I don't understand how they let the Mac lineup get in the state it's in.
With their money they could easily have upgraded the line up with new internals whilst they finished off any innovations that they wanted to roll out.
Piss poor management, very unusual.
Apple doesn't like to use money from one division to prop up another one, especially if it's one as well established as the Mac division. Microsoft did that with Windows mobile, which is probably why it took them so long to realise it was failing.
The larger point is that , the iMac has been stagnating, and there is no reason it has needed to. (certainly not for lack of Apple monies)
If Intels chips aren't producing significant speed gains then what is the point upgrading the machines? Well, there isn't any, unless you can come up with the tech to work around it.
There are legitimate questions about the Mac lineup. It's pretty bad when even John Gruber is like WTF Apple regarding the Mac Pro. What reason do they have for not updating it for 3 years and not reducing the price? If Apple doesn't want to be in the pro market then discontinue the product. Same thing with the router business. Those products are woefully out of date. Either update them or kill them. But it does call into question why Apple seems to be struggling from a bandwith perspective. Other than the iPhone - which they have no choice but to update every year at the same time - it seems like it's a struggle to get stuff out the door. Is Apple's functional org structure hurting them? Would things be different if there was one person responsible for the Mac and nothing else?
It's simple. The Skylake architecture for the E5 class of Xeon processors was originally road mapped for Late 2015 and haas been delayed by Intel until early 2017. It has nothing to do with Apple, it has everything to do with their vendor, Intel.
Really? So there's absolutely nothing in the Mac Pro that could have been updated between Dec 2013 and now? The GPUs and I/O are the latest and greatest available? Then why are even John Gruber and Rene Ritchie complaining? They're certainly not Apple haters nor stupid.
Why you are on this "because something could be updated in the Mac Pro, Apple should've updated the Mac Pro"? Apple could update something every few months in the Mac Pro if it wanted to, but why would they? How many sales does the Mac Pro get? How many more sales would the Mac Pro get if they updated it constantly for minor HW changes? Let's remember that Apple is a for-profit corporation. You complainers should be happy that the Mac Pro was important enough to Apple that they designed the new model for 2013 instead of dropping the lineup entirely like they did with Xserve, otherwise you'd still be complaining about that old casing design that came out over a decade ago that started with PPC chips.
Because it's been over three years since this product has been updated and those who are the target market for this machine are wondering why.
If they don't know why they are idiots as all the reasons have been stated over and over—but they shouldn't be because even a rudimentary understanding of business should tell them why the iPhone is updated yearly and the Mac Pro isn't, or why the iPod had multiple models updated every year and now it's a stagnant product category with still available iPods not being updated for several years. I don't here you bitching about the iPod Nano not being updated, but that's because you don't care about it which deflates your entire premise because Apple certainly could make the iPod Nano better every year if was a viable product in which to do so.
And what do you consider a minor hardware change? Was updating the MacBook Pro to Skylake and USB-C a minor hardware change?
If you're arguing that those were the only two changes to the MacBook Pro then it's impossible to engage in a reasonable discussion with you.
Right so anyone that doesn't agree with Apple's decision making is an idiot. Got it. Btw, I wasn't suggesting those were the only changes to the rMBP. My point is I don't consider those minor changes yet for some they apparently are hence why they think it's perfectly fine that the Mac Pro hasn't been updated or had a price reduction.
I don't understand how they let the Mac lineup get in the state it's in.
With their money they could easily have upgraded the line up with new internals whilst they finished off any innovations that they wanted to roll out.
Piss poor management, very unusual.
Apple doesn't like to use money from one division to prop up another one, especially if it's one as well established as the Mac division. Microsoft did that with Windows mobile, which is probably why it took them so long to realise it was failing.
The larger point is that , the iMac has been stagnating, and there is no reason it has needed to. (certainly not for lack of Apple monies)
What processor was Apple going to use in an updated iMac? Did you want them to release something new with the same specs as today's iMac? I simply don't get why anyone doesn't take the time to understand what Apple is going through with this. I seriously doubt they're purposely not releasing new Macs. If you want the days of the G4 Apple could do that and people would still be seriously pissed off because the upgrades are basically meaningless. Its just an upgrade to say they upgraded them. Is that what you really want???
There is more to a machine than the CPU, everything has moved on since the 2015 release.
although you're being specific about the iMac the Mac Pro and Mac Mini's are a joke.
It would take little investment to simple update the chips etc and keep the current designs, it's disgusting to keep selling these relics at full price and a great disservice to their brand.
And what should they upgrade them with? The chips are part of a chipset which are part of a board that hasn't changed that much in years.
What about GPUs? Or can they only be upgraded when the CPU is upgraded? As I said in another post if it was as simple as Intel chips suitable for this product being delayed would there be this much complaining? I'm going to assume people like John Siracusa and Marco Arment are up to speed on Intel's roadmap and what chipsets are available.
This brings up the question of which executive will Cook replace. If he doesn't hold someone accountable then Come next year the board of directors need to replace him.
Yes this is a sign that the quarterly results will look horrible.
Apple desperately needs Forestal back. Someone with passion and vision other than thinner.
They need someome to me to kick start Siri development. she's (Siri) has turned into the Oldsmobile of AI.
There are legitimate questions about the Mac lineup. It's pretty bad when even John Gruber is like WTF Apple regarding the Mac Pro. What reason do they have for not updating it for 3 years and not reducing the price? If Apple doesn't want to be in the pro market then discontinue the product. Same thing with the router business. Those products are woefully out of date. Either update them or kill them. But it does call into question why Apple seems to be struggling from a bandwith perspective. Other than the iPhone - which they have no choice but to update every year at the same time - it seems like it's a struggle to get stuff out the door. Is Apple's functional org structure hurting them? Would things be different if there was one person responsible for the Mac and nothing else?
Simple logic, which even seems to be beyond Gruber these days of mass Internet hand-wringing, should tell you that Apple has something significant in mind with the Mac Pro. They would have signaled a long time ago if the line was dead-ended, and they would have updated it a long time ago if it were a good or possible strategy to do so.
They may have boxed themselves in to a point with the thermal design or with the specialized US assembly program, for examples, but I think its obvious that a strategic upgrade to the platform is either waiting for components to appear or being worked out in agonizing detail, American style. They may also have been short on engineering personnel and other resources because of Mac Pro or iMac projects.
We may never know why these things take so long, but I think we can be sure they are planning or working seriously on something for the platform, or they would be obligated to end it, publicly.
Edit: Jkichline gives a nice detailed rationale for the delay in post 40 above.
This might be fine for general consumers but does it really work for professionals and prosumers? And you don't even know that Apple has something big up its sleeve for this product, you're just guessing. A lot of good that does a creative professional who needs to update their gear and not sure what they should do. And I think it's just wrong that Apple won't reduce the price on a way out of date product because it might give away that a new one is coming, Pros couldn't give a shit less about surprises. The Mac Pro is not like a new iPhone that needs to be kept secret so Apple can wow everyone on stage and own the news cycle for the day.
Of course I don't know anything specific, I'm just using an exotic technique called reasoning.
In general, your creative professionals have just demonstrated that they are the biggest whiner class around with their reaction to the MacBook Pros.
I think you're right though that they don't care about surprises. I would rephrase that point to say that Apple knows it's a terrible business strategy to telegraph your model update strategy when you are still making and selling the old model. And like you say, lowering the price is going to be interpreted as a strategic telegraph in this climate of hostile Apple kremlinologists and whiners, Gruber and maybe Ritchie included.
Imagine if Apple were making some other kind of business tool, say like corporate jets. Would they have to face this kind of shrieking hostility (see Altivec88's last sentence above in post 77) because they're selling a three-year-old model? I don't think so, because their customers would be a more mature class of logicians, aviation professionals, who would assume that the company has perfectly good reasons for not tinkering with the tested production platform while they're concentrating on a massive update using and testing the critical core components on one or another of their product lines.
And the last thing they want anyone to know is how they do things, plan things, internally. But the customers for computing tools are not, never have been, calm, reasoning, mature, as a group. They tend to be a twitchy, self-important, self-interested cliff-walkers always on the edge of disaster, constantly having to tear their hair out over some technical glitch or other. My sympathies, but when it comes to the hand that feeds them with their tools, they tend to be a pack of nasty chihuahuas. And Gruber and Marco Arment, for example, have been stirring them up traitorously lately. (Though I have to give Gruber massive credit for his sensible and very positions on such things as the MBPs, the TouchBar, the Airpods, and the Watch.)
I feel sorry for Tim and his family that he got a pay cut. But I feel more sorry for all of us who got a failed watch, delayed air pods, no more displays or airports, cancelled car, a 4 year old iPhone case design and a MBP with no ports and the wrong battery. I don't know what Tim's issue has been but I have faith he can turn it around this year, last year he made a lot of failed promises, this year I hope his actions speak louder than his words. Learning to type and use a Mac would be a great start, even just touching or holding a Mac at a keynote, that would make us happy.
Apple desperately needs Forestal back. Someone with passion and vision other than thinner.
Scott Forstall is credited for the original iPhone UI, which great looks and revolutionary smooth springy scrolling. If this is all true then agree he needs to come back and bring us more magical UIs into the world. However It's recently become known that he tended to take credit for other peoples work, so now I'm not sure. The team on the original iPhone and it's revolutiory smooth scrolling UI, bring them all back. And fire every one that made iOS 7 so ugly and full of bloat that 10 runs slower than iOS 6.
There are legitimate questions about the Mac lineup. It's pretty bad when even John Gruber is like WTF Apple regarding the Mac Pro. What reason do they have for not updating it for 3 years and not reducing the price? If Apple doesn't want to be in the pro market then discontinue the product. Same thing with the router business. Those products are woefully out of date. Either update them or kill them. But it does call into question why Apple seems to be struggling from a bandwith perspective. Other than the iPhone - which they have no choice but to update every year at the same time - it seems like it's a struggle to get stuff out the door. Is Apple's functional org structure hurting them? Would things be different if there was one person responsible for the Mac and nothing else?
Simple logic, which even seems to be beyond Gruber these days of mass Internet hand-wringing, should tell you that Apple has something significant in mind with the Mac Pro. They would have signaled a long time ago if the line was dead-ended, and they would have updated it a long time ago if it were a good or possible strategy to do so.
They may have boxed themselves in to a point with the thermal design or with the specialized US assembly program, for examples, but I think its obvious that a strategic upgrade to the platform is either waiting for components to appear or being worked out in agonizing detail, American style. They may also have been short on engineering personnel and other resources because of Mac Pro or iMac projects.
We may never know why these things take so long, but I think we can be sure they are planning or working seriously on something for the platform, or they would be obligated to end it, publicly.
Edit: Jkichline gives a nice detailed rationale for the delay in post 40 above.
Well reasoned & well said -- both you and @Jkichline!
Apple may be at an inflection point for CPUs for the iMac and Mac (maybe even the entire Mac product line). The last time this occurred, Apple switched from the IBM PPC to Intel.
Today's choices seem to be limited to internal development of Apple chips AX (or other?), IBM Power 8 or maybe someone's GPGPU...
"I bought the LG UltraFine 5K display because there simply is no other option from Apple. If there had been, though, I would have bought it in a heartbeat."
It's fine if Apple decided it wasn't in its strategic interests to be in the monitor business but they seriously couldn't be bothered to work with LG on a design that matches Apple's aesthetic? I remember the days when Apple was praised for its superior design and the competition panned for cheap plastic. To me this reeks of laisness on Apple's part. And the sad thing is the competition is upping it's design. This is a new 8K monitor from Dell. Looks way nicer than what LG and Apple produced.
Even Microsoft's Surface line looks sleek and cohesive. The days of the competition producing cheap plastic looking garbage is long gone.
Wow... That Dell monitor is crazy...
I was at the Seybold conference keynote when Steve announced the first G4 and the cinema display that was equally as crazy at that time. I remember everyone being blown away and the mood in the room was electric. I guess Dell and Microsoft finally understand that being passionate about their products is important. Apple can't be bothered by stuff like monitors anymore. Just too busy with Books and Christmas trees now. I guess we can look forward to the next keynote where Tim tells us about Apple's amazing pipeline in his monotone voice and if we are lucky, we'll get a video of how much work went into a new watch strap.
The real news here is...did Apple just announce their results for the Oct-Dec quarter before the official announcement on January 31st? It sounds here like we already know the numbers for calendar year 2016.
Apple's Fiscal year was Oct 2015 through Sept 2016. That's what the compensation is based upon.
I don't understand how they let the Mac lineup get in the state it's in.
With their money they could easily have upgraded the line up with new internals whilst they finished off any innovations that they wanted to roll out.
Piss poor management, very unusual.
non sequitur. The Mac Lineup is not the reason they made less money last year.
and it's quite simple: the Mac Lineup is in the state it's in due to 1) the iPhone is the product that drives the company; 2) Apple's commitment to reduce churn in products (to avoid rapid obsolescence / devaluation); 3) their dependence on Intel to provide 'compelling' upgrades to the x64 computational platform 4) Apple's view that the world [read: the 99% of the buying public that doesn't write code, play computer games, or crashes molecules, planets, or TB databases together] wants lighter more portable products.
I [hopefully] think this is the same conundrum as in 1997-2004 where they had to 'dance with who brung ya' [GSeries chip], until they could get 1) the NeXTSTEP->MacOSX migration reasonably complete, AND the Intel Core/Xeon Chips were Price/Performance competitive with the PowerChips.
I do think that the A series chips will go to the MacOS line... but it's still 4-5 years out, not so much for the Ax chips, but for supporting chip set that provides all the stuff that iDevices don't have to deal with at the performance levels a 'real computer' has to.
I do think the Apple Execs take a very long view in their product pipeline [3+ years], and are compensated such that a couple million a year off the top is a 'pinch' and not a 'penalty' (If I have a x0,000 shares at 2010 $70 RSUs, the real benefit is still to grow stock price 20% over 3 years [remember this is the friction' highest capitalized public company in the free world 5% YoY is serious growth]).
Nothing to see here, business as usual.
Sounds more like you're saying 'Apple can't walk and chew gum at the same time', to me.
Then you're not hearing what I'm writing;-) They are walking, chewing gum, singing songs, snapping fingers, and counting backwards at the same time just fine. They just don't change a stick of gum [Intel processors] until they have a compelling reason to do so [high performance, with heat and power and probably a hundred other key specs coming within their performance envelope], especially since 2 of the other 5 things they are doing (iOS and 'Services' [the real end game]) are where they are and have to advance.
I feel sorry for Tim and his family that he got a pay cut. But I feel more sorry for all of us who got a failed watch, delayed air pods, no more displays or airports, cancelled car, a 4 year old iPhone case design and a MBP with no ports and the wrong battery. I don't know what Tim's issue has been but I have faith he can turn it around this year, last year he made a lot of failed promises, this year I hope his actions speak louder than his words. Learning to type and use a Mac would be a great start, even just touching or holding a Mac at a keynote, that would make us happy.
Exhibit A for the curious sense of entitlement that Apple customers have toward the company that's given them the best communication tools given to any generation since the portable printed book in 1500.
Please tell us where in the UK you are unable to go now that Apple is rumored to have cancelled their car? By the way, I'm on the second week of using my AirPods, and I think they're among the best things that Apple or any consumer company has ever done. Mark my words, wearable wireless audio is a new ecosystem. Amazon should be ashamed, so should Google and especially Microsoft, for missing out on the breakthrough.
There are legitimate questions about the Mac lineup. It's pretty bad when even John Gruber is like WTF Apple regarding the Mac Pro. What reason do they have for not updating it for 3 years and not reducing the price? If Apple doesn't want to be in the pro market then discontinue the product. Same thing with the router business. Those products are woefully out of date. Either update them or kill them. But it does call into question why Apple seems to be struggling from a bandwith perspective. Other than the iPhone - which they have no choice but to update every year at the same time - it seems like it's a struggle to get stuff out the door. Is Apple's functional org structure hurting them? Would things be different if there was one person responsible for the Mac and nothing else?
Simple logic, which even seems to be beyond Gruber these days of mass Internet hand-wringing, should tell you that Apple has something significant in mind with the Mac Pro. They would have signaled a long time ago if the line was dead-ended, and they would have updated it a long time ago if it were a good or possible strategy to do so.
They may have boxed themselves in to a point with the thermal design or with the specialized US assembly program, for examples, but I think its obvious that a strategic upgrade to the platform is either waiting for components to appear or being worked out in agonizing detail, American style. They may also have been short on engineering personnel and other resources because of Mac Pro or iMac projects.
We may never know why these things take so long, but I think we can be sure they are planning or working seriously on something for the platform, or they would be obligated to end it, publicly.
Edit: Jkichline gives a nice detailed rationale for the delay in post 40 above.
Well reasoned & well said -- both you and @Jkichline!
Apple may be at an inflection point for CPUs for the iMac and Mac (maybe even the entire Mac product line). The last time this occurred, Apple switched from the IBM PPC to Intel.
Today's choices seem to be limited to internal development of Apple chips AX (or other?), IBM Power 8 or maybe someone's GPGPU...
I've seen you mention this IBM platform(?) before. Is there a real possibility of mass fabrication? Where and for what companies?
There are legitimate questions about the Mac lineup. It's pretty bad when even John Gruber is like WTF Apple regarding the Mac Pro. What reason do they have for not updating it for 3 years and not reducing the price? If Apple doesn't want to be in the pro market then discontinue the product. Same thing with the router business. Those products are woefully out of date. Either update them or kill them. But it does call into question why Apple seems to be struggling from a bandwith perspective. Other than the iPhone - which they have no choice but to update every year at the same time - it seems like it's a struggle to get stuff out the door. Is Apple's functional org structure hurting them? Would things be different if there was one person responsible for the Mac and nothing else?
It's simple. The Skylake architecture for the E5 class of Xeon processors was originally road mapped for Late 2015 and haas been delayed by Intel until early 2017. It has nothing to do with Apple, it has everything to do with their vendor, Intel.
Not True at all. The lack of a MacPro is 100% completely on Apple's shoulders.
The Xeon E5 has been refreshed twice since 2013. Although the refreshes were not dramatic if you compare the same core count (12 core vs 12 core), the updated Xeon E5v4 maxes out at 22 cores where as the E5v2 that Apple is using maxes out at 12 cores. With Apple's poor decision to rip out a whole processor for the sake of smallness set them behind right from the start, you would think they would be more vigilant to keep up with core counts when a processor is available. For those of us that require cores, a 22 core is a significant leap over 12. The 44 core systems utilizing 2 CPU's that competitors are selling make the MacPro look like cruel joke.
Since they did not change the pricing throughout the past 3 years, even if the E5 was not refreshed by intel (which as I explained above that it was), there were major advancements in GPU's, IO, SSD's that they could have easily slowly refreshed in that time. An update does not need to be dramatic with much fanfare. If they would have simply kept up with current tech on a $10k computer, we would have bought several throughout the last couple of years. The blatant ignoring of the product, with no price drops to compensate for the lower costs they are paying for old tech, has made us buy none. This has turned our once happy to be using Apple products company frustrated and angry beyond belief.
According to Intel (http://ark.intel.com/search/advanced?s=t&ProcessorNumber=E5-), the first 20 or so core Xeon CPU's were released Q1'2016. Could it be that Apple wanted to also include Thunderbolt 3 and those configurations weren't ready yet? Would it have been wise to upgrade the machine with Thunderbolt 2 technology only to re-upgrade it a year later with Thunderbolt 3?
Just asking.
Yes the E5v4 (maxing at 22 cores) was released Q1-2016 which is basically a year ago and the E5v3 (maxing at 16 cores) was released Q1-2015 which is 2 years ago. Both Dell and HP updated their machines with-in a month of these dates. Why didn't Dell and HP have an excuse to wait for thunderbolt 3. Because, you can say that about every component. Now that TB3 is available, why not just wait for the new GPU around the corner. But when that is released, now there is a new CPU that's just around the corner. etc.
I get what you are saying and I agree to wait for a component if we are talking a month here or there. The MacPro hasn't been updated in 3+ freaking years!! They missed two CPU refreshes that were the same socket design and had the same thermal properties. Which means the only thing they literally had to do is change which chips they were ordering and stick them in. The advancement of GPU's in the past 3 years has been even more dramatic but yet their $10k machine is not even capable of doing simple VR. They put USB-C in their low end MacBook almost a year ago for pete sake. How can you guys keep making excuses for Apple when it comes to the MacPro? Their is absolutely no defence for their blatant incompetence to this product and this market.
I feel sorry for Tim and his family that he got a pay cut. But I feel more sorry for all of us who got a failed watch, delayed air pods, no more displays or airports, cancelled car, a 4 year old iPhone case design and a MBP with no ports and the wrong battery. I don't know what Tim's issue has been but I have faith he can turn it around this year, last year he made a lot of failed promises, this year I hope his actions speak louder than his words. Learning to type and use a Mac would be a great start, even just touching or holding a Mac at a keynote, that would make us happy.
Exhibit A for the curious sense of entitlement that Apple customers have toward the company that's given them the best communication tools given to any generation since the portable printed book in 1500.
Please tell us where in the UK you are unable to go now that Apple is rumored to have cancelled their car? By the way, I'm on the second week of using my AirPods, and I think they're among the best things that Apple or any consumer company has ever done. Mark my words, wearable wireless audio is a new ecosystem. Amazon should be ashamed, so should Google and especially Microsoft, for missing out on the breakthrough.
In fairness Google already had a completely wireless Bluetooth wearable audio unit. That was over two years ago when they owned Motorola and introduced the Hint. (I have one around somewhere).
Right so anyone that doesn't agree with Apple's decision making is an idiot. Got it.
Liking or agreeing with Apple's decision is a completely different topic. It's when people word their statements to effectively say "I want this so Apple is wrong not to offer it to me," they are being immature, selfish idiots. Either accept what a company offers or shop elsewhere—alternatively, if you think they are acting illegally then use the law, or if you think there is a void in the market then create your own product to fill that hole.
Actually, the biggest foulup was missing Christmas for the AirPod launch.
Biggest? hardly. let's see... assuming you sold 5 million last quarter, that's only 750Million in sales (remember, this is a $160 peripheral, that would be on top of a $700 phone purchase, if you have 10% buy through that would be friggin' amazing).
It would have been a massive cluster if they shipped 5 Million defective earPods (See Samsung Galaxy 7). I think they did it right.
It was big in the sense that by removing the headphone jack Apple's wireless alternative was not ready along side the iPhone7. Their vision of a wireless future was slightly delayed.
big is not biggest. and you're now saying they it was significant because they missed October release, not the Christmas season. and to complete my pedantism... Their vision wasn't delayed, their delivery was delayed.
Their Biggest foul-up in 2016 was done in 2014, when they 'finally' released a 5.5" 6+. Which caused a FY 2015 Spike in sales, making FY 2016 smaller in comparison, but if you look YoY, sales are back in line with 2010-14 sales growth. One could argue they release just a 6+ in 2014 (and an SE to keep the 4" crowd happy), and then in 2015, release the 6s [new model] and 6s+ in 2015, and they would not have had the dip in FY 2016.
Actually, the biggest foulup was missing Christmas for the AirPod launch.
Biggest? hardly. let's see... assuming you sold 5 million last quarter, that's only 750Million in sales (remember, this is a $160 peripheral, that would be on top of a $700 phone purchase that has lightning enabled earbuds [you don't NEED to buy them], if you have 10% upsell, that would be friggin' amazing).
It would have been a massive cluster if they shipped 5 Million defective earPods (See Samsung Galaxy 7). I think they did it right.
Apple knows that revenue will happen this quarter. if you're spending $160 on ear pods, you a) have a $100 BlueTooth solution already, and/or b) you have $160 available every quarter.
None of that means the AirPod missing the Christmas launch (especially as they'd said they'd be out by November) want the years foulup, unless you can think of one bigger.
answered. see above. They were 'too good' in FY2015. especially when 50% of your sales are on a 2 year recurring schedule.
This brings up the question of which executive will Cook replace. If he doesn't hold someone accountable then Come next year the board of directors need to replace him.
Yes this is a sign that the quarterly results will look horrible.
Apple desperately needs Forestal back. Someone with passion and vision other than thinner.
They need someome to me to kick start Siri development. she's (Siri) has turned into the Oldsmobile of AI.
Yeah the guy who made the animated passbook shredder and reel to reel podcast player is the visionary.
Comments
Btw, I wasn't suggesting those were the only changes to the rMBP. My point is I don't consider those minor changes yet for some they apparently are hence why they think it's perfectly fine that the Mac Pro hasn't been updated or had a price reduction.
Yes this is a sign that the quarterly results will look horrible.
Apple desperately needs Forestal back.
Someone with passion and vision other than thinner.
They need someome to me to kick start Siri development. she's (Siri) has turned into the Oldsmobile of AI.
In general, your creative professionals have just demonstrated that they are the biggest whiner class around with their reaction to the MacBook Pros.
I think you're right though that they don't care about surprises. I would rephrase that point to say that Apple knows it's a terrible business strategy to telegraph your model update strategy when you are still making and selling the old model. And like you say, lowering the price is going to be interpreted as a strategic telegraph in this climate of hostile Apple kremlinologists and whiners, Gruber and maybe Ritchie included.
Imagine if Apple were making some other kind of business tool, say like corporate jets. Would they have to face this kind of shrieking hostility (see Altivec88's last sentence above in post 77) because they're selling a three-year-old model? I don't think so, because their customers would be a more mature class of logicians, aviation professionals, who would assume that the company has perfectly good reasons for not tinkering with the tested production platform while they're concentrating on a massive update using and testing the critical core components on one or another of their product lines.
And the last thing they want anyone to know is how they do things, plan things, internally. But the customers for computing tools are not, never have been, calm, reasoning, mature, as a group. They tend to be a twitchy, self-important, self-interested cliff-walkers always on the edge of disaster, constantly having to tear their hair out over some technical glitch or other. My sympathies, but when it comes to the hand that feeds them with their tools, they tend to be a pack of nasty chihuahuas. And Gruber and Marco Arment, for example, have been stirring them up traitorously lately. (Though I have to give Gruber massive credit for his sensible and very positions on such things as the MBPs, the TouchBar, the Airpods, and the Watch.)
Apple may be at an inflection point for CPUs for the iMac and Mac (maybe even the entire Mac product line). The last time this occurred, Apple switched from the IBM PPC to Intel.
Today's choices seem to be limited to internal development of Apple chips AX (or other?), IBM Power 8 or maybe someone's GPGPU...
I was at the Seybold conference keynote when Steve announced the first G4 and the cinema display that was equally as crazy at that time. I remember everyone being blown away and the mood in the room was electric. I guess Dell and Microsoft finally understand that being passionate about their products is important. Apple can't be bothered by stuff like monitors anymore. Just too busy with Books and Christmas trees now. I guess we can look forward to the next keynote where Tim tells us about Apple's amazing pipeline in his monotone voice and if we are lucky, we'll get a video of how much work went into a new watch strap.
Please tell us where in the UK you are unable to go now that Apple is rumored to have cancelled their car? By the way, I'm on the second week of using my AirPods, and I think they're among the best things that Apple or any consumer company has ever done. Mark my words, wearable wireless audio is a new ecosystem. Amazon should be ashamed, so should Google and especially Microsoft, for missing out on the breakthrough.
I get what you are saying and I agree to wait for a component if we are talking a month here or there. The MacPro hasn't been updated in 3+ freaking years!! They missed two CPU refreshes that were the same socket design and had the same thermal properties. Which means the only thing they literally had to do is change which chips they were ordering and stick them in. The advancement of GPU's in the past 3 years has been even more dramatic but yet their $10k machine is not even capable of doing simple VR. They put USB-C in their low end MacBook almost a year ago for pete sake. How can you guys keep making excuses for Apple when it comes to the MacPro? Their is absolutely no defence for their blatant incompetence to this product and this market.
For whatever reason they've decided so far not to follow up on that with a stereo version as they had indicated they would, sticking with a refresh of the solo piece from 2014. Perhaps waiting for the proper tech to improve it? No idea. But Apple's wireless Airpods use some of the same ideas that the Hint introduced.
http://www.recode.net/2014/10/16/11631942/sublime-subtlety-moto-hint-bluetooth-earbud-finally-gets-it-right
EDIT: Good gosh! I had no idea there were this many completely wireless bluetooth earbuds available.
https://www.wareable.com/samsung/best-hearables
and to complete my pedantism... Their vision wasn't delayed, their delivery was delayed.
Their Biggest foul-up in 2016 was done in 2014, when they 'finally' released a 5.5" 6+. Which caused a FY 2015 Spike in sales, making FY 2016 smaller in comparison, but if you look YoY, sales are back in line with 2010-14 sales growth. One could argue they release just a 6+ in 2014 (and an SE to keep the 4" crowd happy), and then in 2015, release the 6s [new model] and 6s+ in 2015, and they would not have had the dip in FY 2016.
answered. see above. They were 'too good' in FY2015. especially when 50% of your sales are on a 2 year recurring schedule.