Apple isn't doomed because it didn't release new Macs and iPads at WWDC

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 127
    Apple may not be doomed - but my ability to wait for a new Mac Pro is becoming closer and closer to being doomed. I need a faster machine. Currently using a mid 2010 Mac Pro. Don’t want to pay 7k for an iMac Pro and don’t want a normal iMac. If they would just say it’s coming on X date. 
  • Reply 82 of 127
    barth applebarth apple Posts: 1unconfirmed, member
    Thanks  for the excellent update.  Ever since the beginning, Apple has inspired emotions that most other computer companies do not.  It's nice to see that nothing has changed.  As a long-time user, my main complaints are price and how it forces technology change.  In the name of slimmer and lighter laptops, Apple is trying to force me to use iCloud and, incidentally, to buy new connection technology that I don't need or want.  I'll mention a keyboard that I would destroy within a month and move on.  As far as price, I can accept the base price.  I don't like it, but I can accept it.  The premium price for storage and other features, however, is very difficult for me to accept.  As a result, I make do with what I have despite some pain.  I realize that Apple doesn't really need me or my demographic, but as an owner of the first b&w 9 inch (?) screen mac, it makes me a little sad.
  • Reply 83 of 127
    A $5 Big Mac is in no way comparable to a $1000 iPhone. One is a consumable, the other is a durable electronic good. One is priced at the cheapest possible price point, the other is very, very clearly not.
    Even at $5 for a Big Mac won't tempt me through the 'Golden (sic) Arches' the same goes for the iPhone X.
    IMHO, neither are value for money but even paying me $50 won't get me to eat their bugers and I'm not a vegetarian.
    As for the iPhone X, not only is it too expensive for me but FaceId won't work when I'm wearing a Crash Helmet but TouchId does. Removing a glove is a lot easier and faster than removing the helmet.

    The reality is that it is all down to your own individual 'use case'.
    Before anyone thinks that I'm a cheapskate, I bought a new car yesterday.
    YMMV and probably will.
  • Reply 84 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 2,893member

    Rayz2016 said:
    k2kw said:

    Portent of the future

    Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.

    While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.

    But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.

    "Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.

    Of course! Of course! I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.

    For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.

    It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).

    But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.

    In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.

    But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:

    1. X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
    2. X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds. 

    Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:



    Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"

    What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."

    The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.

    The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad

    So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.

    "But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"

    That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.


    One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
    You're making a few assumptions here.

    1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.

    2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.

    Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.
    The much feared "hybrid" device IS coming:   step by step, drip by drip, feature by feature, the iPad is becoming increasingly more powerful, flexible and "computer" like.  And, when it arrives, Apple will roll back the curtain and announce their revolutionary new product called:  "An iPad"....

    But I understand the fear of such a device on the part of Mac loyalists:  They realize that Apple has let the Mac line languish.   They fear it will be scrapped and replaced by what they call a "bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad"....

    Apple has never been one to stick to convention because:  "That's the way it has always been...."   But, on the other hand, they also make the best product possible to meet the needs and desires of their customers....   That need is seldom an "either/or" proposition:  "Do you want cake or do you want ice cream?" / "Do you want a Mac?  Or, do you want an iPad?"    It's usually more like:  "I want it ALL!"

    Nonsense. Apple has said quite clearly that merging the two products is dumb. ”No. Of course not!” Yet some people just don’t like to admit when they’re wrong, so they use cognitive dissonance to dream up some alternate reality where they can still be right. You’re textbook. 
    In responding to my post, you might try responding to what I said rather than what your fears and biases told you...  It might make more sense.
  • Reply 85 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 2,893member
    tmay said:

    Rayz2016 said:
    k2kw said:

    Portent of the future

    Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.

    While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.

    But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.

    "Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.

    Of course! Of course! I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.

    For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.

    It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).

    But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.

    In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.

    But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:

    1. X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
    2. X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds. 

    Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:



    Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"

    What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."

    The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.

    The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad

    So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.

    "But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"

    That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.


    One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
    You're making a few assumptions here.

    1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.

    2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.

    Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.
    on 2, this doesn’t change the fact that AI’s coverage of Marizpan has been completely wrong, as we politely pointed out in the comments of Marzipan stories, going so far as to provide helpful links to the details on why, such as the John Gruber posts and insight...an actual dev and a guy who talks to Phil Schiller and is way closer to the sources than the AI writer who kept saying it was (and i quote) about “iOS apps running on Mac”. No. We explained why that was wrong. Provided links. But still more articles about “iOS apps running on Mac”. Wuuut. 

    Maybe you had your own personal take and maybe AI doesn’t have editorial meetings to figure out what it thinks, but maybe as a news org it should. We did in the paper I worked for and my local paper does too. It makes sense to weight the opinions of those who understand the subject material heavier than those who do not.
    I for one am waiting for my iOS Masters to create the perfect Mac Book analog on ARM, for all of those people that don't require/want Windows compatibility*. Xcode facilitates that, and these frameworks are a path for iOS developers to bring new applications coming to the Mac. To me, this defines a lower cost device, and much more in line with what the education market wants.

    In the meantime, iPad Pro needs only a few UI and UX API's, and a keyboard with a trackpad to get to a similar space. Would that device be a hybrid?

    *In theory, an Apple ARM device might be able to run MS UWP applications, were that device to support necessary API's.
    Only to Mac fans who fear it portends the demise of their much loved Mac...   But then fear does weird things to brains....
  • Reply 86 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 2,893member
    personally i'm thrilled they didn't release any hardware at WWDC. I have wanted it to be software and only software focused for ages. they can have a separate keynote for hardware
    Yeh, hardware gets all the glitz, glitter and glamour -- particularly in Apple's business model where you buy the "device" (Meaning hardware) and get the software (supposedly) "free", but then you get free updates and revisions for years afterwards.

    But, in the end, it is software that sets iPhones above Droids and Macs above Windows.  And, third party developers have a big hand in making that true.   They deserve their own forum to be provided with a little support and education...
  • Reply 87 of 127
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 2,893member
    lewchenko said:
    You know, it's ok to criticise Apple when they don't knock the ball out of the park.

    Something Appleinsider needs to realise.

    I personally thought the event sucked this year and delivered very little of valuable features in terms of the software side of things or other stuff. Especially screen time management in iOS12.... give me a break. Its a non issue that didn't need a fix or more bloat adding to iOS to address. 

    And the lack of hardware is simply disappointing. In the article you said it was Intel's fault there were no new mac book pros. Really ? So how come Dell, HP, Lenovo all have 8th gen machine out to buy right now. (With better keyboards as well).

    At this point Im disappointed in Apple,  but also disappointed in Apple Insider for once again not calling Apple out when it fails. 




    That was pretty much all nonsense....   Next...
  • Reply 88 of 127
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 3,322administrator
    A $5 Big Mac is in no way comparable to a $1000 iPhone. One is a consumable, the other is a durable electronic good. One is priced at the cheapest possible price point, the other is very, very clearly not.
    Even at $5 for a Big Mac won't tempt me through the 'Golden (sic) Arches' the same goes for the iPhone X.
    IMHO, neither are value for money but even paying me $50 won't get me to eat their bugers and I'm not a vegetarian.
    As for the iPhone X, not only is it too expensive for me but FaceId won't work when I'm wearing a Crash Helmet but TouchId does. Removing a glove is a lot easier and faster than removing the helmet.

    The reality is that it is all down to your own individual 'use case'.
    Before anyone thinks that I'm a cheapskate, I bought a new car yesterday.
    YMMV and probably will.
    Use cases balance with price are all that matters to any individual user. 
  • Reply 89 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,228member
    A $5 Big Mac is in no way comparable to a $1000 iPhone. One is a consumable, the other is a durable electronic good. One is priced at the cheapest possible price point, the other is very, very clearly not.
    Even at $5 for a Big Mac won't tempt me through the 'Golden (sic) Arches' the same goes for the iPhone X.
    IMHO, neither are value for money but even paying me $50 won't get me to eat their bugers and I'm not a vegetarian.
    As for the iPhone X, not only is it too expensive for me but FaceId won't work when I'm wearing a Crash Helmet but TouchId does. Removing a glove is a lot easier and faster than removing the helmet.

    The reality is that it is all down to your own individual 'use case'.
    Before anyone thinks that I'm a cheapskate, I bought a new car yesterday.
    YMMV and probably will.
    Well golly gosh I guess it’s just terrible Apple doesn’t make a flagship that still has TouchId.

    Oh wait, it does.  And unless you wear a helmet all the time not even you would be all that hampered by FaceID.

    I guarantee that whatever car you bought someone will claim it’s poor value for the money.

    The iPhone X is as good value for the money as any high performance car.
  • Reply 90 of 127
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 4,580member
    craigs_38 said:
    Apple may not be doomed - but my ability to wait for a new Mac Pro is becoming closer and closer to being doomed. I need a faster machine. Currently using a mid 2010 Mac Pro. Don’t want to pay 7k for an iMac Pro and don’t want a normal iMac. If they would just say it’s coming on X date. 
    How can Apple say its coming out on X date? This is EXACTLY why Apple got out of doing MacWorld Expo's. Its ready when its ready and saying it will be ready on a certain date puts the pressure on them to rush a product out of the door because you will be one of those that will whine and complain when Apple misses that date. 

    It most likely won't be ready until next year so unless you're willing to wait then I guess you'll have to go get something else or cave and get an iMac Pro. Apple isn't just slapping a bunch of off the shelf parts together and calling it the new Mac Pro here. 
    tmayAlex1Nfastasleep
  • Reply 91 of 127
    Koll3manKoll3man Posts: 29member
    Rayz2016 said:
    ascii said:
    I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex). 

    And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
    A fair point, but it's not quite as simple as that. As folk love to point out, Intel has made some small incremental improvements over the years of stagnation, but Apple hasn't always picked them up.

    The root of the problem is that ninety per cent of the Wintel machines out there are pretty much the same. You can even find machines with identical cases, parts and specs sold by different third-party resellers. Windows box builders rarely offer anything unique across their offerings, but in many ways this lack of any real differentiation is an advantage: it means that testing new configurations is easy.

    Because Apple's OS doesn't conform to the WinTel spec (the spec that describes how hardware drivers interact with the Windows plumbing) then all that testing has to be done by Apple, and they also need to do all the testing and development of the drivers to make Bootcamp work with their hardware (bear in mind the increasing number of components that are going into Apple kit that is designed and built by Apple itself).

    So this is probably why Apple doesn't jump on every tiny spec bump to the Intel chips; it wouldn't be cost effective for the Mac unit.

    That's what they would tell you if you ask. The main reason is a bit more simple.

    If a PC user discovers that his machine has a better spec a week after he bought it, he'll just say, "Oh well, I had to jump sometime" and get on with his life.

    The kind of Mac user (especially round here) who complains that Apple doesn't update often enough, is most probably the same sort of Mac user who will complain if Apple updates at the same rate that Intel makes incremental improvements. This kind of Mac user doesn't like to feel that his Mac is out-of-date less than a year after he bought it. In fact, he's the probably the sort of Mac user who will come here and demand a class action because Apple has "obsoleted" his machine when it less than a year old.  
    You are ignoring the simple fact that a Mac user that wants to upgrade his device to a newer Mac he has to settle for Intel's last gen for a very high price while the rest of the industry has moved to Intel's latest hardware.
    Apple's lack of competitiveness can't be ignored by a normal consumer.
    tallest skilelijahg
  • Reply 92 of 127
    BigDannBigDann Posts: 23member
    Even the title of this piece made me laugh at the ridiculousness of AI. I haven't seen any press stories that Apple is doomed. That's just one of those fake news approaches which does nothing to create a productive dialog.

    What I have seen is lots of press stories and user comments with concerns and intense frustration (from customers) that Apple's approach to hardware is plain wrong. We're in June and there has been no Mac hardware introductions this year and now it looks like we will wait until September / October until the next event for this to happen. At the same time the Mac Mini hasn't had an update for 4 years and the Mac Pro refresh is still a long way off. How can this be a good thing? There is no regular update cycle going on here to keep Apple's customers competitive with other platforms but a schedule driven around another set of priorities. 

    Has Intel been slow to introduce new chips... yes. Have Apple been even slower at introducing new computers..... yes! Gen 8 Intel chips are out and have been since October of last year and we haven't seen any iMac or laptop updates. My teenage son finds it hysterical that I would even think that Macs are competitive in the market for computers nowadays, given the 6 core mobile chip in his laptop. This is in essence Apple's problem. They believe their own marketing but less and less people, including the next generation of customers do.
    They dropped the heavy pro market in the MacBook Pro line. Will they recover? Starting to wonder...

    We need the old Unibody back with updated insides! Aimed for the Pro's who need ports and MagSafe.
  • Reply 93 of 127
    BigDannBigDann Posts: 23member
    ascii said:
    I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex). 

    And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
    I agree, its time for an AMD ThreadRipper Mac Pro!
  • Reply 94 of 127
    BigDann said:
    ascii said:
    I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex). 

    And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
    I agree, its time for an AMD ThreadRipper Mac Pro!
    Guess ascii didn't watch the AMD presentation? Seems they should come with criticism for dbl down douchiere (I made up that word lol) in using absurd 'one-up-manship' AMD ThreadRipper 2, with 250w TDP and 32 cores....new 'Mac Pro' with howling turbo fans<<<lynch mobs. So, will this imaginary Mac Pro have a 1000w power supply to run 4 slots of next gen high-end GPU's? Yeah sure, dream on.

    Apple has already lost the actual Mac Pro customer of old, what the Pro is for now, anyone's guess>>>doubt Apple has a clue now. Same for Final Cut Pro>>>Pro's moving on to Davinci Resolve, bc Apple let FCP stagnate, did not deliver enough of what Pro's needed or wanted.


    Apple will be on Intel for years to come....about that ARM, it's possible...but as Steve would say...no really, there are actual words of Apple's true innovator, that would guide us now....only TeamAI seems to want to suppress that, censor that, based on Mike earlier post in this thread, truly as sad as Apple's failure to address their customers outside of the iOS environment. I have to disagree with both AI & Jobs about the Apple store experience & current software dist policies>>>been going down hill for years now, it will only get worse over the next decade.

    Who will go 1st in 10yrs with what will become outdated as much as Sears; 270 Apple stores, or 90 M$ stores?

    And if Apple does move to ARM, they will be chastised for being the copycat...again, following what is already on the PC side, Windows 10 laptops/tablets running on Qualcomm  octacore (we already know from discussions of Intel that more cores is always better, always gives better performance, /snark) smartphone chips of silicon?

  • Reply 95 of 127
    BigDannBigDann Posts: 23member
    ascii said:
    The current Macbook Pro is not a bad design. It looks good and is snappy. There has been a lot of fuss made about the keyboard but the butterfly switches really do stabilise the keys and make them less splashy, they just needed to add more travel to make it more comfortable to type on. Once it gets 6 cores and Vega it will be simply amazing.
    It's technically a MacBook mis-marked !! A REAL MacBook Pro would have the ports.

    Yes, it's an OK design for a jet-setter who needs a light weight system. But, it really doesn't serve the heavy weight pro market. If Apple were to bring out an updated Unibody MacBook Pro 2011/12 design with the i9, retina or better display, serviceable RAM & storage it would be a winner. I know a lot of people would buy it!

    edited June 10
  • Reply 96 of 127
    BigDannBigDann Posts: 23member

    Rayz2016 said:
    k2kw said:

    Portent of the future

    Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.

    While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.

    But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.

    "Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.

    Of course! Of course! I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.

    For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.

    It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).

    But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.

    In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.

    But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:

    1. X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
    2. X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds. 

    Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:



    Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"

    What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."

    The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.

    The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad

    So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.

    "But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"

    That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.


    One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
    You're making a few assumptions here.

    1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.

    2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.

    Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.
    The hybrid MacBook Pro is already here! The Touch Bar uses the ARM APU for the touch bar.

    Apple will continue to use them for specific tasks within the system, it won't supplant the primary CPU in the MacBook/iMac systems. The Apple A Series APU's are very good! But, they are not designed to scale to the level of a full laptop or desktop system in its current design.

    More than likely Apple will create a half step system to compete with the Chromebook's. Basically, an iPad within a clamshell, keyboard & trackpad for the K-12 market.
    mattinoz
  • Reply 97 of 127
    Some really interesting viewpoints here both negative to and supportive of Apple. Rather than get stuck in the hyperbole I did a bit of research because I wanted to see for myself the stats on how often Apple has introduced new hardware and specifically the MacBook Pro's. Some of these stats maybe a little off as the info is coming from Wikipedia so take with a grain of salt. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_Apple_Inc._products

    From 2010 to March 2015 when the last 3rd Gen MB Pro was introduced the average number of days between refreshes was 255. This excludes the fact that sometimes Apple refreshed the 13 inch and 15 inch models at different times of year. However after this there was a 598 day lull before Apple introduced the 4th Gen MB Pro. If you take the average amount of time since the 3rd Gen machines were being refreshed it is now 396 days and this will continue to climb as we haven't seen a refresh yet. So there has been a big change from many Mac intros a year (across the line) to very few and much longer delays.

    One reason for this change could be that Apple have already determined that they will make a change from Intel and are preparing the customer base to expect a yearly processor refresh in the same way that iPhones do. If they do bring in ARM processors for Macs then its likely to be part of the line up first rather than all of it and the only way they can do this is to align their ARM processor refreshes with Intel computer refreshes.

    However moving to ARM is also potentially high risk in many ways as well which go well beyond the processor itself. I can see them trying to close off the Mac in the same way they have closed off the iPhone where all apps have to be purchased through the app store, etc. This would be very tempting for them given their focus on services and security but to my mind it would be the end of the Mac platform and its viability. Yes Apple is producing a ton of cash and is extraordinarily profitable and successful and this all down to the iPhone leading the growth. If they went this route I am sure there could be a short term lift from the Mac. However everything goes in cycles and at some point the smartphone market will slow, just as the PC market has done because there will be the next big thing. History is littered with companies who don't make the switch quickly enough (IBM is one) but what often what is necessary to avoid this is a relatively open platform for your customers to experiment with and provide creative solutions around. This won't happen if they go the iOS route for the Mac. A lot of the software developers I know love Macs but hate iPhones and use Android because its more open. I would be concerned that over time the quality of talent using the Mac would degrade if this happens.
  • Reply 98 of 127
    nhtnht Posts: 4,228member
    BigDann said:
    ascii said:
    The current Macbook Pro is not a bad design. It looks good and is snappy. There has been a lot of fuss made about the keyboard but the butterfly switches really do stabilise the keys and make them less splashy, they just needed to add more travel to make it more comfortable to type on. Once it gets 6 cores and Vega it will be simply amazing.
    It's technically a MacBook mis-marked !! A REAL MacBook Pro would have the ports.

    Yes, it's an OK design for a jet-setter who needs a light weight system. But, it really doesn't serve the heavy weight pro market. If Apple were to bring out an updated Unibody MacBook Pro 2011/12 design with the i9, retina or better display, serviceable RAM & storage it would be a winner. I know a lot of people would buy it!

    Apple has never made real desktop replacement/workstation laptop. The 17” was borderline in this class but not as powerful HP or Dell.

    So go buy a Dell and stop whining.  The MBP is for pros that actually travel.  The iMac Pro is for pros that don’t. 
    fastasleep
  • Reply 99 of 127
    Alex1NAlex1N Posts: 37member
    grifmx said:
    I'm sure Apple will update their computer line a month after I am forced to replace my main Mac. They're probably waiting for me!
    This is perecisely why I ‘joined’
    Appleinsider, having not kept an eye out on the product release schedule and getting an iMac just before the next (significantly upgraded) model came out.

    Having said that, my mid-2010 iMac acquired in 2011 is still going fine, and recent system updates have actually improved its performance, to my great surprise. If I want anything ‘new’, I’ll have to cough up for a new iMac with the pending release of Mojave. The iMac with High Sierra will continue to trundle on for the time being despite that, though.
  • Reply 100 of 127
    RobinZypherRobinZypher Posts: 3unconfirmed, member
    =( I'm in same boat... I have late 2016 MBP due for replacement but that can wait coz of eGPU solution. As far as iPad is concerned I was waiting for new mini to come out at least refresh version alternative smaller screen iPad Pro but both didn't came..so I was wondering what to do now? I need on-the-go gadget like iPad doesnt really feel bringing MBP all the time.
Sign In or Register to comment.