Tim Cook spoke recently with The Irish Independent and he gave his opinion on the chances to release a hybrid computer that would be a combination of a MacBook and an iPad
We feel strongly that customers are not really looking for a converged Mac and iPad,” said Cook. “Because what that would wind up doing, or what we’re worried would happen, is that neither experience would be as good as the customer wants. So we want to make the best tablet in the world and the best Mac in the world. And putting those two together would not achieve either. You’d begin to compromise in different ways
Well, Apple said something similar about small tablets and about the validity of the stylus. Cook recently called the Surface Book a diluted product, when the iPad Pro is clearly following that concept and trying to convince everyone without actually succeeding.
I’m pretty sure that converged device will show up, and I’m confident the MacBook -or a derivative from this one- will probably use ARM processors in the near future. Maybe not in 2016, but 2017 seems feasible.
The big question is what OS will be used on that device. Is Apple working on OS X for ARM? It did the same when it had OS X running on Intel processors in secret during several years.
I see a pattern here.
Source: Tim Cook: Apple won’t create ‘converged’ MacBook and iPad
The reviews are there, and there are more and more coming, but PC World has tried to make the same comparison that Microsoft talked about in the launch event.
Of course comparing one machine to another is a little bit unfair, but every comparison is that. The MacBook Pro (13 inch, Core i5-5752U) is slightly faster than the Surface Book (Intel Core i5 -6300U ) on CPU-related tests, but 1) that’s a comparison between a 28W and 14W TDP chips and 2) these are chips from different generations.
And then there’s the comparison between an integrated GPU (Intel HD 6100 on the MacBook) and a discrete GPU (supposedly, a special version of a GTX 940M on the Surface Book). And the result is pretty clear. Which confirms again that the comparison is unfair. In any case:
The Surface Book’s premium price is what a premium is about. You can’t get discrete graphics in any MacBook Pro, but you can on the Surface Book. And the payoff is clear.
Update (10/23/2015): another comparison, not that realistic either. I can’t understand how a tech reviewer can’t understand the difference between processors. Comparing machines by their price can really give us some surprises. Processors on both machines are absolutely different, (dual core Core i7-6600U with a 15W TDP on the SB vs a quad-core Core i7-4870HQ with a 47W TDP). Of course the MacBook crushes the Surface Book. C’mon.
Source: Surface Book vs. MacBook Pro: It isn’t twice as fast. It’s three times as fast | PCWorld
Microsoft has accomplished something extraordinary today. It has made people not to need their products, but to actually want them. The new Lumias 950/XL became a dream come true: real convergence for devices that can act as smartphones or as complete PCs depending on our needs.
But even more impressive is the launch of both the Surface Pro 4 (“the Surface Pro is leading Apple’s iPad instead of chasing it“, says Savov) and the amazing Surface Book. The event was fantastic in everyway, and even the closing remarks by Satya Nadella were thoughtful:
But the more important thing that Nadella noted was Microsoft’s emphasis on getting people to want its products and services rather than just need them.
This is indeed a new Microsoft. A very welcome one.
Source: Microsoft has warmed my cold cynical heart with hot new hardware | The Verge