I actually have both a Samsung curved TV and curved monitor. While neither is life changing by any stretch, I like both, especially the curve on the large computer monitor.
If you can't dazzle them with performance, appeal to their sense of fashion. Microsoft still hasn't managed to figure out what makes Apple tick.Surface Laptop looks nice..
If you can't dazzle them with performance, appeal to their sense of fashion. Microsoft still hasn't managed to figure out what makes Apple tick.
Clearly Apple is what Microsoft is aiming at with the Surface notebook. I'm betting that they think they're going to cut a fat hog by offering a reasonably sized display and industry-standard serial ports that Apple seems violently opposed to doing.Microsoft does not need to know what makes Apple Tick they can afford to try doing their own thing Apple is just that and they always will be nothing new with them never will be.
Clearly Apple is what Microsoft is aiming at with the Surface notebook. I'm betting that they think they're going to cut a fat hog by offering a reasonably sized display and industry-standard serial ports that Apple seems violently opposed to doing.
Their prices are even comparable to Apple's which is something we never thought we would hear about a mainstream Windows-based computer.
Ah, but Apple has pretty great hardware too and they're not saddled with having to run Windows 10 (Microsoft has gone on record as not supporting Intel gen 7 processors in earlier versions of Windows).We will see Microsoft has really good hardware and manufactures will jump to pricing is not to bad when you get more bang for your buck.
...
But yeah it could do well for could not so it's a little bit of a gamble on their part for sure.
I think Apple figures that all but the i7 and up machines are done in a couple years (regardless of how long the hardware lasts). I can't imagine how they think they're going to regain the workstation market (as lilliputian as it is) with a likely jump backwards in performance (unless they figure out a three dozen plus core ARM CPU). The people that get screwed are the ones that bought an i5 or less Mac in the last couple years. Their only hope is that the ARM transition fails miserably to capture the imaginations (and grand and a half) of the Mac user base or takes a rather long time.What I took away from the macOS 11 on Apple Silicon is all of the Macintosh OS will be native, along with all of the included Apps. Rosetta 2 will be needed for those Intel apps that are not recompiled for Silicon, much like those old PPC apps on the early Intel Macs. Two years seems awfully ambitious to replace the entire consumer-level Macintosh line up.
It doesn't have to be on the die. Fat connections to ARM CPUs already exist. If you're wondering about whether or not Intel will license it, I'm betting will do just about anything to get back any of the billions in annual licensing that they'll no longer get from Intel CPUs. They won't give Apple the chance of smacking them with a lawsuit over a widely recognizedOne detail I want to hear about is how Apple is going to support Thunderbolt on the Apple Silicon processor. I’m guessing it will be part of the next generation T2 chip.
Apple is really nothing like DEC outside of both them flailing away at trying to market Macintosh computers back in the '90s. Apple doesn't manufacture much of anything (outside of assembling a relatively few five figure workstations). Apple does the OS part of their products that include apps that surely slam the door on a broad choice of third party apps.In the back of my mind I remember this Computer Company based in Massachusetts that made their own CPU chips, the Operating System, and the software that ran on this system. This architecture was available from a personal desktop all the way up to systems that would fill a Data Center.
They may have, but using AMD64 processors to run ARM code isn't an answer to the question of how they're going to do a workstation. AMD's Opteron A is a much closer fit, but it is a relatively wimpy chip for workstation use. AMD could certainly build processors for Apple so there's a good chance that there will be a deeper relationship. Apple has officially committed to going ARM across the board so they've locked themselves out of AMD64 options where the serious computerly CPU development will likely remain for years.Of course, I wonder if Apple entertained the idea of placing AMD processors into the Mac? They already use their GPUs; it would seem a natural fit. And a ThreadRipper in a Mac Pro would make some Video Professionals pretty happy.
Intel has not stated an intention to abandon Thunderbolt. They promised at CES to deliver Thunderbolt 4 this year with the Tiger Lake CPU. Intel is also allowing third parties to develop Thunderbolt glue chips for other applications.I thought Thunderbolt was not long for this world.