Hope for apple.
Well not really.
Surely apple is not blind. THey will have seen the way the market is moving for the past 5 years, and the reason we have only been getting incremental upgrades on practically all models this year is becuase Apple is devoting practically all of its company resources into producing something really, really cool.
Well, I hope so anyway. The other (and some would argue more realistic) viewpoint is this:
Apple IS blind. They have seen the market moving for five years, but decided to screw it all, give us incremental upgrades and hope for the best. Apple was blind when it didn't outsource years ago, its still blind now. So, get ready to go back to the big bad PC world and deal.
I sure as hell hope it's option one, but it could just as easily be #2.
Just my $0.05
Surely apple is not blind. THey will have seen the way the market is moving for the past 5 years, and the reason we have only been getting incremental upgrades on practically all models this year is becuase Apple is devoting practically all of its company resources into producing something really, really cool.
Well, I hope so anyway. The other (and some would argue more realistic) viewpoint is this:
Apple IS blind. They have seen the market moving for five years, but decided to screw it all, give us incremental upgrades and hope for the best. Apple was blind when it didn't outsource years ago, its still blind now. So, get ready to go back to the big bad PC world and deal.
I sure as hell hope it's option one, but it could just as easily be #2.
Just my $0.05
Comments
Welcome to the forum, Mr. Negative.
Originally posted by Kickaha
I think he's confusing outsourcing with licensing.
Yes sorry, outsourcing/licencsing - confused. I was refering to when way back at the beggining, Apple refused to give other companies their software, practically forcing them to go with Microsoft.
The main gist of it it this - Why has apple only been given us incremental upgrades on most of their product lines - has to be a reason for, either a) or b)
Then...
I realized that throughout history humans have competeted and while the winner receives the accolades the runner up was frequently right behind the winner. So the only way to really win is to exploit your nemesis' careless folly.
Apple may be able to do that. As four licensing the OS. I honestly like being a member of the smaller platform. It allows Apple to be nimble and actually ship product now. Microsoft has done an admirable job with Windows but they are sagging under the weight of owning %90 of the market. Even with that immense advantage their costs of maintaining this domination is skyrocketing.
A lot is going to change in the next 5 years. Be prepared for a wild ride.
I think Apple has benefitted a lot from the small installed user base (when compared to the Windows installed user base) and precisely because they have control of the hardware and those planned upgrade cycles is that the transition to OS X has been an enjoyable ride (well, at the beginning it was a little rough around the edges but subsequent releases of Mac OS X haven't had much trouble). That's never the case with MS who has to support like millions of different computer configurations every time they ship a new OS. I'm ranting. It's Sunday morning and I may not make much sense cos I only had 3 hours of sleep. Back to bed.
Originally posted by pyriX
the reason we have only been getting incremental upgrades on practically all models
Explain to me how a Flat Panel All-in-one with a G5 processor that is two inches thick is "incremental"? Or a Dual Processor, 2.5GHz G5 with independent front side bus at 1250 MHz, and liquid cooling is "incremental"? Or a headless Mac under $500 is "incremental"?
Originally posted by pyriX
Well not really.
Surely apple is not blind. THey will have seen the way the market is moving for the past 5 years, and the reason we have only been getting incremental upgrades on practically all models this year is becuase Apple is devoting practically all of its company resources into producing something really, really cool.
Well, I hope so anyway. The other (and some would argue more realistic) viewpoint is this:
Apple IS blind. They have seen the market moving for five years, but decided to screw it all, give us incremental upgrades and hope for the best. Apple was blind when it didn't outsource years ago, its still blind now. So, get ready to go back to the big bad PC world and deal.
I sure as hell hope it's option one, but it could just as easily be #2.
Just my $0.05
Option #3: Apple would love to release a machine with a much faster processor in it, but they don't make the chips. IBM and Freescale do, and Apple has to use what they get from those two companies. As soon as IBM gives Apple a new processor that is really, really, cool, Apple will use it, but until then, it's incremental upgrades (plus some really, really cool designs like the G5 iMac and the Aluminum PowerBooks).
Originally posted by fahlman
Explain to me how a Flat Panel All-in-one with a G5 processor that is two inches thick is "incremental"? Or a Dual Processor, 2.5GHz G5 with independent front side bus at 1250 MHz, and liquid cooling is "incremental"? Or a headless Mac under $500 is "incremental"?
IMAc G5's are cool. BUt is simply evoloution of existing all in one units. PowerMac G5 Dual is cool. BUt is just evoloution from the previous. Headless Mac for under $800AU is cool, but all they had to do was go back a few years, kill the monitor, and call it a MiniMac.
Dont get me wrong, I like apple's stuff. After using the iMac G5's I was, in a word, impressed. BUT is still just evoloution.
As well as that, I know that apple have been rolling out OSX upgrades like crazy, and believe me, I am aware that Longhorn was supposed to be released this year. But, seems to me at least that wereonly getting spec boosts and price drops, which is great, but I Apple has a history of taking the ordanairy and turning it into the extraordanairy. I want to see it happen again.
Originally posted by pyriX
Dont get me wrong, I like apple's stuff. After using the iMac G5's I was, in a word, impressed. BUT is still just evoloution.
So, what's wrong with evolving proven products to make them better? Apple has had some hits with radical new designs (iMac, iPod), but some terrible misses that cost them dearly (Newton, Copland, Pink, Taligent, Cube, Pippin, eMate, QuickTake).
They have introduced a very radical new design just like two month ago - the Mac mini. And another, the iPod shuffle. And still, you start asking for even more?
Developing something new from the ground up is expensive and till it catches on, you have to invest a lot into marketing to persuade customers. Building on an existing design is much cheaper.
Originally posted by pyriX
IMAc G5's are cool. BUt is simply evoloution of existing all in one units. PowerMac G5 Dual is cool. BUt is just evoloution from the previous. Headless Mac for under $800AU is cool, but all they had to do was go back a few years, kill the monitor, and call it a MiniMac.
Dont get me wrong, I like apple's stuff. After using the iMac G5's I was, in a word, impressed. BUT is still just evoloution.
As well as that, I know that apple have been rolling out OSX upgrades like crazy, and believe me, I am aware that Longhorn was supposed to be released this year. But, seems to me at least that wereonly getting spec boosts and price drops, which is great, but I Apple has a history of taking the ordanairy and turning it into the extraordanairy. I want to see it happen again.
I think the idea is to, like the renowned philosopher Axel Rose once said, "gotta get some patience...yeeeeaaah".
Although 64-bitness was around before the G5, don't you think that Apple could revolutionise the scope of OS when it releases a 64-bit version of OSX?
BTW, PowerMac Quad not good enough for you? Tiger just around the corner with a bundle of good stuff and still its not ennough? the crapily intelligent attempt of iWork a couple of months in the wild and still not impressed? Nothing wrong with evolution or the incremental improvement that evolution brings.
Revolutions tend to happen infrequently...hence revolutions are revolutionary.
I apologise for the semantics.
Originally posted by Smircle
So, what's wrong with evolving proven products to make them better?
Nothing is wrong with it. THere is nothing particurly right about it either.
Step back, and allow me to elaborate. I like Apple's stuff. IT is better than most stuff, in most cases than I could buy with a PC. Apple has a flair for design that I see as unmatched.
All I was saying is that it has been a while since we have had anything but a scroll pad or a SFF PC, or (gasps) a flash based MP3 player. Those are the norm. Practically any shop not selling MAc stuff would have that junk.
TO me at least, and you are enttled to your opinion on the matter, I think that Apple is getting ready for something big, and the reason we haven't had anything really, really cool lately is becuase they are devoting resources to making something really, really cool.
Originally posted by vinney57
Stunningly original and insightful stuff pyriX. Thanks for wasting a minute of my life.
Your welcome.
Future Hardware
Focused discussion and speculation about future Apple hardware.
Is there any focus to this discussion other than your opinion that recent upgrades and additions to the hardware front are relatively inconsequential, and your theory that Apple might have something really really cool at some point in the future?
I think it's a given. So unless you can come up with an actual product you think may be in the works, perhaps even with some sort of semi-tangible evidence to support your musings, I don't see much reason why this thread needs to remain open for discussion...
Originally posted by rageous
Is there any focus to this discussion other than your opinion that recent upgrades and additions to the hardware front are relatively inconsequential, and your theory that Apple might have something really really cool at some point in the future?
I think it's a given. So unless you can come up with an actual product you think may be in the works, perhaps even with some sort of semi-tangible evidence to support your musings, I don't see much reason why this thread needs to remain open for discussion...
Very well. Fair enough. It does say specualation as well, so here is my speculation
Fuel Cell Powered notebooks - Future powerbook upgrade. Your talking around a month of battery life right there, and most major PC vendors have been flaunting concept designs. Apple (as per usual) has remained silient. I believe it would be something really impressive if apple pulls out a Powerbook with a month of battery life, without the chunky apendages of current PC designs. Eminently Possible as well.
Multi-core Machines - Again, practically every major PC manufaturer has been flaunting these things, again Apple has remained (suspicously?) silent. Going back to my original post, surely apple is not blind, and has seen multi core in the works for ages, and hasn't allowed themselves to fall behind.
On the bussiness end of things.
IBM sold their PC division. I really couldn't care less about who makes IBM's notebooks, as long as they remain high quality, but perhaps IBM and Apple have come to an agreement - Apple makes the shell, IBM builds us the guts. Hell, they already make the processor, why not the MBoard, the RAM, and the keyboard as well.
THere is my specualation. I;m sorry if it still doesn't meet the criteria, feel free to close/move if it doesn't.
All we need is consistant progress forward faster than the "Other Side" and Apple's momentum will continue to grow. Little innovations pave the way for large changes in the way people interact with computers. If Apple can make it profitable for historically PC-only companies to develop cool Mac software, we *can't lose*.
Radically faster hardware might make some niche applications attractive on the Mac (take the affinity between Altivec and gene processing code, for example) but what Apple needs is a never-ending stream of Cool Stuff that Everyone Wants.
For free. Yeah
The first personal computer was merely a repackaging of existing technology. The first Mac was done by applying GUI innovation done 20 years earlier by someone at HP. OS X was only NeXT, which was only an updated Mac GUI slapped on a Unix derivative.
That we are now looking forward to incremental improvements in OS X and hardware is a testament to how far Apple has come. It wasn't long ago that we wanted an OS rewrite and a totally new CPU architecture.
Personally, my wants are more in terms of repackaging. I wish Apple could find a way to repackage their towers into two lines; a "pro" dual CPU line, and a "consumer" single CPU line. Make the consumer towers hover at around $1000. I realize that for market dynamics beyond Apple's control, this cannot happen at this moment, but I look forward to the day when Apple has enough market share to offer a more consumer-friendly product line.