MacBook refreshes push Apple to 4th in global notebook shipments

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 44
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,084member
    1. I think it has become obvious that dongles/touchbar/keyboard "concerns" are in the EXTREME minority, as is the 32GB RAM "issue." I notice the entitled class of user are increasingly wrong about stuff (not their personal tastes/needs, but as to how not catering to them will "hurt" Apple. Wow, so hurt.) 2. For the **VERY VERY FEW** who need more of those things, other laptops are available. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. 3. The biggest issue for a lot of the entitled class is the RAM limit. Two thoughts on this: a. As SSDs get faster and GPUs get more powerful, this matters a whole lot less than it used to. Not saying SSDs/GPUs can replace loads o'RAM, but that's where we seem to be headed and, as the powerful games now available on Macs demonstrate, RAM just isn't the be-all it once was. b. The RAM limit is nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with Intel. Perhaps you "power users" need to direct your venom at the King of Slippage in the computer industry these days, rather than Apple. Just sayin'.
    Solichiapscooter63watto_cobratmay
  • Reply 22 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    StrangeDays said:
    Here a guy shows just how many pro-grade programs you can run without issue before you hit the 16GB and start page swapping. I really doubt any of the web-complainers are doing this.
    Thanks for finding that! That's the one I mentioned earlier... I thought it was pulled off-line after he was hired by Apple. I used to follow him a lot. :)

    But.... as I also mentioned above, if you do certain kinds of things.... just about any amount of RAM can be too little. So, there's absolutely a need for it for some pros. It would make sense for Apple to try and address it with a more high-end MBP, kind of like when they still had the MBP 17". There's absolutely a market for a more power-house laptop.
    edited November 2017 watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    chasm said:
    1. I think it has become obvious that dongles/touchbar/keyboard "concerns" are in the EXTREME minority, as is the 32GB RAM "issue." I notice the entitled class of user are increasingly wrong about stuff (not their personal tastes/needs, but as to how not catering to them will "hurt" Apple. Wow, so hurt.) 2. For the **VERY VERY FEW** who need more of those things, other laptops are available. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out. 3. The biggest issue for a lot of the entitled class is the RAM limit. Two thoughts on this: a. As SSDs get faster and GPUs get more powerful, this matters a whole lot less than it used to. Not saying SSDs/GPUs can replace loads o'RAM, but that's where we seem to be headed and, as the powerful games now available on Macs demonstrate, RAM just isn't the be-all it once was. b. The RAM limit is nothing to do with Apple and everything to do with Intel. Perhaps you "power users" need to direct your venom at the King of Slippage in the computer industry these days, rather than Apple. Just sayin'.
    Yes, but...

    Apple could have used a chipset that supported 32GB, it just wouldn't fit in as tiny of package. It is absolutely an issue for people who actually need the RAM, but they are going to be quite limited in their laptop options, even with other brands.

    The problem with lack of ports or the Touch Bar, is that for some people the dongles are an incredible pain (not undoable, but it sucks). And, the Touch Bar is just in the way, IMO. I've read too many people talk about accidentally bumping it, or wanting the actual keys (esp. esc.). It was a cute technological show-case better left for their consumer machines where that flash might be enjoyed more. Make it an up-sell option for the new MacBook Air and the emoji crowd would go nuts over it. It just isn't a pro feature.
  • Reply 24 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Heh.... so I'm listening to a podcast (Boag World) a few minutes ago... and Paul Boag's MBP is away for 8-10 days because of a keyboard problem. His co-host says that one of their laptops (at the small design agency he owns) is also away for 6-8 days. So, out of the podcasts I listen... it seems like 75% of the people I know have new MBPs (maybe 6 so far) have keyboard problems. I suppose this could just be a coincidence? (And, then there are the popular Mac bloggers and YouTubers... where it seems many also have problems.)
  • Reply 25 of 44
    Not surprised. I waited 8 years to buy a new Mac. Got the 13" MBP. I love it. I don't really care about the Touch Bar, but I wanted that model for the extra fan. Thought I'd hate the keyboard and the trackpad. Love them both. This thing is amazing. I hope they sell many millions.
  • Reply 26 of 44
    chasmchasm Posts: 1,084member
    cgWerks said:
    Apple could have used a chipset that supported 32GB, it just wouldn't fit in as tiny of package. It is absolutely an issue for people who actually need the RAM, but they are going to be quite limited in their laptop options, even with other brands.

    The problem with lack of ports or the Touch Bar, is that for some people the dongles are an incredible pain (not undoable, but it sucks). And, the Touch Bar is just in the way, IMO. I've read too many people talk about accidentally bumping it, or wanting the actual keys (esp. esc.). It was a cute technological show-case better left for their consumer machines where that flash might be enjoyed more. Make it an up-sell option for the new MacBook Air and the emoji crowd would go nuts over it. It just isn't a pro feature.
    Re: 32GB -- Apple's customers have made it EXTREMELY clear that battery life is the most important feature they value. Thus, Apple needed to use LP (stands for "Low Power") DDR. So rather than just switching to a higher-power chipset that supports higher-power RAM and somehow not losing customers due to dramatically less battery life, they'd ALSO have to design a new controller and use physically thicker RAM, and thus the MBP would be considerably thicker than its predecessor AND get noticeably less battery life. Oh yeah, that's an easy sell for sure!

    Again, blame for this goes to Intel.

    Re: ports -- USB-C is a standard throughout the entire PC industry now. Mac users, long accustomed to having non-PC standard ports up until 1998, have always had to deal with dongles, so I consider this rather a bogus argument. There are cheap hubs a-plenty, but so far most people I've run into actually using a USB-C/TB3 MBP have need of exactly one dongle -- a USB-A one -- and even that is for legacy equipment they're just not ready to give up. Nobody's complaining about using TB3 I notice, because the speed difference from TB2 is phenomenal. So this is really about having to "give up" using USB-A 99 percent of the time, or the SD slot the other one percent. Again, pretty bogus IMO.

    Re: touchbar -- this claim is 100 percent pure BS. Were these butterfingers people forever triggering the brightness/volume/Mission Control accidentally when it was the function key row? Are they so clueless that they don't know they can set it to be the function key row again if they really have no use for it? It's a visual contextual menu, so saying it's useless is like saying Apple should have never given in to the left-click. I don't know any MBP-using FCP editors or photo people who think it is anything less than a great time-saver, though I've run into some people who are frustrated that (insert third-party app here) doesn't support it. For any touch-typists, it's fantastic because it takes those sorts of menus off the screen and puts them where your hands already are. And I haven't even mentioned how great having Touch ID to unlock the machine is. I think most of these arguments are nonsense from stick-in-the-muds who dislike change and yet ... for some strange reason ... buy Apple products knowing full well that tumultuous change is what they made their name on and the thing they do most consistently. :)
    Solichiabrucemc
  • Reply 27 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    stoutie said:
    Not surprised. I waited 8 years to buy a new Mac. Got the 13" MBP. I love it. I don't really care about the Touch Bar, but I wanted that model for the extra fan. Thought I'd hate the keyboard and the trackpad. Love them both. This thing is amazing. I hope they sell many millions.
    Good to note about the 2 fan vs 1 fan... I hadn't realized that. After a bit more reading, it seems the 'esc' model can post higher speeds - for a few seconds - and then gets throttled down for thermal reasons. So, I guess you have to get the Touch Bar models for more speed endurance.

    chasm said:
    Re: 32GB -- Apple's customers have made it EXTREMELY clear that battery life is the most important feature they value. Thus, Apple needed to use LP (stands for "Low Power") DDR. So rather than just switching to a higher-power chipset that supports higher-power RAM and somehow not losing customers due to dramatically less battery life, they'd ALSO have to design a new controller and use physically thicker RAM, and thus the MBP would be considerably thicker than its predecessor AND get noticeably less battery life. Oh yeah, that's an easy sell for sure!

    Again, blame for this goes to Intel.

    Re: ports -- USB-C is a standard throughout the entire PC industry now. Mac users, long accustomed to having non-PC standard ports up until 1998, have always had to deal with dongles, so I consider this rather a bogus argument. There are cheap hubs a-plenty, but so far most people I've run into actually using a USB-C/TB3 MBP have need of exactly one dongle -- a USB-A one -- and even that is for legacy equipment they're just not ready to give up. Nobody's complaining about using TB3 I notice, because the speed difference from TB2 is phenomenal. So this is really about having to "give up" using USB-A 99 percent of the time, or the SD slot the other one percent. Again, pretty bogus IMO.

    Re: touchbar -- this claim is 100 percent pure BS. Were these butterfingers people forever triggering the brightness/volume/Mission Control accidentally when it was the function key row? Are they so clueless that they don't know they can set it to be the function key row again if they really have no use for it? It's a visual contextual menu, so saying it's useless is like saying Apple should have never given in to the left-click. I don't know any MBP-using FCP editors or photo people who think it is anything less than a great time-saver, though I've run into some people who are frustrated that (insert third-party app here) doesn't support it. For any touch-typists, it's fantastic because it takes those sorts of menus off the screen and puts them where your hands already are. And I haven't even mentioned how great having Touch ID to unlock the machine is. I think most of these arguments are nonsense from stick-in-the-muds who dislike change and yet ... for some strange reason ... buy Apple products knowing full well that tumultuous change is what they made their name on and the thing they do most consistently. :)
    Like I said earlier.... it might have been a good idea for Apple to make a model for the higher-demanding pros. While battery life is important, the people who need more RAM would gladly have a big bigger laptop with less battery life to get the extra RAM. And... that's one of the arguments about the direction Apple has gone. They are building towards a different audience than the traditional pros they used to.

    re: USB-C - hopefully it becomes a standard some day. Right now it's a mess. 'cheap hubs a-plenty' cute writing, but you haven't done your research. And... your argument is that prior to 1998, Apple users had non-standard ports, so they shouldn't care now? What kind of argument is that?! Bottom line, there is very little USB-C equipment available, so an adapter is almost always necessary (and, it's a laptop... portable), there aren't USB-C hubs available, and the standard is a *mess* both in complexity and quality. https://marco.org/2017/10/14/impossible-dream-of-usb-c

    re: touch-bar - Um, no these 'butterfingers' weren't accidentally triggering a real key push, because it required, well, an actual push. A touch-bar just requires a brush while typing numbers or symbols. And, if you're a touch-typist, you'd have to look down to use it (making you no longer a touch-typist).

    Yes, there has been a lot of change with Apple in the 30+ years I've been an advocate of the platform. But, it hasn't been until the last 5-10 years that many of the changes seem to be moving in the wrong direction (if UX, productivity, etc. are your concern vs Apple stock price and fashion)!
  • Reply 28 of 44
    Wait a moment: do we really believe those numbers?
    • Apple says 5.4M “Macs” sold
    • TrendForce says 4.43M (of those were) “MacBooks” (including Airs and Pros I assume?)
    Am I missing something? Do we really think Apple only sold just under a million Mac desktops (iMac, Mac mini, Mac Pro) in that period? Who verifies these claims if Apple themselves don’t break down the device types??
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 29 of 44
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,389member
    cgWerks said:
    stoutie said:
    Not surprised. I waited 8 years to buy a new Mac. Got the 13" MBP. I love it. I don't really care about the Touch Bar, but I wanted that model for the extra fan. Thought I'd hate the keyboard and the trackpad. Love them both. This thing is amazing. I hope they sell many millions.
    Good to note about the 2 fan vs 1 fan... I hadn't realized that. After a bit more reading, it seems the 'esc' model can post higher speeds - for a few seconds - and then gets throttled down for thermal reasons. So, I guess you have to get the Touch Bar models for more speed endurance.

    chasm said:
    Re: 32GB -- Apple's customers have made it EXTREMELY clear that battery life is the most important feature they value. Thus, Apple needed to use LP (stands for "Low Power") DDR. So rather than just switching to a higher-power chipset that supports higher-power RAM and somehow not losing customers due to dramatically less battery life, they'd ALSO have to design a new controller and use physically thicker RAM, and thus the MBP would be considerably thicker than its predecessor AND get noticeably less battery life. Oh yeah, that's an easy sell for sure!

    Again, blame for this goes to Intel.

    Re: ports -- USB-C is a standard throughout the entire PC industry now. Mac users, long accustomed to having non-PC standard ports up until 1998, have always had to deal with dongles, so I consider this rather a bogus argument. There are cheap hubs a-plenty, but so far most people I've run into actually using a USB-C/TB3 MBP have need of exactly one dongle -- a USB-A one -- and even that is for legacy equipment they're just not ready to give up. Nobody's complaining about using TB3 I notice, because the speed difference from TB2 is phenomenal. So this is really about having to "give up" using USB-A 99 percent of the time, or the SD slot the other one percent. Again, pretty bogus IMO.

    Re: touchbar -- this claim is 100 percent pure BS. Were these butterfingers people forever triggering the brightness/volume/Mission Control accidentally when it was the function key row? Are they so clueless that they don't know they can set it to be the function key row again if they really have no use for it? It's a visual contextual menu, so saying it's useless is like saying Apple should have never given in to the left-click. I don't know any MBP-using FCP editors or photo people who think it is anything less than a great time-saver, though I've run into some people who are frustrated that (insert third-party app here) doesn't support it. For any touch-typists, it's fantastic because it takes those sorts of menus off the screen and puts them where your hands already are. And I haven't even mentioned how great having Touch ID to unlock the machine is. I think most of these arguments are nonsense from stick-in-the-muds who dislike change and yet ... for some strange reason ... buy Apple products knowing full well that tumultuous change is what they made their name on and the thing they do most consistently. :)
    Like I said earlier.... it might have been a good idea for Apple to make a model for the higher-demanding pros. While battery life is important, the people who need more RAM would gladly have a big bigger laptop with less battery life to get the extra RAM. And... that's one of the arguments about the direction Apple has gone. They are building towards a different audience than the traditional pros they used to.

    re: USB-C - hopefully it becomes a standard some day. Right now it's a mess. 'cheap hubs a-plenty' cute writing, but you haven't done your research. And... your argument is that prior to 1998, Apple users had non-standard ports, so they shouldn't care now? What kind of argument is that?! Bottom line, there is very little USB-C equipment available, so an adapter is almost always necessary (and, it's a laptop... portable), there aren't USB-C hubs available, and the standard is a *mess* both in complexity and quality. https://marco.org/2017/10/14/impossible-dream-of-usb-c

    re: touch-bar - Um, no these 'butterfingers' weren't accidentally triggering a real key push, because it required, well, an actual push. A touch-bar just requires a brush while typing numbers or symbols. And, if you're a touch-typist, you'd have to look down to use it (making you no longer a touch-typist).

    Yes, there has been a lot of change with Apple in the 30+ years I've been an advocate of the platform. But, it hasn't been until the last 5-10 years that many of the changes seem to be moving in the wrong direction (if UX, productivity, etc. are your concern vs Apple stock price and fashion)!
    Apple doesn't have a big enough market for a portable workstation, which is what you are asking for. Expect, at best, end of 2018 for Cannon Lake, and 32 GB Lpddr4/Lpddr4X because I'm not seeing Coffee Lake as being the processor that Apple has been waiting for.

    Meanwhile, Mac Book Pro sales are pretty darn good; they must be hitting that sweet spot, hence why Apple is not acting on "pro's" desires, but will wait for the technology to come to them.
  • Reply 30 of 44
    MacProMacPro Posts: 17,875member
    Speaking as not just a Mac lover but also as a share holder I'd like to see an additional column showing net profit per unit and total next to the total sales column. 
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 31 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Wait a moment: do we really believe those numbers?
    • Apple says 5.4M “Macs” sold
    • TrendForce says 4.43M (of those were) “MacBooks” (including Airs and Pros I assume?)
    Am I missing something? Do we really think Apple only sold just under a million Mac desktops (iMac, Mac mini, Mac Pro) in that period? Who verifies these claims if Apple themselves don’t break down the device types??
    That sounds a little bit odd, but they aren't probably selling many Minis or Mac Pros, so it would just be iMacs. And, a ton of students and every-day people who aren't iOS based, lean towards laptops. The real question is what percentage of them are MBP vs MB and Air.... and where the increases came vs other years/quarters. But, I don't doubt they sold more MBPs that previous models, as they are growing in general. That doesn't mean Apple nailed it, or  people like them. The only way we'd know that, is if Apple had made a proper alternative... and then see which sells more.

    And, even that would be relatively meaningless, as this isn't (or at least shouldn't be!) a popularity contest. They should be making the best tools for various market segments of their user-base... not trying to pick what single (or a couple) designs will move the most units.

    tmay said:
    Apple doesn't have a big enough market for a portable workstation, which is what you are asking for. Expect, at best, end of 2018 for Cannon Lake, and 32 GB Lpddr4/Lpddr4X because I'm not seeing Coffee Lake as being the processor that Apple has been waiting for.

    Meanwhile, Mac Book Pro sales are pretty darn good; they must be hitting that sweet spot, hence why Apple is not acting on "pro's" desires, but will wait for the technology to come to them.
    If they've got a big enough market for a $10k Watch, they have a big enough market for a higher end laptop. I don't need one, but there are people who do, and would buy it. The more important question is.... what will those people do, and what end-effect will it have on Apple if they move away?
  • Reply 32 of 44
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,464member
    cgWerks said:
    tmay said:
    Apple doesn't have a big enough market for a portable workstation, which is what you are asking for. Expect, at best, end of 2018 for Cannon Lake, and 32 GB Lpddr4/Lpddr4X because I'm not seeing Coffee Lake as being the processor that Apple has been waiting for.

    Meanwhile, Mac Book Pro sales are pretty darn good; they must be hitting that sweet spot, hence why Apple is not acting on "pro's" desires, but will wait for the technology to come to them.
    If they've got a big enough market for a $10k Watch, they have a big enough market for a higher end laptop. I don't need one, but there are people who do, and would buy it. The more important question is.... what will those people do, and what end-effect will it have on Apple if they move away?
    Do they currently sell a $10K Watch? It seem like that was just a promotional thing and it was because of gold casing with all the electronics being the same as all the other Watches, and not because of having to engineer an entirely new computer. With a 15" with twice as much RAM, with less energy efficient RAM that puts out more heat and possibly needs more cooling, which may not be possible without making the casing thicker or removing/reducing other components, you're talking about a major effort.

    I agreed with you're previous comment because you stated in your first sentience that they "might," but not you're going into the deep end with an affirmation that they should do it if they were able to sell a gold Watch to even one person.

    I think you'd be better off arguing that a 17" MacBook Pro could be a worthwhile endeavour for Apple, but if Apple isn't doing either then we must assume that they don't believe the market is big enough to warrant the effort.
  • Reply 33 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    Do they currently sell a $10K Watch? It seem like that was just a promotional thing and it was because of gold casing with all the electronics being the same as all the other Watches, and not because of having to engineer an entirely new computer. With a 15" with twice as much RAM, with less energy efficient RAM that puts out more heat and possibly needs more cooling, which may not be possible without making the casing thicker or removing/reducing other components, you're talking about a major effort.

    I agreed with you're previous comment because you stated in your first sentience that they "might," but not you're going into the deep end with an affirmation that they should do it if they were able to sell a gold Watch to even one person.

    I think you'd be better off arguing that a 17" MacBook Pro could be a worthwhile endeavour for Apple, but if Apple isn't doing either then we must assume that they don't believe the market is big enough to warrant the effort.
    You're probably correct that it's a poor example, as it wasn't so much a one-off. But, I probably could have said Watch in general, or HomePod, or iMac Pro, etc. Compared to some of these other devices, these don't sell as many either. I don't think it would take a ton of effort to take a design like the previous generation of MacBook Pros and bring them to 32GB. Yes, maybe making it a 17" would 'kill two birds' though maybe not as well.

    I'm just saying that given their resources, making something like that isn't out of the questions (especially considering some of the more recent projects they've been involved in or products they've made). If it fills out the product line to address the needs of their traditional audience (i.e.: creative pros, scientific pros, etc.), it *might* be worth making even if they didn't make much money on it in comparison to other products.
  • Reply 34 of 44
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,464member
    cgWerks said:
    Soli said:
    Do they currently sell a $10K Watch? It seem like that was just a promotional thing and it was because of gold casing with all the electronics being the same as all the other Watches, and not because of having to engineer an entirely new computer. With a 15" with twice as much RAM, with less energy efficient RAM that puts out more heat and possibly needs more cooling, which may not be possible without making the casing thicker or removing/reducing other components, you're talking about a major effort.

    I agreed with you're previous comment because you stated in your first sentience that they "might," but not you're going into the deep end with an affirmation that they should do it if they were able to sell a gold Watch to even one person.

    I think you'd be better off arguing that a 17" MacBook Pro could be a worthwhile endeavour for Apple, but if Apple isn't doing either then we must assume that they don't believe the market is big enough to warrant the effort.
    You're probably correct that it's a poor example, as it wasn't so much a one-off. But, I probably could have said Watch in general, or HomePod, or iMac Pro, etc. Compared to some of these other devices, these don't sell as many either. I don't think it would take a ton of effort to take a design like the previous generation of MacBook Pros and bring them to 32GB. Yes, maybe making it a 17" would 'kill two birds' though maybe not as well.

    I'm just saying that given their resources, making something like that isn't out of the questions (especially considering some of the more recent projects they've been involved in or products they've made). If it fills out the product line to address the needs of their traditional audience (i.e.: creative pros, scientific pros, etc.), it *might* be worth making even if they didn't make much money on it in comparison to other products.
    1) The Watch sells a hell of a lot more units that Mac does. I'm not sure where it fits in term of revenue and profits, but it was recently stated to be more than the iPod market at its peak.

    2) The Mac Pro is a perfect example as to why you should be careful what you wish for. Apple revamped the Mac Pro and it seemingly never had enough sales to warrant them updating it with frequency. I have to think that a MacBook Pro that it's completely redesigned to support non-LPDDR4 RAM at 32 or 64GiB capacities, with either a larger and heavier casing, a small battery capacity, and possibly other reductions, and what is assuredly worse battery life is going to both low-yeild and expesnive, as low-yield products tend to be. It's not skin off my back if Apple builds such a product, but they currently aren't so there must be a good reason why, from their point of view.
  • Reply 35 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    1) The Watch sells a hell of a lot more units that Mac does. I'm not sure where it fits in term of revenue and profits, but it was recently stated to be more than the iPod market at its peak.

    2) The Mac Pro is a perfect example as to why you should be careful what you wish for. Apple revamped the Mac Pro and it seemingly never had enough sales to warrant them updating it with frequency. I have to think that a MacBook Pro that it's completely redesigned to support non-LPDDR4 RAM at 32 or 64GiB capacities, with either a larger and heavier casing, a small battery capacity, and possibly other reductions, and what is assuredly worse battery life is going to both low-yeild and expesnive, as low-yield products tend to be. It's not skin off my back if Apple builds such a product, but they currently aren't so there must be a good reason why, from their point of view.
    It sells far less than iPhones though, so why not get rid of it and just focus on iPhones? (If the number of units moved is the criteria of whether a product should exist or not.)

    But, my point was that Apple builds other rather irrelevant products in the grand-scheme. If the Watch disappeared tomorrow, would they lose any meaningful customer/product segment, or would the world be any worse off? I'm guessing it's because the Watch is part of their fashion/consumer future vision, whereas they don't really care that much about the creative pros anymore.

    re: Mac Pro - I think the reason they did what they did, was so Schiller could get up on stage and go, 'can't innovate, my *%$'. I think they thought they were innovating, and unfortunately that took priority over actually finding out what pros really wanted/needed. If they redesigned the current cylinder Mac Pro with more prosumer oriented parts (i.e.: i7 quad-core, SSD, Radeon 580) and priced it accordingly, I bet they'd sell a ton of them. Or, if they'd made a true successor to the 'cheese grater' they'd also have sold well.

    But, again, that isn't my point. My point is that even if they would only sell a few thousand high-end MBPs, it still might be a product category that is important enough to create. Having the best creative pros and scientists using Apple has a ripple-down effect worth more than 'are we selling enough of these to make X profit'.

    I think the reason is that they aren't aiming at that market as much anymore. The pro products are now more aimed at being an up-sell to those with the money to differentiate themselves from the non-pro users/products. Pro is a quality of the user now, instead of being a quality of the product.
    edited November 2017
  • Reply 36 of 44
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,464member
    cgWerks said:
    Soli said:
    1) The Watch sells a hell of a lot more units that Mac does. I'm not sure where it fits in term of revenue and profits, but it was recently stated to be more than the iPod market at its peak.

    2) The Mac Pro is a perfect example as to why you should be careful what you wish for. Apple revamped the Mac Pro and it seemingly never had enough sales to warrant them updating it with frequency. I have to think that a MacBook Pro that it's completely redesigned to support non-LPDDR4 RAM at 32 or 64GiB capacities, with either a larger and heavier casing, a small battery capacity, and possibly other reductions, and what is assuredly worse battery life is going to both low-yeild and expesnive, as low-yield products tend to be. It's not skin off my back if Apple builds such a product, but they currently aren't so there must be a good reason why, from their point of view.
    It sells far less than iPhones though, so why not get rid of it and just focus on iPhones? (If the number of units moved is the criteria of whether a product should exist or not.)
    That's a ridiculous and shortsighted comment.

    But, my point was that Apple builds other rather irrelevant products in the grand-scheme.
    There is nothing irrelevant about the Apple Watch.
  • Reply 37 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    There is nothing irrelevant about the Apple Watch.
    And, even less irrelevant about powerful enough pro computers for creative pros and scientists.
  • Reply 38 of 44
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,464member
    cgWerks said:
    Soli said:
    There is nothing irrelevant about the Apple Watch.
    And, even less irrelevant about powerful enough pro computers for creative pros and scientists.
    Apple thinking they have that covered well enough. I agree. if you think there's a void in the market then you have a wonderful opportunity to exploit.
    flaneur
  • Reply 39 of 44
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 1,893member
    Soli said:
    Apple thinking they have that covered well enough. I agree. if you think there's a void in the market then you have a wonderful opportunity to exploit.
    It's not quite that simple. It has been well exploited by other companies, hardware-wise. The problem is the OS and eco-system one has to break free from.
  • Reply 40 of 44
    nhtnht Posts: 4,374member
    cgWerks said:
    Soli said:
    Apple thinking they have that covered well enough. I agree. if you think there's a void in the market then you have a wonderful opportunity to exploit.
    It's not quite that simple. It has been well exploited by other companies, hardware-wise. The problem is the OS and eco-system one has to break free from.
    There's nothing wrong with linux or windows.  Break free and enjoy your hardware utopia.  If you aren't going to be happy with the MBP, iMac Pro and the fact they are working on a new Mac Pro sitting around here whining isn't going to do you any good.
    Soli
Sign In or Register to comment.