as an external monitor, which makes it a lot nicer. Also leaving Firewire 400 off is interesting, as I prefer it to USB 2.0 for the higher speed. Looks like I'll not be buying another Macbook for a while.
They're all crap. On my MPB (mid-2008 model) there's no tactile feedback at the exact point of the key firing its signal. Sure there's a feedback point, but it's about a millimeter too high (early). You have to push a key firmly into its mushy base to get it to work. Combine that with the lack of audio feedback and you get a keyboard that I hate.
Also leaving Firewire 400 off is interesting, as I prefer it to USB 2.0 for the higher speed.
If you mean "lower" when you say "higher", then your statement is true.
USB 2.0 is 480 Mbps. Firewire 400 is...100, 200, or 400 Mbps. Firewire 800, on the other hand, tops out at 800 Mbps, but uses an incompatible cable type, thus making it even less common than Firewire 400, and practically useless except for folks doing high end video work (since those are the only devices I can think of that still ship with 1394 interfaces...maybe some audio devices do, too).
480 Mbps is theoretical speed. Most things don't reach that. In real life usage, Firewire 400 tends to be quicker than USB 2.0, or at least that's the case from my experience.
I keep hearing "theoretical speed" applied to USB, as if there's some theory under which one would be able to get 480 Mb of data transferred in one second.
No, 480M is the baud. (Download the USB 2.0 spec and check out the wire protocol.) The fastest you can transfer data is with a bulk transfer, which top out at 53248000 Bps = 406.25 Mbps. (That's what I would call the "theoretical speed".) Other transfer types are slower.
Companies like advertising "480 Mbps" because it's a high number, but it's not physically possible to transfer data over USB2 that fast.
the reason USB 2.0 is more common in the marketplace is that it's cheaper than firewire. Firewire, or IEEE1394, requires a license from Apple (this could be just if the company wants to use the term "Firewire"). Each firewire device has its own controller, which relieves the CPU from having to manage transfers, thus a real-world faster transfer time. I routinely do large transfers (4gb) from CF cards and having a firewire card reader is really great. I tried a USB 2.0 reader at a friends house and it was much slower.
On-Paper standards are interesting. Real-world performance is more interesting.
I really need a new laptop (PowerBook is ready to kick the bucket), but at a certain point Apple needs to understand that some of its users are decently traditional and just really, really like the Mac OS. I feel like if Apple had to compete with other Mac OS players, I'd get a better deal and better products. Apple is making great things right now, but they're also trying to force you into a corner by saying "if you want the good Mac OS stuff, you have to put up with everything else we want to push on you".
Maybe I'm the only one who feels like Apple is getting arrogant with their marketshare. Maybe this isn't parallel to how Apple previously got arrogant and lost nearly all its marketshare. Maybe I don't want to go back to the dark days when I was openly mocked for my Mac choice.