|
|
|
|
|
by cookiecaper
4118 days ago
|
|
Why should one go to all this trouble just so he can use a Mac? There are many decent competitors out there that don't require these types of hacks (and for the record, I carry two USB batteries in my bag since there are occasions when I'm in the field for extended periods of time (24 hours+), but I certainly wouldn't be charitable to the idea of draining that backup power because Apple thought I needed to save 2mm of vertical space more than I needed the ability to transfer battery power from my laptop to my phone). That's the gist of the thing here. Apple people take using Apple products seriously and will go to lengths to make it work. Other people take their work seriously and will use the tool that best suits their needs. It's hard for me to imagine a MacBook ever best suiting the needs of a user that's more advanced than the casual Facebook browser just because so many sacrifices are made for aesthetics, and honestly even that market is a dubious target for the MacBook since the emergence of the tablet (for lighter casual users) and the ultrabook (for heavier casual users). Do we care more about having the sexiest laptop in the airport or getting more productive time in? That's the dilemma one goes through when choosing PC v. Mac. |
|
The sine qua non of a computer's usefulness to me is its ability to support Emacs. While my experience has been that, all else equal, any portable machine is inferior for this purpose to any desktop, I have yet to find a better portable Emacs machine than the 15" rMBP. When I do find one, I'll use it instead.
If your "all Apple users are fashion-obsessed lightweights" proposition is susceptible to the white raven's disproof, this should amply suffice. (When was the last time you ran across an Emacs user who was either "fashion-obsessed" or "lightweight"?) But I suspect you'll prefer to explain away a white raven, than to reconsider your apparent confusion of reality with an "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" ad.