Not doomed, but it would sure as heck help their customers if they released hardware equivalent to or better than i7 configurations...
Or, you know, one with a keyboard that worked.
I didnt buy in 2016 because of the speed, but I'm still waiting because the keyboard stinks. Rene Ritchie’s died. Heck, one display MacBook Pro model in my local store had a broken B key.
I got a Lenovo in 2016 and I’m ready for something with a better battery. If nothing shows up by the end of the year, I’ll be pretty disappointed.
Right now, with this box, releasing sooner is better.
Totally agree with Bubblefree... Apple's total lack of real hardware updates the last few years is flat terrible... I own 8 Apple products & all of them barely work because Apple's buggy software updates has rushed their demise... I get the spinning ball on the calendar almost daily, how insane is that... Photo crashes many times daily & if you play a game on Apple you are totally screwed... One recent update for the iMac, totally killed it, a simple Excel spreadsheet wouldn't work, so I had to nearly double my RAM to bring it back to life... Things like AirPrint have quit working long ago, even on my iPhone X... Apple's software can't barely keep a bluetooth connected for more than 24 hours before you have to shut it down & start over... Which brings me to Apple's hardware which is totally obsolete & it is criminal that they sell to the unsuspecting newbies as new... Why Apple is into producing tv programs, making cars & Apple watches that don't work (I had 2 of them)... They need to get back to basics... The trolls on this site as far I am concerned are those who keep saying how awesome Apple is when daily spinning balls keep crashing everything... AI needs objective administrators...
My Mac is 7 years old now and I don't have any of these problems. It sounds like you have a hardware problem; the only Macs I've encountered lately with issues like those had a dying HD that needed replacing.
Apple didn’t say boo about cloud or data storage services. No what’s new in CloudKit no what’s new in coreData. Surely that is a bigger problem than no new hardware at the hardware agnostic event.
Apple didn’t say boo about cloud or data storage services. No what’s new in CloudKit no what’s new in coreData. Surely that is a bigger problem than no new hardware at the hardware agnostic event.
Yeah, huge problem. You know WWDC is a week long, right?
TUESDAY, 10:00 AM
iCloud and CloudKit Lab
Technology Lab 9 — 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM
Talk with CloudKit engineers to understand how you can leverage the CloudKit APIs in your app and on your website. Get advice on how to model your data, save and query records, subscribe to updates, create custom record zones, and share your records with other users. Talk to Apple experts about how to make the most of all the iCloud technologies. Bring all your CloudKit and iCloud questions, your laptop, and your code.
Lab 2020
TUESDAY, 3:00 PM
Core Data Lab
Technology Lab 7 — 3:00 PM to 5:30 PM
Core Data is a framework that manages object graphs, relationships, and persistence of those objects. Apple engineers will be on hand to answer questions about Core Data and how it reduces the amount of code you have to write to manage your model. We're here to help you get answers, learn about the latest development techniques and tools, and improve your code and apps.
Lab 2090
THURSDAY, 2:00 PM
Core Data Best Practices
Executive Ballroom — 2:00 PM to 2:40 PM
As your app gains more customers and becomes more feature-rich, you may find yourself with new problems to solve. Core Data is a powerful tool that has changed a lot over the years. Learn about the new best practices in Core Data, such as how to use concurrency and persistent history, and discover how to test for, and resolve, common problems using familiar technologies.
Apple didn’t say boo about cloud or data storage services. No what’s new in CloudKit no what’s new in coreData. Surely that is a bigger problem than no new hardware at the hardware agnostic event.
Yeah, huge problem. You know WWDC is a week long, right?
TUESDAY, 10:00 AM
iCloud and CloudKit Lab
Technology Lab 9 — 10:00 AM to 12:00 PM
Talk with CloudKit engineers to understand how you can leverage the CloudKit APIs in your app and on your website. Get advice on how to model your data, save and query records, subscribe to updates, create custom record zones, and share your records with other users. Talk to Apple experts about how to make the most of all the iCloud technologies. Bring all your CloudKit and iCloud questions, your laptop, and your code.
Lab 2020
TUESDAY, 3:00 PM
Core Data Lab
Technology Lab 7 — 3:00 PM to 5:30 PM
Core Data is a framework that manages object graphs, relationships, and persistence of those objects. Apple engineers will be on hand to answer questions about Core Data and how it reduces the amount of code you have to write to manage your model. We're here to help you get answers, learn about the latest development techniques and tools, and improve your code and apps.
Lab 2090
THURSDAY, 2:00 PM
Core Data Best Practices
Executive Ballroom — 2:00 PM to 2:40 PM
As your app gains more customers and becomes more feature-rich, you may find yourself with new problems to solve. Core Data is a powerful tool that has changed a lot over the years. Learn about the new best practices in Core Data, such as how to use concurrency and persistent history, and discover how to test for, and resolve, common problems using familiar technologies.
Yes they have the full suite of labs and best practices talks. I’ll admit haven’t been able to watch the last one yet. Still normally there would also be a what’s new to cover api improvements, better services and such. Best practices suggests no improvement in API. I hope I’m wrong.
Two things: Clearly, people bitching about lack of Apple hardware aren’t Apple Haters, they are Apple Lovers, hard core Apple junkies even. You know, macheads. Secondly, is it possible that the plan is that hardware releases from now on are to be held In the specifically designed for that purpose Steve Jobs Theater?
I might get excited about an iPhone upgrade if I could have wireless CarPlay, but that seems to all be in the hands of the CarPlay compatible onboard systems (in my case, Ford Sync, and it aint happening.)
For CarPlay & AppleTV Apple should look at leveraging their SiP skills to produce systems other can integrate into their own designs.
I think Apple would greatly accelerate wireless CarPlay by having no licence fee And a rapid approval process, if one is needed at all. Also for existing CarPlay units produce an encrypted wireless dongle (CarPlay only of course) that fits the head unit’s USB port and lets the head unit think it is a wired connection to the phone.
I’m glad Apple put Google Maps and Waze on CarPlay. It’s the best thing for users.
I wonder how the people that bought $14k Series 0 Edition Apple Watches now feel about them being obsolete. But I suppose if you are spending $14k on a watch, you don't really care.
I guess I don't know what to make of the trend I'm seeing about exciting new Apple stuff coming out on a schedule largely controlled by others. I might get excited about an iPhone upgrade if I could have wireless CarPlay, but that seems to all be in the hands of the CarPlay compatible onboard systems (in my case, Ford Sync, and it aint happening.) New Mac Minis will now wait for Marzipan to take 18 more of its 20 steps, and that's because Intel something something something. Apple turned displays over to other people, and as far as I can tell, they sorta dorked that up. Similar situation for wifi base stations: no more airports, so I'm just sorta hoping mine dont fail, and that Apple does actually have someone doing security updates for them. I could use a replacement iPad mini, but...
While I get that Apple has business reasons for the decisions they make, all these decisions seem to be unfavorable to products I am interested in. HomePod? Meh. Not at that price, and the subscription it generally requires for full functionality. $5k iMacs? Nah. MacPro? I don't make movies. ATV? Eh. Mine is fine, collecting dust, in favor of my TTCL Roku set. $3k laptops? A new iMac to get Mojave so I can have Dark Mode? No thanks. But hey, I can still get 50GB of iCloud storage for $.99, so I can share my desktop and documents.
YMMV. I'm sure I will be told this is all my fault.
whole lot of whining for a guy who isnt interested in what Apple has to offer. Or maybe you are but cant afford it? Either way, you are not the target market.
I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex).
And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.
While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.
But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.
"Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.
Was the new file system in both iOS and macOS step 1?
Does the touchbar on the latest laptops have any special adaptive functionality with respect to the new ported iOS Apps.
I'm sure that what Apple delivers next year will be great. Apple has a whole year to make it much, much better.
Hardware's day is coming
There was a lot of info doled out, and more is yet to come as the new documents are studied, and the betas evolve further. This week was the developer's week, but there are signs that new hardware is coming not just in the short term, but the long term as well.
Apple is very much beholden to its hardware partners, especially Intel -- at least for now. As we have to keep saying, it is (mostly) on Intel why the MacBook Pro doesn't yet support 32GB of RAM, and also why Apple's powerful portable wasn't updated just yet.
Claiming that Apple is doomed because they didn't roll out new gear at WWDC is disingenuous and ignorant of history.
It's hard to believe that mac Computers with Apple designed chips aren't 3-5 years down the road. Apple's chips are great for power management. This will be great in both Apple's laptops and their data centers.
I like the software only WWDC keynote. It would be nice if they could do a Spring or Summer hardware event for iPads and computers. Computers are a $25 Billion business for Apple. If they did reqular updates and were a little more cost competitive they could easily be a $100 Billion business.
Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.
While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.
But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.
"Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.
Of course! Of course!
I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.
For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.
It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).
But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.
In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.
But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:
X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds.
Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:
Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"
What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."
The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.
The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad
So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.
"But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"
That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.
One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex).
And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
A fair point, but it's not quite as simple as that. As folk love to point out, Intel has made some small incremental improvements over the years of stagnation, but Apple hasn't always picked them up.
The root of the problem is that ninety per cent of the Wintel machines out there are pretty much the same. You can even find machines with identical cases, parts and specs sold by different third-party resellers. Windows box builders rarely offer anything unique across their offerings, but in many ways this lack of any real differentiation is an advantage: it means that testing new configurations is easy.
Because Apple's OS doesn't conform to the WinTel spec (the spec that describes how hardware drivers interact with the Windows plumbing) then all that testing has to be done by Apple, and they also need to do all the testing and development of the drivers to make Bootcamp work with their hardware (bear in mind the increasing number of components that are going into Apple kit that is designed and built by Apple itself).
So this is probably why Apple doesn't jump on every tiny spec bump to the Intel chips; it wouldn't be cost effective for the Mac unit.
That's what they would tell you if you ask. The main reason is a bit more simple.
If a PC user discovers that his machine has a better spec a week after he bought it, he'll just say, "Oh well, I had to jump sometime" and get on with his life.
The kind of Mac user (especially round here) who complains that Apple doesn't update often enough, is most probably the same sort of Mac user who will complain if Apple updates at the same rate that Intel makes incremental improvements. This kind of Mac user doesn't like to feel that his Mac is out-of-date less than a year after he bought it. In fact, he's the probably the sort of Mac user who will come here and demand a class action because Apple has "obsoleted" his machine when it less than a year old.
So I had three grand Canadian saved in a savings account plus another thousand in my checking to cover any must have upgrades I was ready to pull the trigger on a new MacBook Pro, I was even entertaining the idea of a 15 inch Pro because by the time you factor in upping the RAM and processor and SSD you're actually pretty well at the entry level point for the 15 inch anyway. I was all set as soon as they introduced the new Macs with coffee lake processors, the ones with more cores than I have now, the ones that would be able to run all the apps I use like butter, the ones that would be the first major improvement from Intel since the Sandybridge chips, one of which is in my MacBook Pro!
And ... nothing. NOTHING!
I took two grand of that savings and threw it on my student loans as my own personal middle finger to Apple (Which isn't to say I can't just put it on my line of credit if they announce it next week).
The problem for me is that my Mac won't run Mojave, and I get that the GPU in it can't do the fancy Metal stuff that they're probably integrating into the window server or whatever. But I have to ask what's the hold up with the new MacBook Pros? When Apple first switched to Intel they were getting early access to chips. Now Intel releases something and Apple will get around to it in six months? If something is out and available and an improvement, I want Apple to be using it because if I get a new Mac I'm not paying a reduced rate if I'm using old tech. If my laptop gets stolen or something, I don't want to know that I'm paying the price that it'll be when the chip that's already out is finally included but that Apple is waiting until they feel like it to release a new computer.
Now I get that they probably make even more on the sale of any computers when the hardware inside is a bit out dated. But come on, the Mac isn't even a big business compared to the iPhone. If it'll help them release new stuff in time I'd be fine with them essentially just using Intel reference hardware in a unibody case with a nice display so long as it runs macOS. I don't CARE if it's the thinnest laptop on the planet, to be honest I'd rather it wasn't. The new keyboards don't feel as nice as the old ones. I'd gladly pay for a Mac that looks exactly like my 2011 MacBook Pro if it came with a high res screen and current gen processor (heck I'd be over the moon if the SSD and RAM were upgradable!) I just want a computer that is using current gen tech. I don't mind paying stupid amounts, (Correction the Canadian dollar sucks and Apple's been upping the price of the MacBook Pro to insane levels, but I'll pay it!) so long as when I buy I'm buying the best that Apple can give me, not the best that they're lazily getting around to.
If you need to hire more hardware engineers, do it! They say they don't have enough key people around, fine, hire in some new people. Let them know that they don't get to make new prototypes or try out crazy design ideas. Their whole job is to figure out what is necessary to keep a computer that looks exactly like the one before it running with whatever the new hardware is inside. Put these teams in charge of the Mac mini, put them in charge of the MacBook Pro. Heck come out with a new product, call it MacBook Not Our Flagship and just put out whatever new stuff is available EVEN if the computer has to be more than an inch thick! Just let me use a powerful computer that runs macOS that can't be beaten by a Hackintosh built at the same time!
I blame Intel for the lack of Mac updates. I have been a fan of chipzilla for a while now, but lately they've been behaving very badly. They've gone from simply producing slow updates to outright misleading people (with the 28-core CPU nonsense at Computex).
And watch their Computex presenation as well, was there ever such a collection of improperly prepared, condescending, fake ass douches in one presentation? The sooner Mac moves to AMD x64 or ARM the better.
A fair point, but it's not quite as simple as that. As folk love to point out, Intel has made some small incremental improvements over the years of stagnation, but Apple hasn't always picked them up.
The root of the problem is that ninety per cent of the Wintel machines out there are pretty much the same. You can even find machines with identical cases, parts and specs sold by different third-party resellers. Windows box builders rarely offer anything unique across their offerings, but in many ways this lack of any real differentiation is an advantage: it means that testing new configurations is easy.
Because Apple's OS doesn't conform to the WinTel spec (the spec that describes how hardware drivers interact with the Windows plumbing) then all that testing has to be done by Apple, and they also need to do all the testing and development of the drivers to make Bootcamp work with their hardware (bear in mind the increasing number of components that are going into Apple kit that is designed and built by Apple itself).
So this is probably why Apple doesn't jump on every tiny spec bump to the Intel chips; it wouldn't be cost effective for the Mac unit.
That's what they would tell you if you ask. The main reason is a bit more simple.
If a PC user discovers that his machine has a better spec a week after he bought it, he'll just say, "Oh well, I had to jump sometime" and get on with his life.
The kind of Mac user (especially round here) who complains that Apple doesn't update often enough, is most probably the same sort of Mac user who will complain if Apple updates at the same rate that Intel makes incremental improvements. This kind of Mac user doesn't like to feel that his Mac is out-of-date less than a year after he bought it. In fact, he's the probably the sort of Mac user who will come here and demand a class action because Apple has "obsoleted" his machine when it less than a year old.
I don't think Mac users are the irrational (suing over upgrades) whiners you make them sound like. A lot of them are video editors, an application that is heavy on the processor, and having the latest CPU or GPU can make a real difference in their daily workflow.
Tue, Apple do have to write their own drivers, and that would make it more work for them to upgrade a machine than a PC OEM. But the component vendors will be giving them the C source code of the Windows drivers and Apple will just be fitting it to their driver framework, its not like they're reverse engineering component interfaces and writing a driver from scratch or anything. And a lot of testing can be automated.
I suspect what is going on with the Macbook Pro is that Apple made it noticeably thinner in 2016 and if they were to upgrade it to a new Coffee Lake 6-core it may thermal throttle too much, so they are waiting for the next gen 10nm chip, which was supposed to come out this year but has now been delayed to next year thanks to Intel's difficulties. Apple trusted Intel's roadmap and it turned out to be wrong.
There was a telling moment in 2016 when they went into the Christmas season with iMacs that were the exact same iMacs from 2015.
You could do an 'about this Mac' and see '2015' on your brand spanking new Christmas Mac (Apple's biggest sales point of the year) in '2017'.
That is unforgivable and shows how much importance they give to the line.
They could have done any amount of minimal tweaking to make them technically newer machines (like upping the base storage) just to change the revision number and at least make it seem as if it was a new Mac and get rid of the 2015 references.
They simply didn't bother. Marketing must have been pulling their hair out.
I was in the market for one of those machines but pulled out. They didn't even discount them.
I knew I wasn't alone and expected sales to be impacted.
If you look at the results for that quarter you could be forgiven for thinking that far from being impacted, sales were actually great.
Look deeper though and you see a different story. Sales were probably impacted but by Mac users refusing to buy into a mutton for lamb deal so how did the numbers appear so good?
Apple admitted that most (I can't remember the exact wording) new Mac sales went to NEW Mac users.
I feel sorry for those users who probably thought they were getting the latest and greatest (technically, it was of course - in the consumer iMac space), but we're really getting the exact same iMacs from Christmas 2015.
That is the state of the Mac today.
People will point out the obvious. Apple is iPhone now. That ignores the other obvious point though. Apple has never sold Macs in the numbers it does today. It is still very much a multi million dollar business and (as a result of poor product refreshes), is actually underperforming.
I'd love to see it split off from 'Apple' and become 'Apple Computer' again (not unlike how FileMaker works) and start competing again.
It's ridiculous when competitors release machines and reviewers call it 'the machine Apple would like to make' or some such comments.
The current Macbook Pro is not a bad design. It looks good and is snappy. There has been a lot of fuss made about the keyboard but the butterfly switches really do stabilise the keys and make them less splashy, they just needed to add more travel to make it more comfortable to type on. Once it gets 6 cores and Vega it will be simply amazing.
2019 will be the end of Intel powered Macs. Apple confirms that Mojave is the last MacOS to support 32bit software so I think the 64bit only update next year will contain code to run on A series chips or will possibly only run on A series Macs. It will cut the reliance on Intel and ensure we see more updates to the platform.
The iPhone works so well because Apple controls hardware and software. As soon as Apple control the iMac processor, we'll see the future.
I wonder if we’ll get new laptops for back to school? Is there something Apple is waiting on from Intel?
It's coming...
Apple rolled out an affordable iPad for students. But the entire Mac line is pretty much devoted to high end users -- as their cheapest laptops cost double what a "normal" laptop cost -- and laptops, no matter how you cut it, are now commodity material... At this point, the primary thing that sets MacBooks apart from generic Windows machines is the software and Apple's ecosystem -- which is why Apple focused on it for it's software developers.
Basically: Lenovo, Asus, HP, Dell and the like can duplicate any Mac simply by going out and buying the CPU, GPU, SSD, memory or whatever. Some might say that times are changing. But not really: What set the mighty first Mac apart from the competition was not hardware but software. Anybody could buy a Motorola 68010 processor or diskette drive. But nobody could buy or develop the software that made it exceptional....
But the cost to develop that software is the same whether they sell one copy or a billion copies. The only thing that changes is the revenue that it brings in.
So, it's time for Apple to open the flood gates of affordable hardware....
POWER TO THE PEOPLE! MACs FOR ALL!
(But then, a cursor on the iPad wouldn't hurt at all either!)
Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.
While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.
But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.
"Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.
Of course! Of course!
I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.
For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.
It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).
But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.
In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.
But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:
X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds.
Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:
Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"
What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."
The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.
The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad
So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.
"But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"
That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.
One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
You're making a few assumptions here.
1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.
2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.
Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.
Speaking about telling developers what to expect in the future, Apple previewed the fruits of project "Marzipan" at WWDC. Instead of a straight emulation layer, it turned out to be a framework and API for porting over iPad apps to the Mac.
While I'm certain that this can be used for good or evil, skillfully or poorly, it isn't a regression. I also believe that it is an early step for migrating at least some of the Mac line to ARM, as the porting friction reduces even further as the technology is finally released to developers in full in 2019.
But, like we said on the AppleInsider Podcast on Friday, this reveal of what is rumored to be called Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process.
"Marzipan is about step two of a twenty step process." - best description of what I believe will be an evolution of both iOS and macOS to create new and enhanced versions of both over many years. Now I believe that way down the road macComputers will support Touch and the iPad will support the mouse. It's like when Job's said "Stylus. yuck" but apple came out with a Pencil that is better. When the "merger" is done it will be without compromises and the experience on both will be better.
Of course! Of course!
I didn't see it at first, but now it's perfectly clear.
For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.
It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).
But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.
In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.
But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:
X-Files Case Number 7737228728: The Internal Reality Twist. When a senior Apple exec goes on stage and drops a twenty-foot on-screen "NO" to the question of merging MacOS and iOS, what folk here think is "Well, it was an on-screen "NO", rather than a real, touchable "NO" pressed from Apple-crafted ceramic and honed smooth with lasers and a Jony Ive talkover explaining, in soothing British tones, how the massive "NO" was made. Since it's not a tangible "NO" then it's not a real "NO", so that means that they're planning on merging iOS and MacOS two years from now!"
X-Files Case Number 7737228729: The Historical Reality Twist. When Steve Jobs said Apple won't do something; then years later, Apple does it, then this is proof that they can change their minds.
Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:
Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"
What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."
The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.
The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad
So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.
"But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"
That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.
One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
You're making a few assumptions here.
1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.
2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.
Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.
The much feared "hybrid" device IS coming: step by step, drip by drip, feature by feature, the iPad is becoming increasingly more powerful, flexible and "computer" like. And, when it arrives, Apple will roll back the curtain and announce their revolutionary new product called: "An iPad"....
But I understand the fear of such a device on the part of Mac loyalists: They realize that Apple has let the Mac line languish. They fear it will be scrapped and replaced by what they call a "bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad"....
Apple has never been one to stick to convention because: "That's the way it has always been...." But, on the other hand, they also make the best product possible to meet the needs and desires of their customers.... That need is seldom an "either/or" proposition: "Do you want cake or do you want ice cream?" / "Do you want a Mac? Or, do you want an iPad?" It's usually more like: "I want it ALL!"
Comments
I didnt buy in 2016 because of the speed, but I'm still waiting because the keyboard stinks. Rene Ritchie’s died. Heck, one display MacBook Pro model in my local store had a broken B key.
I got a Lenovo in 2016 and I’m ready for something with a better battery. If nothing shows up by the end of the year, I’ll be pretty disappointed.
Right now, with this box, releasing sooner is better.
TUESDAY, 10:00 AM
iCloud and CloudKit Lab
Technology Lab 9 — 10:00 AM to 12:00 PMTalk with CloudKit engineers to understand how you can leverage the CloudKit APIs in your app and on your website. Get advice on how to model your data, save and query records, subscribe to updates, create custom record zones, and share your records with other users. Talk to Apple experts about how to make the most of all the iCloud technologies. Bring all your CloudKit and iCloud questions, your laptop, and your code.
Lab 2020TUESDAY, 3:00 PM
Core Data Lab
Technology Lab 7 — 3:00 PM to 5:30 PMCore Data is a framework that manages object graphs, relationships, and persistence of those objects. Apple engineers will be on hand to answer questions about Core Data and how it reduces the amount of code you have to write to manage your model. We're here to help you get answers, learn about the latest development techniques and tools, and improve your code and apps.
Lab 2090THURSDAY, 2:00 PM
Core Data Best Practices
Executive Ballroom — 2:00 PM to 2:40 PMAs your app gains more customers and becomes more feature-rich, you may find yourself with new problems to solve. Core Data is a powerful tool that has changed a lot over the years. Learn about the new best practices in Core Data, such as how to use concurrency and persistent history, and discover how to test for, and resolve, common problems using familiar technologies.
Session 224 View video and resourcesWas the new file system in both iOS and macOS step 1?
Does the touchbar on the latest laptops have any special adaptive functionality with respect to the new ported iOS Apps.
I'm sure that what Apple delivers next year will be great. Apple has a whole year to make it much, much better.
It's hard to believe that mac Computers with Apple designed chips aren't 3-5 years down the road. Apple's chips are great for power management. This will be great in both Apple's laptops and their data centers.
I like the software only WWDC keynote. It would be nice if they could do a Spring or Summer hardware event for iPads and computers. Computers are a $25 Billion business for Apple. If they did reqular updates and were a little more cost competitive they could easily be a $100 Billion business.
For weeks, I've been wondering why AppleInsider has insisted that Apple was planning an emulation layer so that iOS apps can run on Macs, when the initial report they cribbed from, seasoned developers, experienced journalists, and just about everyone in between said that Apple was coming up with an API to make it easier for themselves and developers to port applications between iOS and MacOS. AI was getting it so badly wrong, I was starting to wonder if they were just saying it to generate page clicks. No they weren't; they really did just get it badly wrong.
It made no sense at all to me (and I suspect it had @StrangeDays shaking his head in wonder too).
But as it turns out, AppleInsider simply made the classic mistake of the inexperienced journalist and rookie police detective: they started with what they wanted to believe, and then worked in reverse to find evidence to make it fact.
In this case, AppleInsider (and you) want to believe that Apple will merge the Mac and the iPad into some sort of bastardised hybrid FrankenMacPad. The reason that you want this is the same reason that is behind every odd request that shows up here: price. Rather than caring if this would actually work, what folk are thinking is "if Apple made such a machine, then I wouldn't have to buy two machines". Any compromises such a device would suffer would be complained about endlessly of course, but at least you got it for a cheaper outlay than buying a Mac and an iPad.
But back to the original point: this pattern of thinking leads to two strange phenomena that are unique to the Mac world:
Actually, I'm going to stop there, because point #2 is perfectly reasonable: if Apple didn't change their minds when they've taken the wrong path, then the company would never have survived this long, and that is an indisputable fact. The problem is the Historical Twist part. In this case, folk tend to make up their own words for what was actually said, so that it can reinforce what they're actually wishing for. Here's a video:
Jobs did not say "Stylus … yuk!"
What Jobs actually said was, "If you need a stylus then you've already failed."
The difference is subtle, but if you don't get it then you don't really understand why the iPad succeeded where so many before it did not. Jobs did not say that they would never have a stylus; what he actually said was that from day one the iPad was designed so that it wouldn't need one. This requirement shaped how the tablet was built, how iOS was designed, how apps would look and how folk would interact with them. Thanks to Jobs's insistence that Apple's designers would not assume a stylus would ever be available, they came up with a system that could happily work with a finger or a stylus.
The whole premise that Apple will make a FrankenMacPad because they once said they wouldn't make a stylus is flawed – because Apple didn't say they wouldn't make a stylus. In fact, if anything, Jobs statement about the stylus proves he believes that the best devices have to be designed from the ground up to support one overall style of interaction for the best possible user experience, so if anything, the stylus quote (the real one) actually points to a future without a FrankenMacPad
So, does this mean that Apple will never make a hybrid? No, of course not. As I've said, Apple can and does change its mind. But as things stand, they've already made prototypes; the ergonomics over long periods of use don't work. From my own experience, when I work with hybrids, I tend to just use them as laptops, and most of the folk around me tend to do the same thing. So is there is no current plan to make on? Nope. Sorry, there isn't. This Marzipan is not the first step to a hybrid, it's just another step along an endless road to make iOS and MacOS work better together, without compromising devices running either.
"But if Apple doesn't think touchscreens belong on the Mac, then what about the Touch Bar huh? Yeah, clever clogs! What about that??"
That is not a touch screen, it is a touch keyboard, and we know that Apple has loved touch keyboards for years.
One other thing: Jobs's statement on the need for a stylus bears greater weight when you remember that the iPad was actually conceived before the iPhone.
The root of the problem is that ninety per cent of the Wintel machines out there are pretty much the same. You can even find machines with identical cases, parts and specs sold by different third-party resellers. Windows box builders rarely offer anything unique across their offerings, but in many ways this lack of any real differentiation is an advantage: it means that testing new configurations is easy.
Because Apple's OS doesn't conform to the WinTel spec (the spec that describes how hardware drivers interact with the Windows plumbing) then all that testing has to be done by Apple, and they also need to do all the testing and development of the drivers to make Bootcamp work with their hardware (bear in mind the increasing number of components that are going into Apple kit that is designed and built by Apple itself).
So this is probably why Apple doesn't jump on every tiny spec bump to the Intel chips; it wouldn't be cost effective for the Mac unit.
That's what they would tell you if you ask. The main reason is a bit more simple.
If a PC user discovers that his machine has a better spec a week after he bought it, he'll just say, "Oh well, I had to jump sometime" and get on with his life.
The kind of Mac user (especially round here) who complains that Apple doesn't update often enough, is most probably the same sort of Mac user who will complain if Apple updates at the same rate that Intel makes incremental improvements. This kind of Mac user doesn't like to feel that his Mac is out-of-date less than a year after he bought it. In fact, he's the probably the sort of Mac user who will come here and demand a class action because Apple has "obsoleted" his machine when it less than a year old.
You could do an 'about this Mac' and see '2015' on your brand spanking new Christmas Mac (Apple's biggest sales point of the year) in '2017'.
That is unforgivable and shows how much importance they give to the line.
They could have done any amount of minimal tweaking to make them technically newer machines (like upping the base storage) just to change the revision number and at least make it seem as if it was a new Mac and get rid of the 2015 references.
They simply didn't bother. Marketing must have been pulling their hair out.
I was in the market for one of those machines but pulled out. They didn't even discount them.
I knew I wasn't alone and expected sales to be impacted.
If you look at the results for that quarter you could be forgiven for thinking that far from being impacted, sales were actually great.
Look deeper though and you see a different story. Sales were probably impacted but by Mac users refusing to buy into a mutton for lamb deal so how did the numbers appear so good?
Apple admitted that most (I can't remember the exact wording) new Mac sales went to NEW Mac users.
I feel sorry for those users who probably thought they were getting the latest and greatest (technically, it was of course - in the consumer iMac space), but we're really getting the exact same iMacs from Christmas 2015.
That is the state of the Mac today.
People will point out the obvious. Apple is iPhone now. That ignores the other obvious point though. Apple has never sold Macs in the numbers it does today. It is still very much a multi million dollar business and (as a result of poor product refreshes), is actually underperforming.
I'd love to see it split off from 'Apple' and become 'Apple Computer' again (not unlike how FileMaker works) and start competing again.
It's ridiculous when competitors release machines and reviewers call it 'the machine Apple would like to make' or some such comments.
Apple confirms that Mojave is the last MacOS to support 32bit software so I think the 64bit only update next year will contain code to run on A series chips or will possibly only run on A series Macs. It will cut the reliance on Intel and ensure we see more updates to the platform.
The iPhone works so well because Apple controls hardware and software. As soon as Apple control the iMac processor, we'll see the future.
So, it's time for Apple to open the flood gates of affordable hardware....
1) That I believe that a hybrid device is coming. I have never said that. ARM-powered Macs != hybrid Mac and iPad. It's just a Mac, running macOS, with an ARM processor. The Intel Macs were no longer PowerPC Macs, they were Intel Macs.
2) I am on record for well over a year saying that Marzipan isn't an emulation framework. Not just in multiple editorials, but on the AI podcast, and my own. AI is not some monolithic agency with planning meetings on common opinions and interpretations.
Those two make the rest of your assumptions about this editorial problematic.