25 replies to this topic

[Unky]

I cannot tell you how excited I get every Apple unveil.Call me silly or not I always come out impressed with what the
staff at Apple has come up with. But this September the 12th I was genuinely disappointed in what Apple showed the public.
None of it was elegant or simple or remotely pleasing to look at.Starting with iPod Nano.


The new Nano , when I saw seemed like the Nokia design team started designing Apple products. It looks like the Lumina case
with a Nokia queue interface. The colors I may add were horrifying, all but the Grey and black made my feel like
Coughing up a lung. And for a former Apple fan this is both horrifying and heartbreaking to see happen to a company that
prided themselves on aesthetically pleasing devices.

There isn't much to say about the touch except for having a wristband that literally has no use, when do you ever hang an iPod from your wrist, and the occasional drop is rare or never.Also I can guarantee that 99% of iPod owners would never be caught wearing a "Wrist strap". New colors, a wrist strap, and Siri. Now call the most amazing iPod touch yet. And you've got America hooked...

The headphones look like a running headphone that don't fall out when exercising. Quite frankly they are ugly. If any other company other than Apple came out with the same product. No one would wear them..

To sum this up. Apple post Job's sucks more than ever before. Period.

These are just my opinions and are not meant to harm or offend anyone. But it shows I will not be buying any apple products,
in the time being..

-Peter

The following images may disturb you:

[M.F. Ensembleson]

D:< No, Bad Apple, Bad!

[Will101]

apple only sell by making products smaller or bigger and advertising as new so more people rush to have a 'new' product

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

Personally, I don't mind what they've done with the new iPhone and Nano (cant say the same for the touch, sadly)

Nothing is groundbreaking, as we had come to expect from Jobs at apple, and frankly I wouldn't upgrade out of contract for it, but it's nice.

Though I will say, they've done much better with the new computers than they have with the new mobile devices. The retina macbook is probably the closest we have ever come to a both easily portable and powerful laptop yet.

[pseudoswede]

The retina macbook is probably the closest we have ever come to a both easily portable and powerful laptop yet.

Asus and their Zenbook Prime line would disagree. And for about half the price, too.

[QK Flight Industries]

Meanwhile, Apple is torturing a poor Polish grocery website. Go, Apple, go (make a fool of yourself)!

http://www.digitaltr...r-infringement/

[Yuxi]

Asus and their Zenbook Prime line would disagree. And for about half the price, too.

Half the price, half the hardware. They're not even in the same category - the Zenbook competes with the MacBook Air and other ultrabooks, not the 15" retina Pro.
Ultrabooks themselves are pricey for the performance. There are more powerful but less portable laptops to be had for even $600.

The retina MBP has a quad core processor, a real-gaming-capable 650M graphics card, 7 hours of battery life, and of course the high-resolution display - all for under 5 pounds.
The Zenbook Prime has none of those (other than the weight). It has worse battery life and is nowhere near as powerful.

The only comparable ZenBook is the U500, which isn't even available yet.

Of course, if you're looking at a pure price/performance perspective, the MBP is far from the best (on par with the ZenBook, for that matter). I agree with Agre about the power + size/weight/battery combination - it's a very good compromise. Pricey, but there aren't many alternatives that fit the same description.

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

Asus and their Zenbook Prime line would disagree. And for about half the price, too.

Just a small piece of advice, if your going to be a smart ass, at least make sure your being a correct smart ass

[pseudoswede]

The retina MBP has a quad core processor

The Zenbook UX31A has an i7 Ivy Bridge processor.

a real-gaming-capable 650M graphics card

Who cares. I don't use laptops to game. I use laptops for stuff, like, work.

and of course the high-resolution display - all for under 5 pounds.

1080p on a 13.3" IPS screen is fine by me - all for under 3 pounds.

With the $900 savings, I can also go and buy the new iPhone 5 and iPod Touch.

Just a small piece of advice, if your going to be a smart ass, at least make sure your being a correct smart ass

Sorry. The MacBook Pro is overpriced by a long shot. The only thing going for it is the display.

[Spanish David]

Half the price, half the hardware. They're not even in the same category - the Zenbook competes with the MacBook Air and other ultrabooks, not the 15" retina Pro.
Ultrabooks themselves are pricey for the performance. There are more powerful but less portable laptops to be had for even $600.

The retina MBP has a quad core processor, a real-gaming-capable 650M graphics card, 7 hours of battery life, and of course the high-resolution display - all for under 5 pounds.
The Zenbook Prime has none of those (other than the weight). It has worse battery life and is nowhere near as powerful.

The only comparable ZenBook is the U500, which isn't even available yet.

Of course, if you're looking at a pure price/performance perspective, the MBP is far from the best (on par with the ZenBook, for that matter). I agree with Agre about the power + size/weight/battery combination - it's a very good compromise. Pricey, but there aren't many alternatives that fit the same description.

Yuxi dont try to justify your MBA purchase

( secretly steals yuxi's MBA )

pd: its just a joke... dont attack me fanboys!

[Yuxi]

It seems you still don't understand that you're comparing products across different categories.

The Zenbook UX31A has an i7 Ivy Bridge processor.

The i7 Zenbook has a ULV processor (i7-3517U), which runs 2 cores at 2.8ghz with turbo boost. The 15" MBP runs a full-voltage i7-3610QM, with 4 cores at 3.1ghz with TB. That's more than twice the processing power.

Who cares. I don't use laptops to game. I use laptops for stuff, like, work.

If you don't need the CPU or graphics horsepower (which you clearly don't), you're looking at the wrong product segment. Again, the Zenbook is in the same category as the $999-1199 MacBook Air, not the Pro.

1080p on a 13.3" IPS screen is fine by me - all for under 3 pounds.

I agree, the Zenbook's screen is the best in its class (ultrabooks, not full-size quad core laptops).

Sorry. The MacBook Pro is overpriced by a long shot. The only thing going for it is the display.

Compared to the Zenbook (or any ultrabook/MacBook Air), it has more than twice the CPU power, several times the GPU power, and longer battery life. So if you want to compare it like that, the price per additional unit of performance is extremely good, because an ultrabook itself has poor price vs. pure performance ratio.

A non-Mac gaming laptop with similar specs (i7 quad + 650M/660M/670M) runs about $1200-1600. Those are the 8 pound bricks with 1-3 hours of battery life. I happen to have one. Now add huge amounts of battery, lose half the weight, add a 2880x1800 screen, and the retina MBP doesn't look like that horrible of a deal anymore.


Your argument is as valid as comparing the specs of a more powerful $600 HP/Dell laptop with the Zenbook or any other ultrabook. And some people do argue that ultrabooks are overpriced, overhyped, blah blah blah. Want me to go there?

You sound like someone who does his work fine using MS Paint or Paint.NET, looks at Photoshop, and complains that it's overpriced. Yes, it is overpriced. For your needs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.S. if I weren't going into iOS development, I would have bought an Zenbook to carry to school with me - I love the screen. It doesn't have enough CPU or graphics power to serve as my main computer, but I have my overpriced $1600 tank of a gaming laptop for that.

[Yuxi]

fanboy

jk dont hurt me.

Replace "retina MBP" with "generic laptop with quad i7, gaming-class graphics, 7 hour battery, super-high-resolution screen, and < 5 pound weight" and my post doesn't change a bit. Oh wait, that combination doesn't exist.

IIRC until recently I was the one arguing about how MacBook Pros were so overpriced. Now that the MBP's hardware has caught up and I've had my "cost efficient" PC gaming laptop for 2+ years, my views have shifted somewhat.

[Yuxi]

thats why i said jk jeeze.... its like war in this thread.

The only things I talked about were raw tech specs. Nowhere did "this company is good, that company sucks" come up.

My point (with the long posts above) is that one who needs the specs of an ultrabook should just get an ultrabook - that's great. Anything more powerful is not better and will be overpriced for someone who doesn't need or use the additional capabilities - one such capability being performance (beyond dual core and integrated graphics), portability, and endurance in one package without heavily compromising on one. If anyone can find another laptop that combines all 3 of those for whatever the price, I want to know because I want one.

This has nothing to do with any one brand - it's the same with gaming laptops, mobile workstations, Alienwares, MacBook Pros, etc. I'll leave it at that and leave the conversation.

[Kirkland]

I dunno if y'all realize this, but Jobs wasn't revolutionary out of his newly released products,

again Apple Mania kicks in and a simple update where nearly nothing was done and everybody is having parties. Only his new items are actually groundbreaking.

[Yuxi]

Care to detail what "new items"

The first iPod, the iTunes store, the first iPhone, the app store, the first iPad...now every company has candy bar smartphones, a music/movie store, an app store, tablets (which many saw as useless before the iPad took off). If you only look at the last 1-2 years, Apple does look less "revolutionary" in comparison when you forget the trendsetting they did before their competitors followed.

None of those were technological firsts, but they were the first in their field to appeal to the average consumer. I am well aware clunky MP3 players, windows mobile / Symbian / blackberry phones, and Microsoft tablet PCs existed. Even Android phones didn't really become competitive until after the iPhone 4 came out.

And @Kitty I would say adding LTE and a major processor upgrade to a phone amounts to more than "almost nothing," unless one just looks at the outside appearance and nothing else. Most people don't upgrade every year anyway - if you upgrade every 2 or 3 years, the yearly incremental changes stack up.

One can make the same argument about regular processors for example. They've looked exactly the same for many years, and each new generation brings nothing but incremental performance and efficiency improvements. Yet when you upgrade every few years, you will find that performance has more than doubled with the same or even lower power consumption. Of course CPUs aren't exactly exciting consumer gadgets, since you only get to compare performance and can't judge by the looks

[X-Wing @Aliciousness]

Look, I am going to be honest here. I admit I am a bit of an apple fanboy, but the level of anti-apple fanaticism I am hearing in this thread is just hilarious. Yes, the new iPhone looks quite a lot like the old one... But does the Galaxy S III look a whole lot different from the S II? Not a whole lot. You can say apple didn't invent 99% of the technologies many say they did, but in all of those cases they were the first to be able to make it into something that people actually wanted. You may think it's stupid and that they shouldn't get the credit, but it doesn't matter how awesome a technology you invent if you can't get people to buy it. This is what has made Apple the most valuable company in the world.

Long story short, get your facts straight before blurting them out around here

[Kirkland]

iPad, iPhone, iPod

[Unky]

Agre,

I think to me, Apple holds a responsibility like no other company. Every time they come out with a new product it should be so great you actually want to buy it. And post Tim Cook every time they came out with a new product I was hooked. I admit, I thought Apple was the greatest thing since sliced bread. And frankly this was the first time I was disappointed in an Apple product. And your comment about the Galaxy SIII and SII, no one really expects Samsung to come out with a great product as much as we rely on Apple to come out with something stunning.

Just my thought's.

-Peter

[Yuxi]

Agre,

I think to me, Apple holds a responsibility like no other company. Every time they come out with a new product it should be so great you actually want to buy it. And post Tim Cook every time they came out with a new product I was hooked. I admit, I thought Apple was the greatest thing since sliced bread. And frankly this was the first time I was disappointed in an Apple product. And your comment about the Galaxy SIII and SII, no one really expects Samsung to come out with a great product as much as we rely on Apple to come out with something stunning.

Just my thought's.

-Peter

I think people have too high expectations for incremental releases of mature products. Past the first 2-3 generations of a new product there is much less room for major "oooh, aaah" improvements. I don't see people getting this anxious over new model year cars, yearly refreshes of laptops and other computer hardware, etc., but somehow with the iPhone people expect groundbreaking changes every year and are unimpressed with upgrades that bring the device up-to-date technologically.

[Unky]

Here's a great article from the BBC talking about Apple after Jobs:

http://www.bbc.com/n...nology-19557497

"Now, having had two years to plot and scheme, Apple's renowned designer Jonathan Ive has replaced the tiny 3.5in (8.9cm) screen with a slightly-less-tiny 4in (10.2cm) screen? Wow. Knock me over with a feather. What do you do with the rest of your time, Jony?


This is what happens when a company is too cheap to invest in research and development. Did you know that Apple spends far less on R&D than any of its rivals - a paltry 2% of revenues, versus 14% for Google and Microsoft?
No wonder the Android platform, where new models appear every week, now represents 68% of the smartphone market, up from 47% a year ago, while Apple slid to 17% over the same period.
In case you're bad at maths, let me work that out for you: Android's market share is now four times that of Apple. Four times!
Worse, despite all its bluster about innovation, Apple has become a copycat, and not even a good one. Why is Apple making the iPhone bigger? To keep up with the top Android phones.

(Phones that, mind you, Apple fanboys ridiculed at first.)
The problem is that the new iPhone won't really give you much more screen real estate than the old one. Worse, it looks ridiculous.
Apple also has become a copycat in tablets. Jobs once said the iPad's 9.7in screen was the perfect size, and smaller tablets made no sense. Then the Android camp had success with 7in tablets like Amazon's Kindle Fire and Google's Nexus 7, and now Apple supposedly will announce its own smaller iPad in October. Talk about thinking different!"
That exactly sums up my thoughts on Apple...

-Peter