Editorial: The future of Apple's Macintosh

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 159
    Marvin said:
    ...
    They have over $250 billion, they make about $20b revenue from Macs per year. That means they could give every Mac user a free Mac for 10 years and still have over $50b. They'd probably have over $250b in fact because most of the income is from the iPhone. If they just try to keep the Mac prices a bit more reasonable, it would be fine. So aim for entry laptops and desktop $1000-1500. 15" MBP and 27" iMac $1500-2500 (iMac is mostly still ok but HDDs). Mac Pro $2500+. The higher-end Macs sell so few units anyway, taking a margin hit there will be a small impact on their balance sheet - 3 million units x $300 average price cut (e.g $200 off entry MBP, $500 off MP) = $900m out of $5b net profit.
    That's an interesting perspective. They could reduce Mac prices without a "race to the bottom", and given the volume, the reduced margin does not affect their bottom line in a major way. Makes me go "hmm."

    Historically, it doesn't seem Apple cares too much about market share, but this pricing strategy could increase it. If this were announced, the marketing benefit alone should pump up sales, with the added volume causing at least some offset from the reduced margin. It would certainly make a lot of people happy.

    And about those free Macs..where do I sign up? :D
  • Reply 142 of 159
    xzuxzu Posts: 115member
    I know I am in the minority, my business benefits from the most modern computer components so the iMac, being a laptop mounted behind a beautiful screen does not fit my needs. Its hard for me to justify buying a new monitor every 3 years, more memory is helpful and we have had soo many heat related issues with the iMac over the years. Not the typical user I am sure, but I would love a Mac that has more flexibility.  

    Having built a Hackintosh, just to compare the MacOS and windows on the exact same hardware, I can say the MacOS is far more responsive and runs incredibly on modern hardware. Now that the latest graphic drivers for some cards won't be updated I am afraid the Hackintosh is dead, not that I would recommend it for anyone doing work that there jobs depend on. 

    I would like a option for full blown desktop. Aesthetic tastes aside, Apple was the company that displayed the internals of the hardware with the first iMac.. It would be great for a portion of the community if they built, allowed, or licensed hardware/software so that we can have some options.

     

    https://forums.bit-tech.net/showthread.php?t=315349


    GeorgeBMac
  • Reply 143 of 159
    Back in the 90s, when Apple embarked on their licensing scheme, they were floundering, desperate to do anything to save the company that was, at its worst, $1 billion in the red. Licensing the OS, so they could expand their presence seemed like one way, but it backfired as they were then competing with other companies who could build cheaper machines and just slap a MacOS on to run them. In the meantime, they were also competing with Microsoft, BeOS, Linux, and other OSes. It was a mess. But, now that they have money to burn, it might be worth looking into a tightly-controlled licensing scheme again. One that binds the MacOS to the guts, and let others build the shell and put their own label on it.
    License the Apple brand to the enterprise and STEM markets, so that they have to buy the processor, and board as well as the MacOS. Then companies could build blades, towers, etc. that run, and could even be supported by Apple, with Apple not having to deal with a million different configurations or "hackintoshes" that never quite work as promised. And anyone who wants to go the "hackintosh" route can do so, but they void the licensing agreement and subsequent support resources from Apple.
    At the same time, Apple would still have their "walled garden" with regard to their consumer products (iOS, iMac, Mini, etc.)
    This way, Apple could expand their presence in the high-end computing/enterprise market (i.e., stealing Intel's tagline, and changing it to "Apple Inside"), while still sustaining and continuing to grow their brand in the consumer market, where they're most profitable.
    Solixzu
  • Reply 144 of 159
    Marvin said:
    ... On the higher end, the Mac Pro spec can be compared with systems from places like Puget (this company revenue estimate is $1-5m so higher-end machines are selling in the hundreds - low thousands):

    https://www.pugetsystems.com/nav/genesis/II/customize.php

    A $7k 12-core MP matches with a 28-core setup for price, GPU options there would match (single 1070 is around dual D700). The CPU performance difference is 2x for the same price or 1.6x faster for single 20-core CPU. This is comparing 3 year old hardware to the latest and it's only 1.6-2x faster. Obviously it's better having the latest spec but a 3 year+ refresh cycle is understandable. ...
    Plus, the superior, consistent performance of the cylinder further reduces the real-world difference. That's the bargain Apple is making when it chooses to not make it possible to switch out CPUs and GPUs -- you lose the ability to upgrade, but you get more out of the hardware you have.

    I must confess I don't understand how external Thunderbolt CPU and/or GPU upgrades would work in relation to the core CPU/GPU, but I think that's probably what Apple thinks is the future for the people who want macOS along with the latest and greatest CPU/GPU. As for the majority of actual MP Late 2013 users (i.e., people who actually bought them and are actually using them), Apple seems to believe they are going to happily upgrade when Apple judges it is time to do so. 

    Skylake-EP with the LGA 3647 socket and massive amounts of RAM (supposedly 16 slots of DDR4 RDIMM per CPU) is a big deal and meets the basic idea DED lays out in this article: "By only updating new models when there's something significant to offer ..., Apple can sell its new products to a hungry audience that has been waiting to upgrade."

    One thing that is easy to forget is that Google, Facebook, Amazon, Baidu, and the like are already using Skylake-EP, far ahead of the public release -- Apple knows exactly what is coming and is probably already using it to power their servers. For example, Microsoft has shown off a dual-processor Skylake-EP motherboard (the RAM slots are blacked out in the photo) for their "Project Olympus" open-source server hardware.
    edited March 8 xzu
  • Reply 145 of 159
    Back in the 90s, when Apple embarked on their licensing scheme, they were floundering, desperate to do anything to save the company that was, at its worst, $1 billion in the red. Licensing the OS, so they could expand their presence seemed like one way, but it backfired as they were then competing with other companies who could build cheaper machines and just slap a MacOS on to run them. In the meantime, they were also competing with Microsoft, BeOS, Linux, and other OSes. It was a mess. But, now that they have money to burn, it might be worth looking into a tightly-controlled licensing scheme again. One that binds the MacOS to the guts, and let others build the shell and put their own label on it.
    License the Apple brand to the enterprise and STEM markets, so that they have to buy the processor, and board as well as the MacOS. Then companies could build blades, towers, etc. that run, and could even be supported by Apple, with Apple not having to deal with a million different configurations or "hackintoshes" that never quite work as promised. And anyone who wants to go the "hackintosh" route can do so, but they void the licensing agreement and subsequent support resources from Apple.
    At the same time, Apple would still have their "walled garden" with regard to their consumer products (iOS, iMac, Mini, etc.)
    This way, Apple could expand their presence in the high-end computing/enterprise market (i.e., stealing Intel's tagline, and changing it to "Apple Inside"), while still sustaining and continuing to grow their brand in the consumer market, where they're most profitable.
    At the very least they can do the mac os server for VM's Licensing where you can run in ESXI / QEMU-libvirt / hyper-v on any base hardware.  And sell a full mac os server builds for it.

    For workstations they can only sell them though dell / hp / IBM / etc. That can say don't really to need to route all video though TB. The  dell / hp / IBM  systems do have TB though an add on card and they can route though the video out of a full sized video card with an voodoo like loop-back cable. Or just route the low end on board video (not cpu based) found in servers / workstations though it.

    Apples workstation that must look cool really hurt the new mac pro. The older one was ok but was stilled based on the old space heater G5's cases. And they could of done TB with full sized video cards with loop back cables with open NON TB linked video out ports.
  • Reply 146 of 159
    obsrvrobsrvr Posts: 5member
    My previous firm (in a technical consulting niche in the architectural/construction market) started with early Macintosh computers because of a single piece of niche software relevant to our design work.  Our clients, however, used PCs and the developing Windows lineup, communicating with the Office suite and designing with Autocad.  We were forced to follow suit in order to be on their teams.  Subsequently better technical software programs were written for the Windows OS and we transitioned to the same desktops and portables that the business world was adopting everywhere.   I retired in 2008 and am interested in a wide variety of things, and use an old 2009 iMac.  I still think that the Office suite is easy (enough) to work in, and use Excel a lot, but I sorely miss  VB and VBA for a lot of creative applications that I could build  myself. Microsoft seems to intentionally cripple their software for use on the Mac platform.

    Adobe is not much different.  Doing more art and photography, and informal engineering design, more as a hobby basis, I have stuck with Photoshop, which never seems a comfortable fit for my iMac.  So far, I don't like the drafting programs available for iMac compared with Autocad, and I don't like Autocad's pricing since I can't pay for it out of a revenue stream it generates, and wish for a good MacOS style, 3D drafting and design suite compatible with 3D printers that would be easy to learn and implement.  This is the manufacturing tech today and the foreseeable future, and I'd like to see Apple competing in the educational market more effectively than it is now.  I use a desktop because I am not as mobile in retirement as I had to be as a consultant.

    I may represent a growing segment of our aging population in that regard, but then, I regard a phone as an emergency device and care not a whit for its social medium value.  (Mobile phones may contribute more to death by highway each year than all the terrorists throw at us in the same time period, but that's an unrelated observation.)  I love Macs, and wish that Apple would improve its software offerings to match the stuff that a lot of coders are writing for the PC market because it's larger, in the business world.
  • Reply 147 of 159
    christianmattschristianmatts Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    apple could do creative pros and it's self a favor and license OS X to a niche workstation vender like boxx to create a pro os x workstations. Would let them focus on consumer/mass market they prefer - continue to make iMac and laptops. Pros would get the workstations they want with the os they prefer.
  • Reply 148 of 159
    obsrvr said:
    My previous firm (in a technical consulting niche in the architectural/construction market) started with early Macintosh computers because of a single piece of niche software relevant to our design work.  Our clients, however, used PCs and the developing Windows lineup, communicating with the Office suite and designing with Autocad.  We were forced to follow suit in order to be on their teams.  Subsequently better technical software programs were written for the Windows OS and we transitioned to the same desktops and portables that the business world was adopting everywhere.   I retired in 2008 and am interested in a wide variety of things, and use an old 2009 iMac.  I still think that the Office suite is easy (enough) to work in, and use Excel a lot, but I sorely miss  VB and VBA for a lot of creative applications that I could build  myself. Microsoft seems to intentionally cripple their software for use on the Mac platform.

    Adobe is not much different.  Doing more art and photography, and informal engineering design, more as a hobby basis, I have stuck with Photoshop, which never seems a comfortable fit for my iMac.  So far, I don't like the drafting programs available for iMac compared with Autocad, and I don't like Autocad's pricing since I can't pay for it out of a revenue stream it generates, and wish for a good MacOS style, 3D drafting and design suite compatible with 3D printers that would be easy to learn and implement.  This is the manufacturing tech today and the foreseeable future, and I'd like to see Apple competing in the educational market more effectively than it is now.  I use a desktop because I am not as mobile in retirement as I had to be as a consultant.

    I may represent a growing segment of our aging population in that regard, but then, I regard a phone as an emergency device and care not a whit for its social medium value.  (Mobile phones may contribute more to death by highway each year than all the terrorists throw at us in the same time period, but that's an unrelated observation.)  I love Macs, and wish that Apple would improve its software offerings to match the stuff that a lot of coders are writing for the PC market because it's larger, in the business world.
    Yes, as Apple slips out of the business and education markets due to high prices and limited power software, it can hide for a time in the mobile market.  However, it will pay a price down the line because:  One of their strengths is integration between platforms.   If it loses a major platform, that integration loses its meaning and effectiveness.
  • Reply 149 of 159
    obsrvr said:
    My previous firm (in a technical consulting niche in the architectural/construction market) started with early Macintosh computers because of a single piece of niche software relevant to our design work.  Our clients, however, used PCs and the developing Windows lineup, communicating with the Office suite and designing with Autocad.  We were forced to follow suit in order to be on their teams.  Subsequently better technical software programs were written for the Windows OS and we transitioned to the same desktops and portables that the business world was adopting everywhere.   I retired in 2008 and am interested in a wide variety of things, and use an old 2009 iMac.  I still think that the Office suite is easy (enough) to work in, and use Excel a lot, but I sorely miss  VB and VBA for a lot of creative applications that I could build  myself. Microsoft seems to intentionally cripple their software for use on the Mac platform.

    Adobe is not much different.  Doing more art and photography, and informal engineering design, more as a hobby basis, I have stuck with Photoshop, which never seems a comfortable fit for my iMac.  So far, I don't like the drafting programs available for iMac compared with Autocad, and I don't like Autocad's pricing since I can't pay for it out of a revenue stream it generates, and wish for a good MacOS style, 3D drafting and design suite compatible with 3D printers that would be easy to learn and implement.  This is the manufacturing tech today and the foreseeable future, and I'd like to see Apple competing in the educational market more effectively than it is now.  I use a desktop because I am not as mobile in retirement as I had to be as a consultant.

    I may represent a growing segment of our aging population in that regard, but then, I regard a phone as an emergency device and care not a whit for its social medium value.  (Mobile phones may contribute more to death by highway each year than all the terrorists throw at us in the same time period, but that's an unrelated observation.)  I love Macs, and wish that Apple would improve its software offerings to match the stuff that a lot of coders are writing for the PC market because it's larger, in the business world.
    Autocad is available for the Mac since about 2012. I'm not sure how many macOS-based architects and the like have switched from Vectorworks, but it's good to have another industry-standard option.

    I haven't seen any signs of Microsoft crippling their macOS editions of Office since the end of the Gates/Ballmer era. Other than Windows-only things, and I'm not even sure what they are. I'm not sure if that is a sign of Apple's strength, or just a change of attitude at Microsoft.

    This is not to disagree with your point about software and its importance. Agree 100%.
  • Reply 150 of 159
    I was really liking where this editorial was going and then it fell off a cliff when when the writer started suggesting that Apple license MacOS to help propogate it and take on Windows...Does anyone remember the PowerPC?  Does anyone remember why it failed?  Its because the minute you license the OS to multiple hardware vendors it severely degraded Apple's ability to maintain stability on its platform because it could no longer test all of the variable hardware configurations and as a result MacOS became so buggy that Apple almost died because of it...Then to suggest that they try and take on Microsoft by buying up a few competing software suites is so short-sited its not even funny...Apple is not going to erode Windows domination by buying or building competing software suites because Microsoft still dominates the business infrastructure...What does that mean?  Well Windows is your domain controller, windows desktops/laptops connect to domain controller to gain access to other windows services like shared network drives, email, sharepoint sites etc.  When Apple moved away from Xserve they essentially killed the ecosystem that would have allowed them to erode the Windows Platform...This cannot be accomplished by simply throwing a few competing software suites out there because businesses drive consumer demand, not the other way around...

    THIS is why the lack of updates to the iMac, Mac Pro and Mac Mini are eventually going to lead to Apples downfall...yes downfall.  Because the reason why iPhones, and iPads and Macbooks are so popular is because the heavy hitter developers, artists and video/audio philes are what brought Apple products to the masses...And moving away from those products will result in those high end users moving away from Mac to other platforms and slowly taking with them the continuity with those other product lines that was asked for by those high-end users in the first place. 

    Apple needs to step up to the times...Drop the Apple TV line and update the Mac Mini with an integrated Apple TV interface.  Let it run as a Plex Server, Streaming Media Player and lite Mac machine to get the MacOS out to the masses and increase adoption.

    Bring back the All aluminum Mac Pro and give power users the ability to upgrade components with Apple Certified replacement parts.

    Finally let the iMac be that Cross-Blend of MacPro and Mac Mini.  Intergrate the Apple TV app into iMac but give it the power to run higher end tasks and labor intensive software.

    Apple don't forget the users that lifted you from the depths of obscurity...
    RogueCitizen1hosshead
  • Reply 151 of 159
    twa440twa440 Posts: 29member
    Soli said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Soli said:
    lmac said:
    Apple doesn't care about its 20 billion dollar Mac business
    :facepalm:
    I think people tend read and then just massage the logic to fit what they want to hear. 

    If Apple did build this blazing hot, multi-slotted, bristling-with-ports machine that everyone is apparently demanding, then I guarantee that all these so-called "professionals" would spend the next year complaining how ugly it is. 
    This "silent majority" of real professionals either had their chance and blew it or were never as significant as the highly-vocal few on tech forums claim. Apple had the huge tower in the Power Mac G5. Then they moved to the Intel-based Mac Pro using a very similar casing with a little more usable interior volume. These two machines combined last a little over a decade before Apple released the pejoratively named "trash can" Mac Pro.

    The law of parsimony tells me that we have to assume that the very large, comparatively noisy tower with expansion slots simply wasn't good enough to warrant more large towers, and that's before I even consider what happened to Xserve and my experience with seeing data centers with multitudes of Mac minis a lot more often than seeing a single Mac Pro (note that the Mac minis would almost certainly cost more than a Mac Pro for the same volume).

    The new Mac Pro seemed like both an exercise for Apple to show their excellence in engineering and a Hail Mary for the professional desktop Mac user that doesn't want an AIO. It's a brilliant machine, but I certainly don't need one, but I've also never needed the old-tower Mac Pro, but I did buy the latter as a gift once.)

    What is Apple is to do? Build something with very little to no profit when they can spend their limited resources on something that suits their needs and their customer's needs the best. Luckily, as a professional, I don't think Apple is done with me yet and I used this atest and most brilliant MacBook Pro as an example.

    PS: Just a hunch, but I'm guessing the same people that want Apple to build the elusive xMac are probably the same ones that complain about Tim Cook being photographed having dinner with friends or that Apple Park landscaping is underway are taking away resources from releasing new Macs. The irony, if true. 
    Limited resources? Thats a laugh
  • Reply 152 of 159
    SoliSoli Posts: 2,887member
    twa440 said:
    Soli said:
    Rayz2016 said:

    Soli said:
    lmac said:
    Apple doesn't care about its 20 billion dollar Mac business
    :facepalm:
    I think people tend read and then just massage the logic to fit what they want to hear. 

    If Apple did build this blazing hot, multi-slotted, bristling-with-ports machine that everyone is apparently demanding, then I guarantee that all these so-called "professionals" would spend the next year complaining how ugly it is. 
    This "silent majority" of real professionals either had their chance and blew it or were never as significant as the highly-vocal few on tech forums claim. Apple had the huge tower in the Power Mac G5. Then they moved to the Intel-based Mac Pro using a very similar casing with a little more usable interior volume. These two machines combined last a little over a decade before Apple released the pejoratively named "trash can" Mac Pro.

    The law of parsimony tells me that we have to assume that the very large, comparatively noisy tower with expansion slots simply wasn't good enough to warrant more large towers, and that's before I even consider what happened to Xserve and my experience with seeing data centers with multitudes of Mac minis a lot more often than seeing a single Mac Pro (note that the Mac minis would almost certainly cost more than a Mac Pro for the same volume).

    The new Mac Pro seemed like both an exercise for Apple to show their excellence in engineering and a Hail Mary for the professional desktop Mac user that doesn't want an AIO. It's a brilliant machine, but I certainly don't need one, but I've also never needed the old-tower Mac Pro, but I did buy the latter as a gift once.)

    What is Apple is to do? Build something with very little to no profit when they can spend their limited resources on something that suits their needs and their customer's needs the best. Luckily, as a professional, I don't think Apple is done with me yet and I used this atest and most brilliant MacBook Pro as an example.

    PS: Just a hunch, but I'm guessing the same people that want Apple to build the elusive xMac are probably the same ones that complain about Tim Cook being photographed having dinner with friends or that Apple Park landscaping is underway are taking away resources from releasing new Macs. The irony, if true. 
    Limited resources? Thats a laugh
    If I you don't think that Apple has any limitations on resources then that explains you lack of comprehension and unreasonable expectations.
    edited March 10
  • Reply 153 of 159
    obsrvr said:
    My previous firm (in a technical consulting niche in the architectural/construction market) started with early Macintosh computers because of a single piece of niche software relevant to our design work.  Our clients, however, used PCs and the developing Windows lineup, communicating with the Office suite and designing with Autocad.  We were forced to follow suit in order to be on their teams.  Subsequently better technical software programs were written for the Windows OS and we transitioned to the same desktops and portables that the business world was adopting everywhere.   I retired in 2008 and am interested in a wide variety of things, and use an old 2009 iMac.  I still think that the Office suite is easy (enough) to work in, and use Excel a lot, but I sorely miss  VB and VBA for a lot of creative applications that I could build  myself. Microsoft seems to intentionally cripple their software for use on the Mac platform.

    Adobe is not much different.  Doing more art and photography, and informal engineering design, more as a hobby basis, I have stuck with Photoshop, which never seems a comfortable fit for my iMac.  So far, I don't like the drafting programs available for iMac compared with Autocad, and I don't like Autocad's pricing since I can't pay for it out of a revenue stream it generates, and wish for a good MacOS style, 3D drafting and design suite compatible with 3D printers that would be easy to learn and implement.  This is the manufacturing tech today and the foreseeable future, and I'd like to see Apple competing in the educational market more effectively than it is now.  I use a desktop because I am not as mobile in retirement as I had to be as a consultant.

    I may represent a growing segment of our aging population in that regard, but then, I regard a phone as an emergency device and care not a whit for its social medium value.  (Mobile phones may contribute more to death by highway each year than all the terrorists throw at us in the same time period, but that's an unrelated observation.)  I love Macs, and wish that Apple would improve its software offerings to match the stuff that a lot of coders are writing for the PC market because it's larger, in the business world.
    As a long time AutoCAD user on Windows, when I started using AutoCAD on a 5K iMac back in 2014, I was disappointed that Autodesk tried to "Macify" the UI. This may have made sense for a Mac person interested in AutoCAD, but with no experience with it, (never mind how few people this might be), but ignoring a very large installed base of existing AutoCAD users familiar with a certain UI made no sense, unless the Mac version UI was so much better--which it definitely was not. I was just starting to figure out how to tweak AutoCAD Mac to get closer to the Windows version, then 2017 came out. Much better! AutoCAD (& AutoCAD LT) 2017 for Mac is definitely an improvement over previous versions, especially the UI. It is now more consistent with the Windows version, with layout tabs along the bottom and open drawing tabs along the top (I can't believe they only now figured this out).  Even Microsoft made their Office UI more consistent across OSes, which makes it that much easier to change platforms or remain cross-platform. You may or may not like Autodesk or MS software, but being consistent across platforms I think is very important.

    BTW, as you suggest, AutoCAD is only available on subscription now but AutoCAD LT (not 3D I realize) is relatively cheap--you can actually go 1 month at time for $45/mo or spring for $270/yr.

    PS: For 3D CAD, SketchUp is not bad. A lot of people (including some pros) really like it. Free version is fine for personal projects that don't need proper sheet layouts and such, and Pro version is inexpensive. It's a bit confusing if you're coming from AutoCAD, but the online tutorials help figuring it out.
    edited March 10 xzu
  • Reply 154 of 159
    RogueCitizen1RogueCitizen1 Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    I'm offended that Apple Insider validates the horrid treatment of the Mac product line.   Everyone knows that the CEO of Apple has a background in cost control at Compaq,  but the bigger question is why the hell he won't allow for incremental yearly updates to the Macintosh computer line across the board like they have traditionally done years before.

    to do motherboard updates would not cost much and sell more computers than the current pathetic pace.  Hell, it is an accounting point which wouldn't even cost much.  This was a huge fail to the Apple Insider readership. It's beyond sad that Apple doesn't do product refreshes this way when it has been obvious new advancements have been made in other product lines.   

    This stuff is making people windows users again and AI shows that it really is not an advocate for consumers.    just a corporate shill?    Lame
    edited March 11
  • Reply 155 of 159
    I appreciate the details of the product cycles and how apple retains customer loyalty by not having to buy a new MacBook until the older model is not supported. It's also interesting that you highlighted that Mac users do not usually revert to Windows after using Mac for long enough.
  • Reply 156 of 159
    AppleInsider said: "Apple has enough money to make a really fast desktop Mac Pro even if it doesn't sell in significant quantities."
    It wouldn't cost much to design an excellent update to the Mac Mini. It wouldn't have to be so tiny -- just have Thunderbolt 3, SSD storage, and especially RAM upgradeable to 32 GB (or more).
  • Reply 157 of 159
    nealtnealt Posts: 1member
    I would suggest that Apple put the MacOS on the iPad. I think they have enough hardware in the iPad to do it. Microsoft's Surface Pro has taken this approach and has attracted many users. Running IOS on the Mac should be easy as they already have an simulator.
  • Reply 158 of 159
    SoliSoli Posts: 2,887member
    nealt said:
    I would suggest that Apple put the MacOS on the iPad. I think they have enough hardware in the iPad to do it. Microsoft's Surface Pro has taken this approach and has attracted many users. Running IOS on the Mac should be easy as they already have an simulator.
    Apple has enough "HW engineers" to do many things, but why you think they should do it because you think they can do it is something else entirely.
  • Reply 159 of 159
    It doesn't help when they drop their own software support as they update the OS's and iOS's.....

    ...as an art photographer still happily running a 2010 iMac dual screen and having used Aperture since it's inception as my digital darkroom, it's really killing it for me,(and I suspect many others like me), that the updated OS's aren't so Aperture friendly as all that. I'm running the latest Sierra version and it's still tanking my Aperture images library.

    Photos just SUCKS for real photography....

    While I can't afford to just replace my gear,(see Art Photography), I certainly CAN afford to work with software that moves my 2010 product into the NOW. The fact that Apple has not obsoleted elderware is part of what sold me on Apple many many years ago- they just don't trash hardware every few years by creating not-compatible OS's. It would be sweet if they'd take that wider view into some of their own,(past), creativity/artistic softwares that may, or may not, integrate well with the multi-updated OS and iOS wares that we are now running across all of our platforms and devices.  

    I really don't think that,in spite of their insistences, they are all that CONCERNED with the needs of the artistic community at large. I don't use my iPad Pro to take photos, for instance,(yet I am exploring the limits of what an iPhone 6s can do with photography), I DO use my Mac and my iPad to work with images I've made on my DSLR and film cameras. It's realistic to say that Apple's largest margin is in catering to the needs of 18->39 year-old iPhone Facebooker I-Text-While-Driving clientele.

    It would REALLY be Thinking Different for them to stay square with those of us who have been here since before the Cube and the Quicksilver.
    It was, after all, the black turtle-neck wearing crowd that made Apple the Cool Kid in the first place.
     ;) 



Sign In or Register to comment.