5 ms·

> These rants are typical but would be much better if people identified the glorious PC hardware they are using. As someone who's never bought Apple HW (but us

by jlg23 10y ago

> These rants are typical but would be much better if people identified the glorious PC hardware they are using. As someone who's never bought Apple HW (but used it, when paid for by employers, as secondary devices): There is no "glorious" PC hardware anymore (though, the top-of-the-line thinkpads from about 2000 were amazing (a20p, anyone?). But today, compared to Apple's pricing, they are so cheap that I can get equivalent HW for half the price (equivalent wrt performance, not manufacturing quality!). I can have it serviced around the world without having to find a vendor-specific shop. And if it really is FUBAR, I can invest the 50% I saved on the initial purchase and get a brand new, next generation PC.

lmm 10y ago
I've got a Surface Book and it's glorious.
Chathamization 10y ago
> But today, compared to Apple's pricing, they are so cheap that I can get equivalent HW for half the price (equivalent wrt performance, not manufacturing quality!). How true is this? For instance, I often see the XPS brought up as an alternative to the MPB, but whenever I look into it, it seems like the price is comparable for similar hardware configurations.[1] [1] http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/apple-macbook-pro-13-vs-dell-xps-13-apple-macbook-dell-xps-13/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/apple-macbook-pro-13-...
- nsxwolf 10y ago
  It's only true if you focus on one or two features or specs and ignore everything else. When people make that claim they usually find something with the same CPU and amount of memory and use it as a comp.
  - jlg23 10y ago
    Of course. But considering things I do not consider essential is like saying "yes" to "you save $1 when buying 5 apples, we charge for 4" when you only wanted one in the first place. The OP wrote about the specific "sw dev" group, not the average user. (e.g.: If I could downgrade the resolution of the displays for a significant discount, apple hw would be much more tempting to me - after all, 99% of the time I spend on computers I look at monospace fonts in emacs...)
    - matt4077 10y ago
      I feel like text is where the retina screens really pay off. I'm not even sure if I could notice the difference looking at photos. But a good font on a retina display is something I still notice, even after having used it for 2 years+.
- wompfox 10y ago
  In your source, it lists $1499 vs $849. Not so comparable to me. Also IMO the XPS has a bit of a 'premium' price tag to it. A similar hardware configuration on a Thinkpad T series would be significantly cheaper
- dabernathy89 10y ago
  Top of the line XPS 15, including touch screen is $1650: - i5 Quad Core (i5-6300HQ) - 8GB RAM (upgradeable to 32) - 256GB HD (upgradeable) - 2GB Graphics card (GTX 960M) Lowest quality new model MBP (15" w/ touch bar) is $2399: - i7 quad core - 16GB RAM (not upgradeable) - 256GB HD (not upgradeable) - 2GB Graphics card (Radeon Pro 450) So for $750 you get a little more RAM, slightly better CPU, and Mac build quality (I have no idea how the graphics cards compare). That seems like a pretty big difference to me for fairly similar specs. Especially considering that you can upgrade your XPS in the future. I'm on a Macbook Air now, but for my next laptop I'll be deciding between the 2 above (or possibly the last model rMBP).
  - dabernathy89 10y ago
    If you don't care about touch bar / touch screen it's similar. $1400 XPS vs $1999 MBP, a $600 difference, but the MBP doesn't have a dedicated graphics card.
    - snovv_crash 10y ago
      And the XPS without the dGPU is cheaper too...
  - Fnoord 10y ago
    > (not upgradeable) True, this is a real issue, and I agree we're paying premium_price^2 for the newest MBPs. However, in this day and age of networked computing and fast WiFi why would 256 GB not be enough? Did you check the performance of the XPS SSD compared to the MBP? I take it the RAM is DDR4. The 16 GB LPDDR3 RAM means more battery life. The resolution of the 2015 MBP 15" is also in between 1080p and 4k, a sacrifice, for battery power. The graphics card isn't upgradeable on either machine. And I did look at the XPS. I'm not going to buy a machine which makes a lot of noise, and the XPS has coil whine. Why don't you compare to the 2015 rMBP? I tried out the butterfly keyboard of the 2016 version in store and I found it far too noisy (the travel also isn't a good aspect). Do you really need the graphics card? Have you looked at eGPU?
    - 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
hguant 10y ago
> There is no "glorious" PC hardware anymore Just built a PC at home for gaming and Windows tinkering, and I have to say - it feels pretty glorious. Also, and I feel like a shill for having said this so many times, the new Razer Blade laptops, Surface Book Pro, and Surface Studio have successfully plucked the "top tier industrial design" mantle from Apple, in terms of innovation and coolness factor (which, as Apple has proved time and again, really does matter). Which is more interesting - a massive touch screen computer that moves weightlessly, with a hockey puck sensor that makes those cool radial menus we see in every other science fiction movie, or a laptop with a touch screen above the keyboard? I think there is a great future for 'glorious PC hardware', both for enthusiasts like myself who build their own rig, and from companies like Microsoft, ASUS and the like, who have had their clock cleaned by Apple for the last few years and have finally come up with a response that's not just "copy the MacBook" (and not "novelty for novelty's sake" either).
- itchyouch 10y ago
  I played around with my friends surface pro and the surface studio at the MS store and while the build quality on both have been excellent, the touch & dial interface has left a bit to be desired. I feel like the recent output has been releasing new features for the sake of doing it because it is possible, not necessarily because there are significant usability/ux improvements. I found the dial & touch to be a bit fatigue inducing and less efficient than using a keyboard/mouse for anything beyond the first 20-30 minutes of work. Touch works on smaller screens because the physical effort to swipe a finger is minimal, but on large screens, it's fatigue inducing. I'd be guessing that Apple has tried these other input methods, but hasn't quite figured out how to address usability in this context of a large screen. The fatigue issue of raising a hand to a screen (even if the studio is laid down flat) is pretty huge, or resting a dial on the screen taking up pixels becomes an interference to either constantly move on/off or keep stationary next to the keyboard. Most people working hours a day on the computer can keep their hands within several inches, but the other input methods do feel gimmicky for general purpose use. Not to discount the dial entirely, as there was an old 3rd party Apple accessory maker who released a dial exactly like the surface dial over a decade ago, but targeted film & music makers who would use the dial for scrubbing video/audio. Microsoft is definitely upping it's ante, but there is a certain touch of refinement that feels missing, while Apple is slowly degrading in their small touches of refinement that bring user happiness.
a3n 10y ago
> But today, compared to Apple's pricing, they are so cheap that I can get equivalent HW for half the price (equivalent wrt performance, not manufacturing quality!). Agreed. With Linux I can control the price of my hardware. I can move my environment, the part I care about, up and down the price spectrum as I care to and where I can afford. I care much more about what I'm doing with the abstract "computer" in front of me than what it physically is. Particularly something as fast-changing and fast-obsoleting as computer hardware. And obsolescence does matter, as newer softer slowly comes to expect newer hardware.

by jlg23 10y ago

lmm 10y ago

I've got a Surface Book and it's glorious.

Chathamization 10y ago

> But today, compared to Apple's pricing, they are so cheap that I can get equivalent HW for half the price (equivalent wrt performance, not manufacturing quality!). How true is this? For instance, I often see the XPS brought up as an alternative to the MPB, but whenever I look into it, it seems like the price is comparable for similar hardware configurations.[1] [1] http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/apple-macbook-pro-13-vs-dell-xps-13-apple-macbook-dell-xps-13/ http://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/apple-macbook-pro-13-...

nsxwolf 10y ago
It's only true if you focus on one or two features or specs and ignore everything else. When people make that claim they usually find something with the same CPU and amount of memory and use it as a comp.
- jlg23 10y ago
  Of course. But considering things I do not consider essential is like saying "yes" to "you save $1 when buying 5 apples, we charge for 4" when you only wanted one in the first place. The OP wrote about the specific "sw dev" group, not the average user. (e.g.: If I could downgrade the resolution of the displays for a significant discount, apple hw would be much more tempting to me - after all, 99% of the time I spend on computers I look at monospace fonts in emacs...)
  - matt4077 10y ago
    I feel like text is where the retina screens really pay off. I'm not even sure if I could notice the difference looking at photos. But a good font on a retina display is something I still notice, even after having used it for 2 years+.
wompfox 10y ago
In your source, it lists $1499 vs $849. Not so comparable to me. Also IMO the XPS has a bit of a 'premium' price tag to it. A similar hardware configuration on a Thinkpad T series would be significantly cheaper
dabernathy89 10y ago
Top of the line XPS 15, including touch screen is $1650: - i5 Quad Core (i5-6300HQ) - 8GB RAM (upgradeable to 32) - 256GB HD (upgradeable) - 2GB Graphics card (GTX 960M) Lowest quality new model MBP (15" w/ touch bar) is $2399: - i7 quad core - 16GB RAM (not upgradeable) - 256GB HD (not upgradeable) - 2GB Graphics card (Radeon Pro 450) So for $750 you get a little more RAM, slightly better CPU, and Mac build quality (I have no idea how the graphics cards compare). That seems like a pretty big difference to me for fairly similar specs. Especially considering that you can upgrade your XPS in the future. I'm on a Macbook Air now, but for my next laptop I'll be deciding between the 2 above (or possibly the last model rMBP).
- dabernathy89 10y ago
  If you don't care about touch bar / touch screen it's similar. $1400 XPS vs $1999 MBP, a $600 difference, but the MBP doesn't have a dedicated graphics card.
  - snovv_crash 10y ago
    And the XPS without the dGPU is cheaper too...
- Fnoord 10y ago
  > (not upgradeable) True, this is a real issue, and I agree we're paying premium_price^2 for the newest MBPs. However, in this day and age of networked computing and fast WiFi why would 256 GB not be enough? Did you check the performance of the XPS SSD compared to the MBP? I take it the RAM is DDR4. The 16 GB LPDDR3 RAM means more battery life. The resolution of the 2015 MBP 15" is also in between 1080p and 4k, a sacrifice, for battery power. The graphics card isn't upgradeable on either machine. And I did look at the XPS. I'm not going to buy a machine which makes a lot of noise, and the XPS has coil whine. Why don't you compare to the 2015 rMBP? I tried out the butterfly keyboard of the 2016 version in store and I found it far too noisy (the travel also isn't a good aspect). Do you really need the graphics card? Have you looked at eGPU?
  - 10y ago
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

hguant 10y ago

> There is no "glorious" PC hardware anymore Just built a PC at home for gaming and Windows tinkering, and I have to say - it feels pretty glorious. Also, and I feel like a shill for having said this so many times, the new Razer Blade laptops, Surface Book Pro, and Surface Studio have successfully plucked the "top tier industrial design" mantle from Apple, in terms of innovation and coolness factor (which, as Apple has proved time and again, really does matter). Which is more interesting - a massive touch screen computer that moves weightlessly, with a hockey puck sensor that makes those cool radial menus we see in every other science fiction movie, or a laptop with a touch screen above the keyboard? I think there is a great future for 'glorious PC hardware', both for enthusiasts like myself who build their own rig, and from companies like Microsoft, ASUS and the like, who have had their clock cleaned by Apple for the last few years and have finally come up with a response that's not just "copy the MacBook" (and not "novelty for novelty's sake" either).

itchyouch 10y ago
I played around with my friends surface pro and the surface studio at the MS store and while the build quality on both have been excellent, the touch & dial interface has left a bit to be desired. I feel like the recent output has been releasing new features for the sake of doing it because it is possible, not necessarily because there are significant usability/ux improvements. I found the dial & touch to be a bit fatigue inducing and less efficient than using a keyboard/mouse for anything beyond the first 20-30 minutes of work. Touch works on smaller screens because the physical effort to swipe a finger is minimal, but on large screens, it's fatigue inducing. I'd be guessing that Apple has tried these other input methods, but hasn't quite figured out how to address usability in this context of a large screen. The fatigue issue of raising a hand to a screen (even if the studio is laid down flat) is pretty huge, or resting a dial on the screen taking up pixels becomes an interference to either constantly move on/off or keep stationary next to the keyboard. Most people working hours a day on the computer can keep their hands within several inches, but the other input methods do feel gimmicky for general purpose use. Not to discount the dial entirely, as there was an old 3rd party Apple accessory maker who released a dial exactly like the surface dial over a decade ago, but targeted film & music makers who would use the dial for scrubbing video/audio. Microsoft is definitely upping it's ante, but there is a certain touch of refinement that feels missing, while Apple is slowly degrading in their small touches of refinement that bring user happiness.

a3n 10y ago

> But today, compared to Apple's pricing, they are so cheap that I can get equivalent HW for half the price (equivalent wrt performance, not manufacturing quality!). Agreed. With Linux I can control the price of my hardware. I can move my environment, the part I care about, up and down the price spectrum as I care to and where I can afford. I care much more about what I'm doing with the abstract "computer" in front of me than what it physically is. Particularly something as fast-changing and fast-obsoleting as computer hardware. And obsolescence does matter, as newer softer slowly comes to expect newer hardware.