>The new guts are getting you better performance but also better battery life with what Apple says is 10 hours of web browsing or 11 hours of iTunes movie playback.
Movie playback used to be considered the de facto test of the most rigorous power use a computer would go through. Spinning DVDs and hard drives have been replaced with SSD, hardware accelerated decoding of video has replaced maxing out your CPU.
I wonder if it's the same on the Windows side; has Microsoft optimized IE (or the new browser, whatever it's called) for power usage?
I have Windows on Bootcamp but I don't know if Microsoft breaks down power usage like Apple does. I could compare Firefox to Edge, otherwise.
I don't think the mac power usage thing takes into account GPU usage but for that you'd probably want to download something third party to check the watt usage itself.
The other option for extensions is to specify certain sites that they work with (this is the "read and change all data on 'x.com'" permission prompt). That only works for site-specific extensions (like Reddit Enhancement Suite, or Camel Camel Camel).
This either because they are not documented, or because of the amount of special case code that would be required.
You can compile webkit from scratch, note the similar battery efficiency AND check it's code.
What's it with Apple that brings out the conspiracy theorists in people? (other pet peeves: "they purposefully remove ports to sell more adapters", "they purposefully cripple mobile web apps", etc).
It's not limited to Apple, but the pattern is the same: it goes immediately from conjecture to absolute certainty of malicious intent (but they didn't count on the speaker being clever enough to see through the scam). And if disproved, it's just the exception that proves the rule, which the speaker then has to loudly reassert.
We need a new rule: Never ascribe to malice what's adequately explained by others having different priorities than you.
Just because they aren't guilty here doesn't mean Apple hasn't behaved badly at some point. And when a company prizes short term profits from loyal customers over long term profits and gains of market share, that isn't a conspiracy -- it's a strategy.
Because market segmentation. It's a concept in sales as old as Adam Smith.
Possibly, the people buying the 64GB iPhone for slightly more than they should are actually subsidising the people getting the 32GB for less than otherwise.
The problem is that there isn't a 32GB iPhone 6s, though it would only cost Apple a few pennies per unit to offer one. Instead, it has a 16GB version (too little storage) and then jumps to a 64GB version (which is comparatively overpriced).
Either way, purely in terms of manufacturing costs, it's a choice between "overpriced" and "even more overpriced" -- or, if it makes you feel better, "premium priced" and "even more premium priced". I don't think "subsidising" comes into it.
Well, it's not that simple. Safari's Webkit has started as a fork of KHTML, which was already open-source.
Webkit's development has been conducted for circa one year behind closed doors. Then they released it as open source. KHTML dev have been faced with the option of merging a giant patch, throw away a year's worth of work and rebase on webkit or continue on their own.
1) Webkit has not been open source from the start, but from one year later
2) Webkit is open source, it's so because it's a fork of KHTML. A wild fork though, an aggressive, non-cooperative fork. Webkit effectively hijacked and killed KHTML.
I know, I was using Konqueror before it was cool. That's beside the point though.
>1) Webkit has not been open source from the start, but from one year later
Still irrelevant to our discussion.
>2) Webkit is open source, it's so because it's a fork of KHTML. A wild fork though, an aggressive, non-cooperative fork. Webkit effectively hijacked and killed KHTML.
And also a fork so much advanced (even at the first year) from KHTML that might as well have been a totally different project. And I should know, I'm one of the (I presume) few in here using Konqueror and KHTML in KDE 2.0 back in the day (that would be circa 2000-2003), for my, then modest browsing needs. And I know the whole backstory, as I was reading the "dot" then (KDE's news portal).
The thing is, WebKit, the fork, saw far more success than KHTML as an open source project, and became itself one of the largest open source successes. In fact it's so much a not just Apple thing, that code from there also powers Chrome, the most popular browser today (and Opera) and numerous other projects.
And, like with KHTML, Google forked Webkit to create Blink. When you want freedom to shape a project as you please, that's what you do. If you can keep 'em up, forks are nothing to be ashamed of. Some of the most successful projects have been forks (and sometimes, they even merged back after many years, e.g. XEmacs).
But still, this is again all beside the point. You whole comment until here merely repeats: "This Apple is not that benevolent -- they only made WebKit open source because they based it on an open source project". Nobody argued otherwise, and it's now what's under discussion.
And you can check battery efficiency without the plugins -- which aren't any secret either.
Edit: Fixed poor wording.
It would be much better of there was a good way to have the server issue partial updates of the DOM in response to user action without needing JS glue to make it happen.
Web developers can do this now if they don't need to easily react to user input. They can use HTTP multipart messages and slowly stream in HTML as needed. This is also fairly buggy in current browsers as websites stopped using it ever since XMLHttpRequest came out.
My current config: OS X, Firefox 45.0.2, NoScript 184.108.40.206.
What doesn't work properly is the search at the bottom of the page. For that I switch to Safari (with JS enabled).
There's a h264ify chrome extension that forces YouTube to serve H.264 to Chrome on OS X so it can be hardware decoded. It significantly reduces battery drain.
Intel's next generation, Kaby Lake, should have full support. Most new mobile SoCs already support VP9, IIRC.
There are no licensing fees for distributing free/ad-supported h264.
With Chrome, The Great Suspender seems to work well at reducing background tab CPU.
I'm not really surprised by this, but it would be interesting to see how much Virtualbox hooks into the power-saving functionality on the host machine, and if this can be optimized. I'd have thought that a VM that's pretty much idle would be able to somehow utilize the host computer's power saving methods. Maybe it can, but I haven't enabled it in the VM settings... Any tips?
In any case, until Veertu support USB devices it is not much use for me.
Homebrew is not for replicating a deployment environment in your work machine.
I run Postgresql on one of my VPS machines, and I dread having to upgrade it all the time.
It would make a better test if they reported battery life when web browsing both with and without ad blocking. It'll certainly make a noticeable difference.
I heard the sentiment from Conte at Georgia Tech with regards to Amdahl and speedup, but it seems to hold generally whenever any type of numeric performance measure is presented.
I get, and respect, the desire to move everything to USB-C, and I'm willing to take the hit with dongles to help move things forward - but couldn't we do that on the MacBook Air?
I know, everyone will say, "MacBook Pro" - but, once again, I don't care about the Retina, and the MacBook air is a monster of a system, awesome processing power - I'm running 31 Apps right now on my MBair, including two Virtual Machines (one of them Windows), full office suite, Aperture - and it's not even spinning up the fans.
The MacBook released today is a less useful system for me in almost every way than the MacBook Air released three years ago.
I moved from a 13" MacBook Air (Core i7, 8GB RAM) to a MacBook 12". I absolutely love it, it's much lighter, the keyboard is great once you get used to this, I prefer retina, and not having fans is great as well. Force touch is a nice gimmick, but I haven't used it much. The Core M CPU is not a problem for me in practice. Since buying the Air I have been doing more and more deep learning and anything without a CUDA GPU won't be practical anyway. So I work on a server with an nVidia Tesla card. For all may daily work and most development, the Core M holds up absolutely fine.
Even if I wasn't cursed with sausage-fingered, basketball-palming hands to type with, I'd go stark raving mad having that little screen real-estate.
It's actually great. Instead of trying to fit so much, I just focus on the task at hand. No doubt, in-editor docs/autocomplete help a lot. Plus I stopped doing web work which has been a huge boon overall. Note I started with a 1280x800 but now all screens are 1080p or other 16:9. That ratio is the real killer.
It also provided incentive to get a proper tiling window manager.
About the only exception was when working with Visio. The large monitor is pretty handy then.
It's certainly not compliant with European health and safety regulations. Here, we have to provide an external keyboard, monitor and mouse for anyone that uses a laptop for more than an hour.
(British regulations, since they're obviously in English, laptops on page 50 http://www.hse.gov.uk/pubns/books/l26.htm )
When I'm docked I use a Matias Ergo Pro (almost a great keyboard, but unfortunately the only one of it's form factor) and a 1920x1300 display.
Screen real estate is like coffee. If you're addicted you need it. It can be wonderful in specific situations. But people who never start aren't really at any disadvantage.
One terminal, ssh'd into one tmux session. Typically running emacs in two column mode among many other tmux tabs.
I don't get distracted much :)
I tried the keyboard but after a decade of using MacBook chiclet keys, the abbreviated keystroke was frustrating.
Heck, can even buy it and then return it for a refund, no questions asked, in some countries.
I'm mostly reminded of the MBA when it first came out. It was $1800 back then, and that was with some pretty shitty options. e.g. you had a regular HD, if you wanted an SSD it was $1k extra, or $2.8k in total, and you'd only have a 64gb SSD. And if you wanted a CPU upgrade (because the MBA was slower than the regular Macbook), you'd $300 extra, or $3.1k total, and it was still slower btw. And look how far the MBA has come!
I think I'm really going to like the MB, but usually first gen just isn't good value. Today? Well we've got a MBA and MBP at home, no way I'm getting the MB or trading with it. Give it 1-2 generations though and I'm sure that'll change for me.
Considering it's built in, it's light-years ahead of the junk that Windows calls a shell window.
iTerm 2 doesn't do this. It's the "accurate" one. If you prefer your colors the way Terminal mangles them, you'll have to set them that way. :)
But...you can see where Apple is coming from. Between the increasingly powerful tiny Macbook and the increasingly tiny powerful Pro, it's a small slice of use cases indeed left for the Air, and I see why they're ditching it. Still makes me sad though.
if you want to be even more frustrated by this, try scrolling by clicking and dragging the scrollbar on the side of the window. note that it's buttery smooth.
so it's almost certainly caused by JS scroll event handling, since the iTunes store on OS X is just a big webview.
it's frickin' insane. it's a page of static pictures. it should hit 60fps easily.
no one cares about quality software.
It's incredible how much the 'smoothness' of user experience has regressed, on average, across the board. Seeing that kind of unnecessary jank totally drives me up the wall.
Generally, i try not to think about it too much.. because it often feels like I'm part of a tiny minority that thinks this is an absurd state of things.
Slack is a perfect example. I love Slack and use it very heavily. But it's maddening how laggy their "app" (which is just their web interface in a wrapper) often feels. Users should not be frequently experiencing keyboard lag in a chat app!
The MacBook comes with a base configuration of 256GB SSD and 8GiB of RAM. The MacBook Air comes with a 128GB SSD and 4GiB of RAM (Edit: came with. Apparently this year they finally upped them to 8GiB RAM, so the price difference may have widened.). For the MacBook Air 13" and MacBook Pro 13" upgraded to 256GB SSD and 8GiB of RAM, the price is closer IIRC.
(I'd check, but Apple's website is amusingly broken right now.)
MacBook with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,299 (base model)
MacBook Air 13" with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,199 (upgrade from 8GiB RAM, 128GB SSD $999 model)
MacBook Pro 13" with 8GiB RAM, 256GB SSD: $1,499 (upgrade from 8GiB RAM, 128GB SSD $1,299 model)
So the MacBook is somewhere between MacBook Air and MacBook Pro pricing, $100 pricier than a comparable Air in terms of RAM and SSD, $200 cheaper than the Pro. Interesting.
In their default configurations, the MacBook has an m3, the Air a low-clockrate i5, the Pro a high-clockrate i5. On the other hand, the Air does not have Retina, while the Pro and MacBook do.
Back then, I thought that system would land in Spring/Summer 2014. Things have certainly slowed down - at least they got the Battery life in a good place.
So, here is what we are looking at with the MacBook
2304 x 1440 pixels. (12" IPS Retina)
10 Hours Battery
8 GiB Memory
512 GB SSD
1.3GHz dual-core Intel Core m7, Turbo Boost up to 3.1GHz
I'm trying to figure out if I can hold out another year. I kinda want the 13" display. I use this screen for everything, and real-estate is precious, but I don't know if it's a deal killer - particularly as it supports the same scaled resolution as my MBair (1440x900) - and my close up eyesight is awesome. Might have to see what the Terminal looks like in scaled resolution. I'm not a big fan of the mobile processors on this box, but everyone says it's ok. Be interesting to see how VMware holds up with Windows/OpenBSD. 8 GiB/memory, turns out to be fine. Apple isn't increasing it because you really don't need more with OS X on a non pro system - so I'm dropping 16 GiB from my wishlist.
It looks like this may be the end of the line for the MacBook Air (other than a memory bump for the 13" up to 8 GB for the same $999 price) - Given that Retina probably isn't that big a deal, I'm almost considering the 2015 Broadwell MacBook Air just as a holder for my older Laptop. I can go light on the CPU and probably still come out ahead of the MacBook, even with the pre-skylake architecture. Take good care of it for three years (it won't be my daily driver) - and there will still be probably 50% of it's value when I finally upgrade to my "final" system (or at least something I hold onto for six or so years). $1199 MBAir gets me 1.6GHz Dual-Core Intel Core i5, Turbo Boost up to 2.7GHz, 8GiB, 256 GB PCI-e SSD, 12 Hours Battery.
I may just wait for Anandtech/GeekBench to review this gear to see how the Skylake m5 1.2 GHz compares with the Core i5 1.6 GHz before making a decision...
It is. Trust me. Once you get used to smooth print-like text, nothing else compares.
So - pricing may not be that far off then, but, of course, it means that if you want a $999 Mac laptop, you'll need to go with an outdated processor.
(Unfortunate that only the X1 Carbon convertible tablet has OLED, not the lighter non-convertible.)
Reminds me of this funny video from last year .
At 4GB, I'd agree with you. But I'm still running my 2009 (!!!!!!!) MBP with 8GB RAM, and it's fine. And no doubt, the new MacBook is a bajillion times faster than my somehow-increasingly-heavier-each-year-brick-of-aluminum MBP and will handle memory pressure like a champ.
And speaking of memory pressure, for it's intended use, even with 30 Chrome tabs, 8GB is fine. Plus, given Apple's track record of device support over the last 7 or 8 years, Apple intends this machine to be usable for at least 3 years.
Seriously thinking it may finally be the year I upgrade -- I will miss the matte screen though.
The extra RAM has some big disadvantages:
1. As I recall, I lost about 40 minutes run time on batteries.
2. It decreases battery sleep time. Prior to the upgrade, I could go for 4 or 5 days in sleep, and still have useful enough battery life. Now it is more like 2 or 3 days.
3. It dramatically increases time to sleep and wake from sleep.
4. It eats valuable SSD space. You need 16GB to sleep. And you swap files will be bigger. You likely need a bigger SSD to support the RAM
5. RAM does cost money up front.
If you do need 16GB, you know it and should be ready for these trade offs. As someone who regularly runs 2 or 3 browsers, Mac and Linux development tools, MS Office, Adobe, Linux and Windows VMs, etc, I am in the class of people who need the extra RAM. Most people do not.
Well, I'll have to call BS on that. It maybe increase it, but hardly "dramatically". In fact time to sleep/wake is fast enough to barely care about it.
And I have 16GB RAM and the older, 2013 era, SSDs. Newer MBP SSDs are 2x-3x the speed of mine.
Plus, since then Apple added memory compression...
That and I'm a bit heavy on the tab (ab)use.
Now I did do the RAM and SSD upgrades at the same time. I went from 8GB of RAM and a 250GB SSD.
I remember spending some time trying to figure out why wake/sleep times where so hugely increased. I could never pin it down exactly, but I strongly suspect it was related to the RAM increase.
However, I was surprised at how much work I was still able to do. I felt the slowness of the CPU far more than the limited RAM.
I am happy to be back to 16GB except when I look at battery life. And I could adapt to less RAM.
I'm guessing that SSDs and swapping really changed the game around virtual memory performance on Mac laptops.
However, "Sleep" on MacBooks is a combination of what people commonly refer to as Sleep and Hibernation
I believe that the current method is to Sleep the system with both keeping the RAM powered AND write RAM to the drive. If there is enough battery, the system will wake fast by using the current RAM, if the battery dies, it recovers from the RAM image stored on drive.
This works well for most people using base configurations. For those of us using the limits of the hardware, it might not give the preferred results. There are various GUI and CLI tools such as SmartSleep to control Sleep and Hibernate based on your preferences and taking into consideration the current battery level.
And, as another bonus, I have a "Click to Hibernate" feature that I've been wanting for a long time. My return from hibernation is very fast, and, in theory, the battery loss should be fairly minimal while in a hibernate state.
I haven't experimented with using it to try and keep a machine running with the lid closed, however - that's traditionally considered risky for heat reasons.
SmartSleep does add a significant trick, it allows you to automatically change the mode based on the current battery level.
Well, yeah. This thread is centered around laptops, after all.
OS X really does work miracles with virtual memory - my 16 GiB Windows 7 machine starts spinning up and swapping if I leave google earth running in it overnight. And next morning - there is always a 60 second pause while everything swaps back in...
Of course, some people get crazy and have like 60-70 tabs open, that's just not my flow.
I bought a 13" Macbook Air in 2011 that I still use. It was and is an amazing laptop. It's really in a sweet spot for size and power.
For years buyers including me have wanted a retina display and (ideally) the option for 16GB of RAM.
The Macbook is just too much of a compromise. Crappy keyboard. Only one port that's also used for power. Really low power CPU.
Why can't I just get the Macbook's display on a Macbook Air?
I guess Apple assumes (probably correctly) that if you really need 16GB of RAM, you can afford an rMBP.
I also know a bunch of developers who bought and love the MacBook. Not sure how they're making do with that single port but apparently it works for some.
At least a patch to recognize the WildcatPoint PCH is in 4.6:
Filco Majestouch Convertible 2 review: the quest for a Mac-compatible, wireless, mechanical keyboard: http://johnscullen.com/filco-review/
 - http://www.keyboardco.com/keyboard/filco-convertible-2-usa-a...
It seems so sensible, I don't understand why there aren't more convertible keyboards like that! Together with a convertible bluetooth mouse like the Razer Orochi that also supports multiple bluetooth pairings, it's the best of both worlds for low latency USB gaming, charging, and wireless switching like a KVM between Macs, PCs, tablets, phones, GearVR, etc.
I wish there were more convertible devices like that to choose from. The KBTalKing Pro looked wonderful, but never made it to regular production ("factory issues"). http://kbtalkingusa.com/ http://www.keyboardlover.com/kbtalking_review.php
Be careful shopping for convertible devices that actually use Bluetooth and not some proprietary dongle, and that actually use USB for fast low latency data instead of just charging!
I expect the next major thing to happen to the MBA to be its discontinuation.
If they added a lighting port on Macs too.
Suddenly all kinds of peripherals for iPhone/iPad could be reused with Macs too (with the appropriate driver updates).
Normal usage time is about 4 hours on the cheaper units I use, and that's just playback without any microphone use. Maybe longer on more expensive units, while they are new, but I doubt many would get you through a whole work day of continuous activity.
Also, pairing is still fiddly and would probably put off a lot of casual users. (Especially when you have a N-to-N mapping between devices and headphones.)
USB-C could still work if there are enough ports. While it's been great having a common standard for headphones across devices (partly thanks to the original iPhone not requiring a custom dongle), it does start to feel a bit of an anomaly in an era where everything is converging on the new USB standard(s).
Kinda? Apple owns Beats so http://www.beatsbydre.com/headphones/browse-headphones/wirel...
Too bad they're expensive. Interestingly they're $275 here in .se, but listed as $399 on the US page.
Why? USB DACs exist. I use one all the time with my apple stuff.
And I, as part of a seemingly and disappointingly small subset of users, will refuse to ever buy.
If those headphones don't unplug from the amp to allow me to use a 3.5mm stereo jack. Yes.
>or would you refuse to buy a dedicated amp/dac with which you could use any headphones?
I would not refuse that.
I try to avoid buying products which have non-standard connectors that limit connectivity with other devices.
I only buy headphones with a standard 3.5mm stereo jack because I have a ton of different devices and I don't want to limit myself to audio devices which only have a USB port or Bluetooth chip. That's just silly in my eyes.
If the headphones have a stereo jack then my opinion of them might be different, but still dependent on their quality.
Currently I lug around a 15" MPBr and I would like something lighter to do development on the train but I wonder about performance.
Has anyone tried to do C++ builds on XCode using one of these machines?
I bought a maxed out 11" Air last summer, because it has a
LOT more processing power to offer over the MacBook. Not as nice a screen, but I use it tethered to a monitor when I need a nice screen.
Of all the computers I've ever owned, this one's my favourite. The portability is unbelievable and it's got enough guts to handle Xcode. Your needs may differ from mine but I can't recommend it enough.
Maybe I can try one during the 14 day return period.
Thanks for all the replies!
Something like a GalaxyVR with an VR first DesktopEnvironment. That will have a huge 3d floating code editor.
This and a lightweight/wireless keyboard. Could be perfect, and mean less slouching.
Unfortunately smartphones aren't probably high resolution enough, yet.
-- Douglas Adams on the early marketing efforts for the Wheel
It should have a hue angle of 0 degrees, a saturation of 0% and a lightness of 25.9%.
It should be obtained by blending #848484 with #000000 .