I remember my parents complaining about how expensive concessions were when I was a kid in the 90s too, and sometimes we would hit the gas station first and stuff snacks in my mom's bag to sneak them in to the theater. They also complained about prices if we couldn't do the Tuesday matinee.
Not sure anything's changed. The movie theater experience has always been expensive and I think your bill is pretty much in line with inflation.
> The movie theater experience has always been expensive.
I don't think they were that expensive in the 1930s and 40s, maybe into the 50s. Supposedly, in the 1930s, they were around 25 cents, which $5 in today's money.
We've just seriously gone of the rails on pricing for some reason, but it probably started before I was born (in 75) and has just gotten a lot worse over time (so in the 90s, they were expensive, but are even more expensive today).
> And yet same specs iPad + Magic keyboard will cost you twice as much
It's not about specs, it's about capability. You compare the Neo to the wrong iPad.
The base model iPad + keyboard folio match the MacBook Neo price, which seems to be intentional. iPadOS requires less resources to run but is functionally equivalent outside of being able to run arbitrary programs.
Which makes me wonder who the Neo is for. If someone wants to build software they should be paying more money. The average person is fine with an iPad, and it will even give them a touchscreen, the Neo won't.
I think you're undervaluing touchscreen capability, which even the cheapest laptops offer now. Kids and non-tech folks have come to expect it by default.
Now that Apple is attempting to compete in this space, they'll have to pitch these folks on what macOS without touch capability offers over Windows with touch capability.
Maybe it will still sell well enough, maybe people aren't that stuck on touchscreens.
It's impossible for them to support a 10-bit 6k@120Hz monitor with current hardware and keeping the old one around would be embarrassing. The Pro 5k will probably sell better/be more profitable anyway.
Apple refuses to remove things without clear replacements, for better or more often worse.
The 6k XDR has been replaced, apparently they've got something coming for the Mac Pro. I don't know why it wasn't the Mac Studio update last year. Maybe we find out at WWDC this year.
Current hardware and standards have them backed into a corner.
No Mac today supports 6k 10-bit @ 120Hz because the DisplayPort 2.1 standard can't handle it uncompressed and that's the best Macs offer. HDMI 2.2 just came out last year and would likely be able to handle it over a TB5 cable, but again, no hardware support.
So say that Apple did update the Pro Display XDR, what would it have exactly? More dimming zones for sure, the new Studio XDR has 4x the dimming zones. But they are clearly not confident in OLED tech for standalone monitors yet, so no OLED.
Anyway, their updated XDR would be shipping with the same ol' 60Hz. Reviewers and social media and tech nerds would rip them to shreds, it'd be a PR clownshow. I can already see the "Apple really expects us to pay $7k for a 60Hz monitor in 2026" viral posts.
And Apple being Apple would never explain why a monitor is lacking a feature like 120Hz, because it would mean acknowledging people had higher expectations. So we get an expensive 5k 120Hz monitor instead.
The 5k iMac was introduced in 2014. There was one change in 2015 that added P3 color gamut, so it appears to have been the exact same LG-manufactured panel for at least 11 years.
Google gave an official response in the article: background play is limited to Premium users, so anyone experiencing this behavior is already not using their wallet.
reply