Expensive luxury land fill like all foldable displays currently are. This takes it to the extreme. I am not impressed. We should be building for sustainability at this stage of our existence and this is exactly the opposite of it.
Plus it runs the worst touch based operating system on the market.
Yep. Fuck the butterfly keyboard and touch bar. But I'll still get an Apple laptop next time I get a new device because it's the least annoying when they don't let Ive run amok.
Only because Apple's track record so far is a lot better than Asus' or other OEMs in terms of not adding novelty or gadget-y features to their pro products.
Apple has mastered the second mover advantage. They let all the other companies blow money on R&D and educating users while they simply observe the pain points. Then, they swoop in a few years later and reap the benefits.
To be fair, they don't just "reap the benefits". They are working hard at improving new technology until it is really a product. They have many prototypes long before the first product, but don't end up selling those prototypes.
What novelty features did Asus do? Apple did touchbar, the thinnest keyboard on earth, a super underpowered 12 inch MacBook, a screen with an iphone build in. And that is only the last few years.
I bet you've heard the saying "in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king" . That's what Apple is. You can be a "fan" of the one-eyed man without believing everything he makes or says is awesome.
I think most people are aware of fandoms and that some people will blindly support something, but that's very different from saying "this site would be cheering for it".
A device that allows me to get both a desktop-like experience as well as a notebook-like experience is more wasteful than having both a desktop and a laptop? (or a desktop dock with monitor and a laptop)
The point is that the iPadOS is not designed to be used with a keyboard but windows is. Having a touchscreen on this laptop is a useful/useless add on and not the primary feature.
It, uhm, works with a keyboard. While touch-based UX is nearly flawless, there are some weird delays, e.g. when switching keyboard layout (you may not know of this problem if your language uses Latin script) -- very annoying since it tends to swallow characters.
Uhm, I have the iPad Pro 12" and that "magic" Apple keyboard cover (that crazy expensive one) and use Japanese, English, German as my input languages, switching often. Zero lag whatsoever.
Good, maybe it was related to the Logitech keyboard. How do you switch layouts, cmd+space? It opened a small window that blocked all input until it auto-closed half a second later.
It has a dedicated key with a globe symbol in the lower left corner. I know what pop-up you are talking about, but that's non-input-blocking, i.e. the language is active when you press the button, and you can continue typing without any wait.
It's possible that your iPad is not performant enough to both render that popup and and deal with keystrokes at the same time. I'd recommend the Pro iPads for any kind of serious work.
That was Pro 10.5 2017, it’s still a very fast device. The Logitech keyboard didn’t have this dedicated button and I last used it like a year ago, so I’m glad the issue is nonexistent now with proper hardware. Thanks for the response.
Windows 11's window management is brilliant, nothing comes close out of the box (of course i3/sway/etc. can be customized to match it). Windows tablets as laptops are generally more usable than iPads as laptops due to stuff like multi-user support, filesystem access and much better window management. As tablets (media consumption + creative work like drawing) iPads are better.
This foldable device can be a nice primary machine while an iPad can't replace a laptop for most users. Macbooks are of course fine devices, but I think folding can become a nice feature when it matures.
> This means companies are being pushed to build more efficient things.
No, this means companies are being pushed to build the least expensive things, efficiency is just coincidental in some cases.
> Humans will fix sustainability issues automatically.
That depends, if you mean "eventually" I can somewhat agree with the argument but that's just a wishful thinking thought exercise. Eventually sustainability issues will be fixed because if not everyone will eventually die from the lack of resources, doesn't mean that the fixes are timely or with the least suffering that we as a species could be capable of.
> No, this means companies are being pushed to build the least expensive things
Least expensive literally translate to more efficeny. To build cheaper things you need to spend less on electricity for manufacturing, less on transport (fuel), less on labor etc. Which means more efficeny.
> Eventually sustainability issues will be fixed because if not everyone will eventually die from the lack of resources, doesn't mean that the fixes are timely or with the least suffering that we as a species could be capable
Sure. But this also assumes we are on the verge of collapsing because of sustainability issues. We don't know that. This also assumes somehow if we start pushing on sustainability now we are going to overcome that. We don't know that.
> Least expensive literally translate to more efficeny. To build cheaper things you need to spend less on electricity for manufacturing, less on transport (fuel), less on labor etc. Which means more efficeny.
You are just considering the production aspect of efficiency. Cheaper is not higher quality, cheaper goods have a higher rate of failure, higher rate of failure means increased consumption which pushes production up. More efficient and cheaper production with better quality definitely falls into your argument, anything else becomes highly variable if it will translate, ultimately, to better efficiency of resource usage overall.
> Sure. But this also assumes we are on the verge of collapsing because of sustainability issues. We don't know that. This also assumes somehow if we start pushing on sustainability now we are going to overcome that. We don't know that.
Why on the verge? I'm using the same time-scale as you did: eventually, which in mathematical terms would mean a function with its time component using a limit approaching infinity. Eventually automatically solving sustainability because "market forces" push towards efficiency doesn't mean that we should just accept that as a rule and that it's the best course of action given that we can actively model and predict if we should and could be more efficient and sustainable.
What's the argument against focusing on sustainability first? Hampering innovation and some warped sense of progress?
Plus it runs the worst touch based operating system on the market.