>paying a $1000+ for a macbook
>minus battery, speakers and touch pad, this is all you get
>for a glorified raspberry pie
Top kek m8, there's no need to state the super obvious. But I suppose that's where the cost is, in muh display. Buying a mac is like the cuckold of technology
>take all my money and reward me with this sub-standard computer
>mmmmm feels good apple, feels reel gud
>look at my new raspberry pi 2, it's in a brushed aluminum case with retina display!!
>>B-but it's still a raspberry
>muh display! Muh brushed aluminum! Totally worth $1000! Oh and I have to buy a $79 adapter otherwise idk what I would have done with that money! Thanks apple for helping me spend my money!
it's an honest question, I thought being condescending would help me get better help much in the same way that people on the web are quicker to correct you than to answer you.
you disappoint me. I just want a sleek laptop that I can use in bed and play New Vegas on the odd time.
Enjoy your cracks and glare.
Enjoy your dents and uncomfortable cold in the winter.
Metal and glass is not inherently better than plastic. You're demanding your computer satisfy certain arbitrary requirements because Apple has convinced you they're synonymous with quality.
> I just want a sleek laptop that I can use in bed and play New Vegas on the odd time.
Oh god the Apple marketing is working
People really have no idea what a piece of shit this is
>For general-use tasks that don’t peg the processor, the oversimplified version is that Core M performs a lot like the Ivy Bridge Core i5 and i7 CPUs in the 2012 MacBook Airs. If you’ve got a 2013 or 2015 MacBook Air, it will be a step down. If you have a 2012 MacBook Air, it’s a step sideways at best.
Who cares about what they're saying? Why would any one pay $1300+ for a laptop with such poor specs.
Do we even know what the screen is like? The Macbook Air screen wasn't very good was it?
thin&light comes at a price, I already know this
I don't want this laptop, I just want something that's thin&light with a metal body and glass screen, it doesn't need to be a mac
this seems like my most likely choice, it looks pretty and it's powerful enough
>>I don't want this laptop, I just want something that's thin&light with a metal body and glass screen, it doesn't need to be a mac
Surface 3. has magnesium body, and the best screen.
I think full OS tablets (NOT fanless) are the future. I can't wait for a free as in freedom hardware tablet to come out. I've seen some talk about one coming out soon.
>sidegrade from a 3 year old ultraportable
This is the best thing an Apple reviewer can say about it and you're trying to use that as a defense?
Full os tablets work great as portable moleskin notebooks. That's more or less their "productivity" niche.
Without a keyboard and a bigger screen though, they're infuriating for trying to accomplish anything less than trivial. And the second you add a keyboard, the touchscreen is essentially a useless, heavy, power hog.
plastic flexes, gets surface scratches easy, isn't solid or sleek looking, and is just fugly in general for laptops.
The only exception is the black nexus 5 in terms of looks for plastic
How the fuck do they reach $1300? Battery life doesn't even make up for it. It has the worst of all worlds.
>processing power of a shitty tablet (1.1GHz Core-M)
>battery life of a power-hungry laptop (only 9hrs despite a measly 4.5W TDP)
>expandability and repairability of a phone
>aluminum build with no fan so it doubles as a self-heated frying pan (at least macfags won't be able to reproduce)
>price with Apple tax
If you used startpage, nothing would be in your search history. The keyword isn't in the URL.
Many people are fine with a 12" screen for productivity. I never got the hang of it.
There are thin keyboards available. The touchscreen doesn't waste much power. And I'd rather have a touchscreen that I can switch to when I want a portable, non-keyboard tablet.
Also this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YJntflGSeLM
>teflon phones in future
>everyone puts a rubber case on their phone
sounds great dude
Protip: Intel rates all Broadwell chips with SDP, they're just calling it TDP. They draw more than 4.5w under load. SDP is just based on light workloads without much GPU utilization.
>thinner and lighter than the machine they specifically made to be thin and light (with a shittier cpu)
>more expensive than the base model of their prosumer laptop, same price as the retina mbp
What were they thinking? Are we just in an awkward in-between phase while they refresh and retire other lines or something?