I hate that type of rubbish that Cook is spouting.
How difficult is it to simply come out with a model update regularly that has a faster processor, new graphics card, and maybe new ports (Thunderbolt 3, USB-C, etc).? Apple itself is probably making it harder to do this by inherently making designs non-upgradable.
The main problem is Apple thinks they need to reinvent the wheel every time they come out with a desktop. The cylinder Mac Pro is a perfect example...it's more about visual aesthetic then anything else. They probably spent years refining the cylinder. The Mac mini is the Cube concept refined to it's maximum (minus any thought for upgradability or expandability).
Then to see their laptop line adopt a gimmick like the Touch Bar...and remove all ports except USB-C...it really makes me wonder what they are thinking. I like Apple products, and they will sell millions of units regardless of what I think, but it's still frustrating.
There is a frustration when some people are used to computers being upgraded every year, and now they are not always (by Apple). However, these same people will then complain that the improvements of one model over the other make it not worth buying (heck, we hear this in smartphones right now, where there is significantly more change year-over-year in performance). In the iMac 5k example, the performance improvement that could be delivered this year over last is small. So is the 2015 iMac now obsolete, when a theoretical 2016 with next gen Intel would be a small 10%ish (theoretical) improvement, and likely no user experience improvement. Isn't that just playing the "specs game", that Apple has never played.
I know that other PC vendors do, but are very incremental updates helpful?
When I read this thread, I am not sure what would make some happy. They want cheaper, bigger, more ports, customizable towers, no consideration for design. Doesn't seem like they would have ever been happy with Apple.
Those who keep on blaming Intel for Apple's excuses, I have two words for you: Surface Studio
That desktop is still based on Intel's Skylake CPU which is a year old and the Nvidia GPU is also based on at least one-year old technology. Other than the 128GB SSD and hi-res touch-screen, nothing else is latest and greatest.
You don't get it, it's not about the specs it's about the product. There are other ways to innovate, and Apple seems to have lost its way.
So tell me, what's so innovative about this Microsoft Surface Studio? The fact that you can draw on the screen? The movement of the screen? Other than that, its really an iMac with slightly updated specs albeit still out dated specs before it ships. This thing isn't even shipping yet and has an enormous price tag on it, suited for a very niche market.
Quoting Steve Jobs...I think I'm gonna puke! This isn't Steve's Apple anymore...get over it!
If you watch recent Macbreak Weekly episodes you will see Leo Laporte with one on his desk that he is playing around with.... but what I notice is that it is not likely going to be very comfortable in either position.... If you lower it to a drafting table angle a keyboard in front of it is not going to work out that way or you will not be able to reach the top of the screen, and using a pen will only have you keyboarding with your body...... you will still have to lean forward to reach the bars at the top of the screen which is not going to be ergonomically very good.... Then if you put it up in an iMac position you are not going to use the drawing mechanism. Now if you are drawing on a large board but not like a draftsman (i.e. freehand) it is likely going to be uncomfortable focusing on areas at the edge of your reach.
I stick by my original premise that Apple is still closer.... A desktop can focus on what it does best, and an iPad can focus on what it can do best. What I want is for the iPad and Mac to work almost as seamless extensions of each other when used together but not compromise their functionality when used separately. It is almost as though Microsoft is throwing darts all over the place hoping to hit something directly, but the likelihood of doing that without work and planning.... not good.
This is exactly why Apple doesn't make a touchscreen iMac. It would be stupid for them to do so. Its cool for a whole 5 seconds and then its just a very expensive touchscreen that you'll never use.
Perhaps that's true for YOUR use. For the things I do, it's fantastic.
One of those applications is firing audio cues during live shows. The touch screen is essentially a giant control surface with dozens of buttons. It's WAAAY faster, easier and MUCH more intuitive than selecting and firing with a keyboard and/or pointing device. When I need to do things that are not easily accomplished with a fat finger, like accessing menus, I just use the mouse.
One of my big complaints about using Pro Tools without a physical fader controller is that I can't turn one thing up while simultaneously turning something else down. It takes two passes to accomplish something as simple as ducking music while bringing up a voice-over. With a touch screen, I can. Even if I still work *mostly* with the keyboard and pointing device, the occasions when they aren't the best tool for the job make having the touch screen a worthwhile addition. It also saves me the expense of and desk real estate required for a physical fader controller. And I can reconfigure the layout of the controls however I want, which obviously can't be done with a physical controller. It may be possible to do all that with an iPad sidecar, but that's less convenient than just sliding my finger over a screen that's right where I'm already looking.
Now what I'm doing is obviously not "mainstream" so is there any benefit to "average" users? I don't know, but I'm inclined to think so based on watching my wife. She spends most of her day on an iPad Pro in the keyboard case. It sits upright like a laptop and she hasn't ever given any indication that it's uncomfortable or unnatural. I don't think it has ever crossed her mind. Whenever we get together in front of my laptop she pokes and swipes at the screen out of habit. To her, it seems perfectly natural.
I understand that some people don't see any benefit in touch for their computing needs, but don't be too quick to dismiss it as "stupid." It can be really useful.
Great Tim, but now Apple must demonstrate it with a brand new Mac Pro and Thunderbolt displays for it and for a brand new Mac mini. Because I guess Apple does not want us to use the ugly LG proposal. BTW, the iMac and all All-In-One (AIO) are a waste of resources and a huge aggression to planet Earth when you have to discard a great expensive display after CPU becomes obsolete. Displays last many, many, many years more (about 20 years).
People can't complain that Apple is all about form and not function, and then complain about the LG display because it is ugly.
W don't need a redesign of the Mac Pro - it is a beautiful, elegant, quiet, compact package. We do need an upgrade of it - faster CPUs, updated GPU, ... oh ... and an Apple monitor (in different sizes: 21inch, 24, 30inch) to go with it. No point talking about new desktops on the way, while killing off Apple monitors. That sends a mixed message ... and the Apple Lucky Gadget monitor shambles is the most mixed and murky message I can remember from Apple. Almost embarrassing.
A slow product lifecycle is better for you, as an Apple customer, as the products have a longer useful life, retain their value so if you upgrade you can resell it for more than that HP laptop. A slower lifecycle is better for the planet. Period. Use, reuse, recycle. NOT USE, dump.
Shame the "reuse" is much more difficult in a Mac than a PC as its unupgradable. And recycling MacBooks is also not as easy as Apple claims due to the copious amounts of glue. Pretty dodgy getting those Li-Ion batteries out with a scraper.
And how many people these days upgrade their PC beyond maybe putting RAM on it? Just because its upgradable doesn't mean people are actually doing it. When a PC gets older and slow they go buy new ones for another $299-$499 (disposable PC's).
You can turn your Mac into Apple and they recycle it for you. If it has any value, they'll even give you credit for it. Unless you're doing the recycling for everyone how do you know about the difficulty of getting batteries out? Its not like these are going to Bob's recycling center.
But you can't even put RAM in the MBP/MP, nor the smaller iMac without half a day's worth of disassembly and rebuild, idiot design decision on the iMac especially. Actually these days PCs are lasting longer than ever, mainly due to the brick wall Intel's hit as far as processor speeds are concerned. People just aren't buying PCs as often as they were, evidenced by the slowdown in the PC market (obviously partly due to smartphones too). I do know a fair proportion of people who have had HDD etc upgrades, though they usually just get an external drive, granted. My point was more that you could upgrade (and therefore extend the life of) an older Mac, but now you can't. You can upgrade a $299 PC, you can't upgrade a $1299 Mac. Madness.
I've swapped batteries on Apple devices, and that's how I know how hard they are to remove. They must use industrial strength glue.
I have to agree with that to a certain extent. You piss people off if you don't release annually, and you piss others off if you do but don't have much to differentiate it. CPU performance is not increasing by leaps and bounds, and Thunderbolt or USB don't evolve that quickly.... which leaves SSDs as the only ones that seem to be evolving at any pace.
This is true, but prices for SSDs are falling quickly, and Apple never passes those savings onto customers. They just charge the same price all year (or in fact, increase the price lately) for the same ageing and often hardware, rarely bumping the specs and keeping the price constant mid-cycle. They already charge extortionate rates for SSD upgrades on release, that only gets worse as time goes on. For the price of the 250gb->1TB upgrade on the MBP, you can get two 1TB mSATA SSDs. And you'd get to keep the original 256gb drive. Not only that, their base storage is embarrassingly measly.
One of those applications is firing audio cues during live shows. The touch screen is essentially a giant control surface with dozens of buttons. It's WAAAY faster, easier and MUCH more intuitive than selecting and firing with a keyboard and/or pointing device. When I need to do things that are not easily accomplished with a fat finger, like accessing menus, I just use the mouse.
Could you expand on what you are doing:
What are the buttons for and how do you use them?
Are the buttons big enough and far enough apart that you can accurately access them?
Is there tactile or visual feedback?
One of my big complaints about using Pro Tools without a physical fader controller is that I can't turn one thing up while simultaneously turning something else down. It takes two passes to accomplish something as simple as ducking music while bringing up a voice-over. With a touch screen, I can. Even if I still work *mostly* with the keyboard and pointing device, the occasions when they aren't the best tool for the job make having the touch screen a worthwhile addition. It also saves me the expense of and desk real estate required for a physical fader controller. And I can reconfigure the layout of the controls however I want, which obviously can't be done with a physical controller.
I've never used Avid -- but, AIR, even iMovie you can do ducking with a single control. It's quite easy on FCPX -- you just Range Select the Audio then interactively Drag the DB line up or down. FCPX adds fade-in and fade-out:
It may be possible to do all that with an iPad sidecar, but that's less convenient than just sliding my finger over a screen that's right where I'm already looking.
If Apple were to enhance support for iPad sidecar (I like that description), e.g. faster wired connection/interaction, interface options, etc, you could access the controls on the main (non-touch) display using the sidecar... the could be (optionally) display a cursor and trigger tactile and visual feedback while manipulating controls (buttons, sliders, etc.) on the main screen.
Now what I'm doing is obviously not "mainstream" so is there any benefit to "average" users? I don't know, but I'm inclined to think so based on watching my wife. She spends most of her day on an iPad Pro in the keyboard case. It sits upright like a laptop and she hasn't ever given any indication that it's uncomfortable or unnatural. I don't think it has ever crossed her mind. Whenever we get together in front of my laptop she pokes and swipes at the screen out of habit. To her, it seems perfectly natural. I understand that some people don't see any benefit in touch for their computing needs, but don't be too quick to dismiss it as "stupid." It can be really useful.
IMO, a Touch ComputerUI (direct or sidecar) isn't mainstream [yet] because there are no good solutions available at a reasonable price -- but the potential is certainly there!
I can't imagine "desktop" computers anymore for Apple. Every generation of Macs become less and less upgradable. Even lower entry iMacs cannot be upgraded with RAM.
We need REAL desktop computer that is capable of upgrades with RAM, SSD, and GPU. That's not much to ask, is it?!?!
I have Mac mini, iMac 27" Retina, MacBook Air, and now MacBook Pro. I had to spend more upfront just to have extra RAM and SSD. It's ridiculous. If Apple just let them upgrade at a later date, it would have sold a GREAT deal more. But no... apple chose the approach where consumers must pay more upfront to have more RAM or storage.
Apple's going the wrong direction. I am a huge fan of Apple and I love the Mac. I love the iOS devices (also own few iPhones and iPads).
But I feel that Apple is ignoring the untapped market and that is those who want Macs but can't afford simply due to premium prices.
Video gaming is out. Many video game addicts will NOT think of having a Mac. And that's understandable, I wouldn't either.
The Mac Pro, while elegant in design in several respects, is still not upgradable with GPU or SSD which defeats the purpose of a workstation PC. While Thunderbolt 2 provides enough bandwidth, some people would rather just have it all on internal drives. The goal is to hide all the cables and dongles and external devices as much as possible.
So, Tim Cook, I don't have faith that our desktop computers will ever be as good as the old Macs. Prove me wrong.
"We need REAL desktop computer that is capable of upgrades with RAM, SSD, and GPU. That's not much to ask, is it?!?! "
I get your frustration but that won't happen. That ship has sailed as far as Apple's concerned.
Those who keep on blaming Intel for Apple's excuses, I have two words for you: Surface Studio
That desktop is still based on Intel's Skylake CPU which is a year old and the Nvidia GPU is also based on at least one-year old technology. Other than the 128GB SSD and hi-res touch-screen, nothing else is latest and greatest.
You don't get it, it's not about the specs it's about the product. There are other ways to innovate, and Apple seems to have lost its way.
for all intents and purposes, all MS really did was take a 27" iMac, put one year old specs in it, and slapped a touch screen on it. How is that innovative?
Those who keep on blaming Intel for Apple's excuses, I have two words for you: Surface Studio
That desktop is still based on Intel's Skylake CPU which is a year old and the Nvidia GPU is also based on at least one-year old technology. Other than the 128GB SSD and hi-res touch-screen, nothing else is latest and greatest.
You don't get it, it's not about the specs it's about the product. There are other ways to innovate, and Apple seems to have lost its way.
...
Quoting Steve Jobs...I think I'm gonna puke! This isn't Steve's Apple anymore...get over it!
You should puke, because that's where Apple is at this point, lost without a visionary. Tim is anything but a visionary.
Steve Jobs is one in a million. There is no visionary of the likes of Steve Jobs. Not within Apple. Not outside of Apple. The tech world has to make do with what they got. And no, I don't agree that Elon Musk is it. He doesn't come close.
As soon as an iPad runs Pro Tools or Ovation and has a big enough screen to show me a reasonable fraction of a session, I'm in. Until then, Windows computers are a MUCH better choice as touch-capable production tools.
Except, there is very little choice when it comes to quality touch-capable software to take advantage of touch-based Windows computers.
The fact that Mr. Cook has to assure people that Mac desktops will continue is, to me, an indication of how bad the Mac development situation has become. Can anyone imagine him having to reassure people that there are new iPhones coming after three years with no updates?
Heck, I don't even care for an "incredible" redesign. Update the Mac Pro with the latest processor from Intel whenever these come out. In fact, shut up, take my money and ship a cheese grater with the latest Xeon and GPUs. 3 years without an update is pathetic.
That people are calling for the return of the "cheese grater Mac Pro" should be indicator enough that pros are tired of waiting.
"Great desktops"? I'm getting very skeptical about that. Apple is flirting with losing professional and creative users whose influence goes far beyond direct sales to them. The Pro and its "can't innovate, my ass" intro has been a complete letdown. If that's the kind of thing Cook has in mind, Apple might just as well cede this market to others and move desktop employees to the car.
My wife's iMac from 2010 needed replacement. I waited and waited for an Xmas update. When I gave up and bought the latest and greatest last month it was shown to be an October 2015 model in the About This Mac menu. Pathetic. Apple, the new Phone Company.
I think the situation you describe is truly sad. Many people will be receiving 'new' iMacs this Christmas unaware that they are not new at all. Given by parents, aunts, uncles and spending a not small amount in an effort to give them the best they can. In just a few months those new Macs will feel more than a little aged. It's sad.
Those who keep on blaming Intel for Apple's excuses, I have two words for you: Surface Studio
That desktop is still based on Intel's Skylake CPU which is a year old and the Nvidia GPU is also based on at least one-year old technology. Other than the 128GB SSD and hi-res touch-screen, nothing else is latest and greatest.
You don't get it, it's not about the specs it's about the product. There are other ways to innovate, and Apple seems to have lost its way.
...
Quoting Steve Jobs...I think I'm gonna puke! This isn't Steve's Apple anymore...get over it!
You should puke, because that's where Apple is at this point, lost without a visionary. Tim is anything but a visionary.
Steve Jobs is one in a million. There is no visionary of the likes of Steve Jobs. Not within Apple. Not outside of Apple. The tech world has to make do with what they got. And no, I don't agree that Elon Musk is it. He doesn't come close.
I have a lot of respect for Elon Musk, primarily for the very daring ventures he started with his money. He truly set out to make a difference in a couple of diverse and expensive areas (Tesla and SpaceX). He has great dreams, and puts his money where is mouth his. I wish him great success.
But Elon Musk and Steve Jobs are/were very different. Anybody that thinks Elon Musk should be brought in to run Apple needs to have their head examined. Over-promising and under-delivering is not going to make Apple a better company.
That's been a pretty long road map for the Mac Pro...
Intel's roadmap has been quite long as well...which doesn't help things.
I still want to see Apple go back to a mini tower for the Mac Pro. It doesn't have to be as large as the old Mac Pro, but maybe the size of the PowerMac G4. Put a couple of PCIe slots, couple of flash storage slots, etc. It would also be cool I think to keep it the same black aluminum.
At the company I work for, almost every Mac Pro we use gets installed in a rack. We have used some off-the-shelf Mac Pro rack mount solutions, but worked with a local sheet metal fabricator to get a simplified version made. They work, but are not particularly elegant. We are probably in the minority, but we would much rather have a rack mountable Mac Pro, maybe a single RU form factor along the lines of the old X-Serve (those things were beautifully packaged). BTW, even the old towers weren't readily rack mounted--too tall to be placed sideways, inefficient use of space when mounted upright.
Perhaps that's true for YOUR use. For the things I do, it's fantastic.
One of those applications is firing audio cues during live shows. The touch screen is essentially a giant control surface with dozens of buttons. It's WAAAY faster, easier and MUCH more intuitive than selecting and firing with a keyboard and/or pointing device. When I need to do things that are not easily accomplished with a fat finger, like accessing menus, I just use the mouse.
One of my big complaints about using Pro Tools without a physical fader controller is that I can't turn one thing up while simultaneously turning something else down.
It may be possible to do all that with an iPad sidecar, but that's less convenient than just sliding my finger over a screen that's right where I'm already looking.
How is it less convenient? The controls and displays are together on the iPad. Ideally in a control surface you don't need to look at the mix screen. All the info is at your fingertips and for the controls the iPad offers it looks to be mostly there. It's not a S6 replacement but it's free.
And seriously, you're bitching about how Apple is inferior without even trying the free app?
As soon as an iPad runs Pro Tools or Ovation and has a big enough screen to show me a reasonable fraction of a session, I'm in. Until then, Windows computers are a MUCH better choice as touch-capable production tools.
Perhaps not the most cost effective solution, but have you tried (or considered) attaching a multi-touch monitor to your Mac?
It may be possible to do all that with an iPad sidecar, but that's less convenient than just sliding my finger over a screen that's right where I'm already looking.
If Apple were to enhance support for iPad sidecar (I like that description), e.g. faster wired connection/interaction, interface options, etc, you could access the controls on the main (non-touch) display using the sidecar... the could be (optionally) display a cursor and trigger tactile and visual feedback while manipulating controls (buttons, sliders, etc.) on the main screen.
...
IMO, a Touch ComputerUI (direct or sidecar) isn't mainstream [yet] because there are no good solutions available at a reasonable price -- but the potential is certainly there!
OMG. It exists. It's free. It even works over wired ethernet. Given the larger iPad Pro there's enough real estate for an indie project and if you are a pro you likely have access to a frigging editing bay and a higher end physical control deck.
Here's an example remoting to an iMac 5K using the Screens App
I can do all that using a MBP 15" retina logging into my iMac 5k, which is the only way I can edit server files when not on the local network because of security restrictions, but everything is so tiny, I waste a ton of time zooming in and out and is also prone to mistakes when the text is so small.
Comments
How difficult is it to simply come out with a model update regularly that has a faster processor, new graphics card, and maybe new ports (Thunderbolt 3, USB-C, etc).? Apple itself is probably making it harder to do this by inherently making designs non-upgradable.
The main problem is Apple thinks they need to reinvent the wheel every time they come out with a desktop. The cylinder Mac Pro is a perfect example...it's more about visual aesthetic then anything else. They probably spent years refining the cylinder. The Mac mini is the Cube concept refined to it's maximum (minus any thought for upgradability or expandability).
Then to see their laptop line adopt a gimmick like the Touch Bar...and remove all ports except USB-C...it really makes me wonder what they are thinking. I like Apple products, and they will sell millions of units regardless of what I think, but it's still frustrating.
I know that other PC vendors do, but are very incremental updates helpful?
One of those applications is firing audio cues during live shows. The touch screen is essentially a giant control surface with dozens of buttons. It's WAAAY faster, easier and MUCH more intuitive than selecting and firing with a keyboard and/or pointing device. When I need to do things that are not easily accomplished with a fat finger, like accessing menus, I just use the mouse.
One of my big complaints about using Pro Tools without a physical fader controller is that I can't turn one thing up while simultaneously turning something else down. It takes two passes to accomplish something as simple as ducking music while bringing up a voice-over. With a touch screen, I can. Even if I still work *mostly* with the keyboard and pointing device, the occasions when they aren't the best tool for the job make having the touch screen a worthwhile addition. It also saves me the expense of and desk real estate required for a physical fader controller. And I can reconfigure the layout of the controls however I want, which obviously can't be done with a physical controller. It may be possible to do all that with an iPad sidecar, but that's less convenient than just sliding my finger over a screen that's right where I'm already looking.
Now what I'm doing is obviously not "mainstream" so is there any benefit to "average" users? I don't know, but I'm inclined to think so based on watching my wife. She spends most of her day on an iPad Pro in the keyboard case. It sits upright like a laptop and she hasn't ever given any indication that it's uncomfortable or unnatural. I don't think it has ever crossed her mind. Whenever we get together in front of my laptop she pokes and swipes at the screen out of habit. To her, it seems perfectly natural.
I understand that some people don't see any benefit in touch for their computing needs, but don't be too quick to dismiss it as "stupid." It can be really useful.
Quick informal poll...
Those of you who use a trashcan Mac Pro:
1. Does the second GPU provide any benefit for the work you do?
2. Would the Mac Pro be more useful for YOUR work if they dropped the second GPU and added a second CPU instead?
Just curious. In my case the answers are no to #1 and yes to #2.
I've swapped batteries on Apple devices, and that's how I know how hard they are to remove. They must use industrial strength glue.
I've never used Avid -- but, AIR, even iMovie you can do ducking with a single control. It's quite easy on FCPX -- you just Range Select the Audio then interactively Drag the DB line up or down. FCPX adds fade-in and fade-out:
If Apple were to enhance support for iPad sidecar (I like that description), e.g. faster wired connection/interaction, interface options, etc, you could access the controls on the main (non-touch) display using the sidecar... the could be (optionally) display a cursor and trigger tactile and visual feedback while manipulating controls (buttons, sliders, etc.) on the main screen.
IMO, a Touch Computer UI (direct or sidecar) isn't mainstream [yet] because there are no good solutions available at a reasonable price -- but the potential is certainly there!
I get your frustration but that won't happen. That ship has sailed as far as Apple's concerned.
I hope you got yours discounted at least.
But Elon Musk and Steve Jobs are/were very different. Anybody that thinks Elon Musk should be brought in to run Apple needs to have their head examined. Over-promising and under-delivering is not going to make Apple a better company.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/pro-tools-control/id1017075761?mt=8
Free iPad app from Avid.
Soft keys, custom app sets, channel controls etc. It even works over ethernet (via camera connection kit) for lower latency.
http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-page/2016/5/18/pro-tools-control-app-update-a-first-look
How is it less convenient? The controls and displays are together on the iPad. Ideally in a control surface you don't need to look at the mix screen. All the info is at your fingertips and for the controls the iPad offers it looks to be mostly there. It's not a S6 replacement but it's free.
And seriously, you're bitching about how Apple is inferior without even trying the free app?
OMG. It exists. It's free. It even works over wired ethernet. Given the larger iPad Pro there's enough real estate for an indie project and if you are a pro you likely have access to a frigging editing bay and a higher end physical control deck.