Apple exec suggests new iMacs may not come till 2013

1235789

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 169
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,385member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Evilution View Post



    2013! You'd better be f¥€#ing with me. My iMac is playing up and I need to upgrade it and I'm not ever going to buy a PC again.


    How old is your system? And what do you use it for?  What are the main apps that you are using?  Maybe I can offer you a couple of good reasons why to wait, OR you can get a iMac knowing there is going to be a new one next year, or get a MacBookPro retina with a Thunderbolt display (or a cheap and dirty large panel monitor).    I think they have to wait for a new panel and the new panels aren't shipping yet.  Plus there might be some other things that like 802.11ac that they are waiting on, etc.

  • Reply 82 of 169
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,385member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Rabbit_Coach View Post


     


     




    My advice for anything computer related: If you need one - buy one and never look back! Anything else is masochism.



    Well said.  I always think that no matter what you buy and it applies to ALL manufacturers.  We are always buying the latest and greatest prototype because there will be always something better in a few months or a year that will make what we have obsolete.  It's just the nature of computers, stereos, cars, clothes, etc.

  • Reply 83 of 169
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post


    I don't think it is that.  I think they are going to announce something, but they with the iMac, they might have to wait for new panels that haven't shipped yet, there might be new graphics chips that haven't shipped yet, and there might be some other components that haven't shipped yet,



     


    What are you talking about? The iMac has not been updated for 406 days. This has not precedent in iMac's history. Apple could easily find anything they need to give it a routine refresh if they wanted to.


     


     


    Quote:


    Quote:Originally Posted by drblank View Post


     


    so it doesn't make sense to announce one upgrade now and then another MAJOR upgrade in 6 or 7 months from now.




     


    The Titanium Powerbook G4 was updated for the last time in November 2002, and then in February 2003 Apple introduced the all new Aluminum Powerbook G4. Besides the update cycle for the Macs in the past was more or less twice a year, or three times each two years. They could easily have updated the iMac around this WWDC and then introduce a redesigned model in 6-9 months from now, or even after one year if it is going to be radically different. They just did not want to. A reasonable explanation would be that they put much resources on iOS and the satellite-around-it-hardware.

  • Reply 84 of 169
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Just say no to Hackentosh Macs.

    For my desktop needs immseriously thinking of going back to Linux. Yeah hardware support sucks but frankly it isn't as bad as on Apples systems. My experiences with USB to RS232 adapters taught me that lesson.

    Frankly I've never been an iMac customer and likely never will be. However I had high hopes that the Mini would morph into something more acceptable. Ivy Bridge or Trinity certainly could have vastly improved the Mini. Now I will have to reconsider the Mini as a potential solution and instead look to the Windows hardware world.
    bcode wrote: »
    Having been waiting to buy an iMac myself, I'm obviously disappointed to hear this news -- though it could very well be misleading on purpose... It would not be the first time that Apple was less than forthcoming about their future plans.

    Today's keynote was over 2 hours long and they rushed through many of the sections as it was, adding another section to talk about Desktop hardware may have been unfeasible.  To say nothing of the fact that Apple always likes to milk one product release before over-shadowing it with another.

    All of this being said, the real fact of the matter is that the iMac is typically refreshed every 273 days, and it has now been just over 400 since the last upgrade.  Making us wait another 6-8 months would essentially spell the end of Apple's mid-range desktop market, as I'm sure we're all contemplating a Hackintosh right about now; something that I'm sure has not escaped the grasp of Tim and his team.

    Optimistic?  Perhaps, but it's all I have to cling to at the moment...

    Well the one thing we have to remember is this thread is based on an unofficial conversation with an excutives of unknown placement. He simply may not have the details down right. I have to balance that with what appears to be fairly clear statements regarding 2013. All in all I'm not hopeful at all. Even if the hardware comes early in 2013 it is very likely to not reflect user needs. I mean really if they can't support users with hardware that meets their needs after 400 days then they are grossly out of touch with user needs.

    By the way I'm talking about USB 3 here which is extremely important if you are buying new hardware. Modern GPUs in an iMac are always welcomed too. I have to agree though making users wait +6 months is asinine. It will be very interesting to see what happens to desktop sales this year if nothing rolls out with Mountain Lion. .
  • Reply 85 of 169
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I'm not sure what is up with he six months thing. However I totally disagree with respect to the need for an iMac overhaul. The current iMac is a terrible design and I will not buy one as it is now. But then again you would have to be really hard up for an iMac right now to buy the current model as it is nothing but legacy hardware.

    In any event the problem today isn't with anyone model it is that Apple turned its back on the entire desktop user community. Effectively nothing was revved in a manner that users need. Not only did they walk away from the desktop user, they debuted the "new" Mac Pro which amounted to throwing those users the finger. It is really terrible behavior for such a large company. If Apple doesn't want desktop customers they should just say so.
    kenaustus wrote: »
    I don't see Apple waiting 6+ months for an iMac.  

    Maybe it is because I'm waiting for an update before buying, but the iMac is just too good a design for Apple to walk away from.  Like the Mac Pro, there is no need to change the external design.  Improve the innards and display and put it on the market.
  • Reply 86 of 169
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,385member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by PB View Post


     


    What are you talking about? The iMac has not been updated for 406 days. This has not precedent in iMac's history. Apple could easily find anything they need to give it a routine refresh if they wanted to.


     


     


     


    The Titanium Powerbook G4 was updated for the last time in November 2002, and then in February 2003 Apple introduced the all new Aluminum Powerbook G4. Besides the update cycle for the Macs in the past was more or less twice a year, or three times each two years. They could easily have updated the iMac around this WWDC and then introduce a redesigned model in 6-9 months from now, or even after one year if it is going to be radically different. They just did not want to. A reasonable explanation would be that they put much resources on iOS and the satellite-around-it-hardware.



    Here is the thing.  Apple has suppliers building new mfg plants to make new displays, assembly, this or that.  What happens if the panel supplier for a new BIG panel isn't finished building their new mfg plant in time to announce the iMac in time for WWDC?   I mean seriously, they have custom fans, speakers on the new MBP and guess what?  They can't put it out right now because of whatever reason(s) and just because YOU or I or someone else wants something now, doesn't mean that we can get it now.  They put resources on iOS because they want to have a new iOS every year. But they put the resources where they can and they do their job in whatever time frame they can and they release stuff when they can and if they have to delay something for WHATEVER reason, then that's what it is.  Yeah, I would love to see a new iMac, but if the reason is not known to me, then I or anyone else can't just make up some invalid reason because we honestly don't the REAL reason unless Apple tells us, which they might or might not be able to, want to, or need to.  All we know is that the new iMac wasn't released yesterday and if the new one takes another 6 or 7 months, then it will take another 6 or 7 months.  If you can't wait, you basically have a few options.  Get an iMac that they have now, get a MBP now or buy a PC and suffer from having to use Windows.  Personally, I was planning on getting an iMac too, but I may decide to buy a MBP instead because that retina model KICKS any other product out there and it does the same thing and i can get a big flat panel screen if I need a bigger monitor to look at.  EIther way, the world isn't going to end just because Apple couldn't get their iMac out and HOPEFULLY, we'll get some more info from Apple IF they decide to go public about it.  

  • Reply 87 of 169
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,385member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Soundvision View Post





    Well you don't see any blind, deaf or handicapped people walking around with Mac Pros in their hand do you?

    I sold Macs for a living for many years and I've impacted a lot of people's lives with iPads, iPhone/iPod Touch and the Universal Access features of Mac OS X. I've never impacted someone's life with a Mac Pro. Not discounting the Mac Pro or its lack of update cycle, but being mad because they didn't update your high end Mac doesn't discount their motives.


    I am sure there is a logical reason that Apple hasn't mentioned because there might be something that they just simply have to wait for and they may not want to tell us because IT'S A SURPRISE. 


     


    Do you know that in the Audiophile world that products are refreshed sometimes 3 to 5 years between models?  Sometimes even longer. You just can't FORCE things to happen.  If you need a new product get what they currently have that does the job OR wait.  I mean, their products have a lifespan of at least 3 years because that's the AppleCare Warranty period when you buy one, so if a product hasn't been replaced in 3 years, THEN I would start worrying.

  • Reply 88 of 169
    tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 43,388member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post

    I mean, their products have a lifespan of at least 3 years because that's the AppleCare Warranty period when you buy one, so if a product hasn't been replaced in 3 years, THEN I would start worrying.


     


    That's far too lenient.

  • Reply 89 of 169
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    This isn't just an affront to creative professionals it is a slap in the face to every desktop user. That is if the rumor about no iMacs this year are true. The problem for Mac Pro users is the take this crap and shut up approach that Apple has taken to this update.

    Mind you I'm not so much up in arms over the non E5 update as I'm am over the glaring slap in the face that the old GPU card is. What the hell is that all about?
    mode wrote: »
    You and pretty much every creative professional in the world.

    Replacing infrastructure, software, work-flow, education and familiarity is no small feat - for any size company and it comes at a cost.
    Solip is wrong to say we "don't have to buy their products".
    The reality is you don't have to buy their products. Thinking like that is why Apple might be able to get away with this abomination of an update.
    Lots of us are at a crossroads - and our patience is growing thin.

    Up until yesterday I was suggesting that people should be patient as Apple must have been working on a significant update to the Mac Pro. Obviously that did not come through. Sometimes that happens but you expect companies like Apple to have viable contingency plans. This rev of the Mac Pro could have been such a contingency plan if they had taken the time to actually update it to reflect today's needs. That would have meant including a significantly upgraded GPU card, USB 3 ports (even if on a PCI card) and whatever else needed a refresh. Instead we get CPU upgrades only, which I don't knock but they are hardly enough.

    I still kinda want to believe that Apple is overhauling their desktop line up to make it a rational play for the next few years but my faith is greatly diminished. They have had far to long of a time to modernize the desktop. I'm speaking of the entire lineup here. So my suggestion is to explore the alternatives.
  • Reply 90 of 169

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by mstone View Post





    . Apple cares only about profit not civilization 


     


     


    As a stockholder, I say screw civilization and focus on profits.

  • Reply 91 of 169
    kpluckkpluck Posts: 500member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by 26Chrisr View Post


    To be perfectly honest, anyone buying a iMac today is being ripped off by Apple PERIOD.


     


    Since the May 2011 iMac appeared, the cost of its components have dropped substantially, particularly the CPU, RAM, GPU and LCD panel - given the Apple premium is already 30% on all their  desktops at launch, that means today anyone one purchasing the iMac is giving 50% of the price to Apple directly in profit.


     


    The company has no excuses, its a blatant rip-off and the fools purchasing 18 month old technology don't have much of a clue - they are but shinny toys to go with their iOS toys.


     


    All desktop users are asking for - that's those of us who making both a living and enjoy leisure time on their Mac's - is a slight revision of the existing product and not a new Steve Ive inspired re-design.


     


    Surely, it is not too difficult to make the leap to Ivy Bridge and a new GPU - perhaps with additional RAM and larger HDD in top end model.


     


    Judging by the Mac Pro revision, it appears Apple are giving us the finger - God I wish I'd not sold by iMac BTO 27in i7 now, I'm still using the other one I own, but without a refresh, I'm tempted to do a Hackintosh and utilise latest top end Sandy Bridge i7K's - with the money I save, I can then easily afford a Dell 27in monitor or Apple TB LCD - Aesthetics are one thing, exploitation is another, and Apple are now exploiting the Sheople and becoming more and more a business focused on the elite, rather than your average consumer. 



     


    http://www.helpguide.org/mental/stress_relief_meditation_yoga_relaxation.htm


     


    -kpluck

  • Reply 92 of 169
    drblankdrblank Posts: 3,385member


    I'm limping on an ancient CoreDuo iMac that is a first generation Intel with Snow Leopard that i would love to replace, but guess what?  I either have to wait for a new iMac because I prefer to have the latest processors OR I buy a MBP and a large panel monitor and do it that way. So if you have something newer than a first generation iMac running Snow Leopard, then you don't have anything to complain about.  OK.  Seriously.


     


    So sit back get what they have now, or get nice tall cool glass of STFU and don't be an idiot about it.

  • Reply 93 of 169
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by drblank View Post


    Here is the thing.  Apple has suppliers building new mfg plants to make new displays, assembly, this or that.  What happens if the panel supplier for a new BIG panel isn't finished building their new mfg plant in time to announce the iMac in time for WWDC?   I mean seriously, they have custom fans, speakers on the new MBP and guess what?  They can't put it out right now because of whatever reason(s) and just because YOU or I or someone else wants something now, doesn't mean that we can get it now.



    The problems of the kind you mention are often known. There have been numerous times in the past when some delays were explained by such issues. For the case of the iMac we have total darkness and silence.


     


    Quote:


    Originally Posted by drblank View Post



    EIther way, the world isn't going to end just because Apple couldn't get their iMac out and HOPEFULLY, we'll get some more info from Apple IF they decide to go public about it.



    I think they went public about it in a way not exactly open but quite explicit by turning their back to the desktop users. This is all they could come up with after 685 days for the Mac Pro and 406 days for the iMac? Give me break here.

  • Reply 94 of 169
    shaun, ukshaun, uk Posts: 1,050member


    I would not be surprised if Apple quietly updated the iMac and Mac Mini later in the year and then axed the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro next year.


     


    Then next year an all new iMac with a smaller/cheaper entry level model to replace the Mac Mini and a high end pro model to replace the Mac Pro.

  • Reply 95 of 169
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,510member
    Yes really.

    For you maybe, but the majority opinion seems to be that the case design is just fine. I have no problem with mine. Don't mistake the outer shell for the internals. Apple has made major changes there several times.

    This isn't a consumer device. If you think that the case has to look different just so that it looks different, you aren't buying pro level machines, because we don't care what the outside looks like, as long as it does what it's supposed to do, and that it does.

    Do I want a new Mac Pro? You bet! But the outer shell is of no importance. I'm not trying to show people by the case, that I just bought the newest. If that's what bothers you, then your mind is on the wrong thing.
  • Reply 96 of 169
    lilgto64lilgto64 Posts: 1,147member


    Maybe - just maybe - the Pro hasn't been updated because sales for the product are still strong - "strong" meaning they meet whatever internal target that Apple has for them. Or just maybe - they haven't hit a sales figured required to trigger the next evolution. 


     


    Just speculating here - and yes an upgrade that sparks a rush of sales can't be left out of the equation. But in my opinion - it is beyond a waste of time to make claims that no one at Apple cares about the Pro line simply because there has been no update in x months (or years). 


     


    As for design - I don't think the Pro tower is dated - though it has been a long time since I have felt a need for the power and expandability the tower offers. I did buy a Mac Mini Server with 12TB external RAID array recently - for data intensive purposes with little CPU load. 


     


    Also, as a Mac user since the Mac SE - I have seen this sort of discussion throughout Apple's history - wild speculation regarding someone's particular favorite machine and why Apple hasn't updated it in so long - as well as denigrating whatever new product comes out as why would ANYONE want THAT since it doesn't fit MY expectations or requirements. 


     


    My dad's theory of how to ensure that a manufacturer would produce a newer better product is to go buy the current product since it always seems like the next best thing comes along right AFTER you spent your money on the previous one. 


     


    My last three notebook purchases have been 17" Mac notebooks - a PowerBook G4, a Core2 Duo, and a Core i7 - with the apparent demise of the 17" form factor (for now) I don't know what I my next notebook will be - although since I don't expect it to be for at least a year or possibly two - I will deal with that decision when the time comes - will there be a 17" Mac option then? or will I find one of the 15" options acceptable? That remains to be seen - it is far more likely that I would buy a 15" MacBook than anything in the Windows world. In the mean time I will not lament Apple's decision to make business decisions that keep the company profitably in business. 


     
  • Reply 97 of 169
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,309moderator
    zoffdino wrote:
    I don't fucking need a new design, just give me the same Mac Pro, with 2012 CPUs, Thunderbolt, etc

    Focus on sales figures, profit margin, market share, popularity, etc... is the typical mindset of a company runs by a bunch of MBAs, not the daring, bold Apple I've known and loved.

    So you're saying for Apple to be daring and bold, they should give you the same design but with new components?

    I'd say for Apple to be daring and bold, they would do what they did with FCPX. Turn round to the customers who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars and say 'we're going this way now because it leads to a better place, come along for the ride or take the well worn path without us'.

    Everyone has a benchmark for their computer. The individual workstation owner who laughs at the iMac and laptop owner would be laughed at by the render wrangler.

    There is no job in 2012 you can do on a Mac Pro that you cannot do on a Macbook Pro. Some final passes on jobs will take longer but not many and there is still a Mac Pro available to do the grunt work.

    I don't expect this rumour to be true at all. Pogue didn't even say Apple executive, he just said executive. It could have been the executive toilet attendent at the Moscone centre. There's no reason Apple would launch OS X 10.8 and not have a new set of consumer desktops.

    Apple rarely launches all products at once. The laptops are the biggest sellers and they always come first, then it's the iMac and Mini. They will be updated in July or August at the latest.
  • Reply 98 of 169
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    This is the first keynote presentation that I wasn't interested in watching. I've been shopping for a new computer. I'm not interested in Facebook integration or super displays. I'm interested in CPUs, RAM, graphics cards, and energy consumption. It seems like Apple is more interested in integrating all of us with everything on the internet whether we want it or not. Tag this and that. Send it out to the world of social web sites.
    I don't see it that way. Apples laptops are excellent examples of hardware, they currently don't have a bad laptop deign. So from that standpoint they are still about hardware. It is the desktop that has been ignored for too long. Some throw up their arms when I call the desktop lineup stagnet but I suspect hearts are changing here.

    As to software one of the reasons I moved from Linux to a MBP was software. Specifically Apples software. You can't dismiss the importance of software, it becomes glaringly obvious once you walk up to a Windows machine. People often forget that underneath Mac OS/X lies UNIX which is a huge advantage for the platform.

    Apple has given up the embodiment of the "Think Different" 1984 advertisement. Now they're more interested in getting us to do everything the Apple way. They want us to integrate our phones with our computers, iPads, the internet, TVs, and even with purchasing products anywhere we can make a purchase with credit cards. Apple tells people they can't purchase apps outside of the Apple environment. They won't let people do what they want with their iDevices otherwise their warranties will be voided. That certainly is the opposite of "Think Different".
    Really this is no place to whine about Apple. One of the reasons that I own an iPhone is that infrastructure, without which the iPhone would be useless.
    Apple got us thinking we were special because we were different than the rest, but Apple is now one of the largest corporations on the planet. They got that way by getting us to join in the ranks. So now we number in the tens of millions. I'm sure that the people at Apple think of us as just joining the Apple family, but it doesn't feel like that. It feels very superficial.
    Please get a grip. You really need to look into why you need to feel special.
    I'm getting the urge to jump ship. Anybody else feel this way? Tux (Linux) here I come!

    I came to Apple from an array of Linux machines, many of which I still have and use. The MBP is my primary "computer" now though and I don't see that changing. Why? Because it works well even if a little old. Notably though most of my Mail and web access is now handled on an iPad, because it simply is a better tool for that.

    Since I'm still using Linux I can reflect a bit on that. It is a great tool in its own right, however you simply don't have the quality software to choose from that you have on the Mac. Let me be more specific, you don't have the quality user apps that the Mac is known for on Linux. You do have very high quality apps available for Linux but these are not normally mainstream user apps. Even then the quality apps on Linux for the most part have crap UIs.

    With respect to hardware Linux is an incredible mixed bag. It is often harder to get Linux to run on new hardware where as Apples Mac OS often doesn't rise on older hardware. Desktop hardware is generally not a problem, laptops however still are. Thankfully both AMD and Intel are supporting their hardware well these days with both closed and open source support. Sometime that support is farther ahead than Apples. In the end though Linux requires constant updating and user intervention to keep the hardware running well. Worst is the constant need to update a "distro" (about every six months) because you need to get the latest updates to support your hardware. If you don't do a complete distro update your system slowly becomes a mess if you try to retro (back port support) update.

    Linux works best on hardware that has been around awhile and if you can remain on one distro release for as long as possible. Otherwise the need to constantly update your distro becomes a pain and is no where near as pain free as a Mac OS update.

    In any event I'd think long and hard about switching to Linux, it really doesnt work that great as a desktop system running user productivity software. It is just to much monkeying around. It is a different story though if you have more focused uses in mind.
  • Reply 99 of 169
    sevenfeetsevenfeet Posts: 465member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by orange whip View Post


    ... no... as melgross said... not really


     


    Apple intentionally limits the product range and slows down the product cycle for a number of reasons (read the Steve Jobs book... its states it plainly0


     


    - to coincide with seasonal consumer trends


    - they only change something when they have something better to replace it - the Mac Pro is great design - what competing product would you suggest is anywhere close to the Mac Pro.... hmm, I thought so....


    - to simply tell the story - Apple makes 'insanely great' products not a bunch of crap.


    - to make it easier for customers to select the product they need - go figure which Sony product or pre 1997 Apple product you need... it's bewildering


    - it effectively and efficiently reinforces brand recognition


     


    Many Apple products have remained the same for far longer than competitors products. Apple has one style of keyboard and has had so for years, how many does microsoft have? Why do they need different styles? Why don't they just make one really good one?



     


    I think you've hit the nail on the head.


     


    Apple has different priorities than the rest of the computer and consumer electronics industries and while Apple is the one being copied a lot these days, most companies still don't do everything Apple's way.  First, I'm not surprised that we saw Macs that didn't get upgraded right now.  I can't remember a time that Apple turned over the entire Mac product line at once.  The fact that they turned over the entire Macbook line at once is pretty extraordinary.


     


    Second, I'm sure the "unnamed Apple exec" who spoke to David Pogue is probably "unnamed Apple exec Phil Schiller".  I'm certain they knew there would be some blowback from people expecting to see Ivy bridge across the board all at once and a new Mac Pro (instead of the speed bump) and the message was to be patient.  It's not surprising to se the Macbooks get the new toys first.  They outsell the desktop Macs 3 to 1 easy.  And if you look at the comments above, the iMac isn't as beholden to the "seasonal buying trends" meaning "back to school" as it was a decade ago.  Most students carry Macbooks of some sort now or even iPads or both.  Oh sure, the iMac is still needed to classrooms and people who want a desktop Mac, either at home or at a business.  But school systems buy more iPads now anyway than Macs and those buyers care more about price than the latest Ivy Bridge hotness.


     


    Somehow I still don't think we'll have to wait for 2013 for new iMacs or Mac Minis...they will just get updated press release style in a few months.


     


    As for the Mac Pro, given the fact that Apple made a behind the scenes comment to Pogue at all means they are sensitive to these buyers.  Mac Pro buyers are not the rest of us.  Back in the old days, a lot of die hard geeks such as myself made sure to get whatever Mac tower Apple made at the time.  Now the Mac Pro is owned almost exclusively by the "time is money" crowd, and some collegiate academic and scientific circles.  If I need to processa lot of uncompressed video for a TV show or movie, I'm sorry but a Macbook Pro Retina is not going to cut it.  There used to be an old saying with car engines "there is no substitute for cubic inches".  For people who need the horsepower, only a multi-cored Xeon will get you to a deadline.


     


    Which brings us to Apple's problem.  Since the "time is money" crowd buys machines when they need them, not necessarily due to "seasonal consumer trends", this machine ends up having a longer life cycle and we've seen that during the entire life of the Mac Pro since 2006 (and before that going back to the PowerMac days).  Right now I'm sure that Apple debated whether or not to go to Sandy Bridge-E for the Mac Pro right now.  On one hand, they need PCI 3.0 (which SB-E has) but they also need USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt (which SB-E does not have).  Suitable Ivy Bridge Xeon architecture won't be available until 2013 and this is where I think Apple decided to go with the extended product cycle strategy.  If they replace the Mac Pro with a new one, they are looking to have this guy around for 2-3 years with minimal changes.  They really don't want to shoehorn some added technology over and above what SB-E offers only to have it all on the chip level in six months anyway.  Better to wait and then do it all at once (which is more economical too).

  • Reply 100 of 169
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    ... no... as melgross said... not really

    Apple intentionally limits the product range and slows down the product cycle for a number of reasons (read the Steve Jobs book... its states it plainly0
    There is a difference between slowing down and giving up. Look at old people, those that slow down enjoy their old years, those that give up die.
    - to coincide with seasonal consumer trends
    USB 3 is a consummer trend and an important one, so how is ignoring it on the desktop smart.
    - they only change something when they have something better to replace it
    OK so where is Ivy Bridge in a Mini?
    - the Mac Pro is great design - what competing product would you suggest is anywhere close to the Mac Pro.... hmm, I thought so....
    At this point the Mac Pro is a piece of crap. If you can't recognize that how do you expect people to consider what you are writing here?
    - to simply tell the story - Apple makes 'insanely great' products not a bunch of crap.
    The Mac Pro is now a heaping pile of crap. Computers these days without USB 3 are crap. It looks like Apples entire desktop line is a smoldering pile of crap.
    - to make it easier for customers to select the product they need - go figure which Sony product or pre 1997 Apple product you need... it's bewildering
    That concept has truly gotten old especially when it seems to be justification for ignoring significant portions of the market.
    - it effectively and efficiently reinforces brand recognition
    So you are saying that Apple keeps the same Mac Pro case around so that people can recognize crap easier?
    Many Apple products have remained the same for far longer than competitors products. Apple has one style of keyboard and has had so for years, how many does microsoft have? Why do they need different styles? Why don't they just make one really good one?

    Actually I've been asking for years that question, why oesnt Apple make a good keyboard.

    Please don't let Apples marketing BS blind you to the current situation.
Sign In or Register to comment.