MacBook Pro gets Retina Display; MacBook Air updated with Ivy Bridge - <AUTHOR> http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2012/06/macbook-pro-gets-retina-display-macbook-air-also-updated-with-ivy-bridge/ <comment><USER2> I have been a Windows user my whole life. As a hacker who has recently moved to San Francisco, I've continuously battled Apple fanboys and Linux fanatics alike on why I love Windows and absolutely do not understand why people want to switch platforms.

Then I watched this keynote.

I'm buying a Macbook Pro.

<comment><USER3> Speaking as a Windows user who uses a Mac for dev on iOS: you will be frustrated by Mac OS, at least initially. I've been using Mac OS daily for over a year and I still find Windows superior in many ways. This is my opinion, of course. Not trying to change minds or trolling.

That retina display is dead sexy though.

<comment><USER4> I love my Mac (as I said in my reply to OP), but I agree that Mac OS takes some getting used to. Luckily I had some Linux experience before switching so I felt right at home at the terminal. But some things still feel odd to me, even after several years.

\- The unified menu bar makes sense and saves space, but it's still somewhat disconcerting to someone who is used to their menus having some spatial context with what they are controlling.

\- I've always hated the "three gumballs". I much prefer Windows' minimize, maximize, and quit windows controls. Again, the "maximum useful size" feature makes sense, but it's almost never what I want. I really miss Aero snap. There are some programs that will help you out for this stuff. I'm pretty partial to Moom myself. UPDATE: Moom JUST got updated with a "snap to corners" feature. I like it!

\- The Finder is still pretty brain-dead. Windows explorer is much better for a power-user.

\- And then there's XCode. Oh how I miss Visual Studio. Yes, XCode is getting nicer by the year, but I also do Windows development on my Parallels VM so I'm constantly reminded of how much nicer it is to code C# in Visual Studio than Objective-C in XCode (and I don't even mind Objective-C as a language).

<comment><USER5> It always shocks me tha Finder doesn't have cmd-X cut... cutting is by far the most frequent operation I do in other non-dual-pane file managers. But what do you like better about windows explorer? Finder's "view as columns" makes it feel a little bit more powerful to me.

<comment><USER6> it doesn't have Cut, but it now (as of Lion, I think), Move Here as an alternative to Paste, use it with Cmd-Opt-V.

<comment><USER5> Thank you!

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER7> Once you go Air, you never go back. And this year's Air announcement (like last year's) is pretty 'meh', so I'll be keeping with my old faithful 2010 Air for the time being. The retina displays are fantastic, but as a web dev I'm already dreading the merry havoc it's going to wreak with images on web pages.

On a wider note, I feel myself... drifting away from all of this. In previous years I would have been all over WWDC live blogs and so on- this year I'm already fed up with my Twitter stream being filled with it, and am dreading the Hacker News front page being liberally coated with Apple. I am happy to just read the post-game analysis after the fact. Reality Distortion Field Fatigue, perhaps?

<comment><AUTHOR> The option of 8GB of RAM is nice, since the RAM isn't upgradable.

<comment><USER8> 2010 Air did t have AES-NI either, which made FileVault slow. 2011 MBA just lacks 8gb; I think I will be sticking with mine since I do my heavy VM work on another machine.

Lack of gigabit Ethernet on the big pro air makes me sad, though.

<comment><USER9> Integrated gigabit. There is apparently going to be a thunderbolt gigabit ethernet dongle, and thunderbolt can actually support gigabit speeds.

<comment><USER10> There's already a thunderbolt gigabit ethernet dongle called the "thunderbolt display", although it's probably too big for people to carry around with them.

<comment><USER11> Well, there's also already (as of today anyway) a thunderbolt to gigabit ethernet adapter for $29.

<http://store.apple.com/us/product/MD463ZM/A?fnode=MTY1NDA3Ng>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Should clear this up. There is an updated MacBook Air line (11" and 13"). There is an updated MacBook Pro line (13" and 15" with 'normal' screen, same chassis and updated internals). And then there is a new 15" MacBook Pro with a 2880 x 1800 screen and is 0.71" thick. I like to dub this one the MacBook Pro Air.

<comment><USER13> So the Air do not have the retina display? The 15" pro would be good, but can not go back to a mechanical hdd.

<comment><USER14> The 15" Pro with the retina display is SSD.

<comment><USER13> Just read that as well, which makes it a very valid option. Would be great to develop on a screen like this.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> I don't want a "Retina display", I want a true 1920x1080 on my 15" MBP. Apple is trying to impose that density is the same thing as resolution, which is not. A "Retina display" of 2880x1800 is just a "better" 1440x900. Give me the option to choose between double pixels and real pixels and I'll buy thee.

<comment><USER16> What would happen if you ran Windows or Linux on the MBP? What resolution would you get?

<comment><USER17> Windows has had High DPI mode for quite awhile. Not sure if that will be compatible with the new MPB, but it should help. Too bad most windows apps are fairly broken in high DPI mode.

<comment><USER18> I've tried using the 125% and 150% DPI modes in Windows 7 on a 1080p display and the support is still rather primitive. My HP ENVY 15 actually shipped with 125% mode enabled by default. Lots of icons, graphical elements, and many fonts become blurry/pixelated when enabled.

I'm guessing a reason we haven't seen high DPI screens from Dell/HP/Sony/etc is partially because the Windows OS doesn't really support it that well just yet. Hopefully things have changed in Windows 8.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER4> This may sound weird, but I'm most curious to see how the terminal looks on a retina display (when Apple or someone like iTerm makes one for it). I think having paper-resolution monospaced fonts will be awesome.

<comment><USER19> I know that true hackers don't anti-alias monotype fonts, but I have been using anti-aliased Consolas for a few years now. It is a font best-designed coding books use (<http://www.abookapart.com/>), and it should only look better, not worse, on print-like display.

<comment><USER20> > _I know that true hackers don't anti-alias monotype fonts_

That may be true, but they're going to need a monocle if they want to see 9-pt courier at native resolution on one of these bad boys.

<comment><USER21> The system will upscale it to the same physical height by doubling the pixel size of it. No monocle needed (though highly recommended for its long-lasting style).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER22> I am platform agnostic.

That said, the one thing that continues to concern me with Apple is the continuation of their closed philosophy. The Mac App Store being the latest incarnation of their quest for total control. I, frankly, don't know what to make of it.

An Apple ecosystem would have no competitors. Like it or not, Microsoft enabled an incredible level of global competition that, ultimately, has been responsible for bringing us the Internet as we know it. Stop and think about what I just said before you disagree. Nearly all of the hardware developments in the last thirty years have come on the backs of the MS platform. You can build inexpensive and powerful servers today because of MS. Same with Linux and other advances. They lit the fire that triggered an incredible evolutionary chain in both consumer and professional computing.

While I understand why Apple does it this way --and they are fully entitled to do so-- I would not want to see a world where their computers are adopted en- masse unless they let go and break the chains.

<comment><USER23> _Like it or not, Microsoft enabled an incredible level of global competition that, ultimately, has been responsible for bringing us the Internet as we know it_

That's pretty rich. Networking was a fundamental feature of many operating systems that predate Microsoft's existence . The first web browser was developed not on Windows, but the precursor to OSX (NextSTEP) and MS played catch up in basic browser features around the web's early years. The vast majority of servers are Linux based.

It's silly to attribute the rise of commodity PC hardware to them as well - it's only their lawsuits that prevented Linux from seeing widespread distribution, which would have enabled just as much innovation.

<comment><USER22> Re-read what I wrote and think about it. I knew it would be open for creative interpretations like yours.

I did not attribute the Internet to Microsoft.

What I said is that "Microsoft enabled an incredible level of global competition" and it is this competition that, in turn, allowed the internet to evolve into what we have today.

Yes, networking existed way before MS.

Yes, TBL wrote the first browser on NS.

Yes, MS played catch-up with browsers.

That is not the point.

Linux didn't begin life until 1991. By that time the MS-ecosystem-driven PC evolution was very well under way. Linus Torvalds wrote the initial version of Linux on a '386 based PC. By that time PC clones ruled the world. The evolution had gone through the 8086, 80186 and 80286 processors. Machines cost a fraction of what the original true IBM PC cost, were faster and did a lot more.

None of this would have happened with a closed hardware model. In fact, it did not. Apple was around at the same time, of course. They focused on keeping it all to themselves. MS, in turn, just did the software and let everyone else figure out the hardware. Yes, it was chaotic but it worked.

As the internet begun to heat-up it was Linux running on PC hardware that made it explode. The internet required hardware to grow and explode into every corner of the world. It was the cheap PC hardware that resulted from the evolution of the PC around the MS software that, among other things, enabled the internet to explode like it did. Nobody can even attempt to credit Apple with any of that.

Again, I am not anti-Apple here. Among other things, I develop iOS apps and have a nearly equal number of Windows and MacOS machine in the shop. I will likely buy more Apple hardware in the next few months. No issues there.

My original post was not about bashing Apple, it was to highlight my concern for the increasing closed-everything (not just hardware) approach Apple is taking --which is a fact. In some cases it is almost despotic. As a developer, that concerns me a great deal. As a consumer, I prefer to see competition at all levels. I'd really like to see Apple open-up.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Linux
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Apple_Inc.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_personal_computers#The_IBM_PC
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_browser
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_web_browsers
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WorldWideWeb
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mosaic_(web_browser)
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_web_browsers

<comment><USER24> _MS, in turn, just did the software and let everyone else figure out the hardware._

Microsoft had nothing to do with the openness of the PC architecture. By the time MS had any influence, the PC market had already been well established with several manufacturers churning out PC clones.

 _It was the cheap PC hardware that resulted from the evolution of the PC around the MS software..._

Isn't it the other way around? At least in the beginning, the MS software seemed to evolve around advances in the PC hardware. At some point Microsoft probably got enough leverage to influence the process, but another company (or a consortium of companies) would have probably got to do that if MS had not been around.

<comment><USER25> "Microsoft had nothing to do with the openness of the PC architecture." Actually, it does! You've mentioned Microsoft leverage - it could have been used a lot more Apple-like way, to impose a "Microsoft Application Store" or something, to racket every software company, to pillage every developer with "rights to develop" licences and to take "it's rightful cut" from every product sold on Windows. All those could induce a strong feeling of closeness. Yet, all those didn't happened under Microsoft rule. Those "goodies" we come to enjoy first-hand only in the great Apple garden!

"...another company (or a consortium of companies) would have probably got to do that if MS had not been around." I am glad it wasn't Apple or another one with an Apple-like vision. It would have been a curse on the computing industry.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I'm really hoping it can drive three external monitors... Looks somewhat promising:

        * Two Thunderbolt[/DisplayPort?] ports
        * One HDMI port
        * A Geforce 650M (capable of driving 4 active displays [1]).

[1] [http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce- GT-650M.71887.0....](http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce- GT-650M.71887.0.html)

EDIT: "Up to two external displays" (thanks dsirijus)

<comment><USER27> If you are hacking or doing office work (and not gaming), you can easily support an additional 1080p monitor over USB2 using DisplayLink tech. I did it in a former life using a 13" MBP and over a Belkin USB2 hub, even with no glitches.

With USB3 now, you could probably run several. I bet you could get 4 HD monitors easy.

<comment><USER28> "Up to two external displays."

<http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/specs/>

<comment><USER10> 2 external displays at the full thunderbolt display (2560 x 1600) resolution. I'm betting you could do more displays if the resolution is lower, however I don't think you can buy external displays with lower resolution that use the thunderbolt port.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER29> I'm curious about Magsafe2. As a student, knowing that 20% of students on campus (those with Apple computers) use the same charger as me, I find it really easy to borrow a cable for 20 minutes to get charged up for class. I'm guessing Magsafe2 isn't compatible with traditional magsafe.

<comment><USER30> Update: It's not but they sell a $9.99 adapter "The MagSafe to MagSafe 2 Converter allows you to use the MagSafe connector on your LED Cinema Display, Thunderbolt Display, or MagSafe Power Adapter to charge your MagSafe 2-equipped Mac computer."

It looks and I would guess it would be magsafe 1 compatible. Maybe it has extra features or power to it. Pretty much any MB* can be charged on any power adapter albeit slower (or not at all if heavily using it).

<comment><USER31> It's thinner than Magsafe1, so no. Time to buy all new power adapters!

<comment><USER32> Magsafe is six years old, so I'm willing to cut Apple a break on that one.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER33> I'm curious to know how Mac handles apps moving between a Retina Display Mac and a non-Retina display (Thunderbolt, whatever). Apps need to be updated to handle retina, otherwise they draw double pixels.. so what happens when you have a window that's halfway between a Retina and non-Retina?

My two guesses: 1\. The entire window draws as doubled pixels, as if it didn't support Retina at all 2\. The window gets two separate paint events, one retina and one non-retina.

Anyone know how this works yet?

<comment><USER34> I don't think apps need to be updated, the OS will just send two separate screen redraws to the app. If you put a window half on an 8-bit color screen and half on a 16-bit color screen it works fine too, I don't see why this would be different.

</comment></comment><comment><USER35> Perhaps I'm the only one, but I'm really waiting and praying for a new Mac Pro system and 30" Retina displays. Its been since 2010 for an update on the Mac Pro. Currently, I can't fathom why anyone would purchase them given the price. But the laptops have never felt capable enough for fulltime use for HD video editing (or 2K or 4K...)

Unless there's a "just one more thing" with these, it seems that the Mac Pro appears more and more dead.

<comment><USER36> The Mac Pro is dead. Many audio and video guys I know have already switched to PC or built / bought a Hackintosh.

<comment><USER37> You probably not know that many pro audio and video guys then...

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER38> This may be a bit off-topic, but I have to wonder why I see laptop screens with much higher resolution than desktop monitors. It just seems so backwards (in terms of practical use) that as screen size increases, the screen resolution seems to _decrease_. So now in many ways most desktop rigs are inferior to a 15" laptop as far as productivity goes.

My intuition for the cause, is that the more surface area of the screen, the harder it is to consistently manufacture the panels without defects. But I'm not convinced because I'd imagine such incredibly high resolutions on laptop panels must be pretty demanding technology as well.

I just want 2880x1880 30" monitors for my office :)

<comment><USER32> I don't think that really holds. I had a cheap 2048x1152 23" monitor in 2009. Excepting very rare 2048x1536 15" laptop displays, it was comparable in pixel count to the previously-top 1920x1200 laptop resolution. The iMacs have had a 2560x1440 27" option since 2009 and I'd expect the next update to go higher. There have been 2560x1440 or similar 30" displays for a while, my boss was using one in early 2009 or so, 2880x1880 or higher can't be far off.

Since you're comparing with "most desktop rigs", you should also remember that most 15" laptops are 1280x800 or 1440x900.

<comment><USER39> _you should also remember that most 15" laptops are 1280x800 or 1440x900._

Today, most are the appalling 1366x768. I have to give Apple major points for sticking with decent resolutions and 16:10.

<comment><USER32> I love when this gets brought up because Apple was one of the first to move from 4:3 to 16:10 in the first place.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> As a 2011 MacBook Air user, my biggest envy is USB 3.0. Thunderbolt accessories have been few and far between, and then priced at an exorbitant premium.

But hey, they finally made a Thunderbolt Firewire adapter cable.

<comment><USER40> USB 3 accessories are pretty far and few between too, aren't they? What do you actually want to plug in to that port?

<comment><USER41> My external hard drive :-)

I throw a lot of data around. I like backups. The difference between USB2 and USB3 will be non-trivial for me.

<comment><USER42> Seagate has a $99 ThunderBolt dock available but figure an extra $50 for a cable to go with it. It's designed for their GoFlex enclosures but I think it works fine with a bare drive too.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> It looks great. But I think I'm waiting to see how hot this machine gets. It's more compact and still has an 85W power adapter. Because of the higher DPI, it's pushing a lot more pixels even doing menial stuff.

For perspective: my (larger) 2010 MBP 15" w/SSD gets very warm even when not doing anything with the GPU. Compiling in IntelliJ will get it to burn your lap off. When I've tried to use it to play games, it practically melts itself.

<comment><USER44> The GT 650 has NVidia's Optimus technology, so it should be OK if you're not doing 3D stuff. That said, with an 1800p display, anything that touches the GPU is going to peg it, and I have no doubt the machine will get quite hot under these circumstances.

<comment><USER43> Well, right now my 2010 MBP is driving my cinema display for just reading email and stuff and is baking hot on the bottom. This is the trade-off with this newer machine, I suspect. It packs a ton of power in a smaller space... that just generates a lot of heat.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Why for heaven's sake is the new macbook pro €2279 when it's only $2199 in the US? It's a beautiful machine, and I'm used to some price differences between the US and Europe (USD = EUR, right, Apple?) but this is outrageous! That's almost 500 dolars more...

<comment><USER46> Presumably because the € price includes VAT (which is usually 20%+ in the EU), and the US$ price does not. The real US price would vary by state, and they usually don't show the amount of sales tax on the purchase price. This is a tax thing, not an apple thing.

<comment><USER47> $2,199 + 20% = $2,638.8 = 2,111€

Still doesn't explain a higher price.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER48> Belkin & Matrox are coming out with Thunderbolt docks:

Belkin <http://www.belkin.com/thunderbolt/>

Matrox <http://www.matrox.com/docking_station/en/ds1/>

</comment><comment><USER49> Will you still be able to order a MacBook with the matte display? Or does the retina display preclude this?

I hate the glossy screen and was happy to pay extra for matte on my current MacBook.

<comment><USER50> They're saying they did something to the glass to make it less reflective.

<comment><USER51> that's kind of like saying i did something to my turds to make them less smelly. may be true, but i still don't want to hang out with one.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER52> I really hope that other manufacturers try to copy this soon. I'd kill for a thinkpad (or any other machine that runs Linux nicely, has three buttons and an eraser-stick, and has decent battery life) with a retina display.

<comment><USER53> Well, once scaled, the retina screen comes to be about the same resolution as that of the W series Thinkpads (1080p), which is probably how you'd be using it until apps start supporting the resolution bump natively anyway. I just ordered a W530 with that display, 2.7ghz i7 quad core, and their most powerful graphics card for under $1,900. It's not a 'Retina' macbook, but still seems like a good deal to me.

</comment></comment><comment><USER54> Do any employees know whether or not the new MacBooks are available at retail locations today?

edit: Apple Store Berkeley says no.

<comment><USER55> Surely available in the downtown SF Apple store.

Exhibit A: <http://instagr.am/p/LvfFx3CPKI/>

</comment></comment><comment><USER56> The more annoying problem is the storage: the lowest end model only holds 256 GB with absolutely no option on checkout to upgrade. And because it's soldered on, one can't simply install an upgrade themselves. So, in order for me to just get double the amount, I have to spend a minimum $600 extra.

<comment><USER39> Although with USB3, you can get external storage that's both cheap and fast. Often not convenient for portable use, but great for a desktop replacement.

</comment></comment><comment><USER57> I wonder what Ubuntu would look like on a retina display.

<comment><USER40> Pretty tiny, I bet.

</comment></comment><comment><USER58> 2880x1800 pixels on a 15.4 inch display? That's pretty impressive from a technical stand point, but I can't see how it's going to be useful in real life - I find 1680x1050 to be at the threshold of usability for me.

1600x900 is perfect on a 15.6, and 1920x1080 is the maximum I'd go for on a 17 inch display. Any higher and I'd just connect a bigger external display...

Can anyone give me an idea of what this resolution can actually be useful for?

<comment><USER59> I'm still using a couple of _ancient_ 15.6" Windows laptops (the cool kids all laugh at me) _because_ they have 1920x1080 and 1920x1200 displays -- and I'm in my fifties, finding that my arms get shorter and shorter every year (that is, creeping presbyopia -- combined with myopia -- means that I need different glasses for _everything_ now). Apart from text-based activity (development and such), I do a considerable amount of image manipulation using Photoshop and plugins. Current-model affordable machines tend to have resolutions that are far too small for my day-to-day use, making me choose between UI elements and what I'm working on. 1600x900 is far too restrictive (and yes, I own a machine with that resolution), and I'd really like the option of taking my work with me without carting around a separate monitor (the reason I use laptops in the first place).

<comment><USER60> The new ASUS Zenbook Prime runs 1920x1080 in 13": [http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/asus_zenbook_prime_u...](http://www.laptopmag.com/review/laptops/asus_zenbook_prime_ux31a.aspx)

I prefer Windows--I'm going to try this out vs. the new Macbook Pro, but I may indeed pick up the ASUS.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER61> When I got my Thinkpad W500 with a 1920x1280 display four years ago people complained over the Internet about those tiny pixels you can hardly see. It didn't have a funny name though and was just a display.

<comment><USER62> I have a Dell Inspiron 6000 from 2005. It has a WUXGA display (1920x1200) on a 15" screen.

Sadly, screen resolutions have been decreasing and moving towards 16:9 ratio. It's nice to see Apple emphasize the screen again and push competition.

</comment></comment><comment><AUTHOR> I think the comparisons to the Macbook Air are misleading. At least for me, the distinct appeal of the Macbook Air is that it's light; either 2.38 or 2.96 pounds. The new model Macbook Pro may be a great laptop in many ways, but at 4.46 pounds it's not light. I'm going to notice that in my messenger bag to a much greater extent than I would an Air.

<comment><USER63> I'm kind of amazed that the pro is only that much heavier than the air. It feels like it's like it's at least twice as heavy.

</comment></comment><comment><USER64> Hopefully the macbook pro with retina display supports 16gb of ram. Everything else sounds amazing, but being limited to 8gb of ram for another few years is going to hold me back.

<comment><USER65> The question right now is if the RAM is upgradable or soldered to the board a la the Air...

<comment><USER11> Per [http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/11/apple-introduces-next- ge...](http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/11/apple-introduces-next-generation- macbook-pro-with-15-4-retina-display-starts-at-2199/) , "up to 16GB of MacBook Air-like non-upgradable 1600MHz RAM."

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> I have multiple machines. I'm a UNIX/Linux sysadmin "by trade" since 1995 and use whatever machine / OS combination fits the task at hand best.

At work I have a Core2Duo Mac Mini that runs Windows 7 in a VM for my "work stuff" on a second monitor. At home I have the current Core i5 Mac Mini for my main system, with an AMD Bulldozer-based Windows box for games and things that require Windows. Sure, I prefer *nix, but I'll admin and use whatever gets the bills paid.

When it comes to laptops, I have a 2010 Macbook Air 11", a 2010 Macbook Pro 13", a Thinkpad T61 with Ubuntu, a Lenovo G470 with Win7, and a Thinkpad X120e running Windows 7.

A couple of hours ago, I sold the MBAir and MBPro to friends and ordered the new Core i5 11.6" Air with 128G SSD and 8G RAM. It's not often that I will buy the "current" machine without waiting for a refurb to be available.

</comment><comment><USER67> No builtin ethernet? My router at home doesn't allow wireless access to the admin.interface. I like my ethernet from time to time...

<comment><USER29> They released a thunderbolt to ethernet adapter.

</comment></comment><comment><USER68> I'm at WWDC and after seeing one up close, it delivers on all the hyperbole attached to the launch. It's a truly incredible piece of hardware and the display is as game changing as the original iPhone retina screen was.

</comment><comment><USER69> While the new laptops seem very nice, the Mac Pro is a blatant attempt to insult the customer's intelligence. A video card from 2009, seriously? A quick search of newegg.com revealed that this card is so old and obsolete that they don't even sell it anymore. I understand that graphics cards aren't the most important thing in the world to many of Apple's customers, but there is absolutely no reason that they don't at least have a 6990 or even the new 7990 available as an option.

<comment><USER39> Apple doesn't want normal customers to even consider the Mac Pro. It exists to milk high-end pro users who are locked into Mac-based ecosystems, and possibly to make the rest of the lineup look less expensive.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> With a quad-core CPU and an NVidia 650M and that beast of a screen, will heat be an issue? They've put a lot of powerful components in a relatively small package.

</comment><comment><USER71> Was anyone else expecting a Macbook Air 15" with Retina display?

<comment><USER72> by removing the hard-drive in lieu of flash and removing the media drive, that's exactly what they've just given you, wouldn't you say? (but with real graphics card so you can actually do something with that beautiful display other than watch HD content stutter. and quad core i7.)

granted its not an air, but - are you _sure_ you want one?

<comment><USER73> I imagine it needs the memory bandwidth of a real card with dedicated RAM to even just composite windows fast, so the air is not an option. This has the benefit of making a bigger difference between the two lines again too, although the 13 inch looks a weak offering now.

<comment><USER72> but there is a "15 inch air" from samsung, [http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/09/15-inch-samsung- series-9-...](http://www.engadget.com/2012/04/09/15-inch-samsung- series-9-review-2012/) , which is along the lines the parent must have been thinking of.

I think the 15 inch macbook as just announced is a far better option, with a single weak point (7 hrs) compared to an air-style form factor which would be weaker at _everything_ \- except weight and slightly thinner form factor.

basically, if all someone wants to do is type on it and not have to think about carrying it with them or not (e.g. a reporter for stories, student for essays, CEO for emails), a 15 inch air was not announced today. for everyone else, what was just announced is better than the 15 inch air.

<comment><USER71> Didn't know about the Samsung Series 9. Thanks for the tip!

<comment><USER72> for what it's worth, based on the review I just linked I would never touch it. (key sentence: "The real problem, though, isn't that the keys aren't cushy enough, but that they're _sticky_ , and sometimes fail to register key presses. Ultimately, we still managed to type the brunt of this review on the Series 9, albeit with copious taps to the Backspace key.") yeah, that's not a laptop I'll be using.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER74> Prices here in Brazil were nudged up a little:

        Air 11": R$2699 -> R$3699 (1849 USD)
        MBP 13": R$3599 -> R$3999 (2000 USD)
        MBP Retina: R$9999 (4500 USD - WHAT??)
        MBP Retina maxed out: R$15973 (~8000 USD...)

The prices for the new retina MBPs are outrageous. Tax rate for imports is 60%, and IT companies are eligible for some tax exemptions/reductions, it doesn't make any sense. For R$10k you can fly to the US and buy _two_ retina MBPs. The first one would be exempt from taxes on return.

Apple prices went from ridiculous (buy a Mac or buy a car) 6 years ago to very competitive, until this update - apparently the good days are over.

</comment><comment><USER75> Will you be able to configure different DPI settings per monitor on OSX, or will there be some iOS-like implicit 2x scale on retina displays? Otherwise this MacBook might be somewhat awkward to use with a non-"retina" external monitor...

</comment><comment><USER76> I was hoping 2560x1600 13" pro, preferably in a fullsized body (instead of this Airy silliness). Instead just a overprized and oversized Air, and lackluster minimal refresh to real Pros.

</comment><comment><USER77> Very nice. Every year I am getting more and more tempted to make the switch from Windows to OS X. I like my iPhone but have always preferred Windows to OS X however I am not very excited with the way Microsoft are taking things with Windows 8.

Also I love the hardware and design. They only company who comes close to Apple's design is Asus in my opinion and even then they are still not quite there.

Does anyone know if the SSD is a standard SATA drive or a custom built in one (i.e. not user upgradable)?

<comment><USER78> custom. looks like the RAM is custom too, just like on the Air.

<comment><USER77> That is what I suspected. It is a shame as I doubt the built in SSD has the performance of the Intel SSDs :(

<comment><USER78> Supposedly Apple is using "faster" flash memory now... we'll see soon when the first reviews come out.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER79> I can't find any details regarding the existence of an optical drive on the new MacBook Pro. Has it been removed? Also, does anyone know how MagSafe2 differs from MagSafe?

<comment><USER80> Optical drive has gone the way of the floppy on the "next generation" MacBook Pro. It's still there on the "old" MacBook Pros that just got a spec bump today.

<comment><USER81> Not so sure about the updated MacBook Pro as the spec sheet does not list a optical drive. So it might also be gone.

<comment><USER80> [http://images.apple.com/macbook- pro/performance/13-and-15-in...](http://images.apple.com/macbook- pro/performance/13-and-15-inch/images/processor.jpg)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER82> Finally they removed the DVD driver.

<comment><USER83> As someone who appreciated the DVD drive because it could be removed and the space/connector used to install a second 2.5" hard drive, I see the removal of the DVD drive altogether as a negative.

This combined with on-board RAM and on-board SSD storage... are any of the components in these new retina display MacBook Pros replaceable?

</comment></comment><comment><USER84> I think even if you are not a fan of macs or even this laptop you should still love it. Because of this new release we should expect to see releases from every other competitor by the end of the year to match the same screen resolution. Hopefully this will jumpstart the tv resolution from HD 1080 to something bigger like 4k and once this happens the next gen game consoles will surely follow on with greater amounts of details.

</comment><comment><USER16> So, what is the effective resolution of the MBP now?

<comment><USER85> 1440x900, same as the old "low res" screen.

<comment><USER86> I was going to say this, but I would say its _slightly_ better because the "effective" pixels are sharper -- You could probably run a text editor with a smaller font and still feel comfortable.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER87> I made a big switch from Mac based video editing to PC centric one in December last year. I'm kind of glad and sad there are no new Mac Pros. PCs took over big time in our industry (now video, CG was never Macs domain anyhow). Still, Macbook Air and Pros are best laptops there are, regardless of OS on it.

</comment><comment><USER88> Any eligible* student planning on purchasing the retina MacBook Pro can get the base model for $1999 USD (a $200 discount) plus a free $100 Apple gift card.

Details here: <http://store.apple.com/us/browse/campaigns/back_to_school>

</comment><comment><USER89> And bye bye 17inch macbook pro.

I guess it wasn't selling as good as the 15inch, ans is obsoleted by the retina one. But it's funny how there is so little mention of it, even if it was the top of the line for so long, representing the "everything's on board" mentality, just as the mac pro is.

</comment><comment><USER90> I get little hints of Apple losing it's finesse. The plugs are on either side of the new MacBooks, a detail that Apple previously didn't miss. And two Thunderbolts? Does anyone here actually have a thunderbolt device?

<comment><USER91> My MacBook Pro from about 7 years ago has ports on both sides, and the optical drive slot in the front. More recent ones have the ports on the left side and the optical drive on the right. I think Apple just moves them around to match the constraints presented by the components inside the machine.

Having a USB port on each side is nice, IMHO. For example, I have a pair of external speakers where the right speaker connects to the USB port, which is a bit awkward when you only have USB ports on the left side of the laptop.

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> No MBP 13" refresh, too bad, I was hoping for that. That size is just the noteook sweet spot for me. More specifically, I'd love to the see the discrete Nvidia 650M GPU in the 13", want to play with CUDA on it.

Back to waiting...

</comment><comment><USER93> Holy crap 2880x1800. I've been buying 15" 1920x1200 laptops for last 10 years because I love resolution, but this is just absurdly awesome.

I only use Linux, but if no one else competes with this LCD I'll buy a Macbook Pro for sure.

<comment><USER94> Can't you throw linux on a mbp?

<comment><USER93> Sure, just not a fan of the premium price. I'd be willing to pay it though for that pixels-per-inch.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER95> Price-wise, the new retina MBPs seem to stack up pretty well with a ThinkPad W-series, so I don't really see a price issue here. What are people comparing against that they see the price as steep?

</comment><comment><USER96> Is anyone doing thorough reviews for Apple products? With technical details such as component specs (CPU/SSD/display), real world battery life testing and so on.

Did all Macbooks get Ivy Bridge update or not?

<comment><USER97> Anandtech is good if you want the nitty gritty detail.

</comment></comment><comment><USER98> Tech specs for new MPB: [http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macboo...](http://store.apple.com/us/browse/home/shop_mac/family/macbook_pro/select)

</comment><comment><USER99> Is the line in port gone? Having line in and headphones out has been great for my use cases, and I was sad to see those go from the 13". Are they gone across the board now?

<comment><USER100> The line in ports may have been combined with the headphone jack. I thought I remembered reading about that somewhere.

<comment><USER99> On 13" they were about 2 years ago. Still on 15" and 17" models, and from the other response, it sounds like they still are there.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER101> In 2012 there is only one producer who is bold enough to come out with new laptop model without touch-screen. And still it is leading edge.

</comment><comment><USER102> The new Macbook Pro landing page is out <http://www.apple.com/macbook-pro/>

</comment><comment><USER103> Any information on when they update the iMac line? I really don't need a new laptop but want to switch to MacOS :(

</comment><comment><USER104> It takes a lot of 99¢ app sales to afford one of those new laptops. If you're in the app selling business.

<comment><USER105> 3,174 sales to be exact.

</comment></comment><comment><USER20> I'm bummed no dual-drive configuration.

</comment><comment><USER106> I want one of those new shiny MacBook Air Pros! :) Seriously Apple, why not name them like that?

<comment><USER107> Because that's confusing as hell.

</comment></comment><comment><USER108> Am I the only one who noticed that the lid does not have the shiny words "Macbook Pro" anymore?

</comment><comment><USER109> seems the ivy bridge is 20 degrees c hotter than the sandybridge chipset when overclocked:

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)>

</comment><comment><USER110> Does anyone know if the new MacBook Air can drive more than one external display?

<comment><USER110> Got the official word from Apple: nope, only one external display.

</comment></comment><comment><USER111> Looks like they dropped the 17" MBP and replaced it with the new 15" Retina MBP.

</comment><comment><USER112> all I want is 3g on laptops

<comment><USER113> What would be the point when there's not a single US cell network that offers unlimited 3G data for computers? Or is there someone in California? There's not here. Might as well just tether from your phone since you can only do it a few times a month without hitting your data cap.

<comment><USER32> Who said anything about unlimited? 3 or 5 GBs of backup data for when you can't find or can't be bothered to find an open wifi network could still be quite nice. It won't replace your stream-HD-movies-all-day-wireless-N but it doesn't have to.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER114> I've never owned an Apple product before. I'll probably buy this thing, it's amazing, but I won't use OS X, no, no :P

<comment><USER115> OS X might be the only OS to take advantage of the pixel doubling for a while.

</comment></comment><comment><USER116> Too expensive... really too much

</comment><comment><USER117> No Ethernet??

<comment><USER118> Via a Thunderbolt dongle, apparently.

<comment><USER119> The thing is, the ethernet port is too thick. At least on the air it would be impossible, I think the same thing happens here.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER120> The Macs are awesome and I can't wait to throw down and replace my MBP, but I'm going to be nauseous from my iOS friends trying to rub iOS features in my face. Congratulations, Android users had that for years, or even a year.

</comment><comment><USER121> Are these OLED displays - is this a first for a laptop? I'm interested in any technology that makes it more comfortable to use the machine. Currently I read most web pages on my Kindle out of desperation.

<comment><USER122> They're LED backlit IPS panels.

<comment><USER121> Oh shucks! Nice then, but could be nicer.

<comment><USER123> LCD has much better colour accuracy right now, probably because it's a much more mature technology.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER124> I guess the "Retina Display" is the admission that they never figured out how to do decent font rendering?

<comment><USER118> You really think "fonts look better" is the main selling point for the Retina displays?

<comment><USER125> Well, it was for me. I held off on the iPad until an iPad 3. After using an iPhone 4, when I picked up an iPad 1 or 2, I saw pixels everywhere. The main thing I use my iPad for is reading. I guessed that would be the case, so I held off on getting one until it had a high-resolution display that could display text without visible pixels.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER126> Looks like I'll have to be heading to the Apple store after the keynote is over...

Edit: I'm curious, why the downvotes?

<comment><USER127> Probably because it didn't add much to the discussion, which is actually what down-voting is technically supposed to be used for. Makes sense, I wouldn't want this comment to be up towards the top - it's just you saying you want to buy a MBP.</comment></comment>


BigDog grabs, lifts, and throws cinder blocks with its new arm - <AUTHOR> http://www.gizmag.com/bigdog-grabs-lifts-throws-new-arm/26473/ <comment><USER2> It's weird, every new video of Big Dog terrifies me more, but in a strange way I feel sorry for it at the same time.</comment>


Mixpanel is awesome, but still uses Google Analytics on their own site - <AUTHOR> http://mixpanel.com

<comment><AUTHOR> I'm not bashing them, I'm only saying it merely shows that although event/action tracking is a great approach, "traditional" traffic analytics are still needed.

</comment><comment><USER2> Perhaps they're just keeping an eye on their competitor?</comment>


The Amazons of the dark net - <AUTHOR> http://www.economist.com/news/international/21629417-business-thriving-anonymous-internet-despite-efforts-law-enforcers <comment><USER3> Perhaps the most interesting point is in the last paragraph:

> Moreover, the deep web's denizens will continue to adapt. Jamie Bartlett, > author of "The Dark Net", predicts: "The future of these markets is not > centralised sites like Silk Road 2.0, but sites where…listings, messaging, > payment and feedback are all separated, controlled by no central party"—and > thus impossible to close.

I know some work along these lines has been started with e.g. OpenBazaar, but it may be a while before they are seen in any large scale activities - <USER2> another five years still until they are at all commonplace, or even available to the general public.

<comment><USER4> The Tor version of Openbazaar is available as of a few days ago. You can download it here.

[https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/2ko33b/help_nee...](https://www.reddit.com/r/OpenBazaar/comments/2ko33b/help_needed_please_test_new_tor_support/)

At this point it is stable and can be used to run a store via Tor. The last of the core system (arbitration and notary) will be completed by the end of the year.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> I'm amazed that buyers will trust anonymous online drug dealers with their address.

Isn't that what happens?

<comment><USER6> I've been following the dark net markets subreddit for a while because I'm fascinated by that question too. The consensus there seems to be, surprisingly, that having the authorities connect your address to illicit activity isn't that big a deal. When I've suggested that such association would constitute probable cause for a search warrant and hence anyone who's clearly exposed their address by communicating it unencrypted to a drug dealer should consult a criminal lawyer and henceforth keep their house clean of evidence, I've been downvoted. It really surprises me that people are risking their liberty this way.

<comment><USER7> You've likely been downvoted because you misunderstand how it works.

Only idiots are communicating their addresses unencrypted - PGP encryption for addresses is standard. So the only way for your address to be matched to your dark net activity is if a.) the person you are buying from gets busted and b.) the person you're buying from doesn't destroy the address after they ship the package.

<comment><USER8> c.) the person you are buying from is an actual police agency.

The police use undercover drug dealers on the streets. Why wouldn't they use them online, where it is much cheaper and safer.

<comment><USER9> There are reputation systems on most sites. Unless the site operator was in on it or they were actually providing product, they would not get a lot of addresses.

<comment><USER10> Who says they have to bust you _immediately_? How long-term can a sting run? Why not collect addresses for six months, and then wrangle up hundreds of purchasers?

<comment><USER9> That's what I meant with having to provide product. If they don't deliver they will receive bad reviews. I do not know if it is legal for American law enforcement to sell drugs, though.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER11> "THE first ever e-commerce transaction..."

Is there a missing footnote?

<comment><USER12> According to The Guardian[1]:

In John Markoff 's 2005 book What the Dormouse Said: How the Sixties Counterculture Shaped the Personal Computer Industry (even the book's title is from a hoary old Jefferson Airplane track) he reveals that the world's first online transaction was a drug deal:

In 1971 or 1972, Stanford students using Arpanet accounts at Stanford University's Artificial Intelligence Laboratory engaged in a commercial transaction with their counterparts at Massachussetts Institute of Technology. Before Amazon, before eBay, the seminal act of e-commerce was a drug deal. The students used the network to quietly arrange the sale of an undetermined amount of marijuana.

[1] [http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/apr/19/online- high-n...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/apr/19/online-high-net- drugs-deal)

</comment></comment><comment><USER13> This is about Silk Road et al. What about the AWS of the dark net? Does that exist?

<comment><USER14> Well, I don't know about the 'dark' side, but I know @kordless has been hacking on StackMonkey:

[https://www.stackmonkey.com/](https://www.stackmonkey.com/)

Which lets you buy compute instances anonymously using BitCoin.

<comment><USER15> >anonymously using BitCoin

and a Google account. I don't think anyone would consider using this provider for a hidden service on Tor.

<comment><USER16> You don't appear to need an account to launch instances.

<comment><USER17> That is correct. The pool simply aggregates things for searching. That'll go away eventually when we get a blockchain up for it.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It is rather naive for this writer to assume that things like online reviews will work or continue to work for these illegal sites. Why do they believe that illegal drug sites will have honest reviews when even yelp, which is supposed to be completely legal and reviews completely legal businesses has obviously manipulated reviews. Of course people will eventually start padding their ratings, and the websites themselves will start manipulating ratings.

So this is not some panacea for getting higher quality drugs. It is not even something that will ensure your safety from the police. As I have mentioned before, the police can get you online the way they usually get you -- by having an undercover police agent pretend to be the seller. In fact it would be much cheaper and more effective for the police to collect addresses from an illegal drugs site than the dangerous and tricky business of using undercover agents on the street.

I think the economist is being very disingenuous by cheerleading for these online sites. These are not safer from police or drug purity standpoint.

<comment><USER18> > It is rather naive for this writer to assume that things like online reviews > will work or continue to work for these illegal sites. Why do they believe > that illegal drug sites will have honest reviews

It is rather naive to call that 'rather naive' given that the black-markets have functioned well since January 2011 (so, coming up on 4 years soon). I don't think it would take scammers 4 years to realize that reviews can be faked.

> when even yelp, which is supposed to be completely legal and reviews > completely legal businesses has obviously manipulated reviews.

Yelp doesn't control purchases of services and take commissions and only let buyers review, so it's in a different position from the operators of a black- market.

> As I have mentioned before, the police can get you online the way they > usually get you -- by having an undercover police agent pretend to be the > seller.

So why don't they? Why are they ignoring the infallible wisdom of the great hristov?

<comment><USER19> Also worth noting the reason Yelp's reviews are obviously manipulated is that a lot of Yelp's money comes from people paying to be able to manipulate the reviews. Not hard to get better review accuracy than that.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER20> Willful blindness, I must say.</comment>


Cryptocurrency conference serves attendees cannabis without consent - <AUTHOR> https://www.wired.com/story/at-this-crypto-event-the-attendees-really-were-high <comment><USER2> Overall, it seems kind of rude to be involved with something where people accidentally ingest substances, where better event planning could've prevented non-intentional consumption, and then make a statement condemning substance abuse, rather than just owning the event planning mistake. Though maybe they have legal reasons for not wanting to take ownership of the mistake...

It seems it would've been better if the statement wasn't

"I would like to make it clear: substance abuse is against the values that we uphold."

(Just using cannabis isn't substance abuse - substance abuse is a specific thing, i.e. see the following list for opioid abuse criteria, most of the criteria should apply to most other substances [https://www.buppractice.com/node/12351](https://www.buppractice.com/node/12351))

But instead

"I would like to make it clear: serving people drugs without making it explicitly clear that they are consuming drugs is against the values that we uphold."

<comment><USER3> > kind of rude

Rude is not saying thank you when someone holds the door for you. This is a ridiculous disaster.

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> That's fucked up. Why force when there are people like me who would have loved to eat that :/

</comment><comment><USER5> Seems like a greenfield for lawyers.

</comment><comment><USER6> > Telegram, the crypto world's preferred messaging service.

Is that so?

<comment><USER7> My first thought:"I'm using signal. Should I be using telegram?"

<comment><USER8> They're improperly using "crypto world", to mean "crypto _currency_ world" \- fucking idiotic.

Crypto already means something, people: cryptography.</comment></comment></comment>


Ignored for Years, Modern Money Theory Is Gaining Converts - <AUTHOR> http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-13/ignored-for-years-a-radical-economic-theory-is-gaining-converts?bcomANews=true <comment><USER2> Here is what I now believe: MMT doesn't really matter that much. How base money is produced doesn't really matter that much. A metal standard, fiat via government coercion, rocks at the bottom of the ocean, wampum, whatever. As long as it isn't insane and chaotic, it will probably work.

What matters is no longer allowing the banking system to engage in fraud by introducing multiple claims on the same currency unit in the same time period, which is to say that currency deposits must be duration matched with loans. No more borrowing short and lending long.

Of course, practically, MMT will be used to justify more government boondoggles, wars, and bail outs of the rich, rather than something that might actually be effective, like a citizens dividend, but that's politics, not economics.

<comment><USER3> What you're describing isn't crazy, it's how _any other entity besides a bank must operate_. If a friend asks to borrow $50, I have to open up my wallet and give him $50 from it (or deny the loan). I can't keep the $50 in my wallet, promise to not spend it, and print out a shiny new $50 bill to give him!

Banks were given this privilege because they were highly regulated, essentially just extensions of the Federal Reserve itself. Of course over time they argued this was unfair and chipped away at the regulation, while still retaining the privileges.

Given how much is at stake, I don't see anything changing until it all falls apart. Easy creation of money directly supports the Federal Reserve's mission of overstimulating the economy through artificially forcing inflation. The proceeds aren't just skimmed by a countable corrupt cabal, they're funding the entirety of several industries!

<comment><USER4> No, this is how banks have worked for hundreds of years. Regulations and (especially) insurance have now made this much safer.

<comment><USER3> A few hundred years is really not that long to prove a social system. Previously banks created their own currencies - this system allows them to create _the_ currency. The "safety" is the elimination of direct feedback, which allows problems to _accumulate_ and creates a "too big to fail" situation. A lack of bank runs is fantastic, but when the run finally occurs on USD it will not be pretty.

<comment><USER4> "Too big to fail" has nothing to do with fractional reserve banking. All banks work the same way, but the vast majority are not too big to fail. And, many of the too big to fail financial institutions are not banks.

Banks in total provide about 20% of the total credit in the U.S. Even if they were perfectly risk-free, you'd still have the other 80% to worry about.

If you're worried about fractional reserve banking, you're worrying about the wrong thing IMO.

<comment><USER3> The "too big to fail" I'm referring to is the currency itself. If a smaller country were to inflate the fuck out of its monetary base the way USG does, they would get corresponding exchange rates in short order. But being the global reserve currency, inflation of USD instead sets the tempo of the global economy. That is until it results in a long term shift away from USD, at which point we're completely fucked as the reserve bubble pops.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER5> Ignored for years? What? From what I can tell that's how we got into $19 trillion dollars of debt. The only reason it's now being defended as a systematic theory is that it's become embarrassing to still believe it in the face of all evidence.

Simply put: MMT completely ignores floating exchange rates.

The only reason that hasn't been completely catastrophic (for the US) is that we're the global exchange currency, and can basically tax the whole world by printing more money.

The long term problem is that too much inflation (or, more accurately, taxation) may drive people away from our currency, and MMT will be shown for the sham that it is.

<comment><USER6> I don't think you _can_ drive people away from the US dollar, simply because any such destabilising action will hit the real economy first. And the US has seen low consumer inflation for years now.

MMT absolutely does take account of forex by recognising that a government has a large amount of power to dictate money flows _within_ the country, but very little power to compel terms of trade overseas. And most countries need to continuously import certain things which cannot be substituted locally, especially fuel.

Expanding the money supply lets people buy more _locally produced_ stuff, but not more imports. This even scales down to local token currencies ("Bristol pound") or Krugman's "babysitting tokens" thought example.

<comment><USER5> > "Expanding the money supply lets people buy more locally produced stuff, but > not more imports."

Right, so for most developed nations this would be disastrous.

<comment><USER7> The worst you can be imposed on you (outside an embargo situation) is balanced trade, paying for real imports with fx acquired through real exports.

<comment><USER5> Which, for the US, would be a very serious downgrade from our current situation.

<comment><USER7> Depends on your position in the current situation.

<comment><USER5> Well, then let's clarify: For almost all Americans -- who produce essentially nothing of value, yet consume a lot of very real, imported goods -- balanced trade would be a complete disaster.

<comment><USER7> Trade deficits are definitely a net positive, but that lack of demand they cause actively harm a large swath of Americans.

There's a reason NAFTA has been so unpopular.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> I had an economics lecturer spouting this crap about how major countries never need worry to repay their debts and could lean on their massive power/influence if they got stuck. Fast forward to a post GFC world and suddenly it's like the story of the group of friends where everyone owes money to everyone else and it's all good until one new friend doesn't owe anyone and suddenly turns around and tells everyone it's time to pay up. Party stopped pretty quick after that.

<comment><USER9> "I had an economics lecturer spouting this crap about how major countries never need worry to repay their debts"

Because if you print your own currency, the risk of you running out of it (insolvency) is _exactly zero_.

Of course, when you thought you heard "major" what he probably said was "sovereign in the currency they borrow". Big difference (US is sovereign; Japan is sovereign; Greece is not; Zimbabwe was not).

"and could lean on their massive power/influence if they got stuck"

"Stuck"?

<comment><USER10> Consider a hypothetical situation where we have to print a lot of currency to repay our debts. Foreign debt-holders realize that they are effectively getting robbed by our monetary policy and complain to their governments. Those governments decide to threaten with military power, to convince us to change our monetary policy or to take some of our assets.

In that situation, our balance sheet would be ok, but our country would be in very bad straits. So we would be stuck in a real sense, if not in an economic sense.

His lecturer probably (naively) believes that America will be dominant for so long that we won't have to worry about pesky things like the threat of war from other countries on economic grounds.

<comment><USER9> >Consider a hypothetical situation where we have to print a lot of currency to repay our debts.

Why? The US government _could_ pay off all of its debts tomorrow by printing money but the hypothetical situation where it would 'need' to simply won't arise.

Same for Japan. Or the UK. Or anybody. Inflation is the only real problem most governments need to concern themselves with (and is inflation too high in the US or Japan?).

>His lecturer probably (naively) believes that America will be dominant for so long

And I suppose Japan has managed to remain solvent with ~220% debt/gdp by being a superpower as well?

His lecturer wasn't being naive. The austerian economists who predicted hyperinflation in Japan in the late 90s for the exact same reasons you're proposing were being naive.

<comment><USER11> >Why? The US government could pay off all of its debts tomorrow by printing money but the hypothetical situation where it would 'need' to simply won't arise.

It could arise pretty easily if international markets lost confidence in the USG's ability to repay. In terms of wealth, I mean. Of course the government can print money to pay in dollars, but from an investor's perspective there's no difference between a country that inflates its currency and a country that only pays a percentage of obligations in an uninflated currency.

Most US debt is short term. It has to be rolled over, and it has to be rolled over at very low interest rates. That was the real genius of QE - they found a way to print money and lower interest rates at the same time.

>And I suppose Japan has managed to remain solvent with ~220% debt/gdp by being a superpower as well?

Japan has remained solvent because that 220% number isn't real. If you subtract out interagency borrowing it's more like 130% (or it was, anyway, the last time I looked into it), which, while not ideal, doesn't exactly put the country in a league of its own.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> «The 20-something-year-old doctrine»

Much older than that, MMT is based upon turn of the last century American socialist (specifically the Social Credit Party) economic theory, but the red scare nearly eliminated it from American discourse for most of a century. It's especially interesting in that it is especially cyclical with respect to depressions/recessions.

Edit to add: Not that there isn't important additional knowledge and theory that MMT brings to the table on top of the turn of the last century theory work, just that it's enough of a direct successor I'd draw the line of history longer.

</comment><comment><USER13> Wow. I don't know where to start with some of these comments. There's just a real lack of understanding of central banking.

Protip: Your critique of "status quo" (e.g. central banking) systems will be taken more seriously when you demonstrate thorough knowledge of the subject matter and don't rely on emotionally laden arguments involving "fraud" and "lies."

<comment><USER14> Whether the critics are aware of how central banking works, central banks are losing credibility.

They've tried everything in Japan & Europe, getting governments trillions into debt, and now they want to go negative interest rates. Clearly what they did before didn't work, and now they are trying something else. They're shooting in the dark and unknowingly killing the economy. It doesn't take a genius to figure out people will just keep cash at home if you impose negative interest rates, and by keeping cash away from banks, reduce the reserves banks hold, and the money they can lend, reducing the money supply, exacerbating the deflation the NIRP was supposed to fight in the first place.[1]

There's no fraud and no lie, except for the fact central bankers operate on economic models detached from reality. The only lie is claiming to know more than they do.

The policies the Japanese central bank tried to impose to lower the value of the Yen in the past few months, only raised it. [https://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USDJPY=X&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q...](https://au.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=USDJPY=X&t=3m&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=)

"Central bank impotency" heading your way.

[1] [http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-seeking-a-place-to- stas...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/japanese-seeking-a-place-to-stash-cash- start-snapping-up-safes-1456136223)

<comment><USER3> > _Clearly what they did before didn 't work, and now they are trying > something else_

Erm no, they're trying the exact same thing _even harder_. The top of the economy is awash in capital with nowhere to go, while the bottom has to run ever faster on the debt treadmill. Creating even more debt that funnels wealth upwards is obviously the solution <g>.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER15> On the one hand, printing money instead of [1] taxing is good because you can get rid of whole government departments (saving real resources) and tax collection no longer has to invade people's privacy by forcing them to give the government extensive records of their economic activity.

On the other hand, taxation is good because it reminds people there are costs to government services when they have to actually pay the tax, and in addition you can use a tax to inject a market signal about costs that would be normally externalized.

[1] Unfortunately, MMT implemented by any government will likely be "in addition to" rather than "instead of" existing tax mechanisms.</comment>


Democratizing QA: How Automated Testing Tools Empower Teams - <AUTHOR> http://blog.runscope.com/posts/democratizing-qa-how-automated-testing-tools-empower-teams <comment><USER2> I've talked to just a couple of companies that outsourced QA abroad for some of their projects and the costs were extremely high in both cases. In one case, costs exceeded $100K in 6 months -- with thousands of tests written (way beyond what was required) and an end result of it being unmanageable by the original team when the contract ended. This is by far a much better story to hear about bringing QA culture into your company, starting within your four walls.</comment>


American TV is Great, is That a Chicken or an Egg? - <AUTHOR> http://jonathancavell.com/wordpress/advice/2010/03/american-tv-is-great-is-that-a-chicken-or-an-egg <comment><USER2> 10pm on Channel 5 is not primetime at all:

[http://uk-tv-guide.com/programme-details/Five/18+March+2010/...](http://uk- tv-guide.com/programme-details/Five/18+March+2010/22:10/In+Hell/Film/)</comment>


$45M in VC funding later, Goodmail Systems shuts down - <AUTHOR> http://paidcontent.org/article/419-e-mail-certification-startup-goodmail-systems-shuts-down/

<comment><USER2> There's a long running joke response to 'solutions to spam' that's been running on slashdot since they were giving out 5-digit uids. cf. [http://www.ninjavspenguin.com/blog/2007/10/01/slashdot- spam-...](http://www.ninjavspenguin.com/blog/2007/10/01/slashdot-spam-post- wizard/)

Although totally flippant, and never addressing the specific issues in a post directly, I've yet to see a thread on /. in over 10 years in which this was not an appropriate response.

Mail is big-H Hard. Yesterday there was a discussion on the demise of the self-hosted mailserver, and there's a real reason why MailChimp etc have become a no-brainer for small-medium enterprise. Trying to run your own mailserver is increasingly becoming a fools errand.

If you want to hit Yahoo and Gmail, you get a solid reverse DNS, implement SPF and DKIM and hope that the spec doesn't change under you. Even then you need to maintain relations with their team if you're sending more than a couple of hundred emails a day to their platform.

Throttling is arbitrarily switched. 50/second, 10/second, 1000/second. Unpublished guidelines which change and you need to comply or your server gets a mysterious 5xx error response which you have to debug. Other error messages related to mailboxen, existence of accounts etc. all have to be handled and appropriately applied to addresses in your list. Send too many post-bounce messages and again the banhammer will be wielded.

If you want to get into AOL Goodmail was one option. For Hotmail you have 'Sender Score' certification which costs an arm and a leg and is completely useless for small-volume senders.

At any point in these, if some jackass passes anything that hits their heuristics you have to do a personal contact contact back and forth with the ISP, and god forbid you encounter human-modified SURBLs. These are terribly subjective, frequently on vacation, but relied on as gospel by many mid-level admins in institutions such as universities and mid-level enterprise.

Email is broken. It was fundamentally based on trust in the early days, and seeing as PGP never (understandably) took off, the whole system is IMO beyond redemption. What we see now is a growth in systems designed to replace email as a functional method of trusted communication. Opt-in services like Twitter, Facebook for interpersonal contact and groupwise style systems intraoffice.

While Gmail has performed admirably to save email's utility for the basic user, that their systems will never be taken up by certain industries and orgs (central control issues, incompetence, revenue streams[SenderScore]) means I think it's well into the long decline we saw with Usenet.

What will emerge, who knows, but I see little hope for the technological replacement or fix to email which wouldn't in using essentially give up all central control to once agency, be it Google, Facebook or whoever.

<comment><USER3> How ironic that the /. link you posted is blocked by my corporate sonicwall...

</comment></comment><comment><USER4> About 3-4 years ago, I was a sysadmin at a marketing company. One of my primary tasks was making sure our emails got delivered. I've been on both sides of the coin: sending marketing messages and an every day email user. We were more or less forced at the time to use Goodmail to get our emails into AOL.

At the end of the day, marketers are trying to get your attention. They'll do anything no matter how annoying. For example, flash banner ads.

With that in mind, Goodmail was just another way for marketers to get mail into your inbox, with an incentive for the ISPs to let it through -- Goodmail split the senders fees with the ISP's.

They wedged themselves into the industry as middle men. I don't think anyone outside of email admins and marketers knew anything about Goodmail or their blue ribbons, especially rural AOL users.

</comment><comment><USER5> FTA: "CEO Daniel Dreymann tells Venturewire that Goodmail was unable to make a profit after Yahoo (NSDQ: YHOO) stopped supporting the system last year."

I was one of those who used to complain to Yahoo bitterly about spam with the "goodmail seal of approval". Over the years I noticed that the amount of spam with their seal was increasing, and I had to complain about it. They had a special deal with Yahoo, and Goodmail's emails had a special blue icon next to them. But they blew this opportunity for a little quick cash. If Goodmail had not lowered their standards and let spam through, they might even still be in business.

</comment><comment><USER6> More detail here: [https://www.fis.dowjones.com/WebBlogs.aspx?aid=DJFVW00020110...](https://www.fis.dowjones.com/WebBlogs.aspx?aid=DJFVW00020110219e72m000b5&ProductIDFromApplication=&r=wsjblog&s=djfvw)

</comment><comment><USER7> I had some discussions with Goodmail late last year about potentially using their service. We send a decent amount of mail via custom qmail servers. For us, it was a chicken and egg problem, Goodmail obviously required a maximum complaint rate but on the flip side higher complaint clients would be the ones most interested in the service. Our low complaint clients were already hitting the inbox and Goodmail didn't seem to justify the extra effort and cost to drive better engagement.

</comment><comment><USER8> Information routes itself around the path of least resistance. In this case, it is spam filters. Once spam filters get smart enough, then GoodMail loses its utility or pricing premium.

</comment><comment><USER9> The people who most want to pay to ensure you receive their email are the people from whom you least want email. That's the problem.</comment>


Ask HN: Engineers, what are good excuses you've used to avoid meetings? - <AUTHOR> <comment><USER2> No excuses. Use numbers. Every hour of your time costs the company a certain amount of money. If you include salary, bonus, equity, benefits, etc., the cost for an engineer could be hundreds of dollars per hour. If your manager can't understand that, and ensure you have more time for actual work, it might be time to seek a better manager.

</comment><comment><USER3> I'm not needed here.

This has no relevance to me.

You know where I sit. Let me know if there is anything you actually need me for.</comment>