One cannot always wait. I own a SW company and hired recently 2 new SW engineers. In the past such people got a MBP, now I've bought them a linux based Dell XPS13 with Skylake processor. Apple lost this opportunity. I cannot understand that Apple does not manage to launch a Skylake MBP, while other manufacturers made similar configurations available around Christmas. Apple is neglecting its Mac line, its management is to blame
And the drivers were so buggy that most early Skylake laptops crashed a lot until Intel released updated drivers in April. Also, the 28W Skylake processors that are suitable for the MacBook Pro just came out a few weeks ago, not back around Christmas. It's clear that the MacBook Air is on the way out (hence it didn't get a Skylake update), and likely the 28W chips either weren't available in sufficient quantities for a Q3-16 MacBook Pro launch, or Apple decided to use the delay to make way for a more radical redesign. Also, CPU performance hasn't improved significantly from Haswell to Broadwell to Skylake (the optimizations have been mostly power management and the GPU).
So is the MBP a special configuration that no PC maker utilizes? What Mac would be equivalent to PCs that have been updated with Skylake?
The only thing you could say is that Apple's doesn't have any updated machines for sale. No one wants to buy a laptop with a 2-year-old processor in it (at the same price as when it was new!)
However... if Apple had released some amazing new machines... and still no one bought them... then you could panic.
But that's not what happened here.
Simply put... Apple's sales are slumping because they haven't had any new machines to offer. They should pick up later this year though... hopefully...
That's not spinning it as a positive though. That's making an excuse for why it's happening. That Apple hasn't kept the Mac line up to date since Steve's death is no one's fault but their own. If they don't announce some bold improvements soon, I'm about three months from giving up on them for my small business needs.
Oh I agree. I didn't mean to suggest that it was positive... I was just explaining why it is happened.
Yes... when you don't release new meaningful models... your sales go down. Apple should be aware of this.
The thing that strikes me as particularly bizarre about the Mac situation is that there seems to be a lot of low-hanging fruit -- changes they could make and products they could introduce that don't require any huge breakthrough. They didn't *have* to move the Mac Mini to a form factor so small that it can't support a quad core CPU, for example. It would not violate the laws of physics to have a version of the Mac Pro with two CPUs and one GPU, or to update the Mac Pro more often than every 3 years. Just by offering a little bit more model diversity -- and keeping those models up to date with CPU and GPU -- they could probably have been flat this past quarter rather than down.
Beyond model diversity, there's also some fairly non-earth-shattering improvements they could make. How about TouchID for Macs? How about a more complete line of hardware for time machine backups? How about external fusion drives that connect via thunderbolt? 5k external display?
One thing that will be great once it's done is the new file system, if for no other reason that it means an end to the spinning beach ball when an external hard drive spins up for a time machine backup. But sheesh -- that should have been done forever ago.
Btw, you assume incorrectly when you say that I'm a PC guy. I own a 2009 Mac Pro, a 2014 iMac, an iPad Air, an iPhone 6+, and an Apple Watch. My first Apple computer was an Apple IIe in 1983. I have long used and appreciated Apple products. Perhaps you are a blind follower, but I'm not -- I love Apple, but that doesn't mean I ignore problems.
Here's a no-brainer, being that Apple touts itself as the company that delivers the best computing experience in their products: Retina-quality screens (for those products that include them) and SSD's in all base configurations across the board. So get rid of the non-Retina iMacs and MacBook Air. Get rid of spinning hard drives in the base config, or at least make the base config an option between a pure SSD and a respectable Fusion Drive (as in no rinky-dink 24GB SSD paired with the HD). And after they do that, get rid of the terms "Air" and "Retina". "Air" lost its meaning with the release of the new MacBook, and Retina will if everything they sell has a Retina screen.
I get that Moore's Law has been overtaken by the laws of physics, which is impacting CPU and GPU performance. But it seems to me there are a lot of simple design decisions Apple could make outside of the CPU and GPU that would send their machines back into the limelight and give customers the feeling they are getting a good value for what they're paying. A 4K iMac with a 5500RPM hard drive does not proffer a sense of value, and Apple just looks greedy when they charge you more for the "upgrade" to a crappy (24GB) Fusion Drive. And those low-budget components like HD's and non-Retina screens do impact the user experience.
This is entirely understandable given that product life ownership of Mac is substantially longer than other PC products. People generally do not feel the need to change as the products are very robust, very reliable and the OS very useable.
Small but simple point. My MBP is now almost 4 years old, I use it 4-5 hours a day almost 7 days a week. It shows near zero signs of wear, not even a single slightly faded keyboard letter.
I have in the past had VAIO's, Tosh etc and not one last anywhere near so well.
Contrast this with most if not all other PC solutions from other vendors. I am not bashing them, just making the point. A aluminium solid build vs in most cases plastic and more plastic from PC vendors.
So, whilst units are steady this is more of a factor of good product just work and last so lets take things into context.
It not a port thing its a fact of engineering for long term use.
Macs might last longer on average - though this might just as well be because of more enthusiastic users who take better care of their computers on average, and low-end PCs killing overall stats - but that still doesn't mean that there are no solid PCs that can go on for long time. Just looking at my wider household and close friends... my brother is still using my old HP ProBook from 2008. Running Windows Vista, last clean reinstall when I gave machine to him, in 2011. My wife's laptop is 2nd gen Sony VAIO S, should be around 5 years old. Never reinstalled, still runs original Win7. My spare laptop is 4 years old HP EliteBook 8570p, recently replaced HDD with SSD not for fault but for better performance. Win7 was reinstalled from scratch on SSD and upgraded to W10. My old desktop, based on Core 2 Quad, is my wife's "backup PC". That should be, what? 5 years old at least? My media PC is Phenom based desktop, it was recently "upgraded" from old dual-core Athlon motherboard (which died) to 2nd hand Phenom CPU-RAM-MoBo, which are 4-5 years old and were running in makeshift backup repository PC, meaning they were on 24/7.
And speaking of which, my wife's 2001 Toshiba Satellite 1000 still works. Completely useless with P3 CPU, 512MB RAM and 15GB HDD, but hey. It works.
Good machines - Lenovo Thinkpad R and T, HP EliteBooks and even some ProBooks, high-end Acer TravelMates... among others... can work for ages, and usually do. Heck, new TravelMates P6 nowadays come with default 4 years on-site warranty, at least here in NZ. Obviously Acer has confidence that they will run over 4 years?
Apple is never going to be #1 in marketshare, so who cares. Making a nice profit is what matters, not making cheap junk and selling it to cheap people.
What's better? 100 pounds of feces or 1 pound of pure gold? Which would you rather have?
Well said. The computer company graveyard is full of companies that didn't understand the difference between market share vs profits on quality products. Producing poor quality low grade systems sold at Walmart and Target for market share isn't going to create repeat customers.
The truth is is that the PC industry as a whole is collapsing and those that are showing higher market share this year will drop next year after the mass market is complete in fill up. The repeat customers will be those that need to replace systems that have stopped working. Apple has a base of customers that are willing to buy at a premium price and continue to upgrade on a consistent basis.
That's a bit narrow view, I think.
PC market has matured. If you have 4 years early iCore desktop and it still works fine, for example, you will not get much with new iCore desktop. Especially if you use computer for normal things - Office, social, media. Laptops are a bit different as battery life and thermals improve with each gen, but even there a lot of people use laptops as desktop replacements, on desk and plugged to mains, so even battery life is not critical for many.
Also... there is definite shift toward premium side, and more and more premium laptops are being offered from most (if not all) traditional Windows manufacturers. All followed by equally premium prices. Frankly, I don't even see MacBooks as overpriced machines anymore. Yes, many OEMs are still making cheap plastic units, but that side seems to be quite flat if not declining, while number of premium options constantly grows.
From where I stand, it seems obvious that everyone is willing to try repeating Apple's formula - sacrifice volume for higher margin. Are they succeeding, I couldn't tell, but intentions are there.
The thing that strikes me as particularly bizarre about the Mac situation is that there seems to be a lot of low-hanging fruit -- changes they could make and products they could introduce that don't require any huge breakthrough. They didn't *have* to move the Mac Mini to a form factor so small that it can't support a quad core CPU, for example. It would not violate the laws of physics to have a version of the Mac Pro with two CPUs and one GPU, or to update the Mac Pro more often than every 3 years. Just by offering a little bit more model diversity -- and keeping those models up to date with CPU and GPU -- they could probably have been flat this past quarter rather than down.
Beyond model diversity, there's also some fairly non-earth-shattering improvements they could make. How about TouchID for Macs? How about a more complete line of hardware for time machine backups? How about external fusion drives that connect via thunderbolt? 5k external display?
One thing that will be great once it's done is the new file system, if for no other reason that it means an end to the spinning beach ball when an external hard drive spins up for a time machine backup. But sheesh -- that should have been done forever ago.
Btw, you assume incorrectly when you say that I'm a PC guy. I own a 2009 Mac Pro, a 2014 iMac, an iPad Air, an iPhone 6+, and an Apple Watch. My first Apple computer was an Apple IIe in 1983. I have long used and appreciated Apple products. Perhaps you are a blind follower, but I'm not -- I love Apple, but that doesn't mean I ignore problems.
Here's a no-brainer, being that Apple touts itself as the company that delivers the best computing experience in their products: Retina-quality screens (for those products that include them) and SSD's in all base configurations across the board. So get rid of the non-Retina iMacs and MacBook Air. Get rid of spinning hard drives in the base config, or at least make the base config an option between a pure SSD and a respectable Fusion Drive (as in no rinky-dink 24GB SSD paired with the HD). And after they do that, get rid of the terms "Air" and "Retina". "Air" lost its meaning with the release of the new MacBook, and Retina will if everything they sell has a Retina screen.
I get that Moore's Law has been overtaken by the laws of physics, which is impacting CPU and GPU performance. But it seems to me there are a lot of simple design decisions Apple could make outside of the CPU and GPU that would send their machines back into the limelight and give customers the feeling they are getting a good value for what they're paying. A 4K iMac with a 5500RPM hard drive does not proffer a sense of value, and Apple just looks greedy when they charge you more for the "upgrade" to a crappy (24GB) Fusion Drive. And those low-budget components like HD's and non-Retina screens do impact the user experience.
I definitely agree that no Mac should come without an SSD and that the fusion drives need improvement. In terms of user experience, it would be better to ship a Mac with a Core2Duo and an SSD than with a 4 GHz Core i7 and a HDD.
I can see an argument for keeping non-retina screens around for price-sensitive customers, though, particularly in education.
Just plug into our projector, doh did not bring the adapter.
Wifi is down just plug into our ethernet, doh did not bring the adapter.
Buy a magazine, the sample images for the tutorial are on the DVD, doh!
Go to get files of fire wire drive, doh did not bring the adapter.
upgrade ram ... doh its soldered in.
go on a trip i have a bag full of damn adapter cables and bulky dvd drive.
my old old mac book pro had NONE of these problems, a nicer keyboard and I could swap out a flat battery to keep working away from a power point.
aside from performance my new mac book pro is an inferior more expensive machine.
the only thing keeping me now is the OS.
yeah but how did you plug a serial port mouse into your old MBP? or a parellel port printer? oh yeah, you didn't because you didn't have to do that anymore. same thing for me with all your other examples.
Comments
Yes... when you don't release new meaningful models... your sales go down. Apple should be aware of this.
Here's to hoping Apple fixes this mistake.
I get that Moore's Law has been overtaken by the laws of physics, which is impacting CPU and GPU performance. But it seems to me there are a lot of simple design decisions Apple could make outside of the CPU and GPU that would send their machines back into the limelight and give customers the feeling they are getting a good value for what they're paying. A 4K iMac with a 5500RPM hard drive does not proffer a sense of value, and Apple just looks greedy when they charge you more for the "upgrade" to a crappy (24GB) Fusion Drive. And those low-budget components like HD's and non-Retina screens do impact the user experience.
And speaking of which, my wife's 2001 Toshiba Satellite 1000 still works. Completely useless with P3 CPU, 512MB RAM and 15GB HDD, but hey. It works.
Good machines - Lenovo Thinkpad R and T, HP EliteBooks and even some ProBooks, high-end Acer TravelMates... among others... can work for ages, and usually do. Heck, new TravelMates P6 nowadays come with default 4 years on-site warranty, at least here in NZ. Obviously Acer has confidence that they will run over 4 years?
PC market has matured. If you have 4 years early iCore desktop and it still works fine, for example, you will not get much with new iCore desktop. Especially if you use computer for normal things - Office, social, media. Laptops are a bit different as battery life and thermals improve with each gen, but even there a lot of people use laptops as desktop replacements, on desk and plugged to mains, so even battery life is not critical for many.
Also... there is definite shift toward premium side, and more and more premium laptops are being offered from most (if not all) traditional Windows manufacturers. All followed by equally premium prices. Frankly, I don't even see MacBooks as overpriced machines anymore. Yes, many OEMs are still making cheap plastic units, but that side seems to be quite flat if not declining, while number of premium options constantly grows.
From where I stand, it seems obvious that everyone is willing to try repeating Apple's formula - sacrifice volume for higher margin. Are they succeeding, I couldn't tell, but intentions are there.
I can see an argument for keeping non-retina screens around for price-sensitive customers, though, particularly in education.
yeah but how did you plug a serial port mouse into your old MBP? or a parellel port printer? oh yeah, you didn't because you didn't have to do that anymore. same thing for me with all your other examples.