The iMac doesn't even have Thunderbolt 2 yet. So I assume this small rev will bring that up to date, along with HDMI 2.0. I'm assuming that USB 3.1 isn't ready for prime time yet.
Aside from that, 4K/Retina and RAM expansion in the 21" are the only things I can think of that are worth waiting for. Those will hopefully be in the next major update in the Fall.
Apple has always been modestly staffed; they are very careful about who they hire, they simply won't grab some random schmuck walking down De Anza Boulevard to fill up a chair.
Here's what we know: iPhones and iPads have dominated both unit sales and overall company revenue for many years (Macs are an increasingly smaller part of the revenue pie). We also know that notebooks are around 75% of total Mac unit sales. In 2013, Apple sold about 7 million Macs, so let's say that there were 2 million Mac desktops sold. We don't know the exact breakdown of sales per model type, but let's say that 75% of desktop Macs were iMacs (a number which I believe to be higher) but for the sake of this analysis, we'll say 500,000 Mac desktops are either Mac minis or Mac Pros.
That's not a lot of boxes.
My hunch is that Apple has a Mac Desktop engineering team that splits time between the Mac Pro and the Mac mini (and possibly to the iMac, although the latter product line has enough sales to probably merit a separate team). Things that the team learns from working on the Mac Pro can be applied to the mini, and vice versa. It makes no sense for Apple to run two fully independent teams on product lines that have such small sales. There is a good chance that the team that designed the new Mac Pro is working on the next generation Mac mini as we speak, and will switch back to the Mac Pro. Unlike the notebooks and the iMac which have some motivation to ship for the "back to school" sales season, that is not really the case for the Mac mini nor Mac Pro. Sure, there are deadlines for that team, but the deadlines don't correspond to a typical release cycle which is why Mac Pro started shipping a few units at the end of last year.
Apple has not gone a wild hiring spree for Mac engineers, so one might deduce that management is relative satisfied with the pace of new Mac products in their pipeline.
I think your estimates are way off.
Macs sold just over 16 million units for the fiscal year of 2013. Just off the top of my head that must be around 5 billion dollars in revenue from macs each quarter. That is just a guess off the top of my head and I think it is close to the low end but really a guess.
So I would say that you are off with regards to your premise.
The meaning of the resources argument, from my point of view at least, is not financial. Obviously there is ample cash to spend. The point is that Apple does not want to spend for such reasons. They proved it years ago, as I mentioned before, in the case of the pair OS X - iOS development. They had already tons of new cash each year in order to expand their developer teams, if they wanted to. Instead, they chose to move developers around according to the needs. They always try to push the available human resources to their limit. But this may mean delays and neglect for products that are not in the front line.
This is more like it, seems to me. Keep focus, move like a start-up, stay nimble. Eddy Cue and Jimmy Iovine were recently backing up this idea
Plus, good engineers don't grow on trees, and money can't buy everything.
Indeed. And a rolling stone gathers no moss, too many cooks spoil the broth and don't keep your eggs all in one basket.
Macs sold just over 16 million units for the fiscal year of 2013. Just off the top of my head that must be around 5 billion dollars in revenue from macs each quarter. That is just a guess off the top of my head and I think it is close to the low end but really a guess.
So I would say that you are off with regards to your premise.
You're right, I apparently I grabbed the wrong numbers off the Internet. It was 16.34 million Macs sold in FY 2013. Mac revenue is about 15%, so from 2013 revenue of $170.9 billion, that's about $25.6 billion for the Mac product line ($1500 ASP).
Anyhow, we can redo the calculations. That would be about 12 million notebooks, 4 million desktops. Of those desktops, probably 3 million are iMacs, the rest are Mac minis or Pros.
If we use the same 75-25 breakout guesstimate between Mac minis and Mac Pros, that's 750K minis and 250K Pros. That's still a paltry 20,000 Pros being sold every month.
Mac sales in 2013 were the lowest since 2010, down 4% Year-over-Year, but the entire PC industry was down 10% YoY.
If we use the same 75-25 breakout guesstimate between Mac minis and Mac Pros, that's 750K minis and 250K Pros. That's still a paltry 20,000 Pros being sold every month.
Mac sales in 2013 were the lowest since 2010, down 4% Year-over-Year, but the entire PC industry was down 10% YoY.
That mac pro volume is unlikely. This was obviously a busy quarter for the Mac Pro, given that it was the first major update since 2010. Marvin had a decent breakdown estimate. AMD is estimated to have shipped around 20% of all workstation GPUs for the first quarter, up from 15%. Even if that was entirely attributed to Apple, they ship 2 per workstation. 250K would actually be a high number, and given the lack of updates last year, I don't think they sold anywhere near that many in 2013.
True, I just gave the benefit of the doubt to the Mac Pro. Like you, I think 250K unit sales would be high, but regardless, the point is that Mac Pro is a fraction of the total Mac business.
My personal guess (with no numbers to prove it) is that Mac Pro is about 2% of total Mac unit sales.
It's really just a silly exercise since Apple does not break out product line sales.
True, I just gave the benefit of the doubt to the Mac Pro. Like you, I think 250K unit sales would be high, but regardless, the point is that Mac Pro is a fraction of the total Mac business.
My personal guess (with no numbers to prove it) is that Mac Pro is about 2% of total Mac unit sales.
It's really just a silly exercise since Apple does not break out product line sales.
That's probably about right, although I somehow forgot to include my reference link in the last post. It's referred to fairly frequently for this stuff.
The Mac Mini I have a good feeling is being dropped eventually.It had it's time and now we move on to better and bigger things by Apple.
How does that make any sense at all? It stands in a category on its own. Its the most affordable Mac. Why would anyone who bought one want to move on to something "bigger" OR "better"?
How does that make any sense at all? It stands in a category on its own. Its the most affordable Mac. Why would anyone who bought one want to move on to something "bigger" OR "better"?
I am a fan of the mac mini because its the cheapest way to buy a new mac. And I am awaiting the new updated or revision mac mini to come out. I have been waiting since last November. But I have a weird feeling that Tim Cooks Apple is going to nix it on the premise it doesnt make enough money. Tim Cook is too much of a logisitics guy. I get the feeling that numbers are more important to him.
Cook is a numbers man all the way.He is no Steve Jobs.
Mr. Cook “thought the world would love a smaller and less expensive tablet,” said Robert A. Iger, the chief executive of Disney and a member of Apple’s board. It was a product that Mr. Jobs thought did not have a market, he said.
Jonathan Ive, the head of design at Apple and a name nearly as adored by its followers as Steve Jobs, says Mr. Cook has not neglected the company’s central mission: innovation. “Honestly, I don’t think anything’s changed,” he said. And that includes the clamor for some exciting new thing. “People felt exactly the same way when we were working on the iPhone,” Mr. Ive added.
If Mr. Jobs was maniacal about design, Mr. Cook projects “quiet consideration,” Mr. Ive said. Mr. Cook digests things carefully, with time, which Mr. Ive said “testifies to the fact he knows it’s important.”
The Mini: Maybe even a 1/2 cylinder of a Mac Pro, utilizing some of the cooling technologies... or even be passive cooling. It can't be too small, as it will need 2 antenna to be an effective 802.11ac receiver...
I'm loving the idea of a 1/2 (or 1/3) cylinder of robot-machined aluminum for the MacNano (15,n). 64/128 GB/SSD HDMI/2USB, etc... but the big question is: iOS (A7) or MacOSX (i5)?? Opps... MacNano won't be an iOS machine because that requires (or works best with??) a touch screen.
Comments
If it doesn't get a retina or 4K screen- NOT INTERESTED.
Guess you’re not interested.
Absolutely not.
Maybe the Mac Mini will become the AppleTV Pro? Some kind of superior gaming machine and media center?
Nope. Now that SJ is gone, Cook is finally free to release the fabled headless xMac.
Absolutely not what?
The iMac doesn't even have Thunderbolt 2 yet. So I assume this small rev will bring that up to date, along with HDMI 2.0. I'm assuming that USB 3.1 isn't ready for prime time yet.
Aside from that, 4K/Retina and RAM expansion in the 21" are the only things I can think of that are worth waiting for. Those will hopefully be in the next major update in the Fall.
Apple has always been modestly staffed; they are very careful about who they hire, they simply won't grab some random schmuck walking down De Anza Boulevard to fill up a chair.
Here's what we know: iPhones and iPads have dominated both unit sales and overall company revenue for many years (Macs are an increasingly smaller part of the revenue pie). We also know that notebooks are around 75% of total Mac unit sales. In 2013, Apple sold about 7 million Macs, so let's say that there were 2 million Mac desktops sold. We don't know the exact breakdown of sales per model type, but let's say that 75% of desktop Macs were iMacs (a number which I believe to be higher) but for the sake of this analysis, we'll say 500,000 Mac desktops are either Mac minis or Mac Pros.
That's not a lot of boxes.
My hunch is that Apple has a Mac Desktop engineering team that splits time between the Mac Pro and the Mac mini (and possibly to the iMac, although the latter product line has enough sales to probably merit a separate team). Things that the team learns from working on the Mac Pro can be applied to the mini, and vice versa. It makes no sense for Apple to run two fully independent teams on product lines that have such small sales. There is a good chance that the team that designed the new Mac Pro is working on the next generation Mac mini as we speak, and will switch back to the Mac Pro. Unlike the notebooks and the iMac which have some motivation to ship for the "back to school" sales season, that is not really the case for the Mac mini nor Mac Pro. Sure, there are deadlines for that team, but the deadlines don't correspond to a typical release cycle which is why Mac Pro started shipping a few units at the end of last year.
Apple has not gone a wild hiring spree for Mac engineers, so one might deduce that management is relative satisfied with the pace of new Mac products in their pipeline.
I think your estimates are way off.
Macs sold just over 16 million units for the fiscal year of 2013. Just off the top of my head that must be around 5 billion dollars in revenue from macs each quarter. That is just a guess off the top of my head and I think it is close to the low end but really a guess.
So I would say that you are off with regards to your premise.
Translation: nobody buys the Mac mini. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing for Apple. More expensive computer = more profit.
That's ridiculous. The Mac mini is the most affordable Mac, and can still be upgraded after purchasing. The iMac is locked down, and overpriced.
I am anxiously awaiting a new Mac mini and it is ridiculous that is hasn't even been spec-bumped. RIDICULOUS.
Are you sure it's ridiculous?
Maybe Apple will redesign the mini as Mac Mini with Beats.
It'll only come in gold and will be renamed the Mac Blingi.
The meaning of the resources argument, from my point of view at least, is not financial. Obviously there is ample cash to spend. The point is that Apple does not want to spend for such reasons. They proved it years ago, as I mentioned before, in the case of the pair OS X - iOS development. They had already tons of new cash each year in order to expand their developer teams, if they wanted to. Instead, they chose to move developers around according to the needs. They always try to push the available human resources to their limit. But this may mean delays and neglect for products that are not in the front line.
This is more like it, seems to me. Keep focus, move like a start-up, stay nimble. Eddy Cue and Jimmy Iovine were recently backing up this idea
Plus, good engineers don't grow on trees, and money can't buy everything.
Indeed. And a rolling stone gathers no moss, too many cooks spoil the broth and don't keep your eggs all in one basket.
I think your estimates are way off.
Macs sold just over 16 million units for the fiscal year of 2013. Just off the top of my head that must be around 5 billion dollars in revenue from macs each quarter. That is just a guess off the top of my head and I think it is close to the low end but really a guess.
So I would say that you are off with regards to your premise.
You're right, I apparently I grabbed the wrong numbers off the Internet. It was 16.34 million Macs sold in FY 2013. Mac revenue is about 15%, so from 2013 revenue of $170.9 billion, that's about $25.6 billion for the Mac product line ($1500 ASP).
Anyhow, we can redo the calculations. That would be about 12 million notebooks, 4 million desktops. Of those desktops, probably 3 million are iMacs, the rest are Mac minis or Pros.
If we use the same 75-25 breakout guesstimate between Mac minis and Mac Pros, that's 750K minis and 250K Pros. That's still a paltry 20,000 Pros being sold every month.
Mac sales in 2013 were the lowest since 2010, down 4% Year-over-Year, but the entire PC industry was down 10% YoY.
If we use the same 75-25 breakout guesstimate between Mac minis and Mac Pros, that's 750K minis and 250K Pros. That's still a paltry 20,000 Pros being sold every month.
Mac sales in 2013 were the lowest since 2010, down 4% Year-over-Year, but the entire PC industry was down 10% YoY.
That mac pro volume is unlikely. This was obviously a busy quarter for the Mac Pro, given that it was the first major update since 2010. Marvin had a decent breakdown estimate. AMD is estimated to have shipped around 20% of all workstation GPUs for the first quarter, up from 15%. Even if that was entirely attributed to Apple, they ship 2 per workstation. 250K would actually be a high number, and given the lack of updates last year, I don't think they sold anywhere near that many in 2013.
True, I just gave the benefit of the doubt to the Mac Pro. Like you, I think 250K unit sales would be high, but regardless, the point is that Mac Pro is a fraction of the total Mac business.
My personal guess (with no numbers to prove it) is that Mac Pro is about 2% of total Mac unit sales.
It's really just a silly exercise since Apple does not break out product line sales.
True, I just gave the benefit of the doubt to the Mac Pro. Like you, I think 250K unit sales would be high, but regardless, the point is that Mac Pro is a fraction of the total Mac business.
My personal guess (with no numbers to prove it) is that Mac Pro is about 2% of total Mac unit sales.
It's really just a silly exercise since Apple does not break out product line sales.
That's probably about right, although I somehow forgot to include my reference link in the last post. It's referred to fairly frequently for this stuff.
The Mac Mini I have a good feeling is being dropped eventually.It had it's time and now we move on to better and bigger things by Apple.
The Mac Mini I have a good feeling is being dropped eventually.It had it's time and now we move on to better and bigger things by Apple.
How does that make any sense at all? It stands in a category on its own. Its the most affordable Mac. Why would anyone who bought one want to move on to something "bigger" OR "better"?
How does that make any sense at all? It stands in a category on its own. Its the most affordable Mac. Why would anyone who bought one want to move on to something "bigger" OR "better"?
I am a fan of the mac mini because its the cheapest way to buy a new mac. And I am awaiting the new updated or revision mac mini to come out. I have been waiting since last November. But I have a weird feeling that Tim Cooks Apple is going to nix it on the premise it doesnt make enough money. Tim Cook is too much of a logisitics guy. I get the feeling that numbers are more important to him.
I hope I am wrong.
Perhaps a mini version of the Mac Pro is about to be announced. That would be nice.
I think you are right on this. Cook is a numbers man all the way.He is no Steve Jobs.
The Mini: Maybe even a 1/2 cylinder of a Mac Pro, utilizing some of the cooling technologies... or even be passive cooling. It can't be too small, as it will need 2 antenna to be an effective 802.11ac receiver...
I'm loving the idea of a 1/2 (or 1/3) cylinder of robot-machined aluminum for the MacNano (15,n). 64/128 GB/SSD HDMI/2USB, etc... but the big question is: iOS (A7) or MacOSX (i5)?? Opps... MacNano won't be an iOS machine because that requires (or works best with??) a touch screen.