2020. 2. 7. 18:10ㆍ카테고리 없음
July 30, 2018 We Have Good News For All You Big Mac Lovers Out There. Calling all Big Mac lovers: the 50th anniversary of your favorite burger is almost here, and McDonald's has big plans in store to help you celebrate the special occasion. The good news is Apple just refreshed the MacBook Air lineup with a new $1,200 13-inch Retina model, which we now consider the leading candidate for a first-time Mac buyer.
Is the most polished. Knows the most about what you're interested in.
And thinks it knows best. You could predict all of this just from how these technology companies have always behaved but now they're hoping to control the news you read in apps too. As a result of their distinctive company philosophies, each of these three have clear advantages and each have minor disadvantages. Then while all are on iOS —and all are free —you also need to think about whether you'll want to read on your phone, Apple Watch, Mac, or in a web browser. Unless you're going to read all three news services, all the time, this is how to pick the right one for you. Google News In some way this is the newest kid on the block as Google News has been formed from the ashes both of what was Google News & Weather and of Google Play Newsstand. The current app combines the features of these in to one package that is fast to get started with and quick to fill you in on everything you want to know.
The speed of starting is because Google doesn't stop to ask what topics you're interested in: it uses information the company has already gathered from articles you read in Chrome, or what you search for, to get you started. You can, though, fine tune Google News by working through its options in the iOS app. Tap on Favorites and then you can work through topics, sources and locations to define what you're interested in.
Google News is also the easiest to use when you want to block a news service. Say you have strong feelings about one venue or another and just can't bear to see anything else from them. The first time you see a story in Google News from them, you can tap to bring up preferences and choose Hide stories, for instance. More than the speed of finding what topics you're interested in, Google News leverages the company's strength as a search engine to fill you in on all the details you want. While it will present a news story from a site such as CNN, Fox News, or wherever, it will also always give you an important extra option.
Under each story there is an option called View Full Coverage. Tap that and you get to see how the same story is being covered elsewhere. That elsewhere does include other news sites but it will gather together opinion pieces, videos, and Twitter. That feature is the reason to use the Google News app. It's the reason to put up with Google's traditional clunky design. And it may be another reason to put up with Google's other tradition, the trade-off you have to make between features and privacy. Security aside, the reasons not to use Google News are that there is no Apple Watch version nor a Mac one.
However, you can so it effectively has a desktop app. Microsoft News Microsoft News for iOS doesn't force you to select favorite topics or subjects either. By default, it presents a roundup of news based on your country.
It does also have a prominent localization button. The first time you tap that, you get asked for permission for the app to calculate where you are. Thereafter, the button takes you to extremely local news sources like your county's weekly newspaper. You can instead specify that you want to read about another particular area you specify. It would be good to be able to maintain both your local area news and another selected region such as where you work. However, this ability to look locally comes with Microsoft News offering you as many different local news sources as it can find. That's the closest you can get to Google News's Full Stories feature.
The trouble is that you know which of your local news sources is worth paying attention to —and Microsoft News does not. If you could tell it, that would be one thing, but you can't and that's the key failing of this app. Microsoft won't let you block a news service and so very often you'll read a headline before you see that it's from paper you know doesn't work for you.
Then, too, there is really only the iOS app for Microsoft News. You can get an Android version but for Apple users there's no Mac edition.
Strictly speaking there isn't a web version either but Microsoft News does power. Apple News Apple News is the only one of these three that has an iOS, Apple Watch and Mac app. However, that Mac app is really the iOS one ported over for macOS Mojave.
Being from Apple, it knows little about you but Siri will recommend news stories and sources based on what you choose to do with your iPhone. It's not Apple tracking you, it's your iPhone learning what you like. You do need to do that to get the most out of Apple News, but even without it, the app delivers you the main stories from your local region. It's a feature called Top Stories and tends to be national or state headlines but the selection is curated by an editorial team at Apple. Apple News is almost as good as Google News at letting you remove news services you don't trust or don't like. In this case, you need to find a story from there and tap on the Dislike button. That adds the site to a list that Apple News won't use.
Or rather, it eventually won't use it. While Apple says that iCloud keeps this in sync, when testing for this article, we found we had to dislike a few stories before it dropped a source and also that having done that on our iPhone, we had to do it on iPad too. Of these three news apps, Apple News looks the best. You expected that but Apple has done a nice job of presenting a lot of information in a small space. And the winner is It's easier to pick a loser.
Microsoft News is fine, it's just not much more than that. If there were no alternatives, we'd be using Microsoft News. However, there are alternatives and every sensible news junkie should be going for Google News. We say that with absolute certainty —and yet we find ourselves reading Apple News instead. That is because it's just a pleasant reading experience on iOS. That is because having the iOS app now on our Macs as well means we get to use the same one on all our screens.
And actually the fact that we use it everywhere means it is learning what we do or don't like. It just lacks that Full Stories feature that we so love. For day to day keeping up with events, we're on Apple News. When we need to know more, we fire up Google News.
Tuesday’s announcement by Apple that the current Mac Pro will be replaced by a new model–but not this year–was one of the most curious ones it’s made in recent memory. It was a defense of the Mac, a promise of things to come, an attempt to reassure professional Mac users, and an admission of failure, all at once.
Here’s what it was: A restatement of Apple’s support for the Mac. Three years ago, Phil Schiller sat across a table from me at Apple’s Infinite Loop campus and responded to my question about the future of the Mac by saying, “” And in stories posted today based on a prior interview, Schiller. “The Mac has an important, long future at Apple we have every intention to keep going and investing in the Mac,” he said. For those who doubt the esteem the Mac holds at Apple, it’s worth nothing that Apple has been unwavering in its insistence that the Mac is an ongoing concern, not a product with a rapidly approaching expiration date.
A remarkable admission of failure. The lack of updates on the Mac Pro made it obvious that this product was a flop, but it’s still to Apple’s credit that it came out and took its lumps. Going above and beyond the call of duty, the execs went into some detail about how the company made a bet on a unique design approach in the hopes that pro users would come to rely on the two GPUs that the system provided.
It was a mistake, perhaps predicated on a troubling lack of understanding about what Apple’s professional customers really desired in a Mac Pro. Apple executives wouldn’t specify exactly when they realized that the existing Mac Pro needed to be killed, but it must have been somewhat recently, or this entire process could have happened sooner. (And perhaps a new Mac Pro would arrive sooner than 2018.) Acceptance that the current Mac Pro isn’t going to sell. Apple very rarely announces any product (or even the existence of a product) months in advance. When it does so, it’s generally in a new category. This is because the moment a company announces that it’s replacing a product with a newer model, sales tend to fall off a cliff. (It’s called the.) But in the case of the Mac Pro, it’s already been so long since the machine was updated, it can’t be selling.
A signal sent to professional Mac users. The Mac Pro has been sitting, unadjusted, on Apple’s price lists for years now. The company’s silence on the issue has been deafening. In the past year, speculation about the future of the model has risen to a fever pitch, with cranky pro users beginning to brag about building custom Intel-based PCs as “hackintoshes” running Sierra just to show how far behind the curve Apple is.
It seems like Apple has twice tried to cool the ire of the market via Tim Cook statements–one embedded in, another –about the company’s commitment to pro users. But the statements never took.
Cook’s statements were so vague that they could be read as negative by those who wanted to believe the worst. Tuesday’s statement, on the other hand, couldn’t be more clear. A promise of a new Apple-branded monitor. Despite reports that an unnamed Apple executive had declared that Apple was “out of the display business” last year, on Tuesday Schiller confirmed that in addition to the new Mac Pro, Apple would release a display to go along with it. It’s possible that cosmetic and technical issues around Apple promoted with the new MacBook Pros may have prompted this move.
Perhaps there was enough negative feedback around the LG display for someone at Apple to convince the powers that be that it was in Apple’s best interest to control this product category rather than leaving it to a partner? And here’s what it wasn’t: An update to the current Mac Pro. Reports from the writers who attended Apple’s private roundtable session used words like “bump” to support the changes Apple made on the current Mac Pro model today. But as on Twitter, this isn’t an update at all.
Here’s what Schiller said: 'In the meantime, we’re going to update the configs to make it faster and better for their dollar. This is not a new model, not a new design, we’re just going to update the configs. We’re doing that this week.” The two available Mac Pro configurations aren’t new, they’re just newly priced. So if you must buy a Mac Pro right now, at least it’s a better deal than it was. Not a good deal, mind you, but a better one. A solution for people who need a better professional Mac this year.
As excited as we can be that the soap-opera story of the fate of the Mac Pro has been resolved, the fact is, its replacement won’t arrive until 2018 at the earliest, and we know nothing about it. If you’re a professional Mac user with a long-in-the-tooth Mac Pro or iMac and you need more power today, or next month, or this fall, Apple won’t have a new Mac Pro to sell you. Perhaps a new iMac will appeal to you–Apple suggested on Tuesday that iMac upgrades that may appeal to professional users are on the horizon–but if not, it’s going to be a long wait. A commitment to update the new Mac Pro in a timely fashion.
Schiller suggested that the new Mac Pro will be more capable of receiving hardware updates, but on what schedule? It seems that Apple’s most high-end users want the company to track hardware updates as closely as possible with new chip releases from Intel. When this new Mac Pro debuts in 2018, will the company take that approach? Or will it do as it has done on most of its other computers lately, and lag behind Intel’s processor releases by months? In the end, Tuesday’s announcement allows Apple to stop the bleeding of a self-inflicted wound. It should probably have come to this conclusion a lot sooner, but whether it was an inability for those who green-lit the Mac Pro to see that they had made a mistake or a simple lack of focus on this particular market segment, the product languished far too long and became an embarrassment.
More Good News For Macbook
At least now the deed is done. The “trash can” Mac is bound for the garbage dump itself. In the long run, it’s good news for Apple’s professional users. But in the short run, it doesn’t change Apple’s lack of competitiveness compared to other Intel PCs.
More Good News For America Book
At least now high-end pros can know that if they’re waiting for a solution from Apple in the next few months, they’re probably out of luck.