You must not know any video, audio, animation, or other media professionals. I won't get over it and neither will they. Scientific applications require expandability. Thunderbolt is not going to replace internally expandable computers. Apple is losing the faith of the pros that kept them alive before the stock speculators and bean counters began driving decisions. Upgradability is critical to many of us out here. Some of us must do more complex work than you. Not all of us are looking for an "adequate" piece of sculpture. I want my computer to be beautiful, but not sealed and inaccessible. I think the Mac Pro is a beautiful design. They might be able to meet their production goals with a bit more space inside as well. Don't forget "form follows function". Some of us have more complex functioning in mind. Not everyone, but there are enough of us who have staked our livelihoods on computers with expandability and the highest possible performance.
It is now obvious with hindsight that the new designed iMac was a generation too early. They could have left the old design for one more generation and still put in the ivy bridge, usb 3, ugraded SSD plus HDD offerings/Fusion, and faster GPU's. They would have no supply problems and they'd have been able to delivery earlier. This would have more than satisfied pretty close to 100% of users.
100% agree & I've said the same thing frequently. They screwed up the entire refresh in a huge way.
I wonder if Tim didn't have the strength to stand up to Jonny and say "the new design ships early 2013 once we've worked out the manufacturing issues".
Had they released a speedbump back in April or so last year they'd be about ready to surprise everyone with the new revision now.
Apple isn't afraid to make money. They usually do continue to sell an older product right up until the new one is being put on the shelves. They even keep it hush hush for as long as possible like they did with the iPad (4). Because of all the historical data I am not satisfied with simply saying "Apple did it wrong" without considering why they did what they did with the iMac and at least one other product, as previously mentioned. The simplest answer to me is that they choose to lose some Mac units sales, revenue and profit from a severely limited number of iMacs to get an 3 month of progress on something.
The point is that I can't imagine a single thing Apple gained by not having an iMac on the shelves for 2 months.
Clearly, there might be some reason for delaying the new product (manufacturing difficulties, need to build inventory, etc). But I can't see ANY upside to taking the old one off the market for a couple of months. Maybe you can enlighten me.
You must not know any video, audio, animation, or other media professionals. I won't get over it and neither will they. Scientific applications require expandability. Thunderbolt is not going to replace internally expandable computers. Apple is losing the faith of the pros that kept them alive before the stock speculators and bean counters began driving decisions. Upgradability is critical to many of us out here. Some of us must do more complex work than you. Not all of us are looking for an "adequate" piece of sculpture. I want my computer to be beautiful, but not sealed and inaccessible. I think the Mac Pro is a beautiful design. They might be able to meet their production goals with a bit more space inside as well. Don't forget "form follows function". Some of us have more complex functioning in mind. Not everyone, but there are enough of us who have staked our livelihoods on computers with expandability and the highest possible performance.
That's why Apple sells the Mac Pro.
Oh, what you want is a computer with maximum power, maximum expandability, and a $499 price point. Not going to happen.
The point is that I can't imagine a single thing Apple gained by not having an iMac on the shelves for 2 months.
Clearly, there might be some reason for delaying the new product (manufacturing difficulties, need to build inventory, etc). But I can't see ANY upside to taking the old one off the market for a couple of months. Maybe you can enlighten me.
I already gave an example. There might be a reason an extra 3 months on working on the display bonding or stir-friction welding or something else in the iMacs will benefit them in the long run that makes any profits gained by eschewing the design changes and sticking with the old style iMacs less opportunistic for their long term bottom line.
We have to remember that our inability to conceive of a reason is not proof that there is no reason. And we both know that it's atypical for Apple to allow such a wide gap between the new and old products so it's only logical not to rule out a reason for its existence even if we can't figure out what it is.
Apple would have sold a LOT more Macs in the quarter if they had held off the iMac update till 2013. It was a dumb move to announce the product weeks before it was to ship AND THEN when the ship date did arrive not have enough AND THEN have manufacturing issues.
Quite embarrassing actually and they paid the cost of their mistake this quarter.
Yes, it was a monumental fu[k up. If Jobs were still CEO, heads would roll. Cook wouldn't sleep for weeks. It would be a bloodbath at Apple.
It is now obvious with hindsight that the new designed iMac was a generation too early. They could have left the old design for one more generation and still put in the ivy bridge, usb 3, ugraded SSD plus HDD offerings/Fusion, and faster GPU's. They would have no supply problems and they'd have been able to delivery earlier. This would have more than satisfied pretty close to 100% of users.
What a monumental fu[k up on the iMac redesign. If Steve Jobs were still CEO it would be a bloodbath at Apple.
Note to the Mod who keeps deleting my post: WTF? You got a problem with Apple making a mistake, take it up with Apple instead of those who point it out.
Who was fired when Apple didn't sell a single iPhone for months back in 2008?
A better example is the MobileMe debacle. Jobs fired MobileMe director Rob Schoeben after chewing out the team and telling them they should hate each other for having let each other down. He condemned the entire team for having "tarnished Apple's image".
Note that the MobileMe debacle didn't have the same repercussions on sales that this iMac debacle has. This iMac failure is comparable to some of Motorola's failures, and it's well documented how Jobs felt about Motorola.
I'm surprised there isn't more anger here at AI given how many users are also Apple stock investors. When Apple's mistakes are costing you money and you still make excuses for Apple, that's a warning sign that you're a fanboy.
Or more people use optical drives than Apple thought and they don't want to be forced to use an external one when a desktop computer should have internal room for it?
A better example is the MobileMe debacle. Jobs fired MobileMe director Rob Schoeben after chewing out the team and telling them they should hate each other for having let each other down. He condemned the entire team for having "tarnished Apple's image".
Note that the MobileMe debacle didn't have the same repercussions on sales that this iMac debacle has. This iMac failure is comparable to some of Motorola's failures, and it's well documented how Jobs felt about Motorola.
I'm surprised there isn't more anger here at AI given how many users are also Apple stock investors. When Apple's mistakes are costing you money and you still make excuses for Apple, that's a warning sign that you're a fanboy.
What resources could possibly not be available to the MobileMe team? They ran out of a href tags? There is nothing relevant about the two. Again, whom did Jobs fire when the have no iPhone sales for 2 months when they transitioned from one model to the other?
Hint: I'm trying to get you to see that production has certain limitations that can (and have) caused issues in the short term but have little to no effect in the long term and can actually be beneficial in the long run.
If you are still not getting it let me try a scenario you might be familiar with. Two people just graduate high school. One get a job right out of HS and is making money. The other decides to go to college to further his education. He doesn't work for 4 more years yet in that time frame the other guy has made money each week and has been promoted in his job. 3 more years go by and the kid in college has finished his masters and now he's ready to enter the work force. Which one is likely to make more money in their lifetime?
The bottom line is you can't claim that Jobs wouldn't have done the same thing and there is precedence to show that Apple under Jobs rule has done the same thing which makes any claim that Jobs would never if he were alive or Tim Cook is ruining Apple to be complete BS>
Or more people use optical drives than Apple thought and they don't want to be forced to use an external one when a desktop computer should have internal room for it?
Just a thought.
So they have a 3-4 week waiting period because Apple is lying? Seriously?!
They made the mistake of using a design that is so difficult to mass manufacture. This show the design is unpractical. You can claim the design is great, but what good there is if you cannot mass produce it?
They made the mistake of using a design that is so difficult to mass manufacture. This show the design is unpractical. You can claim the design is great, but what good there is if you cannot mass produce it?
Why can't they mass produce it? Why did they choose this design?
The chief designer of the iMac is deluded here. He thinks his so-called industrial design is so great that they cannot mass produce the product to the detriment of the company.
Well, maybe it does not really matter anyway, since their market share is so low.
The point is that I can't imagine a single thing Apple gained by not having an iMac on the shelves for 2 months.
Clearly, there might be some reason for delaying the new product (manufacturing difficulties, need to build inventory, etc). But I can't see ANY upside to taking the old one off the market for a couple of months. Maybe you can enlighten me.
That's why Apple sells the Mac Pro.
Oh, what you want is a computer with maximum power, maximum expandability, and a $499 price point. Not going to happen.
I am not expecting a $499 price point for a Mac Pro. My last one a 2010 5,1 cost well over $4000, before graphics upgrades and more RAM, and I would pay that again for the next version. You sir, have no comprehension of the professional market and the money that is spent there. I just hope Apple honors their promise of "something great" , intimating a new Mac Pro, later this year. They are going to lose the the Pro, Science, and high end market to Windows, and I dread that. Super thin, difficult to manufacture, non-upgradable computers that look good on the desks at fashion magazine offices are not what we need at the high end. No disrespect intended to Jony Ive. He is a genius, who happens to be a neighbor of mine in Hawaii, where I had the largest non-linear editing sales business in the state a few years ago. All Mac by the way, Avid, etc.
He did the PowerMac G5 design in the first place. You know, probably the single best tower computer design ever made? I think he knows what he's doing in this regard.
Comments
You must not know any video, audio, animation, or other media professionals. I won't get over it and neither will they. Scientific applications require expandability. Thunderbolt is not going to replace internally expandable computers. Apple is losing the faith of the pros that kept them alive before the stock speculators and bean counters began driving decisions. Upgradability is critical to many of us out here. Some of us must do more complex work than you. Not all of us are looking for an "adequate" piece of sculpture. I want my computer to be beautiful, but not sealed and inaccessible. I think the Mac Pro is a beautiful design. They might be able to meet their production goals with a bit more space inside as well. Don't forget "form follows function". Some of us have more complex functioning in mind. Not everyone, but there are enough of us who have staked our livelihoods on computers with expandability and the highest possible performance.
100% agree & I've said the same thing frequently. They screwed up the entire refresh in a huge way.
I wonder if Tim didn't have the strength to stand up to Jonny and say "the new design ships early 2013 once we've worked out the manufacturing issues".
Had they released a speedbump back in April or so last year they'd be about ready to surprise everyone with the new revision now.
The point is that I can't imagine a single thing Apple gained by not having an iMac on the shelves for 2 months.
Clearly, there might be some reason for delaying the new product (manufacturing difficulties, need to build inventory, etc). But I can't see ANY upside to taking the old one off the market for a couple of months. Maybe you can enlighten me.
That's why Apple sells the Mac Pro.
Oh, what you want is a computer with maximum power, maximum expandability, and a $499 price point. Not going to happen.
I already gave an example. There might be a reason an extra 3 months on working on the display bonding or stir-friction welding or something else in the iMacs will benefit them in the long run that makes any profits gained by eschewing the design changes and sticking with the old style iMacs less opportunistic for their long term bottom line.
We have to remember that our inability to conceive of a reason is not proof that there is no reason. And we both know that it's atypical for Apple to allow such a wide gap between the new and old products so it's only logical not to rule out a reason for its existence even if we can't figure out what it is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackbook
Apple would have sold a LOT more Macs in the quarter if they had held off the iMac update till 2013. It was a dumb move to announce the product weeks before it was to ship AND THEN when the ship date did arrive not have enough AND THEN have manufacturing issues.
Quite embarrassing actually and they paid the cost of their mistake this quarter.
Yes, it was a monumental fu[k up. If Jobs were still CEO, heads would roll. Cook wouldn't sleep for weeks. It would be a bloodbath at Apple.
Who was fired when Apple didn't sell a single iPhone for months back in 2008?
What a monumental fu[k up on the iMac redesign. If Steve Jobs were still CEO it would be a bloodbath at Apple.
Note to the Mod who keeps deleting my post: WTF? Stop being an Apple fanboy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AnalogJack
It is now obvious with hindsight that the new designed iMac was a generation too early. They could have left the old design for one more generation and still put in the ivy bridge, usb 3, ugraded SSD plus HDD offerings/Fusion, and faster GPU's. They would have no supply problems and they'd have been able to delivery earlier. This would have more than satisfied pretty close to 100% of users.
What a monumental fu[k up on the iMac redesign. If Steve Jobs were still CEO it would be a bloodbath at Apple.
Note to the Mod who keeps deleting my post: WTF? You got a problem with Apple making a mistake, take it up with Apple instead of those who point it out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
Who was fired when Apple didn't sell a single iPhone for months back in 2008?
A better example is the MobileMe debacle. Jobs fired MobileMe director Rob Schoeben after chewing out the team and telling them they should hate each other for having let each other down. He condemned the entire team for having "tarnished Apple's image".
Note that the MobileMe debacle didn't have the same repercussions on sales that this iMac debacle has. This iMac failure is comparable to some of Motorola's failures, and it's well documented how Jobs felt about Motorola.
I'm surprised there isn't more anger here at AI given how many users are also Apple stock investors. When Apple's mistakes are costing you money and you still make excuses for Apple, that's a warning sign that you're a fanboy.
Or more people use optical drives than Apple thought and they don't want to be forced to use an external one when a desktop computer should have internal room for it?
Just a thought.
Originally Posted by MacTac
Just a thought.
A completely incorrect one.
What resources could possibly not be available to the MobileMe team? They ran out of a href tags? There is nothing relevant about the two. Again, whom did Jobs fire when the have no iPhone sales for 2 months when they transitioned from one model to the other?
Hint: I'm trying to get you to see that production has certain limitations that can (and have) caused issues in the short term but have little to no effect in the long term and can actually be beneficial in the long run.
If you are still not getting it let me try a scenario you might be familiar with. Two people just graduate high school. One get a job right out of HS and is making money. The other decides to go to college to further his education. He doesn't work for 4 more years yet in that time frame the other guy has made money each week and has been promoted in his job. 3 more years go by and the kid in college has finished his masters and now he's ready to enter the work force. Which one is likely to make more money in their lifetime?
The bottom line is you can't claim that Jobs wouldn't have done the same thing and there is precedence to show that Apple under Jobs rule has done the same thing which makes any claim that Jobs would never if he were alive or Tim Cook is ruining Apple to be complete BS>
So they have a 3-4 week waiting period because Apple is lying? Seriously?!
They made the mistake of using a design that is so difficult to mass manufacture. This show the design is unpractical. You can claim the design is great, but what good there is if you cannot mass produce it?
Why can't they mass produce it? Why did they choose this design?
Originally Posted by peter236
…a design that is… …difficult to mass manufacture. …show[s] the design is unpractical.
Eh, this doesn't quite follow.
The chief designer of the iMac is deluded here. He thinks his so-called industrial design is so great that they cannot mass produce the product to the detriment of the company.
Well, maybe it does not really matter anyway, since their market share is so low.
Originally Posted by peter236
He thinks his so-called industrial design is so great ?|? that they cannot mass produce the product…
Once again, these two parts don't follow. You have to have a connection, but the former doesn't imply the latter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
The point is that I can't imagine a single thing Apple gained by not having an iMac on the shelves for 2 months.
Clearly, there might be some reason for delaying the new product (manufacturing difficulties, need to build inventory, etc). But I can't see ANY upside to taking the old one off the market for a couple of months. Maybe you can enlighten me.
That's why Apple sells the Mac Pro.
Oh, what you want is a computer with maximum power, maximum expandability, and a $499 price point. Not going to happen.
I am not expecting a $499 price point for a Mac Pro. My last one a 2010 5,1 cost well over $4000, before graphics upgrades and more RAM, and I would pay that again for the next version. You sir, have no comprehension of the professional market and the money that is spent there. I just hope Apple honors their promise of "something great" , intimating a new Mac Pro, later this year. They are going to lose the the Pro, Science, and high end market to Windows, and I dread that. Super thin, difficult to manufacture, non-upgradable computers that look good on the desks at fashion magazine offices are not what we need at the high end. No disrespect intended to Jony Ive. He is a genius, who happens to be a neighbor of mine in Hawaii, where I had the largest non-linear editing sales business in the state a few years ago. All Mac by the way, Avid, etc.
Originally Posted by Jim W
No disrespect intended to Jony Ive.
He did the PowerMac G5 design in the first place. You know, probably the single best tower computer design ever made? I think he knows what he's doing in this regard.