Hacker News Reader

Comment by LeanderK | Hacker News Reader

It's always interesting how something monopoly-like makes companies lazy.

I am a cs-student with 3 1/2 year old a machbook pro, which I bought when I started my studies. I must say that I am still very, very satisfied, it's holding up great. Great display, suprsingly good battery life etc.

If something happens to my macbook, i would probalby spend a serious percentage of my savings saving on a new laptop. It's a very imporant part of my life, i do most of my work with it and I highly value the flexibility.

In this hypthetical scenario, i would really like to buy a new macbook and would probably go through a lot of financial pain if they took their line-up seriously. But it's really getting ridiculus.

I really don't understand why they fail so hard to update their hardware.

View on HN

Sad fact is that Mac sales are now 10% of Apples revenue. I think the only reason Macs receive any attention at all within Apple is because you need Macs to build iphone/ipad apps. Another way of framing this is - how much effort do you put on the bottom 10 percent of your TODO list.

The Mac line brought them ~25B revenue in 2017, in one of their best years ever.

Looking at a business of this magnitude, I don't see how it matters what percentage of the total revenue this is. There's so much money to be had here and, unlike an individual, a company's attention shouldn't be so limited as to essentially make them forget to collect this additional revenue.

>> a company's attention shouldn't be so limited as to essentially make them forget to collect this additional revenue.

For a publicly-traded company all that matters is stock price. One would assume that collecting revenues has a direct impact on that price, but we are not in so rational a world. Today it is all about growth potential rather than current revenues. Apple could be turning huge profits on laptops, but if they see that as a mature market then they will and must ignore it.

Given Apple's grip on users, they may even see laptops as a competitor to their iPhone business. Time on the macbook is time not on the iPhone. The intent may be to transition all macbook devotees away from lap/desktops altogether.

> For a publicly-traded company all that matters is stock price.

Really? You don't want to qualify that at all, maybe?

If not, please explain the first 10 years of AMZN.

He said potential growth. People see Amazon as a growth business.

This is the part I just don't understand. The Mac is a $25B business by itself, and yet it seems to be operated like a vanity project, largely limiting itself to flashy launches like the Touch Bar or iMac Pro instead of maintaining a steady update pipeline like any other B2B product company.

I have no idea if macs only account for 10% of Apple revenue, but assuming it's true, it doesn't matter what dollar amount that 10% works out to.

We find percentages useful precisely so that we can see through deceptively high dollars to the truth that they don't really play a big part in total dollars brought in.

The fact that it's 25B (if it is, again, no idea) only serves to illustrate the heart-stopping scale at which Apple does business. We're talking about a company for whom even such a sum is a bottom 10% priority from a pure revenue standpoint.

Taken separately, this makes some sense, but they already delivered the hardware on this and put in the work on the designs. It doesn't make sense to fail to even put in the minimal amount of work to update the line in a well run company.

The only reasons I can think of are that they have taken designers completely off the mac line and put them all on the iPhone and other lines or else that they have put alot of designers on some kind of secret project, like moving to a different architecture and it's taking longer than expected to get it right. And even these don't seem to match up with how the company of 10-15 years ago would run things.

Oh definitely, I wasn't weighing in on how apple views macs, just that countering "it's X%" with "but that's $Y" doesn't really work.

As to the actual matter at hand, I hope the output we're seeing now is the result of a de-prioritization, because I don't like to think of these results as best efforts.

> Sad fact is that Mac sales are now 10% of Apples revenue. I think the only reason Macs receive any attention at all within Apple is because you need Macs to build iphone/ipad apps. Another way of framing this is - how much effort do you put on the bottom 10 percent of your TODO list.

I think it's wrong to analogize a large corporation to an individual like that. An individual only has a limited capacity to divide its productive capacity, but a corporation almost has an infinite amount.

One of Apple's problems is that they often take what are probably good ideas too far. Some focus is good, but too much can be bad. Back when Steve Jobs took over, it was probably right for them to hyperfocus on a small number of models and software products, but the situation is different now. There's no good reason for a company as successful as they are now to not give the Mac division the resources and leadership it needs to be successful. Unfortunately, they seem to be neglecting it instead.

Another way to look at that is the company risks up to 10% of its top line if it doesn't support the product line. Everyone's priorities may differ but if I'm running a business I don't casually give up 10% of my revenue. That's a lot!

It's a bit of a chicken-and-egg scenario in that you can't get past that 10% unless you really devote the energy to it, and you can't justify the energy when it seems to contribute so little to your revenue.

At one time Apple had a lot of passion for desktop and laptop computers. Today, they just seem to be nonchalantly kicking the metaphorical can down the road. You can't blame consumers for not going crazy for products that Apple isn't crazy about themselves.

While true, Mac is still larger in revenue than the Apple Watch and the iPad -- both of which receive regular updates.

OTOH it's a lot more of a headache to maintain the complete Mac lineup than a few iPad models.

I'm still using a 2011 MBP, and I'm quite satisfied. I've replaced the battery, upgraded the RAM, upgraded the HD, and replaced the HD cable, but it's still sufficient for my needs (heavy compute gets done on remote servers anyway).

I'm on Linux though, so given recent fails and the general trend towards non-repairability and non-upgradeability, there's very little incentive for me to consider Apple hardware when I eventually upgrade.

Last year I upgraded a 2011 and 2010 MBP to a new MB and MBP. The older laptops I had already maxed out RAM and replaced them with SSDs. The new laptops were worth the upgrade for boot time, wake from sleep, weight, and battery life. However, every criticism about the new laptops are true--even if you throw money at dongles, cables, and wireless replacements. What's ridiculous is I bought an Apple usb-c to hdmi cable and it has very large amounts of signal issues on both the MB and MBP. Thankfully a third-party usb-c to displayport doesn't have those issues. Lastly, since the RAM and HDD aren't upgradable I had to pay higher prices upfront instead of upgrading after the fact like I've been doing for over a decade. Unfortunately, this was also true when looking at similar Linux/PC laptops.

I think if I had a 2012 model I would have been able to wait longer for new laptops. Currently, I'm very likely dumping the MBP as soon as new ones come out with a better keyboard.

When I did my shopping last year I was prepared to get a Linux laptop if things looked comparable and the price was significantly cheaper (assuming the risk of unknown problems like battery or hardware longevity) and the prices were roughly the same with other compromises I wasn't prepared to make.

2011s are a great machine. But as of the next MacOS release 10.14 they are no longer supported, as 10.14 will enforce Metal and those pre 2012s don't have the right gpus for it. I recently picked up a lightly used 2015 because the current touch bar ones continue to have problems.

I'm using Fedora anyway, so the software part doesn't bother me.

Could you justify your first sentence some more? Your claim is that Apple is a monopoly - over what I wonder? Neither Mac OS nor iOS are a monopoly. Monopolies do trend towards efficiency of effort on their behalf and so-called 'rent seeking' but I'm not really sure that is what we are seeing here. Sticking with a tried and true keyboard design would be the monopolistic bent, avoiding any significant upgrades or consumer oriented innovations.

Despite people's claim, the new macbook pros do have big innovations. You might not like them, but here they are: - Thin -> substantially thinner than my older mac book pro. It's nice! - Keyboard is part of making it thinner - Touchid built in - oled/dynamic keyboard/touch strip

These are consumer oriented innovations, even if you do not like them (personally I don't like the keyboard or the touch-strip.

In recent year MBP have been a near monopoly for developers machines, at least in small-to-medium startups.

Apple still sells the 2015 pre USB C MacBooks new. If I had to buy a MacBook, that’s the one to get.

I've run into a few issues with the Early to Mid 2015 Macbook fans. Maybe it's just a coincidence, but I've seen it across three machines.

Not for much longer I think, they are already unavailable in the UK.

The iPad Pro is the future of Apple. I am beginning to suspect that general purpose computing has no future apart from Linux—and even then, those of us clinging to it are going to start looking a lot like Amiga enthusiasts who’re keeping their old machines alive by sheer force of will.

It's hard to imagine when there is still, like, active PC gaming communities and PCs are so important to office work.

I remember seeing a lot of this take when people were buying up iPads, but I think there are real limitations -- tablets are just not really good for doing work.

I very much hope you are right and I am wrong. The iPad Pro seems to be trying to mitigate some of those issues—at least for the growing segment of the populace who’d prefer to do everything on their phone.

I don’t like where Apple is going, but I can easily see a Macbook a generation or two out whose software is more iOS than macOS, and whose character is pretty locked-down / appified.

Nah, Mac OS dev tools are far too *nix-based. That's assuming Apple values its developer base.

Tablets are perfectly capable of doing work - tablet operating systems on the other hand....

If Apple would just add support for pointing devices and if they would allow access to arbitrary files stored on USB devices via the Files app, the iPad could serve the needs of most people.

So basically if they turned it into a laptop

Yes. But with a much more consumer friendly OS. It would be easier to add laptop capabilities seamlessly to iOS than touch screen capabilities to OS X.

I don't see how you figure. Windows 8/10 does the latter and it works fine. Yes, controls in applications not designed for touch interaction don't work well without a mouse and keyboard, but again, I contend that a keyboard and mouse are much more suitable for productive work.

Windows 8/10 don't "work fine" as a touch screen OS. Most programs people use everyday still use menus that are not optimized for touch and there is still a special "tablet mode". Even parts of the OS itself are not geared fortouch.

If you aim to replace office productivity apps you're going to run into the exact same problem

There is already both Microsoft Office for the iPad and Apple's iWork suite.

Yes, and they provide a fraction of the functionality.

The question is how many people use the missing functionality? Also, office development is not static. MS is continuing to add functionality and with the better scriptability coming with iOS 12, iOS will get more powerful.

https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2001/03/23/strategy-letter-iv...

Nobody uses all of the esoteric features of Office, but most people use at least a few.

Are there professionals who use an iPad for the majority of their work beyond sending emails and interacting with web apps/their mobile clients?

I rarely see the people who bought in on the iPad revolution almost a decade ago use their iPad beyond light browsing and sending emails.

To me, it seems to have replaced the morning paper more than it has laptops.

The iPad Pro is a general purpose computer by any meaningful definition of the term "general purpose computer".

John Gruber made an observation countering this narrative[1]

To sum it up; looking around you don't see people in coffee shops using iPads (or any tablets)--it's all laptops. Even though iPads have outsold laptops by a significant margin for years now.

As a bit of a tangent (also mentioned by him); anyone who is productive on an iPad Pro uses a keyboard. Apple has refused to add touchscreens to laptops, but iPads with keyboard suffer this exact problem. So something still needs to evolve.

I see iPads/phones replacing the entertainment needs a general purpose computer used to fill and maybe Apple gets out of general purpose computing. This is also happening for "light" computing needs in business; like POS and inventory. But I don't see any sign that a PC going away at all for workhorse tasks just yet.

[1] https://daringfireball.net/linked/2018/06/13/ipad-trackpad-i...

> Even though iPads have outsold laptops by a significant margin for years now.

Actually they barely ever did, and the peak is past. For example in 2017 there were about 164 million laptops sold versus 161 million tablets of all types.

In 2007 it was 109 million laptops and zero tablets.

I was thinking about Apple Laptops vs iPads since the whole assertion is that Apple is giving up on computer hardware because iPads will replace them. The best numbers I could find [1][2] is that Apple sold 19 million Macs (desktops and laptops) and 43 million tablets in 2017, with similar numbers the previous year. My point still stands: if Apple is betting that so many iPads are starting to replace the functionality of traditional computers and they're selling very large numbers of them, how come they're rarely, if ever, seen where we see them in public use such as cafes?

[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/276308/global-apple-mac-...

[2] https://www.macrumors.com/2018/02/05/4q17-ipad-vs-other-tabl...

I don't disagree with you about the fate of general purpose computing, but I doubt the iPad Pro is the future. I think pfranz[1] makes a good point about laptops, but that doesn't mean that laptop has to be a Mac. Given the change in name for Apple Books, I get the feeling that an iOS, ARM-powered laptop called the iBook is that future.

1) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17313710

> The iPad Pro is the future of Apple.

Maybe it's more accurate to say that iOS is the (present and) future of Apple. All arrows seem to point in this direction. It's a mobile, run-anywhere world that Apple sees as the future.

In that vision, MacOS machines are a cash cow business. And the corporate playbook for those is min-investment, max harvesting.

Not at all.

Someone has to write all the software, and they're not going to be writing it on an iPad. Even with an external mouse and keyboard.

> It's always interesting how something monopoly-like makes companies lazy.

> I really don't understand why they fail so hard to update their hardware.

It's not because of their monopoly-like status, it's because they make so little money on Macs compared to the vast sums of money they make on iPhones. They probably look at their developers, and ask "how much is it worth to us to have this developer work on a Mac? How much is it worth to us to have this developer work on an iPhone?" and the iPhone wins out every time.

Which... well, sucks, for the rest of us, but it's not laziness—it's opportunity costs.

But then, they lose interests (and endorsements) of software engineers and IT professionals. And, in the words of Steve Ballmer "developers developers developers".

If they want to sell hardware, they need to convince me to recommend them to the person who asks my advice. (rhetorical "me")

"developer work on an iPhone" . Sorry, I don't get it.

I mean Apple developers / engineers, either being assigned to work on the iPhone hardware & iOS software, or the Mac hardware & macOs software.

They don't update their hardware because of the reasons you stated in your post. People love Macs and would buy them regardless of hardware.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com