You took all the context out of his post. He isn't whining. He is giving his opinion.
It is not the price per se. It's also the fact that you have to decide how much SSD you need for the life of the machine at the time of purchase. That makes it 1000+ dollars on top of the purchase price of an already expensive machine.
That Samsung SSD will come down in price, the Apple SSD probably won't see as much discounting.
That's my interpretation of his post and I agree with it. I am not whining either.
'LMAO'?
That was just unnecessary.
The "opinion" on how Apple should build laptops from someone who doesn't upgrade for 8 (or 6) years is pretty pointless.
Better for Apple to listen to Pros that are on a 3 year replacement cycle because they actually have pro needs and buys things.
Which means it doesn't really matter if you can get 2TB ssds in a few years for less because you are due for a new laptop anyway.
I dropped my brand new MBP off at the Genius bar on Dec 28 because the TouchID stopped working. This was at Valley Fair in San Jose, CA not that far from main headquarters. I was told that, since the hardware was so new, it would have to be shipped off for repairs/diagnosis.
They said I'd be contacted in 3-5 days about the laptop repairs. It's been ~8 days already (even accounting for a 3 day holiday) and still no word. I'm definitely disappointed in the handling of this.
They did have the proper dongles on site. No hardware diagnosis by running special diagnosis software was done at the time.
Or you could actually act like a pro and either keep your own spare or join Apple's Joint Venture program for business customers that includes loaners when your covered equipment is in for repairs.
No wait, what am I thinking? Better to just complain about how Apple is evil.
Service subject to availability. Requires scheduling a genius bar appointment (no one will go to your home) If the repair is going to take more than 24 hours (from the genius bar visit - not the failure time) you might get a loaner if Apple has a similar machine in the store. Apple is not obliged to provide a loaner. ...
I will tell you what EVIL is. Shipping woefully under capacity tablets and phones (16GB), removing the sweet spot (32GB) from a model with the sole intention of coercing users up to a more expensive (64GB). Which company did that?
I'm sorry but converting Mike's quoted text into 'blah, blah, blah' was just plain rude.
True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining.
Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch. If Apple were to be like you and play it safe then we'd still be using the machine on the left and not the one on the right. Most of the companies who make Windows machines play it safe and follow; most make very little if any money from their computer division compared to Apple's computer division.
The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.
Apple II - ditched the price and the computer lab to bring computing to the home, school and office desk Macintosh - ditched learning complex computer commands so that anyone could use a computer iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus. iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone. iPad - ditched the necessity of a stylus for effective tablet computing 2016 MacBook Pro - ditched redundancy to provide a simple, truly UNIVERSAL USB to flexibly meet all needs be they for network, storage, display or power.
The ideal time to introduce something new will always be next year but then no needs will ever be met today! It's a similar phenonemon with those advising to wait next year for Intel's Kaby Lake, then the next advance after that and so forth. Those people may as well not bother buying a computer until the desktop quantum computer arrives, but then they'll be version 2 to come, then 3... Those same people are extremely unlikely to be professionals who need work done by their computer TODAY.
Now, onto the topic on hand. If soldering everything onto the motherboard meant only 1 in 5,000 Mac portables developed logic board faults instead of 1 in 500 then Apple makes substantial savings in manufacture, diagnostic and repair costs plus their customers get a more reliable product. If Apple's research revealed less than 1 in 500 MacBook Pro users ever upgrade the internals of their MacBook Pros then why should Apple waste time, capital and materials making an inferior more unreliable product? A product which they'll offer everybody yet is only best suited for meeting the needs of the small upgrade minority?
Leaving out the power adapter extension cord and not putting a few USB adapters (or a coupon for a few) in the box feels like Apple has been taken over by accountants.
Localtalk Boxes and cabling
ADB keyboards
AAUI adapters
SCSI terminators DIN-8 serial cabling
DB-45 SCSI adapters
DB-15 to VGA adapters
The first shift to USB cables DVI to ADC adapters
FireWire cables
30-pin cables and accessories
Lightning cables and accessories.
And NOW you think that the power adapter extension cord omission means that Apple has been taken over by accountants?
It is not a question of 'NOW'. It's a feeling he has and he just gave that example. It's more a question of things building up over time and the result of this latest move. I think that's pretty clear from his post.
And when everything switches over to mostly USB-C all of this will be a non-issue. USB-C peripherals are coming. You know the dongle/USB-C cable thing going into buying a 2016 MacBook Pro so I don't see why its an issue other than just something to bitch about. If you're not ready to make the switch then don't buy one until things are ready for you.
These new machines cannot physically accommodate the other ports but we have already heard that there is possibly division within Apple on whether this 'thin at any cost' route was the right way to go. Not in the absolute sense but in the sense that there is room for a thicker, heavier machine in the same lineup with a bigger port spread.
The problem is that such a machine (especially if it were user upgradeable) might very well take the sales spotlight from the current model. Bigger, heavier, thicker, slower, more repairable but more popular?
You can disagree with me but it is very, very clear that a lot of users would actually buy into such a machine.
Well, the thing is that a lot of Users would actually buy a lot of things that Apple can, but does not, make.
Going by the various threads on AI over the years, Apple could have sold millions of Xserve machines, Tower Mac Pros, Tower Mac Minis, iPhone 7s with a headphone jack, an iPad with OS X, 17" MBPs... the list goes on and on. But that doesn't affect anything.
People need to face the fact that Apple will go along with what they think is the best. I honestly believe that the new MBPs are machines that are worth having. People who can move their workflows will do so.
Your argument that the deciding factor for all design decisions on the new MBPs boiled down to Apple's "obsession" with thinness is pretty ludicrous.
Whether people like it or not, we are moving to an era where DIY is slowly eroding. Whether it cars or computers, they will get more and more difficult to repair/ upgrade. And as always, Apple leads the pact, taking the brunt of user complaints.
True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining.
Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch. If Apple were to be like you and play it safe then we'd still be using the machine on the left and not the one on the right. Most of the companies who make Windows machines play it safe and follow; most make very little if any money from their computer division compared to Apple's computer division.
The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.
Apple II - ditched the price and the computer lab to bring computing to the home, school and office desk Macintosh - ditched learning complex computer commands so that anyone could use a computer iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus. iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone. iPad - ditched the necessity of a stylus for effective tablet computing 2016 MacBook Pro - ditched redundancy to provide a simple, truly UNIVERSAL USB to flexibly meet all needs be they for network, storage, display or power.
The ideal time to introduce something new will always be next year but then no needs will ever be met today! It's a similar phenonemon with those advising to wait next year for Intel's Kaby Lake, then the next advance after that and so forth. Those people may as well not bother buying a computer until the desktop quantum computer arrives, but then they'll be version 2 to come, then 3... Those same people are extremely unlikely to be professionals who need work done by their computer TODAY.
Now, onto the topic on hand. If soldering everything onto the motherboard meant only 1 in 5,000 Mac portables developed logic board faults instead of 1 in 500 then Apple makes substantial savings in manufacture, diagnostic and repair costs plus their customers get a more reliable product. If Apple's research revealed less than 1 in 500 MacBook Pro users ever upgrade the internals of their MacBook Pros then why should Apple waste time, capital and materials making an inferior more unreliable product? A product which they'll offer everybody yet is only best suited for meeting the needs of the small upgrade minority?
I'm very sorry but I had to stop reading your post when I read the very first paragraph:
"Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch"
You clearly didn't even bother to read what I wrote. This is the first paragraph one of my recent replies:
"True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining." I put 'only' in capitals to make my point even clearer.
You are making me repeat myself unnecessarily, then you complain about a 'torrent'.
No one is saying that USB-C should not be here now. Not one single person. I suggest you re-read what I said. I will read your reply a little later on.
You took all the context out of his post. He isn't whining. He is giving his opinion.
It is not the price per se. It's also the fact that you have to decide how much SSD you need for the life of the machine at the time of purchase. That makes it 1000+ dollars on top of the purchase price of an already expensive machine.
That Samsung SSD will come down in price, the Apple SSD probably won't see as much discounting.
That's my interpretation of his post and I agree with it. I am not whining either.
'LMAO'?
That was just unnecessary.
The "opinion" on how Apple should build laptops from someone who doesn't upgrade for 8 (or 6) years is pretty pointless.
Better for Apple to listen to Pros that are on a 3 year replacement cycle because they actually have pro needs and buys things.
Which means it doesn't really matter if you can get 2TB ssds in a few years for less because you are due for a new laptop anyway.
'Better for Apple'. So true. I am happy to see that almost a decade of prolonged economic downturn has had no effect on your upgrade cycle. Many people have actually moved onto longer upgrade cycles which is precisely why people have been giving new life to their 'old' machines by upgrading them. I would add that I've always considered my needs before buying a machine and if a machine fits my needs I have no need to upgrade it.
Apple might not like to see this and my heart bleeds for them.
True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining.
Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch. If Apple were to be like you and play it safe then we'd still be using the machine on the left and not the one on the right. Most of the companies who make Windows machines play it safe and follow; most make very little if any money from their computer division compared to Apple's computer division.
The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.
Apple II - ditched the price and the computer lab to bring computing to the home, school and office desk Macintosh - ditched learning complex computer commands so that anyone could use a computer iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus. iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone. iPad - ditched the necessity of a stylus for effective tablet computing 2016 MacBook Pro - ditched redundancy to provide a simple, truly UNIVERSAL USB to flexibly meet all needs be they for network, storage, display or power.
The ideal time to introduce something new will always be next year but then no needs will ever be met today! It's a similar phenonemon with those advising to wait next year for Intel's Kaby Lake, then the next advance after that and so forth. Those people may as well not bother buying a computer until the desktop quantum computer arrives, but then they'll be version 2 to come, then 3... Those same people are extremely unlikely to be professionals who need work done by their computer TODAY.
Now, onto the topic on hand. If soldering everything onto the motherboard meant only 1 in 5,000 Mac portables developed logic board faults instead of 1 in 500 then Apple makes substantial savings in manufacture, diagnostic and repair costs plus their customers get a more reliable product. If Apple's research revealed less than 1 in 500 MacBook Pro users ever upgrade the internals of their MacBook Pros then why should Apple waste time, capital and materials making an inferior more unreliable product? A product which they'll offer everybody yet is only best suited for meeting the needs of the small upgrade minority?
I think you have misunderstood some key points.
'Playing safe'. No one is saying they should play safe and only safe. They can take all the risks they want but they could also provide safer options.
'The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.'
So why have we are we passing through Apple's most important sales quarter with last year's machines? I have seen very little pushing forward with the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro. Your claims sound nice but reality is distinct. I would add that there is nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs, much less anything to warrant the 'hello again' label.
I've spent time in stores trying the new keyboard. I don't like it. It feels hard and people say it's overly noisy. Obviously I couldn't evaluate that in store. The travel is so short because of the thinness of the machine. There is no other reason.
Do you think the battery issues some people are seeing are exaggerated?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for pushing forward but with certain considerations taken into account.
'iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus'.
Yes but down the line, FireWire had to be added. Perhaps the UNIVERSAL aspect wasn't as universal after all? Ethernet never went away. Nor did audio input/output. USB became truly universal when USB 2 became a reality but then Apple dragged its heels implementing it. Ironic.
'iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone.'
'Large screen'? I know what you want to imply but the large screen (in a modern context) was not provided as an option because Apple thought it was a bad design. Market forces changed that.
I don't want to unpick your post but I hope you can see things aren't really exactly like you are presenting them.
The move to soldered on components and glue is real and may or may not have an impact on reliability but that doesn't make it necessarily a good move.
"Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch"
You clearly didn't even bother to read what I wrote. This is the first paragraph one of my recent replies:
"True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining."
I put 'only' in capitals to make my point even clearer.
You are making me repeat myself unnecessarily, then you complain about a 'torrent'.
No one is saying that USB-C should not be here now. Not one single person. I suggest you re-read what I said. I will read your reply a little later on.
I've read what you've written but I'm beginning to wonder if you understand what you write?
Your response to my post even contradicts itself. USB-C isn't the future, it is reality today; it's just that you feel that Apple is wrong today in not duplicating function in putting the legacy USB port onto its latest laptop.
Apple doesn't want to compromise on its push forward and putting the old USB port, whose functions are met by the superior Thunderbolt 3, on their latest machines is a compromise to doing things the old way, a compromise to design, manufacture and attainable performance of their latest machines.
There comes a moment when you have to cut the rope and soar into the sky, you cannot fly with one foot on the ground.
Service subject to availability. Requires scheduling a genius bar appointment (no one will go to your home) If the repair is going to take more than 24 hours (from the genius bar visit - not the failure time) you might get a loaner if Apple has a similar machine in the store. Apple is not obliged to provide a loaner. ...
I will tell you what EVIL is. Shipping woefully under capacity tablets and phones (16GB), removing the sweet spot (32GB) from a model with the sole intention of coercing users up to a more expensive (64GB). Which company did that?
I'm sorry but converting Mike's quoted text into 'blah, blah, blah' was just plain rude.
Lol...it was evil to replace the 32GB option with 64GB. And you wonder why people call you a troll.
And the whining about loaner starting from the start of the Genius Bar visit is amusing. Until they look at it they don't know if it's a simple or complex fix that would take more than a day.
This is on par with Nikon's professional service program. Loaners from NPS are also subject to availability. The primary difference is that Nikon will put a repair facility at a major event like the olympics for journalists. For other pros (wildlife, studio, wedding, etc) they have to find a Nikon store/authorized repair center or ship it to one.
So I can see how a photographer, who needs to already schlep an asston of gear, would prefer a thinner, lighter MBP with no user serviceable parts. That's the equipment model they already are used to.
If you need on site service then yes, you would need to contract with a 3rd party to provide that service.
'Playing safe'. No one is saying they should play safe and only safe. They can take all the risks they want but they could also provide safer options.
So accept they've taken the risk of adopting pure USB-C today if you accept they can take all the risks they want. They took the risk with the USB-C connector on the 2015 MacBook and have pushed further with the 2016 MacBook Pros.
So why have we are we passing through Apple's most important sales quarter with last year's machines? I have seen very little pushing forward with the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro. Your claims sound nice but reality is distinct. I would add that there is nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs, much less anything to warrant the 'hello again' label.
I find your reasoning to be all over the place: on the one hand Apple should be playing it safe and providing safe options, on the other hand Apple should be creating revolutionary products every single year? Even with a company as large as Apple the creative talent is a finite resource: you want the same people who create Macs to simultaneously provide safe options and be revolutionary every year!
I believe most people would prefer something non-repairable that is reliable enough to not require repair over something repairable that was unreliable enough to warrant frequent repair and be unavailable to use. When was the last time you had to repair or upgrade the electronics in your washing machine or car?
"Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch"
You clearly didn't even bother to read what I wrote. This is the first paragraph one of my recent replies:
"True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining."
I put 'only' in capitals to make my point even clearer.
You are making me repeat myself unnecessarily, then you complain about a 'torrent'.
No one is saying that USB-C should not be here now. Not one single person. I suggest you re-read what I said. I will read your reply a little later on.
I've read what you've written but I'm beginning to wonder if you understand what you write?
Your response to my post even contradicts itself. USB-C isn't the future, it is reality today; it's just that you feel that Apple is wrong today in not duplicating function in putting the legacy USB port onto its latest laptop.
Apple doesn't want to compromise on its push forward and putting the old USB port, whose functions are met by the superior Thunderbolt 3, on their latest machines is a compromise to doing things the old way, a compromise to design, manufacture and attainable performance of their latest machines.
There comes a moment when you have to cut the rope and soar into the sky, you cannot fly with one foot on the ground.
I am not contradicting myself.
You are now splitting hairs. Of the installed base of ports, what percentage are USB-C?
Of the installed base of devices, what percentage are USB-C?
If you want to say that because a minute fraction of devices have USB-C today, then it is 'present', then go ahead. The reality is that until it becomes universal it is not 'present' by a long shot. It is a port for the future. Most people can understand that.
I was just using the same argument that the people defending USB-C are using. Just for the sake of simplicity. It really isn't that important.
What is important is that very few people have USB-C devices at home and not providing an orderly transition to USB-C was completely unnecessary.
But that in itself didn't even have to be an issue: stealth fighter and stealth bomber.
I have posed this question many times: which one of the two would be more successful?
I think a stealth bomber would leave a stealth fighter in the dust in terms of sales even if it were heavier, thicker, 'slower' (with socketed RAM/SSD) without the Touchbar etc.
That is a telling question. I have also noted that Apple itself seems to have brought both solutions to higher management but with the stealth fighter winning out.
Let's wait and see how sales go. If the new MBPs are blazing a trail to glory then I don't foresee much change in thinking on Apple's part. If, on the other hand, sales are not meeting expectations, Apple has two options. Discount until sales pick up or try the stealth bomber option.
'Better for Apple'. So true. I am happy to see that almost a decade of prolonged economic downturn has had no effect on your upgrade cycle. Many people have actually moved onto longer upgrade cycles which is precisely why people have been giving new life to their 'old' machines by upgrading them. I would add that I've always considered my needs before buying a machine and if a machine fits my needs I have no need to upgrade it.
Apple might not like to see this and my heart bleeds for them.
If you don't need to upgrade but once in 8 years you don't matter from a pro perspective.
You don't have Pro needs and can buy a MB every 3 years instead and end up with a higher average performance than buying a top end MBP for $3k+.
Top end 2008 MBP Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 @ 2.8 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2913
Mid tier 2008 MB Intel Core 2 Duo P7350 @ 2.0 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2114
2011 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-2467M @ 1.6 GHz (2 cores) multi core 3738
2014 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-4260U @ 1.4 GHz (2 cores) multi core 5061
After 1 replacement cycle you have more compute power than your top end MBP, up to date ports and AppleCare AND a backup machine (unless you sold it which reduces your cost).
And you save money in year one for more cash reserves for any "prolonged economic downturns". If you have to delay you 2014 update to 2015 you're still ahead of the game.
An 8 year tech refresh cycle for computer hardware is plain stupid for any pro.
If you want to say that because a minute fraction of devices have USB-C today, then it is 'present', then go ahead. The reality is that until it becomes universal it is not 'present' by a long shot. It is a port for the future. Most people can understand that.
What is important is that very few people have USB-C devices at home and not providing an orderly transition to USB-C was completely unnecessary.
But that in itself didn't even have to be an issue: stealth fighter and stealth bomber.
I have posed this question many times: which one of the two would be more successful?
I think a stealth bomber would leave a stealth fighter in the dust in terms of sales even if it were heavier, thicker, 'slower' (with socketed RAM/SSD) without the Touchbar etc.
That is a telling question. I have also noted that Apple itself seems to have brought both solutions to higher management but with the stealth fighter winning out.
Let's wait and see how sales go. If the new MBPs are blazing a trail to glory then I don't foresee much change in thinking on Apple's part. If, on the other hand, sales are not meeting expectations, Apple has two options. Discount until sales pick up or try the stealth bomber option.
Ignoring the fact that USB-C isn't relevant to this topic:
Chicken and egg: more USB-C devices won't be manufactured until there are USB-C computers to plug them into; more USB-C computers won't be manufactured unless there's a demand to plug in USB-C devices. It will never become universal until a company is bold enough to provide USB-C benefits to its customers. That company is Apple.
Live with the reality that current and future Mac laptops won't have USB-A ports whatever the sales figures of the 2016 MacBook Pros. A year on from now there will be even more Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C peripherals to plug into 2017 MacBook Pros.
Even your stealth bomber versus stealth fighter analogy tellingly reveals the flaws of your perspective. Very few militaries of the world have large bombers: the small multi-role combat 'fighters" have greater versatility. Even the militaries with bombers, like the US, use their small multi-role 'fighters" far more frequently in combat bombing than the big bombers. These militaries have also put far greater emphasis and resource into updating their small agile multi-role combat planes than their big bombers.
The 2016 Macbook Pros are the F-35s and F-22s of the computer world, yet you wish for Apple to make B-36 Peacemakers. That was a compromise bomber that used both piston and jet engines, look just how quickly the USAF dropped that idea.
'Better for Apple'. So true. I am happy to see that almost a decade of prolonged economic downturn has had no effect on your upgrade cycle. Many people have actually moved onto longer upgrade cycles which is precisely why people have been giving new life to their 'old' machines by upgrading them. I would add that I've always considered my needs before buying a machine and if a machine fits my needs I have no need to upgrade it.
Apple might not like to see this and my heart bleeds for them.
If you don't need to upgrade but once in 8 years you don't matter from a pro perspective.
You don't have Pro needs and can buy a MB every 3 years instead and end up with a higher average performance than buying a top end MBP for $3k+.
Top end 2008 MBP Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 @ 2.8 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2913
Mid tier 2008 MB Intel Core 2 Duo P7350 @ 2.0 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2114
2011 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-2467M @ 1.6 GHz (2 cores) multi core 3738
2014 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-4260U @ 1.4 GHz (2 cores) multi core 5061
After 1 replacement cycle you have more compute power than your top end MBP, up to date ports and AppleCare AND a backup machine (unless you sold it which reduces your cost).
And you save money in year one for more cash reserves for any "prolonged economic downturns". If you have to delay you 2014 update to 2015 you're still ahead of the game.
An 8 year tech refresh cycle for computer hardware is plain stupid for any pro.
If you 'matter' or not from a pro perspective does not depend on your upgrade cycle. If you do professional work on your computer you are a pro. Some pro environments require you to be as up to date as possible. Others do not.
Your ability to upgrade to a new machine is wholly dependent on your being able to afford one, be it at a company or self employed level.
The idea of picking cheaper machines and upgrading more often is fine for some people. It's what I do with my phones. It gives me new tech, redundancy or the option of passing the old phone onto someone might be interested in it.
My post was on your assertion of the three year pro cycle. You chose to jump to the extreme case of an eight year cycle but what if the cycle were four or five years? I'm seeing four plus years in critical infrastructure datacenters and the same is true of many pros and companies. Just read the boards here to get a basic idea. Yes, some people can upgrade more frequently. Others, not so frequently. The reasons are clear.
Using low powered, small screened offerings isn't viable for most pros and the numbers don't work out for many either.
My MacBook pro touch 15" died yesterday. No power, won't charge. I brought it into the Apple Store on 5th Avenue and they had no diagnostic equipment and had to send it back to Apple for repairs. They could not replace it because it wasn't the standard stock model. Not sure how they are equipped to do repairs if the NY flagship store is unable to do basic diagnostics.
'iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus'.
Yes but down the line, FireWire had to be added. Perhaps the UNIVERSAL aspect wasn't as universal after all? Ethernet never went away. Nor did audio input/output. USB became truly universal when USB 2 became a reality but then Apple dragged its heels implementing it. Ironic.
To be fair, Firewire was a fixture on the pro machines as soon as they were updated the following year.
It was added to the iMac when it made sense to do so (when the consumer G3 hit 400 MHz, making the machine capable of editing DV footage — a first in the consumer market). There wasn't really much use for Firewire in the consumer space beyond DV in late 1999.
You are, of course, correct that Apple delayed implementation of USB2. I guess they were trying to give Firewire more of a foothold for a while, in hopes that it would become an established standard in the consumer space. The advent of AVCHD and USB2 camcorders basically nullified the necessity for Firewire for consumers, though.
If you want to say that because a minute fraction of devices have USB-C today, then it is 'present', then go ahead. The reality is that until it becomes universal it is not 'present' by a long shot. It is a port for the future. Most people can understand that.
What is important is that very few people have USB-C devices at home and not providing an orderly transition to USB-C was completely unnecessary.
But that in itself didn't even have to be an issue: stealth fighter and stealth bomber.
I have posed this question many times: which one of the two would be more successful?
I think a stealth bomber would leave a stealth fighter in the dust in terms of sales even if it were heavier, thicker, 'slower' (with socketed RAM/SSD) without the Touchbar etc.
That is a telling question. I have also noted that Apple itself seems to have brought both solutions to higher management but with the stealth fighter winning out.
Let's wait and see how sales go. If the new MBPs are blazing a trail to glory then I don't foresee much change in thinking on Apple's part. If, on the other hand, sales are not meeting expectations, Apple has two options. Discount until sales pick up or try the stealth bomber option.
Ignoring the fact that USB-C isn't relevant to this topic:
Chicken and egg: more USB-C devices won't be manufactured until there are USB-C computers to plug them into; more USB-C computers won't be manufactured unless there's a demand to plug in USB-C devices. It will never become universal until a company is bold enough to provide USB-C benefits to its customers. That company is Apple.
Live with the reality that current and future Mac laptops won't have USB-A ports whatever the sales figures of the 2016 MacBook Pros. A year on from now there will be even more Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C peripherals to plug into 2017 MacBook Pros.
Even your stealth bomber versus stealth fighter analogy tellingly reveals the flaws of your perspective. Very few militaries of the world have large bombers: the small multi-role combat 'fighters" have greater versatility. Even the militaries with bombers, like the US, use their small multi-role 'fighters" far more frequently in combat bombing than the big bombers. These militaries have also put far greater emphasis and resource into updating their small agile multi-role combat planes than their big bombers.
The 2016 Macbook Pros are the F-35s and F-22s of the computer world, yet you wish for Apple to make B-36 Peacemakers. That was a compromise bomber that used both piston and jet engines, look just how quickly the USAF dropped that idea.
Once again the argument about not having USB-C is plunked into a post. NOBODY, ihas even so much as suggested the idea.
Don't forget that analogy to stealth and fighter bombers has nothing to do with me but within Apple itself, at least if rumours are to be believed. I am just using it as it's a clean way to differentiate between two design proposals.
'Playing safe'. No one is saying they should play safe and only safe. They can take all the risks they want but they could also provide safer options.
So accept they've taken the risk of adopting pure USB-C today if you accept they can take all the risks they want. They took the risk with the USB-C connector on the 2015 MacBook and have pushed further with the 2016 MacBook Pros.
So why have we are we passing through Apple's most important sales quarter with last year's machines? I have seen very little pushing forward with the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro. Your claims sound nice but reality is distinct. I would add that there is nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs, much less anything to warrant the 'hello again' label.
I find your reasoning to be all over the place: on the one hand Apple should be playing it safe and providing safe options, on the other hand Apple should be creating revolutionary products every single year? Even with a company as large as Apple the creative talent is a finite resource: you want the same people who create Macs to simultaneously provide safe options and be revolutionary every year!
I believe most people would prefer something non-repairable that is reliable enough to not require repair over something repairable that was unreliable enough to warrant frequent repair and be unavailable to use. When was the last time you had to repair or upgrade the electronics in your washing machine or car?
Interesting. You are just ignoring what you are not interested in seeing.
My case doesn't boil down to 'this' or 'that'. They could have released machines for both markets. One playing safe and one taking risks. The problem is that I am sure the 'safe' machine would blow the other one out of the water even if it were, thicker, heavier and slower, didn't have a TouchBar etc.
There is absolutely nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs. They are evolutionary.
Resources are a problem but more a management problem than anything else. Although Apple denies it, everything indicates that engineers have been assigned to non Mac areas and are perhaps spread too thin on the ground. The Mac is simply playing second fiddle to the iDevices. Clearly it makes sense when so much of your revenues derive from iDevice sales. However, it doesn't make much sense either to neglect a multibillion dollar company in its own right. That's why I vouch for separating the two divisions. I wonder if any shareholders will bring this up in February.
The risk on the original MB with USB-C was minimal. It was basically a secondary machine and underpowered and overpriced. Reviews had a hard time dealing with one port, the lack of power and price point. It had its niche but it was a niche all the same.
Have you seen many cases of the SSD and RAM socket connections to the main board failing? Have you seen many cases of solder failing (especially but not limited to graphics cards)? I bet you've seen far more of the latter.
Tell me how much care you put into soldering quality and I will tell you how reliable your machine will be. Tell me about your thermal design and I will tell you even more.
Right now we have no idea how reliable these machines will be. Let time be the judge of that.
My MacBook pro touch 15" died yesterday. No power, won't charge. I brought it into the Apple Store on 5th Avenue and they had no diagnostic equipment and had to send it back to Apple for repairs. They could not replace it because it wasn't the standard stock model. Not sure how they are equipped to do repairs if the NY flagship store is unable to do basic diagnostics.
I'm sorry you find yourself in that situation. Is repair the only option or can you request a new machine straight from the factory?
Not even having diagnostics tools really is unacceptable more than two months after launch.
Comments
Better for Apple to listen to Pros that are on a 3 year replacement cycle because they actually have pro needs and buys things.
Which means it doesn't really matter if you can get 2TB ssds in a few years for less because you are due for a new laptop anyway.
They said I'd be contacted in 3-5 days about the laptop repairs. It's been ~8 days already (even accounting for a 3 day holiday) and still no word. I'm definitely disappointed in the handling of this.
They did have the proper dongles on site. No hardware diagnosis by running special diagnosis software was done at the time.
Requires scheduling a genius bar appointment (no one will go to your home)
If the repair is going to take more than 24 hours (from the genius bar visit - not the failure time) you might get a loaner if Apple has a similar machine in the store.
Apple is not obliged to provide a loaner.
...
I will tell you what EVIL is. Shipping woefully under capacity tablets and phones (16GB), removing the sweet spot (32GB) from a model with the sole intention of coercing users up to a more expensive (64GB). Which company did that?
I'm sorry but converting Mike's quoted text into 'blah, blah, blah' was just plain rude.
Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch.
If Apple were to be like you and play it safe then we'd still be using the machine on the left and not the one on the right.
Most of the companies who make Windows machines play it safe and follow; most make very little if any money from their computer division compared to Apple's computer division.
The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.
Apple II - ditched the price and the computer lab to bring computing to the home, school and office desk
Macintosh - ditched learning complex computer commands so that anyone could use a computer
iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus.
iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone.
iPad - ditched the necessity of a stylus for effective tablet computing
2016 MacBook Pro - ditched redundancy to provide a simple, truly UNIVERSAL USB to flexibly meet all needs be they for network, storage, display or power.
The ideal time to introduce something new will always be next year but then no needs will ever be met today!
It's a similar phenonemon with those advising to wait next year for Intel's Kaby Lake, then the next advance after that and so forth.
Those people may as well not bother buying a computer until the desktop quantum computer arrives, but then they'll be version 2 to come, then 3...
Those same people are extremely unlikely to be professionals who need work done by their computer TODAY.
Now, onto the topic on hand.
If soldering everything onto the motherboard meant only 1 in 5,000 Mac portables developed logic board faults instead of 1 in 500 then Apple makes substantial savings in manufacture, diagnostic and repair costs plus their customers get a more reliable product. If Apple's research revealed less than 1 in 500 MacBook Pro users ever upgrade the internals of their MacBook Pros then why should Apple waste time, capital and materials making an inferior more unreliable product? A product which they'll offer everybody yet is only best suited for meeting the needs of the small upgrade minority?
Well, the thing is that a lot of Users would actually buy a lot of things that Apple can, but does not, make.
Going by the various threads on AI over the years, Apple could have sold millions of Xserve machines, Tower Mac Pros, Tower Mac Minis, iPhone 7s with a headphone jack, an iPad with OS X, 17" MBPs... the list goes on and on. But that doesn't affect anything.
People need to face the fact that Apple will go along with what they think is the best. I honestly believe that the new MBPs are machines that are worth having. People who can move their workflows will do so.
Your argument that the deciding factor for all design decisions on the new MBPs boiled down to Apple's "obsession" with thinness is pretty ludicrous.
Whether people like it or not, we are moving to an era where DIY is slowly eroding. Whether it cars or computers, they will get more and more difficult to repair/ upgrade. And as always, Apple leads the pact, taking the brunt of user complaints.
"Fundamentally your recent torrent of posts are saying Apple shouldn't move forward but wait until most computer manufacturers are using USB-C and then make the switch"
You clearly didn't even bother to read what I wrote. This is the first paragraph one of my recent replies:
"True. USB-C is coming. It is the future. No one has issues with it. Having ONLY USB-C is another matter and you will find a lot of division of opinion over that. It isn't whining."
I put 'only' in capitals to make my point even clearer.
You are making me repeat myself unnecessarily, then you complain about a 'torrent'.
No one is saying that USB-C should not be here now. Not one single person. I suggest you re-read what I said. I will read your reply a little later on.
Apple might not like to see this and my heart bleeds for them.
'Playing safe'. No one is saying they should play safe and only safe. They can take all the risks they want but they could also provide safer options.
'The very ethos of Apple is to push forward for the implementation of technology to be better.'
So why have we are we passing through Apple's most important sales quarter with last year's machines? I have seen very little pushing forward with the iMac, Mini and Mac Pro. Your claims sound nice but reality is distinct. I would add that there is nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs, much less anything to warrant the 'hello again' label.
I've spent time in stores trying the new keyboard. I don't like it. It feels hard and people say it's overly noisy. Obviously I couldn't evaluate that in store. The travel is so short because of the thinness of the machine. There is no other reason.
Do you think the battery issues some people are seeing are exaggerated?
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for pushing forward but with certain considerations taken into account.
'iMac - ditched a myriad of ports for an easier UNIVERSAL Serial Bus'.
Yes but down the line, FireWire had to be added. Perhaps the UNIVERSAL aspect wasn't as universal after all? Ethernet never went away. Nor did audio input/output. USB became truly universal when USB 2 became a reality but then Apple dragged its heels implementing it. Ironic.
'iPhone - ditched the physical keyboard to provide a large screen on a versatile smartphone.'
'Large screen'? I know what you want to imply but the large screen (in a modern context) was not provided as an option because Apple thought it was a bad design. Market forces changed that.
I don't want to unpick your post but I hope you can see things aren't really exactly like you are presenting them.
The move to soldered on components and glue is real and may or may not have an impact on reliability but that doesn't make it necessarily a good move.
Your response to my post even contradicts itself. USB-C isn't the future, it is reality today; it's just that you feel that Apple is wrong today in not duplicating function in putting the legacy USB port onto its latest laptop.
Apple doesn't want to compromise on its push forward and putting the old USB port, whose functions are met by the superior Thunderbolt 3, on their latest machines is a compromise to doing things the old way, a compromise to design, manufacture and attainable performance of their latest machines.
There comes a moment when you have to cut the rope and soar into the sky, you cannot fly with one foot on the ground.
And the whining about loaner starting from the start of the Genius Bar visit is amusing. Until they look at it they don't know if it's a simple or complex fix that would take more than a day.
This is on par with Nikon's professional service program. Loaners from NPS are also subject to availability. The primary difference is that Nikon will put a repair facility at a major event like the olympics for journalists. For other pros (wildlife, studio, wedding, etc) they have to find a Nikon store/authorized repair center or ship it to one.
So I can see how a photographer, who needs to already schlep an asston of gear, would prefer a thinner, lighter MBP with no user serviceable parts. That's the equipment model they already are used to.
If you need on site service then yes, you would need to contract with a 3rd party to provide that service.
They took the risk with the USB-C connector on the 2015 MacBook and have pushed further with the 2016 MacBook Pros.
I find your reasoning to be all over the place: on the one hand Apple should be playing it safe and providing safe options, on the other hand Apple should be creating revolutionary products every single year? Even with a company as large as Apple the creative talent is a finite resource: you want the same people who create Macs to simultaneously provide safe options and be revolutionary every year!
i.e. one foot dragging on the ground as you attempt to fly.
It is accepted in the electronics industry that soldered on components improve reliability AND performance, that's why SMT is used in most electronic products:
http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/84946/advantage-or-disadvantages-of-smd-over-through-hole-design-in-high-frequencies
http://www.radio-electronics.com/info/data/smt/what-is-surface-mount-technology-tutorial.php
I believe most people would prefer something non-repairable that is reliable enough to not require repair over something repairable that was unreliable enough to warrant frequent repair and be unavailable to use.
When was the last time you had to repair or upgrade the electronics in your washing machine or car?
You are now splitting hairs. Of the installed base of ports, what percentage are USB-C?
Of the installed base of devices, what percentage are USB-C?
If you want to say that because a minute fraction of devices have USB-C today, then it is 'present', then go ahead. The reality is that until it becomes universal it is not 'present' by a long shot. It is a port for the future. Most people can understand that.
I was just using the same argument that the people defending USB-C are using. Just for the sake of simplicity. It really isn't that important.
What is important is that very few people have USB-C devices at home and not providing an orderly transition to USB-C was completely unnecessary.
But that in itself didn't even have to be an issue: stealth fighter and stealth bomber.
I have posed this question many times: which one of the two would be more successful?
I think a stealth bomber would leave a stealth fighter in the dust in terms of sales even if it were heavier, thicker, 'slower' (with socketed RAM/SSD) without the Touchbar etc.
That is a telling question. I have also noted that Apple itself seems to have brought both solutions to higher management but with the stealth fighter winning out.
Let's wait and see how sales go. If the new MBPs are blazing a trail to glory then I don't foresee much change in thinking on Apple's part. If, on the other hand, sales are not meeting expectations, Apple has two options. Discount until sales pick up or try the stealth bomber option.
You don't have Pro needs and can buy a MB every 3 years instead and end up with a higher average performance than buying a top end MBP for $3k+.
Top end 2008 MBP Intel Core 2 Duo T9600 @ 2.8 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2913
Mid tier 2008 MB Intel Core 2 Duo P7350 @ 2.0 GHz (2 cores) multi core 2114
2011 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-2467M @ 1.6 GHz (2 cores) multi core 3738
2014 MBA 11" Intel Core i5-4260U @ 1.4 GHz (2 cores) multi core 5061
After 1 replacement cycle you have more compute power than your top end MBP, up to date ports and AppleCare AND a backup machine (unless you sold it which reduces your cost).
And you save money in year one for more cash reserves for any "prolonged economic downturns". If you have to delay you 2014 update to 2015 you're still ahead of the game.
An 8 year tech refresh cycle for computer hardware is plain stupid for any pro.
Chicken and egg: more USB-C devices won't be manufactured until there are USB-C computers to plug them into; more USB-C computers won't be manufactured unless there's a demand to plug in USB-C devices.
It will never become universal until a company is bold enough to provide USB-C benefits to its customers.
That company is Apple.
Live with the reality that current and future Mac laptops won't have USB-A ports whatever the sales figures of the 2016 MacBook Pros. A year on from now there will be even more Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C peripherals to plug into 2017 MacBook Pros.
Even your stealth bomber versus stealth fighter analogy tellingly reveals the flaws of your perspective.
Very few militaries of the world have large bombers: the small multi-role combat 'fighters" have greater versatility.
Even the militaries with bombers, like the US, use their small multi-role 'fighters" far more frequently in combat bombing than the big bombers.
These militaries have also put far greater emphasis and resource into updating their small agile multi-role combat planes than their big bombers.
The 2016 Macbook Pros are the F-35s and F-22s of the computer world, yet you wish for Apple to make B-36 Peacemakers. That was a compromise bomber that used both piston and jet engines, look just how quickly the USAF dropped that idea.
Your ability to upgrade to a new machine is wholly dependent on your being able to afford one, be it at a company or self employed level.
The idea of picking cheaper machines and upgrading more often is fine for some people. It's what I do with my phones. It gives me new tech, redundancy or the option of passing the old phone onto someone might be interested in it.
My post was on your assertion of the three year pro cycle. You chose to jump to the extreme case of an eight year cycle but what if the cycle were four or five years? I'm seeing four plus years in critical infrastructure datacenters and the same is true of many pros and companies. Just read the boards here to get a basic idea. Yes, some people can upgrade more frequently. Others, not so frequently. The reasons are clear.
Using low powered, small screened offerings isn't viable for most pros and the numbers don't work out for many either.
It was added to the iMac when it made sense to do so (when the consumer G3 hit 400 MHz, making the machine capable of editing DV footage — a first in the consumer market). There wasn't really much use for Firewire in the consumer space beyond DV in late 1999.
You are, of course, correct that Apple delayed implementation of USB2. I guess they were trying to give Firewire more of a foothold for a while, in hopes that it would become an established standard in the consumer space. The advent of AVCHD and USB2 camcorders basically nullified the necessity for Firewire for consumers, though.
Don't forget that analogy to stealth and fighter bombers has nothing to do with me but within Apple itself, at least if rumours are to be believed. I am just using it as it's a clean way to differentiate between two design proposals.
My case doesn't boil down to 'this' or 'that'. They could have released machines for both markets. One playing safe and one taking risks. The problem is that I am sure the 'safe' machine would blow the other one out of the water even if it were, thicker, heavier and slower, didn't have a TouchBar etc.
There is absolutely nothing revolutionary about the new MBPs. They are evolutionary.
Resources are a problem but more a management problem than anything else. Although Apple denies it, everything indicates that engineers have been assigned to non Mac areas and are perhaps spread too thin on the ground. The Mac is simply playing second fiddle to the iDevices. Clearly it makes sense when so much of your revenues derive from iDevice sales. However, it doesn't make much sense either to neglect a multibillion dollar company in its own right. That's why I vouch for separating the two divisions. I wonder if any shareholders will bring this up in February.
The risk on the original MB with USB-C was minimal. It was basically a secondary machine and underpowered and overpriced. Reviews had a hard time dealing with one port, the lack of power and price point. It had its niche but it was a niche all the same.
Have you seen many cases of the SSD and RAM socket connections to the main board failing? Have you seen many cases of solder failing (especially but not limited to graphics cards)? I bet you've seen far more of the latter.
Tell me how much care you put into soldering quality and I will tell you how reliable your machine will be. Tell me about your thermal design and I will tell you even more.
Right now we have no idea how reliable these machines will be. Let time be the judge of that.
Not even having diagnostics tools really is unacceptable more than two months after launch.