altivec88

hexclock said:

ireland said:

Non-symmetrical is insane.

That line struck me as well. Is it shaped like a T-bone steak or what?

Mike Wuerthele said:

Ironhead said:

Äpfelundbirnen said:

I'd be much more interested in a description of the reverse switch since I just bought a used Dell workstation for video and photo editing. I maxed it out with components I'd not even be able to put in a Mac, with the exception of an outdated Mac Pro. This is after 25 years of exclusive Mac usage. Back in the day the Mac was a serious offer for people like me. Nowadays I'd pay a multitude for an inferior Apple machine. It's probably my mistake to expect a smart phone company to deliver powerful stationary computers for creative professionals like I

That was my first thought.

I GUARANTEE that we aren't running any "Switching to Windows?" articles.

Rayz2016 said:

altivec88 said:

Rayz2016 said:

gatorguy said:

Rayz2016 said:

Mikeymike said:

Rayz2016 said:

saarek said:

I don't understand how they let the Mac lineup get in the state it's in.

With their money they could easily have upgraded the line up with new internals whilst they finished off any innovations that they wanted to roll out.

Piss poor management, very unusual.

Apple doesn't like to use money from one division to prop up another one, especially if it's one as well established as the Mac division. Microsoft did that with Windows mobile, which is probably why it took them so long to realise it was failing. 

The larger point is that , the iMac has been stagnating, and there is no reason it has needed to. (certainly not for lack of Apple monies)

If Intels chips aren't producing significant speed gains then what is the point upgrading the machines? Well, there isn't any, unless you can come up with the tech to work around it. 

Post #77 makes what seems like valid arguments. 

Not really though. The chips didn't improve, so the suggestion here is that Apple takes the existing chips and pack more cores into a larger case. 

Pardon Me?

So what you are telling me is that there is no improvement in these processors.   That a 22 core E5v4 would render our scenes at roughly the same speed as a 12 core E5v2.  I think you need to do some more investigating on this before you continue spewing out your false assumptions.

The socket and thermal properties are exactly the same.  Using the new chips is just a simple swap with no case design change required, you know like Dell and HP are able to do or are you saying Dell and HP have super case designs where they were able to update their workstations twice in this time but Apple can't.

Are you also claiming there were no advancements in GPU's.   That the D-700 is equivalent to what HP and Dell offer in their workstations.  You know like the Nvidia Quadro line or even the low priced 1080 GTX.   Again I think you need to do some more investigating to see how behind Apple is on this.

Actually I was just saying why post #77 wasn't the answer: it's not Apple's style to solve the problem by putting more of the same cores in a larger case. They rarely go bigger unless there's a good reason.  

But reading your points it's like you've never read a single thing about the way Apple designs its machines. Yes, I'm sure that chips will work in Dell and HP machines but then I've never had a Dell or HP machine last half as long as an Apple box, and the reason I imagine, is that Apple takes a lot more care of how the put their gear together. The components they use aren't the most powerful, or the most up to date, but they work within the ridiculously close tolerances that they set for the machines they build. Just because an upgraded chip will work in a Dell case, doesn't mean it'll work in Apple's. Now, they could put them in the same cases as HP and Dell (and I can imagine the whining you'd do if they did) but as I said, that isn't their style. 

But you are right, this is on Apple. They could easily build a big ugly case with loads of fans and give the whingers here could then bleat on about how ugly it is. They simply chose not to. If you disagree then buy another machine. 

patchythepirate said:

apple jockey said:

It could be argued that Apple was played by the PRC. At the time Apple began its serious expansion in China they were feigning an open arms policy to Apple in particular. So Apples assumptions of smooth sailing in China, were warranted. Having put the machine in motion to make a serious play in China, it was only then that the PRC was going to be playing a little underhanded with Apple. By then Apple had made a 'can't turn back' move into,China, and has been trying to play nice and conform to China's cumbersome expectations, regulation and protectionism.

Things will be shaken up by the new Administration. Hopefully a more just relationship we evolve for US commerce in China.

also, to sogs ongoing shit storm on Mr. Cook. Can Tim Cook be held accountable for the problems Apple has faced? To some extent yes, could he do better, yes. But the predominant hurdles, roadblocks and and limitations in Apples forward progress are beyond Apples control.

Here is a partial list of problems that have held Apple back which were substantially outside of their control.
A.)Chinese never ending movement of the legal, political, consumer sentiment, corporate expectation boundaries. Must be dealt with by Apple but can't tangibly prevent these substantial changes from having an impact.
B.)the malaise in the Global sentiment, weakened consumer finances, regulatory changes in many nation states, regions and nation blocks.
C.)Very significant Forex difficulties that cannot be completely rectified.
D.)of course a downturn in the volume of devices needed by consumers, for various reasons.
E.) Important elections, power struggles and crises throughout the world.
F.) and the never ending dint of naysayers  throughout the readable universe looking for Apple to fail.

Great post. It's not like Apple's growth has been slowing at the expense of others, which just shows that the bigger issues are macro, as you described so well. And looking at Apple products, they are clearly best-in-class by a wide margin in all the areas they compete (aside from a few service categories). Apple is making very sensible choices. The only 2 things I really find fault with is:
1) that maybe they could do something to shake it up a bit, something that will be more overtly "innovative," along with the substantial, but more subtle innovation that they continue to excel at (it does seem as though Apple is about to make an interesting move with the iPhone in the near future).
and
2) Your "F" bullet point. The amount of bashing, crying, whining, complaining, snickering, spiteful comments... being made about Apple on a regular basis are not just annoying, but I think they are damaging to the company. As an example, no "normal" consumers I talk to have any appreciation or knowledge of Apple's stance on privacy and Apple's great security, but almost everyone I talk to feels Apple is responsible for workers killing themselves (which, with a little information, is of course beyond absurd). It seems like Apple creates a webpage or makes an occasional statement and that's it. I'm not sure what the answer is, but it doesn't seem like Apple cares much about this negativity, which only reinforces its validity in people's minds, no matter how ridiculous.