Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Rather than merging, Apple is defining new OS categories to define specific experiences: watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS, and despite lots of shared code, each of Apple's platforms is increasingly specializing.
My opinion, which is all it is, was the plan of the new Cook suzerainty in 2013 was that the ipad and iOS derivatives were the future computing platform, and hence the focus on iOS devices and Mac development was de emphasised, or if you really want to be paranoid, actively depreciated. I note that MacOS isn’t in your list.
So we ended up with a long hiatus, new MBP and Mac Pros that apart from chip speed, were less utilitarian than their predecessors, and an increase in price, all to make the iPad Pro more attractive. It also meant the ying and yang between designers and engineers were loosened up to the advantage of designers, which leads to outcomes like the MBP keyboard fiasco.
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
It was under Steve Jobs that the un-upgradeable, un-repairable, and un-expandable iMac was conceived. It was the first consumer product released under his leadership when he returned to Apple in the late 90's.
"By the same token, that also means that there are all manners of other potential niche Macs that Apple is purposely not shipping because they would not strategically advance any goal. So the appearance of Mac Pro is not evidence that other "wishlist Macs" are similarly in the pipeline, such as a scaled-down version speculatively aimed at "pro-ish" consumers, or one aimed at gamers, or crypto miners, and so on."
Respectfully, what do you think the most recent revision of the Mac-Mini, especially when coupled with an e-GPU, is? The same CPU that was tailor made for render farms (which we are buying a bunch fo specifically for our render farm) is already "pro-ish", and capable of scaling upward if your requirements also include a stout GPU.
That past Mac-Minis may have been lackluster performers is not an indication of the capabilities of the most recent model.
This may have contained some interesting thoughts (or not), but it's another of DED's wordy (2871 of 'em) epistles that start with God creating the world, then the formation of continents, the extinction of dinosaurs, the emergence of civilizations, man making stone tools and developing technology and on and on until we get to some kind of point. Maybe.
Actually the point usually gets completely missed if it is even there. I really don’t see the point in these articles, the mix of history with wishful thinking just mis leads people.
I think this was informative and a good series of lessons that explain why great ideas, invention, and even prototyping, serve simply as fuel for innovation, but are not innovative on their own. Transforming great ideas, inventions, and prototypes into products that deliver value for lots of people, i.e., qualifying them as innovative, requires many more contributions from a multifaceted and dedicated team that collectively knows how to bridge the gap that usually exists between strategy and execution. Some organizations excel at strategy, some organizations excel at execution, but few organizations excel at both and can make the transition without major losses. Apple isn't perfect by any means, but they do seem to get over the strategy-execution gap in a mostly lossless way, which means they're more often than not building the right things in the right way and at the right time.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
It was under Steve Jobs that the un-upgradeable, un-repairable, and un-expandable iMac was conceived. It was the first consumer product released under his leadership when he returned to Apple in the late 90's.
I don’t think that is quite true. Jobs wanted an all in one that is appliance like as possible, but deliberately unrepairable? People still fiddle about with Bondi blue iMacs. The iMac G5 was designed with a removable back, a beautifully laid out interior and even had diagnostic lights to tell the pleb what was wrong.
I grant you that the 2006 Intel iMac was designed to make things difficult(even getting at the PRAM battery was a nightmare), but the 2009-12 iMac was much more repairable, if a bit fiddly. Repairs really became practically impossible for all Mac design after Cook had become acting CEO and his supply chain ethos starting filtering through the organisation. the Development timelines would fit. You can just imagine how he sold the cylinder Mac to a dying Jobs: a replacement to the Cube, but done right!
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
It was under Steve Jobs that the un-upgradeable, un-repairable, and un-expandable iMac was conceived. It was the first consumer product released under his leadership when he returned to Apple in the late 90's.
Not to mention the original Mac. El Jobso loved controlling the whole widget... which for most consumer products is right I’d say. Mac Pro is a different beast of course.
On an unrelated note, the Xserve lived on to a 2009 (not 2006) model that was only discontinued in January of 2011. We still have two in heavy use at my job.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
It was under Steve Jobs that the un-upgradeable, un-repairable, and un-expandable iMac was conceived. It was the first consumer product released under his leadership when he returned to Apple in the late 90's.
Yes, and while under Jobs the white plastic 2006 5G iMac and its Intel replacement tried out a repairable case with user-replaceable everything, that pretty clearly failed because it ended up driving unnecessary replacement of parts. Most people don't know how to troubleshoot or fix things. So under Jobs, the iMac turned into a sleek aluminum case that was minimally accessible and user upgradable. A year after he passed the iMac got thinner, a design that was clearly in the labs when he was alive.
"By the same token, that also means that there are all manners of other potential niche Macs that Apple is purposely not shipping because they would not strategically advance any goal. So the appearance of Mac Pro is not evidence that other "wishlist Macs" are similarly in the pipeline, such as a scaled-down version speculatively aimed at "pro-ish" consumers, or one aimed at gamers, or crypto miners, and so on."
Respectfully, what do you think the most recent revision of the Mac-Mini, especially when coupled with an e-GPU, is? The same CPU that was tailor made for render farms (which we are buying a bunch fo specifically for our render farm) is already "pro-ish", and capable of scaling upward if your requirements also include a stout GPU.
That past Mac-Minis may have been lackluster performers is not an indication of the capabilities of the most recent model.
Sure, but the Mac mini is not an unreleased product people are hoping Apple will make, which is what I mean by 'other "wishlist Macs" are similarly in the pipeline.'
The idea of a mini-server or a cheaper Pro is what I meant.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
Nothing was like that under Steve Jobs...idk what world you lived in. Steve hated people getting inside his computers. And I didn't know "Pro" meant being able to get inside it. Since you want to play the what if game...what if Macs were the same today if Steve were here still running Apple?
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Rather than merging, Apple is defining new OS categories to define specific experiences: watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS, and despite lots of shared code, each of Apple's platforms is increasingly specializing.
My opinion, which is all it is, was the plan of the new Cook suzerainty in 2013 was that the ipad and iOS derivatives were the future computing platform, and hence the focus on iOS devices and Mac development was de emphasised, or if you really want to be paranoid, actively depreciated. I note that MacOS isn’t in your list.
So we ended up with a long hiatus, new MBP and Mac Pros that apart from chip speed, were less utilitarian than their predecessors, and an increase in price, all to make the iPad Pro more attractive. It also meant the ying and yang between designers and engineers were loosened up to the advantage of designers, which leads to outcomes like the MBP keyboard fiasco.
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
Except that flies in the face of what the execs say and have said all long — they love their macs and the idea of them getting out of mac is crazy talk. Schiller has flat out said this on podcasts.
Creative writing and fan fiction is all that is. The reality is what they’ve said all along, and you were simply wrong. No need to write a backstory to explain your error.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
Another newbie to Apple who doesn’t even understand Apple and its history. Jobs disliked expandability going back to the development of the original Macintosh. Oops.
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Switching out Intel’s CPUs for Apple’s has nothing to do with the incorrect prediction of iOS and MacOS merging.
Apple currently runs MacOS on x86, but they can also make it run on ARM if they so choose. That is completely separate from how close or far apart iOS and MacOS are now, or will become in the future. Apple can add an ARM version of MacOS whether MacOS and iOS converge, stay the same or diverge.
Apple's executivecommittee doesn't form its strategic direction for products from emails and blog postings or the public comments that get posted on them.
<snip the majority of the article that talks about Android>
On the new Mac Pro, it's pretty clear Apple has a strong strategic intent causing it to ship such a very expensive machine that will apparently have a relatively limited addressable audience.
A lot has changed since 2006...
That last sentence is really the kicker in light of what Steve Jobs said in the past:
"You know how many committees we have at Apple? Zero. We have no committees. We are organized like a start-up."
But rather than go down the path of a Cupertino worshipper and praise every Apple product primarily because "Apple has a strong strategic intent," I would suggest a better approach is to evaluate how well those products are received. We know how well the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro was (or rather, WASN'T) received. And now we see a new Mac Pro priced so high the average consumer can never evaluate it.
Here's another thing Steve said in the past:
"Get closer than ever to your customers. So close that you tell them what they need well before they realize it themselves."
These days, many of us who have loved Apple products since the 1980's are increasingly being isolated in terms of features and price. And keep in mind that we know full well how expensive Apple has traditionally been versus the competition. But through it all, there was always "significant value" that made the price worth it. But what about today? The entire MacBook line is pretty much the same port-bastardized, super-thin, inadequately cooled design with a bad keyboard. The Mac Pro is a niche product priced in the Xserve category along with the iMac Pro. The Mac Mini is a fine little machine but priced a bit too high for what you get. And then there's the basic iMac, which is really Apple's saving grace in the entire Macintosh line. With that basic iMac you get USB-A -- imagine that! You get an SD card slot -- again, imagine! And you get all the bells and whistles we've all come to expect from Apple. The iMac really is the machine that Apple knows we want and need, and we know it too. None of the other Macs do that for us. The sad part is that those other Macs once did satisfy our needs. The upgradable and expandable Mac Pro once was affordable. Apple notebooks too were once upgradable and offered practical ports and a good keyboard too. The Mac Mini was once priced at a consumer friendly $499. The only Mac with value appeal is the base iMac today.
Steve Jobs once said:
"If you don’t love it, you’re going to fail."
He was referring to Apple but we should apply that to consumers too. If we don't love Apple products en masse, those products cannot be successful in the long term. And remember, the 2013 Mac Pro wasn't successful, and Apple tried to ignore that and they kept it in the Apple Store long past the date when it actually died in the market. Apple doesn't like to admit failure, even when something obviously has. Funny how fast Apple forgot what Steve said on that subject, long before the 2013 Mac Pro made its debut:
"Sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes. It is best to admit them quickly and get on with improving your other innovations."
You're not going to make a success of a product that has extremely limited appeal, which is how they designed the new Mac Pro. It's only saving grace is tech trickle-down.
"The products suck! There’s no sex in them anymore!"
Folks, that's Steve Jobs again, not me. If we the consumer think a product sucks, it does. And neither Apple marketing nor the tech media will ever be successful at changing our minds on that. What will change our minds? Products that are practical and affordable and reliable and enjoyable to use, and therefore don't suck.
Still think Apple knows best and their Borg collective is far beyond your feeble brain?
"Once you discover one simple fact, and that is everything around you that you call life, was made up by people that were no smarter than you."
Steve Jobs educates us once again. Apple is filled with many brilliant and highly paid people who individually are not necessarily smarter than you or I. When they release the insanely great, we know it, just as we know a product that is merely insane.
At this point you my reader may think me excessively hungry for features Apple no longer offers and excessively foolish for expecting Apple to return to a consumer-focused mindset. But Steve yet again says that's okay:
"Stay hungry, stay foolish. Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently."
We're never going to get more from Apple until we start to expect more from Apple.
Comments
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
Repairs really became practically impossible for all Mac design after Cook had become acting CEO and his supply chain ethos starting filtering through the organisation. the Development timelines would fit. You can just imagine how he sold the cylinder Mac to a dying Jobs: a replacement to the Cube, but done right!
The idea of a mini-server or a cheaper Pro is what I meant.
Creative writing and fan fiction is all that is. The reality is what they’ve said all along, and you were simply wrong. No need to write a backstory to explain your error.
Another newbie to Apple who doesn’t even understand Apple and its history. Jobs disliked expandability going back to the development of the original Macintosh. Oops.
https://www.folklore.org/StoryView.py?project=Macintosh&story=Diagnostic_Port.txt
"You know how many committees we have at Apple? Zero. We have no committees. We are organized like a start-up."
But rather than go down the path of a Cupertino worshipper and praise every Apple product primarily because "Apple has a strong strategic intent," I would suggest a better approach is to evaluate how well those products are received. We know how well the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro was (or rather, WASN'T) received. And now we see a new Mac Pro priced so high the average consumer can never evaluate it.
Here's another thing Steve said in the past:
"Get closer than ever to your customers. So close that you tell them what they need well before they realize it themselves."
These days, many of us who have loved Apple products since the 1980's are increasingly being isolated in terms of features and price. And keep in mind that we know full well how expensive Apple has traditionally been versus the competition. But through it all, there was always "significant value" that made the price worth it. But what about today? The entire MacBook line is pretty much the same port-bastardized, super-thin, inadequately cooled design with a bad keyboard. The Mac Pro is a niche product priced in the Xserve category along with the iMac Pro. The Mac Mini is a fine little machine but priced a bit too high for what you get. And then there's the basic iMac, which is really Apple's saving grace in the entire Macintosh line. With that basic iMac you get USB-A -- imagine that! You get an SD card slot -- again, imagine! And you get all the bells and whistles we've all come to expect from Apple. The iMac really is the machine that Apple knows we want and need, and we know it too. None of the other Macs do that for us. The sad part is that those other Macs once did satisfy our needs. The upgradable and expandable Mac Pro once was affordable. Apple notebooks too were once upgradable and offered practical ports and a good keyboard too. The Mac Mini was once priced at a consumer friendly $499. The only Mac with value appeal is the base iMac today.
Steve Jobs once said:
"If you don’t love it, you’re going to fail."
He was referring to Apple but we should apply that to consumers too. If we don't love Apple products en masse, those products cannot be successful in the long term. And remember, the 2013 Mac Pro wasn't successful, and Apple tried to ignore that and they kept it in the Apple Store long past the date when it actually died in the market. Apple doesn't like to admit failure, even when something obviously has. Funny how fast Apple forgot what Steve said on that subject, long before the 2013 Mac Pro made its debut:
"Sometimes when you innovate, you make mistakes. It is best to admit them quickly and get on with improving your other innovations."
You're not going to make a success of a product that has extremely limited appeal, which is how they designed the new Mac Pro. It's only saving grace is tech trickle-down.
"The products suck! There’s no sex in them anymore!"
Folks, that's Steve Jobs again, not me. If we the consumer think a product sucks, it does. And neither Apple marketing nor the tech media will ever be successful at changing our minds on that. What will change our minds? Products that are practical and affordable and reliable and enjoyable to use, and therefore don't suck.
Still think Apple knows best and their Borg collective is far beyond your feeble brain?
"Once you discover one simple fact, and that is everything around you that you call life, was made up by people that were no smarter than you."
Steve Jobs educates us once again. Apple is filled with many brilliant and highly paid people who individually are not necessarily smarter than you or I. When they release the insanely great, we know it, just as we know a product that is merely insane.
At this point you my reader may think me excessively hungry for features Apple no longer offers and excessively foolish for expecting Apple to return to a consumer-focused mindset. But Steve yet again says that's okay:
"Stay hungry, stay foolish. Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes. The ones who see things differently."
We're never going to get more from Apple until we start to expect more from Apple.