If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: No. It's crappy advice. Apple will not merge iOS and MacOS despite greater and greater integration and interoperability between them (across apps via iCloud and local comms services such as handover). it depends what you call merge. under the hood, they're already merged, since both are os x, but with a different user interface layer and minor other differences. It's not OS X. yes it most certainly is os x. It has a lot of OS X components because it's os x. but its behaviour, most notably in the user relationship to the file system is completely different. more accurately, the ui layer is the major difference, specifically appkit versus uikit. the mac does provide direct file system access, but it's not normally needed, so that falls into the minor category. there are other minor differences, such as ios not including useless crap such as man pages or drivers for hardware that will never exist on any ios device. Likewise wrt to the gammut of i/o for MacOS v the thin world of iOS. there's nothing thin about it. in fact, some frameworks show up on ios before they do on the mac. The main difference is that iOS is mainly a "consumption and capture" device whereas a Mac is a mainly "workstation and creation" device. There is overlap (when isn't there?). But they will remain very separate for many years to come. that's a myth. both platforms serve both purposes, depending on the user and tasks. Wow - what contradiction in one phrase. there's no contradiction. different people use ios devices and macs for different things, a concept you refuse to accept. some users consume, some create and some do both, regardless of device, and not just with macs or ios devices either. That said, the higher end iPads are becoming desktop class devices in computing and graphics power. they already are and have been for a while. the a11 chip benchmarks faster than recent macbook pros. But they are hampered to a degree where storage and peripherals are concerned. not really. Really. Don't see many Thunderbolt class peripherals running at full tilt in an iOS environment. Try printing a 4 colour separation from iOS ... etc. Indeed using iOS where a lot of files are in use is pretty lame all around. It's just not oriented to that. that's one highly specific use case and you know it. plenty of people create and edit videos & photos, create and edit music, write novels or papers and much more, entirely on an ipad or iphone. iOS / iDevices are thinly interfaced. Which is fine for what they do. anyone who thinks that is not using ios devices to their potential. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article , Alan Browne
wrote: No issue for 1080 - used to do that with my SO's prior MBA w/o issue and it was slow. there absolutely is an issue with 1080p. both my '08 and '09 macbook pros drop frames with 1080p, and the latter has an ssd. Sucks to be you - did same with aforementioned MBA w/o issue. SSD is irrelevant since the HD has way more that enough BW to deliver the content. ssd is very relevant and has made a noticeable difference in overall performance on my '09 mbp, but even with an ssd, there absolutely is an issue with 1080p. i tried it prior to posting my previous post and it was dropping frames like crazy and losing sync. h.265 is rare in most respects. nope. it's actually rather common, and that's even before it became the default format for iphones. And yet one has no issue finding most content in 264 on the web and elsewhere. Default ‚ required. I haven't to date been unable to view a video because it was .265. True non issue. there's plenty of h.265 on the 'net and more every day. I sold an iMac (late 2007 v.) with a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 6 GB of RAM. The family that bought it still use it daily and w/o complaint. I'm not sure what OS it is at. I sold it to them with Mavericks installed. it's probably still on mavericks, and also quite a bit faster than the macbook. Not really. The iMac was a 2007 model. If the Macbook quoted is 2009/2010 then it has a pretty good processor. a core 2 duo of unspecified speed, which can be anywhere from 2-2.4 ghz. Yep, fine for general use. 2010 is 2.4 actually. the ad did not specify 2010. the ad simply said core 2 duo and high sierra. that means anywhere from late 2009 (the earliest that high sierra requires) to mid-2010 (when the macbook took a hiatus). the 2009 started at 2 ghz and the 2010 ended at 2.4 ghz. since the ad did not specify a speed or year, it's highly likely it's the older and slower model. If I were to invest in improving that laptop at all it would be for the SSD first and the RAM only possibly depending on the configuration as sold. at which point, it becomes not such a good deal. It's more than fine for someone who is "Mac curious". it's not representative of what a modern mac can do. for example, It doesn't have to be for someone who simply wants to see what OS X is all about. If one likes that experience then sell it off and get the real thing. it will be a ****ty experience because it's old and slow compared to a modern mac and it also doesn't do all of the extremely useful things that have been added since 2009-10. there's no handoff & continuity. the display is also not very good as well as being pre-retina. So what? My 2012 iMac (this one) is not retina either. Doesn't stop me from doing anything I need to do. i didn't say it would stop anyone. a retina display makes a *huge* difference and handoff & continuity are *extremely* useful. it's stuck with usb 2 and a sata ii internal drive, so even if one replaces the hd with an ssd, it's nowhere near as fast as a mac a couple of years newer with pci-e nvme ssd and any external drives will be slow compared to usb 3. it also lacks bluetooth 4, so a number of bluetooth peripherals won't work, or they'll fall back to classic and its awful pairing process. sure, someone can manage without any of that, but it going to give the wrong answer to 'what this mac thing is about'. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
On Nov 13, 2017, Alan Browne wrote
(in ): On 2017-11-13 16:39, nospam wrote: In , Alan Browne wrote: I'm tempted to pick up one of those MacBooks at $149 just to see what the Mac thing is like, but I probably won't. Dunno what I'd do with a second laptop. That is a pretty good price for a refurbished MacBook, (note; Macbook, not MacBookPro) and could make for a budget on-the-road machine. It could do with a bit more RAM, and perhaps an SSD upgrade. So spend another $200 and you would have your budget Mac. considering how old it is, it's not a pretty good price at all. although adding memory and ssd would help (and very easy to do), it's wasted money for something that old. Perhaps $150 is a bit steep in that market. very steep for something that old. But the laptop will still be fine for most general use that isn't CPU intensive. That includes photo editing, office apps, mail, web, video watching, etc. small photos and videos, perhaps, but for 1080p and/or h.265, it's going to fall flat. No issue for 1080 - used to do that with my SO's prior MBA w/o issue and it was slow. there absolutely is an issue with 1080p. both my '08 and '09 macbook pros drop frames with 1080p, and the latter has an ssd. Sucks to be you - did same with aforementioned MBA w/o issue. SSD is irrelevant since the HD has way more that enough BW to deliver the content. no issue on more recent macs. h.265 is rare in most respects. nope. it's actually rather common, and that's even before it became the default format for iphones. And yet one has no issue finding most content in 264 on the web and elsewhere. Default â‰* required. I haven't to date been unable to view a video because it was .265. True non issue. I sold an iMac (late 2007 v.) with a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 6 GB of RAM. The family that bought it still use it daily and w/o complaint. I'm not sure what OS it is at. I sold it to them with Mavericks installed. it's probably still on mavericks, and also quite a bit faster than the macbook. Not really. The iMac was a 2007 model. If the Macbook quoted is 2009/2010 then it has a pretty good processor. a core 2 duo of unspecified speed, which can be anywhere from 2-2.4 ghz. Yep, fine for general use. 2010 is 2.4 actually. more than likely it's on the slower end, otherwise the store would have listed the cpu speed as well as jacked their price even more. the macbook also has a slow laptop drive. your 2007 imac had 2.8 ghz core 2 duo processor (already faster), more memory, a much faster desktop drive and a faster gpu. so yes, it was faster. Not enough to matter for general purpose use. The notebook mentioned is 4 GB. My iMac had 6 (at the end - started at 2). If I were to invest in improving that laptop at all it would be for the SSD first and the RAM only possibly depending on the configuration as sold. at which point, it becomes not such a good deal. It's more than fine for someone who is "Mac curious". it's not representative of what a modern mac can do. for example, It doesn't have to be for someone who simply wants to see what OS X is all about. If one likes that experience then sell it off and get the real thing. there's no handoff & continuity. the display is also not very good as well as being pre-retina. So what? My 2012 iMac (this one) is not retina either. Doesn't stop me from doing anything I need to do. ....and this Mid-2010 21.5 inch, 3.6 GHz Core i5, with 16 GB DDR3, running macOS 10.12.6 still manages to get stuff done. One day I will treat myself to a new Mac. buying something cheap, only to spend money on it to make it less sucky is not a good idea. No need to spend more on it. Those are just possibilities if one wanted to keep the thing. Yup! If the inclination grabs one, then that particular MacBook is a good candidate for an SSD, and possibly another 4 GB RAM. Who cares if it doesn’t have a retina display if it will do the work. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article .com,
Savageduck wrote: ...and this Mid-2010 21.5 inch, 3.6 GHz Core i5, with 16 GB DDR3, running macOS 10.12.6 still manages to get stuff done. One day I will treat myself to a new Mac. you keep saying that buying something cheap, only to spend money on it to make it less sucky is not a good idea. No need to spend more on it. Those are just possibilities if one wanted to keep the thing. Yup! If the inclination grabs one, then that particular MacBook is a good candidate for an SSD, and possibly another 4 GB RAM. Who cares if it doesnąt have a retina display if it will do the work. because by the time you add all that stuff, you've spent about what a more recent mac would have cost, which has many more features. and actually, for tony's situation, a used mac mini would be the best choice, which he could plug into his existing displays and use his existing keyboard and mouse. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article , Tony Cooper
wrote: As the original poster of this thread...the *only* reason I'd buy one of those Macs is out of curiosity. it's the wrong mac to buy just for curiosity. Oh. Is there a Code of Conduct involved in deciding to buy a used Mac? Is it in the TOS not buy one out of curiosity? Is it a mortal or venial Applesin? yes there is, and it's called having manners and not being a dumb****. assholes are not allowed into the mac cult. you lose. I have a perfectly fine Windows desktop and laptop that have never caused me a problem, and see no reason to switch to a Mac. yet another reason not to bother. I really depend on your input to tell me if my reasons for doing something are the right reasons. completely missing the point, as always. You *really* must have too much time on your hands to type out posts like this. Did you get laid off at the Geek desk? more of your insults. they must be paying you overtime. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
On Nov 13, 2017, nospam wrote
(in ) : In iganews.com, Savageduck wrote: ...and this Mid-2010 21.5 inch, 3.6 GHz Core i5, with 16 GB DDR3, running macOS 10.12.6 still manages to get stuff done. One day I will treat myself to a new Mac. you keep saying that ....and I will. I finally bought the new 10.5” iPad Pro as an upgrade for my old iPad2. It is just that this old steam driven Mac plods on, doing all I ask of it, while I keep stumbling over other things I want to buy. Then I have another overseas trip scheduled for February, and that has lifted ±$3000 from my bank account. buying something cheap, only to spend money on it to make it less sucky is not a good idea. No need to spend more on it. Those are just possibilities if one wanted to keep the thing. Yup! If the inclination grabs one, then that particular MacBook is a good candidate for an SSD, and possibly another 4 GB RAM. Who cares if it doesn¹t have a retina display if it will do the work. because by the time you add all that stuff, you've spent about what a more recent mac would have cost, which has many more features. Not quite. To start with that $149 MacBook as configured should be enough to give him a taste. He might, or might not want to beef it up by spending anything from $150-$350 extra. If he gets infected, he might even decide to pony up and by something new rather than an upgrade of the old machine. and actually, for tony's situation, a used mac mini would be the best choice, which he could plug into his existing displays and use his existing keyboard and mouse. A used mini would do the job for him. However, he is just exploring as part of a thought experiment, and not quite ready to make any real move towards conversion to Mac. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article .com,
Savageduck wrote: buying something cheap, only to spend money on it to make it less sucky is not a good idea. No need to spend more on it. Those are just possibilities if one wanted to keep the thing. Yup! If the inclination grabs one, then that particular MacBook is a good candidate for an SSD, and possibly another 4 GB RAM. Who cares if it doesn1t have a retina display if it will do the work. because by the time you add all that stuff, you've spent about what a more recent mac would have cost, which has many more features. Not quite. To start with that $149 MacBook as configured should be enough to give him a taste. He might, or might not want to beef it up by spending anything from $150-$350 extra. If he gets infected, he might even decide to pony up and by something new rather than an upgrade of the old machine. a not very good taste. it's too old. he won't see much of a difference from what he has now, other than it being a different os. and actually, for tony's situation, a used mac mini would be the best choice, which he could plug into his existing displays and use his existing keyboard and mouse. A used mini would do the job for him. However, he is just exploring as part of a thought experiment, and not quite ready to make any real move towards conversion to Mac. a used mini from a few years ago for $50-100 would be a much better choice than a 7-8 year old macbook. it would be much faster and support more of apple's latest technologies. with careful shopping, one could even find a 2014 mac mini for around $200, possibly less, which would be a *much* better choice than an 8 year old macbook. the older 2012 mac minis are in higher demand than the '14s, so they're a little more expensive, but also a good choice. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
On 11/13/2017 4:07 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
On 2017-11-13 10:41, PeterN wrote: On 11/13/2017 2:56 AM, android wrote: Lots of folks are curious in what step Apple will take next with Mac hard and software. If you are interested in the current family of systems it might be a good idea to take a step back and see where they are heading. Will there be separate mac- and i- OSs or will they merge? Will the hardware merge so that we will see ARM processors on Macs? That will be sorted out then the new Mac Pro system arrives. Until then the serious hobbyist with other obligations and limited resources could be wise to wait and see if Apples new offerings due in a year or so just see if is that is that they want. They do charge for the gear, you know! Good advice No.Â* It's crappy advice.Â* Apple will not merge iOS and MacOS despite greater and greater integration and interoperability between them (across apps via iCloud and local comms services such as handover). I was not agreeing with the specifics. If there is no immediate need to "upgrade," it is smarter to wait, and see if the now latest and greatest will be superseded by something that will better fulfill your needs. Also, your needs may change. I can always spend money. What they will do (and almost certainly have running in the back room) is move Macs from intel to ARM processors.Â* But this will be very transparent to users and more so than during the past quite smooth transition from PowerPC to intel. Those developers who completely adopted XCode/Cocoa will be able to distribute their code to the new ARM world with nary a change to their code - so no impact on late intel adopters, contrary to the nonsense above.Â* This will be even smoother than the Rosetta supported PPC/intel transition. The main difference is that iOS is mainly a "consumption and capture" device whereas a Mac is a mainly "workstation and creation" device. There is overlap (when isn't there?).Â* But they will remain very separate for many years to come. That said, the higher end iPads are becoming desktop class devices in computing and graphics power.Â* But they are hampered to a degree where storage and peripherals are concerned. If one operates several Macs, iPhones and iPads as I do at home and at work, one is very grateful for the interoperability provided in a near seamless manner between iOS and Mac OS.Â* There's no need to merge them - indeed "under the hood" they have had a ton of commonality since the iPhone (or even iPod). -- PeterN |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
On 11/13/2017 4:16 PM, Tony Cooper wrote:
snip As the original poster of this thread...the *only* reason I'd buy one of those Macs is out of curiosity. I have a perfectly fine Windows desktop and laptop that have never caused me a problem, and see no reason to switch to a Mac. I have been tempted to get one of these, to satisfy my curiosity. https://thepihut.com/collections/raspberry-pi-camera/products/zerocam-noir-camera-for-raspberry-pi-zero My interest started about a year ago during a discussion of relativity theory. The Raspberry PI handles the python equations well. -- PeterN |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Cheap Apple
In article ,
Tony Cooper wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 22:41:57 +0100, android wrote: In article , Tony Cooper wrote: On Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:50:28 -0500, Alan Browne wrote: On 2017-11-12 20:12, nospam wrote: In article , Alan Browne wrote: I'm tempted to pick up one of those MacBooks at $149 just to see what the Mac thing is like, but I probably won't. Dunno what I'd do with a second laptop. That is a pretty good price for a refurbished MacBook, (note; Macbook, not MacBookPro) and could make for a budget on-the-road machine. It could do with a bit more RAM, and perhaps an SSD upgrade. So spend another $200 and you would have your budget Mac. considering how old it is, it's not a pretty good price at all. although adding memory and ssd would help (and very easy to do), it's wasted money for something that old. Perhaps $150 is a bit steep in that market. very steep for something that old. But the laptop will still be fine for most general use that isn't CPU intensive. That includes photo editing, office apps, mail, web, video watching, etc. small photos and videos, perhaps, but for 1080p and/or h.265, it's going to fall flat. No issue for 1080 - used to do that with my SO's prior MBA w/o issue and it was slow. h.265 is rare in most respects. I sold an iMac (late 2007 v.) with a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo with 6 GB of RAM. The family that bought it still use it daily and w/o complaint. I'm not sure what OS it is at. I sold it to them with Mavericks installed. it's probably still on mavericks, and also quite a bit faster than the macbook. Not really. The iMac was a 2007 model. If the Macbook quoted is 2009/2010 then it has a pretty good processor. If I were to invest in improving that laptop at all it would be for the SSD first and the RAM only possibly depending on the configuration as sold. at which point, it becomes not such a good deal. It's more than fine for someone who is "Mac curious". As the original poster of this thread...the *only* reason I'd buy one of those Macs is out of curiosity. I have a perfectly fine Windows desktop and laptop that have never caused me a problem, and see no reason to switch to a Mac. Treat yourself to an old Mac then. I guess that your life is like an empty void that have to be filled with the 15 year old buzz about that what the OSX was... I suggest these for you: http://headphonescompared.com/wp-con...t-noise-cancel ling-headphones-under-100.jpg They'll stop those whooshing noises from causing hearing loss. Oki! :-)) -- teleportation kills |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|