What the Heck Is Happening at Apple?
cringely.com
cringely.com
I'm never going to buy an iPhone without a headphone jack, but reinstating the jack on a future model would be admitting they made a mistake with the iPhone 7.
Likewise, with the new MacBook Pros, they are not going to release an update in a year's time that doesn't sacrifice ports and performance and battery life for size and weight, because doing so would be admitting a mistake. Nor are they going to dramatically cut the prices, such that they are actually affordable for someone, because doing so would be admitting a mistake.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12836747
> [The Macbook Air] didn't become popular until they added a second USB port and SD card reader, added a higher resolution screen, fixed the battery life issues, fixed the horribly slow performance, and reduced the price big-time.
Give it long enough, and it'll even be admitting to making big mistakes with Windows 10 telemetry data reporting.
And the reason they aren't cutting prices is likely because they're more profitable with prices as they are, not because they're afraid of admitting a mistake.
[1] https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/neptune/neptune-pine-sm...
I've always found it interesting that the Android/iOS debate seems to go only one way. My handful of Android friends have tried convert with some new feature that does x and y over the years, yet I've never found myself trying to convince them to make the opposite switch. I think your quote sums that up pretty nicely.
But none of that matters. If I bought a personal iPhone, I'd miss a few things. I like installing software that isn't on the Google store (specifically, F-Droid, Amazon, and Humble Bundle, in my case). I like having a little Linux system on my phone, and being able to remote into it. I like using scp to get files on and off, torrenting on the phone, being able to expand the device's memory when my needs change, and plugging it in like a giant USB key if I'm somewhere that my laptop doesn't get wifi.
Tellingly, I just bought a new Android phone that took some pretty blatant design cues from Apple's hardware. I think the choice mirrors the choice of which device I use in different situations, in a way.
My first preference would be a desktop computer: powerful CPU+GPU, comfortable inputs, very nice outputs (multiple large monitors, a nice speaker system), and enough storage for everything I want, with room to spare. My next would be a laptop; it's not as nice, but it's certainly easier to carry into the living room. Past that, my phone isn't as capable, but it's easier to put in my pocket...so I'm stuck with whichever tools fits my requirements in my current situation.
Is there a site we can legally use to register that bet? I'd be interested in taking it.
I honestly don't think that the headphone jack will ever go away. Wireless audio is like wireless internet, in that it's better than nothing but worse than something with wires and a stable connexion.
I daresay you're correct that Apple think they're right, but … I think they're wrong. The question is, can they remain irrational longer than the rest of the market can be rational? I _think_, given Android's market success, that they ultimately can't: Apple have made too many mistakes in too short a timespan.
But only time will tell.
> Wireless audio is like wireless internet, in
> that it's better than nothing but worse than
> something with wires and a stable connexion.
Worked at a much larger tech company 1 year ago. Had a desktop that was plugged in, so there's that. Guess I overstated (though I can't say I actually did plug it in myself). Also had a laptop that I worked on over wireless without problems. There were 5k-10k people in that office.
Still I do almost everything over wireless.
Obviously if you don't have a 3.5mm jack, that doesn't help.
You need a local wifi network for the CC, so you have to setup a wifi hotspot with your phone. Then you make the connection. The downside is that you cannot use car stereo buttons to skip to the next song. And you probably need double usb-charging for the CC and the phone. That's quite a lot of work to setup each and every drive, but for longer drives it might be a good option.
https://www.amazon.com/Antec-Portable-Bluetooth-Receiver-Hea...
Pair this with your phone, and plug it into power. When your car turns on, it powers on, pairs with your phone, and spits audio out over 3.5mm to the car stereo.
Comes with a 3.5mm male -> 3.5mm male plug for this purpose.
I think they are legal, because the winnings doesn't go to the participants, but to a charity of the winners choosing.
At this point we've been up for 14 years. If we're good enough for Warren Buffet's million-dollar bet [1], I'd say we can handle this bet too.
http://longbets.org. Also the site Warren Buffet used to bet that he could beat hedge funds with the S&P 500.
I don't know of any website that let you place a bet like that, but you could probably place it at a bookmakers.
regardless of the claim, you are just setting yourself up for failure when you make unbound claims like that, nothing lasts forever.
It depends on what factors you value. Wired beats wireless for reliability and speed. It gets crushed for convenience, though.
My home wireless is really spotty. I want to run Ethernet to several locations... in order to install more access points.
I believe that the iphone is by far the best executed mobile phone platform and the best hardware - and has been from day one.
However, I have never purchased or used an iphone because of my stubborn indignation over the lack of plain old USB for charging.
Contrary to all expectation and experience, everyone in the world got together on one little thing - establishing the global standard for USB charging - and the world was actually a very slightly better place. And apple shat all over that, and continues to do so, in order to make (on average) an extra $10 for every iphone sold.
So fuck that and fuck their iphone.
The stress of holding up the entire mass of the connected device (that can be as large as an iPad Pro!) is on the connector; and the stress of being held up by that connector is on the tiny part of the device that grips it. That'd be impossible with a USB connector (even USB-C), on both sides.
As it stands if you have a brand new Macbook Pro and iPhone 7 you can't connect the two without an adapter, which is just stupid.
Without a cable, not without an adapter. Very big difference. I can use the same cable to charge my phone from my MacBook's power supply and from the MacBook itself. When I travel, I only take one power supply and two cables. Even if the iPhone and the MacBook used the same connector, I'd still take two cables so I could simultaneously charge them both, so I don't have to carry any extra hardware.
Yes, it would be nice if they could use the same cable, but at least I don't have to take any extra cable or dongle for charging my iPhone (I still need dongles for other things, though).
All that being said, it'a interesting to use this logic to deduce what Apple does or doesn't consider an "accessory." The iPhone, iPad, iPod? Accessories. The Apple TV? Computer! The port to plug it into a computer—for XCode provisioning et al—is USB-C! To connect to it right now, you need either a MacBook with its charger cable; or the new MBP, plus an extra C:C cable; or a USB-A male:male cable (rare!) plus Apple's "MacBook USB" (female-USB:male-USB-C) adapter. A male-A:male-C adapter would be great, but nobody has yet made one. The market is very nascent.)
And well, many many other problems with that new thing that are entirely unrelated to USB.
In fairness, there are two huge new benefits to their new approach:
* You can charge on either the left or the right side. This reduces cable strain.
* If the cable breaks, you can swap it for another (cheap) USB-C cable, without having to buy another power brick.
There's an argument against Magsafe too: laptops are lighter now, so the magnets would have to be weaker to still work reliably, and thus also have more accidental disconnections (this is irritating). I'm not completely sold on this argument, but you can buy third-party USB-C Magsafe-like adaptors if it's really important to you.
For me, who's had several frayed chargers over the years due to cable strain, I really like their new approach.
(Note: there's a legitimate argument against Apple here too... I've heard that the reason Magsafe chargers are so susceptible to fraying is because they don't use PVC, and instead use a more 'environmentally-friendly' plastic, which is much weaker. They could still use more substantial strain relief regardless, but I'd guess they have aesthetic arguments against that, which is a silly reason for something so important. I'm not sure how much truth there is to this however.)
I think the difference now is that laptop batteries last a hell of a lot longer than they used to. So many people have a fixed charging location (e.g., a desk) and spend a lot less time in some place with a cable precariously stretched across the room to reach a couch or w/e.
Just a personal theory, maybe not true for others.
I can't either. A this point it's more the convenience of being able to pick up and go without needing to unplug the machine, and one I'll miss when I eventually get a new machine. That said, it's human nature not to remember things that don't happen.
That's a market that exists, sure. Is it a big market? I doubt it.
Yeah, that is a pretty weak argument :) The MagSafe works not by working (directly) against the strength of the magnet, but by the lever action of the connector eccentrically against the body. You can try this yourself by trying to pull the MagSafe away straight on compared to at a slight angle. Also, existing MagSafe is used with MBA, which are lighter than the new MBP. If that were really a problem, we'd already be seeing it.
I do hope that there are good third-party MagSafe replacements out there. The reviews of the Griffin BreakSafe are mixed. https://www.amazon.com/Griffin-BreakSafe-Breakaway-Chromeboo...
Or maybe Apple will come out with one in the future. I would love to know more about how Apple arrived at the decision to not provide some sort of MagSafe equivalent feature.
Apple doesn't use a shitty micro-USB plug? End of the world. Laptop manufacturers use a cornucopia of power plugs that change basically all the time? Crickets.
Is it wrong? We'll see. I think a lot of people work with their laptops plugged in as a matter of habit rather than necessity. That doesn't make it wrong, though.
I reached that conclusion over the "can't install apps without the manufacturer's permission" thing. I've always been surprised more developers didn't feel the same way.
Reaching outside of the walled garden isn't hard, but there are more things to consider compared to installing an apk on Android.
Not being able to install apps is a nuisance; not being able to distribute apps for others to install is a deal-breaker, but the main thing is that I'm afraid of our world becoming a place where walled gardens are the typical model for consumer electronics.
They are in a shitty place right now. They can't go USB-c without pissing off a good amount of their customers, but they can stick with lightening forever either (it's already starting to show its age WRT transfer speeds and other abilities)
Someone else raised an interesting point about docks. The lightning connection is designed to be strong enough to support a phone in a doc. I'm pretty sure this is not a design consideration for USB-C given how no one seems to care about Android docks.
The advantage of USB-C isn't so much in physical connection but the actual capabilities of the interface. Lightning isn't very powerful by comparison.
It is? I've been charging my Moto G for a few months like that.
Ridiculously fast charging, plus the ability to use the same charger for both your laptop and your phone.
Being able to consolidate all the chargers I own is an unbelievably exciting promise. That's only an option for me because I use an Android phone.
How much faster are we talking? I haven't seen any numbers with this claim, nor any justification. There are fast charging systems on the market already with Micro-USB. Qualcomm says their quick-charge solution (used in the new Pixel phones) works with A, Micro, C and others.
https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/quick-charge/fa...
> plus the ability to use the same charger for both your laptop and your phone.
I'm not sure that's really all that compelling. It's nice, but I don't think it's nearly as nice as, say, my dock working.
The iPad Pro seems to support quick charging with the Lightning to USB-C cable and MacBook 29W USB PD adapter. And charges about twice as fast (2.5 hr vs 5 hr).
At this point, you might be tempted to claim that I would be able to use the same cables as other devices. To this, I'll point to the ongoing switch to USB-C and note that's you're buying new cables anyway.
Micro USB was a shitty plug. USB-C is better, but you can actually thank Apple for that, because it's a reaction to the Lightning plug.
My least favorite thing about my 5x is that it's USB-C. I regret upgrading before USB-C became more commonplace.
Please use the downvote button for comments that are not relevant to the discussion, not as the "I disagree" button. We aren't reddit. My point is factual, 26 million Americans move every year. The challenges and hassels would be comparable if we had different plugs for all our appliances and electronics are analogous to the problems we have with different standards for charging ports on our cell phones, just a larger scale.
Imagine what the market for appliances would look like if we had to accommodate for different outlets. Imagine if your kitchen aid stand mixer you bought for 600 dollars wasn't compatible with the apartment complex you wanted to move into. Or your iron, or your tv, or your charger for your laptop, or your hair dryer.
Also, my oven is actually an entirely different plug from my TV, and my dryer is different still. My lightbulbs connect through a totally different interface that doesn't even look like a plug! I actually seem to be doing okay with that.
I'm trying to illustrate why your analogy isn't good. How many phones do you own that are 100 years old? How many of those charge with Micro-USB? How many of them even have connections not designed to be hard-wired?
It's unreasonable to point at electrical standards that took decades to reach and have stood for decades and say "look, standards are great" as if that logic is applicable to phones that will be replaced in a few years that are using standards that have existing for less than a decade (Micro-USB) and only a year (Type-C). In the past two decades there have been over a dozen changes to the USB spec and almost a dozen different physical connectors.
While consistency is great, standardizing on a bad standard too early isn't a good thing. Would USB-C exist if not for Lightning?
> but 220 volt outlets are standardized in the US as well.
Kind of. There are both 3-prong (NEMA-10) and 4-prong (NEMA-14) 220 plugs in wide use. There are actually a whole bunch of "standard" connections in lesser use.
> The point is because of Apple continuing to "move us forward" we will never have something to standardize around.
If the alternative is that we were stuck with Micro-USB for a hundred years, then I'm very happy that Apple "moved us forward".
Not sure about 100 years old, but I can tell you my past 6 phones have all charged with Micro usb. The Blackberry Storm and the Blackberry Storm 2, a Moto Droid, LG G2, Nexus 4, and my current Samsung phone. I can still use the same charger, both wall and car, I got with my LG, with my current phone.
In 3 years, USB-C will dominate the market, but will have only a 3-year history of backwards compatibility. Assuming Apple keeps the lightning connector for that time (and I expect they will; 30-pin had a longer lifespan than Micro-USB), they'll have a 7-year history and a far longer history of backwards compatibility than USB-C.
At some point in the future, Apple might even jump on the USB-C train for their phones. But I think it will be a while, and I don't think Apple is doing the wrong thing by their customers by waiting.
> In 3 years, USB-C will dominate the market,
Which is another type of fallacy, but that's besides the point -- why will they change? Because everyone wanted a different charger or because some company decided to be "brave" and "courageous" and change them?
As for why? My pet theory is because the companies making phones could no longer defend the outdated and annoying Micro-USB in the face of Lightning.
I'll note that almost everyone who complains about lightning seems to not be an Apple user. Apple users seem fine with the horror of not sharing cables with Android devices. Apple users are also pretty happy that random hotels and whatnot have docks for their phones.
Oh, it's absolutely not. Apple makes a killing selling adapters. It's the users who get screwed.
Also, another point: I have a medical device and a Kindle which both charge via micro-USB, meaning I only had to bring one charger when I traveled. Huge benefit.
Apple customers aren't getting "screwed" as you claimed.
If you're still using micro USB, I hate to break the news, but you will absolutely be buying some new cables in the future.
In your case, you're carrying two other devices that use Micro-USB, which is great for you. Unfortunately you're likely to be facing a choice of replacing all of your devices or carrying two cables regardless the next time you upgrade your phone.
Apple obviously knows this, as they just moved their macbook to USB-C.
now i can charge my android phone with the same cable as my macbook, android is more compatible with the new macbook than the iphone is; thats an embarrassment
This is a baseless claim. They happen to use the same connector. iOS has a number of far more meaningful integration points with OS X, including iCloud and Messages.
both of which are atrocious.
Suggesting they'd knowingly sabotage #1 for #2 is absurd.
Clearly many of these decisions have been popular. I'd even wager that this an unprofitable decision for them, in the short term. This might sound counter to my original assertion that they're sabotaging billions of iPhone revenues for millions of accessory revenues, but it isn't.
There's a third thing they're optimizing for, and I think they're willing to sacrifice both of those revenues for it. USB-C is the "right" thing forward. Bluetooth is the "right" thing forward. They're trying to push the industry towards these things (whether or not it's a good idea is something you can agree or disagree with), and they're willing to sacrifice earnings if they believe make that future come sooner.
Happened with floppy drives, happened with CD drives, and it's happening now with USB-C and the removal of the audio jack. For better or worse, the bean-counters have never been in charge at Apple, and that's been one of their greatest long-term strengths.
Where "trending towards obsolescence" means "has realistically at least three years of non-negligible use for Micro USB", versus "was replaced by its manufacturer just over four years ago" (September 2012).
I'm yet to see gym equipment (a niche example) with Lightning, it's only 30 pin connectors.
If they'd gone with micro-USB, you would have the exact same complaint two or three years from now. That micro-USB devices still have 2 or 3 more years left of ubiquity is just a function of this exact moment in time, and you could have said that three years ago for 30-pin too.
That's a 11 year run.
I bet those treadmills are not even that old yet.
So let's call it. Micro-USB, 2007 -> 2016 (9 years). It had less of a run than the 30 pin dock connector!
---
I still have USB-B, USB-Mini and USB-Micro, and USB3-Micro-B devices... some were built even after USB-Micro was available, yet they still use USB Mini (which in most cases is a lot more sturdy than Micro). I have a ton of different cables for different devices because there was no real standardization until USB-C very very recently.
Why was the same vocal crowd not out when manufacturers switched from Mini to Micro and everyone had to buy all new cables?
With USB3 there is also a USB3-TypeB connector, which is not even backwards compatible with USB-TypeB...
It was a completely bonehead move on Apple's part IMHO. I know they had their reasons for doing it, but I still think it was a big mistake.
Additionally, Why do I HAVE to use Itunes to sync the phone? I just want to grab a photo off of it.. where's my USB mode?
It's all just data in USB mode!
Thankfully, the comment you replied to is moot as well. I plug my phone into my machine, unlock the screen, and pull pictures off it all the time.
Still, when putting music on it, I'm left wishing that I had the option to use something like gtkpod, like I used to use with my iPod, back in the day.
They stuck with 30-pin because it was something their customer base had already bought into, and they didn't want to force a change. They went with Lightning because, let's be honest, micro-USB is shit — every micro-USB device I've owned has had the connector fail within two years. Lightning can handle 12W of power, micro-USB 9W. Lightning is reversible. Lightning has no moving parts on the connector, prone to breaking (or worse) grabbing onto your $700 device with a death grip and bring nigh-unremovable.
It would be great if they switched now to USB-C. They're clearly in the works on that, but didn't want to make a connector change on their phones after only two revs.
I'm always surprised by folks talking about failing microUSB ports. The microUSB port on my old G2 (HTC Desire Z) still works fine as does the miniUSB port on my G1 (HTC Dream).
I'm always surprised by folks talking about their non-failing micro-USB ports, as if that somehow discounts other people's devices that have failed.
I have had a number of lightning connectors fail on me. They're designed to fail. Pressure-held copper edge-connectors for devices went out with the Commodore 64's user port.
The fact that it is reversible is convenient but hardly worthy of consideration as a feature alongside "ubiquity" "cost" and "durability".
The old iPhone connector had it's limitations but it was established and really quite solid in my experience. Micro USB perhaps has limited features technically, and is ugly, but I don't believe the advantages that Apple presents for lightning outweigh the drawbacks.
As an interface it has a couple of niche use-cases that it fulfils but it is a step backwards in terms of connector design and in fact has a "worse" connector than the two other interfaces it purports to improve upon.
Props to Apple for padding out their profit margin and all that but they can absolutely go and shite if they think I'm going to swallow their "better connector" bullshit.
And they expect me to use it instead of a headphones jack now as well!
Are you saying that because you think there will be a better alternative to the 3.5mm jack a decade from now? What does that have to do with what Apple is doing now?
Apple wasn't the first company to ditch it, or even the second...
http://www.androidcentral.com/moto-z-doesnt-have-headphone-j...
But thank god I have a thinner phone, I was really having issues sliding it under doors.
Now your headphones must come with all the electronics required for USB-C and their own seperate DACs. This means they're going to be slightly more expensive without any actual improvement over your 3.5mm headphones. Not to mention all of those threats of DRM and whatnot looming around. So with that in mind, why would I possibly want to make the move to USB-C?
I suppose I realized this when I saw folks at a former employer's manufacturing department all buying $100 BT headphones... because that meant they could set their phone down and not worry about yanking it off the lab bench.
Now instead they have to worry about:
- charging stations
- how the headphones identify themselves to the computer
- skype and/or Windows arbitrarily refusing to acknowledge them as headphones during calls
- DRM
- more than 20$ on average price increase
- Security and privacy
It would likely have taken me a full workday to get them up to speed on any security/privacy issues.
As for DRM, not only do I think they wouldn't care so long as their music played, but I'm with everyone who sees no difference between a remote DAC and a local one. (Heck, these folks in manufacturing could easily have disassembled the headphones and put in an analog output at the appropriate point, they had the relevant rework skills -- and that would not trip any phone-internal tamper sensors.)
I don't think I'm going back to the audiologist to spend more hundreds of dollars a second pair that only works with iPhones and not my Mac or any pro audio equipment. Or depending on any battery device (like wireless headphones) that can't be plugged in while operating. Or having a device in my pocket that I can't plug in to a real PA system to test. Or paying what I currently pay for headphones that are iOS XOR Android.
Apple may be right for the millions who only ever use the included headphones, but in a world with compelling iOS alternatives that still have headphone jacks, I'm not throwing away the rest of my equipment or carrying adapters everywhere.
It adds too many unnecessary steps.
Adapters suck for unpredictable situations but those aren't common enough and Apple knows this.
Using a pair of headphones with multiple devices? At least between phone and laptop? That's not a corner case, even though Apple seems to think so by skipping out on a Lightning port on the Macs after putting out lightning headphones.
As long as you do that, the pain of having a (free) dongle attached to it kind of fades in comparison.
I'll take that bet. A decade, so lets say, we bet for $100,000? Is that Ok with you?
How about he wins if >50% of smartphones sold in the U.S. in 2026 lack 3.5mm headphone ports.
I'd personally bet $10k against you/OP on this.
That's the other guy's fault, though, because he (foolishly) offered a bet where the taker has "(almost) complete control of the outcome":
>>> I would be willing to bet that within a decade you HAPPILY buy a phone without a headphone jack, whether that be an Android or iPhone.
Might as well call him on it.
Now I actually do believe the OP will "happily" buy a phone without a headphone port. But not if he has a financial incentive to change his behavior.
Honestly, the OP might resign himself to it, but I'll doubt he'll be happy about it. It's not like headphones are currently connected with obsolete digital interfaces (e.g. RS232). Headphones are, by their very nature, analog, and making their connection digital just makes integration harder.
The wireless standard used by headphones (possibly not BT) will have enough bandwidth to no longer be the bottleneck in wireless audio quality. And more importantly they'll never need to be "charged".
Who's going to miss cables?
Sure, absolutely when Rezence” or “PMA,” or whatever the wireless charging standard becomes is ubiquitous. However we don't have that today, no will we have it in 18-24 months, the general duration of a customer's contractual obligation to a carrier and phone model.
And for people that need to type and talk at the same time, sometimes for hours at stretch - for maintenance window or outages or even just long conference calls, not being able to accessboth a headphone jack and a power simultaneously on their phones is a real deal breaker.
I don't think the OP is necessarily pooh-poohing change but rather being pragmatic and practical for the immediate term.
Something like a USB-C for everything could be doable - but as far as I know, USB-C ports are thicker than 3.5mm jacks.
I bet within a decade we will all happily buy autonomous cars without a steering wheel. This is because in a decade, battery life, software, connectivity and manufacturing experience will provide a large benefit and will be normalized.
I find it extremely difficult to believe that this will provide a 10x better experience. Here is what Apple is doing:
* The Computer is the Hub for all devices
* the cloud is the Hub
* the phone is the Hub
That's fine. Except that if my phone is using bluetooth to be constantly connected to my headphons & iwatch, as well as occasionally my computer; AND it can power my headphones it really dosn't matter if you give me 2x the previous phones battery I am running 4x the amount of devices off it. Apple needed to deliver a phone that lasts >3 days and headphones that aren't a chopped up earbud that can max out at 2 hours.
the iphone 7s will probably be awesome, this is the bridge model as Walt Mossberg put it, and it doesn't seem realistic to even consider buying it.
But definitely it is not going to be proprietary lightning digital audio port that requires external DAC and licensing.
No, sorry. I actually enjoy the music I listen to.
Steve Jobs on why the iPod color doesn't have video said something to the effect of "nobody want to watch video on a tiny screen". a generation or 2 later the iPod (classic style) can play video.
You can totally make do with html/javascript apps on the iPhone. Not long after there is an SDK/app store.
cut and paste on iOS: It took a couple years but here is our version that is world beating.
That round mouse they included with the original iMac didn't last long.
I think a lot of projects were killed (Newton, Pipin, iPod, the motorola phone that used iTunes.) that just didn't work out.
Not to mention 'ping' (social media for iTunes) and the cloud based infrastructure.
I think the problem is Steve really liked the mac, and you could see that during his demos he was a power user and understood the product better.
Said no one, ever, including Apple with the original iPhone.
I edited the comment to reflect that.
I think there's an alternate universe out there where Apple kept the Newton and it evolved into the iPhone.
I know this has been litigated to death in the original thread, but I think the 4 USB-C ports implicitly admits the MacBook with only a single USB-C port was a mistake. I think obsessing about having specific legacy ports is short sighted, and pushing forward with new connection technologies fits well with Apple's history of innovation. Having ports capable of being every thing from power connector to video display to high speed disk connector to mouse or keyboard port offers great flexibility and will seem like an obvious choice very soon.
I think the claimed battery life still fairs well against similarly spec'd PCs?
Size and weight are super important characteristics for many users. Not sure sacrificing these attributes would appeal to most laptop consumers.
"Nor are they going to dramatically cut the prices, such that they are actually affordable for someone, because doing so would be admitting a mistake."
It's only a mistake if their overall profits would be higher by cutting prices.
Now, the sacrifice I don't understand at all is capping RAM at 16GB. Makes the MacBook Pro seem like a very low end machine compared to the competition, and will almost certainly shorten its useful lifespan, especially for professional user.
Apparently, the lack of a higher capacity RAM was due to the performance/energy ratio.
Totally agreed. The laptop I'm writing this on has 8GB and Firefox happily gobbles most of it. The server I recently built has 16GB which already feels very constrained. My next laptop is going to have 32GB for sure. If Apple don't have a 32GB Macbook Pro my next laptop ain't going to be from Apple.
Oh. And it's fares well, no?
LPDDR3 RAM speed = 17 GB/sec, SSD read - 3 GB/sec. As much as it sounds crazy, i believe, SSD will eventually replace big and inefficient RAM's (which consume 6 W of power for each 16 GB slot)
Not sure what you call "admission" but they did screw up their Maps application and apologized for it[1].
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/sep/28/apple-map...
For the average developer the MBP amortizes out to somewhere around one day of salary per year, out of the ~251 annual work days, even less if you keep it more than four years. Is there any other industry with lower overhead costs?
Everyone is acting like Apple is extorting people or being unconscionable because they can't have 32 gigs of ram (no one else can at any small laptop size, Intel's chipset is the limitation), or the prices are extreme when they're really just right in line with inflation...
Do take a look at this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qr_KxouI8Zs
In corporate politics that would be a suicide. Only Jobs was powerful enough to make mistakes.
Anyway it is shocking what Apple does now. During Jobs Apple removed product features only used by laggards. Now Apple removes the features used even by pragmatists and early adopters[1]. Do you known how many people moved exclusively to wireless headphones and TH3?
Another surprising thing is ignoring the professionals. They are in minority and it is hard to see them on sales charts. But they are opinion leaders.
Many people overpay for Apple products because they want to look as real professionals. Majority don't care which laptop is the thinnest, they use products used by opinion leadres. With current trend, in 5 years Apple brand might be associated with rich bozos buying gold phones. Just look at the Mercedes S vs Tesla Models S sales in last 2 years.
To wit: an insignificant change (dropping skeuomorphic UI) was coincident with Scott Forstall being canned.
> Many people overpay for Apple products because they want to look as real professionals. Majority don't care which laptop is the thinnest, they use products used by opinion leadres.
I used to think this way, until I went through 3 PC laptops in 2 years. Macs are worth every penny of the premium Apple commands, and more.
That said, to keep me as a customer they are going to have to do a better job convincing me they aren't planning to discontinue the Mac lineup. And they'll have to offer a more convincing spec bump over my 2014 15" rMBP, which remains borderline-overkill for my needs.
Maybe you should stop shopping for cheap, consumer-grade crap and get a real laptop like a Thinkpad or Latitude.
I don't give a shit about trackpads; I use the Trackpoints (which Macs don't have) since they're much easier and faster to use, and a separate mouse most of the time. No touchpad compares to a real mouse, just like a touchscreen keyboard will never compare to a real keyboard.
They're available with high-resolution screens, and even better, they're matte (Macs are not, they're glossy), so I can see them in different lighting situations.
Finally, I get mine at dirt-cheap prices by buying them used, because corporations buy these things in bulk and only keep them for a couple of years before liquidating them. So there's a very healthy used market with machines in excellent, near-new shape because they don't hold their resale value the way Macs do with their cultist followers (and the fact that most people have zero awareness of enterprise laptops). And since computers aren't actually improving technologically any more, a 3-year-old laptop in excellent condition is just as productive and useful as a brand-new one, but at a fraction of the cost.
Depending on your work, I think this is an outdated viewpoint.
Apple sells large, detached trackpads, and they're quite popular amongst people I know (all hardcore programmers):
https://www.apple.com/magic-accessories/
I personally still prefer a mouse when at a desktop, but it can't be denied that Apple's trackpads and their gesture support are incredibly good.
If only that were true. Lenovo products are high priced chunks of thin, flexible plastic.
You're basically comparing 30th floor office space to a freaking warehouse.
The PCs all failed spontaneously; it's not even like I dropped them or anything. And only one was the hard drive.
As for Mercedes S vs. Tesla Model S, that seems like an apples-and-oranges comparison there. The Mercedes isn't electric. EVs are fundamentally different vehicles from gas-powered cars, and someone who really wants an EV is not going to even bother looking at gas-powered cars in the same price range. That would be like looking at a really nice microwave oven and then buying a really nice set of stainless-steel cookware instead; sure, they can both be used for cooking, but they're really different approaches to the problem and not normally used for the same thing.
Just stop right there, OK?
Look back through my comments and you can see I've made this point a few times, but I'll make it again just for you. Mac laptops are sturdy, well made devices. My workstation provided by work is a lenovo W series laptop. I can push the bottom screen bezel and it flexes a full half inch. The plastic above the keyboard flexes also. The trackpad is meh (and TINY!). For the price (which at the time of purchase was not really inexpensive), it is cheap plastic crap.
My rMBP is solid. Feels wonderful to type on. The screen hinge stays put and doesn't shimmy. The keyboard feel solid with no flex. It's worth the price, especially compared to a lot of the junk that's out there today.
You misunderstood me. I agree that Apple products have the best build quality. But Apple was always something more than a well build luxury product. MacBook Pro was a tool used by professionals to create good things. Without professionals, it is just another luxury product. And ordinary luxury product won't have that high sales.
The macbook pro I used to use had a big dent in the front after only a year of use, and several scratches and dings. This X200 is over 10 years old and has _no_ signs of wear, and all of the hardware supports Linux _perfectly_ OOTB. It has a far better keyboard, too, plus a fingerprint reader and the famous little thinkpad light. I also used a Thinkpad T420 for a while, which has many of the same benefits and packs more of a punch.
Subconciously I take a professional with a good thinkpad more seriously than one with a Macbook.
Someone who values quality? It's not like I jab it all the time, but knowing it does it irks me. So glad I wasn't the one who paid for this junk.
> The macbook pro I used to use had a big dent in the front after only a year of use, and several scratches and dings. This X200 is over 10 years old and has _no_ signs of wear,...
So, you've matured and take better care of your things. Good!
> Subconciously I take a professional with a good thinkpad more seriously than one with a Macbook.
That makes absolutely zero sense.
Edit: I disagree about the keyboards, kinda. I have here a late 2014 rMBP, a Lenovo W530 and T510. I prefer the mac keyboard. I hate the w530 keyboard, but the t510 keyboard is really nice (it's before lenovo did the redesign).
This whole meme that people who buy Apple are sheep is getting old.
Like the original USB on the iMac (which also caused uproar), USB-C is significantly better than the previous mess of competing standards. The iPhone should have been usb-c too but that's a whole other debate.
Like the original MacBook Air (which was panned for performance), these new computers will be used by many for serious work, they are not fatally flawed or underpowered.
Like serial ports, analogue audio ports have had their day, USB has more than enough bandwidth.
You might disagree with these choices and compromises, but it's simply hubris to imagine HN denizens are in sync with the majority, or even ahead of it, they very rarely are.
Apple does. At least with Maps fiasco, Tim Cook apologized publicly.
Also as mentioned in the article - Apple charges a premium to, some would say, wisely cash-in on early adopters; over the life of the product its price drops. If you want an affordable Apple product - just like any other company - don't buy the very latest, newest model of any of their stuff.
Yes? Many companies do that, especially small to medium businesses.
Multinationals are the only exception.
Really? No one remembers the very public apology from Tim Cook about their Maps roll out?
Compare the number of Google employees making public statements through blogs with the number of Apple employees who do so.
There's very little acknowledgement of public input, as if anything the public had to say about Apple products doesn't matter because Apple knows better.
They have backtracked from decisions made, several times, and admitted to mistakes too. Apple Maps is a good example. MobileMe, the return of buttons to the iPod shuffle, price cut on iPhone... same.
The problem is that what you or I think is a mistake, it might not be one in the eyes of Apple.
A lot of the frustration I see these days can be summed up as "Apple no longer is making a product that I like, therefore it is making products that nobody likes".
Well, maybe. Time will tell. But I think they have a very clear vision about how they want their computers to look and feel (same for iPhones) and they are heading there full-speed. For some customers it will be a deal breaker, for others it might be what they need to jump ship and buy a Mac or upgrade from a Macbook Air to a more profitable Macbook Pro.
When you hear about post-PC and how the computer market is changing, THIS is exactly what it means. Traditional computers and laptops are going to become more expensive, sell in less quantities and be very, very focused on some specific needs.
For companies like Apple, Microsoft, Dell, etc... this will translate into much simpler product lines that will update less frequently.
In a country as lawsuit happy as the USA, would any decent legal departement allow a company to admit a mistake?
And if these machines do not sell, I would expect they will cut prices or price the next version (which, then, may come out fairly soon) lower (it wouldn't surprise me if their roadmap already includes a version with a Skylake CPU and DDR4 memory at the current price point, while keeping the existing models around at lower prices)
Apple has a ton of money and a willingness to percolate new ideas. We won't be able to really evaluate the new MBP--and the ideas it contains--for years.
The Air wasn't a replacement of the Pro. It was a new device, an ultra portable.
It didn't become popular until they added a second USB port and SD card reader, added a higher resolution screen, fixed the battery life issues, fixed the horribly slow performance, and reduced the price big-time.
The second Air was a genuinely good machine, and that's when it became really popular.
- When they dropped the matte screen option
- When they dropped the 17-inch screen size
- When they dropped the Express Card slot
- When they dropped the optical "super drive"
- When they dropped Ethernet and Firewire
- When they made the battery non-removable
- When they made the display Retina
Many of these complaints were driven by legitimate concerns at the time (for example first-gen Retina machines really did struggle sometimes). Ultimately Apple saw significant sales growth, even among pros, and I don't see many calls these days to reverse those decisions.[1]
[1] This thread will probably now be inundated with calls to reverse those decisions.
This time, they do not have a single laptop with competitive specs. This time, they do not have a single laptop that has enough horsepower to be good upgrade for a lot of professionals. The new graphic card is average at best and there's only 16GB ram.
There's actually only one decision from your list I'd love to reverse. I liked the 17 inch macbook pro and I'd love to have one again... I have a macbook for when I need portability, my macbook pro is my work machine and just needs to go from my desk to my client's office.
It's fine to criticize Apple for that (plenty have), but to me it seems weird to single out the newest model for something that has characterized the line for years.
I expect the 32GB option will appear with the next Intel architecture. They undoubtedly engineered the case for that point in time and will just suffer the complaints until they get there. The case is not something they can change from year to year; the logic board is.
In the meantime it will be interesting to see what happens when people actually try the new machines.
Each of these lacks did impact my life, in the way of significant, but manageable, annoyances. The lack of optical drive meant my partner and I couldn't watch DVDs on it. The lack of Ethernet meant that transferring any significant amount of data off of it was a pain in the butt. And I went through periods of eye strain as a result of the screen.
Each of these was a serious annoyance that bothered me. But I put up with it, and was even considering getting a new Macbook Pro as my next machine, because the rest of the experience was great. Now, I'm definitely not going to be getting a new Macbook Pro, because the most recent changes cross over the line from significant, but manageable, annoyances in to the realm of major hindrances.
it's ok, the rest is disappointing though
> these new Macs seem to have gained an average of $200 over the preceding models of the same size. What makes Apple think they can get away with that? Apple can get away with that because it always has gotten away with it.
So, inflation has gone up 10.7 percent since 2010, which is just over $200 on a $2000 laptop.
http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
Seems like a bogus assumption to suggest that Apple is "getting away" with something. What comparable companies with comparable products have left their prices untouched since 2010? The Big Mac went up more than 20% since 2010.
> Apple fanboys are proud to be the first and proud to have spent so much. It’s a luxury thing, I suppose. [...] This very durability presents a problem for Apple
I'm totally confused. Apple has a problem because it's products are too good? The products outlive your cheap shitty Windows laptops 3:1, yet only luxury and status explains why people buy Apple products?
> All Apple needs is a new product category, right? Another iMac, iPod, iPhone, iPad will do nicely. Where is it? It isn’t anywhere and in that sense Apple has lost its mojo.
Same argument every year. This one has been used every year that a new product category was introduced, because it's deemed not new enough. How many product categories have been introduced since Apple started, or even since the iMac? And how many years have elapsed since then? It's a strange myth or fail or arithmetic to think Apple has done something mind glowingly innovative twice a year for the last 15 years.
> So, inflation has gone up 10.7 percent since 2010, which is just over $200 on a $2000 laptop.
> http://www.bls.gov/data/inflation_calculator.htm
> Seems like a bogus assumption to suggest that Apple is "getting away" with something. What comparable companies with comparable products have left their prices untouched since 2010? The Big Mac went up more than 20% since 2010.
You're looking at the wrong data. The price index for personal computers and peripherals has decreased from 7.0 to 4.2 over that same period. Using the price index as a guide, a $2000 laptop in 2010 would be priced at $1200 today.
http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2015/long-term-price-trends-for-...
This is tracking specs for computers. The $1200 laptop today would have to have the exact same specs as the $2000 laptop from 2010. Does that even pass the smell test for thinking about pricing of a new product? I don't think so. That data is clearly essentially tracking Moore's law, showing that the price of any computer with a certain size hard drive and a certain size RAM has dropped by half every 2-4 years.
You're implying that Apple is stealing the gains and gouging the customers, where other companies' laptop have dropped in price 40% over the last 6 years, yet no such thing has occurred.
A decent Dell 15" laptop with similar hardware specs to the new MacBook Pro costs over $2000 vs Apple's $2400. That is more or less the same difference it was 6 years ago, and about as far back as I can remember. While Apple laptops are a little more expensive than same-spec laptops by other manufacturers, that difference did not go up by 50% with this new Macbook Pro, it has been about the same for as long as laptops have existed.
The BLS has dedicated an entire FAQ page to answering the question of how they account for changes in quality with changes in price. They've thought about this question hard and I'm reasonably confident they have statisticians on staff whose full time jobs are dedicated to making sure the CPI isn't just regurgitating Moore's Law.
I'm not questioning the data, I'm saying you are using it incorrectly.
This is not the right data with which to evaluate prices for new products in the market, this data is showing prices for equal-spec computers. A brand new MacBook Pro with a new touch strip interface and SSD and larger ram and brighter display and longer battery life and lightning connectors, does not compare dollar for dollar to the 2010 MacBook Pro. The price for the new one is expected to be higher than what the CPI shows.
Inflation isn't perfect for evaluating new products, but it's actually better than the CPI, because manufacturers are trying to get the same amount of money or more out of consumers every year, they are not allowing products to cost less and less. Historically, that's exactly what's happened. My family spent about $2500 on our first computer in 1983. Today I spend about $2000 on a computer. I've spent somewhere in the neighborhood of $2000 on every computer I've ever bought between 1983 and now. My expenditure doesn't track the CPI, and it never has. Nobody else's does either.
Not sure what all the fuss is about: that machine is awesome and reasonably priced by apple standards. It even has the esc key that everyone is whining about. It is indeed missing a few ports, but the machine itself is so solidly built and fast from my first interactions, that I am considering buying one. I'm going to wait for the touch screen ones first though.
Also for the record, I've ordered the XPS's and Lenovo's people are mentioning here are alternatives. They are decent machines, but it takes 2-3 tries to get a fully functioning one without QA issues.
Boy was that a mistake.
As I recall the laptop was only about $200 cheaper than an equivalent Macbook Air. In return I got a non-functioning trackpad [1], flaky Wifi NIC, and a lid that takes two hands to open. Oh, and the same non-replaceable hardware and limited port selection that people complain about on Macs. It would have been far better to get a Macbook and just install Ubuntu on it. Say what you will, but Apple hardware is really great.
p.s., The Dell laptop and I made our peace after I propitiated it with a USB Mouse. I still use it.
[1] http://en.community.dell.com/support-forums/laptop/f/3518/t/...
Citation needed. The implication that 1/2 to 2/3 of Dell XPS and Lenovo laptops fail QA would seem to be ... big news.
One company I worked for offered to buy me any laptop I wanted. When I asked for a MacBook Pro, they talked me out of it and I got a Lenovo running Linux instead. The machine had great specs on paper, and it ran software just fine, but it was the worst laptop experience I've ever had. The trackpad was completely unusable, the keyboard & screen were crappy. It was fine as a desktop computer, when you plug in an external mouse & keyboard & monitor. It was truly awful as a laptop.
The companies who actually pay for and produce the movies, films, documentaries, etc would never agree to it.
If they're not growing to your liking, blame consumers for handing over all that cash year after year just for the Apple brand, and hopefully a useful product that turns on, turns off and all those other fancy things.
This looks like Cringely's solution to the problem: just own the content at the source of creation and then the downwind problems will sort themselves out in Apple's favor.
My idea? Apple should purchase Dish Network/EchoStar and merge their satellite and Sling systems into the Apple ecosystem.
(You also get to own a fleet of deployed geosync satellites. That could be cool for other applications down the line).
The magical idea is just a lark thrown in for amusement. Cringely often tosses out semi-crazy ideas as entertainment.
Trying to produce a vertically integrated lock-in based system where you can only watch the latest shows on a multi-thousand dollar computer is also going to go down very badly with the public.
The highly integrated approach they've taken to hardware, software, and services across Watch, phone, tablet, computer, apps and a number of accessories have put them in an awkward place. They need to integrate more things into the stack, and whatever they choose needs to be almost immediately integrated into the full stack. HomeKit has been an effort to jump into the IoT with a better platform. Seemingly, Apple's main strategy now is to rely on the accessories or apps to highlight opportunities (siri, maps, etc) and then buy them and integrate them. I suggest that Apple should probably buy Sonos to continue pushing HomeKit and to follow on their acquisition of Beats, especially given the tighter integration that Sonos now has with the Apple ecosystem.
The lack of an obvious target for complete ecosystem integration is not only their lack of creativity, but the lack of obvious consumer demand for additional pieces of the puzzle. CarPlay is very nice, but it doesn't change car buying behavior, it is more like icing on the deal.
Finally, this leaves Software, which Apple has been investing less in since creating the app store. They've become comfortable as a platform company and have been unable to beat Adobe and others in the pro app market. To any professional, Software should be the obvious target, but it seems the vast majority of Apple's customers don't care enough to seek alternatives to Apple's apps. I think the lack of focus on pro software is what is really behind the lack of newer pro-level machines, since I suspect that APple's engineers on the software side were really the ones pushing for greater levels of machine performance (Logic, Aperture, Final Cut X).
Right now, Apple has Breadth in their stack, and they need depth. Software is the way to build depth, but it is not clear that Apple has anyone who understands software beyond OS-level details.
That's a pretty broad statement to make! What does it take for someone to qualify as understanding software?
They killed Aperture rather than compete with Lightroom, despite many people still using it. They replaced iPhoto with Photos (which is TERRIBLE, even for consumers). They replaced Final Cut with Final Cut X which eliminated half of the features at launch. iMovie loses random features with every major update (cut/paste across projects? really?) I don't need to really explain the number of things wrong with iTunes. The Mac App store itself doesn't work that well, except in highlighting the poor reviews of Apple's own apps.
imovie: 2 stars garageband: 3.5 stars Pages: 3 stars numbers: 3.5 stars facetime: 2 stars apple remote desktop: 3.5 stars apple configurator: 2.5 stars macOS server: 3 stars.
Now, nearly 2 years later, Final Cut and Logic have passed 4 stars, but they no longer offer a real photo editor of any kind, and they replaced Aperture/iPhoto with a pathetic iOS clone app.
So, I think I'm on pretty solid ground saying they don't get it.
Switched to full linux and windows around osx 10.3 and never regretted it. Even without final cut or imovie.
In one case I heard of, a young lady bought a car with CarPlay, and when it didn't work, she tried to make the dealership buy it back under a lemon law. The dealership made Car Play work, and she kept the car.
If I want to buy a car (used or new) and find out that it has CarPlay I will go back because I refuse to buy an iPhone and it wont work with my Android so what's the point?
Edit: why so many down votes?
They are very different in terms of architecture and wouldn't be surprised to see manufacturers stick with one or another to reduce cost.
Doubling down is a term from black jack where you double your bet because you think you have a good chance of winning. So in this case, you will offer double the money to buy a car because it has a feature you don't want?
Even when it comes to Apple, I cannot be assured that it will even work in 4 years much less the 8 or 10 that I usually keep my cars.
I know I am just one data point but pretty much everyone thinks that the infotainment systems that car manufacturers create is junk. As CarPlay increases in use I think the demand for it will increase as well.
The interfaces car manufactures build are horrible. Once you try CarPlay or likely the Android equivalent you'll never go back.
Interesting data point: one of the Ford models I was considering _still_ has it listed as "Coming soon". Glad I skipped that one.
Having used it for the past 6 months, it's now a basic part of my car-buying checklist.
Overall my best options for music are SiriusXM, USB flash drives, the Honda Pandora, and the Honda iPod interface. None of these involve Carplay. Also, Carplay requires a corded hookup. The Bluetooth in my car lets me make calls without hooking anything up.
I don't know if Honda's setup is atypically decent, but after buying the car in part because of Carplay, I now don't use Carplay.
This trend towards thin/light everything at the expense of upgrade-ability and repair-ability confuses me but I'm not the target demographic.
I got alot of work done on planes with what passed for a laptop in the 1990s...
60% or my work is through SSH, 30% writing in outlook, and 10% in various trace analyzers and debuggers. When it came time to upgrade my work laptop, I just asked for the lightest one I could get. A 15" with an extended battery I felt was irritatingly heavy to lug around.
My personal laptop is a 2009 Dell 13". Not very thin, but light.
(Irritatingly enough, outlook is probably more demanding on my laptop than the debuggers and analyzers)
If the new 15" MBP was the same weight as last generation and included the new Kaby Lake processor, more RAM, better battery, etc. would you pass on it for the weight?
If Apple had the same announcement last week, but instead of calling MBP and calling it just the MacBook, people wouldn't be in as much of an uproar (aside from the fact that the MBPs are delayed yet again).
USB-C and thinness are great--no one is arguing against that--but for a Pro line, to sacrifice utility and power is foolhardy. However it seems like Apple is going down some path of convergence, which doesn't look good for many professionals.
> Ok I'll bite. I'd like the power of the 15" MBP, but after having the 15" in 2008 which I found to be too heavy to carry with me in my bag constantly
He was talking about thickness, not weight. Those are correlated, to a degree, but it seems like Apple has compromised on things in its quest for thinness that it wouldn't have had to in a quest for lightness.
I don't think consumers care at all. I have some non-tech family members/friends who buy a new MacBook every two or three years. Not because they have specific new features that they want. They are happy with a Mac and want to have the latest and greatest, just because plus high resale value after that time period. Though, I expect that many consumers will skip this generation, simply because they don't want to drop 79 Euro on Apple's USB-C to VGA/HDMI connector.
As for compromising features for thinness and weight: the 2nd generation Air was very popular and had relatively weak CPUs and only 2GB RAM in the base models.
Right but this is the Pro model...
The fully loaded 13" MBP I just ordered is about the same weight and size which can easily be lugged around in a day bag without being too heavy and lets me get the 16GB of RAM I wanted - happy days.
Til i kick in an osx vm. Then i need an additional 8gb easily. Macosx tends to eat memory for breakfast
The thing is, the macbook pro is Apples "workstation" machine, by price and by the fact that they don't offer many alternatives. So people expect it to support workstation loads, and 32G and 8 cores is not excessive for that today.
I use my MBP for dev work, and would love to have faster compile times for example
I have a macbook for portability but for the macbook pro, I don't need it to be light or thinner, I need it to be powerful.
16GB just flat out isn't enough.
If Apple wants to dominate music industry, all it has to do is to create a baseline support for songwriters.
If Apple wants to dominate software industry, all it has to do is to create a baseline support for programmers.
If Apple wants to dominate computer industry, all it has to do is to create a baseline support for EE guys.
If Apple wants to dominate the flower industry, all it has to do is to create a baseline support for horticulturists and maybe buy some bees?
Naivety of couch analysts with no clue how certain industry works and why so is always amusing and irritating at the same time.
Perhaps the _exact_ idea he mentions isn't solid, but the spirit of it is true.
Why is this one self obviously stupid? Maybe song writers, and maybe TV and movie writers, are under valued and there really is a huge arbitrage opportunity there?
"If Apple wants to dominate software industry, all it has to do is to create a baseline support for programmers."
Like the App Store? Gave any programmer on Earth a low friction way to access consumers and take payments with very little up front effort. Not a bad baseline, given what existed before.
What he is proposing is a vertical integration within an industry that doesn't work like that. It did once (studio model) and that crumbled for various reasons (I can elaborate on that too if you want). On top of vertical integration, he is proposing a base income. Sort of like accelerators, but communist version. In a sense where selected writers would have income to fall back on, whether they work or not (whether they're motivated to work on quality or quantity or not at all).
edit: here's a bit of background on Studio system of ye olde https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Studio_system
Is there really any person, anywhere, who isn't absolutely certain that in ten years time we will all look back on the time warner / ATT merger and how badly it turned out and the 20 billion dollar write off and blah blah blah ?
In fact, in this case, the actual company in question has already been the subject of the very same narrative - the disaster that was the AOL/TW merger.[1]
It's incredible to watch the people who spent all of their B-school years studying these train wrecks dive right into a new (but almost identical) train wreck of their own. Goldman complaining about Apple not being involved is either stupidity or a selfish for the m&a fees that would have resulted.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time_Warner#Merger_with_AOL
I believe this creates a window of opportunity for other vendors to offer top-of-the-line Linux/Unix-friendly laptops. Many people here, including me, would jump at the chance to buy a high-quality Linux laptop without the MacBook Pro's nonsensical limitations.
For the life of me I do not know why one of the top Linux distro makers hasn't attempted this. Or even a consortium of them? The top ten distros on Distrowatch are:
1 Mint
2 Debian
3 Ubuntu
4 openSUSE
5 elementary
6 Manjaro
7 Fedora
8 Zorin
9 CentOS
10 ArchI didn't leave Apple; Apple left me.
It's not as pretty as a Macbook, but they do exist.
Unfortunately, no company will be able to do the above, because government prevents all of that from happening. The next 100 years will be a period of great innovative stagnation, until people and voters understand that innovation must first be legalized before it can occur. And we haven't even begun to educate voters and politicians on these matters, so it's going to take a looong time.
I just want them to make a pro laptop
What if Google had just stuck to search? Would your life be better?
[1] https://mesosphere.com/blog/2015/04/23/apple-details-j-a-r-v...
Apple has become too reliant on iPhone and unsure how to look beyond it.
Either they would have to shake the leadership team up like Microsoft or split the company up.
Does Apple not make enough money, do they need to grow?
They could of course just enjoy sales from the iphone and live off past innovation, but that would mean that they could cut costs by at least 50% and fire most of the workforce. Don't know if that's what they want.
If Apple can take themselves private again, there will be less pressure on them to keep growing.
What I'm getting at is I think everybody is overly concerned that Apple isn't releasing any "new" devices. They don't really have to. Looking at market share, they completely dominate on the products they already have. If anything, they can sit back, wait for the "next big thing" and do what Apple typically does best: Copy it, and make it so much better.
And the Mac has always been their core product, especially since Apple's comeback with the imac. It's no longer their main source of income, but it's a very strong brand that had consistently been getting more and more market share over time. It probably didn't have the huge margin and volume of the iphone, but it'd be a critical error if they were to discontinue it. They should invest more in it, I think; rebrand the new Macbook Pro to just Macbook, come out with a new line of Pros that are bigger again (with pro hardware and features, for the discerning user), update the Mac Pro, etc.
In other industries like cars, the manufacturers don't necessarily create hugely different models every year, but only small improvements on last year's model, and they seem to do okay.
Personally I think the touch-bar thing on the Mac is unremarkable, even a gimmick. Why would anyone want the furniture moving around on their keyboard? I could be wrong, I suppose if it's highly customizable then it will be handy for programmable shortcuts.
Apple cannot rest on their laurels because if they stop innovating Android manufactures will implement all of their features and sell the phones for cheaper than an iPhone. The Google Pixel is a killer phone and could easily steal some iPhone market share if a new iPhone does not keep iterating with new features.
If Apple keeps removing two features for every new one that they add, that's going to upset some customers.
> Aren't they allowed to sit on the Apple II? Why must they come up with amazing new stuff when they've already got a mountain of cash and loyal fans who love the point release updates?
Last time Apple built the entire company around a single product (Apple II) they almost went bankrupt.
And the iPhone isn't a single product, but has all sorts of dependencies via the app store and iTunes. Not to mention the built-in features like the camera, maps, AI, and whatever else it can do natively. In fact, modern smartphones can do so much, consumers probably find it hard to keep up with it all.
And finally, if I were Apple, I'd release an advertisement along the lines of "fire-proof gloves not required" or something clever with a subtle dig at the Samsung disaster which undoubtedly strengthened iPhone sales.
If you're not growing, you're stagnating or declining. If Apple don't continue to innovate, then someone else will pick up the baton. Android continues to get better and better as a mobile OS, and the Android ecosystem continues to get better too. Linux and Windows both have some improvements over macOS, although macOS is better than them in other ways; if Apple continues to under-invest here then there won't be much reason to run its software, meaning there won't be much reason to buy its hardware. We've already seen that Apple's hardware itself is not as good as it could be, which means that offerings from other companies are comparatively more competitive.
> In other industries like cars, the manufacturers don't necessarily create hugely different models every year, but only small improvements on last year's model, and they seem to do okay.
I don't know if I'd go that far. On the one hand, cars haven't radically changed in decades (they still have four tyres, a steering wheel, windows, seats; most use internal-combustion engines), but OTOH they have changed: roll cages, crush zones, airbags, infotainment systems, heated & cooled seats, more intelligence, electric engines.
And indeed it's the models which do offer the most innovation which get the most attention. I don't know if they're the most profitable though.
I'm sure Apple will be fine. Their first attempt at the iPad Pro wasn't received that well, but they'll fix that and deliver something good next year. I'm actually on the lookout for a tablet I can draw on, but I'm hesitant to buy a Surface Pro because I don't trust Windows 10. I don't want my OS to be a service with mandatory updates and whatever other control they take away, but then again that's where Apple are headed too. I prefer the OS to be in the background, out of sight, not pushing itself to the foreground, desperate for attention and relevance.
Because I think (IMHO) the smartphone industry is about to hit the same problem that Microsoft hit with Office. How do you impress your customer base year after year? Do you hit a point were adding more features to your product is making it more complicated and worse off because of it? Has your competition caught up just enough that in the eyes of the consumer, the difference between best and second best in your product category is small - and price becomes the most important item on the feature list?
Product category churn is something all companies need to keep their finger on. Eventually, everything becomes a commodity and price is the only thing you can improve on. And profit margins become the casualty.
And yes, I do think the auto industry is about to hit the foothills of this curve.
Then the market shifted and Microsoft had to scramble, change the leadership team, their structure, their goals, etc. Took a while.
Not saying Apple has to come up with amazing stuff all the time. Just need to look for opportunities outside of iPhone. Or even with the smartphone segment.
They are doing fine right now. But what about in 5 years?
Here's the thing. Apple is making this increasingly difficult in newer Macbook Pros.
The average Joe with a Mac (or a Lenovo or a Dell for that matter) doesn't know about RAM upgrades or SSD random seek times. He doesn't want to know. Apple still manages to deliver a laptop that will work decently out of the box for the years to come, with a reasonably fast SSD and an acceptable amount of memory for most tasks.
Now, why the rest of their product line (Mini, iMac) still ships with sub-par hardware (4 GB base memory and/or 5400 rpm drives), that I don't know. I guess they're becoming products for a more and more niche market.
That's true, but I think the point is, the people in the tech bubble are also the people making the apps.
I don't know how you'd go about testing this, but I feel very strongly that part of Apple's recent success has been due to making very developer-friendly computers in the early 2000s. The original iPhone was a joy to program for (once they finally opened it up) because it was based on OS X, which was already pretty great compared to the competition.
If programmers stop buying Macs, because they're just too expensive, too limited and unexpandable, the apps will start drying up and users will start drifting away. Maybe.
It's just hard to see who these new machines are aimed at. I see tons of students using Macs in coffee shops -- but what's happening to the low-end, semi-affordable Airs? Graphics and video professionals love Macs -- but where's an up-to-date Mac Pro, or at least a really beefy MacBook Pro? I'm a mobile app developer, I love my MBP, but if I get a new one I'd also need a ton of adaptors for all the mobile devices I work with.
Well now you see why XCode can only run on Macs. Want to write apps for the biggest and most profitable mobile ecosystem? Gotta buy a Mac, we don't care if you don't like the lack of upgradability.
1. Larger body for bigger battery
2. Previous keyboard mech that devs seem to love
3. Up to 32gb
4. Graphic card options
5. Ports galore
Perhaps I don't realise just how expensive it would be to manufacture a line that has lower but more targeted sales.
"I would love to seem them cannibalize their lack luster, overpriced iCloud by introducing a “personal cloud” home server product (that would also be the hub for HomeKit, and all that other stuff). Apple getting back to their roots as a high-margin value added hardware company. NAS systems are terrible, especially when trying to integrate them into a macOS and iOS network."
You're thinking the Time Capsule, which is basically an Airport base station with a hard drive that can be used for Time Machine backups. I don't know what other functions it has.
1. Just works.
2. Primary mode of operation as a cache for iCloud and all other Apple things. Acting as a router probably and as was said a HomeKit hub.
3. Private cloud as an option.
The Google Pixel phone is better suited for the new MBP than the iPhone.
I think there are serious leadership problems at Apple and these sorts of incompatibilities among their own products is a symptom.
I'm stuck on my late 2011 MBP because every model after it is failing at the 'professional' part by removing ports and upgradeable/swappable components. USB-C is nice and all but it's not sufficient as the only port (and with only 3 of them left while charging).
If you go back that far - then yes. More recently? Not so much:
Apple's iPhone Share Continues To Slip In The US And Japan
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2015/06/30/apples-iph...
Apple's Smartphone Profit Share Slipping Vs. Samsung
http://www.investors.com/news/technology/click/apples-smartp...
Latest Gartner/IDC data shows Apple PC market share & shipments slip, Macs fall behind ASUS globally
https://9to5mac.com/2016/07/11/apple-market-share-shipments-...
https://www.amazon.com/Haunted-Empire-Apple-After-Steve/dp/0...
Also, the MacBook Pro just launched. We can't know if it'll be a success or not, until 4-6 months later. I'm personally going to buy one (the higher end).
There's not much to be changed in the macbook pro. Yes, it would be nice to have more cpu or a better gpu, but no, not at the expense of battery life.
I think the bar is awesome, although I won't upgrade since my 2013 retina mbp is doing everything perfectly fine. If I would be able to add the bar for $300, I'd do it.
The last 10 years, apple has created: iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, the Retina macbooks, the new macbook, the new mac pro, new imac, better icloud, the new appletv, better music/itunes, the app store and probably lots of other things.
All greatly different than before.
Whenever Apple does something, it always seems incremental... Until 5 years down the road when they realise they were in a revolution.
what the heck indeed..
His arguments makes no sense to me. How is it cheaper to own a laptop that is expensive in the first place, but is also one of the less upgradeable ones on the market (making it more expensive to run post-warranty)?
And no, that's not what IBM reported either. They reported that Macs are cheaper to use as company PCs (which doesn't necessarily extrapolate to the laptop market as a whole).
But, to be fair, apple's computers tend to be well built and not break easily. I had a powerbook that lasted 9 years (used for a few years then gave it to my parents). All the apple computers I bought lasted a long time (except for a second gen macbook air I had). I've had a small toshiba laptop and it broke after 3 years shortly after the insurance stopped.
It's anecdotal but I've seen it also with friends.
- Don't just look at the initial outlay that gets you on the Apple ladder : Macs also have a much, much better resale value than PCs, even years later. It's incremental and relatively painless if you upgrade regularly.
- You're a human, your peace of mind matters and your time isn't free. Buy stuff that brings you joy or at a minimum, stuff that doesn't feel like death by a thousand cuts day after day. And you might not recognize that before you've tried a Mac, seriously (I used to be a hardcore desktop Linux guy until 2004)
As someone who briefly lost faith in Apple last year, then went ahead and built a Hackintosh ("why not?"), I can't stress the second point nearly enough.
My high end 32GB 4Ghz Core i7 box with Thunderbolt and a 32" screen cost me about 25% less than a top of the line iMac that satisfies the same use cases. Great.
The money I saved is roughly what I make in 1-2 days, but I've spent at least a dozen evenings so far researching / troubleshooting / preparing for OS upgrades. Plus I need to reboot the box once after each cold boot before it will see my TB devices and I can play music on my audio interface. Great. Not to mention the floor/desk space compared to an iMac.
The tinkering was fun at times, I don't completely regret trying, but frankly life is too short : guess who's going back to the Mac next time ?
Buying TWC is a monumentally stupid idea for Apple that I won't even go into.
Apple is obviously working on things (including self driving car systems), it just doesn't announce them and it doesn't hesitate to cancel them if it doesn't like the results. Those are, IMHO, good qualities about Apple.
The idea that Apple has to get into a new category is kind of ridiculous. It doesn't have to do anything. It has solid profits and tons of money on hand. They can coast. The stock value will go down or stall for a bit if they do, but so what? When they release another great product, if it is successful, the stock price will reflect it at that time.
One of the things that keep senior engineers at a company like Apple is vast amount of money they can make from their stock options. If the share price tanks then the senior engineers don't make anywhere close to the money they can make elsewhere, so they leave. That makes it harder to develop a successful product.
I'm not suggesting Apple is a single failure away from a death spiral, but I am saying they can't rest on their laurels simply because they're Apple.
No, but they can because they have something like $200 billion cash on hand. Which means if they really care about their stock price they can do a buy back if they want. Or if they are worried about employee compensation due to lagging stock price they can give bonuses, etc.
That's technically true, but getting that money to a place where they can use it to buy back stock or to pay bonuses to their engineering staff would be incredibly expensive. There's a reason why they've not repatriated it yet.
I can imagine that you wouldn't actively take risks with money that's expensive to use, but if they were already in a death spiral, wouldn't they use it to avoid going down the drain entirely?
It seems absurd to me to sit on $200 billion if you can't use at least a good fraction of it - but I don't even begin to understand the legal and accounting issues with handling that sort of money.
Still I really don't understand the touch bar. When Microsoft is the lead in fully touch screens for their PCs and tablets you know something is wrong at Apple. A touch bar?? Really, what about all that screen where the action is really taking place.
Then comes the abandonware as I term some of their hardware, namely the Mac Pro but you can add the mini to that. Don't they have any shame?
Can someone explain why Apple has less tolerance to failure? It would seem like they're in the perfect place for failures -- it's not going to torch the company, and they have stable revenue to offset any failures. This seemed like it was more of a company culture thing, but maybe there are strong reasons why Apple couldn't tolerate some failures in the name of searching / growing?
From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MagSafe
(I'm honestly not trying to be a jerk, and will certainly admit that I thought MagSafe was several years newer than that - I still stick by my comment above, though)
.. to your examples:
* Stranger mice have been made than Apple's. Also, Apple's 'strange mouse' lineage goes all the way back to the first iMac in 1998.
* Siri on the desktop isn't anything innovative, it's figuring out some way to build some iOS code to run in regular macOS.
* .. and the pencil is just a stylus. They can call it whatever they want.
IMHO, none of these rise to the level of something like MagSafe, which is a mundane part of a laptop done in a new and innovative way.
This is pure speculation stated as if it were fact. It makes me question the validity of the rest of the article.
As it is, the AMD models will probably consume more power than the entry level Skylake model would have with the iris pro graphics.
As a company, they're also wasting time and energy on designing the new building.
It's ridiculous that the company can't bother to do the basic product line maintenance that even dying companies like HP can do. Why are they making Mac Pros and Mac Minis?
It's an institutional hubris that is very dangerous.
Magsafe:
Maybe I'm just lucky, but I have never been in the position where could be tripping over the power cable but not over another cable that was also attached to a device. That's the thing: I rarely ever have just the power connected, so magsafe doesn't really protect me much.
Plus: With 10 hours of battery life, maybe I don't even need to connect the device outside of charging in the cases where I really only need power.
On the other hand, by not having a proprietary power connector, I can share power adapters with other devices, and I finally reach the point where I only have to connect exactly one cable to the machine to both power it and to connect the USB hub where all the devices I use are already connected to.
Touch Bar:
This is finally a discoverable function row. Yes. I'm a developer and I'm using some shortcuts involving F-Keys. But I'd much rather just press the touch-screen button spelling the name of the function I'm using instead of fiddling with various modifier keys and a matching F-key.
This is a huge improvement in discoverability of shortcuts and I can't wait for applications to take advantage of this and show me context-specific shortcuts. It will also make new application much easier to learn and to be maximally productive with them.
The Esc-Key still exists, albeit only on a touch screen, but as it's to the top left, I assume I'll still be able to hit it blind. If an App decides not to show me the Esc button, I assume it also doesn't have a binding for it.
And speaking of binding: If I have trouble hitting the virtual esc key, I'll be able to rebind caps lock.
Touch ID comes at the cost of having another locked-down processor running in my machine. I don't like this 100% but on the other hand, I think this is the first time where there's crypto hardware built into a machine that then isn't used for DRM but to protect something of mine that I really, really don't want applications to have access to.
I might even be using this.
USB-C:
Yes. Right now that's annoying because right now I only have maybe one or two USB-C cables. But as USB-C is so much superior to the other existing USB solutions, I fully expect USB-C to quickly become a standard and for cables to be bundled with the various devices.
I already have more USB cables (A to Micro, A to Mini, A to B, A to lightning) than I can count and most devices I purchase come with more unneeded cables. It's just a matter of time before the collection completes itself.
At that point I will finally have my reversible plug on my machine. No more fumbling and trying the correct orientation. Also in the really rare case when I really need to plug more than the monitor (which has a hub on its own), I now have a much more versatile solution as any device can be plugged into any slot. Much better.
With regards to HDMI and DisplayPort, it was my experience so far that neither HDMI nor DisplayPort would actually work for me in all the cases where I wanted to plug in the laptop (with the exception of my desk in the office where I had a thunderbolt display): Whether it was at conferences or at customers for presentations: The selection of ports I had to deal with included the (Lenovo proprietary) Mini-HDMI, DVI and VGA. Only very rarely could I use HDMI and Display Port was never available.
Which meant that I needed to have a collection of dongles with me anyways, so there, nothing changes.
So now I'm left with the other two arguments I hear:
One is the missing card-reader which, I can accept is annoying for some and we'll have to see how it plays out. Once everything is just USB-C, then maybe it's worth it to just connect the device instead of removing the card, dealing with card-size converters and all that crap.
The other is the 16GB RAM restriction which, by now we have learned is a hardware restriction because there's no solution yet for low voltage RAM if more than 16GB are required.
Sure. They could have gone with non-low-voltage RAM, but that would have come at the cost of either battery life or size and weight.
And weight, honestly, so far was the only thing that was annoying me about my existing MBP (2012 retina). Every gram the can shave off is very welcome to me as it brings me closer to my optimal configuration which would be to just have one device and commute with it.
The current machine is too heavy for that and who knows, the new one might be light enough.
Being able to do serious development (which you totally can on these new boxes) and still commute with the machine, this would be a total dream of mine and maybe, just maybe, this machine is the one to finally make it possible - even at the cost of 16GB of maximum ram. The existing 16GB is enough for MacOS and a VM or two.
With respect to dongles, I know people hate dongles, and I agree that dongles for no purpose other than thin-ness (i.e. mini-vga and mini-dvi that Apple had for awhile) are terrible. But the move from single purpose semi-proprietary ports to universal use industry standard ports that also happen to have nice physical properties (small, reversible) is a great development.
a) means it has to be reasonably powerful, but also thin and light for road warriors. But why is a single device better than a range of device -- really light Air for those who need portability, and a beefy 17" for people who need power?
b) is fine as far as it goes, but taking away all the other ports, and doing this in the same machine that ticks all the boxes in part a), just means it's a compromise that's awkward for everyone.
If I buy Apple's latest laptop and their latest phone right now, they have different connectors, so I still need the same number of cables as before, I just need a whole set of new ones. If the next iPhone switches to USB-C, that would start to make sense (but then all those Lightning headphones suddenly become obsolete, so that's a bit awkward...)
It's not that the new MBPs are really bad, they're just underwhelming. If I needed a new Mac right now I'd be feeling resigned rather than excited about it. (Which is a strange feeling! Who doesn't like getting brand-new Apple kit?)
Computers are finally powerful enough that they think they can manage both at the same time. Having replaced both my travel netbook and my 18" gaming laptop with a Surface Book, I think they're right.
There are many people who would love a Mac but don't have a ton of money. Apple don't have to slash prices to meet that demand, the current Air was already doing OK. But they're actually moving in the opposite direction, raising prices.
And there are many people who like Macs and are prepared to spend a lot of money on one. Why limit their options to a very narrow range of models?
(I guess the cynical answers would be, low-end users aren't worth much, and high-end users will upgrade frequently anyway so there's no need to sell them a machine with headroom for future expansion.)
Whether it would be better to make a cheaper Air than the cheapest new model is a separate question. I'll just say that Apple has always gone the premium route (and the limited-range-of-models route) and there are advantages and disadvantages to that.
I like a device powerful enough to do development on while still being able to commute with it. And these new machines might finally be the ones to make this possible, so that's great in my book.
> If the next iPhone switches to USB-C, that would start to make sense
it won't. They want to keep Lightning in order to keep their MFI licensing program going (asking for $4 ish for every unit sold). However, they will quite possibly ship an USB-C to Lightning cable, so existing headphones and friends keep working - you'll just be able to connect your phone directly.
This cable already exists (http://www.apple.com/shop/product/MK0X2AM/A/usb-c-to-lightni... - priced outrageously, of course), btw, so you don't need an ugly dongle to connect an iPhone.
Me too! So despite my complaints, this direction is probably OK for me (except they're getting even more ridiculously expensive).
All this business with overpriced adapters and dongles still makes me more resigned than excited, though.
I'm going to give it at least a year before upgrading. I assume by that point, the MBP will be more or less the same, just missing the headphone jack. :)
What else would you be plugging into a macbook? Particularly in a setting like a coffee shop which is probably where the highest risk of someone tripping over the power cable is.
> Plus: With 10 hours of battery life, maybe I don't even need to connect the device outside of charging in the cases where I really only need power.
If you want to keep that 10 hour life you have to not drain it too often. (Or rather you have to not charge it too quickly, but unfortunately that amounts to the same thing).
> On the other hand, by not having a proprietary power connector, I can share power adapters with other devices, and I finally reach the point where I only have to connect exactly one cable to the machine to both power it and to connect the USB hub where all the devices I use are already connected to.
This is true. Though if Apple were going to give up on Magsafe as a competitive advantage I wish they would've just licensed the patents and allowed USB-C to use the same tech.
an iPhone, an Android Device (if I'm doing development) and headphones (especially in a coffee shop)
>This is true. Though if Apple were going to give up on Magsafe as a competitive advantage I wish they would've just licensed the patents and allowed USB-C to use the same tech
The moment you have a data connection, accidental disconnects (like they happen with magsafe all the time) become very annoying and possibly lead to data corruption and/or kernel panics (in the thunderbolt case when you have, say, an external GPU connected to that cable)
Try yanking a USB-stick while it's copying data.
If you really, really want to use one of your ports for power only, use one of the various third-party magnetic USB-C adapters (like https://griffintechnology.com/us/breaksafe-magnetic-usb-c-po... - first hit on Google)
With the wire trailing so you can trip over it? I always thought Magsafe was smart because it recognises that while I might have other stuff plugged in, that stuff and its wire is on the desk where power can't be.
That's really my main worry, I can currently step through/into/out of functions etc in my IDE without even looking at the keyboard, if the touch bar is going to be the same then I'm not overly bothered by anything else.
I fear the lack of haptic feedback will make the whole process feel awkward.
MagSafe:
I have three 85W MagSafe adapters. Replacing these would cost an extra $200 over the cost of the machine. I have four kids, two of which are toddlers. Sometimes I am working somewhere not at my desk and the cord gets pulled or tripped on.
TouchBar:
About 70% of the time I am at my desk using an extra Apple keyboard and magic trackpad. There is no option for an external Touch Bar. I'm not going to get used to using a feature only available to me 30% of the time. The price difference of the Touch Bar appears to be about $300 (comparing last year's model and the 13" non-Touch Bar to the Touch Bar model). That is a lot of money for something I am not going to use.
USB-C:
I don't really have a problem with USB-C (other than losing MagSafe), but it does mean buying new cables and some dongles (~$80 in my case). However, the big issue is that I spend 70% of time at my desk with my power, 32" 4K display, headphones and lighting cable (trackpad changing and iPhone) plugged in. Currently these can all plug in on the same side of the device. On the other side I have a USB port and SD card reader for those occurrences I need it. This leads to "docking" and "undocking" being straight forward, and a clean and tidy desk. With the new MBP I would have to have cable plugging in on both sides of the machine. My desk is small enough that this would lead to cables hanging off the edge of my desk, which would lead to things getting tangled and generally messy. The other option would be to drop $250-$300 on a Thunderbolt 3 dock and stash it all behind my monitor. But that just raises the price even more.
Physical Size:
I don't need a thinner computer. The case I need to protect my laptop is far thicker than the laptop itself. It doesn't make my life better in any way to have a thinner machine. It would make my life better to have the same thickness with a larger battery.
Ram:
I do cross-platform development in C++. I am building and testing GUIs on Linux, Windows and macOS. Having extra ram to throw at my VMs would be great. Being able to have my four primary development VMs running with adequate ram and being able to boot up another VM to debug an issue in another OS version would be great. 32GB would be nice, but 16GB will be just fine. If there had been a larger battery instead of a thinner case, maybe they could have allowed another memory controller…
Summary:
I was planning on spending $3200 on a new MBP because there was need for a new machine in my household. I could use to upgrade storage from 512GB to 1TB. The extra CPU bump for compiling would have been nice. The improved screen sounds great. However, with the addition of the Touch Bar and new ports, the ergonomics are reduced (cables on both sides, plus dongles), and the cost would now be at least $3700. With tax and AppleCare this is pushing well over $4,000. But in the end the improvements for me would be a faster CPU, larger HD and nicer screen. the downside would be messing up the ergonomics of my setup, and making my machine more prone to damage from falls.
Maybe in a few years once there are more significant improvements in the internals, and there are more displays providing TB3 connectivity, I'll feel the cost is justified. For now, the loaded previous model is available as a refurb for $2600. I won't need any new cables, everything else in my setup will work with it, and I can get a faster CPU, GPU and larger SSD. The main thing I will miss out on is bump in GPU and move from Crystalwell to Skylake. I'm willing to sacrifice that for $1100.
because otherwise it's useless to me, and I think pretty much everyone I work with
That's the only explanation that makes sense to me.
My own experience with Apple's computers has been similar. The last Apple I purchased was a MacBook Pro back in 2006/7 that lasted me a solid eight years, including three in an extremely hot and dusty environment. The only problem it ever had was a faulty optical drive (and I did always have lots of trouble with Apple's laptop optical drives). But that is just one more individual experience.
Anyway, I don't know that "revenue generated while using the computer" really says anything at all. And I doubt Apple would come out ahead in that calculation industry wide.
>but that still puts me only about $1600 into this device
I always forget how dis-attached and money-blind pro-apple authors are from the 98% of people and how they approach money. I guess if I was in the 1%, I'd also think Apple was the cheap option! (I'd probably also think that about Lexus and BMW...)
$1600 over 6 years, or about $270 a year, is not inexpensive and the false label "cheaper to own" is absurd to the highest degree.
I could go out right now and buy a $600 laptop, a $200 chromebook, and be out $800 dollars. Then I could build a $500 rather powerful budget desktop, and be at $1300, with three devices, and have $300 leftover for repairs or upgrades.
I could buy a $800 laptop and another one in 3-6 years for that price.
I could buy an iPad, a Chromebook, and a $600 laptop. I could buy three $500 laptops.
There is no universe in existence where spending $1600 total cost of ownership in 6 years approaches ANYTHING CLOSE to "cheaper to own".
Frankly, I DON'T EVEN KNOW windows users who have spent $1600 in the past 6 years total, except for hardcore PC gamers whose hardware so dramatically eclipses the medium-grade consumer level tech in Apple laptops that to compare them is entertaining and silly.
->socking it to the customer when a new product is released is a tradition in Cupertino dating back to the Apple III.
Remember the original 128K Macintosh cost more than $2400 and it was close to useless.
____ Does anyone know at what point it was that Apple blew up after firing jobs and had to call him back. was it before or after this?
As opposed to the other 68K offerings at the time it was pretty good, it brought window managed user interfaces to the masses (rather than those Apollo workstations that probably nobody remembers).
The ST was a game changer price wise but that 'useless' 128K Mac in many ways wrote history.
My question was where it fitted in Jobs 86 departure from apple.
I have a PC at home, almost passing the 5 year mark now. No problems with it, fast enough, plays the latest games. Only problems I've had with it was corrupted memory banks, but I'm inclined to think that's more to do with installing it myself than anything.
I bought an $850 Thinkpad T410 in 2010. Every time I've checked new laptops in the past couple of years I concluded that it wasn't worth upgrading - I'd only get a twofold increase in performance for $800+.
(Also reduced weight and increased battery life, but as a 6 ft. guy with a roommy backpack, carrying a 5 lbs laptop and a 1.5 lbs spare battery is not a problem.)
It still works fine but I ended up buying a higher spec'ed* mint-condition refurbished T410 for $250 this year, and a USB3 expansion card. I expect to get a good run out of it since I can cannibalize the old one for parts.
Not everyone has the time and know-how to service their own laptop, but for someone who does, like me, the nice thing with the Thinkpad ecosystem is the abundance of cheap end-of-lease refurbished parts and accessories, which are i) cheap and ii) probably better maintained than what you can get used from some bloke on craigslist.
(But the flipside is that new Lenovo parts and accessories are horrendously overpriced, since they target businesses.)
*HDD vs SSD, 8gb vs 4gb memory, i7 vs i5, 1400x900 vs 1280x800, discrete vs integrated graphics.
Do those upgrades listed include labor at apple care? The numbers don't even add up.
Not to mention, unless there have been some large strides in macOS lately, older apple products seem to lag pretty hard when you upgrade to the current OS and basically stop working if you don't. Windows 10 runs great on old PCs and many apps still function all the way back to Windows Vista.
[0] https://resource.squaretrade.com/laptop-reliability-1109
The IBM guy said Macs are more expensive to buy but cheaper to support, because
>Only 5% of IBM's Mac employees needed help-desk support, versus 40% of PC users
Guessing what percentage of Linux users needed help desk support is left as an exercise to the reader.
The economics of a business maintaining a fleet of laptops for mostly clueless users vs a tech-savvy individual maintaining their own laptop are not the same.
Also keep in mind that IBM started a Mac enterprise integration service last year. I'll let you draw your own conclusions.
http://blog.macsales.com/38440-ssd-in-late-2016-entry-level-...
It may take a while for a 3rd party replacement to become available, but it's not soldered onto the motherboard. If you take it to Apple with a SSD failure, they're not going to bill you $800 for a new logic board to fix it.
Not sure where this assumption came from. It's like everyone's saying "I don't like this computer, so everything about it must be terrible."
No. $795+tax. "You might want to look at buying a new Mac" which got me same screen, same SSD, same memory, CPU from Haswell to Broadwell... I love planned obsolescence and "part pricing to encourage replacement, not repair".
[0]: http://www.businessinsider.com/an-ibm-it-guy-macs-are-300-ch...
Admittedly, I haven't read the entire thing. I stopped when I got to third paragraph because it seemed like an odd statement with no real backup other than the very general quote from IBM -
> There are lots of reasons for this, not least that better OS software means Apple needs to update its systems far less often than Microsoft updates Windows. "We have to go out and manage the Mac environment 104 fewer times a year than PC," Previn said.
I don't doubt IBM's information here by any means, but just as with Cringley's and my own example of consumer MacBook ownership, it's only one example - "IBM finds Apple computers cheaper to manage", not "Apple computers are cheaper to own".
[0] http://www.computerworld.com/article/3131906/apple-mac/ibm-s...
For me, I was itching for a reason to upgrade from my 2012 rMBP and to be honest, I have no plans to now. I don't want a thinner or lighter laptop, I just want everything to work all at once and some better battery life. The USB-C (and they fact that they didn't even mention it during the terrible keynote) was my biggest drawback, because now I literally have to buy adapters to plug in to my pre-existing adapters for this damn thing to work... Nope.
When Apple got rid of the CD/DVD drive, or FireWire, it wasn't this much of an issue because I could agree that those were things I didn't use (along with the vast majority). But with the headphone jack (on the iPhones only thankfully), and now the SD card reader, USB, HDMI, and Mini-DP... All things I use on an almost daily basis. It sucks that people will have to buy ~ $100 of adapters to get their old functionality back.
Also, if they're really touting this thing as such a professional's device, then their magical touch bar is even more flawed. I plug in external monitors when I use Final Cut Pro, Lightroom, Photoshop, etc. - most of their demos. Looking at a different monitor and then using the touch bar seems like such an awkward gesture.
Now, it's not the best comparison, as desktops and laptops have their own benefits, but if someone was to build a PC with the specs of the cheapest MacBook Pro (excluding peripherals), it would cost significantly less
Just speculating: maybe Tim Cook wants to force a decline in sales in order to justify the killing of the low-performant MacBook line? Hackintoshes are fairly common nowadays and external keyboard and trackpad 2 can keep the great interaction provided by OSX.
As much as we like to hate on the new MBP (myself included) -- in the grander scheme of things, the new MBP is a more than competent Mac laptop for a lot of people.
The thing with people who spend a lot of time with computers is that we're an extremely passionate bunch. And because we're so passionate, we pay attention to the small details that matter most to us, while assuming those details have equal importance to everyone else, when that may not be the case.
I tend to think a lot of people, including those who aren't terribly happy about the changes, will begrudgingly accept these changes over time. If you're a fan of the Mac operating system, you don't really have many other places to go, even if those places are functionally equivalent.
For a lot of people who hate the changes in the new MBP, staying on macOS is still better than having to switch to Windows.
The lack of 32GB options on Macbook Pros is definitely frustrating, though.
"Ultra expensive, ultra heavy".
Or you could get a Dell Precision 7510, 6.2lb (versus 5.5lb), Xeon CPU... for $2300.
So many unused headphones, so much waste....
At these past keynotes for example product managers have given canned passionless presentations for Apple products. Like the Apple TV presentation from last week
AFAIK, Picasso didn't.
The real problem with post-Jobs Apple is that Jobs had a vision and Tim Cook does not. Don't get me wrong: Cook has done wonders on the logistics and provisioning front to turn Apple into the behemoth but is he the leader Apple really needs? I have doubts.
When Apple announced the watch, I raised an eyebrow. Personally I think smartwatches are stupid. The tech just isn't there yet (battery life, size, etc). Apple traditionally only got into markets once they were proven. That wasn't (and still isn't) the case with smartwatches.
Look at Apple's change in direction. The first Apple Watch was positioned like a luxury brand (another change for Apple). This one is focused on health and fitness. Even there it's a compromise (eg for any serious exercise with a heart rate monitor you need a chest strap and no one has yet invented an HRM without one that's sufficiently accurate without one under stress). But constant health monitoring and potentially warning before you have a major health event (eg stroke, heart attack) is a real potential growth market. But again, the tech just isn't there yet.
Steve Jobs famously stuck to having one mouse button. I think he was wrong on this one. The right-click is here to stay but he did have a point about discoverability. So I was once again shocked when Apple introduced Force/3D Touch as it has even more discoverability and consistency problems. It also adds weight and cost. The haptic home button is also (IMHO) a step backwards.
And again, ditching the headphone jack seems too soon. In another shock, Apple's Ear Pods have been "delayed". Has Apple ever not had their shit together to delay a product after announcement like this?
So phones are becoming if they haven't already a commodity. What I mean is that pretty much any smartphone you buy now is probably going to be good enough, even the prepaid phones you buy for $150 or less. Oh the hardware front, only these things seem to matter now:
- Display (although arguably they are or soon will be all good enough)
- Battery life only to the point that it's sufficient (ie beyond a certain point it doesn't matter and they'll all get to that point)
- The camera
One the last one it does seem like the Pixel is better than the iPhone 7 (disclaimer: I work for Google).
After that, it's software the matters and is the real differentiator between phones (IMHO). iOS, once clean, simple and elegant, seems to have gotten clunkier, confused and is suffering more from feature bloat. That's natural if product managers and UI/UX people aren't reined in.
This is mirrored in OSX, which seems to have gotten worse starting with Yosemite.
as tech is becoming mainstream, more and more "football coaches" will spout their nonsense, just like in sports.
...according to writers.
Writers seem to me to be paid at a market clearing rate, with the protection of a union. It seems to me that if they were truly underpaid they might find a better use for their time.
Apple, I'm done. You fucked me and I'm done.
Demand for talent has skyrocketed over the last 5 years.
Apple is doing and will do a shitload of money anyway.
People will buy Apple stuff anyway because people already are: unless you are an Apple user, you should know how "religious" (I'm being kind here) Apple users are. They have been consciously been buying outdated and overpriced hardware until now, and they have been super proud about this too.
Also, unless Apple software actively gets in the way of users doing their stuff it is all going to be "okay".
So this is going to last anything from five to ten years at least, still imho.
I have no true idea whether newer apple stuff is so bad or not (besides the idiotic drop of the audio jack on the iPhone). But Apple users have been subject to this Apple-isy for literally decades.
I have a suspicion that now that Apple Macbook Pros are so widespread, complaining about Apple is the new hipsteria.
This is what I feel, reading the news, on a foggy October, almost-November morning.
The only exception, Apple Music, is catching up to Spotify but that comes at the cost of paying for exclusives.
This is a usual mistake people make. They assume that performance is simply a matter of specifications. It's not.
The fanbase clearly helps Apple at the moment, but it can disappear within a few years if another company manages to make something truly better.
It's not about the hardware. It's about the tight and seamless integration between the hardware and the software. The competitors are living in a completely different reality in that regard.
Y'know, you're not wrong, but here's the thing: once I set up a Linux desktop or laptop, it just works, just like a Mac does. From what I can ascertain, Windows is the same. It's not like the 80s, dealing with IRQs and what-not. Linux is a little more annoying, with proprietary drivers for some graphics cards, but again: once it's set up, it runs. The integration is just as tight as on a Mac: the hard drive stores data (with a better file system than HFS+ …); the graphics card displays graphics; the USB system delivers data; the headphone ports play music.
Not only that, but I also have freedom, which is no small thing. So, the experience is a bit worse at set-up time, and better on an ongoing basis. That's not a bad trade-off.