Ha! I remember this guy! Normally his reviews are very straightforward with no theatrical stuff, but in this case it seems like it was warranted. It's obvious by now that Apple has really dropped...
Ha! I remember this guy! Normally his reviews are very straightforward with no theatrical stuff, but in this case it seems like it was warranted.
It's obvious by now that Apple has really dropped the ball on the MacBook design, and this is someone who owns a MacBook Pro 15" 2018 model. I have to get a special keyboard cover because I'm just that worried about the keyboard getting dirt and debris, even though it makes the keyboard even more worse to type on (if that was even possible)
I think the 2016 MacBook keyboard is the single worst design blunder in Apple’s history, honestly. I mean, shipping a keyboard that breaks due to a mote of dust slipping in is bad, but there are a...
I think the 2016 MacBook keyboard is the single worst design blunder in Apple’s history, honestly. I mean, shipping a keyboard that breaks due to a mote of dust slipping in is bad, but there are a bunch of other factors that compound this right into “worst ever” territory:
We’re almost 3 years in and Apple is still shipping the thing with mere minor improvements that don’t really fix the problem because Apple can’t admit the design is fundamentally flawed
The reason for the keyboard redesign was to enable a thinner chassis, but we’ve pushed beyond reasonable thinness at this point when it comes to thermal requirements on a "pro" machine, so the whole redesign was pointless
The Touchbar is a useless gimmick and the loss of a hardware ESC key is brutal for people who use the ESC key a lot
The keyboard itself is weirdly loud and stiff. I know people who hate it and I know people who have gotten used to it, but I don’t know anyone who loves it
In the age of smartphones and tablets, the hardware keyboard is the defining feature of the laptop form factor, so fucking it up is that much worse
Wintel laptop hardware has vastly improved in the past 5-10 years. Of course Windows itself is still as awful as it’s ever been (perhaps worse in the age of Win10) but Dell, HP, and Lenovo laptops are more attractive than ever.
It’s just a fuckup of massive proportions and probably the worst damage Apple has ever done to their brand with a single design decision.
And before anyone hits me with “Apple’s going to shit under Cook,” I bet you that Steve “You’re holding it wrong” Jobs would have valiantly defended this terrible keyboard. Jobs loved hardware gimmicks. Institutionally, it was probably inevitable that Apple would at some point overdesign their keyboard. The problem here is that they didn’t revert the design after the first rev.
Apple's released duds before—the Apple III, the iMac hockey puck mouse, the G4 cube, the iPhone 4 antenna, the voice-only iPod shuffle—but Apple had the good sense to kill or fix all those products before they did any significant, lasting damage to the brand. Yet for some reason, they're going all in on this blasted keyboard.
Good points generally but it seems like the argument made in the video is that the keyboard is inextricably tied to the chassis design so as long as we have this chassis, we have the crap keyboard...
Good points generally but it seems like the argument made in the video is that the keyboard is inextricably tied to the chassis design so as long as we have this chassis, we have the crap keyboard too.
But seriously, $4000+ for this thing? WHAT THE FUCK. Overall the big picture I’m getting is that in terms of MB and MBP etc, Apple made a decision whether consciously or not to prioritize aesthetics and arbitrary notions of thinness etc over performance. I hope this doesn’t actually signal the end of MBP as a lasting brand but I’m not holding out much hope.
I am a formerly loyal Apply customer too. So I guess my next move is to start looking into Hackintoshes. I really hate Windows.
I think at first he would defend it, but given how much criticism this keyboard has received I think after a year he would have a rethink. You could make the argument that Steve defended the...
And before anyone hits me with “Apple’s going to shit under Cook,” I bet you that Steve “You’re holding it wrong” Jobs would have valiantly defended this terrible keyboard. Jobs loved hardware gimmicks.
I think at first he would defend it, but given how much criticism this keyboard has received I think after a year he would have a rethink.
You could make the argument that Steve defended the iPhone as they sold really well at the time he was defending the antenna issue. With MacBook Pro, I'm not sure if they sell anywhere near as much as iPhones. I could be wrong. They definitely aren't the market leader though.
For Apple to hold onto this design for so long makes me think Tim Cook is really trying to do the minimal amount of cost work to produce the maximum amount of profit. I hope it bites him in the arse though.
This gets me sweating because normally I'd say, "okay, then I'll move on and get a different laptop next!" but Apple still does 85% of things so much better than the competition (like, macOS...
This gets me sweating because normally I'd say, "okay, then I'll move on and get a different laptop next!" but Apple still does 85% of things so much better than the competition (like, macOS alone) and I neither really want to switch nor are there any real alternatives. Not really talking about raw CPU power or anything (I long stopped caring) but that damn keyboard, the scrapping of the F-keys... it's a really weird phase for Apple and there's rumors they'll drop Intel in favor of some weird custom CPU, which would likely mean no more Boot Camp, which I occasionally want to use.
Any specifics you can name that you really need from Apple? I think there are some serious alternatives out there today, and Apple went from expensive but worth it to only expensive.
Any specifics you can name that you really need from Apple? I think there are some serious alternatives out there today, and Apple went from expensive but worth it to only expensive.
I guess it starts and ends with macOS. I just prefer the OS over Windows and any Linux distribution. It's a sane UI yet perfectly UNIX compatible, it has great default settings, the best high-res...
I guess it starts and ends with macOS. I just prefer the OS over Windows and any Linux distribution. It's a sane UI yet perfectly UNIX compatible, it has great default settings, the best high-res screen use, etc, etc.
On the hardware side, it's just a great screen, low fan noise, comfortable handling and size (opening and closing the lid, form factor, etc), the trackpad is still the best mouse alternative I know. I like the way the keyboard backlight is done. I used to like the MagSafe power cable attachment but I guess that's gone now.
In terms of individual parts, it should be possible to find a laptop with equal or better CPU/GPU, SSD or even screen. But as soon as you do that, you're looking at prices comparably expensive and it's not like those competitors have zero "quirks" of their own. Also for external design issues (trackpad, lid design, fan noise, etc) possible candidates are already getting harder to find.
In the end, it's mostly macOS. There's hundreds of little things buried in its design philosophy that add up. I dislike Windows for the usual reasons, I dislike all Linux distributions I've came across for their clumsy UI and all their hassle with maintenance. I think I'm kinda stuck, there.
You like what you like and that's fair but it's a shame that Mac users are stuck with a single manufacturer that essentially forces an objectively mediocre product and gets away with charging an...
You like what you like and that's fair but it's a shame that Mac users are stuck with a single manufacturer that essentially forces an objectively mediocre product and gets away with charging an exhuberant price.
Atleast with PCs you have choices. You may have laptops similarly priced to Macs but you can atleast choose the one that'll perform the best.
The problem is it’s not mediocre. If you actually ignore the awful keyboard, it’s legitimately a fantastic product. The display gamut is outstanding, the trackpad is the best on any laptop, bar...
The problem is it’s not mediocre. If you actually ignore the awful keyboard, it’s legitimately a fantastic product. The display gamut is outstanding, the trackpad is the best on any laptop, bar none. It’s light, yet powerful. It feels sturdy. It does everything most people throw at it. It has AirDrop and seamlessly syncs with your iPhone. You can unlock it with your Apple Watch.
It may be mediocre if you haven’t actually ever evaluated it before or used it, but for those who bleed six colours, it’s an indispensable product.
That’s why’s we’re so angry about the keyboard. Because they’re ruining the MacBook.
This x1000. The current MacBooks are just fantastic machines except for the damned keyboards. I really am quite fond of my 2nd gen 15” Pro and I’m lucky that I don’t mind the feel of the keyboard...
This x1000. The current MacBooks are just fantastic machines except for the damned keyboards. I really am quite fond of my 2nd gen 15” Pro and I’m lucky that I don’t mind the feel of the keyboard and haven’t had a key fail.
But I just struggle to recommend them to anyone who isn’t already dead set on a Mac without a glaring “this machine has widespread keyboard reliability problems!” disclaimer. This keyboard redesign that nobody wanted or asked for has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in the worst possible way—particularly when you consider that nobody had any complaints about the keyboard design it replaced.
Seriously... I'm writing this comment on one of the "old" keyboards and it's a great typing experience. I've had this MBP for four years and never had any trouble with the keys. They remain crisp...
Seriously... I'm writing this comment on one of the "old" keyboards and it's a great typing experience. I've had this MBP for four years and never had any trouble with the keys. They remain crisp and responsive, with satisfying play and no double-hits or misses. That's about as expertly as I know how to explain a keyboard (and I'm probably using those words wrong too) but it's just good. I like typing on it.
I also have a new MBP for work, and I hate that keyboard. Often I can't tell if I hit a key because I couldn't feel it depress. Literally about 5% of the time I press the space bar I get two spaces. There's no satisfying haptic feedback or sound. I feel like I'm gonna break the thing every time I use it. They removed the escape and function keys, which I use constantly, and replaced them with the janky and gimmicky touch bar. This is worse in every possible way. It's thinner, but so marginally so that who cares? Shaving off millimeters of thickness isn't remotely a priority for me.
On top of that, the trackpad is larger but also seems to be less sensitive and the force click feedback feels less precise than on my older machine. Because it's so wide I'm constantly brushing it with my wrists when I type. It feels less sturdy to the touch as well. I'm also frustrated that they removed the magsafe power connector, which was a legitimately great feature of the line for many years. I recognize that there are some advantages to USB-C, but for me they don't justify the move away from the old one. I wish Apple would've at least made a magsafe-to-USB-C dongle thing that still allows the cord to breakaway on impact, even if they wanted to standardize the port.
For all my complaining, I really do like the touch ID fingerprint reader on the new machines. It's the one hardware innovation that actually is a quality of life improvement over my older machine.
I am not a Mac user, but it is sad even for me: not the instance, but the trend, of changing something not for improvement, but just to sell a new batch of it. The hardware dickbar that the...
I am not a Mac user, but it is sad even for me: not the instance, but the trend, of changing something not for improvement, but just to sell a new batch of it. The hardware dickbar that the Macbook has is an example. Or the notch that apple farted from their braind and many are copying. Or how Gnome fucked up menus and redistributed the functionality between two random context menus and two sets of icons w/o any reason and consistency.
Computers are more than hardware, software, and performance. The MacBook Pro has the best trackpad of any laptop, and it's not even close. For the longest time, no other laptop had displays as...
Computers are more than hardware, software, and performance. The MacBook Pro has the best trackpad of any laptop, and it's not even close. For the longest time, no other laptop had displays as good as Apple's (though in the last few years, that's been changing.)
Having to wait for weeks or even days for a keyboard fix on any laptop is below any standards for me, for one. I'm typing this on a rather old Asus laptop, and I haven't had a failing key yet....
Having to wait for weeks or even days for a keyboard fix on any laptop is below any standards for me, for one. I'm typing this on a rather old Asus laptop, and I haven't had a failing key yet. Should the keys themselves fail, I have a set in its packaging under my bed, which I can easily install.
The way people describe Mac OS (or however it is spelled) is really interesting. Is it that much better than Windows or Linux? I used the OS for around a minute at a shop, and I decided it's a pain. I think I'd only get one if I wanted to write apps for Apple's platforms (which I read is lucrative, but the barrier to entry is very restrictive for me).
For the record, I also built my own desktop PC because I can't be arsed to pay Apple $5000 to put their hardware into a nice desktop casing. I'm mostly talking about laptop design issues, where...
For the record, I also built my own desktop PC because I can't be arsed to pay Apple $5000 to put their hardware into a nice desktop casing. I'm mostly talking about laptop design issues, where DIY solutions are harder.
Apple, so far, simply had the best compromises for high-end laptops but with the failing keyboards, the weird touch-bar and the threat of leaving Intel for some even more isolating custom chip, they're no longer a real option.
For the record, if you’re really a Mac-afficianado, you should be incredibly excited about ARM on Mac. Provided Marzipan doesn’t completely screw with the UI affordances we associate with macOS...
For the record, if you’re really a Mac-afficianado, you should be incredibly excited about ARM on Mac. Provided Marzipan doesn’t completely screw with the UI affordances we associate with macOS too much, we’re looking at much more secure and power efficient laptops that will slash and burn intel’s benchmarks by a large margin. I can’t wait.
If apps use SPI’s to perform critical functions, that’s on them. Apple’s API’s on Mac will otherwise provide the correct bytecode to run on either Intel or ARM.
I want some inter-compatibility. You can currently run Boot Camp and basically use a MBP as a Windows 10 machine with no problems. That kinda covers the only little gripe I have with the Mac...
I want some inter-compatibility. You can currently run Boot Camp and basically use a MBP as a Windows 10 machine with no problems. That kinda covers the only little gripe I have with the Mac ecosystem, which is some software not supported on it. If I truly need it, I just boot into Windows. With that option gone, it's a completely isolated platform.
I've long been afraid of trends at Apple to basically merge iPads into the MacBook line and going full custom ARM a red line for me.
Arm Macs are going to be great for everyone who is fully vested in the Mac ecosystem. They’re going to be a disaster for for anyone who needs their Mac to interoperate outside the Mac ecosystem,...
Arm Macs are going to be great for everyone who is fully vested in the Mac ecosystem.
They’re going to be a disaster for for anyone who needs their Mac to interoperate outside the Mac ecosystem, and the transition is going to be long and painful.
Is there honestly anything people need to interoperate outside of the Mac ecosystem that can't be done over SSH or a VM? Genuinely curious because I've always wondered what the rationale for...
Is there honestly anything people need to interoperate outside of the Mac ecosystem that can't be done over SSH or a VM? Genuinely curious because I've always wondered what the rationale for bootcamp actually was. I've never once needed to use Windows.
It’s largely a question of how long it will take for professional cross-platform software to transition to the new architecture, and whether or not the Arm builds will be as performant as the...
It’s largely a question of how long it will take for professional cross-platform software to transition to the new architecture, and whether or not the Arm builds will be as performant as the Intel builds.
In a nutshell: how long before there’s Arm native Photoshop? It’s not just Photoshop of course, but it’s that entire category of expensive, professional software with their own ecosystems.
I'd probably expect Apple to make a big splash about how $largeCompany will be supporting ARM on Mac from day 1, and that'll probably be Adobe and Microsoft. But yes I understand the concern, it...
I'd probably expect Apple to make a big splash about how $largeCompany will be supporting ARM on Mac from day 1, and that'll probably be Adobe and Microsoft. But yes I understand the concern, it will be a period of pain. Luckily, all Mac App Store applications will "just work".
This is highly reminiscent of the PowerPC transition though. People hated it. There was an inordinate amount of criticism. But it was a necessary step to continue evolving the Mac platform. It's time for the next step ;).
This is very different from the PPC transition. The PPC architecture was essentially on life support and Apple was running the ventilator. Power still sees some niche use today, but for all...
This is highly reminiscent of the PowerPC transition though.
This is very different from the PPC transition. The PPC architecture was essentially on life support and Apple was running the ventilator. Power still sees some niche use today, but for all intents and purposes Apple was the last one out.
x86-64, on the other hand, is the world's dominant architecture for general purpose desktop and cloud computing. Apple isn't leaving Intel because Intel is floundering, Apple is leaving Intel in spite of Intel's utter dominance. I can all-but-guarantee you that some vendors will see this transition as their opportunity to exit the Mac platform: when it's just a matter of targeting the same architecture on a different OS, a port is manageable. But when it's a totally different OS and architecture? It has to be worth it. And in a world that is increasingly doing all their computing on cloud and mobile, the math on "worth it" might not work out with this new barrier.
Another key difference from the PPC transition is that the first gen Intel Core chips were just flat out better than the PPC chips they replaced. It only took one or two revisions before software ran faster in Rosetta on an Intel Mac than it did on all but the beefiest, final generation PPC Macs. That's not going to happen this time around. The absolute best case scenario here is that the first generation of Mac Arm chips are slightly faster than the midrange Intel chips they replaced when running native code and abysmally slower when running emulated Intel binaries. A more likely outcome is parity when comparing native binaries, maybe even slight degradation if the software in question made extensive use of Intel-specific instruction set extensions like AVX.
So like I said: if you're all in on the Mac platform, there's nothing but benefits here. Smaller, thinner Macs that are faster with batteries that last longer. And if you largely use your Mac as thin client to access apps and services on the cloud, then it's the same situation. You won't reap the benefits as much, but you won't get hit with any real downsides.
But if you're in that small group that's running something locally which is processor intensive in a cross-platform ecosystem (think scientific and engineering disciplines) you could be really screwed here. As in, "fuck it I guess I'm going back to Windows/Linux" screwed.
If you look at where the puck is going to be, Apple is going to attempt to provide a development toolkit to allow devs to build a single code base to target both macOS and iOS. They’ve already...
And in a world that is increasingly doing all their computing on cloud and mobile, the math on "worth it" might not work out with this new barrier.
If you look at where the puck is going to be, Apple is going to attempt to provide a development toolkit to allow devs to build a single code base to target both macOS and iOS. They’ve already showed this capability in the News, Voice Memos, and Stocks apps on macOS 10.14 (though, they’re really quite crappy compared to apps developed specifically for macOS—they’re fine as proofs of concept). I was truly skeptical that Apple was going to ever merge macOS and iOS, but it really is looking like this is at least going to be an option to allow them to bridge the transition to their own CPUs in the Mac product line.
One major question that sticks in my mind is, how can they attempt to pull something like this transition off if they don’t have something like Rosetta? Rosetta was the translation layer that magically allowed Intel macs to run apps compiled for PPC with hardly any overhead. Time will tell, but my guess is that the Apple silicon that has already started showing up in the iMac Pros and MacBook Pros in the T-series SoCs is only the beginning. Maybe they’ll allow a mixed computing platform where you can run apps off x86 and an Apple SoC in the same box?
Apple will never merge iOS and macOS, but they will bend over backwards to make iOS apps translate to macOS apps with as little work from the developer as they can get away with. Which is the...
Apple will never merge iOS and macOS, but they will bend over backwards to make iOS apps translate to macOS apps with as little work from the developer as they can get away with.
Which is the right move for Apple: JavaScript solutions are in the process of consuming desktop app UIs. By making iOS and macOS different targets of the same development process, they can hold the line against that trend as long as iPhone continues to be massively popular.
But on the other hand, boy are "Marzipan" apps terrible. Just total garbage. Worse, even, than the JavaScript apps that Apple expects them to stave off. At least JavaScript apps expect that you are using a mouse + keyboard. Marzipan apps just map mouse actions to touch events, and keyboard support is basically non-existent.
We're witnessing the death of the desktop in slow motion and although I understand why this is happening and maybe even grudgingly agree that it's the best way for legacy platforms to stay afloat as we stand on the brink of an entire generation which was raised on touch entering the workforce, it still makes me sad.
One major question that sticks in my mind is, how can they attempt to pull something like this transition off if they don’t have something like Rosetta?
They can't, which is why an x86-64 to Armv8 translation layer will be part of the announcement. Microsoft shipped it over a year ago, albeit with just x86 and not x86-64. Still, given that Microsoft solved a subset of this problem over a year ago, I'm sure Apple has it in the bag. I bet they even resurrect the Rosetta branding.
I've never had to use Windows via Bootcamp either (but in the past, plenty of times via VMware/Parallels). However you and I are mere drops in the ocean of Mac users and that we have no need does...
I've never had to use Windows via Bootcamp either (but in the past, plenty of times via VMware/Parallels).
However you and I are mere drops in the ocean of Mac users and that we have no need does in no way suggest that millions of others don't either.
Yea, my stance on this is to not let the Linux community dodge their responsibility, there. It's not just a driver or hardware issue (although, that too!), it's an issue of respecting that last...
Yea, my stance on this is to not let the Linux community dodge their responsibility, there. It's not just a driver or hardware issue (although, that too!), it's an issue of respecting that last 10%, that last 1% of polish of the UX design which no Linux distro really nails. Even Windows 10 does the average user interaction better than Linux – which is not a compliment for Windows 10.
It's small things. Lots of small things that can only be addressed by actually doing user testing, actually having professional designers who put user interest first and somehow getting a technical team on board and implement a concrete vision for the average person's Linux experience. After all, it's still an OS for geeks and IT professionals. All efforts to push it more into the mainstream, as a truly open alternative to Windows and to macOS, fall short. Which is a shame, but it is what it is.
I interact with Linux here and there, mostly over the command line, but I'm not ready for the headaches of making it my day-to-day operating system. Every couple of years, I try for a week or two, and nothing really seems to change for the better.
Exactly. I think as long as the Linux community clings to excuses when this discussion comes up, somehow delegating it to "that other distro" or that "the complaint isn't formulated precisely...
Which "Linux community", though?
Exactly.
I think as long as the Linux community clings to excuses when this discussion comes up, somehow delegating it to "that other distro" or that "the complaint isn't formulated precisely enough to put in a bug tracker", it will never become a serious competitor for mainstream users. Which is fine and maybe a reasonable path to focus on for an open source project. But I simply can't agree that the current efforts made in UX on any Linux distro are enough or that there is a serious trend for the better. It's a Linux-wide problem. It's a problem with priorities in the community of typical Linux users, whatever you want to call them.
I hate how this might come off as disrespectful for the thousands of hours put into current Linux distros, I acknowledge that there is work being done and some incremental improvements. But this is a fundamental, philosophical issue that I believe humans influential in the world of Linux-development simply don't understand. You want users? Understand UX design.
That "X" in "UX" includes the very architecture of having "distros" (maybe it's not a perfect system?), it includes driver standards for essential interactions (including the politics of prioritizing negotiating that with major manufacturers), it includes working with hardware. It includes acknowledging compatibility issues (even if "unfair") and prioritizing them over everything if they're the main issue holding people back. It includes weirdly spaced fonts that stick to the side of the window, get cut off when opening in its default position and are spaced in a way that makes it hard to see which elements belong together. It includes testing hundreds of real-world desktop environments with real users and looking at what features they need most and arranging them in a useful hierarchy. It includes the wording of error messages and making sure people can't activate some weird setting by accident. It includes icon design, typography and color choices. All that shit is unprofessional and misarranged on every Linux distro I've ever seen. It costs a minute here, and hour there and before you know it, you just spent a day setting up something that should take a single click.
If you seriously claim the only problem non-"IT" users have with Linux is the occasional driver hiccup, that's IMO the kind of downplaying the issue that keeps people from adopting it. If you don't have an idealistic friend who helps you set it up, if you actually need it for work and set it up for thousands of people, you'll see the reality of it causing problems. You can claim how there would be "an easy fix" all day long, it doesn't matter. It's about the day-to-day issues you encounter when using the software, a definition of "stability" that includes real-world workflows.
Gotta jump on your mention of Wayland, as I'm totally loving it. I dual boot Win10 and Arch, and I set up my Arch install with Drew Devault's awesome project, swaywm, which is basically a clone of...
Gotta jump on your mention of Wayland, as I'm totally loving it.
I dual boot Win10 and Arch, and I set up my Arch install with Drew Devault's awesome project, swaywm, which is basically a clone of i3 for Wayland. It's absolutely amazing compared to Xorg, and everything is a ton simpler. Sway itself is still missing some quality of life ecosystem stuff from i3, but that all seems to be coming along as quickly as can be expected.
Very excited to see how Wayland does as more DE's switch over and new ones are written.
In response specifically to your link, it would appear that the move to Windows is largely a political move. This statement by The Document Foundation was linked in the original article and covers...
In response specifically to your link, it would appear that the move to Windows is largely a political move. This statement by The Document Foundation was linked in the original article and covers a lot of why this was a bad idea. This whole thing appears to be another example of the bosses listening to the salespeople more than the employees.
Appreciate the perspective. I’ve been trying to get into Linux a little bit, not having much luck yet due to issues I assumed were specific to my hardware. But from what you and others are saying...
Appreciate the perspective. I’ve been trying to get into Linux a little bit, not having much luck yet due to issues I assumed were specific to my hardware. But from what you and others are saying it seem like it’s really just not worth the effort except as a curiosity.
What type of issues are you having? I've used Linux as my daily driver on and off for a few years now, and I'd say that it really can be worth the effort depending on one's needs. I'd be happy to...
What type of issues are you having? I've used Linux as my daily driver on and off for a few years now, and I'd say that it really can be worth the effort depending on one's needs. I'd be happy to help with any issues I have experience with.
You and me both. I tried to get Ubuntu and Elementary working properly on my retina Macbook Pro. It mostly worked although have a recollection of struggling to get wifi working properly (although...
You and me both. I tried to get Ubuntu and Elementary working properly on my retina Macbook Pro. It mostly worked although have a recollection of struggling to get wifi working properly (although it did in the end), however the issue I kept on coming up against was screen resolution. I simply couldn't get the screen resolution to play nicely and ended up spending more time on the command line configuring the display than I wanted to. Still didn't get it working correctly.
For someone else a little less tech savvy, they'd have given up in the first second never mind the hours I spent. In the end I scrubbed it and went back to OSX.
While I still have a strong desire to use Linux on the desktop, I'm not really willing to invest any more time in it.
I have many reasons to avoid Apple myself, but, from what you write, I must agree that you wouldn’t be happy with a PC - either Linux or Windows. So go for it, I guess!
I have many reasons to avoid Apple myself, but, from what you write, I must agree that you wouldn’t be happy with a PC - either Linux or Windows. So go for it, I guess!
Thinkpads are always a good choice. If you're looking for good laptops, the channel of the guy in the linked video has reviewed some good ones like the Razer Blade Pro or the ASUS Zephyrus G....
Thinkpads are always a good choice. If you're looking for good laptops, the channel of the guy in the linked video has reviewed some good ones like the Razer Blade Pro or the ASUS Zephyrus G. Ultimately it depends on what you're looking for in a laptop though.
their trackpad is the only reason why I still use my macbook over any other laptop. I wish there was some other trackpad out there that is even close to as nice as the ones on the macbooks.
their trackpad is the only reason why I still use my macbook over any other laptop. I wish there was some other trackpad out there that is even close to as nice as the ones on the macbooks.
I can't believe they have the gall to charge US$4,000 for such a poorly designed machine. Like what's the point of having an i9 powered computer if you can't even take advantage of it.
I can't believe they have the gall to charge US$4,000 for such a poorly designed machine. Like what's the point of having an i9 powered computer if you can't even take advantage of it.
The i9 line is appealing for it's ability to turboboost above the base clock. The MacBook Pro chassis is too thin to contain a cooling system required to take advantage of this, meaning there's no...
The i9 line is appealing for it's ability to turboboost above the base clock. The MacBook Pro chassis is too thin to contain a cooling system required to take advantage of this, meaning there's no real reason to get the i9 over the i7: they will perform about the same after the i9 is throttled to work within the constraints of the MacBook Pro chassis.
Because if you actually try and use the power of the i9, it overheats and throttles to avoid thermal damage. The chassis can't support such powerful chipsets inside of it.
Because if you actually try and use the power of the i9, it overheats and throttles to avoid thermal damage. The chassis can't support such powerful chipsets inside of it.
Ha! I remember this guy! Normally his reviews are very straightforward with no theatrical stuff, but in this case it seems like it was warranted.
It's obvious by now that Apple has really dropped the ball on the MacBook design, and this is someone who owns a MacBook Pro 15" 2018 model. I have to get a special keyboard cover because I'm just that worried about the keyboard getting dirt and debris, even though it makes the keyboard even more worse to type on (if that was even possible)
I think the 2016 MacBook keyboard is the single worst design blunder in Apple’s history, honestly. I mean, shipping a keyboard that breaks due to a mote of dust slipping in is bad, but there are a bunch of other factors that compound this right into “worst ever” territory:
It’s just a fuckup of massive proportions and probably the worst damage Apple has ever done to their brand with a single design decision.
And before anyone hits me with “Apple’s going to shit under Cook,” I bet you that Steve “You’re holding it wrong” Jobs would have valiantly defended this terrible keyboard. Jobs loved hardware gimmicks. Institutionally, it was probably inevitable that Apple would at some point overdesign their keyboard. The problem here is that they didn’t revert the design after the first rev.
Apple's released duds before—the Apple III, the iMac hockey puck mouse, the G4 cube, the iPhone 4 antenna, the voice-only iPod shuffle—but Apple had the good sense to kill or fix all those products before they did any significant, lasting damage to the brand. Yet for some reason, they're going all in on this blasted keyboard.
Good points generally but it seems like the argument made in the video is that the keyboard is inextricably tied to the chassis design so as long as we have this chassis, we have the crap keyboard too.
But seriously, $4000+ for this thing? WHAT THE FUCK. Overall the big picture I’m getting is that in terms of MB and MBP etc, Apple made a decision whether consciously or not to prioritize aesthetics and arbitrary notions of thinness etc over performance. I hope this doesn’t actually signal the end of MBP as a lasting brand but I’m not holding out much hope.
I am a formerly loyal Apply customer too. So I guess my next move is to start looking into Hackintoshes. I really hate Windows.
I think at first he would defend it, but given how much criticism this keyboard has received I think after a year he would have a rethink.
You could make the argument that Steve defended the iPhone as they sold really well at the time he was defending the antenna issue. With MacBook Pro, I'm not sure if they sell anywhere near as much as iPhones. I could be wrong. They definitely aren't the market leader though.
For Apple to hold onto this design for so long makes me think Tim Cook is really trying to do the minimal amount of cost work to produce the maximum amount of profit. I hope it bites him in the arse though.
This gets me sweating because normally I'd say, "okay, then I'll move on and get a different laptop next!" but Apple still does 85% of things so much better than the competition (like, macOS alone) and I neither really want to switch nor are there any real alternatives. Not really talking about raw CPU power or anything (I long stopped caring) but that damn keyboard, the scrapping of the F-keys... it's a really weird phase for Apple and there's rumors they'll drop Intel in favor of some weird custom CPU, which would likely mean no more Boot Camp, which I occasionally want to use.
Any specifics you can name that you really need from Apple? I think there are some serious alternatives out there today, and Apple went from expensive but worth it to only expensive.
I guess it starts and ends with macOS. I just prefer the OS over Windows and any Linux distribution. It's a sane UI yet perfectly UNIX compatible, it has great default settings, the best high-res screen use, etc, etc.
On the hardware side, it's just a great screen, low fan noise, comfortable handling and size (opening and closing the lid, form factor, etc), the trackpad is still the best mouse alternative I know. I like the way the keyboard backlight is done. I used to like the MagSafe power cable attachment but I guess that's gone now.
In terms of individual parts, it should be possible to find a laptop with equal or better CPU/GPU, SSD or even screen. But as soon as you do that, you're looking at prices comparably expensive and it's not like those competitors have zero "quirks" of their own. Also for external design issues (trackpad, lid design, fan noise, etc) possible candidates are already getting harder to find.
In the end, it's mostly macOS. There's hundreds of little things buried in its design philosophy that add up. I dislike Windows for the usual reasons, I dislike all Linux distributions I've came across for their clumsy UI and all their hassle with maintenance. I think I'm kinda stuck, there.
You like what you like and that's fair but it's a shame that Mac users are stuck with a single manufacturer that essentially forces an objectively mediocre product and gets away with charging an exhuberant price.
Atleast with PCs you have choices. You may have laptops similarly priced to Macs but you can atleast choose the one that'll perform the best.
The problem is it’s not mediocre. If you actually ignore the awful keyboard, it’s legitimately a fantastic product. The display gamut is outstanding, the trackpad is the best on any laptop, bar none. It’s light, yet powerful. It feels sturdy. It does everything most people throw at it. It has AirDrop and seamlessly syncs with your iPhone. You can unlock it with your Apple Watch.
It may be mediocre if you haven’t actually ever evaluated it before or used it, but for those who bleed six colours, it’s an indispensable product.
That’s why’s we’re so angry about the keyboard. Because they’re ruining the MacBook.
This x1000. The current MacBooks are just fantastic machines except for the damned keyboards. I really am quite fond of my 2nd gen 15” Pro and I’m lucky that I don’t mind the feel of the keyboard and haven’t had a key fail.
But I just struggle to recommend them to anyone who isn’t already dead set on a Mac without a glaring “this machine has widespread keyboard reliability problems!” disclaimer. This keyboard redesign that nobody wanted or asked for has snatched defeat from the jaws of victory in the worst possible way—particularly when you consider that nobody had any complaints about the keyboard design it replaced.
Seriously... I'm writing this comment on one of the "old" keyboards and it's a great typing experience. I've had this MBP for four years and never had any trouble with the keys. They remain crisp and responsive, with satisfying play and no double-hits or misses. That's about as expertly as I know how to explain a keyboard (and I'm probably using those words wrong too) but it's just good. I like typing on it.
I also have a new MBP for work, and I hate that keyboard. Often I can't tell if I hit a key because I couldn't feel it depress. Literally about 5% of the time I press the space bar I get two spaces. There's no satisfying haptic feedback or sound. I feel like I'm gonna break the thing every time I use it. They removed the escape and function keys, which I use constantly, and replaced them with the janky and gimmicky touch bar. This is worse in every possible way. It's thinner, but so marginally so that who cares? Shaving off millimeters of thickness isn't remotely a priority for me.
On top of that, the trackpad is larger but also seems to be less sensitive and the force click feedback feels less precise than on my older machine. Because it's so wide I'm constantly brushing it with my wrists when I type. It feels less sturdy to the touch as well. I'm also frustrated that they removed the magsafe power connector, which was a legitimately great feature of the line for many years. I recognize that there are some advantages to USB-C, but for me they don't justify the move away from the old one. I wish Apple would've at least made a magsafe-to-USB-C dongle thing that still allows the cord to breakaway on impact, even if they wanted to standardize the port.
For all my complaining, I really do like the touch ID fingerprint reader on the new machines. It's the one hardware innovation that actually is a quality of life improvement over my older machine.
I am not a Mac user, but it is sad even for me: not the instance, but the trend, of changing something not for improvement, but just to sell a new batch of it. The hardware dickbar that the Macbook has is an example. Or the notch that apple farted from their braind and many are copying. Or how Gnome fucked up menus and redistributed the functionality between two random context menus and two sets of icons w/o any reason and consistency.
A computer that can't be used to its fullest capabilities is mediocre
I honestly don't know what that is supposed to mean. Who says? Can you expand on your comment to the standards of a normal Tildes comment?
Computers are more than hardware, software, and performance. The MacBook Pro has the best trackpad of any laptop, and it's not even close. For the longest time, no other laptop had displays as good as Apple's (though in the last few years, that's been changing.)
Having to wait for weeks or even days for a keyboard fix on any laptop is below any standards for me, for one. I'm typing this on a rather old Asus laptop, and I haven't had a failing key yet. Should the keys themselves fail, I have a set in its packaging under my bed, which I can easily install.
The way people describe Mac OS (or however it is spelled) is really interesting. Is it that much better than Windows or Linux? I used the OS for around a minute at a shop, and I decided it's a pain. I think I'd only get one if I wanted to write apps for Apple's platforms (which I read is lucrative, but the barrier to entry is very restrictive for me).
For the record, I also built my own desktop PC because I can't be arsed to pay Apple $5000 to put their hardware into a nice desktop casing. I'm mostly talking about laptop design issues, where DIY solutions are harder.
Apple, so far, simply had the best compromises for high-end laptops but with the failing keyboards, the weird touch-bar and the threat of leaving Intel for some even more isolating custom chip, they're no longer a real option.
For the record, if you’re really a Mac-afficianado, you should be incredibly excited about ARM on Mac. Provided Marzipan doesn’t completely screw with the UI affordances we associate with macOS too much, we’re looking at much more secure and power efficient laptops that will slash and burn intel’s benchmarks by a large margin. I can’t wait.
If apps use SPI’s to perform critical functions, that’s on them. Apple’s API’s on Mac will otherwise provide the correct bytecode to run on either Intel or ARM.
I want some inter-compatibility. You can currently run Boot Camp and basically use a MBP as a Windows 10 machine with no problems. That kinda covers the only little gripe I have with the Mac ecosystem, which is some software not supported on it. If I truly need it, I just boot into Windows. With that option gone, it's a completely isolated platform.
I've long been afraid of trends at Apple to basically merge iPads into the MacBook line and going full custom ARM a red line for me.
Arm Macs are going to be great for everyone who is fully vested in the Mac ecosystem.
They’re going to be a disaster for for anyone who needs their Mac to interoperate outside the Mac ecosystem, and the transition is going to be long and painful.
Is there honestly anything people need to interoperate outside of the Mac ecosystem that can't be done over SSH or a VM? Genuinely curious because I've always wondered what the rationale for bootcamp actually was. I've never once needed to use Windows.
It’s largely a question of how long it will take for professional cross-platform software to transition to the new architecture, and whether or not the Arm builds will be as performant as the Intel builds.
In a nutshell: how long before there’s Arm native Photoshop? It’s not just Photoshop of course, but it’s that entire category of expensive, professional software with their own ecosystems.
I'd probably expect Apple to make a big splash about how $largeCompany will be supporting ARM on Mac from day 1, and that'll probably be Adobe and Microsoft. But yes I understand the concern, it will be a period of pain. Luckily, all Mac App Store applications will "just work".
This is highly reminiscent of the PowerPC transition though. People hated it. There was an inordinate amount of criticism. But it was a necessary step to continue evolving the Mac platform. It's time for the next step ;).
This is very different from the PPC transition. The PPC architecture was essentially on life support and Apple was running the ventilator. Power still sees some niche use today, but for all intents and purposes Apple was the last one out.
x86-64, on the other hand, is the world's dominant architecture for general purpose desktop and cloud computing. Apple isn't leaving Intel because Intel is floundering, Apple is leaving Intel in spite of Intel's utter dominance. I can all-but-guarantee you that some vendors will see this transition as their opportunity to exit the Mac platform: when it's just a matter of targeting the same architecture on a different OS, a port is manageable. But when it's a totally different OS and architecture? It has to be worth it. And in a world that is increasingly doing all their computing on cloud and mobile, the math on "worth it" might not work out with this new barrier.
Another key difference from the PPC transition is that the first gen Intel Core chips were just flat out better than the PPC chips they replaced. It only took one or two revisions before software ran faster in Rosetta on an Intel Mac than it did on all but the beefiest, final generation PPC Macs. That's not going to happen this time around. The absolute best case scenario here is that the first generation of Mac Arm chips are slightly faster than the midrange Intel chips they replaced when running native code and abysmally slower when running emulated Intel binaries. A more likely outcome is parity when comparing native binaries, maybe even slight degradation if the software in question made extensive use of Intel-specific instruction set extensions like AVX.
So like I said: if you're all in on the Mac platform, there's nothing but benefits here. Smaller, thinner Macs that are faster with batteries that last longer. And if you largely use your Mac as thin client to access apps and services on the cloud, then it's the same situation. You won't reap the benefits as much, but you won't get hit with any real downsides.
But if you're in that small group that's running something locally which is processor intensive in a cross-platform ecosystem (think scientific and engineering disciplines) you could be really screwed here. As in, "fuck it I guess I'm going back to Windows/Linux" screwed.
If you look at where the puck is going to be, Apple is going to attempt to provide a development toolkit to allow devs to build a single code base to target both macOS and iOS. They’ve already showed this capability in the News, Voice Memos, and Stocks apps on macOS 10.14 (though, they’re really quite crappy compared to apps developed specifically for macOS—they’re fine as proofs of concept). I was truly skeptical that Apple was going to ever merge macOS and iOS, but it really is looking like this is at least going to be an option to allow them to bridge the transition to their own CPUs in the Mac product line.
One major question that sticks in my mind is, how can they attempt to pull something like this transition off if they don’t have something like Rosetta? Rosetta was the translation layer that magically allowed Intel macs to run apps compiled for PPC with hardly any overhead. Time will tell, but my guess is that the Apple silicon that has already started showing up in the iMac Pros and MacBook Pros in the T-series SoCs is only the beginning. Maybe they’ll allow a mixed computing platform where you can run apps off x86 and an Apple SoC in the same box?
Apple will never merge iOS and macOS, but they will bend over backwards to make iOS apps translate to macOS apps with as little work from the developer as they can get away with.
Which is the right move for Apple: JavaScript solutions are in the process of consuming desktop app UIs. By making iOS and macOS different targets of the same development process, they can hold the line against that trend as long as iPhone continues to be massively popular.
But on the other hand, boy are "Marzipan" apps terrible. Just total garbage. Worse, even, than the JavaScript apps that Apple expects them to stave off. At least JavaScript apps expect that you are using a mouse + keyboard. Marzipan apps just map mouse actions to touch events, and keyboard support is basically non-existent.
We're witnessing the death of the desktop in slow motion and although I understand why this is happening and maybe even grudgingly agree that it's the best way for legacy platforms to stay afloat as we stand on the brink of an entire generation which was raised on touch entering the workforce, it still makes me sad.
They can't, which is why an x86-64 to Armv8 translation layer will be part of the announcement. Microsoft shipped it over a year ago, albeit with just x86 and not x86-64. Still, given that Microsoft solved a subset of this problem over a year ago, I'm sure Apple has it in the bag. I bet they even resurrect the Rosetta branding.
There are some Microsoft programs that are pretty indispensable for my work. Can you get the monthly updates on a Mac without bootcamp?
I've never had to use Windows via Bootcamp either (but in the past, plenty of times via VMware/Parallels).
However you and I are mere drops in the ocean of Mac users and that we have no need does in no way suggest that millions of others don't either.
Objectively mediocre? No it isn't. Not at all.
Yea, my stance on this is to not let the Linux community dodge their responsibility, there. It's not just a driver or hardware issue (although, that too!), it's an issue of respecting that last 10%, that last 1% of polish of the UX design which no Linux distro really nails. Even Windows 10 does the average user interaction better than Linux – which is not a compliment for Windows 10.
It's small things. Lots of small things that can only be addressed by actually doing user testing, actually having professional designers who put user interest first and somehow getting a technical team on board and implement a concrete vision for the average person's Linux experience. After all, it's still an OS for geeks and IT professionals. All efforts to push it more into the mainstream, as a truly open alternative to Windows and to macOS, fall short. Which is a shame, but it is what it is.
I interact with Linux here and there, mostly over the command line, but I'm not ready for the headaches of making it my day-to-day operating system. Every couple of years, I try for a week or two, and nothing really seems to change for the better.
Exactly.
I think as long as the Linux community clings to excuses when this discussion comes up, somehow delegating it to "that other distro" or that "the complaint isn't formulated precisely enough to put in a bug tracker", it will never become a serious competitor for mainstream users. Which is fine and maybe a reasonable path to focus on for an open source project. But I simply can't agree that the current efforts made in UX on any Linux distro are enough or that there is a serious trend for the better. It's a Linux-wide problem. It's a problem with priorities in the community of typical Linux users, whatever you want to call them.
I hate how this might come off as disrespectful for the thousands of hours put into current Linux distros, I acknowledge that there is work being done and some incremental improvements. But this is a fundamental, philosophical issue that I believe humans influential in the world of Linux-development simply don't understand. You want users? Understand UX design.
That "X" in "UX" includes the very architecture of having "distros" (maybe it's not a perfect system?), it includes driver standards for essential interactions (including the politics of prioritizing negotiating that with major manufacturers), it includes working with hardware. It includes acknowledging compatibility issues (even if "unfair") and prioritizing them over everything if they're the main issue holding people back. It includes weirdly spaced fonts that stick to the side of the window, get cut off when opening in its default position and are spaced in a way that makes it hard to see which elements belong together. It includes testing hundreds of real-world desktop environments with real users and looking at what features they need most and arranging them in a useful hierarchy. It includes the wording of error messages and making sure people can't activate some weird setting by accident. It includes icon design, typography and color choices. All that shit is unprofessional and misarranged on every Linux distro I've ever seen. It costs a minute here, and hour there and before you know it, you just spent a day setting up something that should take a single click.
If you seriously claim the only problem non-"IT" users have with Linux is the occasional driver hiccup, that's IMO the kind of downplaying the issue that keeps people from adopting it. If you don't have an idealistic friend who helps you set it up, if you actually need it for work and set it up for thousands of people, you'll see the reality of it causing problems. You can claim how there would be "an easy fix" all day long, it doesn't matter. It's about the day-to-day issues you encounter when using the software, a definition of "stability" that includes real-world workflows.
Gotta jump on your mention of Wayland, as I'm totally loving it.
I dual boot Win10 and Arch, and I set up my Arch install with Drew Devault's awesome project,
swaywm, which is basically a clone of i3 for Wayland. It's absolutely amazing compared to Xorg, and everything is a ton simpler. Sway itself is still missing some quality of life ecosystem stuff from i3, but that all seems to be coming along as quickly as can be expected.Very excited to see how Wayland does as more DE's switch over and new ones are written.
In response specifically to your link, it would appear that the move to Windows is largely a political move. This statement by The Document Foundation was linked in the original article and covers a lot of why this was a bad idea. This whole thing appears to be another example of the bosses listening to the salespeople more than the employees.
Appreciate the perspective. I’ve been trying to get into Linux a little bit, not having much luck yet due to issues I assumed were specific to my hardware. But from what you and others are saying it seem like it’s really just not worth the effort except as a curiosity.
What type of issues are you having? I've used Linux as my daily driver on and off for a few years now, and I'd say that it really can be worth the effort depending on one's needs. I'd be happy to help with any issues I have experience with.
It’s specific to my hardware, I think if I really want to try out Linux I just have the wrong machine for it. Thanks though.
You and me both. I tried to get Ubuntu and Elementary working properly on my retina Macbook Pro. It mostly worked although have a recollection of struggling to get wifi working properly (although it did in the end), however the issue I kept on coming up against was screen resolution. I simply couldn't get the screen resolution to play nicely and ended up spending more time on the command line configuring the display than I wanted to. Still didn't get it working correctly.
For someone else a little less tech savvy, they'd have given up in the first second never mind the hours I spent. In the end I scrubbed it and went back to OSX.
While I still have a strong desire to use Linux on the desktop, I'm not really willing to invest any more time in it.
I have many reasons to avoid Apple myself, but, from what you write, I must agree that you wouldn’t be happy with a PC - either Linux or Windows. So go for it, I guess!
What's the alternative? T490?
Thinkpads are always a good choice. If you're looking for good laptops, the channel of the guy in the linked video has reviewed some good ones like the Razer Blade Pro or the ASUS Zephyrus G. Ultimately it depends on what you're looking for in a laptop though.
their trackpad is the only reason why I still use my macbook over any other laptop. I wish there was some other trackpad out there that is even close to as nice as the ones on the macbooks.
I can't believe they have the gall to charge US$4,000 for such a poorly designed machine. Like what's the point of having an i9 powered computer if you can't even take advantage of it.
In what respects can you not take advantage of it?
The i9 line is appealing for it's ability to turboboost above the base clock. The MacBook Pro chassis is too thin to contain a cooling system required to take advantage of this, meaning there's no real reason to get the i9 over the i7: they will perform about the same after the i9 is throttled to work within the constraints of the MacBook Pro chassis.
Because if you actually try and use the power of the i9, it overheats and throttles to avoid thermal damage. The chassis can't support such powerful chipsets inside of it.