Apple limits 2016 MacBook Pro models to 16GB of RAM to maximize battery life

1234568

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 179
    Soli said:
    flaneur said:
    ^^^ I'd like someone's informed opinion on whether the present memory/controller/battery life limitation is a temporary result of the Intel processor generation that Apple is stuck with right now.

    This implies the next question, when will this new form factor — the size, weight and heat management improvements — when will it see an upgrade in speed and RAM? I'd guess within a year, but I don't know anything about Intel's production path.

    What's obvious to me is that this new package of aluminum is designed by two or three years of intense engineering around the long awaited and finally emergent oxide-backed display. It's the 30% energy savings and the couple of millimeters of new thinness that have determined the form of this generation of laptop, and Apple is ahead as usual in getting the trimming done early.

    So it's too flat to accommodate USB A. Big deal, but there's a round of protest to get through. And so it's too space, temperature and power critical to handle 32 GB at this time. 

    Also big deal, it'll get done next year. (I think.) This is the form factor for the next two, probably more years.
    I can't give a definitive answer, but from the minimal information I've been able to gather, the new MBPs use LPDDR3. If they had used LPDDR4 they could have moved to 32GB or even 64GB, but it's DDR4 RAM isn't low-power.

    Here's what may be the highest-end processor for the new MBP. Note that they state that the type of RAM used affects capacity.
    That page states as memory type DDR4-2133, LPDDR3-1866, DDR3L-1600. Only LPDDR3 is our notebook RAM. The other DDR4 and DDR3L are desktop RAM, see photos, they have pins not balls like LPDDR3 to be soldered on board. Interesting thing, Apple has overclocked the LPDDR3 making it run at 2133 MHz in 15 inch model. They may be using some undocumented feature of Core i7 or a chip tailored to Apple's needs. Anyway, a teardown will reveal what i7 it is.

    More info exists in the product data sheet but apparently not for us mere mortals. See page 19:
    http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/core/6th-gen-core-family-mobile-h-processor-lines-datasheet-vol-1.html


    edited October 2016 pulseimages
  • Reply 142 of 179
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    kamilton said:
    dig48109 said:
    What a terrible decision. We buy high end Macbook Pros in our company. We buy lots of them and we max it out with 1TB SSD and a discrete graphics card. Many of our users are video editors for 360 video and our developers need more RAM for their needs. I need more RAM for running virtual machines. This is clearly a case of Apple not listening to their customers. Most of the time our laptops are plugged in. We can live with a USB type C connector as long as there are enough of them. To Phil Schiller. Give us Apple customers the choice in the Pro series between 1. More RAM sacrificing battery life 2. Choice of AMD/ATI graphics vs nVidia. Sorry but a lot of 3rd party tools still only support CUDA and not yet OpenCL. Typically many small developers who tools we use will write for nVidia only. This throws a monkey wrench in our pipeline development This is frustrating. We've been stuck at 16GB for too many years. There is no excuse for the top end Macbook Pro (w discrete graphics card) to be limited to 32GB. At another former company (500 artists) many of our users using Foundry's Nuke or Mari would be using 128GB or 64GB systems from a 1U system with a PCoIP graphics card. Computers were in Los Angeles and the artists were in Vancouver (BC govt subsidies lured the companies there). Apple time to listen to your customers. One shoe , or one max RAM size does not fit all. Sorry. Don't care what the limits are for the Macbook Air or Macbook (which by the way we never buy, has only one port and that too it has to be used for power, why couldn't he Macbook have two USB-C ports?)
    Oh Boy Here We Go...

    "I represent 1/100th of the 1% that must have 64+ GB of RAM to exist and my opinion is so important that I can't imagine the other millions of MBP users existing in any other paradigm.

    Buy something else or get a desktop solution.  Human Narcissism is a disease, the worst on Earth.  Don't bring it here.  Hit the HP website.  


    News flash, the delay here is exactly like what we dealt with as the G5 roadmap ran dry. Intel has topped out.  Apple waited and waited and finally just did the refresh they had to do.  They ain't happy.  We're going to see an Apple x86 chipset.  They are done with intel holding up innovation.  

    You will get you 64GB standard with 128 option in the next 24 months.
    Oh boy, here we go.  "Buy something else or get a desktop solution.  Human Narcissism is a disease, the worst on Earth.  Don't bring it here.  Hit the HP website."

    Not to point out the obvious, but this isn't narcissism.  Apple is putting out great laptops that top out at a certain bar performance-wise and DON'T currently offer a desktop alternative that is a good fit in plenty of scenarios.  The price/what you get for a Mac Pro right now is unattractive.  No one is complaining that Apple should have done XYZ for this MBP update, but that Apple should offer these things somewhere in their lines because these people want to keep using OS X and stay with Apple and dislike Windows.  Will the Mac Pro be refreshed sooner rather than later?  No doubt, probably 1st quarter.  Will it be an attractive purchase for people who just need more than what the MBP (or any laptop) offers? Maybe not.  That's the main issue.  It might, but it might not.  It might be announced in Jan and ship in Feb, but might not.
    ewtheckman
  • Reply 143 of 179
    flaneur said:
    ^^^ I'd like someone's informed opinion on whether the present memory/controller/battery life limitation is a temporary result of the Intel processor generation that Apple is stuck with right now.
    Well, yeah. If they just use a stock Intel chipset, they’re limited to a given RAM speed (and capacity, which they’ve never willingly hit in 30 years). The battery life is them and them alone, though.
    This is the crazy stuff people are throwing out there. What happens to the second screen when you're using the keyboard and/or trackpad? And if I'm manipulating things on the second screen and don't have to be looking at the display I might as well just be using an iPad.
    Well, the Nintendo DS did amazingly well. So well that that its successors–DSi and 3DS–are basically just it.

    It seems to me that the lower screen could easily be intelligent enough to shut itself off while the cursor is in a text field, and/or know how many of the thousands of touch sensors are being contacted at once (and the proximity to each other) to know “hey, those are wrists; better ignore this for now.”


    So the screen goes dark every time you want to use the keyboard or use it as a trackpad instead of a second screen? Is the screen matte like the touch bar or glossy like an iPad screen? How much power would it consume? Would the laptop have to be super thick and heavy to accommodate a big enough battery to power the second screen? How much would this second screen add to the price of the device? And from a usability standpoint when you're using the second screen what is happening on the main display? Nothing? Or nothing you need to see?  There's a reason Apple put the touch bar as close to the screen as possible. It seems to me the better approach is to keep improving iOS on the iPad not turn the Mac into a touch device. 
  • Reply 144 of 179
    macplusplus said:

    I'd suggest iMac 27" but since you made up your mind for Mac Pro that's even better. Do not hesitate to commit to Mac Pro thinking that Apple would abandon the desktop market, who said anything like that? They even developed a custom display chip for iMac 5K. This is not abandoning, this is more forceful commitment. Since Thunderbolt 3 is implemented now in the Macbooks, then an update to Mac Pro may be near.
    I just checked. The maximum RAM for the iMac is 32 GB, which I'm already past.

    No one said anything explicitly about Apple abandoning the desktop market. It's Apple's approach to advanced users that is the underlying theme of the discussion here. It has been a direction which has been apparent in Apple's decisions for a while.

    There are users who would make use of more than 16 GB RAM even in a notebook. But Apple has apparently decided that such users matter less to them than other priorities. This is only the latest move in a pattern of moves.

    Apple dropped the X-Serve, leaving only the cheese grater Mac Pro that could still serve the user base that does cluster computing. They made moves in their high end professional software (Final Cut, Aperture, etc.) that have caused professional users major grief. They released a new Mac Pro that was less flexible than the old model, cannot be rack mounted, and required replacing almost every single accessory connected to existing machines. They even went with closed proprietary connectors, making upgrades difficult at best.

    And now, as of this desktop free event, that top-of-the-line flagship machine has not been updated for three full years—twice as long as what used to be considered the average period of computer obsolescence*, which was 18 months. (In my experience, the Mac Pro has had a better than that, but more than 3 years for even a spec bump is significantly unusual.) The Mac Mini had been filling the role of a Mac Pro Lite, but it's now been more than 2 years since that was upgraded, and the last "upgrade" was widely considered to actually be a downgrade for how it was being used. Even the iMac hasn't received its normal annual bump.

    Another point to keep in mind is that Apple considers products to be "vintage" if they haven't been manufactured for 5 years, and "obsolete" after 7 years. That means software support for them goes away even if they're still running perfectly. By this standard, the current Mac Pro is more than halfway through that period that Apple itself considers "vintage", and in 6 months will be halfway through the "obsolete" period. That is a long time for any computer model to remain unchanged, let alone the "cutting edge" model.

    Does it make sense to you why some of us are worried that Apple seems to be going after only 80% users and completely abandoning the power user market?

    *Average Obsolescence: The time period when advances in computing technology make buying the old model a waste of money.
    Does it make sense to buy a Mac Pro if you know that every year your jewel will be replaced by a new and better model? This is not an iPhone you can sell easily in the second hand market. Such machines don't need annual upgrades unless there are very serious reasons to do so, otherwise Apple would have made its customers more angry than ever. You build a ten grands worth of a workstation then the next year it becomes obsolete !...

    Your views appear much influenced from Apple kremlinologists and I am sorry if these have prevented you from buying a Mac Pro as soon as it is released. Now that the product is more than halfway through that obscolescence period, a buying decision may be more difficult than ever but sorry again, that was your decision and you must bear with the consequences.

    Apple must completely restructure itself to fulfill every daily demand of every corporate or self-claimed power user. Apple is a general purpose electronics company producing for the mass market, not for vertical markets. There were an Advanced Technology group in 1990s Apple. There were some A/UXes, PowerTalks, OpenDocs and alike. Steve Jobs came and abruptly ended all of these. Do you know why Apple and Adobe are no longer allies as once they were? Steve Jobs criticized Adobe for going "enterprise". This will never be Apple's way. Apple will not be another Sun, DEC, Compaq or HP. The best enterprise thing they've done to date is their MobileOne project with IBM and resulting truck-loads of iPad and Macbook sales.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 145 of 179
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,799member
    Not only limit to 16GBs but use old DDR3 type RAM too dating back to 2009!  Current memory is DDR4 (2014) and in 2018 DDR5 will probably released.
    This is about Notebook RAM, not Desktop RAM.
  • Reply 146 of 179
    macplusplus said:

    Does it make sense to buy a Mac Pro if you know that every year your jewel will be replaced by a new and better model?

    As I already said (though I made a typo when I said it), the Mac Pro lifecycle has generally been superior. Heck, the useful life of most Macs has historically been superior. But not everyone buys new computers at the same time.

    macplusplus said:

    Your views appear much influenced from Apple kremlinologists…
    That's just silly name calling, not a logical argument.

    macplusplus said:

    I am sorry if these have prevented you from buying a Mac Pro as soon as it is released.
    No. What stopped me from buying one as soon as it was released was two things.

    1) My current computer is still perfectly capable of meeting my needs, as I've already pointed out. Spending money unnecessarily is wasting money, especially when it's that much money. And also, as I've already pointed out, the concern is not the computer failing to run, it's Apple's forced obsolescence.

    2) The requirement to replace everything in and attached to my current computer due to Apple's changes. Tape backups, RAID, RAID enclosure, etc. Spending more than $10,000 at one time is not an easy pill to swallow. (Especially to replace something that still works fine.)

    Everyone has to make their own purchase decisions, including timing. If Apple doesn't have systems people want to buy when they are ready to buy them, then they'll buy something else if they think that's in their best interests. No one, including you, gets to dictate someone else's needs.

    macplusplus said:

    Apple is a general purpose electronics company producing for the mass market, not for vertical markets.
    A computer is the ultimate general purpose device. When they reduce capabilities from past levels, they are no longer making general purpose systems, they are making limited purpose systems. The needs of more advanced users don't go away just because anyone arrogantly decrees that to be so.

    Again. It's not just me. Notice that there are a lot of professional users chiming in. Visit other Apple focused web sites. You will see many other similar discussions. I am just one of many.

    I build systems for other Mac users to use. If I can't use the Mac to build systems they need to run their business effectively, then they can't buy Macs to run those systems on. And if they have to use Windows at work, they're less likely to use a very different system at home. And if they have to use Windows at home, they're less likely to buy into other parts of the Apple ecosystem like iPhones, iPads, Apple TV etc. It is a real trickle down effect. I routinely see that "halo effect" at work. And if that effect shows up in my own little part of the world, you can bet your sweet bippy that it shows up elsewhere too.

    If Apple wants to build an interconnected ecosystem, they need to make sure they build all the necessary parts. If they don't, the parts they skip are where the rot starts.
    edited October 2016 tallest skil
  • Reply 147 of 179
    ewtheckman said:
    it's Apple's forced obsolescence.
    I would have continued to reject that term offhand, except we have proof of it now with Sierra. Fuck you, Apple. It runs flawlessly on my Mac Pro, and even with a third party GPU.
    2) The requirement to replace everything in and attached to my current computer due to Apple's changes. Tape backups, RAID, RAID enclosure, etc. Spending more than $10,000 at one time is not an easy pill to swallow. (Especially to replace something that still works fine.)
    How is that a requirement? Yes, you’d probably have to spend $100 in dongles at first, but just keep your stuff until it breaks–then buy Thunderbolt 3 versions. There have ALWAYS been dongles when Apple decides to ignore the past. I still have a few third party ADB-USB (in matching bondi blue transparent plastic) from the original iMac days.
    macplusplus said:
    A computer is the ultimate general purpose device. When they reduce capabilities from past levels, they are no longer making general purpose systems, they are making limited purpose systems. The needs of more advanced users don’t go away just because anyone arrogantly decrees that to be so. Again. It's not just me. Notice that there are a lot of professional users chiming in. Visit other Apple focused web sites. You will see many other similar discussions. I am just one of many.
    And that doesn’t just go for hardware. Need we remind people of the iWork, Final Cut Studio, and Logic Studio fiascos?

    Great comment; hear hear.

    edited October 2016 ewtheckman
  • Reply 148 of 179
    2) The requirement to replace everything in and attached to my current computer due to Apple's changes. Tape backups, RAID, RAID enclosure, etc. Spending more than $10,000 at one time is not an easy pill to swallow. (Especially to replace something that still works fine.)
    How is that a requirement? Yes, you’d probably have to spend $100 in dongles at first, but just keep your stuff until it breaks–then buy Thunderbolt 3 versions.
    I'm running a RAID. The RAID controller is a PCI card. That can't be used in the currently shipping Mac Pro. New Thunderbolt based RAID controllers did eventually come out, but they're $$$. They also require a new drive enclosure due to interface changes.

    I'm also running a tape library for backups. That currently connects with a SCSI card. Again, both card and drive can't be used with the new Mac Pro. I'll be getting a new tape library soon, but that will mean getting a new card for the current Mac Pro, then replacing it with something Thunderbolt based to switch to the new Pro. Again, $$$$.
    tallest skil
  • Reply 149 of 179
    I'm running a RAID. The RAID controller is a PCI card. That can't be used in the currently shipping Mac Pro.
    Oh, right! I’d forgotten all about that.
  • Reply 150 of 179
    2) The requirement to replace everything in and attached to my current computer due to Apple's changes. Tape backups, RAID, RAID enclosure, etc. Spending more than $10,000 at one time is not an easy pill to swallow. (Especially to replace something that still works fine.)
    How is that a requirement? Yes, you’d probably have to spend $100 in dongles at first, but just keep your stuff until it breaks–then buy Thunderbolt 3 versions.
    I'm running a RAID. The RAID controller is a PCI card. That can't be used in the currently shipping Mac Pro. New Thunderbolt based RAID controllers did eventually come out, but they're $$$. They also require a new drive enclosure due to interface changes.

    I'm also running a tape library for backups. That currently connects with a SCSI card. Again, both card and drive can't be used with the new Mac Pro. I'll be getting a new tape library soon, but that will mean getting a new card for the current Mac Pro, then replacing it with something Thunderbolt based to switch to the new Pro. Again, $$$$.
    If they work, leave them as is, don't touch them. If your legacy hardware doesn't work with the Mac Pro, this is the fault of neither your legacy hardware nor Mac Pro. So, what is the point? For your very legitimate reasons you didn't buy a Mac Pro. That doesn't make the current Mac Pro a limited purpose system.

    Anyway I'm done with this discussion involving so many details that interests no one.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 151 of 179

    macplusplus said:
    A computer is the ultimate general purpose device. When they reduce capabilities from past levels, they are no longer making general purpose systems, they are making limited purpose systems. The needs of more advanced users don’t go away just because anyone arrogantly decrees that to be so. Again. It's not just me. Notice that there are a lot of professional users chiming in. Visit other Apple focused web sites. You will see many other similar discussions. I am just one of many.
    And that doesn’t just go for hardware. Need we remind people of the iWork, Final Cut Studio, and Logic Studio fiascos?

    Studio apps: discontinued but main components continue with somewhat satisfactory updates, as I've heard. I am not a user of these except Compressor. I don't use Aperture either, despite having paid for it, since it has been integrated into Photos. 

    iWork: that was a huge mess in its legacy form. I couldn't use Pages in my 2009 13" MBP to format a 200-300 pages book, it was so sluggish. iWork has gone through complete rewrite and recently saw an update for collaboration.

    One of the unusual aspects of Apple is that they don't hesitate to kill their own software if it no longer meets their quality standards, at the expense of making their users angry. And killing in the sense of stopping support, not making it unusable by introducing incompatibilities. It becomes "legacy software" but still works, at least for some time.
    edited October 2016
  • Reply 152 of 179
    macplusplus said:

    If they work, leave them as is, don't touch them. If your legacy hardware doesn't work with the Mac Pro, this is the fault of neither your legacy hardware nor Mac Pro. So, what is the point?
    The necessity of spending a big pile of money all at once to move to the "new" Mac Pro. (I thought I said this already?)
  • Reply 153 of 179
    MacJedi56MacJedi56 Posts: 2unconfirmed, member
    Would it kill them to offer a model with bigger RAM capability, more battery, shorter run-time that is not paper thin?   For crying out loud, give the user community some freaking choice.  I'm NOT BUYING A LAPTOP (at the top-end price) that can't go above 16-GB.  Don't they realize that the limiting factor on the usefulness+longevity+usability on a laptop is how much RAM is in the blasted thing?   They have taken away our ability to add memory as we need, now the FORCE US to only have what they say we can have.  Its getting really really old. 
    pulseimages
  • Reply 154 of 179
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,193member
    Prediction: 99% of people bitching about no 32GB ram option are nowhere even close to needing that much RAM, and it's just another excuse to shit on Apple for them. 

    It's hilarious to see all the well known trolls at Macrumors, who spend their days and nights trashing Apple and in between that, watching porn, feign outrage at the lack of 32GB RAM, as if their trolling and porn watching needs require that. Would some professionals benefit from 32GB RAM? Sure, but these are few and far in between, and definitely don't spend their time trolling Apple messageboards. 
    pulseimagestmayRayz2016
  • Reply 155 of 179
    I was looking through the B&H New Gear & Gadgets Winter 2017 catalog today to see how many PC laptops have the option of 32GB of RAM or higher. A few laptops listed under the Gaming Computers section could handle either 32GB or 64GB of RAM. They were made by MSI and Asus. The vast majority of the other PC laptops were maxed out at 16GB of RAM. What's the quality of these computers by MSI and Asus compared to Apple? I have never even heard of MSI before.
  • Reply 156 of 179
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,799member

    macplusplus said:
    A computer is the ultimate general purpose device. When they reduce capabilities from past levels, they are no longer making general purpose systems, they are making limited purpose systems. The needs of more advanced users don’t go away just because anyone arrogantly decrees that to be so. Again. It's not just me. Notice that there are a lot of professional users chiming in. Visit other Apple focused web sites. You will see many other similar discussions. I am just one of many.
    And that doesn’t just go for hardware. Need we remind people of the iWork, Final Cut Studio, and Logic Studio fiascos?

    Studio apps: discontinued but main components continue with somewhat satisfactory updates, as I've heard. 

    I keep reading this stuff about Apple abandoning their Pro software, and I'm confused. I've been a Logic Pro user for twenty years, and Logic Pro X is FANTASTIC. The best it's ever been.

    Mainstage has been a considerable portion of my bread and butter for years now, and the fact that they're selling it for €30 is just utterly ridiculous. It's what allowed me to order a new MacBook Pro without worrying about supposed price increases. 
    Solitmay
  • Reply 157 of 179
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,380member
    slurpy said:
    Prediction: 99% of people bitching about no 32GB ram option are nowhere even close to needing that much RAM, and it's just another excuse to shit on Apple for them. 

    It's hilarious to see all the well known trolls at Macrumors, who spend their days and nights trashing Apple and in between that, watching porn, feign outrage at the lack of 32GB RAM, as if their trolling and porn watching needs require that. Would some professionals benefit from 32GB RAM? Sure, but these are few and far in between, and definitely don't spend their time trolling Apple messageboards. 
    And if Apple did have a 32GiB option they'd be complaining about no 64GiB option.
    tmay
  • Reply 158 of 179
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,799member
    2) The requirement to replace everything in and attached to my current computer due to Apple's changes. Tape backups, RAID, RAID enclosure, etc. Spending more than $10,000 at one time is not an easy pill to swallow. (Especially to replace something that still works fine.)
    How is that a requirement? Yes, you’d probably have to spend $100 in dongles at first, but just keep your stuff until it breaks–then buy Thunderbolt 3 versions.
    I'm running a RAID. The RAID controller is a PCI card. That can't be used in the currently shipping Mac Pro. New Thunderbolt based RAID controllers did eventually come out, but they're $$$. They also require a new drive enclosure due to interface changes.

    I'm also running a tape library for backups. That currently connects with a SCSI card. Again, both card and drive can't be used with the new Mac Pro. I'll be getting a new tape library soon, but that will mean getting a new card for the current Mac Pro, then replacing it with something Thunderbolt based to switch to the new Pro. Again, $$$$.
    http://magma.com/products/thunderbolt-expansion/

    These have been standard gear for laptop users for decades. Existing PCI chassis should continue to work fine with a $50 Thunderbolt 3 adapter when the port is updated on a new machine.
  • Reply 159 of 179
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,799member
    MacJedi56 said:
    Would it kill them to offer a model with bigger RAM capability, more battery, shorter run-time that is not paper thin?   For crying out loud, give the user community some freaking choice.  I'm NOT BUYING A LAPTOP (at the top-end price) that can't go above 16-GB.  Don't they realize that the limiting factor on the usefulness+longevity+usability on a laptop is how much RAM is in the blasted thing?   They have taken away our ability to add memory as we need, now the FORCE US to only have what they say we can have.  Its getting really really old. 
    The limiting factor in MY 2011 production machine has been its dual-core CPU. RAM was briefly an issue, but then Mavericks happened, with its memory compression.
    pulseimages
  • Reply 160 of 179
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 4,788member
    Rayz2016 said:
    Rayz2016 said:
    crowley said:
    So for all the people whining about not having 32GB, I have a question.

    What are you using currently? Do you have an older model MacBook Pro with 32GB of RAM?
    I'm curious to know the answer to this is well. Did the previous rMBP have a 32GB BTO option?
    They've maxed out at 16GB for quite a while.

    Early 2011 according to wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacBook_Pro#Technical_specifications_2
    Ok so why is this shocking to anyone? Was there even a rumor that they would offer 32GB models?
    I really have no idea. But remember we have the same screaming outrage every time Apple releases an iPad with only <less-ram-than-an-android-tablet>  amount of RAM. 

    This laptop is pretty much what I expected. The only things I don't understand is why they had a reveal event in the first place, and why they haven't got more to show after three years work on this laptop. 

    I agree with Apple that the touch screen on the Surface laptop is poor ergonomics, but I here's what I would have like to have seen: a fifteen inch laptop with a keyboard that lifts out. Underneath is a smart connector which will take a touch screen in its place. On its own, that second screen can be used as a iPad. 

    I dunno.  It took three years for them to embed a long thin Apple Watch above the keyboard; this doesn't bode well for the eventual appearance of an Apple Car; not in my lifetime anyway. 


    Hmm...well I guess I wasn't expecting a radical new laptop design considering what we got with the rMB. IMO there's a reason the PowerBook design from 1991 is still the basic notebook form. No need to reinvent the wheel. What I would like to see though is improvements to iOS on iPad Pro so it's more than iPhone OS blown up. Apple started to go down that path last year but unfortunately this year iPad got little love.

    True enough, but I think that a full size touch screen is going to needed on the lower deck at some point. 

    It is unfortunate that the management team is so poor at articulating their vision. 
    I'm not sure I agree about the touch screen but you are aright about Tim Cook not being able to articulate a vision (he's the CEO it needs to come from him). I wouldn't mind if he was given an Eric Schmidt type roll and someone else took his place as CEO. I wonder sometimes if these product decisions are Schiller's idea or if he's just executing what he thinks Cook wants. The Information ran a piece that had unnamed people inside the company alleging sales and operations run the show inside the company not product guys. That doesn't surprise me as those were the organizations Tim Cook ran when he was COO. And maybe that's what was needed to bring a bigger iPhone to market and make the push into China in a big way but is that the right leadership to shepard in the next big thing for Apple? I'm not so sure.
    Yeah, I stopped reading at 'unnamed guy'.  In the IT press, that's a euphemism for "I've made it up." 
Sign In or Register to comment.