My parents once took a struggling man in. I think he stayed with them for about three years, up until the moment I was conceived and my mom started planning for a future for our family and helped him get into a housing project. For all of my life before adulthood this man would show up once in a while on his racing bike for coffee, talk and proceed to stay for dinner. He was kind, funny and a tidbit strange. His life's story had more drama than a soap opera, but you wouldn't know it. After my father died I proceeded to look for him, but never found him. I still search online for him once in a while, fully knowing he probably isn't alive anymore and probably wouldn't use online anyways. There is some story in my head that he probably showed up to my dads doorstep once on his racing bike to find other people living there, but was too shy to ask for details. A trace lost.
As a listener and big fan of the Heavyweight podcast, I think they'd love to help you find him. That is if you're ok with sharing your story to the general public.
My philosophy of math muscles tingle at both sentences at about the same rate.
P=NP and P=!NP are both proven nor disproven. (There is redundant information in this sentence.)
History shows us that the historical / ‘effort’ argument is not applicable to mathematics. All proofs were unproven once until proven successfully for the first time. Harder problems need bigger shoulders to stand on. Sometimes this is due to new tools, sometimes it is a magically gifted individual focusing on the problem, usually some mix of both. All we know is that all before have failed. It’s one of the beauties in math.
To defend OP somewhat: his throw out should be someone else’s pre-owned and then we are square.
Not in defense: This is a customer who sees itself as an ultra pro user that only wants the best on all dimensions regardless of economics. Nice that there are about a few hundred of these customers in the world. This is a market that doesn’t exist and frankly, give this customer their wish and they only have other or more wishes.
The MacBook currently has two models, each available in two sizes, each size has three to six default configurations. There are dozens of MacBooks before you even get into the customization options.
Great advice. This works in companies as well! What is the goal of your writing and who is the target audience? Memos (they still exist) can be drastically different for different audiences. Mess this up and you end up on the wrong end of the stick.
A detailed memo is not meant for (most) senior management. They will all individually find a hook to hang up their coat of the week and you will go home a thousand questions, but without the decision you need. Give a senior management memo to technical staff and they will cry for months because you lack the technical skills to understand the problems they face. Give a sales memo to technical people, or the reverse and it will probably be flat out ignored. The key is differentiation. Differentiation is only possible if you practise writing the smallest set of convincing arguments in each memo you deliver.
She has a right to seek attention? And you are right. The truth untold and the moments that never were cannot be recounted. They can be grieved and part of grief is anger.
I re-learned by my tears when reading this that the only thing that counts in life is love and connection. Connections not made are missed opportunities.
I lost a parent in my early twenties. Alas, anger was a very large part of my emotional arsenal then. Writer could have had a role model in her father. If only the truth would have been there between father and daughter. Layers upon layers of difficult interactions. Thinking about your parents death and the period of time they made you, cared for you, formed you, hindered you, burdened you with emotional baggage, is different with each passing of a few springs.
Clear mission, a well set up team and autonomy in execution can make most jobs fun to do? Stress (due to), lack of autonomy, lack of clear mission and bad teams and management I think are the root of unhappy work?
With the power of M-chips, this would cannabalize MacBooks via iPad Air / Pro. They are sitting on a golden cash flow and not willing to revolutionize computing again (as the iPhone did).
Just as a N=1, I would rather pay a recurring fee in the Disney-Netflix range to Apple to get more liberty in usage from my machines. But I think they don’t dare to go those routes, because they need the broad market base and cannot extract the current cash flow from a smaller base, while setting expectations that the Googles, Samsungs can copy.
Industry leaders dilemma. Apple currently settles on market differentiation via physical products.
Historically, cannibalizing has always been the right choice when it comes to such things. That was a major point of the first iPhone, that it was a full replacement for your iPod, which was instrumental in its success. All this thinking does is cloud ones judgement and let competitors succeed.
Not saying you are wrong, this may be the reason Apple operates nowadays, but I maintain it is shortsighted.
Two bits floating in my mind: I'm in management (different sector, totally different scale) and deciding to move forward against a market as a market leader is a really scary decision. We did and changed our proposition against a trend in the market. The market mostly followed our lead. Thats what we hoped for, but sure couldn't count on at the time of the decision. So we had to make sure to have all stakeholders involved in the risk - What if most of our customers just left? Then suppose you are in management for Apple. The stakes are massive. How would you communicate this shift?
The other one is: You should take the strength of your opposition into account when making bold moves. Android / Google / the brands fabricating the products I would say (no need for the old debate) are market followers. They are good at following and produce more technical diverse products, minus the margins. If you do not expect your opposition to make the bold move first, but do expect them to follow your bold move, I would argue you should be less likely to play bold moves unless you know they cannot follow you. So game theory I think also favors the status quo for Apple.
That said, the iPhone was more expensive than the iPod, and replaced 1 Apple device (plus a device made by someone else like Nokia) with 1 alternative Apple device. This had an expected increase in revenue per customer.
Replacing the MacBook + iPad with an iPhone + some dock accessories might reduce revenue per customer.
But Mac sales pale in comparison to iPhone, and are similar to iPad numbers. So whatever revenue they would lose by not selling Macs with macOS, they could easily make up from additional sales of iPhones and iPads with macOS.
Besides, they've increasingly been expanding iPadOS to have more desktop-like features, so it wouldn't be far-fetched to offer full-blown macOS on these devices. It's not a hardware issue at all at this point.
> With the power of M-chips, this would cannabalize MacBooks via iPad Air / Pro.
Only for the truly low end. The thermals alone are a serious difference, you can't expect an iPad-class device to support the same power dissipation as a legit MacBook.
The MacBook Air is a legit MacBook and not that much heftier than the iPad. With how powerful and efficient M chips are, they could work out just fine for a lot of people despite the more constrained thermals.
They're not doing it today because current Apple leadership doesn't have the same incisiveness as the one back when they were sacrificing their most successful product on the iPhone altar so the competition can't. And to be fair, Apple has a much stronger position with a wider moat then they did back then. So they can afford to give more time to the competition to compete.
> They're not doing it today because current Apple leadership doesn't have the same incisiveness as the one back when they were sacrificing their most successful product on the iPhone altar so the competition can't.
Apple wouldn't just sacrifice the entry-level MacBook product category and I'm not even sure about that - the look-and-feel of a "display with attached keyboard" (i.e. Thinkpax X1 Tablet-style) is vastly different from a bottom-heavy Macbook with actual hinges. The former isn't really usable as a literal laptop unless you got some seriously long upper legs.
The more important thing that Apple would have to sacrifice is the App Store cash cow and users not having root rights. On a iPad or iPhone I'm willing to accept that, but on a machine I actually want to do work? No way in hell.
But that's it right here. It just takes boiling the frog slowly enough. The high powered M-powered iPads are already testing the waters of what people will accept for work (I don't think they're aimed purely at content consumption like the "smaller" iPads). I think Apple can afford to wait because they don't need to cannibalize anything today, and because the replacement isn't strictly a superset of what it's replacing, it comes with the caveats you mention. As soon as the market is ready to tolerate more lock-in, it might happen.
Enough people do just emails/Teams/Office for work so plugging in an iPhone and turning it into a desktop with mouse, keyboard, and external screen(s) can tick all the boxes for usability. Or an iPad with keyboard since similar sized devices were historically used for portability. Most work devices are locked down anyway, no root, no software installation.
> Apple wouldn't just sacrifice the entry-level MacBook product category and I'm not even sure about that - the look-and-feel of a "display with attached keyboard" (i.e. Thinkpax X1 Tablet-style) is vastly different from a bottom-heavy Macbook with actual hinges. The former isn't really usable as a literal laptop unless you got some seriously long upper legs.
The iPad Pro with Magic Keyboard is just that and in my personal experience does very well even on shorter legs due to its weight distribution. Were Apple to go down the route of actually enabling Xcode, etc. on iPads, they'd likely invest a bit more into the ergonomics of course, but they are already there and not comparable to Lenovos efforts in that regard.
On the contrary, I'm sure they'd be more than happy to part with macbooks if they could retain their developers. But then you could probably kiss your binary freedom goodbye.
The world of mathematics is only a language. The (Platonic) concepts go from simple to very complex, but at the base stands a (dynamic and evolving) language.
The real world however is far more complex and perhaps rooted in a universal language, but in one we don’t know (yet) and ultimately try to describe and order by all scientific endeavors combined.
This philosophy is an attempt to point out that you can create worlds from mathematics, but we are far from describing or simulating ‘Our World’ (Platonic concept) in mathematics.
Profound point. My mother struggled with alcoholism and ultimately succumbed to that disease. In philosophy of mind they use “akrasia” and “akratic thinking” for acting against ones better judgement. It helped me somewhat getting to understand what my mother was going through at that time.
She wanted to change, tried a many multiple of times and it failed. Fault, guilt, blame are useless concepts to use on the Other. And only in moderation should they be applied to the Self. There deep disconnects between what we think, know and do.
Around 1997 I learned the concept of RTFM! Obviously my father already taught me to look in the DOS and WordPerfect manuals to learn about features and commands one might use. Great learnings.
Haha, have you missed your etymology and poetry classes? A lesson is something you learn. A learning is an act or experience. A joke telling someone of when you’ve learned to RTFM is intended to feel like a yoke.
reply