Apple has 'great desktops' on Mac roadmap, CEO Tim Cook says

1356711

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 217
    elijahg said:
    [..[
    I'm constantly amazed at how one person is supposedly responsible for the entire Mac lineup. People really believe that Mac hardware is decided by Jony Ive and Jony Ive alone?!?
    Ive is reportedly pretty much the most powerful guy at Apple now.rogifan_new said:
    [...]
    A bag full of dongles? Seriously?
    USB C->A x2
    USB C->HDMI
    USB C->SD
    USB C->USB C Hub to supply extra ports for dongles
    USB C -> Displayport

    And now you have a computer with a decent number of ports.
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    edited December 2016 Macsplosionwatto_cobracharlesgresai46
  • Reply 42 of 217
    Soli said:
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    An honest question:

    Because they make both the hardware and the software, couldn't Apple mitigate the long Intel roadmap by including A10X chips to offload some of the work from the Intel and 3rd-party graphic chips?
    1) Has this even been worked out with GPUs? We have GPU switching, but I don't think we have the dGPU and iGPU working together in Macs.

    2) They kind of do this with the new MBP's T1-chip, but not so much about offloading complex work, as unique work for Touch ID and Apple Pay using a variant of watchOS on ARM on the chip to interact with macOS on the x86_64. I'm assuming that the T1 is also responsible for the GPU output of the Touch Bar, but I don't know if that's the case.

    Macs always had ARM chips. ssd controllers, wifi, etc.
  • Reply 43 of 217
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    An honest question:

    Because they make both the hardware and the software, couldn't Apple mitigate the long Intel roadmap by including A10X chips to offload some of the work from the Intel and 3rd-party graphic chips?

    They could, but they'd do better upgrading other things in the Macs such as the ridiculous spinning HDD they still use in the iMacs, or adding an extra couple of x86 cores. but that'd require better cooling, and the thin design won't allow that so thats a no. The other hardware in the computers (GPU for example) is progressing much faster than Intel CPUs.

    OK so for months people have been complaining about how tight-lipped Apple was, that they wouldn't comment on their desktop plans and worries they would be shutting it down. Now, Apple comments on this, and what do people do? Complain. 

    Very perplexing. 
    They've not really commented on their plans other than to say "we don't consider the Mac dead, yet"
    You don't expect Apple to tell *you* their detailed product plans, do you? He said it's not dead nor do they plan to kill it. I think that's more specific than Apple has ever been about future products.
    There's quite a difference between detailed and "we have some products on the way". Which is all they've said, and pretty sure everyone knew they have some Macs on the way. Eventually. Though maybe not for the MP.
    Sounds pretty clear to me -- not killing Mac, which was what all the hand-wringing had been about before today. And Cook has already commented on there being a future MP in an email to a customer. So I'm not really understanding what is offensive about this memo. What more could you reasonably expect him to tell you? Apple doesn't release details about announced products.
    "And Cook has already commented on there being a future MP in an email to a customer."

    He has? Where?
    dysamoria
  • Reply 44 of 217
    My iMac has been the best computer I've ever owned... That being said what I've seen of the Surface Studio (hardware) in real time was very compelling: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/surface/devices/surface-studio/overview ...and dare I suggest even innovative...? ...and we can't buy (or even pre-order) a full sized mac monitor at this point, so my 2016 MBP is not yet in as designed use (literally in a drawer), and I'm still using what is now classed by Apple as 'obsolete' - a 17" mbp testing a non-Apple display - I can't use my iMac as a target display either with 2016 mbp (TB3 spec should support DisplayPort) as larger size screens seem preferable to squinting, at least for me... I will be curious: http://www.razerzone.com/gaming-systems/razer-blade-pro which offers a 4K 17" IPS display (pro?) with one of the top performing graphics cards available - but until hands on tough to say, fan noise & heat being obvious concerns... So I truly hope Mr. Cook is correct, and we will be impressed with what comes next, and it will all 'just work', and for me it could not come soon enough...
    Umm, thats a gaming GPU, it won't equal AMD in video editing.

    Its the fastest GPU for gaming, but for anything else? meh.
  • Reply 45 of 217
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    An honest question:

    Because they make both the hardware and the software, couldn't Apple mitigate the long Intel roadmap by including A10X chips to offload some of the work from the Intel and 3rd-party graphic chips?

    They could, but they'd do better upgrading other things in the Macs such as the ridiculous spinning HDD they still use in the iMacs, or adding an extra couple of x86 cores. but that'd require better cooling, and the thin design won't allow that so thats a no. The other hardware in the computers (GPU for example) is progressing much faster than Intel CPUs.

    OK so for months people have been complaining about how tight-lipped Apple was, that they wouldn't comment on their desktop plans and worries they would be shutting it down. Now, Apple comments on this, and what do people do? Complain. 

    Very perplexing. 
    They've not really commented on their plans other than to say "we don't consider the Mac dead, yet"
    You don't expect Apple to tell *you* their detailed product plans, do you? He said it's not dead nor do they plan to kill it. I think that's more specific than Apple has ever been about future products.
    There's quite a difference between detailed and "we have some products on the way". Which is all they've said, and pretty sure everyone knew they have some Macs on the way. Eventually. Though maybe not for the MP.
    Sounds pretty clear to me -- not killing Mac, which was what all the hand-wringing had been about before today. And Cook has already commented on there being a future MP in an email to a customer. So I'm not really understanding what is offensive about this memo. What more could you reasonably expect him to tell you? Apple doesn't release details about announced products.
    Really? I've not heard about that email. But in any case, when will it come out? It's the same fashion icon it was in 2013.
    dysamoria
  • Reply 46 of 217
    jvmbjvmb Posts: 53member
    Those who keep on blaming Intel for Apple's excuses, I have two words for you: Surface Studio
    That desktop is still based on Intel's Skylake CPU which is a year old and the Nvidia GPU is also based on at least one-year old technology. Other than the 128GB SSD and hi-res touch-screen, nothing else is latest and greatest.
    Newer CPUs is not the only reason to release a new revision of a desktop. I have the latest Mac Mini (2014) and it has no USB-C ports. How much effort would it have been for Apple to release an updated Mac Mini with USB-C ports? Intel is not to blame for that. 

    Also, you can not blame intel for the lack of quad core processors on the Mac Mini. I have enough space on my desk for a desktop with desktop processors. As Tim said, desktops don't have the same space constraints as laptops. 
    dysamoriafrankeed
  • Reply 47 of 217
    zoetmb said:
    scottw2 said:
    Whereas laptop specs are confined by form factor restrictions, desktops are defined by high performance processors, large screens, ample storage and "a greater variety of I/O."

    Show us you meant what you said, Tim. The iMac is a bunch of mobile components glued behind a big screen. The Mac Mini is un-upgradable box of mobile hardware. The "trashcan" Mac Pro looks neat until you need to connect external accessories typically required of their workloads. You need breakout boxes, cables, external everything. In a senses, the dongle mess that is the 2016 MBP starts with the trashcan.

    Give Jony a challenge to design computers that: (1) upgradable, (2) has wide selection of replacement parts, (3) has ports that people actually need, (4) have regular updates and (5) look good, in that order. He only cares about thinness these days.


    How do you figure Ive only cares about thinness (ignoring for the moment that there's an entire team who designs these things)? Especially since he's gone on record many times to state that design is not just about how a thing looks, but how it works...
    Come on!  I think it's pretty damn obvious that for the last X years, Apple has been designing to form over function.   Ive may have said it's how a thing works, but it's not the result and it has the credibility of a war hawk saying they only care about peace.  It is quite obvious that Apple is most certainly obsessed with thinness, having no seams in the case and with the new MacBook Pros only having one kind of port, I bet, because Ive thinks it looks better when viewed from the side.    If Apple really cared about how something works, they'd stop removing functionality when they "upgrade" applications and would provide a machine with upgradable memory, replaceable battery and replaceable storage.  They seem to go out of their way to prevent any of those things.  And I don't think Ive gives a damn what these machines look like when they're used in the real world and actually connected to other components. 
    I couldn't disagree more. A replaceable battery has tradeoffs -- space and volume. Replaceable storage has tradeoffs -- slower speed. Etc etc.. You're basically making the mistake of thinking that what you want in a machine is what everyone wants, and that isn't so. Many professionals like myself valuable portability+power in a notebook, and that's what they're hitting with this. 

    Hardware design IS tradeoffs. There is no replaceable battery in our smartphones and tablets, despite that being a "loss" of functionality, because the tradeoffs are worth it -- more compact designs. The haters were upset by it in the beginning but now nearly all phones & tablets follow this design, because it makes sense. 

    It sounds like your needs may not be alignment with the products Apple specializes in. 
    Solibaconstangwatto_cobra1983Rayz2016brucemcanomepatchythepirateai46
  • Reply 48 of 217
    elijahg said:
    scottw2 said:
    Whereas laptop specs are confined by form factor restrictions, desktops are defined by high performance processors, large screens, ample storage and "a greater variety of I/O."

    Show us you meant what you said, Tim. The iMac is a bunch of mobile components glued behind a big screen. The Mac Mini is un-upgradable box of mobile hardware. The "trashcan" Mac Pro looks neat until you need to connect external accessories typically required of their workloads. You need breakout boxes, cables, external everything. In a senses, the dongle mess that is the 2016 MBP starts with the trashcan.

    Give Jony a challenge to design computers that: (1) upgradable, (2) has wide selection of replacement parts, (3) has ports that people actually need, (4) have regular updates and (5) look good, in that order. He only cares about thinness these days.


    How do you figure Ive only cares about thinness (ignoring for the moment that there's an entire team who designs these things)? Especially since he's gone on record many times to state that design is not just about how a thing looks, but how it works...
    I'm constantly amazed at how one person is supposedly responsible for the entire Mac lineup. People really believe that Mac hardware is decided by Jony Ive and Jony Ive alone?!?
    Ive is reportedly pretty much the most powerful guy at Apple now.rogifan_new said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    As others have said, it does seem Apple's only able to concentrate on one product these days. Back in the mid 90's they had heaps of products which was really their downfall - though at least they did frequently bring out new models - and they do seem to be going that way again lately (watch straps, anyone?). They should have discontinued the 2015 MBP and replaced it with the touch bar model at the same (bumped) price the 2015 MBP is at.

    As far as the Mac is concerned generally, this "great pipeline" that Cook keeps going on about is either incredibly long, or needs Dyno-Rod. Over and over he has said "we have some great products in the pipeline", then he eventually comes out with the touch bar MBP. That's not particularly "great", Tim. Ive's OCD over thinness is partly the reason, you can't fit powerful CPUs and GPUs into a thin machine. I don't care about thin, I want the computer to be an actual computer I can install drives in, upgrade RAM etc, not a fashion icon.
    When buying a portable notebook, I definitely want thinness -- thinner is less mass which is less weight. That makes carrying it much more convenient. I want a fast SSD, the faster the better. I certainly don't want removable drives. 

    The MBP with TouchBar and TouchID is a great machine. The reviews and user reviews have been very positive. I love my 2014 rMBP because it still flies, but I'd love to have one of these. So why do you think it's not a great portable?
    Thinness which results in you carrying a bagful of dongles wherever you go? Whose weight adds up. The 2015 MBP isn't heavy, and it has a full compliment of useful ports. Obviously I meant removable drives on a desktop, but still, they could have kept the SD card reader in the MBP.

    See the above, + battery life and too expensive.
    A bag full of dongles? Seriously?
    USB C->A x2
    USB C->HDMI
    USB C->SD
    USB C->USB C Hub to supply extra ports for dongles
    USB C -> Displayport

    And now you have a computer with a decent number of ports.
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    baconstangdysamoria
  • Reply 49 of 217
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    elijahg said:
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    if you're saying that Apple can add more ports without affecting the other HW, then I don't think that's true. How do you add, say, 2 more USB-C ports to the MBP without either including another TB controller or stating that these other ports are less capable then the identical port interface next to it?
    StrangeDaysai46
  • Reply 50 of 217
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    An honest question:

    Because they make both the hardware and the software, couldn't Apple mitigate the long Intel roadmap by including A10X chips to offload some of the work from the Intel and 3rd-party graphic chips?

    They could, but they'd do better upgrading other things in the Macs such as the ridiculous spinning HDD they still use in the iMacs, or adding an extra couple of x86 cores. but that'd require better cooling, and the thin design won't allow that so thats a no. The other hardware in the computers (GPU for example) is progressing much faster than Intel CPUs.

    OK so for months people have been complaining about how tight-lipped Apple was, that they wouldn't comment on their desktop plans and worries they would be shutting it down. Now, Apple comments on this, and what do people do? Complain. 

    Very perplexing. 
    They've not really commented on their plans other than to say "we don't consider the Mac dead, yet"
    You don't expect Apple to tell *you* their detailed product plans, do you? He said it's not dead nor do they plan to kill it. I think that's more specific than Apple has ever been about future products.
    There's quite a difference between detailed and "we have some products on the way". Which is all they've said, and pretty sure everyone knew they have some Macs on the way. Eventually. Though maybe not for the MP.
    Sounds pretty clear to me -- not killing Mac, which was what all the hand-wringing had been about before today. And Cook has already commented on there being a future MP in an email to a customer. So I'm not really understanding what is offensive about this memo. What more could you reasonably expect him to tell you? Apple doesn't release details about announced products.
    Really? I've not heard about that email. But in any case, when will it come out? It's the same fashion icon it was in 2013.
    So you're saying you expect Apple to pre-announce launch dates for announced hardware? That doesn't sound like a reasonable thing to expect of Apple.

    Ah, seems his email was just about Macs in general, which the tech scene thought was likely about MacBook Pros, not Pros:

    http://bgr.com/2016/09/12/macbook-pro-2016-release-date/
    ai46
  • Reply 51 of 217
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    scottw2 said:
    Whereas laptop specs are confined by form factor restrictions, desktops are defined by high performance processors, large screens, ample storage and "a greater variety of I/O."

    Show us you meant what you said, Tim. The iMac is a bunch of mobile components glued behind a big screen. The Mac Mini is un-upgradable box of mobile hardware. The "trashcan" Mac Pro looks neat until you need to connect external accessories typically required of their workloads. You need breakout boxes, cables, external everything. In a senses, the dongle mess that is the 2016 MBP starts with the trashcan.

    Give Jony a challenge to design computers that: (1) upgradable, (2) has wide selection of replacement parts, (3) has ports that people actually need, (4) have regular updates and (5) look good, in that order. He only cares about thinness these days.


    How do you figure Ive only cares about thinness (ignoring for the moment that there's an entire team who designs these things)? Especially since he's gone on record many times to state that design is not just about how a thing looks, but how it works...
    I'm constantly amazed at how one person is supposedly responsible for the entire Mac lineup. People really believe that Mac hardware is decided by Jony Ive and Jony Ive alone?!?
    Ive is reportedly pretty much the most powerful guy at Apple now.rogifan_new said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    As others have said, it does seem Apple's only able to concentrate on one product these days. Back in the mid 90's they had heaps of products which was really their downfall - though at least they did frequently bring out new models - and they do seem to be going that way again lately (watch straps, anyone?). They should have discontinued the 2015 MBP and replaced it with the touch bar model at the same (bumped) price the 2015 MBP is at.

    As far as the Mac is concerned generally, this "great pipeline" that Cook keeps going on about is either incredibly long, or needs Dyno-Rod. Over and over he has said "we have some great products in the pipeline", then he eventually comes out with the touch bar MBP. That's not particularly "great", Tim. Ive's OCD over thinness is partly the reason, you can't fit powerful CPUs and GPUs into a thin machine. I don't care about thin, I want the computer to be an actual computer I can install drives in, upgrade RAM etc, not a fashion icon.
    When buying a portable notebook, I definitely want thinness -- thinner is less mass which is less weight. That makes carrying it much more convenient. I want a fast SSD, the faster the better. I certainly don't want removable drives. 

    The MBP with TouchBar and TouchID is a great machine. The reviews and user reviews have been very positive. I love my 2014 rMBP because it still flies, but I'd love to have one of these. So why do you think it's not a great portable?
    Thinness which results in you carrying a bagful of dongles wherever you go? Whose weight adds up. The 2015 MBP isn't heavy, and it has a full compliment of useful ports. Obviously I meant removable drives on a desktop, but still, they could have kept the SD card reader in the MBP.

    See the above, + battery life and too expensive.
    A bag full of dongles? Seriously?
    USB C->A x2
    USB C->HDMI
    USB C->SD
    USB C->USB C Hub to supply extra ports for dongles
    USB C -> Displayport

    And now you have a computer with a decent number of ports.
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    I believe you don't actually know that. Each port requires a controller, power draws, etc etc... I know it all seems like magic, but it isn't -- these things are the end result of careful consideration and decision making.
    watto_cobrapatchythepirateai46
  • Reply 52 of 217
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,909member
    I view this as a small but positive sign. 
    watto_cobra1983
  • Reply 53 of 217
    Soli said:
    elijahg said:
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    if you're saying that Apple can add more ports without affecting the other HW, then I don't think that's true. How do you add, say, 2 more USB-C ports to the MBP without either including another TB controller or stating that these other ports are less capable then the identical port interface next to it?
    They've got nonidentical ports on the MBP already, and the other ports could be USB A, or HDMI, etc.
    baconstangdysamoria
  • Reply 54 of 217

    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    An honest question:

    Because they make both the hardware and the software, couldn't Apple mitigate the long Intel roadmap by including A10X chips to offload some of the work from the Intel and 3rd-party graphic chips?

    They could, but they'd do better upgrading other things in the Macs such as the ridiculous spinning HDD they still use in the iMacs, or adding an extra couple of x86 cores. but that'd require better cooling, and the thin design won't allow that so thats a no. The other hardware in the computers (GPU for example) is progressing much faster than Intel CPUs.

    OK so for months people have been complaining about how tight-lipped Apple was, that they wouldn't comment on their desktop plans and worries they would be shutting it down. Now, Apple comments on this, and what do people do? Complain. 

    Very perplexing. 
    They've not really commented on their plans other than to say "we don't consider the Mac dead, yet"
    You don't expect Apple to tell *you* their detailed product plans, do you? He said it's not dead nor do they plan to kill it. I think that's more specific than Apple has ever been about future products.
    There's quite a difference between detailed and "we have some products on the way". Which is all they've said, and pretty sure everyone knew they have some Macs on the way. Eventually. Though maybe not for the MP.
    Sounds pretty clear to me -- not killing Mac, which was what all the hand-wringing had been about before today. And Cook has already commented on there being a future MP in an email to a customer. So I'm not really understanding what is offensive about this memo. What more could you reasonably expect him to tell you? Apple doesn't release details about announced products.
    Really? I've not heard about that email. But in any case, when will it come out? It's the same fashion icon it was in 2013.
    So you're saying you expect Apple to pre-announce launch dates for announced hardware? That doesn't sound like a reasonable thing to expect of Apple.

    Ah, seems his email was just about Macs in general, which the tech scene thought was likely about MacBook Pros, not Pros:

    http://bgr.com/2016/09/12/macbook-pro-2016-release-date/
    No, but in the past they've allowed hardware to drift on and on with no updates and eventually cancelled it (Xserve)
    1983dysamoria
  • Reply 55 of 217
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,748member
    elijahg said:
    Soli said:
    elijahg said:
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    if you're saying that Apple can add more ports without affecting the other HW, then I don't think that's true. How do you add, say, 2 more USB-C ports to the MBP without either including another TB controller or stating that these other ports are less capable then the identical port interface next to it?
    They've got nonidentical ports on the MBP already, and the other ports could be USB A, or HDMI, etc.
    Which MBP models have non-identical ports of the same port interface? I don't see any. All MBP models are either all USB 3.0 or all USB 3.0/TB. I see no "these two ports are USB 3.0-only and these other two ports include support for TB3" setup.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 56 of 217
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,909member
    macxpress said:
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things. I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
    Sheesh... How many times does the "it's all Intel's fault" myth have to be debunked?

    nevertheless... Intel does suck. 

    singularitydysamoria
  • Reply 57 of 217
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    scottw2 said:
    Whereas laptop specs are confined by form factor restrictions, desktops are defined by high performance processors, large screens, ample storage and "a greater variety of I/O."

    Show us you meant what you said, Tim. The iMac is a bunch of mobile components glued behind a big screen. The Mac Mini is un-upgradable box of mobile hardware. The "trashcan" Mac Pro looks neat until you need to connect external accessories typically required of their workloads. You need breakout boxes, cables, external everything. In a senses, the dongle mess that is the 2016 MBP starts with the trashcan.

    Give Jony a challenge to design computers that: (1) upgradable, (2) has wide selection of replacement parts, (3) has ports that people actually need, (4) have regular updates and (5) look good, in that order. He only cares about thinness these days.


    How do you figure Ive only cares about thinness (ignoring for the moment that there's an entire team who designs these things)? Especially since he's gone on record many times to state that design is not just about how a thing looks, but how it works...
    I'm constantly amazed at how one person is supposedly responsible for the entire Mac lineup. People really believe that Mac hardware is decided by Jony Ive and Jony Ive alone?!?
    Ive is reportedly pretty much the most powerful guy at Apple now.rogifan_new said:
    elijahg said:
    elijahg said:
    As others have said, it does seem Apple's only able to concentrate on one product these days. Back in the mid 90's they had heaps of products which was really their downfall - though at least they did frequently bring out new models - and they do seem to be going that way again lately (watch straps, anyone?). They should have discontinued the 2015 MBP and replaced it with the touch bar model at the same (bumped) price the 2015 MBP is at.

    As far as the Mac is concerned generally, this "great pipeline" that Cook keeps going on about is either incredibly long, or needs Dyno-Rod. Over and over he has said "we have some great products in the pipeline", then he eventually comes out with the touch bar MBP. That's not particularly "great", Tim. Ive's OCD over thinness is partly the reason, you can't fit powerful CPUs and GPUs into a thin machine. I don't care about thin, I want the computer to be an actual computer I can install drives in, upgrade RAM etc, not a fashion icon.
    When buying a portable notebook, I definitely want thinness -- thinner is less mass which is less weight. That makes carrying it much more convenient. I want a fast SSD, the faster the better. I certainly don't want removable drives. 

    The MBP with TouchBar and TouchID is a great machine. The reviews and user reviews have been very positive. I love my 2014 rMBP because it still flies, but I'd love to have one of these. So why do you think it's not a great portable?
    Thinness which results in you carrying a bagful of dongles wherever you go? Whose weight adds up. The 2015 MBP isn't heavy, and it has a full compliment of useful ports. Obviously I meant removable drives on a desktop, but still, they could have kept the SD card reader in the MBP.

    See the above, + battery life and too expensive.
    A bag full of dongles? Seriously?
    USB C->A x2
    USB C->HDMI
    USB C->SD
    USB C->USB C Hub to supply extra ports for dongles
    USB C -> Displayport

    And now you have a computer with a decent number of ports.
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    I believe you don't actually know that. Each port requires a controller, power draws, etc etc... I know it all seems like magic, but it isn't -- these things are the end result of careful consideration and decision making.
    Actually I'm an electronic engineer, and I know very well that it is magic, and when things blow up it releases the magic smoke which makes it all work! ...But seriously yes power is a consideration with USB/TB, but not much else. They managed to fit all the ports in the 2015 model, if they hadn't made thinness sacrifices again they could have on the 2016 too.
    baconstang1983dysamoria
  • Reply 58 of 217
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,114member
    No 5K display from Apple tells me that the iMac 5K will NEVER support target display mode because it's just too costly to implement.  

    No Mac Pro updates in 3 years possibly indicates a new form factor with better storage due to the complaints of the small size and its many lightning ports.  

    No new Mac Mini is because Apple just doesn't really care about it much and prefers to sell more expensive machines.


    All of those things aside, at least give us a processor or memory speed update once a year!

    elijahgmacplusplus1983ai46
  • Reply 59 of 217
    Soli said:
    elijahg said:
    Soli said:
    elijahg said:
    Ive may be their top guy, but it's still your presumption that he's actually designing these things. From what I've read on here he's more removed and doing bigger things -- such as the headquarters, and concept stores.

    But for the dongles, you're assuming one actually needs all of those. One doesn't. In fact, all of our needs are varied and unknowable, which is why it makes more sense to give it universal ports and let individual users customize to their own use cases. I've already mentioned it but as a pro software developer I certainly don't need those ports on my portable. My portable needs a good keyboard, a good screen, faster storage, and wifi. Tho this design is perfect for my use case, and putting in all those ports, with the sacrifices and tradeoffs any hardware design incurs, would be unfavorable.
    There's very little hardware sacrifice to more ports, other than no longer being able to make it appear thinner (tapered edge), of course.
    if you're saying that Apple can add more ports without affecting the other HW, then I don't think that's true. How do you add, say, 2 more USB-C ports to the MBP without either including another TB controller or stating that these other ports are less capable then the identical port interface next to it?
    They've got nonidentical ports on the MBP already, and the other ports could be USB A, or HDMI, etc.
    Which MBP models have non-identical ports of the same port interface? I don't see any. All MBP models are either all USB 3.0 or all USB 3.0/TB. I see no "these two ports are USB 3.0-only and these other two ports include support for TB3" setup.
    http://appleinsider.com/articles/16/10/29/two-of-four-thunderbolt-3-ports-in-new-13-macbook-pro-with-touch-bar-have-reduced-speeds
    Solibaconstangdysamoria
  • Reply 60 of 217
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,715member
    That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
    I think for the Mac Pro and Mac Mini Cook should have said "very old isn't good enough" 
    They have to be ancient before updating (if it ever happens again).
Sign In or Register to comment.