Hacker News Reader

> Finally, the "software is free" announcement

This is really about the desktop/laptop market and not the mobile market. It's important to separate these two markets when looking at this decision.

Right, they are taking aim at MS, but not in the way I think most people here are talking about. For most Windows users, Windows is either free or transparent (OEM install so the price is both ridiculously reduced over consumer, and it's just part of the computer purchase). You'll also generally get years of significant updates to Windows for $0.

For Apple, selling the OS has always been kind of weird. 99.999% of people who get the latest OS X are going to run it on their Apple built and sold computers anyway. And Apple obsoletes their hardware from the upgrade path faster than the Microsoft equivalent. So most users might see 3 or 4 years of solid updates before getting obsoleted out.

(Anecdote, my Windows desktop from early 2007 is still able to be upgraded to the very latest MS desktop OS. My MBP from the same time frame is so obsolete I can't even get a version of Flash that runs on it.)

So what changed? Surface. Apple has never competed well in the desktop/laptop market until very recently. Despite all the MBP and MBA I see at Starbucks, Apple only owns about 10-11% of the global market. But tight vertical integration and a very loyal customer base means they can squeeze that 10% for lots of profit. A user who upgrades their Mac every 3-4 years...well $100 for an OS license isn't all that much. And Mountain Lion? What was that $20?

So Surface changes this, Apple knows that Microsoft has the appetite to swallow ungodly amounts of money trying to get Surface some marketshare. And with Surface the OS is basically free with the device. A Surface Pro 2 isn't a bad little computer and is a better MBA competitor than any ultrabook is. This is the first time that Microsoft has really built, marketed and sold their own computer which means that the OS really is free. A couple price cuts and Surface Pros will dominate the Starbuck's scene (at least outside of the Valley).

While not really important to Apple right now, Apple needs to strategically move to cut this off quickly for the future. As a company Apple is just now finally starting to get large groups of people to move to their computing platform, and it'd be a shame to lose their momentum right now.

(Anecdote, mid 2007 macs should be able to be upgraded to the very latest Apple desktop OS)

Good to know. Mine's a 2006 MBP. :( Stuck on something so ancient I don't even want to pull it out and fire it up to figure it out. It's too bad when a $300 netbook from the same year has outlasted my very expensive laptop in utility.

I hope my current rMBP gets a better life expectancy.

Have you considered installing Ubuntu on it?

I would think you could update that laptop to at least Lion if you wanted. I know a couple people who are still using Snow Leopard just fine since it was solid and fast. The only major app I know of that they've had issues with is the newest version of Lightroom 5 requires Lion.

You're right, and you are the first person I've seen say it out loud.

Further evidence: the Office competitor from Apple is also free. Why? The low-end Surface devices bundled Office for free, and one cycle later Apple began bundling its Office version alongside new devices. Microsoft would bundle Office with the high-end Surface devices (Surface Pros) if it weren't for pesky anti-trust threats looming (Windows RT is advertised to regulators as a separate OS from the Windows NT line, and a lot of weirdness stems from this distinction). It's very clear that Apple is trying to head off the Microsoft efforts with these pricing games.

Personally? I'm bummed there was no mac mini update... I need a new personal server at home, and I had been waiting for a supposed refresh... now I need to build and set up my own Linux server... that was fun when I was in my early 20s, but now it just feels tedious.

and here's Microsoft's reaction...

http://www.informationweek.com/software/productivity-applica...

Perhaps we're still seeing the aftereffects of suing their largest component supplier, who also happen to be one of the largest LCD panel manufacturers in the world?

or it could be the different pieces of said component supplier suing each other. Always hard to figure out how the Chaebol works...

For those who don’t know the term ‘chaebol’:

They’re South Korean business conglomerates, controlled by a chairman who has power over all the operations. Often, the leaders of the divisions are blood relatives. The chaebol have enormous influence in South Korean politics. The largest chaebol are Samsung, Hyundai, and Lucky Goldstar (LG).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaebol

Yes very true; I remember hearing once (I don't know how true this bit is), that Samsung Group alone make up around 20% of the South Korean economy...

It may just be me, but I do detect a slight slowing down of Apple's supply chain in recent years though. I know that they've had a lot of trouble when trying to move away from Samsung, simply because Samsung were/are the only single supplier that is able to provide the sheer quantity of components that Apple need.

Also, Apple always used to have a habit of having their big product announcements available for order and shipping on the day that they announced them, not 2 months down the line. When you add in potential omissions like the 4k monitors (or any kind of monitor refresh since 2011), you have to start thinking that perhaps they have a few troubles down the line.

Whether it's suppliers being difficult, or just a factor of the sheer size that Apple has reached, I really don't know.

> I remember hearing once that Samsung Group alone make up around 20% of the South Korean economy

It was. Right now, South Korea GDP is 1687 trillion Won. Samsung’s revenue is 252 trillion Won. That makes Samsung’s share 15 percent. Hyundai adds another 12% and LG 11%. That’s 38% of the economy in hands of just three companies. Effectively, South Korea is an oligarchy[1].

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy

The 4K Panel Asus use for their monitor is a Sharp part, not a Samsung part; Sharp is, indeed, apparently the only company making these at the moment. Which may be part of why we don't see an Apple one; they tend to go with at least two suppliers for LCDs (possibly three) and Sharp's volume is likely very low for now.

This is one of the key factors. I think the other is that when they shove a high density display into a phone/tablet, it's simply a bigger deal.

When Apple finally does sell a 4k monitor, they won't be selling mountains of them. It won't be a niche halo sports car product like the Mac Pro. It'll just be an expensive monitor with a ThunderBolt hub. There's simply less incentive, so they're going to wait until suppliers catch up rather than pushing the suppliers.

Yup; I also think they'll need to wait a while just for prices to fall. If they made a $1000 4K monitor, they could sell that in moderate numbers; it's in reach of the enthusiast market. At over $3k, they're looking at a segment of the professional graphics market only, and that's probably too small; it'd be even more niche than the Mac Pro, which is at least of some interest to enthusiasts and some developers.

> Where's the Apple 4K Thunderbolt Display?

In their documentation they talk a lot about using 4K TVs. I imagine they're going to release a new display to match it.

Exactly my guess too. There's no way they make a Mac Pro that can make a 4k display look good without making one themselves. My guess is after Christmas though, maybe a Spring event of some sort.

>without making one themselves //

Why not "having Samsung make one for them" as it's been in recent years?

Given that Samsung hasn’t shipped any 4k displays so far, I suspect Apple would rather go with a manufacturer that has experience building them and with whom they don’t have such a complicated relationship. I’m thinking of 4k panel makers like AUO, Innolux, Sharp, and LG.

Now that the rMBP integrated graphics can finally handle the 27" reasonably well...they up the ante to 4k...

Can the 13" rMBP IGP handle 4K? If so that would be awesome, that form factor is perfect every other way...

Can the 13" rMBP IGP handle 4K?

4K is about 2x the pixels. So how comfortably does the IGP handle the onboard display?

4K UHD is 85% more pixels than the 13" rMBP’s internal display. Driving 2 Thunderbolt Displays, which the 13" rMBP can do, involves 6% more pixels than one 4K display at full resolution.

> Can the 13" rMBP IGP handle 4K?

Yes, it can handle 4K ‘Ultra HD’ over HDMI 1.4, like the 15" rMBP.

The new 13" rMBP can also drive 2 Thunderbolt Displays plus the notebook’s internal display (which has the same resolution as a Thunderbolt Display, 2560x1600 pixels.)

http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs-retina/

The Mac Pro still won't be out for two more months. They could launch a 4K display then. Nobody is going to buy a 4K monitor today for the Mac Pro they're getting in January.

Yeah, that's what I'm hoping too. But then it's a bit weird to keep it a surprise. If true, they would announce both at the same time. So my best guess is that they are behind for their display revamp, or it's a product in its own right (TV) and will be announced later. Maybe they missed the holiday season.

I'd say the Mac Pro was teased unusually early. A product like a monitor doesn't call for that kind of buildup.

I have been waiting for a new apple display since about Apr. Money in hand ready to go, just want a new one. I went away from the event, thinking the same as you about 4k monitors. Shrugged my shoulders and said, "Fine. I'll give my money to someone else" .

I really appreciated the made in USA bits and the enviro bits though.

I'm surprised anyone was expecting an Apple 4k announcement. The tech is not affordable yet. Apple is premium, but not that premium. They're not going to release a $3,400 monitor and hype about it at their event, when only 1% of people are going to be able to afford it. The monitor will be branded Retina, and their current Retina mobile displays aren't exclusive to the 1%, regular consumers can afford them.

Apple's 30 inch cinema display originally retailed for $3200.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2004/06/28Apple-Unveils-30-C...

Key point: "hype about it at their event".

That is true, so it isn’t unprecedented, but when Apple announced that display, it also lowered the prices of its other displays to $699 and $999, which it continued selling.

I believe that if and when Apple releases a 4K display, it will not be its only offering. I expect it to be accompanied by a revamped (thinner) 27" display that supports Thunderbolt 2, USB 3, and MagSafe 2 – priced the same as the current Thunderbolt Display ($999).

It was a different market at the time, though. Consumer monitors didn't have the colour accuracy for photo and video professionals, and those people were accustomed to paying a _lot_ for their computers and monitors; the 30" display was going up against even more expensive things from the likes of Ilyama.

Today, it's different. 4K displays haven't (yet) become entrenched in the professional space, and a lot of graphics professionals pay much less for their computers and monitors now. And besides that group, is there really a market for a >$3000 monitor at all? I'd be surprised.

>They're not going to release a $3,400 monitor and hype about it at their event, when only 1% of people are going to be able to afford it. //

You mean 1% of the 1% in the US that can afford, and still want, an Apple laptop?

Apple sold about 30 million Mac notebooks in the US in the last 4 years. Even if only half of those units were bought by unique individuals, that makes for 5 percent of the US population, a far cry from 0.1 percent.

(Background data: Apple has sold 100 million Macs in the last 4 years. 40% of those were sold in the US. Over 70% of the computers Apple sells are notebooks.)

You're saying >5% of all people in USA own a Mac notebook first sold in the last 4 years? That's quite unbelievable to me, I'm [relatively] poorer than I thought(!). Does anyone have corroborating stats on this - most pertinent I could find in a short search was that 75% of USA households have general-purpose computers (from 2011 http://www.census.gov/prod/2013pubs/p20-569.pdf [it's probably higher now]; ~50% use smartphones apparently). Combining those two suggests that >7% of all general purpose computers in the USA are Mac notebooks.

In any case the thread concerns the Mac Pro, not sure why I said laptop. At best it would be MBP sales that were relevant.

EDIT: just found this from 2009, https://www.npd.com/wps/portal/npd/us/news/press-releases/pr...

>"[...] The NPD Group’s 2009 Household Penetration Study, approximately 12 percent of all U.S. computer owning households own an Apple computer, up from 9 percent in 2008. While Apple ownership is growing, those households are decidedly in favor of mixed system environments. Of those 12 percent, nearly 85 percent also own a Windows-based PC.

Multiple computer ownership is a common thread in Apple computer households, with 66 percent of households owning three or more computers, compared to just 29 percent of Windows PC households. Apple owning households are decidedly more mobile as well, with 72 percent of them owning a notebook, whereas only 50 percent of households that have a Windows PC own a notebook." //

That gives us 72% of 12%, ~9% of households who have an Apple computer that also have some brand of notebook.

All the numbers and percentages I used came from Apple’s financial statements. Mac sales have gone up significantly since 2009, but the NPD survey you quoted is in line with what I wrote earlier.

As for Mac Pros: of course that market is tiny. There are no official sales figures available, but I estimate that around 2 million Mac Pros were sold in the US in the last 4 years. That’s less than 1 percent of the population, but a lot more than 1 percent of 1 percent.

The Seiki 39" 4K display is $700 [1]. It has some limitations (you can read all about them at Amazon), but it establishes that the $3,400 price-point set by ASUS and its ilk is quite possibly made up mostly of profit.

I contend that Seiki could outright dominate the desktop display market if they replaced their display's HDMI 1.4 with 2.0 and made the display function a little less like a television and more like a monitor (no splash screen, no speaker, no remote control, better support for ACPI). Drop some things, upgrade some others, keep the same $700 price.

A smaller offering around 32" would also be welcome, I'm sure. But the 39" model makes for a superb desktop display assuming you can be made comfortable with the 30Hz refresh rate thanks to HDMI 1.4.

[1] http://www.seikidigital.com/products/seikiPro/4k.php

Same here, I've been waiting a year now. I don't even want 4k! I just want something that's not 3 years old. I would take a slimmed down monitor (like the new iMac) with the new thunderbolt adapter in a heartbeat, but I can't bring myself to buy the current one.

Well, I probably would, but not at its original price!

iWork 5 is awful. The Inspector was by far the most innovative UI ever seen; brought in by SJ with NeXTStep, and they killed it for a tablet-ish UI.

I'm quite sick of the trend that things have to be dumbed down for the average user so that things look "slick." It's happening in the Linux world, too, look at GNOME 3. At least, there, you have the option to get rid of GDM and Mutter, install OpenBox, and be merry.

Can't do that if you're vested in the Apple ecosystem, unfortunately... which is one of my most vehement dislikes about them.

I'll keep buying Apple because it's the best, but I still wish somebody would produce computers and software for real professionals. I don't care if it's thick; I want an optical drive with Blu-Ray, a decent soundcard, an array of ports, and user accessibility, with the best CPUs, battery life, and nVidia graphics, and with Linux preinstalled; maybe a custom Arch derivative with Wine, and XFCE or Cinnamon installed.

Once Wine matures to the point where virtually all the libraries are in place, I might even switch to running Linux full time and ditch OS X.

> I'm quite sick of the trend that things have to be dumbed down for the average user so that things look "slick."

This has been one of the primary complaints about the One Macintosh Way since the first Mac proved that 1984 was going to be like Nineteen Eighty-Four and its largest competition was systems built around command lines, such as the Apple ][ and Commodore 64. It's never hurt Apple yet, and their durable majorities in coffeeshops and design hausen don't look eager to abandon them over it now.

> At least, there, you have the option to get rid of GDM and Mutter, install OpenBox, and be merry.

You... you understand that Linux has more than one GUI! Are you a god?

My wife has been using a 4K monitor on her desktop for a few weeks now. It's fantastic. This evolution to 4K on the desktop is so overdue that I am simultaneously delighted by it and frustrated that it took so long.

I too am disappointed that 4K (or even better!) has not been adopted by hardware vendors, Apple included. But I personally have made the argument that Microsoft should embrace ultra-high-end desktop computing as a competitive advantage [1] because they seem to be most in need of something to differentiate them from the crowd.

I will open my wallet and tap it empty for the first vendor to deliver desktop computing that is immersive, with bezel-free large form-factor displays. I'm not suggesting Apple should pave the way—if anything they have distanced themselves from desktop computing—but it is nevertheless disappointing that they are not advancing that front even modestly.

[1] http://tiamat.tsotech.com/microsoft

The lack of a new Thunderbolt (which I've been waiting for over a year) was the biggest disappointment for me, I'm not sure how much longer I'll have to wait but I definitely wont be getting their current obsolete models. If it doesn't come in December along-side the new Mac Pro's then I'll be shopping around for one.

But the new iPad's do look amazing. I was destined to get a new iPad mini if it came with Retina display and now it does at the same resolution (and even A7 chip) as the 10" no less! But then now the iPad Air is much lighter and smaller (which were my main issues with it), so now I have buyers uncertainty and have to physically go into the Apple Store to see which one I prefer. I generally prefer going for the 'best experience' Apple has to offer, and if the 10" stayed the same size and weight the iPad mini would've been a no-brainer - now not so sure.

The same with the MacBook Pro, I was going to get the new 15" MBP, but it looks like the 13" got the biggest upgrade and is the better value, and then if you're considering a 13" you'll also have to consider ultra portable 13" Air for max portability.

Personally my "un-ease" with the new products is that it seems to be less clear which products have the best value (well other than the iPad2-filler). It's nicer when the products you want get the best upgrades re-enforcing your decision, not-so-nice when the alternative models get the value/feature bumps - increasing the fear you might get the wrong one!

I don't even need a 4K monitor at £2000. A 15" or 17" external retina thunderbolt screen would be perfect.

They already have the 15" panels, I wonder why they don't sell them as external monitors too.

This. I am going to US now in November and the one thing I wanted to come back to Brazil with was an Apple 4K Thunderbolt Display... I even had hopes for it being the one more thing but no.