The problem I see is that pc tech has already improved since this computer was announced. Cascade x with $1000 18 core CPU’s w/ 256gb ram max will be out soon. Improvements on the amd side side too.
The problem I see is that pc tech has already improved since this computer was announced. Cascade x with $1000 18 core CPU’s w/ 256gb ram max will be out soon. Improvements on the amd side side too.
Tech always improves. It's never gonna be the best Mac forever. Its using unreleased CPU's so idk what CPU is coming thats better and the Mac Pro will also max out at 1.5GB of RAM. Not sure what is better in the end?
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Rather than merging, Apple is defining new OS categories to define specific experiences: watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS, and despite lots of shared code, each of Apple's platforms is increasingly specializing.
My opinion, which is all it is, was the plan of the new Cook suzerainty in 2013 was that the ipad and iOS derivatives were the future computing platform, and hence the focus on iOS devices and Mac development was de emphasised, or if you really want to be paranoid, actively depreciated. I note that MacOS isn’t in your list.
So we ended up with a long hiatus, new MBP and Mac Pros that apart from chip speed, were less utilitarian than their predecessors, and an increase in price, all to make the iPad Pro more attractive. It also meant the ying and yang between designers and engineers were loosened up to the advantage of designers, which leads to outcomes like the MBP keyboard fiasco.
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
Couldn’t disagree more. Apple wanted to make a better laptop, not worse, with the 2016 MBP platform. They wanted to improve the laptop form factor by making it even thinner and lighter via reducing the thickness of the keyboard. That is in no way evidence of a shift of the designer/engineer power balance. Engineers built that flawed keyboard, not designers—and if they had done a better job everyone would have been happier, of course.
Similarly, the mis-step of the 2013 Mac Pro into a multi-GPU architecture vs. one big GPU—and the eventual realization in 2016/2017 of that mis-read of the future—is in no way evidence for your theory that Apple thought the iPad was the future of computing. As they became more capable, tablet computers simply took a chunk of the desktop/laptop market, plus they expanded the overall demand for computers as a whole by enabling new use cases.
That’s really no different from when laptops came along and increased the market for computers by enabling mobile computing, at the expense of desktop market share. We also have iPhones now being used as a person’s primary, or only, computing device.
Workstations>desktops>laptops>tablets>smartphones. They all coexist, and none is obsoleting any of the others. They all have their uses, and which solution is best depends on the application. Apple never thought the iPad was going to replace the Mac; that was mostly driven by paranoia, misinterpreting a Cook quote and misunderstanding the “What’s a computer” iPad commercial.
Saying Apple thought iPads were the future computing platform is the same as saying Apple thought the touch user interface was going to replace the mouse (trackpad) and keyboard user interface. There’s nothing to even remotely suggest that was ever Apple’s thinking, and the fact that Apple never made a touchscreen laptop or monitor is all the evidence one needs that Apple doesn’t think iPads will ever replace desktop/laptop Macs.
Yes some users can satisfy all their computing needs with an iPad, and won’t ever buy another laptop or desktop. Some don’t even need a tablet computer; a smartphone is sufficient for their needs. But Workstation/desktop/laptop Macs aren’t going away anytime soon, and neither is MacOS.
Android device users, for the most part, don't care whether their devices are updated or not. Most consumers buy low-cost Android devices and are happy with them. Android smartphones have a 99% market share percentage in both India and Africa and I'm sure no one is complaining about they're not getting any OS updates. Those lack of updates certainly isn't going to push them to buy and use iPhones. Android smartphones are good enough and that's all that matters to most users. I doubt it matters much to Google as long as they can push those ads out to Android smartphone users as that's how they make their money from people who are just happy to have "free" services to use on a daily basis. Apple will have to forever settle on having a global 10% market share percentage that will never grow as Android OS has everything locked up with low-cost devices.
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Rather than merging, Apple is defining new OS categories to define specific experiences: watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS, and despite lots of shared code, each of Apple's platforms is increasingly specializing.
My opinion, which is all it is, was the plan of the new Cook suzerainty in 2013 was that the ipad and iOS derivatives were the future computing platform, and hence the focus on iOS devices and Mac development was de emphasised, or if you really want to be paranoid, actively depreciated. I note that MacOS isn’t in your list.
So we ended up with a long hiatus, new MBP and Mac Pros that apart from chip speed, were less utilitarian than their predecessors, and an increase in price, all to make the iPad Pro more attractive. It also meant the ying and yang between designers and engineers were loosened up to the advantage of designers, which leads to outcomes like the MBP keyboard fiasco.
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
Couldn’t disagree more. Apple wanted to make a better laptop, not worse, with the 2016 MBP platform. They wanted to improve the laptop form factor by making it even thinner and lighter via reducing the thickness of the keyboard. That is in no way evidence of a shift of the designer/engineer power balance. Engineers built that flawed keyboard, not designers—and if they had done a better job everyone would have been happier, of course.
Similarly, the mis-step of the 2013 Mac Pro into a multi-GPU architecture vs. one big GPU—and the eventual realization in 2016/2017 of that mis-read of the future—is in no way evidence for your theory that Apple thought the iPad was the future of computing. As they became more capable, tablet computers simply took a chunk of the desktop/laptop market, plus they expanded the overall demand for computers as a whole by enabling new use cases.
That’s really no different from when laptops came along and increased the market for computers by enabling mobile computing, at the expense of desktop market share. We also have iPhones now being used as a person’s primary, or only, computing device.
Workstations>desktops>laptops>tablets>smartphones. They all coexist, and none is obsoleting any of the others. They all have their uses, and which solution is best depends on the application. Apple never thought the iPad was going to replace the Mac; that was mostly driven by paranoia, misinterpreting a Cook quote and misunderstanding the “What’s a computer” iPad commercial.
Saying Apple thought iPads were the future computing platform is the same as saying Apple thought the touch user interface was going to replace the mouse (trackpad) and keyboard user interface. There’s nothing to even remotely suggest that was ever Apple’s thinking, and the fact that Apple never made a touchscreen laptop or monitor is all the evidence one needs that Apple doesn’t think iPads will ever replace desktop/laptop Macs.
Yes some users can satisfy all their computing needs with an iPad, and won’t ever buy another laptop or desktop. Some don’t even need a tablet computer; a smartphone is sufficient for their needs. But Workstation/desktop/laptop Macs aren’t going away anytime soon, and neither is MacOS.
Well, sure. I could be overegging it a fair bit. A juicy conspiracy that would more entertainly debated over drinks. I would say though in response to your comment
Saying Apple thought iPads were the future computing platform is the same as saying Apple thought the touch user interface was going to replace the mouse (trackpad) and keyboard user interface. There’s nothing to even remotely suggest that was ever Apple’s thinking, and the fact that Apple never made a touchscreen laptop or monitor is all the evidence one needs that Apple doesn’t think iPads will ever replace desktop/laptop Macs.
kinda supports my theory. Apple never made a touchscreen Mac, but just about every windows laptop has touchscreen. iPad is superior to those, although I suspect windows’ touch interface is better than at the time my theory of an internal Apple plan to hyperfocus on iOS derivative devices as the future, and not be all that focussed on macs, might have been developed. And of course, if we ever see a Mac laptop running a version of iPad OS and an A series chip ( or derivative) I would get even more suspicious.
On another matter,
Except that flies in the face of what the execs say and have said all long — they love their macs and the idea of them getting out of mac is crazy talk. Schiller has flat out said this on podcasts. Creative writing and fan fiction is all that is. The reality is what they’ve said all along, and you were simply wrong. No need to write a backstory to explain your error.
You’re funny StrangeDays. I have a bridge to sell on the market at the moment, real cheap. Interested?
But rather than go down the path of a Cupertino worshipper and praise every Apple product primarily because "Apple has a strong strategic intent," I would suggest a better approach is to evaluate how well those products are received. We know how well the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro was (or rather, WASN'T) received. And now we see a new Mac Pro priced so high the average consumer can never evaluate it.
You do realize that an original Mac 128K in 1984 was $2495 USD. Adjusted for inflation that would be about $6166 USD today, enough for a starter level Mac Pro. But of course it's not a fair comparison because the original Mac's feature set and performance is totally laughable and almost toy-like compared to what the lowest end Mac Mini provides today. Comparing the similarly priced Mac 128K to the new Mac Pro is like comparing a bottle rocket to a Saturn V rocket. It's hard to complain about Apple's prices when you consider what you're getting for the price.
Also keep in mind that the "average consumer" of a Mac Pro is a professional who needs a tool with that level of performance to sustain or grow his/her business or their employer's business. It's no different than the "average consumer" of a 20 ton excavator being someone in the construction business who needs to move a lot of dirt very quickly, not some guy in a condo building a patio in his back yard.
Hey, I'd love to play with all of the big boy toys too, but chances are pretty good that if I have to actually think twice about buying a particular business tool because of the price, I probably don't really need it. If I really needed it as a tool to sustain my business and my livelihood I would not have to think about it at all (disregarding temporary cash flow issues that may defer the purchase to a later date). Sure, owning a 20 ton Caterpillar GC 323 would make me the envy of my neighbors and help me deal with my Chipmunk problem, but I can't afford it and realistically, I don't really need it - sigh...
I miss the days when Apple updated its Mac's annually like it does the iPhone. I hope Apple is very successful with the new MacPro. I don't understand why it is taking years to go from something is coming to a product. I would think that suggests its strategy is not as focused as suggested. After all, a 1 trillion dollar company should be a little bit more nimble? I think the two greatest threats to Apple is the lag between identifying a need and fielding a product, and turning all its products into disposable devices. You can talk about annual free sw updates, but it hides a ugly fact. For all the environmental stuff Apple does, it seems to ignore the fact it abandons perfectly working hardware not just leaving devices unsupported, but latterly breaking the sw. I have Macs, iPhones, iPods, etc… that work just fine accept that the free annual releases of Apple software make them non-functional. I don't like throwing away working devices because Apple chooses to break them. Why not let people pay a few bucks to keep using their working devices? Maybe that could be an apple service offering. Letting me keep using my perfectly functioning 2007 iMac, or my iPhone 5, or say, my iPod Mini…. I love Apple, but, I also feel that my original iPAD, even second gen iPAD deserve better than to be treated like old toys in a toy story….
The problem I see is that pc tech has already improved since this computer was announced. Cascade x with $1000 18 core CPU’s w/ 256gb ram max will be out soon. Improvements on the amd side side too.
Newer isn’t necessarily better. The Cascade-X CPUs aren’t usable for the Mac Pro, due to their low max memory and lack of ECC support, and an insufficient number of PCIe lanes (the 18-core max is also an issue). Those CPUs aren’t even suitable for iMac Pro, due to the memory restrictions. (But the new iMac Pro will use the Xeon W-2200 series, which are much the same as the Cascade-X HEDT CPUs you reference. The Xeons cost a little more, but they support up to 1TB of ECC RAM.)
re: AMD, Apple has yet to show any interest in them. That could change in the future, but I’m not holding my breath.
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
And a very good example of, as DED alluded, the devil being in the details.
Maybe it was 5 years ago when we suggested Apple had a roadmap where MacOS and iOS would merge? Maybe we saw a leaked memo? Or maybe discussed on these forums? Nevertheless, they appear to be following through with that plan. MacBooks with A-series chipsets are around the corner.
Rather than merging, Apple is defining new OS categories to define specific experiences: watchOS, tvOS, iPadOS, and despite lots of shared code, each of Apple's platforms is increasingly specializing.
My opinion, which is all it is, was the plan of the new Cook suzerainty in 2013 was that the ipad and iOS derivatives were the future computing platform, and hence the focus on iOS devices and Mac development was de emphasised, or if you really want to be paranoid, actively depreciated. I note that MacOS isn’t in your list.
So we ended up with a long hiatus, new MBP and Mac Pros that apart from chip speed, were less utilitarian than their predecessors, and an increase in price, all to make the iPad Pro more attractive. It also meant the ying and yang between designers and engineers were loosened up to the advantage of designers, which leads to outcomes like the MBP keyboard fiasco.
it didn’t work out too well, hence the beginnings of a reverse course, starting in the design studio a couple of years ago, now starting to bear fruit.
Couldn’t disagree more. Apple wanted to make a better laptop, not worse, with the 2016 MBP platform. They wanted to improve the laptop form factor by making it even thinner and lighter via reducing the thickness of the keyboard. That is in no way evidence of a shift of the designer/engineer power balance. Engineers built that flawed keyboard, not designers—and if they had done a better job everyone would have been happier, of course.
Similarly, the mis-step of the 2013 Mac Pro into a multi-GPU architecture vs. one big GPU—and the eventual realization in 2016/2017 of that mis-read of the future—is in no way evidence for your theory that Apple thought the iPad was the future of computing. As they became more capable, tablet computers simply took a chunk of the desktop/laptop market, plus they expanded the overall demand for computers as a whole by enabling new use cases.
That’s really no different from when laptops came along and increased the market for computers by enabling mobile computing, at the expense of desktop market share. We also have iPhones now being used as a person’s primary, or only, computing device.
Workstations>desktops>laptops>tablets>smartphones. They all coexist, and none is obsoleting any of the others. They all have their uses, and which solution is best depends on the application. Apple never thought the iPad was going to replace the Mac; that was mostly driven by paranoia, misinterpreting a Cook quote and misunderstanding the “What’s a computer” iPad commercial.
Saying Apple thought iPads were the future computing platform is the same as saying Apple thought the touch user interface was going to replace the mouse (trackpad) and keyboard user interface. There’s nothing to even remotely suggest that was ever Apple’s thinking, and the fact that Apple never made a touchscreen laptop or monitor is all the evidence one needs that Apple doesn’t think iPads will ever replace desktop/laptop Macs.
Yes some users can satisfy all their computing needs with an iPad, and won’t ever buy another laptop or desktop. Some don’t even need a tablet computer; a smartphone is sufficient for their needs. But Workstation/desktop/laptop Macs aren’t going away anytime soon, and neither is MacOS.
Well, sure. I could be overegging it a fair bit. A juicy conspiracy that would more entertainly debated over drinks. I would say though in response to your comment
Saying Apple thought iPads were the future computing platform is the same as saying Apple thought the touch user interface was going to replace the mouse (trackpad) and keyboard user interface. There’s nothing to even remotely suggest that was ever Apple’s thinking, and the fact that Apple never made a touchscreen laptop or monitor is all the evidence one needs that Apple doesn’t think iPads will ever replace desktop/laptop Macs.
kinda supports my theory. Apple never made a touchscreen Mac, but just about every windows laptop has touchscreen. iPad is superior to those, although I suspect windows’ touch interface is better than at the time my theory of an internal Apple plan to hyperfocus on iOS derivative devices as the future, and not be all that focussed on macs, might have been developed. And of course, if we ever see a Mac laptop running a version of iPad OS and an A series chip ( or derivative) I would get even more suspicious.
Sure, who doesn’t love a conspiracy theory
re: Windows touch screen laptops, that’s not really relevant to Mac laptops. Apple thinks (knows) a trackpad/mouse is better than touchscreen+finger for devices other than handheld. That’s why if (when) you ever see Apple’s ARM CPU replace Intel on the Mac, it won’t be running iOS or iPadOS; it’ll be running MacOS/ARM (instead of MacOS/x86).
But rather than go down the path of a Cupertino worshipper and praise every Apple product primarily because "Apple has a strong strategic intent," I would suggest a better approach is to evaluate how well those products are received. We know how well the 2013 trashcan Mac Pro was (or rather, WASN'T) received. And now we see a new Mac Pro priced so high the average consumer can never evaluate it.
You do realize that an original Mac 128K in 1984 was $2495 USD. Adjusted for inflation that would be about $6166 USD today, enough for a starter level Mac Pro.
Also keep in mind that the "average consumer" of a Mac Pro is a...
Hey, I'd love to play with all of the big boy toys too...
Yes, I realize the price after inflation is high, but consider this...
So it really isn't something I dwell on because that somewhat misses the point. What we can or cannot afford today matters most.
When talking about "the average consumerbuyer of the Mac Pro" we must not forget those are the same people who bought (or rather, DIDN'T buy) the 2013 Mac Pro. Sure the new Mac Pro is better in terms of expansion, but the base price is so high that to expand it would mean you really would need to be either a $1 million per year YouTuber or a mid to large size business. It's in many ways an enterprise product like the Xserve. But those products don't last, especially when Apple lets them languish. Remember how often Apple updated the last Mac Pro (trashcan)? And while one can argue it needed an update from Apple more than a more expandable model like the new Mac Pro, the fact remains that if Apple makes a super great, super expensive machine that it almost never updates, it shows would-be buyers that Apple cares about them as much as it clearly DOESN'T CARE about it's Pro machine they never update. That has long been a problem at Apple. And that's why I feel they'd have more success with a lower cost expandable tower targeted at The Rest of Us like they did in the past.
The small upside is that you CAN play with big boy toys now by building a Hackintosh. I think the Hackintosh tower maintains the peace among those of us who love the Mac in that it allows us to vent built-up steam over why Apple still is ignoring that important part of the Mac market. It's troublesome, but a Hackintosh is better than nothing at all when it comes to an expandable tower that runs MacOS.
In the end, Apple is going to surprise everybody with a line of Macs that ditches Intel and runs their own silicone. Catalina is the not-so-subtle start, killing off old apps we love for reasons not clearly seen. But to me it's clear Apple is writing code now for that new Apple silicon, and they need to ditch support of incompatible software. In the past Apple was upfront about that when it transitioned from 68k to the PPC. The switch to Intel was a bit more sudden with them telling us they'd been building OS X on Intel for a long while before they made the switch to Intel. Now they aren't telling is anything, but we know what's coming. But will it have compelling hardware that appeals to you and I? I'm skeptical.
Apple's future plans don't really matter so much. I buy Macs for the value they bring to me today, in light of the port connectivity I need and want today. If a fancy new machine lacks a feature I need, it would be nice to add a card to enable that feature I need, but I can't do that with a Mac today because only the Mac Pro allows it, and I cannot afford a Mac Pro. Thankfully the iMac gives me the ports and SD card slot internally so I have zero complaints. And I still use a 2015 15" MBP, so I have no complaints on the portable front either. But when I need to upgrade in the future, well, that's the kicker.
This may have contained some interesting thoughts (or not), but it's another of DED's wordy (2871 of 'em) epistles that start with God creating the world, then the formation of continents, the extinction of dinosaurs, the emergence of civilizations, man making stone tools and developing technology and on and on until we get to some kind of point. Maybe.
He's the Terrence Malick of AI authors. Maybe not for everyone, but many of us enjoy the journey.
If what you say is true and the Mac Pro is the perfect combination of engineering and long term business strategy, why does it not have the option of NVIDIA GPUs? For ray tracing, AI and general purpose computing, NVIDA has far better performance at the high end than AMD. Why would Apple not want to offer the very best GPUs in a $25k workstation? The only straight faced answer to this question is that Apple management had a falling out with NVIDIA after some GPUs overheated in MacBooks years ago. Doesn't that seem a bit petty to you?
Takes two to tango, as they say.
NVIDIA has CUDA. Apple has Metal. Apple has no interest in CUDA on Macs because Metal is literally everything. It’s the underpinnings for every relevant technology, seen and unseen, on every Apple platform. Apple wants everyone else using Metal as well. It’s tied into the App stores, into Apple’s promises of “free optimizations” over time as compiler technology gets better and better.
Apple plays a long game and expects its partners to play whatever version of that game Apple demands. And it appears NVIDIA won’t. And it appears Apple is ok with that.
The hardware slot proprietary standard Apple has going in the Mac Pro has partners that are playing ball with Apple and it looks like it will pay off. I can’t imagine most of NVIDIA’a customers being happy with them if they’d done something like that.
My goodness. So many words. I don’t mind long content... when it says something useful. This is just another Apple worship piece. More free propaganda for Apple and more echo-chamber content for the believers. These editorials... I’m going to start skipping them outright, like I do with all the sponsored content “articles”.
Folks, that's Steve Jobs again, not me. If we the consumer think a product sucks, it does. And neither Apple marketing nor the tech media will ever be successful at changing our minds on that. What will change our minds? Products that are practical and affordable and reliable and enjoyable to use, and therefore don't suck.
Still think Apple knows best and their Borg collective is far beyond your feeble brain?
You're assuming that most people think the same way as you. They don't, which is why Apple still sells a shit ton of Macs and has the customer sat ratings that it enjoys. My 2018 MBP is my favorite Mac ever, and yes, I've used them since the 9" b&w screen.
If a fancy new machine lacks a feature I need, it would be nice to add a card to enable that feature I need, but I can't do that with a Mac today because only the Mac Pro allows it, and I cannot afford a Mac Pro. Thankfully the iMac gives me the ports and SD card slot internally so I have zero complaints.
Maybe you need to read up on Thunderbolt 3 and PCIe breakout boxes. Or cheap little docks that have USB-A and SD (among other things) on them which address your other problems. I have a USB-C to -A adapter on my keychain for the random time I need it, which is hardly ever. Most everything you own can have its cord replaced to USB-C. There are myriad simple solutions out there that can address the vast majority of use cases. It's NOT a problem for most rational people who just need to get work done.
My goodness. So many words. I don’t mind long content... when it says something useful. This is just another Apple worship piece. More free propaganda for Apple and more echo-chamber content for the believers. These editorials... I’m going to start skipping them outright, like I do with all the sponsored content “articles”.
Please keep us up to date on what else you're not reading on the Internet.
Very well written, grammatically. But it wasn’t really about the Mac Pro was it? It was about the your predictions and interactions with Apple.
Do a history article on your achievements and those that want to read that can do so, I probably would. It was interesting, but I wanted to hear about the Mac Pro, and there was very little content here.
Folks, that's Steve Jobs again, not me. If we the consumer think a product sucks, it does. And neither Apple marketing nor the tech media will ever be successful at changing our minds on that. What will change our minds? Products that are practical and affordable and reliable and enjoyable to use, and therefore don't suck.
Still think Apple knows best and their Borg collective is far beyond your feeble brain?
You're assuming that most people think the same way as you. They don't, which is why Apple still sells a shit ton of Macs and has the customer sat ratings that it enjoys. My 2018 MBP is my favorite Mac ever, and yes, I've used them since the 9" b&w screen.
You are also making assumptions based on your own interpretation of Apple product sales when you boldly speak on behalf of others proclaiming, "They don't." For you to basically say "most people who use Apple products don't think like you" is flawed in that my thinking on the matter is rather complex, as anyone who read my previous posts could clearly see. PC makers sell many more Windows PCs than Macs, yet would one argue those machines are superior due to sheer sales volume alone? Of course not.
We aren't taking about Apple being great because they sell a lot of stuff. Okay, you are, but I am not. I am talking about quality and practicality and what Macs consumers like myself would like to see, which cannot be perfectly gleaned from raw sales numbers alone. You can't just say, "See, this category of Mac sold this many units over this period of time, and therefore we can conclude most of those people are perfectly satisfied with their purchase and prove that Apple is doing everything right." Sorry, but sales numbers don't really show what consumers need or want. The numbers only show what they are buying and numbers don't tell us why they are buying those machines or how they feel about them now versus the past. And then when a consumer like myself does explain what they like or don't like, you offer rebuttals!
I also don't need a lecture about break-out boxes and endless dongles. External devices get damaged and lost. Don't tell me an external SD card reader is better when I travel seeing it can and does get lost. An internal reader is a world better because I don't lose my entire MacBook Pro. To defend dongles is to defend the failed 2013 Mac Pro which was build around that concept. All it's lovely design glory faded to nothing when you see the machine fully plugged into everything. Apple ditched that for the new Mac Pro which addresses those shortcomings, but at a cost the average person cannot afford.
Those myriad of simple solutions you put forth are little more than defending the status quo. If Apple release a 24k gold cup tomorrow you would try to rationalize its sale. I am not like that. I am not going to pressure myself to see the bright side when I am actually not seeing that bright side at all. I praise that which is praiseworthy and chastise that which is not. It's only fair. But despite the fact I am chastising the design and pricing choices of the largest corporation in the world, you have chosen to lambast me. That's the fundamental difference. I don't blast my fellow Mac lovers. I blast what I perceive to be bad design choices but a company big enough to defend itself. I want Apple to Think Different. I feel no need to apologize about that. And I reject the notion that my voice is somehow unimportant because some guy on the internet throws up sales numbers to try and say otherwise.
Forbes writes a fair amount of Apple garage I disagree with, but when they're right, I cannot argue against it:
I agree with a lot of what ded says however i believe the mac book pro is a flawed laptop. Instead of making a reliable solid robust computer they have ruined in my opinion. Im using an alien-ware gaming laptop and i love it. I was an Apple fan but after the keyboard debacle and being told that i had to pay $900 to repair a 15 month old mac book pro i gave. Its now useless. After having viewed several you tube videos by people who repair mac books its pretty obvious apple has compromised the mac book pro with a flimsy design in their pursuit of miniaturization. Design flaws on the wT the lis is connected to the chassis and so on which cause the connectors hinges to break prematurely and brick it. One hardware repairer basically thinks apple is forcing us to buy 3 year protection plans but i doubt that , i think its just bad design. Ive had enough. I only have an iPhone and an iPad now those seem to he reliable.
I'm sorry, but I cannot justify the iMac as a prosumer Mac. I want my Mac to be readily repairable, upgradable and expandable. You know, like they were under Steve Jobs. I don't mind paying a small premium for that as long as the build quality is there, but double retail? Uh, no.
Remember that Wozniak want an upgradable repairable Pc
Comments
kinda supports my theory. Apple never made a touchscreen Mac, but just about every windows laptop has touchscreen. iPad is superior to those, although I suspect windows’ touch interface is better than at the time my theory of an internal Apple plan to hyperfocus on iOS derivative devices as the future, and not be all that focussed on macs, might have been developed.
And of course, if we ever see a Mac laptop running a version of iPad OS and an A series chip ( or derivative) I would get even more suspicious.
On another matter,
You’re funny StrangeDays. I have a bridge to sell on the market at the moment, real cheap. Interested?
re: Windows touch screen laptops, that’s not really relevant to Mac laptops. Apple thinks (knows) a trackpad/mouse is better than touchscreen+finger for devices other than handheld. That’s why if (when) you ever see Apple’s ARM CPU replace Intel on the Mac, it won’t be running iOS or iPadOS; it’ll be running MacOS/ARM (instead of MacOS/x86).
Yes, I realize the price after inflation is high, but consider this...
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2018/06/22/cost-of-a-computer-the-year-you-were-born/36156373/
So it really isn't something I dwell on because that somewhat misses the point. What we can or cannot afford today matters most.
When talking about "the average consumer buyer of the Mac Pro" we must not forget those are the same people who bought (or rather, DIDN'T buy) the 2013 Mac Pro. Sure the new Mac Pro is better in terms of expansion, but the base price is so high that to expand it would mean you really would need to be either a $1 million per year YouTuber or a mid to large size business. It's in many ways an enterprise product like the Xserve. But those products don't last, especially when Apple lets them languish. Remember how often Apple updated the last Mac Pro (trashcan)? And while one can argue it needed an update from Apple more than a more expandable model like the new Mac Pro, the fact remains that if Apple makes a super great, super expensive machine that it almost never updates, it shows would-be buyers that Apple cares about them as much as it clearly DOESN'T CARE about it's Pro machine they never update. That has long been a problem at Apple. And that's why I feel they'd have more success with a lower cost expandable tower targeted at The Rest of Us like they did in the past.
The small upside is that you CAN play with big boy toys now by building a Hackintosh. I think the Hackintosh tower maintains the peace among those of us who love the Mac in that it allows us to vent built-up steam over why Apple still is ignoring that important part of the Mac market. It's troublesome, but a Hackintosh is better than nothing at all when it comes to an expandable tower that runs MacOS.
In the end, Apple is going to surprise everybody with a line of Macs that ditches Intel and runs their own silicone. Catalina is the not-so-subtle start, killing off old apps we love for reasons not clearly seen. But to me it's clear Apple is writing code now for that new Apple silicon, and they need to ditch support of incompatible software. In the past Apple was upfront about that when it transitioned from 68k to the PPC. The switch to Intel was a bit more sudden with them telling us they'd been building OS X on Intel for a long while before they made the switch to Intel. Now they aren't telling is anything, but we know what's coming. But will it have compelling hardware that appeals to you and I? I'm skeptical.
Apple's future plans don't really matter so much. I buy Macs for the value they bring to me today, in light of the port connectivity I need and want today. If a fancy new machine lacks a feature I need, it would be nice to add a card to enable that feature I need, but I can't do that with a Mac today because only the Mac Pro allows it, and I cannot afford a Mac Pro. Thankfully the iMac gives me the ports and SD card slot internally so I have zero complaints. And I still use a 2015 15" MBP, so I have no complaints on the portable front either. But when I need to upgrade in the future, well, that's the kicker.
Maybe you need to read up on Thunderbolt 3 and PCIe breakout boxes. Or cheap little docks that have USB-A and SD (among other things) on them which address your other problems. I have a USB-C to -A adapter on my keychain for the random time I need it, which is hardly ever. Most everything you own can have its cord replaced to USB-C. There are myriad simple solutions out there that can address the vast majority of use cases. It's NOT a problem for most rational people who just need to get work done.
Please keep us up to date on what else you're not reading on the Internet.
We aren't taking about Apple being great because they sell a lot of stuff. Okay, you are, but I am not. I am talking about quality and practicality and what Macs consumers like myself would like to see, which cannot be perfectly gleaned from raw sales numbers alone. You can't just say, "See, this category of Mac sold this many units over this period of time, and therefore we can conclude most of those people are perfectly satisfied with their purchase and prove that Apple is doing everything right." Sorry, but sales numbers don't really show what consumers need or want. The numbers only show what they are buying and numbers don't tell us why they are buying those machines or how they feel about them now versus the past. And then when a consumer like myself does explain what they like or don't like, you offer rebuttals!
I also don't need a lecture about break-out boxes and endless dongles. External devices get damaged and lost. Don't tell me an external SD card reader is better when I travel seeing it can and does get lost. An internal reader is a world better because I don't lose my entire MacBook Pro. To defend dongles is to defend the failed 2013 Mac Pro which was build around that concept. All it's lovely design glory faded to nothing when you see the machine fully plugged into everything. Apple ditched that for the new Mac Pro which addresses those shortcomings, but at a cost the average person cannot afford.
Those myriad of simple solutions you put forth are little more than defending the status quo. If Apple release a 24k gold cup tomorrow you would try to rationalize its sale. I am not like that. I am not going to pressure myself to see the bright side when I am actually not seeing that bright side at all. I praise that which is praiseworthy and chastise that which is not. It's only fair. But despite the fact I am chastising the design and pricing choices of the largest corporation in the world, you have chosen to lambast me. That's the fundamental difference. I don't blast my fellow Mac lovers. I blast what I perceive to be bad design choices but a company big enough to defend itself. I want Apple to Think Different. I feel no need to apologize about that. And I reject the notion that my voice is somehow unimportant because some guy on the internet throws up sales numbers to try and say otherwise.
Forbes writes a fair amount of Apple garage I disagree with, but when they're right, I cannot argue against it:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/ewanspence/2019/09/28/apple-macbook-pro-16-inch-tim-cook-specs-promotion-love-release-date/
thant Jobs made the Mac