3 ms·

> The Mighty Apple with trillions in bank cannot come-up with something "innovative" and chooses the "trade off" approach? Do you think having money means Appl

> The Mighty Apple with trillions in bank cannot come-up with something "innovative" and chooses the "trade off" approach? Do you think having money means Apple never has to make tradeoffs? There are always tradeoffs. It's just not possible to make a good webcam that exists in the tiny space at the top of an ultra-thin screen with ultra-thin bezels. Most manufacturers just make terrible webcams, including the Framework that you've brought up as a good alternative (which has much thicker bezels besides). That's one way to go. Another way is to make space for the webcam. Apple can't magically throw money at every conceivable problem until it disappears. You don't have to buy one of the new MacBooks. I suspect that most designers aren't going to have as much of a problem with it as you're suggesting, though. Outside of full screen most folks won't notice it after a while, and when you go to full screen Apple adds a black bezel anyway.

yellowapple 5y ago
> It's just not possible to make a good webcam that exists in the tiny space at the top of an ultra-thin screen with ultra-thin bezels. Maybe they could consider, you know, not dogmatically pursuing ultra-thin bezels for their own sake? > and when you go to full screen Apple adds a black bezel anyway. That's good to hear, but that then entails entirely removing a chunk of vertical screen real estate - which is already at a premium (relative to horizontal) with widescreen aspect ratios. Contrast with the Framework (or, similarly, the Pixelbook), which doesn't need to do that and boasts a 3:2 aspect ratio to improve upon that vertical real estate.
- josephg 5y ago
  A laptop with thick bezels and no notch is the same as a laptop with no bezels, a notch and those pixels disabled in software. It sounds like you want it both ways - you don’t want to lose your vertical real estate (“which is already at a premium”). And you don’t want the notch. In the same paragraph talking about how important vertical real estate is, you hold up other laptops like the framework as ideal even though they lose vertical real estate via the chunky bezel. I’m confused. Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)? Or do you want more vertical real estate (less bezels + a notch)? Having both would be the best. But given we can’t have that, if you were in charge of the MacBook Pro design, what would you choose?
  - yellowapple 5y ago
    > you hold up other laptops like the framework as ideal even though they lose vertical real estate via the chunky bezel. Because they more than make up for it with the 3:2 aspect ratio. > Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)? Don't care about aesthetics. > But given we can’t have that, if you were in charge of the MacBook Pro design, what would you choose? Bigger top bezel and - ideally - a 3:2 aspect ratio.
    - josephg 5y ago
      I still don't understand. Lets say we have two machines: - Machine 1 has a large top bezel and no notch - Machine 2 has a tiny top bezel and a notch, but the pixels to either side of the notch are disabled in software (and never used). The part of the display thats enabled has identical geometry to machine 1. Aesthetics aside, aren't these machines identical in every way? You have a strong preference for machine 1. Why?
      - yellowapple 5y ago
        > You have a strong preference for machine 1. Why? Because Machine 2 offers nothing of value over Machine 1 - only more complexity and more opportunities for hardware and software issues.

yellowapple 5y ago

> It's just not possible to make a good webcam that exists in the tiny space at the top of an ultra-thin screen with ultra-thin bezels. Maybe they could consider, you know, not dogmatically pursuing ultra-thin bezels for their own sake? > and when you go to full screen Apple adds a black bezel anyway. That's good to hear, but that then entails entirely removing a chunk of vertical screen real estate - which is already at a premium (relative to horizontal) with widescreen aspect ratios. Contrast with the Framework (or, similarly, the Pixelbook), which doesn't need to do that and boasts a 3:2 aspect ratio to improve upon that vertical real estate.

josephg 5y ago
A laptop with thick bezels and no notch is the same as a laptop with no bezels, a notch and those pixels disabled in software. It sounds like you want it both ways - you don’t want to lose your vertical real estate (“which is already at a premium”). And you don’t want the notch. In the same paragraph talking about how important vertical real estate is, you hold up other laptops like the framework as ideal even though they lose vertical real estate via the chunky bezel. I’m confused. Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)? Or do you want more vertical real estate (less bezels + a notch)? Having both would be the best. But given we can’t have that, if you were in charge of the MacBook Pro design, what would you choose?
- yellowapple 5y ago
  > you hold up other laptops like the framework as ideal even though they lose vertical real estate via the chunky bezel. Because they more than make up for it with the 3:2 aspect ratio. > Do you want design aesthetics (no notch)? Don't care about aesthetics. > But given we can’t have that, if you were in charge of the MacBook Pro design, what would you choose? Bigger top bezel and - ideally - a 3:2 aspect ratio.
  - josephg 5y ago
    I still don't understand. Lets say we have two machines: - Machine 1 has a large top bezel and no notch - Machine 2 has a tiny top bezel and a notch, but the pixels to either side of the notch are disabled in software (and never used). The part of the display thats enabled has identical geometry to machine 1. Aesthetics aside, aren't these machines identical in every way? You have a strong preference for machine 1. Why?
    - yellowapple 5y ago
      > You have a strong preference for machine 1. Why? Because Machine 2 offers nothing of value over Machine 1 - only more complexity and more opportunities for hardware and software issues.