This has been the case for Apple computers since the beginning of time. It sounds like you just want a PC.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Why won't the next MacBook Pro be touchscreen? Plus my complaints regarding storage limitations
- Thread starter AbsintheAbstinence
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Sorry but that's just not true till MS signed the deal with IBM Apple was way ahead in terms of specs. The thing is this notebooks aren't like PCs what's top of the line today is just good but still more than enough 2 years from now
Sorry, but I've never understood why people want a touchscreen laptop/computer/iMac. Its a really horrible user experience to reach across and touch the screen. Which is also a symptom of the current iPad Pro where there's not a pointing device/fully integrated keyboard support.
I think it's a difference in how it's implemented. On a 'standard format' laptop, I tend to agree - touchscreens just don't do much for me. However, I've been waiting for a device for 10 years now, one which of all companies, I expected Apple to produce, yet Microsoft did. I am far from a MS fan, to the point of having turned down interview offers with MS - Linux or OS X, and only run Windows inside a VM when I need to for work.
Having said that - Apple's focus on profit over innovation and customer experience, will eventually bite them where it matters. I don't want my MBP to let me touch the screen - I want a new MBP with near-borderless display (so think slightly > 13" MBP today but effective 15" screen area and resolution), that lets me remove the screen when I have a meeting, and goes into tablet mode. Pop a stylus out and write, draw, or take notes via stylus or keyboard (virtual, or via a 'screen/table slim-case with kb). For all I care, the 'screen' could run IOS if it must, have limited storage, then sync when re-connected to the 'base.'
Look at some of the things Lenovo has done with the Yoga line, as well as the MS SurfaceBook (still working out it's own issues, AFAIK) - both are currently non-starters for me running Windows, but if Apple doesn't stop worrying themselves about 'damaging iPad sales' and uses that to staunch innovation on their laptop lines, eventually I'll be back to Linux running OS X and Windows in VMs only, or worse, on a Windows/Linux only system where I have the software I need; I just don't prefer the Windows OS interfaces and annoyances.
Eventually, Apple's going to lose market in a significant way, and start to see just how many people jumped onto the iPhone or iPad or Watch or AppleTV bandwagons after being a Mac owner, or vice versa...remove a party of that ecosystem from viability (or preference, or annoyance) and eventually they're going to question the rest of them as well.
Want to do it in a 'profit-creating' way? Fine. MBP has no touchscreen, but the iPad Pro has edge connectors that replace the MPB display, then you've got a removable touch screen/tablet combo. Done, and at added $.
[doublepost=1473617730][/doublepost]Let me run one more scenario (or a few) for touch-enabled notebooks.
Maybe some of you can relate to at least some of them.
Wake up in the morning, and reach over to your tablet charging wirelessly on its stand along with your phone, to see if anyone overseas/the CEO/your wife/boyfriend/girlfriend has sent anything urgent. Deal with if need be.
Jump in the shower, get ready, grab your cup of coffee and breakfast while scanning business/tech/game/local news on your tablet. Something you read reminds you you need to do two things later - add a pair of todos, and quickly write some notes as the start of a doc for the second one, with the stylus you pop out from the side of the screen, via voice, or virtual keyboard.
You're traveling today locally to meet with a client, then heading to the office, so you slip on the 'minimal' cover to your 'tablet' which is only a keyboard and leather cover, no laptop bag needed as you jump on the train. You need to get some sketches done en route, so you work on the train with stylus, and respond to mails. At the client, your tablet has a single universal port (let's say it's USB-C - why not?) so you can connect and give your presentation on their projector + WebEx, taking notes during, and showing the couple of sketches you put together on the train to solicit feedback. After the meeting, the client's lead comes up and says he though of a few refinements...(s)he's not competent in whatever design tool you did the sketches, but so what? Convert it to a copy, hand him/her your screen and stylus, and let them go to town marking it up for DIRECT feedback.
Done with the client, you head to the office. Once at your desk, you remove the leather cover or simply fold it back, and 'dock' it, where you have a keyboard, mouse or trackpad, a trio of 27-30" displays, and perhaps external storage, which your 'tablet' has already synced to either over the cloud or for those more security conscious, the moment it came within range or on the same wireless network.
During the day, you've got to meet w/teams, both for official meetings, and quick status checks or minor design and other changes. You don't want to carry your laptop around, so you undock the 'tablet' and go to your meetings.
At the end of the day, you know you've got some more work to do, so you decide - for me, I may have another 'dock' at home as well, or decide to bring it all...have dinner w/wife, head into home office to work for a while with multiple displays, then undock the tablet and re-dock on it's charging stand next to the bed..watch some TV and hang out w/wife a while.
Before sleep, grab the tablet to scan through news/forums/macrumors before calling it a night and setting it on your nightstand charger. Of course, your MBP sits waiting for you in your living room/home office/work office/wherever in the event you need more power/accessories, but I certainly don't prefer a full laptop laying in bed glancing through news and forums...
One screen, possibly with the primary storage SSD in it + stylus.
Add second SSD to the 'dock' (macbook pro) for automatic backups beyond cloud syncs.
The 'dock'/MBP base allows for additional performance and connectivity, plus built-in trackpad and keyboard.
For lighter or artistic/drawing/freeform use, full tablet mode, undock the screen and use as an iPad Pro-like system. Good enough for random browsing and email, as well as presentations.
Need the keyboard or on the go a lot during the day, but don't need multiple displays and other input devices beyond a keyboard? Great, buy a Kindle-like cover that slips on with physical keyboard.
Working for hours on text, code, presentations not of an artistic or CAD type level, or need more screens, power, ... - no problem, dock it into the MBP.
Going to travel - decide what you need - do you really want to bring your (current) tablet + laptop + phone + chargers? You choose.
Yes, there are some technical challenges there - I'd actually prefer redundant storage with primary in the screen (tablet) so you're always in sync, perhaps with an option for storage expansion or redundancy in the 'base'(MBP - screen). Does the screen run IOS or OS X? I'm 'OK' w/IOS as long as it creates compatible files then when docked becomes 'just a (touch-enabled) display, but Apps would need overhauls. I'm also OK with running OS X more slowly on an ARM chip when detached.
A lot of nonsense to say Apple don't make what you want, that is fine they can make whatever they like and you can buy whatever you like. That is how capitalism and market forces work.
Waiting for something that Apple shows no sign of making (because they disagree with you, that is allowed) has categorically stated they don't believe in and clearly is not part of their model going forward seems to me a little silly.
I have a Lenovo Yoga 900. I never use the touch screen when it's in laptop mode. But in tablet mode, I never use the keyboard.
People are missing the point here. Having a touch screen on a system which can only be used as a laptop has very little utility. It is cumbersome to use the touch screen in almost all use cases. But having a laptop which can be reconfigured to be a tablet is great, and it's the tablet mode which the touch screen is really meant for.
If I want to use a tablet and a laptop, why should I be forced to buy two separate devices, when I can have both in just one? If Apple had offered such a hybrid device, I would have gotten that to replace both my old HP laptop and iPad3. But Apple has decided to not offer such a product. So, I invested elsewhere. As I've mentioned in other threads, I've come to loathe Windows 10. At the time I bought this system, I didn't know that would happen. But the hardware itself is really, really good and I have no regrets in getting this system from that perspective.
I do wish Apple would offer a product like this one, though.
People are missing the point here. Having a touch screen on a system which can only be used as a laptop has very little utility. It is cumbersome to use the touch screen in almost all use cases. But having a laptop which can be reconfigured to be a tablet is great, and it's the tablet mode which the touch screen is really meant for.
If I want to use a tablet and a laptop, why should I be forced to buy two separate devices, when I can have both in just one? If Apple had offered such a hybrid device, I would have gotten that to replace both my old HP laptop and iPad3. But Apple has decided to not offer such a product. So, I invested elsewhere. As I've mentioned in other threads, I've come to loathe Windows 10. At the time I bought this system, I didn't know that would happen. But the hardware itself is really, really good and I have no regrets in getting this system from that perspective.
I do wish Apple would offer a product like this one, though.
Last edited:
Please no 'lesson' needed about capitalism or market forces - I'm well aware as it's part of my job.
Of course it's 'allowed' - they can do what they like. It remains a valid opinion that they may lose market over time if they don't innovate in ways people care about (OLED bar = ho hum for many) and lose sight of the competition, as well as what others beyond you want. Whether or not they will make it up in broader appeal vs professional users or those wanting a solid combined device (or upgradeable RAM, whatever) $ and time will tell. That does nothing to dispel the opinion that there's a path do again market share and be innovative while providing a combined device. Sorry if you don't like it. *shrug*
You only need to glance across the forum to see 'leaving Apple' threads. The above debate on 'hybrid devices' and it's outcome may or may not have an impact a year from now - time will tell.
Exactly, and when/if it becomes commonplace or at least truly well executed, I hope Apple has an answer before it impacts them. Maybe it'll fall on it's face again - there were semi-'convertibles' even back to ~Y2K, but tech today or in the near future should allow for a solid solution. Maybe ChromeOS will evolve, or Windows 11... or enough will like the device/convenience/implementation enough to forego their OS of choice (whichever it is).
There will be no touch screen macbook pro because it would make the iPad obsolete....In reality, apple could EASILY make a touch screen macbook pro where you can detach the screen so the screen becomes a tablet but it would be bad for business (but great for the consumer). And I keep reading how OS X is not "optimized" for touchscreen well they can make it optimized for touchscreen or add an iOS mode. They're following samsung in a way, more devices = more profits.
As you point out, the reason why there won't be a 2-in-1 Apple device is due solely to business reasons, not technical reasons. Remember that IOS is a fork of OSX. Both branches have evolved significantly since IOS was derived from OSX, but merging them back together would be technically possible and not insurmountable. But Apple doesn't want to kill off a product line, even though they are implying that they might by marketing the iPad Pro as a desktop replacement. Which will survive, the iPad Pro or the Mac? Right - both. But their product strategy is very confusing in many ways. The iPad Pro is a nice tablet, but it isn't a Mac replacement, even if Microsoft thinks their Surface is a desktop replacement. But I agree that the set of customers who would want a 2-in-1 from Apple is fairly limited. But in thinking about this more, it seems to me that someone who wants a combined laptop and tablet will get it somewhere other than Apple, as I did, and Apple could lose their business altogether.
Last edited:
I think you've answered your own question. So let's put it another way; why should the next MacBook Pro have a touchscreen?
To suggest that Apple are behind the curve says a lot about your reasoning - that you believe the next MBP should have a touchscreen for the simple reason that other manufacturers include them (or that they have become popularised with Windows notebook-tablet-things), and that because Apple do not, they are trailing.
I digress, and believe Apple have been very sensible in this territory.
You have to start off with the user experience. macOS and iOS were developed decades apart, meaning that each was designed around a specific method of input. Keyboards and mice/trackpads are not sexy - they aren't meant to be - but they serve a critical purpose and reliability factor for a kind of operating system. Likewise, when Apple developed iOS, the primary input and navigation was touch. The screen is 'app-centric' and focused on accessibility. The hardware marries with this convenience to offer a different form of device.
The resulting products, a MacBook Pro and iPad, therefore meet different requirements. Each is better and worser at specific tasks.
You could be very general and say "Browsing the internet on an iPad is the best; it's comfortable and the content is close". This is very true, I love it. Yet the spin on this argument is that when you need to hop between multiple tabs, reading, grabbing and using content from each, switching between windows quickly whilst having multiple spaces open, the MacBook is superior because of the hardware and software synergy.
The point of this argument is that if Apple did add a touchscreen, that particular user experience would not be improved upon. Quite the opposite, it could actually slow it down.
By having products designed around specific experiences; there is nothing inherently wrong with this approach. In fact, it serves Apple well because you otherwise start making compromises. How comfortable is it to use a touchscreen on a laptop? How often do you need to clean the screen? How would the user interface change to accommodate touch controls and trackpad input? How would the screen mechanism adapt to a touchscreen-only experience, reliably?
There will be those who reiterate that touch input would not have to be mandatory. That only opens two further questions: 1) Why bother to include touch support for such sparse usage, and 2) Can you really handle a MacBook in the same vein as an iPad when attempting to sketch an image, or handwrite notes?
Now look at the competition. Microsoft, give them their due, have had a crack at combining a whole array of inputs into a single operating system - touch, stylus/pen, trackpad and keyboard. But what do you end up with? A confusing mess. What's ironic is that after making such a big push to overlay Windows 8 with the 'Metro' interface (which confused users further by linking icons to new touchscreen version of existing Windows apps, or to those desktop versions...), Windows 10 has swung things the other way with less touch-presence.
Does that make any sort of sense for a poor Surface owner who does not want to purchase the optional keyboard + trackpad accessory? Well, some Surface models actually ship with the accessory. And once you do start using this accessory, and/or a mouse, you come right back round to...
a notebook.
The moral - if it aint' broken, don't try to fix it.
[doublepost=1473972058][/doublepost]
Alternatively, use/purchase an iOS device?
I don't think asking the average Joe to switch between 'iOS' and 'macOS' is very intuitive, or reasonable. What's more, you're essentially doubling-up existing apps unnecessarily (Windows 8 > 10).
Last edited:
Yes, that is the alternative Apple wants you to use.....buy more stuff. Why is it not reasonable to switch between OS's? It's not like iOS is a complex OS that the MBP can't run. I can run multiple desktop OS's at the same time using virtual machines on my 5 year old MBP. You make the task sound so hard for these world class programs and engineers. Plus with how cheap storage is becoming there really is no downside to be able to use both. But, as we all know, businesses are created to make profit. Apple needs to keep iOS/OSX & computer/tablet separate. I'm pretty sure that's why they didn't want to increase the screen size on their phones because if they did, it would cut into iPad profits. They were probably just really pressured to hop on board the large phone screen train.
Hinges on Macbooks are so good, touch/pen support would make a lot of sense for the typical mac user.
Plus you already pay most of the weight penalty as the MacBooks have glass screen covers.
Plus you already pay most of the weight penalty as the MacBooks have glass screen covers.
No one 'wanted' an iPhone or iPad...until they were shown they had value.
You can follow the leader and play catch-up, or create a new device that so obviously 'just works' that people who didn't 'know' they wanted it - now do.
I know which the Apple of old would have us believe they are - not so much lately.
I gave a long-winded detailed post on how they could manage to keep both tablet and laptop users, and potentially even gain new users/$. It could be done well and potentially grow revenue and lead 'the next evolution' like they did with the iPhone vs e.g. old Blackberrys, or not.
It would be interesting to know just how far diverged iOS and OS X are..you can run an iPhone/iOS emulator on OS X, but would be interesting to see OS X on an i-device performance-wise.
512 works great for me. With so much network storage, and VPN access anywhere, I don't see the point. Will you be happy if they raised the base price $500 (for example) to include your 1TB base model?