|
|
|
|
|
|
by mangeletti
3522 days ago
|
|
|
But, the thing everyone is overlooking is that the new GPU is 82% more performant than the last model, so it's not like they're reducing the specs. They just haven't increased the specs to the level of some of the other big notebooks. I personally think that thinning the frame out while also increasing specs and keeping the battery life high was a smarter move than trying to cram in more RAM and keeping the 99.5 watt-hour battery that, with 32GB of RAM and a better GPU would have resulted in a ~5 hour battery life. However, what I wish Apple would have done, instead of making the new Macbook (the little 12" notebook), was to make the MacBook Pro thin like they have, with the same specs they have added, and then have the only other offering be a larger, more pro notebook (maybe on par with the 2011 level of thickness / weight) with 64GB max RAM and with one of these great GPUs everyone is talking about. They could have done with a ~5 hour battery life on the main battery, keeping the 99.5 battery for airline regulations, with an extra 50+ watt-hour battery that slides into a slot for use when not getting on a plane. This would have given Apple 2 choices, 1) an awesome MacBook Pro for most of us, and 2) an awesome MacBook Super for the power users who don't mind a 5lb notebook. There is not too much value in an even lighter / smaller notebook than the 13" MacBook Pro, which is why the Macbook 12" hasn't been flying off the shelf. Most people who can't do with an iPad (or iPad Pro) need a full notebook, not a 12" device that is slow. |
|
|
Some people need beefy CPUs, some people need beefy GPUs, some people need lots of memory, some people need lots of connectors to avoid a dongle mess.
And instead of offering at least one model that can be fitted with all of that, either as standard or as option, Apple decided that the only group that matter is those that travel a lot and favour light laptops with long battery life.