The experience of texting, tracking, storing – importing – exporting files on a laptop has been optimized to a level that most alternative solutions tablets provide seem to be far-fetched. In 2021, an iPad Pro bears a close resemblance to a high-end laptop when it comes to appearance, but inherent divergences in their softwares and operating systems have made us hesitate to turn to the iPad for professional video editing, coding or content producing.

Manufacturers have been very determined to make their tablets more versatile than ever, facilitating the tablet use for work by introducing “productivity-boosting” gears and accessories. However, the very similar general experience brought by iPad Pro M1, iPad Pro 2020 and iPad Pro 2018 reflects a true fact: No matter how advanced iPads can become or how insanely fast the chips are, an iPad can hardly replace a MacBook. Ever. If Apple wants iPads to take the place of MacBooks, the incorporation should admit their failure very soon.

But does Apple really want to do such a thing?

If Apple really wanted to renovate the iPad to become the MacBook, things would be very different now. First, assuming that iPads were capable of what MacBooks are, Apple would have two different products occupying two separate production lines, having two distinct shapes, but serving only one customer base. In the worst case, the customers’ options might shift from buying both of them in order to make optimal use of the Apple ecosystem to buying either of them. It is admitted that middle-class individuals can often only afford one of the two items for now, but in such a case when the iPad resembles the MacBook, the desire for the products one doesn’t have yet would be eliminated. A smart business keeps widening its customer bases rather than abridge it, and Apple is (apparently) amongst the smartest businesses, if not the smartest one in the world.

Second, Apple is totally aware of what the iPad is lacking in to take the place of a laptop (as we know it too): the operating system and the screen size. They haven’t made big changes to the aspects, which would mean that the US incorporation is aiming to satisfy the current iPad consumers instead of forcing them to use the iPad in a “MacBook” way.

This viewpoint is justifiable by looking at the iPad’s recent revenue. There has been a jump in this figure since Q2 2020, and in Q1 2021, the iPad’s sales reached its climax since Q4 2015, at $8.4 billion. After 6 years, iPad is regaining its position as a striking money-generating item for Apple, given that it’s been the best tablet around for years. iPadOS has proven to aid content creators in various ways, and the iPad itself has very loyal customers. Apple thus has a sufficient number of reasons to invest in macOS and iPadOS separately. They simply shouldn’t be merged into one, or certain harm could be done to Apple’s overall income.

Finally, Apple has continually claimed that merging iPadOS and macOS would be a mistaken idea, and iPad and MacBook’s coexistence would offer a wider range of item choices for the users. If Apple wanted to sell an iPad running macOS (?), many things have to be done to fit the hardware with the softwares (which are costly), while the iPad’s current price shouldn’t be higher at all. There would be no compensation for Apple after all if they revolutionised one of their core products, so the revolution itself is not worthy.

This is the dawn of Apple’s M1 chip. Therefore, the iPad Pro M1 is “merely” an item carrying along with it the best tech Apple can integrate into a tablet, a product that boosts the chip and a tablet that consolidates the dominance of iPad over Android counterparts. It isn’t meant to substitute the MacBook at all, and a merge will not happen anytime soon. 

What do you expect from Windows 11, given you are a gamer? New gaming elements, better gaming apps and communities, or a precursor to renovations?

Direct Storage and AutoHDR are only two among a host of new gaming-support features that can satisfy the community’s ongoing demands for fresh experiences. AutoHDR can already be found on Xbox series, allowing the users to turn high dynamic range on during gaming and thus effectively enhancing the overall visual qualities of the games. DirectStorage, meanwhile, involves both GPU and SSD in the asset-loading process, minimizing the CPU workload and promising way less time waiting and tapping our fingers on the table. Xbox apps will also be integrated into Windows 11, and this is more than good news to console-PC cross-players.

Windows 11 does not have to struggle to combine with Nvidia and AMD’s new graphics features (such as Fidelity FX Super Resolution) to provide optical aids, and every transition effect or frame in games will be taken good care of.

A war declaration to Apple?

In the era of competition and cross-impact, a new software product of Microsoft can have a far-reaching effect on other incorporations, including Apple. While the infamous Apple-developer commission strife barely shows any signs of coming to an end, Microsoft is clearly striving to shorten the bridge between themselves and the app makers.

Microsoft even promotes the use of third-party payment gateways by allowing developers to keep all their revenues if they can integrate a proprietary charging system into their games. This paves the way for a more open, motivated developer community with less dependence on the platform providers and more projected money on the way, and this is also something Apple will not resort to in the foreseeable future.

It is clear that Microsoft wants to attract more developers to their platforms. At the same time, this open move would impose pressure on Apple and Google, who take a notorious 30% cut on every transaction on AppStore and Google Play Store. Microsoft is already the most generous store provider in the market, as they only charge 15% app fee, 12% game fee, and now 0% under particular conditions.

Windows-Android vs. iOS-macOS?

Such popular mobile apps as Tiktok or Instagram will run natively on Windows 11. Although most people would claim themselves as browser users (which belittles the revolution Microsoft is trying to achieve), Microsoft has proven to be proactive to the age of ecosystems. More spaces for creativity would be there for app developers, opportunities for Android app makers to reach 1.3 billion active users of Microsoft are now open, and after Windows 7, every PC user’s excitement is now fuelled again.

As Intel Bridge is used to run Android apps, Microsoft won’t have to negotiate with Android developers to transfer their apps to Windows. In other words, they don’t have to make adjustments to their code at all, while Intel and Microsoft would take the burden. More importantly, the Microsoft Store welcomes apps built on mostly any frameworks, from Win32, UWP, Java, .NET to Progressive Web Apps. Satya Nadella and his teams are aiming to create a fair app store, placing a premium on user equality and the maximization of dev’s benefits. And this strengthens the very Microsoft brand.

The question is: Considering all this, what would Apple do?

If Apple gives in to their complainants (which they are very unlikely to do), this would open up an avenue for other compromises in the future. This would lead Apple to an unwanted situation: Apple will be redefined by the market. Meanwhile, Apple is basically one who wants to bring definitions to the world and not to be redefined. Hence, Apple may possibly retain their policies, but broaden their competitive advantages and make “friends” in other ways. Specifically, messages about security or massive financial incentives for partners would be even more strongly conveyed, in line with the emergence of their other superior services and benefits for all parties involved.

Microsoft has promised to provide us with a faster boot time, a more sensitive Windows Hello, a smoother web-browsing experience with less energy used. However, feature improvements are, admittedly, simply norms.

An enhancement in security features on Windows is what is really and honestly expected by many PC users. Microsoft, in return, has seriously developed encryption and malware prevention elements and will make them default features on Windows 11. All separate apps and features would be put in a single package and run in the background when the PC is turned on, and this promises a better security premise without forcing the PC to sacrifice its performance and user experience. Windows 11 will win over business users this way, given that neither Microsoft nor Apple has a clear advantage in this consumer segment. Also, transition from Windows 10 to 11 would be smoother than ever with Endpoint Manager and Windows Update for Business.

1-click on a taskbar icon, and you can join any meetings you want on Teams. Snap Layouts offers mostly every plausible screen splitting and positioning option, while Snap Groups would change the way we use laptops. And now, security features. Microsoft is simultaneously exhibiting their creativity power and really placing concentration on improving the UX.

Conclusion

The Microsoft – Businesses – Users circle would derive significant benefits from the support of Windows 11, which boosts working productivity, gaming experience, introduces satisfying commission policies and security features. If your PC does not support UEFI, Secure Boot or Trusted Platform Module ver 2.0, considering update your hardware in 5 years to enjoy the likely-to-be-successful Windows 11.

After all, it’s free of charge.

At its release price ($599), Nvidia’s RTX 3070 Ti is precisely $100 above the RTX 3070 and $100 below the RTX 3080. This sets a common expectation: the RTX 3070 Ti would be much faster than the RTX 3070 and only trivially less than the RTX 3080. 

Actual benchmarks let potential buyers down. 10% improvement upon the RTX 3070 means Nvidia’s own RTX 3070 Ti is a far cry from the RTX 3080, pointing out that this 3070 Ti would easily be considered a “bait product” for the two others when those GPUs eventually reach stable prices. The RTX 3070 provides the best p/p by far, while the 3080 aims directly to those who yearn for the best performance at below $1,000. So, what solutions does the RTX 3070 Ti REALLY work towards? 

Whilst current price fluctuations partly justify Nvidia’s decision to sell such a perplexing product, it is the release price that indicates how manufacturers position their GPUs in the market. With $599, the RTX 3070 Ti has 256 more CUDA cores, 8 Tensor cores and 2 RT cores than the RTX 3070, and it also offers 8GB GDDR6X memory rather than GDDR6. Setting aside those advances, as 3070 Ti’s benchmarks show that it is meant for 2K gaming, its distinctions from the RTX 3070 in terms of using purposes remain questionable. 

What matters here is that the Nvidia’s RTX 3070 Ti only gives gamers 60fps or above at 4K in 50% of the tested games, urging us to more than often reduce the resolution for the best gaming experience or make optimal use of our 144Hz monitor. Regarding such games as Watch Dogs, playing ultra settings with the RTX 3070 Ti is simply impossible as even with DLSS, the fps index only reaches roughly 25. 

Remember why Nvidia’s RTX 3070 stirred the market months ago. The RTX 3070 has been a perfect offer carrying along with it unbelievable 2K gaming capabilities, mostly when compared to latest generation’s RTX 2080 Ti at its price range. The RTX 3070 Ti, in contrast, fails to meet public expectations as it surrenders to AMD RX 6800 in most gaming tests, and buyers would automatically turn their head to either the RX 6800 or Nvidia’s own RTX 3080. It is not to mention that AMD’s Smart Access Memory promises more fps than does Nvidia’s Resizable BAR in particular gaming contexts.

There are thus only two reasons for gamers to buy a RTX 3070 Ti. First, they have used Nvidia’s products for a long time; or second, the RTX 3070 Ti is what they are lucky enough to find available anywhere.

RTX 3070 Ti is a “rational” GPU of Nvidia

At the outset, we have a very limited number of choices as of first half of 2021. Amid the global chip shortage, a “normal” new Nvidia’s GPU can possibly cost $1,000 or over – specifically $1,300 for a RTX 3070 or $2,000 for a RTX 3080 on average. When the real price gap between RTX 3070 Ti and RTX 3080 is approximately $400 on free markets, trying to get a new RTX 3080 without knowing whether it can be found in a foreseeable future is more of a risky decision. From the perspective of Nvidia, the RTX 3070 Ti is not necessarily be an outstanding GPU to generate sales.

Rather than blaming the manufacturer for creating a less-than-expected GPU, we should consider why the design and other hardware features of Nvidia’s RTX 3070 Ti rationalize its presence. Nvidia’s purpose of creating such a RTX 3070 Ti would be to position it as a less superior version of the RTX 3080. In other words, the RTX 3070 Ti is not meant to be compared to the 3070, though “comparing” is the most natural reaction of most tech users.

To be more specific, the RTX 3070 Ti has a fan on either of its side, with a push-pull system coming along. The fan on the bottom blows cool airflows to our card, which later will be released to the other side that is close to our CPU’s diffuser and case fans, while a conventional blower system is used to discharge hot airflows through the PCIe slots. This system can also be found on the RTX 3080 Founders Edition and is an optimal solution to keeping the GPUs cool and causing less noise. The RTX 3070 Ti has a similar radiator design from the RTX 3080, despite using small and thin (rather than firm and solid metal) heat fins. A new 12-pin power connector is added on these GPUs to replace the old 6-pin and 8-pin counterparts, and an adapter is readily available in the box. 

All the needed ports, an eye-catching design along with these features promise worthy added values for the RTX 3070 Ti in comparison with the RTX 3070.

Unfortunately, the RTX 3070 Ti consumes 30% more energy than the RTX 3070 does, with its TDP reaching 290W. This explains why Nvidia recommends us to pair RTX 3070 Ti with a 750W PSU (650W for RTX 3070), and this hikes the overall price of our PC. If we use the RTX 2070, the PC would take only maximum 550W.

At $599, we can expect more from the RTX 3070 Ti. It is admitted that Nvidia’s GPUs are viable options for gamers, streamers or video editors with their NVENC, ray-tracing or DLSS, but AMD RX 6800 simply shows greater overall performances with 16GB VRAM GDDR6X instead of only 8GB on the RTX 3070 Ti (which will fail to satisfy a host of our demands in particular points of its life span). AMD’s Fidelity FX Super Resolution is also on the way.

All in all, either RX 6800 or RTX 3070 Ti is barely available these days, and the best GPU we can choose now is any of them that we can find on free markets. RTX 3070 Ti, in the end, is certainly not a disappointment if we manage to buy one.