> I think the most perfect tech combo in the world right now might be a 5k iMac at home, an iPhone 6+ as your phone, and the Macbook as an on-the-go device.
Unfortunately, you can't use a 5K iMac as an additional screen for a Macbook.[1]
[1] "Note that the iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014) does not support Target Display Mode." From http://s831.us/1bYWtfj
Nothing in the quote or article suggests using the 5K iMac as an additional screen, though. To my reading, the author was suggesting the iMac for working, and the Macbook for when you're on-the-go and (hopefully) not working.
Why would someone buy a 5K iMac to use it as a second display? That's what the standalone displays are for.
I like to keep my personal projects and software on my personal hardware and my professional work on my work supplied laptop.
When working at home, I like to use my work laptop with a second display. It seems unfortunate to have to buy a separate Thunderbolt display if I already own a 5K iMac.
And an Apple Watch so you don't have to pull the phone out of your pocket to check every notification, and tripping and falling over onto your just-operated-on shoulder because you have zero balance.
(source: me, a week ago)
I'm surprised his battery life is so short (5-6 hours). I have the base model MacBook and I easily get 8 hours. To go as low as 5 hours, I'd have to keep CPU usage at 100% and run the screen at max brightness.
If I focus on prolonging battery life, I can get 12 hours. That means keeping the screen dim, quitting Mail.app, and closing unnecessary browser tabs. Then the only major eater of battery is compiling stuff.
Overall, I really like the new MacBook. It's thin, light, and fast enough for my needs.
> I'm surprised his battery life is so short (5-6 hours). I have the base model MacBook and I easily get 8 hours. To go as low as 5 hours, I'd have to keep CPU usage at 100% and run the screen at max brightness.
If he's a Chrome user, I wouldn't be surprised. It seems Chrome doesn't sleep/isn't as aggressive at idling as Safari.
I've yet to spend a full day out on my machine though so I cannot confirm first-hand whether Chrome drains the battery so quickly.
I use Chrome, but I run maybe 10 tabs and have all plugins disabled. Safari's lack of WebRTC and general security issues (typically the first to fall at Pwn2Own) have scared me off.
It may surprise people to discover how inefficient some applications can be. It only takes one programming mistake to prevent the CPU from going into deep sleep. Even popular apps such as Spotify, Dropbox, and iCloud sync can fail in this manner and squander power.
I'd love a MacBook. However, I am a bit concerned: is the maximum performance of it worse than the 2013 MacBook Air (current machine)? On this thing I can play Counter-Strike: Source or Left 4 Dead 2 at reasonable settings at 60fps, and I can also get FFXIV to run at just about 30fps (windowed 720p on Windows with the Standard (Laptop) graphics option). I'm not really a serious gamer, these are all (with the exception of FFZIV) older games I play casually. I mainly do web browsing and programming.
If I tried to do these things on the new MacBook, would it run at similar speed, and would I get a heat warning?
Ignoring gaming for a moment: generally, when really stressed, are heat warnings common?
This is a lot like the first generation Air. It's a very light, very thin, low performance. If you want to machine for some simple surfing or to do a lot of writing or wordprocessing on that small and easy to carry around... this could be for you.
If you want any kind of performance or good 3-D capability then get the thicker MacBooks or MacBook Pro. That's clearly not what this machine is aimed at.
I don't see the single port as a big deal (it's clearly the future) but I would have expected a USB port on the power adapter (PlugBug-style) at least for power if not transmission.
No idea why you have been down-voted: it's a good point. having one AC brick with two plugs (USB-C, USB A) would be helpful for charging both the laptop and a phone simultaneously. Right now you can't do that due to the single port on the MacBook.
Honest question: once the Macbook reaches the (approximate) weight and convenience of the iPad -- and has touch input -- is there any future for the iPad?
Sure, iPads are more convenient for giving to kids, but a Macbook with a surface-style keyboard and touchscreen kind of moots that entire line.
I see tablets and the requisite limited tablet software/interface as a necessary evil we had to pass through before we could make full-fledged computers small enough to have the same convenience.
Why do you think it will have touch input? Apple seems fairly determined that laptops and tablets are different form-factors that work better with different ways of interaction.
I think there is definitely merit to this - Windows 8 showed how easy it is to get the hybrid approach wrong, and the gestures with the MacBook's multi-touch trackpads seem to me to be a better way than having to reach up to touch the screen all the time...
> Windows 8 showed how easy it is to get the hybrid approach wrong
On the contrary, a lot of people do find the hybrid approach very useful especially once they are accustomed to it. When travelling I take my Surface Pro instead of my laptop and by the time I am back, I am so used to touching and taping on my screen that I unconsciously do it on my laptop making me look like an idiot. I find touchscreens great and believe it is a means to complement your existing workflow, not replace it.
What Windows 8 did wrong was messing with the familiar old-school interface a bit too much, which made many non-tech-savvy users confused and miserable. My dad had a terrible time with Windows 8. But me? The Surface pro is easily among my favorite devices ever.
The opposite is true as well -- as the iPad increases in specs it will be able to do more of what the macbook does, for a particular subset of users who don't want any complexity behind their computing (less technical folks, for instance).
I think the lesson from the success of the iPad is that there is a large market out there that doesn't want an actual computer.
Personally I'm waiting for the macbook air with skylake. The macbook haptic click is surprisingly usable, but the keyboard is a deal breaker for me. There is hardly any travel and it felt very awkward, worse than the surface keyboard IMO.
The kinds of interfaces that work on direct-manipulation touch screens are different from the kinds of interfaces that work with traditional keyboards and pointing devices. You'd need some way to adjust the interface to match the input method as the computer is running.
The Surface is a computer for Serious Professionals who don't act so casually as to use a computer while lying in bed, or sit cross-legged on the floor, etc.
I'm sure that the Surface is a perfectly useful computer for some people, but I use my laptop in far too many odd positions to get along with one.
My all-in-one dream is a laptop that has a double-sided screen on its lid. When opened, it functions like a normal laptop. When closed, it functions as a tablet. Content is passed back and forth between desktop & tablet mode. Example use-case: I'm surfing the net in laptop mode, and find some longform content; I close the lid and now it's in tablet mode, ready to read.
A double-sided screen might seem like overkill, but it's the only solution I can think of that solves all my personal laptop/tablet-hybrid annoyances, namely (a) kickstand, (b) they often come in two parts, tablet + keyboard, and (c) if you can fold the keyboard over, now the bottom of your tablet is a keyboard.
Asus made a clunky version[1] of this form-factor, but I'm waiting for someone to do it right.
> The problem in one sentence: it is impossible to buy a cable, from Apple or otherwise, that let’s you plug an iPhone 6+ into the Macbook.
I'm not an Apple person by any means and don't really keep up with their products, but I feel the Apple of years past would never have let this happen.
Why do you need to plug your phone into your laptop? Apple seems to found that tons of people don't, that was actually causing them problems. No one would update iOS because they had to be plugged into a computer, and no one would get your pictures off their phone for the same reason, so people would end up running back level versions and having your phones give them space warnings.
At this point it wouldn't surprise me if the average consumer basically never plug the phone into a computer. If you want to do syncing with iTunes it can be done over Wi-Fi, but most people probably just use iCloud. Software updates can be installed over the air. A computer isn't necessary to set the phone up anymore. The existence of things like iCloud photos also means that you don't need to plug your phone into get the pictures off.
People tend to have chargers all over the place, which is really the only thing people plug phones in to do. But you probably charge your phone in a cradle, or in your car, or with the charger that comes with it. Why do you need to plug it into your laptop?
There's been speculation the Apple expect you to treat the new MacBook a lot like an iPad: the port is only there to charge and maybe for an occasional need, but most the time you're not expected to use it.
Will most customers even use it to charge their phone on any kind of regular basis? Even if it came with the cable? Much more cynically, given the size of the battery and that it only has one port do you want to charge your phone at the expense of your laptop?
I hadn't thought of the fact that there was no USB-C to lightning cable. It is an interesting omission, but then again this is an interesting laptop.
I was pointing out that sometimes hotels leave few alternatives, and that sometimes charging via the laptop is often your best solution in that situation to keep all of your devices charged.
Downvote me if you want, but in the past Apple's product line and releases have been extremely carefully choreographed, and they've generally been careful to make sure that their products integrate and work with each other. From a company that prides itself on having tight integration between products and an 'it just works' mentality, it seems sloppy to me that you can't buy a cable to make two of their flagship products work together.
Or... they want you to upload your iTunes stuff to the cloud and share it across your devices from there. Here's a Jobs speech from the late 1990s where he bangs on about this sort of thing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2v0OTCl2nLI
To sync via WiFI you have to have the device plugged in at least once (in order to turn on Sync via WiFi). You cannot plug it in because there is no cable.
Putting a different spin on this - it's very curious that Apple didn't release a USB-C to Lightning port cable. This was clearly a deliberate decision on Apple's part - and I'm wondering if they just decided that by released the USB-C to USB-A dongle (http://store.apple.com/us/product/MJ1M2AM/A/usb-c-to-usb-ada...) , that would be sufficient?
I've plugged my iPhone into my MBP twice, I think.
What will be interesting is what they do with the next model iPhone. I suspect we'll either just keep getting the USB-A -> Lightning cable or the iPhone will get a USB-C port (and come with a USB-A to USB-C cable?). The latter is inevitable, the question is 'when'.
Remember that lightning was designed specifically for the needs of the iPhone and the iPad, not computers in general. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple kept using it on the phones since it's not like there's a huge number of third-party parts that you might want to plug in.
I imagine lightning will be around for a while on the phones. It's still perfectly fit for purpose.
Because otherwise you cannot use your iPhone with your Macbook. It's the most senseless oversight I have seen in years. In order to turn on WiFi sync between iTunes on your Macbook and your iPhone, you need to have it plugged in at least once. You cannot plug it in though, because there is no compatible USB-C to Lightning cable from Apple. D'oh.
TBH, I'm banking on them releasing a refreshed iPhone 7 / iPod Touch / iPad line with USB-C ports supplanting Lightning, so that all you need is more USB C-C cables.
when apple launched the iphone, they went against the grain on what the industry (nokia and everybody else) was using for headset+microphone+buttons combo (unpatented, mind you). They simply copied the 4 connector headset plug, but surreptitiously switched GROUND and MIC (and patented). bam. all iphone users couldn't get a headset other than the one that come in the box, and it took some 6 mo to start shipping spare ones. and i will give apple that it was a decent one. even to this day, it is the only apple product i like. but that proves you are still in the reality distortion field left by jobs and still think apple poop is rainbows.
So it took them a while to ship spares, but they gave you one in the box? It would have been a bigger problem if they didn't even give you one in the box, as you would have basically not been able to use a wired headset for that period.
> but that proves you are still in the reality distortion field left by jobs and still think apple poop is rainbows.
I am in no such place. For a variety of reasons, I choose not own any Apple products and am under no illusions about Steve Jobs. That said, Apple didn't get a reputation for great products (and associated hype around product launches) for no reason.
You mean like how Google doesn't support MicroSD expansion in their Nexus devices so you have to store all of your media in the cloud, probably with Google's services?
(btw, search online for the time --2007?-- that nokia forced the whole industry to microUSB, that every single phone uses nowadays, as the standard charger plug by being the first to mass adopt it. everyone cried charger monoply)
Unfortunately, you can't use a 5K iMac as an additional screen for a Macbook.[1]
[1] "Note that the iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, Late 2014) does not support Target Display Mode." From http://s831.us/1bYWtfj