Apple AirPort Extreme claims top marks in consumer-grade wireless router survey

1356

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 107
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    It seems as though Apple is getting the idea that the only products they want to have are major sellers that are iconic products. They don't want to deal with anything else such as monitors, routers, printers, etc.

    thats a shame, because even a business the size of Apple needs products that sell in small numbers and for less sales dollars overall. I think this is a mistake. I read that Apple has only so many resources, etc, but that's nonsense. A company that's much smaller, but yet has many more products, such as Sony, also has much less resources, but manages to have numerous product lines.

    the reason Apple doesn't persue more products is because they don't want to, not that they can't. An apparent step back is the auto business. If what we read is true, then Apple spendt a lot of money buying and leasing property, mostly for the purpose of coming out with a car, but because they though it would be difficult, they abandoned much of the project. This worries me. They need to do the most difficult things, not the easiest.
    I generally agree. 

    In some ways they are starting to look like IBM -- running away from anything that's difficult. 

    But I also suspect there's a uniquely Apple problem here which is that the way they are structured, there may very well be a shortage of a key resource: the attention of senior management. Their management structure was built around a CEO who wanted to weigh in on almost every single product they sold before it went out the door. That worked well 10 years ago when their CEO was a product genius and workaholic. I doubt that Tim Cook is trying to take on that role -- instead, it's probably Ive's job. But Ive is not Steve Jobs. He's a good designer, but that's just one aspect of making a great product. Jobs also had a pretty good intuition for the needs of a lot of his customers, he could "see where the puck is going", and he could see how all the products and features fit together into a coherent whole. I'm not sure Ive has that. Jobs was also very passionate about his work -- Ive seems bored. 

    So I suspect that a big part of the reason that Apple is abandoning good products and markets is that Jony Ive just doesn't have the time or interest, and that leaves the products withering. Apple may need to figure out how to tweak their structure so that one guy (or a small number of guys) don't become major bottle necks. 


    You've just so eloquently stated my thoughts and fears on post Jobs Apple, well done , the problem is that Steve structured Apple around tacit-knowledge, skills and instincts that only he possed and now that he's gone there's a huge and visible vacancy that just can't be filled, I think to give so much power to Jony was an error, a justifiable and more importantly one that could never be avoided, but an error non the less, one that's likely to erode large chunks of Apple esque, Jony was always going to be what he is At Apple it's like the conductor is gone so the best violinist is now running the orchestra.
    palomine
  • Reply 42 of 107
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,530member
    altivec88 said:
    $200 billion in the bank, 115,000 employees.

    and nobody can design an aluminum monitor frame with an apple logo and stick a panel from another manufacturer in it.

    and don't have enough people to keep staff on the highest rated router.

    and can't update their MacPro line for 3+ years even though intel updated the CPU twice with the same socket

    and can't update their other desktops for years.

    iPhone design has stayed the same for the last 3 years

    iWatch 2 has the same design, ooooh ahhhh, they added a gps and made it thicker.

    What the heck have they done with 100k+ employees in the past few years.  How can companies a fraction of Apple's size and much more limited resources make more products and keep them all current.   Man, when the iPhone party is over, Apple is going to be in some serious trouble.
    Some of these design decisions I understand. Unlike some other companies, Apple has long range goals. If you pay attention, you can see some of them in action. Apple is rarely diverted from those goals by competitor's products.

    we see that with OLED screens for phones. Samsung came out with them as a marketing tool, telling everyone how modern they were. But they weren't nearly ready for prime time. It took years before they became really good. It's really only been the past two years in which the improvements all around have gotten to the point where they are some of the best displays out there. So now, Apple is looking at them seriously. Sure, we think that the iPhone is behind because of that, but it isn't.

    i get that three years of basically the same case seems to be a problem, but really, is it? Man, it's just the case! Everything else inside is different, and improved a lot over the year before. And go to Anandtech, and you'll see that new Android models from Samsung and others are just barely meeting last year's iPhone specs. So are they behind? No.

    apparently, next year, the phone will be completely different, and I suppose Apple didn't think it paid to do a whole new case just for one year. It actually makes sense.

    i get the problem with the Mac Pro, and I'm not thrilled about it. I hope it not that they thinking pro users don't need it anymore, because it's possible that that's exactly what they're thinking. Otherwise, they've got that plan again, and they're sticking to it, with an entirely new design next year, when the Xeon line they need for it will finally come out, almost a year late. I would have preferred slightly improved models with slightly improved CPU's and more significantly improves GPUs. I don't know why Apple stopped doing that. Perhaps they're right, and Mac Pro sales have dropped to the point where they care less about it.

    As far as desktops go, to be fair, they were significantly improved late last year, not years. I know, because I bought my daughter a 27" model with that gorgeous 5K DCI-P3 screen.

    and don't be silly about the Watch. I bought the series 2 when it came out a short while ago. It's a much improved model, much better than any competitor's watch. Not even close. Again you have a hangup about the case. Watch manufacturers have distinctive designs. You can tell who makes the watch from a yard away, even further, with some designs. Most manufacturers have several different sizes in differing materials, but the designs are all about the same. This is Apple's "look". You don't like it fine. They've won awards for the design though, and no other smart watch has. In fact, the rest look cheap and crappy. Eventually, possibly, Apple will come out with more models. But the round smartwatch is a terrible idea, even if it's more conventional. Text is not happy with a round screen.
    edited November 2016 cornchipbrucemc
  • Reply 43 of 107
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    mtbnut said:
    Reassign them to the AirPods division.  It needs help, apparently.

    $200 billion in the bank. 115,000 employees. 

    And are late delivering wireless f-ing earphones. 

    In any other industry, that's a fail. But with Apple, it's "We're taking the time to make sure we're doing it right," and everyone nods in agreement. 

    Nice job. 
    What can they really do when their industrial design chief declares a shape and size that is outside the means of current components? Apple builds with form over function. If they have to ship product with functional defects or ship them much later than announced just because the tech wasn't ready for the chosen form, then that's what they do.
  • Reply 44 of 107
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,750member
    bitmod said:
    My ISP provides a top notch modem that does everything I need and more - and has been the most reliable modem i've ever had.
    Most hifi streamers are using top notch DAC's with built in Tidal, Spotify, have Airplay, iPod, USB, PCM, 3.5, RCA, Coax, and can play all formats from any source.
    Synology has the best and easiest NAS systems out there that blow away anything Apple could even dream of.

    It's understandable that Apple get out of this market.
    "... and has been the most reliable modem i've ever had." 

    My ISP also provides a great modem/router, the discussion here is about routers not modems. One of the quirks about Apple's AirPort Base Stations is that they are routers, but not modems. In my case I turn off my ISP's modem/router's router (if you see what I mean) and hook the modem directly to an Airport extreme via ethernet as the primary router and have several others around the house that automatically configure as extenders.  Apple's auto configuring for this is utterly automatic and unparalleled in the industry IMHO.  I for one am sad about this news.
    pscooter63macbear01
  • Reply 45 of 107
    mtbnut said:
    Reassign them to the AirPods division.  It needs help, apparently.

    $200 billion in the bank. 115,000 employees. 

    And are late delivering wireless f-ing earphones. 

    In any other industry, that's a fail. But with Apple, it's "We're taking the time to make sure we're doing it right," and everyone nods in agreement. 

    Nice job. 
    Almost two-thirds of those employees work in retail
    cornchipwelshdog
  • Reply 46 of 107
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,530member
    dysamoria said:
    mtbnut said:
    Reassign them to the AirPods division.  It needs help, apparently.

    $200 billion in the bank. 115,000 employees. 

    And are late delivering wireless f-ing earphones. 

    In any other industry, that's a fail. But with Apple, it's "We're taking the time to make sure we're doing it right," and everyone nods in agreement. 

    Nice job. 
    What can they really do when their industrial design chief declares a shape and size that is outside the means of current components? Apple builds with form over function. If they have to ship product with functional defects or ship them much later than announced just because the tech wasn't ready for the chosen form, then that's what they do.
    That's just not true. With Apple, form and function are partners. You can't have one without the other.
  • Reply 47 of 107
    holyone said:
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    It seems as though Apple is getting the idea that the only products they want to have are major sellers that are iconic products. They don't want to deal with anything else such as monitors, routers, printers, etc.

    thats a shame, because even a business the size of Apple needs products that sell in small numbers and for less sales dollars overall. I think this is a mistake. I read that Apple has only so many resources, etc, but that's nonsense. A company that's much smaller, but yet has many more products, such as Sony, also has much less resources, but manages to have numerous product lines.

    the reason Apple doesn't persue more products is because they don't want to, not that they can't. An apparent step back is the auto business. If what we read is true, then Apple spendt a lot of money buying and leasing property, mostly for the purpose of coming out with a car, but because they though it would be difficult, they abandoned much of the project. This worries me. They need to do the most difficult things, not the easiest.
    I generally agree. 

    In some ways they are starting to look like IBM -- running away from anything that's difficult. 

    But I also suspect there's a uniquely Apple problem here which is that the way they are structured, there may very well be a shortage of a key resource: the attention of senior management. Their management structure was built around a CEO who wanted to weigh in on almost every single product they sold before it went out the door. That worked well 10 years ago when their CEO was a product genius and workaholic. I doubt that Tim Cook is trying to take on that role -- instead, it's probably Ive's job. But Ive is not Steve Jobs. He's a good designer, but that's just one aspect of making a great product. Jobs also had a pretty good intuition for the needs of a lot of his customers, he could "see where the puck is going", and he could see how all the products and features fit together into a coherent whole. I'm not sure Ive has that. Jobs was also very passionate about his work -- Ive seems bored. 

    So I suspect that a big part of the reason that Apple is abandoning good products and markets is that Jony Ive just doesn't have the time or interest, and that leaves the products withering. Apple may need to figure out how to tweak their structure so that one guy (or a small number of guys) don't become major bottle necks. 


    You've just so eloquently stated my thoughts and fears on post Jobs Apple, well done , the problem is that Steve structured Apple around tacit-knowledge, skills and instincts that only he possed and now that he's gone there's a huge and visible vacancy that just can't be filled, I think to give so much power to Jony was an error, a justifiable and more importantly one that could never be avoided, but an error non the less, one that's likely to erode large chunks of Apple esque, Jony was always going to be what he is At Apple it's like the conductor is gone so the best violinist is now running the orchestra.
    Problem is, who else out in the tech sphere, is a conductor a la Steve Jobs? I'm not sure there is one right now. So Ive is the next best thing. Given their relationship, he's the closest approximation of Steve Jobs.
  • Reply 48 of 107
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member
    altivec88 said:
    Mikeymike said:
    blastdoor said:
    Watching Apple right now is like watching the X-Files in those years when they clearly had no idea where to take the show. 

    How does it make sense to cancel a product like this (or displays) but keep a very niche product like Logic?

    If you depend on any product from Apple other than the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook I suggest you start looking for alternatives because no matter how good the product is, no matter how popular within its market, and no matter how much you are willing to pay -- Apple can and in many cases will kill the product with no clear reason and no warning. 


    People 'need' Logic.
    Nobody 'needs' an Apple display (which is just a rebadged LG or something anyway), or an Apple router.
    Why can't they do both like they have been doing for years?  Why is Apple hurting so bad that they need to cancel these products?
    Because no one is buying them?
  • Reply 49 of 107
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    cali said:
    blastdoor said:
    blastdoor said:
    Watching Apple right now is like watching the X-Files in those years when they clearly had no idea where to take the show. 

    How does it make sense to cancel a product like this (or displays) but keep a very niche product like Logic?

    If you depend on any product from Apple other than the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook I suggest you start looking for alternatives because no matter how good the product is, no matter how popular within its market, and no matter how much you are willing to pay -- Apple can and in many cases will kill the product with no clear reason and no warning. 


    Logic is no niche product. It is used in professional recording studios all over the world. 
    That sure sounds like a niche product to me. 

    Ponder this:

    1. What fraction of mac users use wifi and backup their files?
    2. What fraction of mac users work in a professional recording studio? 
    3. Which is more of a niche product -- AirPort/TimeCapsule or Logic? 
    Logic is Huge. Only 2nd to Pro Tools. 

     What Apple can do is give away logic to every Mac user and give it more attention. Let Dr. Dre handle some of the engineering plug-ins and this program could easily take over Pro Tools which has had a ton of complaints lately. 

    Allow logic and Final Cut Pro to integrate with each other seamlessly and in a few years you'll have 90% of media created on Apple hardware and software. 

     It's kind of funny how you think logic is too niche well another poster said the same thing about Apple routers. 
    Dr. Dre knows nothing about software engineering; keep his hands off my DAW!

    Logic barely gets Apple's attention as is. It couldn't be consuming much of the limited engineering skills at Apple, seeing how infrequent the updates are. Supposedly the Logic developers are the original Emagic team in Germany, so what else are they likely to be doing at Apple? GarageBand, probably. Then there's the team from Camel Audio, who seem to have disappeared from the face of the planet after Logic 10.2 got Alchemy (but nothing else from Camel Audio) and GarageBand got that pseudo-useless remix fx feature.

    Apple's obsession with iPhone and thinness is killing every other product they used to excel at. The software is withering on the vine (I finally spent some serious time porting a pile of data from text to a chart in the iOS version of Numbers on my iPad; the GUI/user experience was lousy with the hidden "replace all" and the microscopic touch areas for the search and replace "buttons").

    Anyone suggesting Logic is too niche and should be abandoned not only doesn't realize how rare it is for Logic to get Apple's attention in the first place, but they can also bite my shiny metal ass. Hell, seeing what the fools in charge of design at Apple are doing to the rest of their product lines, maybe the less Logic gets touched the better. They've already crapped-up the GUI in various places with Apple's ignorant flatness and awful color choices (Alchemy had a fine UI before Apple's flat addiction and pale blue text got thrown in).
  • Reply 50 of 107
    melgross said:
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    It seems as though Apple is getting the idea that the only products they want to have are major sellers that are iconic products. They don't want to deal with anything else such as monitors, routers, printers, etc.

    thats a shame, because even a business the size of Apple needs products that sell in small numbers and for less sales dollars overall. I think this is a mistake. I read that Apple has only so many resources, etc, but that's nonsense. A company that's much smaller, but yet has many more products, such as Sony, also has much less resources, but manages to have numerous product lines.

    the reason Apple doesn't persue more products is because they don't want to, not that they can't. An apparent step back is the auto business. If what we read is true, then Apple spendt a lot of money buying and leasing property, mostly for the purpose of coming out with a car, but because they though it would be difficult, they abandoned much of the project. This worries me. They need to do the most difficult things, not the easiest.
    I generally agree. 

    In some ways they are starting to look like IBM -- running away from anything that's difficult. 

    But I also suspect there's a uniquely Apple problem here which is that the way they are structured, there may very well be a shortage of a key resource: the attention of senior management. Their management structure was built around a CEO who wanted to weigh in on almost every single product they sold before it went out the door. That worked well 10 years ago when their CEO was a product genius and workaholic. I doubt that Tim Cook is trying to take on that role -- instead, it's probably Ive's job. But Ive is not Steve Jobs. He's a good designer, but that's just one aspect of making a great product. Jobs also had a pretty good intuition for the needs of a lot of his customers, he could "see where the puck is going", and he could see how all the products and features fit together into a coherent whole. I'm not sure Ive has that. Jobs was also very passionate about his work -- Ive seems bored. 

    So I suspect that a big part of the reason that Apple is abandoning good products and markets is that Jony Ive just doesn't have the time or interest, and that leaves the products withering. Apple may need to figure out how to tweak their structure so that one guy (or a small number of guys) don't become major bottle necks. 


    Yeah, there was that article recently which said that about the structure, I assume you are referring to that. But I don't agree. The way Apple works removes the dreaded fiefdom syndrome so many businesses have, where each product division fights for control and resources. Microsoft has had that problem for ages, and its only been addressed recently, after Ballmer left.

    i believe that it's just a fear that making a product that isn't seen as the epitome of the industry will be seen as a failure on their part. This comes from Jobs. He made some mistakes, and discontinued them without ever trying to see why they failed and what could be done to reverse it. The Cube is a product that comes to mind. The round iMac mouse is another product like that, but Apple stuck with it for years. So they look at routers, and think that they "only" sell maybe $500 million a year, and that isn't enough to bother with, or they think they won't be able to have an iconic car, and so they drop that project.

    when management gets together at their weekly meetings, they discuss this. I don't think the way the management is set up is the problem.
    Fair point, but I think the true issue is that non of the executive can do what Job's did which in some regards is single handedly responsible for Apple's success, the Steve tittle has been handed to Jony who is sadly the best available choice given the pool, as it is now Apple is making rampant (industrial design) heavy choices, products are now being made as though only industrial designers are going to use them, with compromises that an ID wouldn't mind because of the elegant of the shape, sleek lines and thinness even in places where it's inappropriate (excluding MBP), that what SJ did at Apple he represented normal people who can appreciate nice looking things but more nicely working things, most people don't give a damn about how well designed the inside of their phone is or a book about it, that can mostly be appreciated by other designers IMHO
  • Reply 51 of 107
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,338member
    melgross said:
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    It seems as though Apple is getting the idea that the only products they want to have are major sellers that are iconic products. They don't want to deal with anything else such as monitors, routers, printers, etc.

    thats a shame, because even a business the size of Apple needs products that sell in small numbers and for less sales dollars overall. I think this is a mistake. I read that Apple has only so many resources, etc, but that's nonsense. A company that's much smaller, but yet has many more products, such as Sony, also has much less resources, but manages to have numerous product lines.

    the reason Apple doesn't persue more products is because they don't want to, not that they can't. An apparent step back is the auto business. If what we read is true, then Apple spendt a lot of money buying and leasing property, mostly for the purpose of coming out with a car, but because they though it would be difficult, they abandoned much of the project. This worries me. They need to do the most difficult things, not the easiest.
    I generally agree. 

    In some ways they are starting to look like IBM -- running away from anything that's difficult. 

    But I also suspect there's a uniquely Apple problem here which is that the way they are structured, there may very well be a shortage of a key resource: the attention of senior management. Their management structure was built around a CEO who wanted to weigh in on almost every single product they sold before it went out the door. That worked well 10 years ago when their CEO was a product genius and workaholic. I doubt that Tim Cook is trying to take on that role -- instead, it's probably Ive's job. But Ive is not Steve Jobs. He's a good designer, but that's just one aspect of making a great product. Jobs also had a pretty good intuition for the needs of a lot of his customers, he could "see where the puck is going", and he could see how all the products and features fit together into a coherent whole. I'm not sure Ive has that. Jobs was also very passionate about his work -- Ive seems bored. 

    So I suspect that a big part of the reason that Apple is abandoning good products and markets is that Jony Ive just doesn't have the time or interest, and that leaves the products withering. Apple may need to figure out how to tweak their structure so that one guy (or a small number of guys) don't become major bottle necks. 


    Yeah, there was that article recently which said that about the structure, I assume you are referring to that. But I don't agree. The way Apple works removes the dreaded fiefdom syndrome so many businesses have, where each product division fights for control and resources. Microsoft has had that problem for ages, and its only been addressed recently, after Ballmer left.

    i believe that it's just a fear that making a product that isn't seen as the epitome of the industry will be seen as a failure on their part. This comes from Jobs. He made some mistakes, and discontinued them without ever trying to see why they failed and what could be done to reverse it. The Cube is a product that comes to mind. The round iMac mouse is another product like that, but Apple stuck with it for years. So they look at routers, and think that they "only" sell maybe $500 million a year, and that isn't enough to bother with, or they think they won't be able to have an iconic car, and so they drop that project.

    when management gets together at their weekly meetings, they discuss this. I don't think the way the management is set up is the problem.
    That article made a similar point, but that's not what I mean. I don't want Apple to turn into fiefdoms -- that would obviously be bad. I meant what I said -- I think "tweaks" are needed, not radical changes. 

    I can't say for sure what those tweaks should be since I'm not inside Apple. But from the outside it looks like maybe there are some bottlenecks to product development and it also looks like perhaps there is a lack of individual accountability for some product lines. Those types of issues can be addressed without creating separate profit/loss statements for independent operating divisions (that would be an unwelcome radical change). 
  • Reply 52 of 107
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    altivec88 said:
    grangerfx said:
    And we have validated that Apple is discontinuing routers? I heard it on the internet? Let's get serious people...until Apple makes an announcement it is not true.
    They have yet to deny or explain it and that has been carried as news on a large number of reputable web sites for a week now.
    At the same time this new's broke, a much smaller rumour that Johnny Ives was doing less work at Apple broke out.   Within hours, Apple squashed it saying the its not true.   The demise of the routers was not only posted on rumour sites but it was posted on almost every tech publication out there.  If management or staff can't spend 2 seconds to make a two word statement "not true" on a rumour that seriously affects the sales climate of an active/current product then I give them a fail.
    If Apple had to issue a statement to counter every unfounded rumour and whack job speculator, they would be accused of spamming the internet. 

    And and no one would believe them anyway, just like folk don't believe that Ive is staying. 
    randominternetperson
  • Reply 53 of 107
    I won't believe Apple is exiting the router market just because some attention-needing, jackass bloggers love to spread rumors and speculation about whatever Apple is or isn't doing. I'll wait until Apple makes a formal announcement about those products. I've always found my 2GB Time Capsule to be very reliable as a router but have had a few problems with slow disk transfer speeds and sometimes the Time Capsule disk will drop offline when trying to transfer large amounts of data even on a very reliable gigabit Ethernet network. It has the latest firmware update so I'm not sure what the problem is.

    I get good and solid wireless range throughout my house as my TC router is between my basement and top floor of my house. My bedroom doesn't have ethernet and relies on wireless for my Roku 3 and FireTV Kodi box. I have other online harddrives I use to store and transfer data throughout the house so I don't rely on the slower Time Capsule drive.

    It's funny how all those other branded routers sprout all those antennas and I thought that was something Apple needed to do but that's only how it appears to me. Most of those other routers look a lot techi-er with their displays and everything, so I thought they were better for power users. I just want a router that works in the background and I don't know it's even there.
    edited November 2016 randominternetperson
  • Reply 54 of 107
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,338member

    blastdoor said:
    Watching Apple right now is like watching the X-Files in those years when they clearly had no idea where to take the show. 

    How does it make sense to cancel a product like this (or displays) but keep a very niche product like Logic?

    If you depend on any product from Apple other than the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook I suggest you start looking for alternatives because no matter how good the product is, no matter how popular within its market, and no matter how much you are willing to pay -- Apple can and in many cases will kill the product with no clear reason and no warning. 


    Look I am sad the Airport line is going away, I have loved them since they came out.  But I have to defend Logic here!  You think Logic Pro X is niche?  Oh I suppose Aperture was too?  Apple's high end products may not sell in the same numbers but flagship products and pro users are IMHO important to the entire brand.
    Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to Logic nor do I question its merits as a product. 

    My point is that Apple's strategy here seems incoherent. Logic absolutely is a niche product. That's not an insult -- it's a fact. Mathematica is also a niche product, as is AutoCad. That doesn't mean they aren't great products or extremely important products WITHIN THEIR MARKET NICHE.  But they are niche products. 

    Here are some examples of non-niche products:

    Mail
    Safari
    Microsoft Office
    iOS
    toilet paper

    get it? 

    It occurs to me that the big difference between Logic and routers or between FCP and monitors is a difference between software and hardware. 

    And why is that important? Well.... maybe it's because Jony Ive isn't very involved with software. He doesn't have to sign off on updates to Logic or FCP. But maybe he does have to sign off on routers and monitors. And maybe he doesn't have the time or interest to do that, so the products whither and die. 

    edit --

    one other thought. Another product (or really component) at Apple that receives not only annual updates, but industry-leading amazing updates is the A-SOCs in iPhones and iPads. I'll bet Jony Ive isn't signing off on that either. 

    maybe it's just an amazing coincidence, but it seems to me that wherever you see Apple regularly updating things and making industry-leading products, you don't see much of Jony Ive. 
    edited November 2016 kirkgraypalomine
  • Reply 55 of 107
    Rayz2016Rayz2016 Posts: 6,957member

    altivec88 said:
    $200 billion in the bank, 115,000 employees.

    and nobody can design an aluminum monitor frame with an apple logo and stick a panel from another manufacturer in it.

    and don't have enough people to keep staff on the highest rated router.

    and can't update their MacPro line for 3+ years even though intel updated the CPU twice with the same socket

    and can't update their other desktops for years.

    iPhone design has stayed the same for the last 3 years

    iWatch 2 has the same design, ooooh ahhhh, they added a gps and made it thicker.

    What the heck have they done with 100k+ employees in the past few years.  How can companies a fraction of Apple's size and much more limited resources make more products and keep them all current.   Man, when the iPhone party is over, Apple is going to be in some serious trouble.

    Another person who thinks that all of Apple's 115,000 employees are all qualified to work on every product. 

    "Hey, why doesn't Apple pull six members of San Francisco store retail staff and get them working on designing the new Mac Pro? And if the graphics drivers look like they're gonna be late, grab a few janitors to pick up the slack."

    melgross
  • Reply 56 of 107
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,530member
    Rayz2016 said:
    altivec88 said:
    Mikeymike said:
    blastdoor said:
    Watching Apple right now is like watching the X-Files in those years when they clearly had no idea where to take the show. 

    How does it make sense to cancel a product like this (or displays) but keep a very niche product like Logic?

    If you depend on any product from Apple other than the iPhone, iPad, or MacBook I suggest you start looking for alternatives because no matter how good the product is, no matter how popular within its market, and no matter how much you are willing to pay -- Apple can and in many cases will kill the product with no clear reason and no warning. 


    People 'need' Logic.
    Nobody 'needs' an Apple display (which is just a rebadged LG or something anyway), or an Apple router.
    Why can't they do both like they have been doing for years?  Why is Apple hurting so bad that they need to cancel these products?
    Because no one is buying them?
    People are buying them. I'd expect that if these were products of a smaller company, they would be sales leaders. But for a $200 billion a year company, the sales are very small. It's estimated that the Apple Watch generates about $6 billion for Apple a year, at least, as that's a very low estimate on my part. But that number has been a criticism of the product because "It hardly moves the needle", as one critic said. Well if that number is being criticized as being too low, what number isn't too low?
  • Reply 57 of 107
    melgrossmelgross Posts: 33,530member
    holyone said:
    melgross said:
    blastdoor said:
    melgross said:
    It seems as though Apple is getting the idea that the only products they want to have are major sellers that are iconic products. They don't want to deal with anything else such as monitors, routers, printers, etc.

    thats a shame, because even a business the size of Apple needs products that sell in small numbers and for less sales dollars overall. I think this is a mistake. I read that Apple has only so many resources, etc, but that's nonsense. A company that's much smaller, but yet has many more products, such as Sony, also has much less resources, but manages to have numerous product lines.

    the reason Apple doesn't persue more products is because they don't want to, not that they can't. An apparent step back is the auto business. If what we read is true, then Apple spendt a lot of money buying and leasing property, mostly for the purpose of coming out with a car, but because they though it would be difficult, they abandoned much of the project. This worries me. They need to do the most difficult things, not the easiest.
    I generally agree. 

    In some ways they are starting to look like IBM -- running away from anything that's difficult. 

    But I also suspect there's a uniquely Apple problem here which is that the way they are structured, there may very well be a shortage of a key resource: the attention of senior management. Their management structure was built around a CEO who wanted to weigh in on almost every single product they sold before it went out the door. That worked well 10 years ago when their CEO was a product genius and workaholic. I doubt that Tim Cook is trying to take on that role -- instead, it's probably Ive's job. But Ive is not Steve Jobs. He's a good designer, but that's just one aspect of making a great product. Jobs also had a pretty good intuition for the needs of a lot of his customers, he could "see where the puck is going", and he could see how all the products and features fit together into a coherent whole. I'm not sure Ive has that. Jobs was also very passionate about his work -- Ive seems bored. 

    So I suspect that a big part of the reason that Apple is abandoning good products and markets is that Jony Ive just doesn't have the time or interest, and that leaves the products withering. Apple may need to figure out how to tweak their structure so that one guy (or a small number of guys) don't become major bottle necks. 


    Yeah, there was that article recently which said that about the structure, I assume you are referring to that. But I don't agree. The way Apple works removes the dreaded fiefdom syndrome so many businesses have, where each product division fights for control and resources. Microsoft has had that problem for ages, and its only been addressed recently, after Ballmer left.

    i believe that it's just a fear that making a product that isn't seen as the epitome of the industry will be seen as a failure on their part. This comes from Jobs. He made some mistakes, and discontinued them without ever trying to see why they failed and what could be done to reverse it. The Cube is a product that comes to mind. The round iMac mouse is another product like that, but Apple stuck with it for years. So they look at routers, and think that they "only" sell maybe $500 million a year, and that isn't enough to bother with, or they think they won't be able to have an iconic car, and so they drop that project.

    when management gets together at their weekly meetings, they discuss this. I don't think the way the management is set up is the problem.
    Fair point, but I think the true issue is that non of the executive can do what Job's did which in some regards is single handedly responsible for Apple's success, the Steve tittle has been handed to Jony who is sadly the best available choice given the pool, as it is now Apple is making rampant (industrial design) heavy choices, products are now being made as though only industrial designers are going to use them, with compromises that an ID wouldn't mind because of the elegant of the shape, sleek lines and thinness even in places where it's inappropriate (excluding MBP), that what SJ did at Apple he represented normal people who can appreciate nice looking things but more nicely working things, most people don't give a damn about how well designed the inside of their phone is or a book about it, that can mostly be appreciated by other designers IMHO
    We don't really know exactly how this works within Apple. In fact, know very little about how this works for them. We do read articles from people who know little more about it than we do, but because they've got a pulpit, their words carry some weight, and people think they know something we don't. That's very rarely true.

    if, for example, you read a review of an Android phone, often some operation will be compared to the iPhone, with the iPhone being used as an example of how it should work. You can see that all the time. Apple is just very careful about what they do. Sometimes they do get it wrong, but usually, and much more so than when Jobs was in charge, they will rectify the situation. They did that with watchOS 3. I just can't see Jobs doing that. Maybe, he would have let it ride, or just thrown out the watch.
    edited November 2016
  • Reply 58 of 107
    Rayz2016 said:

    altivec88 said:
    $200 billion in the bank, 115,000 employees.

    and nobody can design an aluminum monitor frame with an apple logo and stick a panel from another manufacturer in it.

    and don't have enough people to keep staff on the highest rated router.

    and can't update their MacPro line for 3+ years even though intel updated the CPU twice with the same socket

    and can't update their other desktops for years.

    iPhone design has stayed the same for the last 3 years

    iWatch 2 has the same design, ooooh ahhhh, they added a gps and made it thicker.

    What the heck have they done with 100k+ employees in the past few years.  How can companies a fraction of Apple's size and much more limited resources make more products and keep them all current.   Man, when the iPhone party is over, Apple is going to be in some serious trouble.

    Another person who thinks that all of Apple's 115,000 employees are all qualified to work on every product. 

    "Hey, why doesn't Apple pull six members of San Francisco store retail staff and get them working on designing the new Mac Pro? And if the graphics drivers look like they're gonna be late, grab a few janitors to pick up the slack."

    Another person drinking the cool aid and doesn't understand that Apple is not performing.

    I guess Dell, HP, etc... must be using 3 members from their retail staff in Texas because they managed to upgrade their workstations twice in this time.  They must have used the cafeteria cook to do the graphic drivers too.   I guess its just too hard for Apple to do this stuff so 3 year old graphic cards will just have to be okay /s
    blastdooranantksundaram
  • Reply 59 of 107
    williamhwilliamh Posts: 1,035member
    melgross said:
    williamh said:
    I've used Apple Airports for many years now and I am generally happy.  I expect the high marks are because most people are intimidated by the idea of the setup of other brands (although they're mostly easy enough.)  Airports have fewer distinguishing features now as a many other routers can also do printer and drive sharing. The main advantage is Time Machine backup for multiple machines on the network.  If you only have one machine to back up, you may as well plug in a drive.

    The Airports are pretty weak when it comes to custom configuration options. In particular, competitors have some content-filter / child safety sorts of options that Airport doesn't have at all.  My kids are too old for that sort of control now, but for little kids it is something.
    Most people never use any of these features on the routers that have them, and most aren't even aware of those features. Apple sells products like these to people who want a reliable product that's easy to set up and maintain, with very good performance. That's Apple's router line. It's not for the wonks who want to do what 99.9% of people aren't interested in.
    You are right and the reasons you put forth for Apple to sell the Airport make plenty of sense to me.  Those are the reasons I bought it (and I was using an Astaro firewall for the other stuff it can't do.)
  • Reply 60 of 107
    Very bummed Apple is deserting this market. I have been happy with Time Capsules for 6+ years now. Solid wifi and seamless, background backup. I was hoping they would come out with some sort of 'home-hub' that would add Alexa like functions with MacOS and iOS wireless backup. Oh, well.
Sign In or Register to comment.