iPad 3 announcement

Why are people content with completely upgrading their hardware every year? Shouldn't there be some kind of outrage over this? I don't usually care much about this kind of thing but if Apple didn't release a newer version of their products every 6 months there wouldn't be as much of a sweatshop problem, right?

  On 3/8/2012 at 2:57 AM, modey said:

Why are people content with completely upgrading their hardware every year? Shouldn't there be some kind of outrage over this? I don't usually care much about this kind of thing but if Apple didn't release a newer version of their products every 6 months there wouldn't be as much of a sweatshop problem, right?

How is that an Apple problem and not a mass consumer-mindset problem? Most tech companies upgrade their devices' internals a couple times a year, and Apple does One Big Announcement per iDevice once a year. How many discreet phones does Samsung put out? Apple has marketing hype that the others lack, but that's all it is.

I used my old iPhone (Second Gen) for 3 years and I've used my Macbook Pro for 5 and I think that's a pretty respectable lifetime.

  On 3/8/2012 at 2:57 AM, modey said:

Why are people content with completely upgrading their hardware every year? Shouldn't there be some kind of outrage over this? I don't usually care much about this kind of thing but if Apple didn't release a newer version of their products every 6 months there wouldn't be as much of a sweatshop problem, right?

Don't really follow tbh. Why would there be outrage? It's not exactly unheard of for companies to release a new or updated product each year, and its not as though my iPad is going to self destruct the second the next version hits the shelves. I am not being forced to upgrade my hardware each year.

If you want to go down that route, go look at the games industry, or even the music software industry. Every year new products get released with increasingly huge demands of processing power. I'd bet most dedicated gamers find themselves installing a new GFX card every year in order to run the newest games.

I expect there would be far greater an outcry if tech companies did not release upgrades every year. The software companies show no signs of slowing down, the pressure is on the hardware manufactures to keep up.

The Apple obsolescence wall definitely hurts when you hit it...

My 2.16ghz Intel Core Duo macbook pro from a few years back is not fit to run OS X Lion since it's 32-bit, so I literally cannot develop apps for iOS 5 even if I pay the $99 developer fee.

The outrage if Microsoft dropped 32-bit support from Windows 8 would be huge.

I don't think many people upgrade every year at all. most people upgrade every other year at best.

  On 3/8/2012 at 3:20 AM, The Face Culler said:

The Apple obsolescence wall definitely hurts when you hit it...

 

My 2.16ghz Intel Core Duo macbook pro from a few years back is not fit to run OS X Lion since it's 32-bit, so I literally cannot develop apps for iOS 5 even if I pay the $99 developer fee.

 

The outrage if Microsoft dropped 32-bit support from Windows 8 would be huge.

that MacBook Pro must be ca. 5 years old now?

i'd say they actually keep their updates compatible for a "reasonable" amount of time, enough to cover what you'd expect a device lifecycle in a work environment to be..

The Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo 64bit divide definitely sucks. That's sort of a nasty pothole on Intel's roadmap.

  On 3/8/2012 at 3:20 AM, The Face Culler said:

The Apple obsolescence wall definitely hurts when you hit it...

 

My 2.16ghz Intel Core Duo macbook pro from a few years back is not fit to run OS X Lion since it's 32-bit, so I literally cannot develop apps for iOS 5 even if I pay the $99 developer fee.

 

The outrage if Microsoft dropped 32-bit support from Windows 8 would be huge.

this!

  On 3/8/2012 at 3:31 AM, jules said:

I don't think many people upgrade every year at all. most people upgrade every other year at best.

Maybe not many of us, but so many people are reckless as fuck with their devices. I've had my main laptop for almost four years now and I don't have any plan to upgrade it any time soon. And I only ever get a new phone when 'planned obsolescence mode' kicks in on my current phone (ie. random things start going horribly wrong all of a sudden). Some of my friends, however, seem to have a different phone every time I see them. WHY?

And sure, other companies are as guilty of upgrading their products as often as Apple, but as mentioned above, Apple seem to have this amazing marketing trick of "YOU NEED THIS RIGHT NOW" that doesn't happen with other companies eg. Siri not working on anything below an iphone 4S, meanwhile it's essentially a useless app for most people.

yeah planned obsolescence dates back waaaay to before apple. or computers.

So.. these look good. Of course. My dad did the clever thing way back when and petitioned his job to get him one for "educational purposes." Brilliant move cause why anyone would pay for these themselves is beyond me.

  On 3/8/2012 at 3:20 AM, The Face Culler said:

The Apple obsolescence wall definitely hurts when you hit it...

 

My 2.16ghz Intel Core Duo macbook pro from a few years back is not fit to run OS X Lion since it's 32-bit, so I literally cannot develop apps for iOS 5 even if I pay the $99 developer fee.

 

The outrage if Microsoft dropped 32-bit support from Windows 8 would be huge.

The last Intel Core Duo that Apple released was in 2006 - I know because I have the same one. That's a six years old laptop.

"It's the best iPad we've ever made"

  On 3/8/2012 at 4:37 AM, dr lopez said:

lol, now I can see what the fuss is about

To be fair, the image on apple.com has a magnifying glass and you're supposed to zoom in and compare.

But in any case, it's like one of those old HDTV ads that were supposed to wow you on a standard definition CRT.

oh man that retnia display looks fucking grandiose in my 15.6" 1366x768 piece of garbage

  On 3/8/2012 at 5:05 AM, baph said:

To be fair, the image on apple.com has a magnifying glass and you're supposed to zoom in and compare.

 

But in any case, it's like one of those old HDTV ads that were supposed to wow you on a standard definition CRT.

even better with the 3DTV ads

  On 3/8/2012 at 4:46 AM, chenGOD said:

The last Intel Core Duo that Apple released was in 2006 - I know because I have the same one. That's a six years old laptop.

6 year old hardware would been crazy old back in the 90's, but my laptop isn't that much slower than the latest MacBook Pros. If you look at raw benchmarks maybe, but the actual every day performance is definitely not worth upgrading, except to be able to use the latest OS & dev tools which seems arbitrary. More RAM would be nice though...

I don't think it's particularly bad that Apple dropped 32-bit support, but it stung me this time and Microsoft would never hear the end of it if they tried that.

The difference between the 2.16 Ghz Core Duo and the 2.2 Ghz Quad Core i7 is weeeeetahded. Seriously. Can't even compare, especially with software that's been optimized for multi-core processors.

Having said that - I was pleasantly surprised at how smooth Snow Leopard was on that 2006 MBP. I would have still been running it if rage hadn't caused me to give it a good whack, crumpling part of the frame.....lol *sad wolf out*

I found out that there is a difficult to obtain version of XCode 4.2 for Snow Leopard that will let me deploy to iOS 5, so my beef with Apple over Lion has been erased... for now.

i've had the 2.4GHz C2D MBPro that came out early '08, which is (or would be, as it died couple months back) really slow compared to the lowest-spec 11" Air that i'm using now - get over it, your Macbook Pro is now a grandpa :]

I have a 2007 2.0ghz core2 duo macbook and a 2011 2.7ghz quad core i5 imac... whilst not comparing like for like in terms of model, I can tell you the speed and performance difference even between the 64bit core2 duo and the sandy bridge core i5 is massive. to say there isn't much difference between a 2.16ghz core duo 32 bit and the new sandy bridge MBPs is nonsense. in my own personal tinkering I've found the core i5 in my imac to be around 6 - 8 times quicker than the core2 duo in my MB depending on what you're doing.

  On 3/8/2012 at 3:20 AM, The Face Culler said:

The Apple obsolescence wall definitely hurts when you hit it...

 

My 2.16ghz Intel Core Duo macbook pro from a few years back is not fit to run OS X Lion since it's 32-bit, so I literally cannot develop apps for iOS 5 even if I pay the $99 developer fee.

 

The outrage if Microsoft dropped 32-bit support from Windows 8 would be huge.

I've got a 2006 iMac that has a Core Duo (not a Core 2 Duo), and it's still great at running Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. as well as it did when I got it. Bummed too that I can't upgrade to Lion, but Snow Leopard is still great, and for Lion I have a 2011 MBP that is beastly when it comes to raw power.

What I like is this is the first computer I've had that's hit 6 years old, nary a problem, and still runs great. That is why you pay a premium for Apple products - they last.

apparently, the battery is a big step forward. fuck, if Apple put all their resources into battery technology, think of how fast we could progress as a society.

http://www.cultofmac.com/151648/apples-amazing-new-ipad-battery-tech-could-lead-to-all-day-macbooks-and-lte-iphones/

biggest upgrade for me was getting an ssd. you forget about it when you have it, things happen so fast the idea of "loading" just kind of disappears... but when i go to use my old computer with a 5400 rpm drive, all those 5 to 30 second pauses between clicking and launching things become painfully obvious. "oh, you want to use photoshop? well, here's the loading screen, it'll be ready by dinner time"...