Apple cuts prices on USB-C & Thunderbolt 3 gear in response to MacBook Pro backlash

168101112

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 224
    avon b7 said:

    brucemc said:
    digitol said:
    Nice, but not even close to good enough. Sounds like there is a serious problem with the new macbook pros. I have never had schiller & Co., come out and  be so vocal about a product launch. I smell fear, and desperation. They say best sales ever, I think the internet proves otherwise:  See what all the other big name longtime pro mac users are saying - 
    http://mjtsai.com/blog/2016/10/27/new-macbook-pros-and-the-state-of-the-mac/


    It must be true, I read it in the Internet. 
    It must be true. I heard it from the mouth of an Apple Engineer
    OMG... the new Rick Roll... LOL.
    baconstang
  • Reply 142 of 224
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,655member
    A nitpick:

    To use non-C connectors with a MacBook Pro you do not use a "dongle," you use an "adapter."

    A dongle is a piece of hardware that stores a software license. It connects to a computer to allow that software to run. Without it the software is disabled. The Pace iLok is an example of a dongle.

    A device that allows putting one kind of plug into another kind of jack/socket/port is an adapter.

    I know we all understand what we're talking about here, but by confusing the definition for others it impedes effective communication in the "pro" environments about which we're claiming concern. It leads to conversations like:

    Freelancer: "Pro Tools won't start. I'm getting a license authorization pop-up."
    Staffer: "You need to plug in the dongle."
    Freelancer: "No, I have the older machine with the regular ports."
    Staffer: "FML."
    I see where you're coming from on this but in current usage I believe dongle can actually be a synonym of adapter. Especially in this context .

    Merriam Webster has this: "a small device that plugs into a computer and serves as an adapter or as a security measure to enable the use of certain software"

    You're right on the ball with regards to the first use of the word though. I've been switching between adapter and dongle in my posts depending on which term seemed to be taking a hold on the internet when talking about the new models. Personally, I agree with you. Of the two I prefer 'adapter'.
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 143 of 224
    HASPs are dongles, but not all dongles are HASPs.

    Dongles can be adapters, HASPs, or basically anything that can be plugged in to add functionality that would otherwise be absent.
    edited November 2016 anome
  • Reply 144 of 224
    wood1208wood1208 Posts: 2,912member
    Most important price cut needed is for new 13.3" mackbook pro BASE model. Nw macbook pro has Inferior spec than equivalent windows laptop but asking twice the price.







  • Reply 145 of 224
    mr omr o Posts: 1,046member
    avon b7 said:

    It must be true. I heard it from the mouth of an Apple Engineer

    LOL, that is hilarious!

    Personally I am in favour of Apple's vision of moving away from dedicated ports on the Macbook Pro. For now, dongles make your computer futureproof and super personal: you can expand your machine into any creative direction you want at any given moment in time. You're no longer carrying around a laptop with ports that are obsolete. You'll always have the latest and greatest at a fraction of the cost. One day, we won't need dongles at all. 
    nolamacguyduervo
  • Reply 146 of 224
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    avon b7 said:
    flaneur said:
    Farnaby said:
    I use and love Apple since 1988. I would never consider using other products. But today, I have mixed feelings and I'm quite worried about Apple answering my simple needs. It's not these new MBP per se : they seem great machines, I'm very happy about some new features, like the touch bar and the touch ID. And even the USB-C / TB only ports seems a good decision. Apple's bold moves have never been the problem for me. But there's a lack of consistency and direction in the Mac field since years now that the MBP / Iphone 7 just put the light on. 

    So : MBP are for pros, so we keep the minijack... but without the optical port. The USB-C is the only way... but we don't use it for the new Iphone. We help the customers with an adapter for the Lightning only port on the Iphone... but we don't put an USB A/C adapter in MBP boxes. We are proud to impose in a bold move the port of the future and say "Get over it" to the customers... but a week later we make some discounts on some adapters. 

    Aren't there meetings where clear strategies are chosen ? Who thought it would be a good idea to abandon two universal, convenient, easy ports (USB and minijack) at the same time on two major products (iPhone and MBP) WITHOUT making the new solutions compatible (iPhone / USB-C and MBP / lightning) ? I'm not used to Apple sending mixed and contradictory messages. I'd rather have a company that makes errors from time to time but has a vision than this big headless thing that can't decide if it wants to go on with the pro market or to stop, or that explains us that portability justifies the most radical choices… but that makes the exact same choices (thin, thin, thin) on a desktop ? 

    Bottom and concrete line for me : I’m willing to change my early 2009 Mac Pro (a great and robust machine) for 2 or 3 years without finding a product fitting my needs : I considered the 2013 Mac Pro but monitors were too pricey for me at the time. Today the Mac Pro « bin » is too old. The iMac could have been a solution but since the machine is not very flexible, I want it to have the latest port technology, so I’m waiting for TB3… It’s fine because my 2009 Mac Pro works fine, but it’s very frustrating to be willing to buy a new machine, to enjoy the latest OS ans technology and to be unable to do it because Apple is too busy building a car in some warehouse. 

    Surely the new MBP doesn’t deserve such a negative feedback. They must be good machines. But the lack of global strategy, the mixed signals, the hesitations, the severe need for refreshments (iMac, Mac Pro etc.), in one word the context — all this explains the bitterness, the disappointment and sometimes the anger, that a 20% discount on some adapters or some approximative justifications won’t soften. 
    "I use and love Apple since 1988."  Not a good start. Troll meter engaged.

    Anyway, you're basically saying that the failure to remove the headphone jack on the new laptops indicates the lack of a global strategy. Got it.
    Basically. NO. He explained things well. Perhaps there was some interference coming out of your troll meter?

    He is worried about the bigger picture. He gave the example of lack of coordination/solution on the MBP/iPhone 7 connectivity issue. He wants to upgrade from a Mac Pro and have some future proofing. He looked at the rest of the product matrix and saw nothing to fit his needs for varying reason (stale lineup, lack of flexibility etc). He also noted that pricing was somewhat high. His observation was that perhaps Apple had invested too much time and effort in developing other products. He even gave an example: the car project.

    It was a balanced post. He gave his opinion. You don't have to share it and you don't have to belittle it either.
    No to you back. "He looked at the rest of the product matrix" — what kind of inflated view do you and he have of yourselves that you can look at Apple's "product matrix" (inflated language) and then make dire pronouncements about the inner strategy of the world's most valuable global technical enterprise? Do think you know so much about how engineering talent and attention is distributed in this complex organization that you think your chance of getting an updated Mac Pro would be better if they weren't "building a car in some warehouse"?

    It's the arrogance-mixed-with-pettiness behind the whining — that's what is so dispiriting about this wave of Apple-shaming over the new MacBook Pros. We see evidence that the whining is getting to Apple in a bad way, as with these price cuts and Schiller's unusual explanations of the reasoning for a power/heat management decision, or an obvious headphone jack decision.

    People assume they know better than the company's product engineers and testers when it comes to such matters as keeping the Lightning port on the phone. I mean does this OP Farnaby actually think there's a strategic inconsistency behind the fact that the phone remains with the Lightning standard while the laptops go with USB C? So how would worrier Farnaby resolve this dichotomy? Could it be that dichotomies are facts of life, like maybe a headphone jack can remain on the laptop because there's room for it? Would the overwhelming concern over Apple's grand vision be resolved if they included an adapter with the laptop, even though many or most might never use it?

    Self-agitated worriers like Farnaby are filling the atmosphere with unnecessary emotional tension. The fact that there's no new Mac Pro may be  caused by an entire revamp of the product concept, like with the three-year gestation for these new MacBook Pros, or it could be that there's new silicon they're waiting for, or it could be that Apple is still thinking like a start-up when it comes to these projects, and teams are moved from the laptop division to the desktop division, etc. We don't know, so we should therefore not poison the atmosphere and move right to "worry" about Apple's "global strategy."  

    It's not helping Apple to go through these whiner fests, just like it didn't help Steve Jobs's mental health when he saw the insanely un-great reaction to the first iPad. Farnaby is not alone. Marco Arment is also a worrier. Wiggin here is badly hindsight second-guessing on hardware design. It's not healthy, because it's not coming from a solid position of engineering, hard-metal or silicon realism. We don't know enough!

    But we do know that one of the cardinal user-experience principles of a portable, laptop computer is that it maximize portability. The new MacBook Pros are unbelievably portable and satisfying to handle. I believe, but I don't know, that they were being designed for the last three to five years around the coming availbility of SSDs, around the shinkage in power and thickness afforded by the oxide display, the development of better heat-management, and finally the amazing low-travel keyboard, which is a blast to type on. And possibly, likely, they were designed around the expectation that processor improvements will allow for RAM doubling in the future.

    Apple knows what they're doing strategically, and will do fine and sell millions of these insanely desirable new laptops, and they don't need Farnaby's or your self-generated worrying. That goes for you too, Marco Arment.
    edited November 2016 watto_cobra
  • Reply 147 of 224
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    brucemc said:
    This just shows how Apple continues to suffer under Tim Cook!  Steve would never have done this
    /s
    Ha ha, your right, and you know Steve did that, after he introduce the iPhone, a massive $200 reduction.
    He knew he was wrong, as Apple is today with its current price points, but he reduced the price of the product itself instead of its adapters, which is the way to go.
    A reduction of $200 would be nice in this case, I don't think apple wants to send a big 'fuck you' to its customers.
  • Reply 148 of 224
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    wood1208 said:
    Most important price cut needed is for new 13.3" mackbook pro BASE model. Nw macbook pro has Inferior spec than equivalent windows laptop but asking twice the price.
    Can you show us this Windows laptop that has an equivalent build quality, display color accuracy and brightness, SSD performance, and other components for 1/2 the price?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 149 of 224
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    knowitall said:
    brucemc said:
    This just shows how Apple continues to suffer under Tim Cook!  Steve would never have done this
    /s
    Ha ha, your right, and you know Steve did that, after he introduce the iPhone, a massive $200 reduction.
    He knew he was wrong, as Apple is today with its current price points, but he reduced the price of the product itself instead of its adapters, which is the way to go.
    A reduction of $200 would be nice in this case, I don't think apple wants to send a big 'fuck you' to its customers.
    1) What fucking adapters would they have to drop for the iPhone in 2007?

    2) Reducing the prices on some adapters has nothing to do with your claim that they failed with Mac itself.

    3) Apple has raised and dropped starting prices on their products countless times over the years.

    Here's a short list for initial price changes for the 15" MBP.

    2006 - $1999 (New casing. Move to Intel) 
    2009 - $1699 (Same casing as the 2008 model. Only a basic spec bump.) Minus $300
    2010 - $1799 (Same casing as the 2008 model, yet the starting price went up because they boosted the component more than usual.) Plus $100
    2012 - $2199 (New casing. Move to Retina display with 4x pixels on IPS panel with LED backlight. USB 3.0, Thunderbolt, and many other major advancements.) Plus $400
    2013 - $1999 (Same casing as 2012 model. Only a basic spec hump.) Minus $200
    2016 - $2399 ((New casing. T1 chip running bridgeOS, based on watchOS, that controls a second display that is OLED multitouch, controls Touch ID and Apple Pay, with Xcode APIs and OS support. Supports 4 TB3 and USB 3.1 ports. Much improved color accuracy and brightness in display while using less power. 2x larger multitouch trackpad, 2x faster SSD using Apple-design controller, and many other major advancements.) Plus $400

    In a year the price will likely be reduced because that' how things typically work when you invest heavily in new technologies that have paid for themselves. If you don't think these advancements are worth it, then you don't have to buy it, but don't claim that the advancements should result in a net change on the cost and therefore price of the product simply because you can't see past its moniker.

    edited November 2016 watto_cobra
  • Reply 150 of 224
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member

    zoetmb said:
    slurpy said:
    Awesome move by Apple. This SHOULD shut up most of the complaints, but of course it won't. 
    It's not like Apple is selling $500 laptops.   There's two ways to look at this:  

    The first is that if someone is buying a laptop that starts at $2400, they should't be complaining about having to buy some adapters, even if they're overpriced and that if you're a pro, technology advances and the investment is the price of doing business.  

    The other way to look at it is that if someone is spending between $2400 and $4300 (for the MBP with all options except for application software and AppleCare), Apple shouldn't have cheaped out and they should have provided 2 to 4 adapters in the box of the customer's choosing.   The price of four adapters/cables is as much as a cheap PC.   

    And then my cost of ownership goes up because I can't replace the battery, expand memory or replace the SSD myself.   Or, if I Iive with a 256GB SSD, I've got to get a ton of external storage for pro-level photos and video and live with the hassle of not having every file with me when I'm out of the home/office.  

    This is another example of Apple labeling something "pro" and then not understanding the workflow of their pro customers.   They did that with FinalCutPro and they did it when they moved away from the tower configuration of the MacPro.  

    Every time Apple switches ports, they tell the market how their new choices are the greatest and how they want both manufacturers and consumers to commit to that port.  Then after a few years, they change their minds and they move on to something else.   Did they really need to drop Mag-safe?  What about all the people who bought extra power supplies to keep at home/office, etc.?   HDMI is ubiquitous on TVs and receivers and the cables have become inexpensive, but now I've got to buy an adapter that costs ten times what the cable cost?

    What was Apple's rationale for going solely to USB-C?   Was it because they truly think this port is the future and that the accessory market will fully move to that port and that it provides technological advantages?   Or was it really because of Ive's anal-obsessiveness over thinness and not wanting to look at different sized/shaped ports on the side of the machine?   What drives me crazy is that Apple wants the machine to have this superior industrial design so that it looks great in photos and in ads, but they have no problem with users having to stick a bunch of dongles and adapters on the thing.   It's the same with the iPhone and the obsession with thinness, but then we have to put it in a case because it can't survive a fall.   So few are really seeing and feeling the thinness anyway.  Sometimes I think people at Apple don't actually use the products they produce in the real world. 

    So, IMO, criticism is warranted.   If Apple wants my money, they're going to have to do a bit better.   I hate using PCs at work, but I'm not spending $4K to $5K on my next computer and I don't want to feel like I have less than what I have today.  So as much as I hate Windows, my next laptop might actually be a Windows machine.  And I've been an Apple customer for 35 years. 
    Ok, very good comment, especially your remark about Jony Ive, when will he appear on stage?
    I do think that profit maximization (and the hot breath of the shareholder) is getting the better of Apple.
    Its all money money money, and Apple holds their customers at ransom by disabling all upgrade options so they cannot expand the life of the computers and have to dig very deep to get all MBs needed.

    This is why Apple is holding back the ARM; if they expand RAM beyond 4GB (and have enough memory pins on the Ax die to support that) board modders will find a way to connect a TB or so external RAM and iPads and iPhones can be used - or have a second life - as regular computers.
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 151 of 224
    flaneur said:

    It's the arrogance-mixed-with-pettiness behind the whining — that's what is so dispiriting about this wave of Apple-shaming over the new MacBook Pros. We see evidence that the whining is getting to Apple in a bad way, as with these price cuts and Schiller's unusual explanations of the reasoning for a power/heat management decision, or an obvious headphone jack decision.

    I really like the new MacBook Pro. I bought it. I think the design decisions they made around both RAM and ports were the right ones.

    That said, I don't think it's our job to worry about how Apple decision makers are affected by our reactions. Our job is to lobby for products that suit our needs, not to worry about their feelings.

    Obviously many of the reactions are based on ignorance of the reasons behind some of Apple's decisions. That may not mean those with complaints are idiots, though. To me it suggests that Apple needs to do a better job of communicating with users. For example, there's no reason for anyone to have expected the new MacBook Pro to offer 32GB of RAM, but for some reason many people did. You and I now know why it doesn't, and the reasons are valid (if one accepts the premise that making the machine bigger, louder, hotter, and heavier is a bad idea), but I don't think MOST people know about things like availability of LPDDR RAM and the limitations of available CPUs. If Apple is as good at gauging user behaviour as some claim, they HAD to see this coming and COULD have been prepared to address it. This may be an example of the Apple culture of always saying as little as possible actually backfiring. Maybe the tech media and objectors would have been assuaged BEFORE it grew into mass hysteria if Apple had headed it off with an explanation on the day of release.

    As for the ports, my personal preference is to have all the ports be universal and not be stuck with single-use ports. However, as we're so fond of pointing out around here, I recognize that I am ONE user and am considering only MY specific situation. I am not "arrogant" enough to assume that my position represents the majority (again, a popular argument on this forum). It's possible that Apple would have been better served by, as some here have suggested, preserving a couple of popular ports. *I* would have been disappointed, and may have been more likely to postpone my purchase until the next generation, but maybe ten others would have purchased now instead of waiting or jumping ship. I don't know one way or the other, but the fact that so many voices are expressing concern makes me wonder if Apple's bold approach of cutting ties with the present to push forward to the future is really a good one. It seems to suit me, but how many others does it alienate?

    Think about it this way. In a face-to-face conversation, I would present you with my new product. There may be something about it that strikes you as making it a bad fit for your intended application. You would say so. I would then explain how the benefits of my design overcome the issue you perceive. We would go back and forth, with you expressing your preferences and asking questions, and me answering your questions by explaining the trade-offs you'd have to make to get what you want. You might decide that you'd rather get something else, or you might realize that getting what you thought you wanted comes with compromises you hadn't considered and decide that what I'm offering is better than you thought.

    Apple doesn't do that. They present the product and walk away.

    Apple tries hard to foster an image of pushing the envelope and damning the torpedoes. That's great if people know where you're headed, but frustrating in the absence of any discussion of how I benefit from their choices or how they envision me moving forward with them. To the person with a room full of USB-A-connected peripherals, which is obviously the most ubiquitous form of connection right now, Apple's public "persona" seems insensitive, dismissive and arrogant. You and I know that's not the case, but only because, as tech-heads, we see more of what's behind the curtain than the average person. If Apple were a person, the way it talks to others would make it the least popular person at a party.

    All of that is a really verbose way of saying Apple could do a lot to calm complaints and overcome negative reaction just by communicating better. Sometimes "no comment" is beneficial to everyone, but maybe it shouldn't be a blanket policy. There are times when Apple would benefit from having a charismatic personality speak publicly about HOW and WHY certain controversial decisions were made, rather than relying on trying to create a mysterious image of a company that knows things you don't. That puts people off.
    edited November 2016 canukstorm
  • Reply 152 of 224
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    ...

    Apple knows what they're doing strategically, and will do fine and sell millions of these insanely desirable new laptops, and they don't need Farnaby's or your self-generated worrying. That goes for you too, Marco Arment.
    Luckily no law agains worrying exists, as it is allowed to ask insanely great prices for equipment.
    Apple doesn't have an patent on expertise (or do they?) and that's why a lot of people do worry about the new MacBook price points.
    The worry behind this worry is that when Apple tries to find out what "de gek er voor geeft" (in good Dutch) this might lead to the demise of the Mac in the long run (or a slower adoption rate) which results in less jobs requiring Macs and more MS suck.

  • Reply 153 of 224
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    knowitall said:
    ...this might lead to the demise of the Mac…
    Apple is Doomed™
  • Reply 154 of 224
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    flaneur said:

    It's the arrogance-mixed-with-pettiness behind the whining — that's what is so dispiriting about this wave of Apple-shaming over the new MacBook Pros. We see evidence that the whining is getting to Apple in a bad way, as with these price cuts and Schiller's unusual explanations of the reasoning for a power/heat management decision, or an obvious headphone jack decision.

    I really like the new MacBook Pro. I bought it. I think the design decisions they made around both RAM and ports were the right ones.

    That said, I don't think it's our job to worry about how Apple decision makers are affected by our reactions. Our job is to lobby for products that suit our needs, not to worry about their feelings.

    Obviously many of the reactions are based on ignorance of the reasons behind some of Apple's decisions. That may not mean those with complaints are idiots, though. To me it suggests that Apple needs to do a better job of communicating with users. For example, there's no reason for anyone to have expected the new MacBook Pro to offer 32GB of RAM, but for some reason many people did. You and I now know why it doesn't, and the reasons are valid (if one accepts the premise that making the machine bigger, louder, hotter, and heavier is a bad idea), but I don't think MOST people know about things like availability of LPDDR RAM and the limitations of available CPUs. If Apple is as good at gauging user behaviour as some claim, they HAD to see this coming and COULD have been prepared to address it. This may be an example of the Apple culture of always saying as little as possible actually backfiring. Maybe the tech media and objectors would have been assuaged BEFORE it grew into mass hysteria if Apple had headed it off with an explanation on the day of release.

    As for the ports, my personal preference is to have all the ports be universal and not be stuck with single-use ports. However, as we're so fond of pointing out around here, I recognize that I am ONE user and am considering only MY specific situation. I am not "arrogant" enough to assume that my position represents the majority (again, a popular argument on this forum). It's possible that Apple would have been better served by, as some here have suggested, preserving a couple of popular ports. *I* would have been disappointed, and may have been more likely to postpone my purchase until the next generation, but maybe ten others would have purchased now instead of waiting or jumping ship. I don't know one way or the other, but the fact that so many voices are expressing concern makes me wonder if Apple's bold approach of cutting ties with the present to push forward to the future is really a good one. It seems to suit me, but how many others does it alienate?

    Think about it this way. In a face-to-face conversation, I would present you with my new product. There may be something about it that strikes you as making it a bad fit for your intended application. You would say so. I would then explain how the benefits of my design overcome the issue you perceive. We would go back and forth, with you expressing your preferences and asking questions, and me answering your questions by explaining the trade-offs you'd have to make to get what you want. You might decide that you'd rather get something else, or you might realize that getting what you thought you wanted comes with compromises you hadn't considered and decide that what I'm offering is better than you thought.

    Apple doesn't do that. They present the product and walk away.

    Apple tries hard to foster an image of pushing the envelope and damning the torpedoes. That's great if people know where you're headed, but frustrating in the absence of any discussion of how I benefit from their choices or how they envision me moving forward with them. To the person with a room full of USB-A-connected peripherals, which is obviously the most ubiquitous form of connection right now, Apple's public "persona" seems insensitive, dismissive and arrogant. You and I know that's not the case, but only because, as tech-heads, we see more of what's behind the curtain than the average person. If Apple were a person, the way it talks to others would make it the least popular person at a party.

    All of that is a really verbose way of saying Apple could do a lot to calm complaints and overcome negative reaction just by communicating better. Sometimes "no comment" is beneficial to everyone, but maybe it shouldn't be a blanket policy. There are times when Apple would benefit from having a charismatic personality speak publicly about HOW and WHY certain controversial decisions were made, rather than relying on trying to create a mysterious image of a company that knows things you don't. That puts people off.
    Good arguments. I can't really trim and isolate points using an iPad with this forum software, so I'll answer in general.

    Yes, but my take would be that Apple will only end up figuring out how to baby their customers, because their customers have become babies and need leading by the hand to accept the simplest realities. That I see is the real problem. A shift has occurred from people who used to think rationally and in some depth to people who start chirping crazily like a flock of birds when Apple-fail memes start Tweeting around. For evidence, just look at Marco Arment's "worry" fits about Apple over the last year or so, and the resulting tweet-storms. Or look at MacRumors any day of the week.

    But the pros are different, you may say. They have reason to be "disappointed" (favorite entitled whiner word) by Apple's seeming gradual abandonment of their segment, the Mac desktops. 

    These two negative PR problems are blended together for Apple. To solve them, they risk talking too much about what should be trade and supplier negotiating secrets. Maybe they have issues with Intel's pace of production R&D, for example. Maybe it's adversarial, maybe it's cooperative, like capital investment. Yet therein lies the answer to the Mac Pro problem, the laptop RAM problem, the "iMac problem" (just learned there was one from a complainer today). How are they going to talk to anyone outside the deepest decision-making part of the organization about engineering involving the available silicon? Without jeopardazing their leverage with Intel?

    It's not about their feelings so much, either. It's about not rattling the perfection-against-all-odds mandate they got from Steve Jobs and which obviously drives Jony Ive — this is a psychological stance against the way the rest of the world does business that must be preservd at all cost.

    I don't believe, in other words, that we have a problem that Apple's PR can address without exposing details of how they run their very successful business that shouldn't be exposed. Or damaging their resolve to surprise and delight their customers, because it's a defensive move that we ask them for if we want them to justify what they are doing. Justify! As if the work of art they produced in that MacBook Pro weren't justification enough.

    Better, I think, that we should keep trying to restore a sense of reason to the whiner base. We should be carping at Gruber for not slapping down Marco Arment when he goes into his fits. The post by Zdziarsky linked to elsewhere is a good start, and more real-world thinking like it should be passed around. It's really our job, not Apple's.

    https://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=6355

    edited November 2016 lorin schultz
  • Reply 155 of 224
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    knowitall said:

    zoetmb said:
    slurpy said:
    Awesome move by Apple. This SHOULD shut up most of the complaints, but of course it won't. 
    It's not like Apple is selling $500 laptops.   There's two ways to look at this:  

    The first is that if someone is buying a laptop that starts at $2400, they should't be complaining about having to buy some adapters, even if they're overpriced and that if you're a pro, technology advances and the investment is the price of doing business.  

    The other way to look at it is that if someone is spending between $2400 and $4300 (for the MBP with all options except for application software and AppleCare), Apple shouldn't have cheaped out and they should have provided 2 to 4 adapters in the box of the customer's choosing.   The price of four adapters/cables is as much as a cheap PC.   

    And then my cost of ownership goes up because I can't replace the battery, expand memory or replace the SSD myself.   Or, if I Iive with a 256GB SSD, I've got to get a ton of external storage for pro-level photos and video and live with the hassle of not having every file with me when I'm out of the home/office.  

    This is another example of Apple labeling something "pro" and then not understanding the workflow of their pro customers.   They did that with FinalCutPro and they did it when they moved away from the tower configuration of the MacPro.  

    Every time Apple switches ports, they tell the market how their new choices are the greatest and how they want lboth manufacturers and consumers to commit to that port.  Then after a few years, they change their minds and they move on to something else.   Did they really need to drop Mag-safe?  What about all the people who bought extra power supplies to keep at home/office, etc.?   HDMI is ubiquitous on TVs and receivers and the cables have become inexpensive, but now I've got to buy an adapter that costs ten times what the cable cost?

    What was Apple's rationale for going solely to USB-C?   Was it because they truly think this port is the future and that the accessory market will fully move to that port and that it provides technological advantages?   Or was it really because of Ive's anal-obsessiveness over thinness and not wanting to look at different sized/shaped ports on the side of the machine?   What drives me crazy is that Apple wants the machine to have this superior industrial design so that it looks great in photos and in ads, but they have no problem with users having to stick a bunch of dongles and adapters on the thing.   It's the same with the iPhone and the obsession with thinness, but then we have to put it in a case because it can't survive a fall.   So few are really seeing and feeling the thinness anyway.  Sometimes I think people at Apple don't actually use the products they produce in the real world. 

    So, IMO, criticism is warranted.   If Apple wants my money, they're going to have to do a bit better.   I hate using PCs at work, but I'm not spending $4K to $5K on my next computer and I don't want to feel like I have less than what I have today.  So as much as I hate Windows, my next laptop might actually be a Windows machine.  And I've been an Apple customer for 35 years. 
    Ok, very good comment, especially your remark about Jony Ive, when will he appear on stage?
    I do think that profit maximization (and the hot breath of the shareholder) is getting the better of Apple.
    Its all money money money, and Apple holds their customers at ransom by disabling all upgrade options so they cannot expand the life of the computers and have to dig very deep to get all MBs needed.

    This is why Apple is holding back the ARM; if they expand RAM beyond 4GB (and have enough memory pins on the Ax die to support that) board modders will find a way to connect a TB or so external RAM and iPads and iPhones can be used - or have a second life - as regular computers.
    That was actually a stupid and gross comment he made about Ive. And he should never appear on stage. That's absolutely not his remit, and you should know that.

    You may not agree with his decisions, but you should acknowledge what's behind them. Example: one of the requirements of a portable machine is that it be rugged enough to survive drops and bumps. Upgradability means points of weakness, thus all the adhesive and the hermetic sealing. It's not about new model upsell, or what would be the same thing, planned obsolescence. Why would they make them so durable if that were so?
    edited November 2016 Solianome
  • Reply 156 of 224
    SoliSoli Posts: 10,035member
    flaneur said:
    That was actually a stupid and gross comment he made about Ive. And he should never appear on stage. That's absolutely not his remit, and you should know that.

    You may not agree with his decisions, but you should acknowledge what's behind them. Example: one of the requirements of a portable machine is that it be rugged enough to survive drops and bumps. Upgradability means points of weakness, thus all the adhesive and the hermetic sealing. It's not about new model upsell, or what would be the same thing, planned obsolescence. Why would they make them so durable if that were so?
    My favorite of the "Apple fleecing" conspiracies is the logic that Apple supports their machines for 5+ years of OS updates, but only does so to purposely cause your device to slow down to a crawl or brick itself, thereby forcing the user to buy a new machine.
  • Reply 157 of 224
    mac_128 said:
    command_f said:
    <Snip>
    But the problem is related to your comments on day by day use: the new MBP is almost useless today. Without a handful of dongles, it can't live in today's world where memory sticks, external drives and devices wanting power to charge want USB-A, projectors want VGA, monitors want Displayport, SD Cards want .. well USB-A for a card reader, and so on. And perhaps a Lightning port for headphones too  ;-)

    In two or three years, this design is going to look really smart but, in the meantime, the old interfaces are essential. So the dongles are essential (literally). So the dongles should have been in the box, particularly as they are throw-away items when the USB-C future arrives. There is precedent for this with the iPhone 7 and headphones (and with the very first MacBook Air that introduced new interface standards, there were two dongles in the box).

    This isn't so much an issue of cost as principle, of Apple's comprehension of its customers' needs and the fact that it is selling an incomplete product. That's disappointing or deceptive, according to your world-view. So I welcome the price cut (the MBP was expensive enough!) but I remain disappointed that Apple got into this position.
    You realize everything you said here could have been said in 1999 about the new PowerMacs and PowerBooks.
    The world is different now than it was in 1999, the standardisation attempts largely succeeded.
  • Reply 158 of 224
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,655member
    flaneur said:
    avon b7 said:
    flaneur said:
    Farnaby said:
    I use and love Apple since 1988. I would never consider using other products. But today, I have mixed feelings and I'm quite worried about Apple answering my simple needs. It's not these new MBP per se : they seem great machines, I'm very happy about some new features, like the touch bar and the touch ID. And even the USB-C / TB only ports seems a good decision. Apple's bold moves have never been the problem for me. But there's a lack of consistency and direction in the Mac field since years now that the MBP / Iphone 7 just put the light on. 

    So : MBP are for pros, so we keep the minijack... but without the optical port. The USB-C is the only way... but we don't use it for the new Iphone. We help the customers with an adapter for the Lightning only port on the Iphone... but we don't put an USB A/C adapter in MBP boxes. We are proud to impose in a bold move the port of the future and say "Get over it" to the customers... but a week later we make some discounts on some adapters. 

    Aren't there meetings where clear strategies are chosen ? Who thought it would be a good idea to abandon two universal, convenient, easy ports (USB and minijack) at the same time on two major products (iPhone and MBP) WITHOUT making the new solutions compatible (iPhone / USB-C and MBP / lightning) ? I'm not used to Apple sending mixed and contradictory messages. I'd rather have a company that makes errors from time to time but has a vision than this big headless thing that can't decide if it wants to go on with the pro market or to stop, or that explains us that portability justifies the most radical choices… but that makes the exact same choices (thin, thin, thin) on a desktop ? 

    Bottom and concrete line for me : I’m willing to change my early 2009 Mac Pro (a great and robust machine) for 2 or 3 years without finding a product fitting my needs : I considered the 2013 Mac Pro but monitors were too pricey for me at the time. Today the Mac Pro « bin » is too old. The iMac could have been a solution but since the machine is not very flexible, I want it to have the latest port technology, so I’m waiting for TB3… It’s fine because my 2009 Mac Pro works fine, but it’s very frustrating to be willing to buy a new machine, to enjoy the latest OS ans technology and to be unable to do it because Apple is too busy building a car in some warehouse. 

    Surely the new MBP doesn’t deserve such a negative feedback. They must be good machines. But the lack of global strategy, the mixed signals, the hesitations, the severe need for refreshments (iMac, Mac Pro etc.), in one word the context — all this explains the bitterness, the disappointment and sometimes the anger, that a 20% discount on some adapters or some approximative justifications won’t soften. 
    "I use and love Apple since 1988."  Not a good start. Troll meter engaged.

    Anyway, you're basically saying that the failure to remove the headphone jack on the new laptops indicates the lack of a global strategy. Got it.
    Basically. NO. He explained things well. Perhaps there was some interference coming out of your troll meter?

    He is worried about the bigger picture. He gave the example of lack of coordination/solution on the MBP/iPhone 7 connectivity issue. He wants to upgrade from a Mac Pro and have some future proofing. He looked at the rest of the product matrix and saw nothing to fit his needs for varying reason (stale lineup, lack of flexibility etc). He also noted that pricing was somewhat high. His observation was that perhaps Apple had invested too much time and effort in developing other products. He even gave an example: the car project.

    It was a balanced post. He gave his opinion. You don't have to share it and you don't have to belittle it either.
    No to you back. "He looked at the rest of the product matrix" — what kind of inflated view do you and he have of yourselves that you can look at Apple's "product matrix" (inflated language) and then make dire pronouncements about the inner strategy of the world's most valuable global technical enterprise? Do think you know so much about how engineering talent and attention is distributed in this complex organization that you think your chance of getting an updated Mac Pro would be better if they weren't "building a car in some warehouse"?

    It's the arrogance-mixed-with-pettiness behind the whining — that's what is so dispiriting about this wave of Apple-shaming over the new MacBook Pros. We see evidence that the whining is getting to Apple in a bad way, as with these price cuts and Schiller's unusual explanations of the reasoning for a power/heat management decision, or an obvious headphone jack decision.

    People assume they know better than the company's product engineers and testers when it comes to such matters as keeping the Lightning port on the phone. I mean does this OP Farnaby actually think there's a strategic inconsistency behind the fact that the phone remains with the Lightning standard while the laptops go with USB C? So how would worrier Farnaby resolve this dichotomy? Could it be that dichotomies are facts of life, like maybe a headphone jack can remain on the laptop because there's room for it? Would the overwhelming concern over Apple's grand vision be resolved if they included an adapter with the laptop, even though many or most might never use it?

    Self-agitated worriers like Farnaby are filling the atmosphere with unnecessary emotional tension. The fact that there's no new Mac Pro may be  caused by an entire revamp of the product concept, like with the three-year gestation for these new MacBook Pros, or it could be that there's new silicon they're waiting for, or it could be that Apple is still thinking like a start-up when it comes to these projects, and teams are moved from the laptop division to the desktop division, etc. We don't know, so we should therefore not poison the atmosphere and move right to "worry" about Apple's "global strategy."  

    It's not helping Apple to go through these whiner fests, just like it didn't help Steve Jobs's mental health when he saw the insanely un-great reaction to the first iPad. Farnaby is not alone. Marco Arment is also a worrier. Wiggin here is badly hindsight second-guessing on hardware design. It's not healthy, because it's not coming from a solid position of engineering, hard-metal or silicon realism. We don't know enough!

    But we do know that one of the cardinal user-experience principles of a portable, laptop computer is that it maximize portability. The new MacBook Pros are unbelievably portable and satisfying to handle. I believe, but I don't know, that they were being designed for the last three to five years around the coming availbility of SSDs, around the shinkage in power and thickness afforded by the oxide display, the development of better heat-management, and finally the amazing low-travel keyboard, which is a blast to type on. And possibly, likely, they were designed around the expectation that processor improvements will allow for RAM doubling in the future.

    Apple knows what they're doing strategically, and will do fine and sell millions of these insanely desirable new laptops, and they don't need Farnaby's or your self-generated worrying. That goes for you too, Marco Arment.
    'Product matrix' is not a term I coined. Apple used it.

     'Value'? Now that's a fickle term. Here today and gone tomorrow in many cases and I care little for 'value' in the context you mention. I want the best machine at a fair price and I don't even mind paying a little extra. If my money buys me quality and peace of mind, it's worth it. I don't want to pay for a name. I want a great product. 'Value' is always based on the past. I don't give a damn if anyone at Apple has a few sleepless nights 'worrying' about what users are saying about the new line. Not that anyone does. Apple has BILLIONS in CASH sitting in fiscal paradises all over the world. That's the only 'value' that matters to them. They sleep well. I didn't see any of those millions being used to maintain backwards compatibility for Rosetta beyond Snow Leopard. They cut support too early. Security update support in the modern computing world is also too short. I saw none of that being used to support its own extinct file formats in OSX. You know, file format support is one of the most boring elements of computing but it's the base of everything. The files you create are your life. There are millions of users that can't open old ClarisWorks documents and many other old Apple formats. No doubt something similar will happen with Pages documents down the line. In fact, it's already happened. Does that surprise anyone? There were problems with the Pages formats between iOS and OSX. These elements are never newsworthy, never 'sexy', but the Apple way is: 'that's the past'. Get over it. Move on.' Just keep buying new Macs and we'll make sure that each new line is more expensive than the previous. We'll make them non upgradeable and unrepairable. We'll ship second tier iDevices with so little starting memory (16GB) that you'll run out of it in a few days of use. We will refuse you the sweet spot option (32GB) and 'force' you up to the next option (64GB) even if you don't need 64GB. We will never include a microSD slot because they're ugly and give the user control of how much storage they want and that would mean less billions in the bank. Etc. Etc. Etc.

    The criticism is warranted. If few people complain, then great, as you can't please everyone all the time. If a large part of the internet goes up in arms you have two options: put it down to the whiners, gripers and bitchers (that 'vocal minority') or start listening and do something about it.

    You shouldn't be worrying, as Phil Schiller has already said this line is a hot seller. The best ever sales! At least as of the other day. We will see if those sales maintain their rhythm.

    As for Apple diverting engineering resources off one project and on to another, it has happened in the past and continues to happen, causing delays. It wouldn't be unrealistic to think that the car project has had an impact too some degree.
  • Reply 159 of 224
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,655member
    flaneur said:
    knowitall said:

    zoetmb said:
    slurpy said:
    Aw's move by Apple. This SHOULD shut up most of the complaints, but of course it won't. 
    It's not like Apple is selling $500 laptops.   There's two ways to look at this:  

    The first is that if someone is buying a laptop that starts at $2400, they should't be complaining about having to buy some adapters, even if they're overpriced and that if you're a pro, technology advances and the investment is the price of doing business.  

    The other way to look at it is that if someone is spending between $2400 and $4300 (for the MBP with all options except for application software and AppleCare), Apple shouldn't have cheaped out and they should have provided 2 to 4 adapters in the box of the customer's choosing.   The price of four adapters/cables is as much as a cheap PC.   

    And then my cost of ownership goes up because I can't replace the battery, expand memory or replace the SSD myself.   Or, if I Iive with a 256GB SSD, I've got to get a ton of external storage for pro-level photos and video and live with the hassle of not having every file with me when I'm out of the home/office.  

    This is another example of Apple labeling something "pro" and then not understanding the workflow of their pro customers.   They did that with FinalCutPro and they did it when they moved away from the tower configuration of the MacPro.  

    Every time Apple switches ports, they tell the market how their new choices are the greatest and how they want lboth manufacturers and consumers to commit to that port.  Then after a few years, they change their minds and they move on to something else.   Did they really need to drop Mag-safe?  What about all the people who bought extra power supplies to keep at home/office, etc.?   HDMI is ubiquitous on TVs and receivers and the cables have become inexpensive, but now I've got to buy an adapter that costs ten times what the cable cost?

    What was Apple's rationale for going solely to USB-C?   Was it because they truly think this port is the future and that the accessory market will fully move to that port and that it provides technological advantages?   Or was it really because of Ive's anal-obsessiveness over thinness and not wanting to look at different sized/shaped ports on the side of the machine?   What drives me crazy is that Apple wants the machine to have this superior industrial design so that it looks great in photos and in ads, but they have no problem with users having to stick a bunch of dongles and adapters on the thing.   It's the same with the iPhone and the obsession with thinness, but then we have to put it in a case because it can't survive a fall.   So few are really seeing and feeling the thinness anyway.  Sometimes I think people at Apple don't actually use the products they produce in the real world. 

    So, IMO, criticism is warranted.   If Apple wants my money, they're going to have to do a bit better.   I hate using PCs at work, but I'm not spending $4K to $5K on my next computer and I don't want to feel like I have less than what I have today.  So as much as I hate Windows, my next laptop might actually be a Windows machine.  And I've been an Apple customer for 35 years. 
    Ok, very good comment, especially your remark about Jony Ive, when will he appear on stage?
    I do think that profit maximization (and the hot breath of the shareholder) is getting the better of Apple.
    Its all money money money, and Apple holds their customers at ransom by disabling all upgrade options so they cannot expand the life of the computers and have to dig very deep to get all MBs needed.

    This is why Apple is holding back the ARM; if they expand RAM beyond 4GB (and have enough memory pins on the Ax die to support that) board modders will find a way to connect a TB or so external RAM and iPads and iPhones can be used - or have a second life - as regular computers.
    That was actually a stupid and gross comment he made about Ive. And he should never appear on stage. That's absolutely not his remit, and you should know that.

    You may not agree with his decisions, but you should acknowledge what's behind them. Example: one of the requirements of a portable machine is that it be rugged enough to survive drops and bumps. Upgradability means points of weakness, thus all the adhesive and the hermetic sealing. It's not about new model upsell, or what would be the same thing, planned obsolescence. Why would they make them so durable if that were so?
    Apple's laptops are not rugged enough to survive drops. Believe me on this. If you suffer a drop - start praying. Upgradability has nothing to do with 'points of weakness'. Where on earth did you hear that? If your connections are good... On the contrary, if your laptop doesn't survive the drop, hermetic sealing and glue mean you lose accessibility to get in and locate the problem. Accessibility together with user upgradeable parts, extends the life of the machine both in terms of lifespan and usefulness.
  • Reply 160 of 224
    flaneurflaneur Posts: 4,526member
    Jeez, no wonder you're so unhappy — going all the way back to ClarisWorks. Why don't you just use your old computers if you want to look at your old stuff? 

    Seriously though, Apple is valuable and well-banked because of the great work they've done, not because of greed, as your corrosive view  would have it. And that great work is a new event in industrial and consumer history, and it stems entirely from a psychological stance, initiated by the founder after many mental adventures using exotic psychological aids, plus native brilliance and a good upbringing by a craftsman, Paul Jobs. Thus also the personal computer industry in California. A psychological stance of working for people's mind expansion, and in Jobs's case, device perfection down to the simple essence of the tool you're making.

    Since it's a local psychological stance (countercultural California) it's vulnerable to subversion by business barbarians and crass commercial opportunists who copy the "look and feel," dilute the trade, and alienate the customer base by seducing it with better specs and close-enough looks.

    The psychological stance is also vulnerable to meme pollution, twitter and fansite shitstorms of negativity stirred up by entitled know-nothings, or worse, people with some knowledge but who harbor some inner unhappiness that causes them to look askance at artistry and great tool-making, and instead pick it apart with petty criticisms that ignore the larger picture. 

    I'd give examples, but they're right in front of us. In any case, I can easily imagine Apple losing their edge by Internet meme subversion. I'm not concered with how anybody sleeps at night. And 200 billion can't buy or do anything to protect that psychological edge they have. 
Sign In or Register to comment.