Same, poor ergonomics. Also I find pro desktop apps such as photoshop and video editing use very compact layouts and controls, many nodes no larger than the tip of the cursor arrow which are sometimes difficult to grab with the mouse let alone a big fat finger.
The ergonomic issue is true of vertical screens but is obvious nonsense when it comes to horizontal screens. Working on a horizontal surface is how we worked for hundredsthousands of years before the advent of computers.
The other problem is solved by better UI design.
However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.
The majority of consumers never needed a PC or Mac, there just wasn't any alternative. The vast majority of people use a computer to accomplish the same things that a pad or smartphone can already do pretty well: surf the web, read/write a small amount of email, use Facebook, Tweet, watch YouTube, listen to music, manage photographs, read an ebook or play games. Only a minority of users need the ability to edit video or photos in a sophisticated way, be able to create large spreadsheets and sophisticated document files efficiently, use CAD/CAM software, be able to view multiple applications at the same time, use development tools, enterprise applications, etc.
But there's always going to be heavy users, both consumers and professionals, who need that power (I happen to be one of them) and who need a quality physical keyboard and a large display. That's going to be, almost by definition, a minority of the market. Apple could give up that market because over time, it will be a smaller percentage of overall revenue, but I think it would be a huge mistake. You really want to keep everyone in the Apple eco-system. If I were to move from a Mac to a PC (ugh!), I think I'd see far less of a reason to stick with an iPhone or buy an iPad as compared with the alternatives.
A vertically-oriented touchscreen is a not very good UI. Try holding your arm up above the keyboard for 20 minutes. It's not comfortable. The nature of the interaction is far different when using a Pad or phone as compared to using a computer. Therefore, the OS's are not going to merge, although I'm sure they'll borrow from each other.
IMO, another reason why PC and Mac sales are down is because even for people who need to use a computer, machines from five years ago still have all the power they need. I'm using a late-2008 MacBook Pro and it's absolutely fine. And in business, most people spend their day using Office apps and searching the web. No need for more power there either. But as higher and higher resolution video becomes the norm, as video games get ever more technically sophisticated and as the economy improves, there will eventually be another upgrade cycle, especially if Apple or the PC manufacturers come through with a major breakthrough that necessitates more computing power. I would suggest that breakthrough would involve more sophisticated AI. The other thing Apple needs to do is to move Siri to the Mac.
For the most part, Apple and the PC manufacturers haven't given consumers a reason to upgrade. A little bit faster, a little bit thinner doesn't cut it and the average person probably can't tell the difference between a retina and non-retina display. But even if they can, Apple has taken away the DVD drive, given us more expensive and lower capacity (but faster) storage and in most machines, made it impossible to upgrade storage or memory. So maybe people are reluctant to upgrade because they see it as a partial downgrade. Apple has to realize that "thinness" is not the absolute most desirable aspect of a computer.
Using many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation. However, I grant you many of the things done in those same applications would be great done with gestures. I've thought for the last few years that a large screen that lay down on the desk at a shallow, comfortable angle, with OS X and also gesture control would be cool. Graphic design, video editing in the likes of , FCPro, After Effects, PS or Music Applications like LPX and so on, all with the ability to use touch or a mouse whenever and wherever you wished. The on screen contextual key boards and ability to work like 'The Minority Report' (although not on a vertical screen for day to day work for me) whilst still being able to grab a mouse if required would seem a perfect and highly adaptable, creative solution to me.
Accuracy and speed are interaction task dependent. While for "many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation", it is not the case for all tasks. For instance, for experienced users, a keyboard is faster for entering commands than a mouse via menu selections. Often cursor control keys are faster than a mouse at sequential interaction tasks requiring the keyboard.
The speed and accuracy of cursor positioning are also dependent upon the movement scaling algorithm used to control the ratio between hand and cursor movement; a large ratio for accuracy and a small ratio for speed. The ratio isn't constant but is adjusted adaptively in response to the input device control speed.
As for drawing and writing tasks, a tablet pen stylus is more accurate than a mouse, and a direct input device such as Wacom's Cintiq is more accurate than an indirect input device where the cursor is controlled from input off screen. This is due to the need to adapt and train eye-hand coordination to the requirements of the device-display interaction. Of course, any perceptible latency will affect accuracy as drawing and writing involves both fluid curvilinear movement and rapid adjustments in direction.
As for the iPad, while its capacitive touch-screen interface design might be ideal for direct touch manipulation and multi-touch interaction, where accuracy is concerned, it leaves something to be desired. Although it uses a coordinate system to determine the size, shape, location, and vector of each touch, mathematical algorithms are required to translate the raw data. The system works well, but the finger is too blunt an instrument to provide precise location information; by necessity it is an approximation. What the iPad is great at is providing an intimate and natural gesture experience scaled to the neurophysiological and mechanical capabilities of the human hand.
However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.
Apple should have done an iPad/Mac hybrid years ago, now even if they plan, they're late because in near feature the majority of ultrabooks will be convertible hybrids running Windows and the ones that are sold in the market are quite pretty and cool (XPS, Taichi, Yoga, Vaio duo).
Apple should hope that Windows store won't have more and more apps. Because even if W8 will have half number of apps that Apple has, that'll be enough for RTs to deal with iPads and Haswell powered hybrids will handle the rest may even kill MacBooks. It's not that easy to beat Windows. They managed to develope their store in a short time and some of the newer generation of hybrids are %20 thinner, lighter, more powerful and serves %40 longer with Haswells and this is an improvement in just one year. Customers want all-in-one devices. Instead of carrying along a tablet and a notebook, they will just have a hybrid, an ultrabook, tablet, included keyboard, digitiser, stand, all inside.
Microsoft's main income is from office. To really go after Microsoft Apple should release a Windows version of iWork. Many Windows users already use iWork on the iPad and would love the same suite of apps on Windows.
As Jobs once said, we need to get away from the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft must lose.
I think most of us can agree that Apple's biggest threat is complacency at this point. As soon as they start to feel invinceable and try to milk the consumer with mediocre upgrades too often that's when they might have a really rude awakening come to them.
I'm concerned that they're already becoming more complacent about consumers continuing to support every minor upgrade and that the pace and drive to innovate has slowed. Sure they've just released iOS 7 and announced a new Mac Pro but both of these only came after sustained and intense criticism for years that the previous offerings were dated and in need of a major overhaul and upgrade. The case was so severe with the Mac Pro that many thought Apple had abandoned or wanted to kill its professional-class desktop, forcing Apple to announce a new model up to 6 months before shipping in an attempt to quash a mass exodus.
That's a nice fiction. Apple doesn't knee jerk respond to whatever the market thinks it should do, but I wouldn't confuse that for "complacency". The company is aware of what the competitors are doing, they understand the market, they have heard what people think they should do, and they are very very deliberate and SELECTIVE about the things they say "yes" to. But don't mistake that for complacency.
That's a nice fiction. Apple doesn't knee jerk respond to whatever the market thinks it should do, but I wouldn't confuse that for "complacency". The company is aware of what the competitors are doing, they understand the market, they have heard what people think they should do, and they are very very deliberate and SELECTIVE about the things they say "yes" to. But don't mistake that for complacency.
I don't think people really grasp the idea that Apple does know what they are doing and understands the market in the large. Many people confuse their version of reality as a majority opinion when in fact it is a tiny minority view.
This does invalidate some opinions but special needs is not Apples forte. For example artist often express the need for a stylus on a tablet, that is fine for them. It Is not however a primary market for Apple.
iOS has a long long way to go. Every time I see some one tries to compare it with Mac OS X or iPad vs Macs, it just makes me mad.
I can not think about living without my Macs, however, my iPads are sitting on shelve and only got charged a few times since I bought them. I hardly can do anything on my iPad. iPad is good for reading a book or some casual browsing/chatting for an hour or two. Other than that, it has no use for me at least. These days my kids play games on it. I can think of iPad being just one remote control for all my electronic devices (Kuros, receivers, projector, BDPs, etc though but nothing more than that, at least for another 5 years safely for sure.
I recently bought maxed out new MBA 11 inch, and can't be happier. I have never enjoyed working on iPad to be honest, its feels to me like I am in jail. The way/pace industry is moving on, towards tablets, maybe in a decade or two, I can see doing something on them though, if i am still alive by then.
I would not buy the trash can. There is no PCIe buss slots and were required to again add that to a third party purchase to hook up to ThunderBolt. The current Steve Jobs aluminum case macs should have at least added Thunder and kept going along with the trash can. I'm so disappointed I'm thinking PC again for audio production. My workstation software now supports PC fortunately. I still dislike Windoze with a passion though. I will run my '09 machine until it fails I guess although the 12 core in the special deals portion of Apples site looks pretty cool right now for a final purchase of their machines.
I’m sure making your computer cost as much as the GDP of New Brunswick is real enticing. " src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
You can't create an iOS app on an iOS device. You need a Mac to do that. Artists, videographers, designers all need large screens and Macs.
Apple will simply scale-down the Mac business accordingly.
Or they will kill that requirement
Apple obviously at some point will release a bigger tablet to kill the MacBooks, just wondering if it will be the last to run Mac OS,
Apple could strike a between $500-1000 market now or hit a $1000+ later (or both), who knows we might see a IOS tablet one day $2000+ (obviously with extra software) with a 20~inch screen.
I would not buy the trash can. There is no PCIe buss slots and were required to again add that to a third party purchase to hook up to ThunderBolt.
If that is your concern you have a terrible attitude. Think abOut it how many professional audio systems from the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's are still in use. More so how much has the technology of interconnecting those apparatus changed over the years. To shy away from the new Mac Pro as a professional audio workstation is just foolish, your PCI Express hardware would need to be changed out anyways.
The current Steve Jobs aluminum case macs should have at least added Thunder and kept going along with the trash can.
In some cases that would make sense.
I'm so disappointed I'm thinking PC again for audio production.
In your case you are making no sense at all. If you started out with a computer using the AT bus would you have refused to update to all the new hardware and standards that have cropped up over the years? From a professional standpoint these new TB based audio hardware interfaces make a lot of sense, the same box you use in the studio can just as easily be used in the field with a Mac Book Pro.
My workstation software now supports PC fortunately. I still dislike Windoze with a passion though. I will run my '09 machine until it fails I guess although the 12 core in the special deals portion of Apples site looks pretty cool right now for a final purchase of their machines.
Lots of luck with the negative thinking!! I really hope you don't express such nonsense around clients as they generally don't respond well to people with an cloud of negativity around them.
Apple obviously at some point will release a bigger tablet to kill the MacBooks, just wondering if it will be the last to run Mac OS,
I don't see tablets killing Notebooks anytime soon. They are used in entirely different ways. It is certainly true that tablets can replace notebooks for many, but those are people that really don't need a tablet in the first place.
Apple could strike a between $500-1000 market now or hit a $1000+ later (or both), who knows we might see a IOS tablet one day $2000+ (obviously with extra software) with a 20~inch screen.
I don't see iOS tablets getting much bigger that 13", if that. I do see more iOS based hardware coming including a more advanced AppleTV. Obviously Apple TV drives a bigger screen, but these aren't direct touch devices.
Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!
Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.
First of all, that's not base configuration. That's all 'up to' specification. Anyways, before posting such irrelevant comparison, you should probably realize that OS X alone is worth about $2000. Plus, the way OS X handles hardware and software renders all those 1,360 cores with 4 trillion GB RAM useless. And ask yourself, are you really willing to pay $6000 for a computer that has malware in the counts of millions, hangs and lags all the time, restarts unexpectedly, and uses the same old core system structure (extremely buggy) as an OS that came out 15 years ago? I know I don't.
On the second topic, you cannot generalize your perception. If you don't like the new Mac Pro, it doesn't mean that it's a "spaghetti monster". I love the old Mac Pro very much - it is beastly and gorgeous at the same time. But once you get your head around the concept of the new design, you can appreciate it. It was desinged 'to accomodate hardware around a single unified thermal core'. So, it doesn't make much noise, remains cool, and reduces the overall volume. This makes it much more mature than ever before. Besides, the new design is also typically Apple - absolutely thoughtful and beautiful.
To me the future is convergence done well. A desktop OS requires a different GUI metaphor than a mobile one. Apple is doing this right (exceptions like the dreadful scrollbar inversion and stupid Launchpad left aside).
What I see is that the iPhone 7 or so will be able to transform into a desktop OS by hooking it up to your monitor. You essentially get an evolved version of OSX. When you disconnect, it just uses the iOS portion.
Content and settings are shared through the local and remote filesystem. Let's hope iCloud makes sense by then.
Coming out of lurkdom for a second time to highlight this. This is what I think-- yes, the junk right now that hints at convergence is just that-- junk. It's clumsy, not well thought out, and a pain to use. But that's not how Apple makes things. I think there is a future for convergence, and if Apple does it, it will be a breath of fresh air compared to what is happening now. All the talk about the 64-bit ARM chip in 5s-- I think this may be the other side to it. That's some serious processing power. The way I see it happening, as quoted above, is that turns into a desktop OS when hooking up to a monitor, and back to iOS when it's not.
Gwmac, I am going to go all out and say that the base price of the MacPro $1500.
Corrections, I did actually, which surprised me since I am in a small town in the middle of Australia, about as far away from the target market for a MacPro. The movie was kick ass 2.
Comments
Same, poor ergonomics. Also I find pro desktop apps such as photoshop and video editing use very compact layouts and controls, many nodes no larger than the tip of the cursor arrow which are sometimes difficult to grab with the mouse let alone a big fat finger.
The ergonomic issue is true of vertical screens but is obvious nonsense when it comes to horizontal screens. Working on a horizontal surface is how we worked for hundreds thousands of years before the advent of computers.
The other problem is solved by better UI design.
However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.
The majority of consumers never needed a PC or Mac, there just wasn't any alternative. The vast majority of people use a computer to accomplish the same things that a pad or smartphone can already do pretty well: surf the web, read/write a small amount of email, use Facebook, Tweet, watch YouTube, listen to music, manage photographs, read an ebook or play games. Only a minority of users need the ability to edit video or photos in a sophisticated way, be able to create large spreadsheets and sophisticated document files efficiently, use CAD/CAM software, be able to view multiple applications at the same time, use development tools, enterprise applications, etc.
But there's always going to be heavy users, both consumers and professionals, who need that power (I happen to be one of them) and who need a quality physical keyboard and a large display. That's going to be, almost by definition, a minority of the market. Apple could give up that market because over time, it will be a smaller percentage of overall revenue, but I think it would be a huge mistake. You really want to keep everyone in the Apple eco-system. If I were to move from a Mac to a PC (ugh!), I think I'd see far less of a reason to stick with an iPhone or buy an iPad as compared with the alternatives.
A vertically-oriented touchscreen is a not very good UI. Try holding your arm up above the keyboard for 20 minutes. It's not comfortable. The nature of the interaction is far different when using a Pad or phone as compared to using a computer. Therefore, the OS's are not going to merge, although I'm sure they'll borrow from each other.
IMO, another reason why PC and Mac sales are down is because even for people who need to use a computer, machines from five years ago still have all the power they need. I'm using a late-2008 MacBook Pro and it's absolutely fine. And in business, most people spend their day using Office apps and searching the web. No need for more power there either. But as higher and higher resolution video becomes the norm, as video games get ever more technically sophisticated and as the economy improves, there will eventually be another upgrade cycle, especially if Apple or the PC manufacturers come through with a major breakthrough that necessitates more computing power. I would suggest that breakthrough would involve more sophisticated AI. The other thing Apple needs to do is to move Siri to the Mac.
For the most part, Apple and the PC manufacturers haven't given consumers a reason to upgrade. A little bit faster, a little bit thinner doesn't cut it and the average person probably can't tell the difference between a retina and non-retina display. But even if they can, Apple has taken away the DVD drive, given us more expensive and lower capacity (but faster) storage and in most machines, made it impossible to upgrade storage or memory. So maybe people are reluctant to upgrade because they see it as a partial downgrade. Apple has to realize that "thinness" is not the absolute most desirable aspect of a computer.
Using many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation. However, I grant you many of the things done in those same applications would be great done with gestures. I've thought for the last few years that a large screen that lay down on the desk at a shallow, comfortable angle, with OS X and also gesture control would be cool. Graphic design, video editing in the likes of , FCPro, After Effects, PS or Music Applications like LPX and so on, all with the ability to use touch or a mouse whenever and wherever you wished. The on screen contextual key boards and ability to work like 'The Minority Report' (although not on a vertical screen for day to day work for me) whilst still being able to grab a mouse if required would seem a perfect and highly adaptable, creative solution to me.
Accuracy and speed are interaction task dependent. While for "many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation", it is not the case for all tasks. For instance, for experienced users, a keyboard is faster for entering commands than a mouse via menu selections. Often cursor control keys are faster than a mouse at sequential interaction tasks requiring the keyboard.
The speed and accuracy of cursor positioning are also dependent upon the movement scaling algorithm used to control the ratio between hand and cursor movement; a large ratio for accuracy and a small ratio for speed. The ratio isn't constant but is adjusted adaptively in response to the input device control speed.
As for drawing and writing tasks, a tablet pen stylus is more accurate than a mouse, and a direct input device such as Wacom's Cintiq is more accurate than an indirect input device where the cursor is controlled from input off screen. This is due to the need to adapt and train eye-hand coordination to the requirements of the device-display interaction. Of course, any perceptible latency will affect accuracy as drawing and writing involves both fluid curvilinear movement and rapid adjustments in direction.
It is interesting to note that Engelbart and his engineers at SRI referred to the on-screen "tracking mark", what we call the screen cursor, as a "bug". This might be a more accurate description for those times when we struggle with cursor accuracy. ;-)
As for the iPad, while its capacitive touch-screen interface design might be ideal for direct touch manipulation and multi-touch interaction, where accuracy is concerned, it leaves something to be desired. Although it uses a coordinate system to determine the size, shape, location, and vector of each touch, mathematical algorithms are required to translate the raw data. The system works well, but the finger is too blunt an instrument to provide precise location information; by necessity it is an approximation. What the iPad is great at is providing an intimate and natural gesture experience scaled to the neurophysiological and mechanical capabilities of the human hand.
However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.
I agree. The future is neural prosthetics. An important evolutionary waypoint as it relates to tool use and cognitive aptitude.
Apple should hope that Windows store won't have more and more apps. Because even if W8 will have half number of apps that Apple has, that'll be enough for RTs to deal with iPads and Haswell powered hybrids will handle the rest may even kill MacBooks. It's not that easy to beat Windows. They managed to develope their store in a short time and some of the newer generation of hybrids are %20 thinner, lighter, more powerful and serves %40 longer with Haswells and this is an improvement in just one year. Customers want all-in-one devices. Instead of carrying along a tablet and a notebook, they will just have a hybrid, an ultrabook, tablet, included keyboard, digitiser, stand, all inside.
The big change is about the come,
As Jobs once said, we need to get away from the notion that for Apple to win, Microsoft must lose.
That's a nice fiction. Apple doesn't knee jerk respond to whatever the market thinks it should do, but I wouldn't confuse that for "complacency". The company is aware of what the competitors are doing, they understand the market, they have heard what people think they should do, and they are very very deliberate and SELECTIVE about the things they say "yes" to. But don't mistake that for complacency.
This does invalidate some opinions but special needs is not Apples forte. For example artist often express the need for a stylus on a tablet, that is fine for them. It Is not however a primary market for Apple.
I can not think about living without my Macs, however, my iPads are sitting on shelve and only got charged a few times since I bought them. I hardly can do anything on my iPad. iPad is good for reading a book or some casual browsing/chatting for an hour or two. Other than that, it has no use for me at least. These days my kids play games on it. I can think of iPad being just one remote control for all my electronic devices (Kuros, receivers, projector, BDPs, etc though
I recently bought maxed out new MBA 11 inch, and can't be happier. I have never enjoyed working on iPad to be honest, its feels to me like I am in jail. The way/pace industry is moving on, towards tablets, maybe in a decade or two, I can see doing something on them though, if i am still alive by then.
Look at the Mac Pro's competition:
HP z820
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations/z820.html
24 cores
512 GB RAM
15 TB internal HDD
Thunderbolt
Dual NVIDIA Quadro K6000 or Dual FirePro cards.
Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!
Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.
Yeah sure, If only Apple would make it easier for hackintoshers to install OS X on generic PC hardware, What's wrong with them? /s
I’m sure making your computer cost as much as the GDP of New Brunswick is real enticing.
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
Apple obviously at some point will release a bigger tablet to kill the MacBooks, just wondering if it will be the last to run Mac OS,
Apple could strike a between $500-1000 market now or hit a $1000+ later (or both), who knows we might see a IOS tablet one day $2000+ (obviously with extra software) with a 20~inch screen.
Lots of luck with the negative thinking!! I really hope you don't express such nonsense around clients as they generally don't respond well to people with an cloud of negativity around them.
I don't see iOS tablets getting much bigger that 13", if that. I do see more iOS based hardware coming including a more advanced AppleTV. Obviously Apple TV drives a bigger screen, but these aren't direct touch devices.
Look at the Mac Pro's competition:
HP z820
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations/z820.html
24 cores
512 GB RAM
15 TB internal HDD
Thunderbolt
Dual NVIDIA Quadro K6000 or Dual FirePro cards.
Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!
Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.
First of all, that's not base configuration. That's all 'up to' specification. Anyways, before posting such irrelevant comparison, you should probably realize that OS X alone is worth about $2000. Plus, the way OS X handles hardware and software renders all those 1,360 cores with 4 trillion GB RAM useless. And ask yourself, are you really willing to pay $6000 for a computer that has malware in the counts of millions, hangs and lags all the time, restarts unexpectedly, and uses the same old core system structure (extremely buggy) as an OS that came out 15 years ago? I know I don't.
On the second topic, you cannot generalize your perception. If you don't like the new Mac Pro, it doesn't mean that it's a "spaghetti monster". I love the old Mac Pro very much - it is beastly and gorgeous at the same time. But once you get your head around the concept of the new design, you can appreciate it. It was desinged 'to accomodate hardware around a single unified thermal core'. So, it doesn't make much noise, remains cool, and reduces the overall volume. This makes it much more mature than ever before. Besides, the new design is also typically Apple - absolutely thoughtful and beautiful.
To me the future is convergence done well. A desktop OS requires a different GUI metaphor than a mobile one. Apple is doing this right (exceptions like the dreadful scrollbar inversion and stupid Launchpad left aside).
What I see is that the iPhone 7 or so will be able to transform into a desktop OS by hooking it up to your monitor. You essentially get an evolved version of OSX. When you disconnect, it just uses the iOS portion.
Content and settings are shared through the local and remote filesystem. Let's hope iCloud makes sense by then.
Coming out of lurkdom for a second time to highlight this. This is what I think-- yes, the junk right now that hints at convergence is just that-- junk. It's clumsy, not well thought out, and a pain to use. But that's not how Apple makes things. I think there is a future for convergence, and if Apple does it, it will be a breath of fresh air compared to what is happening now. All the talk about the 64-bit ARM chip in 5s-- I think this may be the other side to it. That's some serious processing power. The way I see it happening, as quoted above, is that turns into a desktop OS when hooking up to a monitor, and back to iOS when it's not.
Corrections, I did actually, which surprised me since I am in a small town in the middle of Australia, about as far away from the target market for a MacPro. The movie was kick ass 2.