Can't innovate any more, my ass?

[Ethosik]

Yes, the < 1% that make half the content. Not that I'm disagreeing. I'd be anxious to see how many "pros" (of the variety that require real horsepower) have jumped ship already. I bet Apple knows and I bet they made their decision to put off the updates based on that.

What's also a thought: How many pros are really going to switch to Apple if they make a great product from Windows? What killer App or great advantage are they going to have? I'd argue with their neutering of FCPX, probably none?

Like I've said before: intuitively it makes sense for them to con't the Mac Pro--the same pros that use the good hardware often influence other purchases for higher dollar values. However, Apple knows better than all of us. They have telemetry data and probably know exactly how many sales they're missing out on and they can weigh that against the cost of adapting another card into the trash can. I think personally they've done that and found it isn't worth it.



Okay this is the second freaking time you've brought this up: Yes, SOME DAY this will be a thing with RAM, but GPUs are still not even 8GBps and hard drives/processors are doing just fine with their current level of connectivity (or going PCIe, which once again hasn't reached capacity).

This whole argument: GET USED TO SOLDERED STUFF BECAUSE THE RAM OF THE FUTURE WILL BE SOLDERED. Okay fine, have a cookie. Now what about, you know, all other components, as well as this years offerings.

In general I mostly agree, I think most users don't need upgradeable stuff, but the RAM thing is a strange argument for soldering all the things.



RAM may be soldered someday, but to say Apple was trying to warm people up to non-upgradeable parts in '13 (and that was the reason for the trash can) is nonsense to an insane degree.

The after-market video card market has never been higher. Apple made this decision in 2013 and while I wouldn't call the nMP a flop, I think they were expecting a lot more.
[doublepost=1482242631][/doublepost]

That's an odd comparison, but fair enough. Soon enough the nMP itself will not be supported either though. Where will your arbitrary distinction go then ?

My 2010 Mac Pro is still being supported through new OSes. The 2013 Mac Pro will be supported for a long time yet. They cannot sell it at the end of 2016 and end support in 2017.

 

[fhturner]

It was. There has definitely been stealth upgrades and fine revisions to the nMP since launch.

In BMD Speed Test, a nMP purchased this month gets 1,400-1,500 MegaBytes/sec for both read and write.
The original nMP models got 900-1,000 Megabytes/sec.

Uh, no. Inheriting faster SSDs because the suppliers of such modules for your 3+ year-old product don't make the original modules anymore and you now use what they supply for your other, current product lines does NOT qualify as "definitely...stealth upgrades and fine revisions." Aside from this difference in supplier components and dropping the 1TB SSD upsell price by $200 to match the MacBooks released in October, the Mac Pro has seen exactly zero change. In price OR specs.

When Apple sees that a product or a feature is used by less than 1% of their market, they reassign priorities and resources. Counter-apologists, if you will, would say "Apple has so much money, they should/could/must give us what we want!" But that's just the whining of the <1%, and guess what, Apple doesn't care. They are a profit driven enterprise, not a charity for niche nerds. That's not an apology, that's the pragmatism of capitalism.

I guess you missed my Corvette analogy. A company doesn't have to trend toward streamlining into one single product that appeals to the largest # of customers. Until a few years ago, Apple operated this way just fine, where they didn't mind producing high-end products for the smaller "niche" that needed it. Now they can't be bothered. I tried to explain that a product/division w/in a company doesn't have to equal the volume of another product division in order to be profitable and of value to the company (especially if we're talking about halo products), but I guess you skipped that part too.

Finally, why are you implying that Apple is being actually malicious about it? Really? They are trolling us? Now that's ludicrous.

It's also not apologizing to admit that Apple is just a company, not a magical unicorn of an institution that must never fail to satisfy our every highly-personal and varied whims.

When people w/ the same attitude as yourself say this sort of thing, I wonder how they don't see that those of us who are aggravated aren't bitching about a company not satisfying our whims, but rather taking away choices THAT USED TO BE THERE. The failure to satisfy is entirely voluntarily in this case. You also act like we're wrong to expect a company w/ as much talent as Apple to go an extra mile to try to meet the demands of users, whether we're a pro who needs expandability, or a "normal" consumer who'd simply like to have any sort of future-proofing in a product costing $2000 or more. Good grief, talk about missing the point.

To play devil's advocate for a moment, I can see where Apple is coming from and what they're striving to produce. They'll keep shaving those fractions of an inch off the products and eventually we'll end up with something like the paper-thin folding tablets they have in Westworld.

Or if Apple doesn't do it, someone else will get there first. I can't say I particularly like it right now but the future won't happen if we insist that professionals absolutely must have a giant upgradable PC. That sort of power will most likely be offloaded to a server, the tech we own ourselves is inevitably going to be somewhat disposable.

Those tablets ARE cool in Westworld, but I disagree that we have to shed all forms of variety in form factor or function to get there. And even if Apple DOES do it, they don't have to ONLY do paper-thin, folding, Westworld tablets— they can do rhomboidal nnnnnnMPs w/ multiple 12K TB9 displays for Ford to pre-vis his new narrative, and nnnnnncMPs w/ PCIe 7.0 slots to interface with the newest host printers and general park monitoring. Wait...at the rate we're going, that might only be "nnnMP". In any case, having options is not a bad thing.

 

[singhs.apps]

When people w/ the same attitude as yourself say this sort of thing, I wonder how they don't see that those of us who are aggravated aren't bitching about a company not satisfying our whims, but rather taking away choices THAT USED TO BE THERE. The failure to satisfy is entirely voluntarily in this case. You also act like we're wrong to expect a company w/ as much talent as Apple to go an extra mile to try to meet the demands of users, whether we're a pro who needs expandability, or a "normal" consumer who'd simply like to have any sort of future-proofing in a product costing $2000 or more. Good grief, talk about missing the point.

Sigh. Why doesn't everybody get this ? It used to be there. The argument that a nMP is faster than a cMP... well if we had a cMP of 2013 it would be faster than what we got. That arguement doesn't make sense.

Apple is a capitalist entity and hence shouldn't care about the so called <1% is also an odd justification. Ok maybe it doesn't care. Then why even bother with the nMP ? They want to be out of the high end pro market ? Fine. Their decision.

By that yardstick there isn't even a need to discuss any woes of the users since it is the company's decision. Yay !

 

[Ph.D.]

Relax. Everyone here has some understanding of the situation. We can't help but do so, even as some of us struggle with it: It's been 1000+ days with a machine that few here were looking for and which has never been upgraded since. Got it.

Some of us have given up and moved on. Some of us still hold out hope. Some of us visit here just out of boredom or to debate the obvious and the obscure. A few of us are narcisistic enough to think that their dream machine is what Apple must produce and is what everyone else here wants too. Some of us are trapped in our own skulls, bitterly holding onto anger.

But nothing anyone writes here will make Apple do much of anything. Therein lies the need for acceptance. Maybe it will happen (announcement 1st half 2017, I'd guess), and maybe it won't. If the former case turns out to be true, then we now know we won't see another update for another 1000+ days, if ever; get used to it. In the latter case, it will be put to rest, and the truth that rules them all will demand our acceptance: "This too shall pass."

 

[deconstruct60]

On an unrelated note: do you think there will ever be another iteration of the Mac Pro?

I think the Mac Pro is in "hobby" product status. So no 1-2 year product cycles. More like "whenever we get copious spare time over 3-4 years". If they are looking to disappear down the rabbit hole for another 3-4 years then 2H 2017 makes more sense ( Xeon E5 v5 tech, more mature GPUs , possible TB v3 controller revision 2 updates , etc. ). If they were going to cycle approximately every 1.5 years they could go in the Q1-early Q2 time frame.

I suspect one more iteration but I would be doubtful there would be another one after that. Over an extended period of time, treating it as a "hobby" is going to bleed off a large enough portion of the user base that it goes unviable. If the buying response is high enough on this next iteration perhaps it will exit "hobby" status. What happens depends significantly on how many folks buy in the next round; or not. There appears to have been enough last round to do another one, but not enough to make it a high (or above average) priority.

 

[fathergll]

Does anyone else find it sadly humorous that Phil Schiller made that statement ("Can't innovate any more, my ass.") referring to the "new" Mac Pro - which hasn't seen an update since that phrase was uttered?

He was actually referring to the fact that Apple innovated the idea of the nMP being the worlds first computer that is immune to depreciation! If you want proof just check the Apple store, its the same price as day 1.

 

[garnerx]

Those tablets ARE cool in Westworld, but I disagree that we have to shed all forms of variety in form factor or function to get there.

If only Apple thought the same way. I'm not sure they're capable of bringing about whatever future they've envisioned, or even if they have a masterplan beyond constantly reiterating the things Steve Jobs invented almost 10 years ago.

 

[cdapple]

Bloomberg has a report out, today, citing sources within Apple HQ that say Mac development is confirmed to be on the back burner, with no dedicated teams working on hardware or software for the Mac. Just thought that was interesting, considering TC's assurances the other day that they hadn't forgotten about Mac.

 

[goMac]

Bloomberg has a report out, today, citing sources within Apple HQ that say Mac development is confirmed to be on the back burner, with no dedicated teams working on hardware or software for the Mac. Just thought that was interesting, considering TC's assurances the other day that they hadn't forgotten about Mac.

Mac OS and the Mac haven't had a dedicated team in years, but that's misleading at least for Mac OS. Mac OS is done by a combined iOS and Mac OS team. So no, Mac OS doesn't have a dedicated team, but that's a huge difference from it not being actively worked on. After all, someone is working on the Sierra updates and all the Touch Bar work. Technically, iOS no longer has a lot of dedicated teams either because they were merged with the Mac folks.

These changes were done right after Forstall left. But Bloomberg's read on Apple not actively working on the Mac would be wrong. Forstall was the one holding the dedicated teams in place, which lead to a lot of people being moved onto iOS only teams.

 

[cdapple]

Mac OS and the Mac haven't had a dedicated team in years, but that's misleading at least for Mac OS. Mac OS is done by a combined iOS and Mac OS team. So no, Mac OS doesn't have a dedicated team, but that's a huge difference from it not being actively worked on. After all, someone is working on the Sierra updates and all the Touch Bar work. Technically, iOS no longer has a lot of dedicated teams either because they were merged with the Mac folks.

These changes were done right after Forstall left. But Bloomberg's read on Apple not actively working on the Mac would be wrong. Forstall was the one holding the dedicated teams in place, which lead to a lot of people being moved onto iOS only teams.

Got it. Thanks for the clarification on that. That does make more sense.

There were some other interesting claims in the article. If you happen to read it, I would be interested to hear your take on the whole thing.

 

[goMac]

Got it. Thanks for the clarification on that. That does make more sense.

There were some other interesting claims in the article. If you happen to read it, I would be interested to hear your take on the whole thing.

A lot of this is typical Apple. Nearly everything Apple ships is delayed at some point. There are a lot of signals the new MacBook Pro was supposed to ship in June, but got delayed. We don't see that from the outside, but from the inside release dates commonly move to be later, or products never make it to the finish line.

The shared teams also cut both ways. It means Apple can only do one thing at a time. Apple wants to do everything but they can only direct their attention to one thing. When iPhones get attention, the Macs don't. When the Mac gets attention, the iPhone doesn't. Cutting displays and Airport Base stations is one way for them to avoid more distractions.

Apple did used to have dedicated teams for each computer line. The Mac Pro had it's own team, the MacBook Pro had it's own team, etc etc. This made it really easy to hit yearly ship dates because you had teams that just worried about the Mac Pro all the time. But then you have Apple II/Mac style fights where teams are fighting for talent internally. The Mac really suffered in the post-Snow Leopard era because the Mac teams were getting talent pulled to iOS, leaving the Mac teams with no one. I've heard Leopard was the first release where the iPhone team pulled over a lot of the talent, leading to a sub-par release and mistakes like QuickTime X, with the senior engineers who were on iOS coming back for Snow Leopard to fix a lot of the mistakes.

Combined teams were Apple's solution. No fighting over resources because everyone has to share. But it leads to products getting neglected. Even the iOS for the iPad hasn't really changed much because it's having to share resources with iOS for iPhone development.

It's not ideal. But without dedicated teams, Apple probably would have just cut the Mac and moved everyone over to iOS.

Apple also sent out a press release when this all went down:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/201...ration-Across-Hardware-Software-Services.html

So the Bloomberg report is interesting, but the big details all went down in 2012.

I've heard a lot about performance improvements from iOS and Apple Watch making it back to Sierra, so the combined teams still can make a lot of good things happen. But it's hard for a team that is working on iOS devices to shift back to a workstation Mac Pro.

This slowed production and constrained Apple's ability to make enough computers to meet demand.

That part is interesting, because it implies Apple may actually have been selling a lot of nMPs. But the holdup to a new Mac Pro is still external suppliers.

 

[singhs.apps]

But it's hard for a team that is working on iOS devices to shift back to a workstation Mac Pro.

This !

Two diff beasts as far as end users are concerned..

 

[shab]

I've heard a lot about performance improvements from iOS and Apple Watch making it back to Sierra, so the combined teams still can make a lot of good things happen. But it's hard for a team that is working on iOS devices to shift back to a workstation Mac Pro.

I just hope they surprise us!

 

[fhturner]

Combined teams were Apple's solution. No fighting over resources because everyone has to share. But it leads to products getting neglected. Even the iOS for the iPad hasn't really changed much because it's having to share resources with iOS for iPhone development.

Interesting points. But what baffles me is that we're supposed to believe there's apparently just not quite enough talent/resources within the company to go full tilt boogie on both iOS and macOS products simultaneously. So, what...they have like 75% of what they need? Is there no way they can withdraw a little cash from the bank and somehow find that add'l 25% of talented people they need to make 2 full teams (or however many)? They've only got eleventy gazillion $$ in cash reserves alone, right?! I just find it hard to believe that they're scouring the globe but just cannot quite come up w/ enough people worth having on the team to focus on both categories at once. Seems to be more "don't want to" than "can't". Don't you think?

 

[filmak]

I just hope they surprise us!

They have done it already...

 

[Ph.D.]

Good grief, talk about missing the point.

Actually, I think I made some good points about the direction of technology, along with some musings about Apple's presumed thought processes. I did so without acting like I'm talking to a dim-wit, too.

But you are right: Obviously, no-one at Apple has ever heard of a "halo product" before either! Quick, call up Tim, let him know, and they will get right on the nnMP for sure!

 

[iMcLovin]

My personal thoughts is that Apples negligence over the desktop computers is the biggest mistake they have made since before Steve took over the helm again and one that will have a bigger impact on the company than they anticipate. I think Apple is more fragile than they think. The overall brand value and ecosystem takes a big hit when most Mac users and especially pro users feel that Apple has gone completely off track, and that will quite soon start taking a hit on their overall sales. It is something I suspect we will see a result of in 2017.
It is a good indication when a lot of professional users I know, in the artistic commercial business, has given apple till the end of 2016 to cough up a new Mac Pro before they will instead invest in PCs (and I think the art industry use of apple has helped building the brand as something cool). And the same goes from myself. I've been such a good advocate for Apple this last decade, I've always been a huge fan of the company and made sure friends and family buys Macs. I almost blindly paid whatever they demanded to get the best machines, phones, routers, screens etc. But now, after this year, I just felt I've had enough, I don't want to hang on for the ride anymore and I don't talk about Apple in a positive manner anymore....What falls into my mind now when I see the Apple logo is: Extremely overpriced, lots of dongles, microscopic updates and annoying decisions that impacts the user experience. I can't with a good conscience recommend Apple to anyone anymore, because I don't know what their future holds. THIS is a major fall in brand value in my eyes.
I started getting into Apple products through professional computers and that's also where it ended. I never spent as little on Apple as I have this year, and from what it seems I will probably not buy anything from Apple in 2018 either - their 2018 iPhone needs to be pretty darn impressive for me to buy another, because my latest iphones I felt I didn't get much improvement at all for the money I paid. I switched to a PC....and because I know I won't be seeing any new routers, Mac minis, mac pros, apple displays in 2018 either, I have already started sniffing on buying my other peripherals and tech products from other vendors. The only way to stay in the Apple ecosystem today, is to stick with your old products.

The iPhone is a huge success product, but I don't think it can keep its position in the market alone, without the other products holding it up, it is dependent on the overall company product portfolio and brand value. I also don't think Tim can suddenly change his momentum now, it will take him too much time to change focus. Apple all ready spent 3 years making the nMBP which I personally think was a major let down and made me wonder what the amount of people in Apple are actually doing...That machine only helped me see more clearly how far off track Apple has become. and even if they make an iMac in 2017, I'm sure people won't be very impressed with what they have to offer the "pro" market.

Apples silence doesn't make things any better. Its pretty clear from Tims latest internal mail that the Mac Pro is dead - but honestly he should make that official or make a less cryptic official statement.
This means there's not a single machine without mobile components in Apples lineup. Something that also proves that the management in Apple doesn't understand what a "pro" machine is and what components desktop users need.

Such a letdown from a company...I guess I'm still a bit shell shocked from what apple has managed to release in 2016, ending with the last product announcement which was hyped to be the rebirth of the Macintosh.

 

[Ph.D.]

I think Apple is more fragile than they think.

I agree, and they have only got themselves to blame. Evidence? Just look at their ridiculously self-indulgent space-ship. Look at how Microsoft is taking the lead in design. Look at the evolution and state of their product lineup:

iPod - no longer a viable product, having been subsumed by cell phones.
iPad - flat at best, only saved by fat margins for now while others have abandoned the tablet market.
iPhone - flat, with few other seriously-viable markets to enter (India?).
Mac Pro - the Living Dead.
Mac Mini - the Living Dead Jr.
iMac - getting stale, with a design overshadowed by Surface Studio.
MBP - mixed reviews at best.
Monitors, routers, backup peripherals, etc. - gone except for dongles-a-plenty.
A cheap, nasty, overpriced product like Beats - sure, that will bring a halo back to Apple.
Watch - a flop aside from the lucky accident of finding interest as a health monitor.
Apple TV - a stale product languishing with little momentum.
Services - mostly being spanked by Amazon, Google, Netflix, etc.
Apple car - dead (apparently).
VR, AR - no products.
Good will - running out of time.

Have I left anything out? Nothing exciting, I'd guess. If it wasn't for the fact that they have huge amounts of cash (in Ireland), it would be time to trot out the word "beleaguered."

 

[goMac]

They've only got eleventy gazillion $$ in cash reserves alone, right?! I just find it hard to believe that they're scouring the globe but just cannot quite come up w/ enough people worth having on the team to focus on both categories at once. Seems to be more "don't want to" than "can't". Don't you think?

I think... Apple wants people who are loyal to the vision instead of people loyal to a paycheck. That's not a compliment. And it makes jobs harder to fill.

It also means, as the Bloomberg article hints, if people don't believe in the vision, they take off because there isn't a large paycheck holding them to the company. They can drive just down the street and Google would probably shovel a signing bonus in cash into the trunk of their car.

I don't think the pay is any different under Tim. If anything it sounds like it might be slowly improving under Tim. But Tim doesn't command the same loyalty Steve did.

 

[Chancha]

I think... Apple wants people who are loyal to the vision instead of people loyal to a paycheck. That's not a compliment. And it makes jobs harder to fill.

It also means, as the Bloomberg article hints, if people don't believe in the vision, they take off because there isn't a large paycheck holding them to the company. They can drive just down the street and Google would probably shovel a signing bonus in cash into the trunk of their car.

I don't think the pay is any different under Tim. If anything it sounds like it might be slowly improving under Tim. But Tim doesn't command the same loyalty Steve did.

Comapnies with headcount of Apple's typically would have demerged itself, normally for financial reasons, but sometimes also for retaining competitiveness and efficiency. And the latter is what Apple lacks now as suggested by Bloomberg. Talented individuals who are qualified to work in Apple should have the credentials to just sit elsewhere in the Valley. Pay of course is a drive, but more often than not it is just prospects. Able people wouldn't feel comfortable to be dicked around contributing to nothing when the vision that is driving the company is simply off-course, at least compared to when these people were first employed, likely was when Jobs still being there.

 

[filmak]

I agree, and they have only got themselves to blame. Evidence? Just look at their ridiculously self-indulgent space-ship. Look at how Microsoft is taking the lead in design. Look at the evolution and state of their product lineup:

iPod - no longer a viable product, having been subsumed by cell phones.
iPad - flat at best, only saved by fat margins for now while others have abandoned the tablet market.
iPhone - flat, with few other seriously-viable markets to enter (India?).
Mac Pro - the Living Dead.
Mac Mini - the Living Dead Jr.
iMac - getting stale, with a design overshadowed by Surface Studio.
MBP - mixed reviews at best.
Monitors, routers, backup peripherals, etc. - gone except for dongles-a-plenty.
A cheap, nasty, overpriced product like Beats - sure, that will bring a halo back to Apple.
Watch - a flop aside from the lucky accident of finding interest as a health monitor.
Apple TV - a stale product languishing with little momentum.
Services - mostly being spanked by Amazon, Google, Netflix, etc.
Apple car - dead (apparently).
VR, AR - no products.
Good will - running out of time.

Have I left anything out? Nothing exciting, I'd guess. If it wasn't for the fact that they have huge amounts of cash (in Ireland), it would be time to trot out the word "beleaguered."

This is the Apple of today...
Front page.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

Sigh. Why doesn't everybody get this ? It used to be there. The argument that a nMP is faster than a cMP... well if we had a cMP of 2013 it would be faster than what we got. That arguement doesn't make sense.

Apple is a capitalist entity and hence shouldn't care about the so called <1% is also an odd justification. Ok maybe it doesn't care. Then why even bother with the nMP ? They want to be out of the high end pro market ? Fine. Their decision.

By that yardstick there isn't even a need to discuss any woes of the users since it is the company's decision. Yay !

But that's just nonsense a cMp with 2013 tech in it would be exactly the same speed as the trash can with 2013 tech in it. Just unnessecarily huge resource wasting noisy and not nearly so well designed.

 

[singhs.apps]

But that's just nonsense a cMp with 2013 tech in it would be exactly the same speed as the trash can with 2013 tech in it. Just unnessecarily huge resource wasting noisy and not nearly so well designed.

I hope you are saying this as a joke, right ?

The possible cMP with dual socket processors, open pci-e slots to use better cards, potentially more ram, will be the same speed ? And noisy ? My cMP never made much noise under the heaviest of loads running 48 hours straight on full blast.

I am sorry but releasing an underpowered system in the name of cool design IS bad design.

 

[Chancha]

The extra "unused" space of the cMP is not wasted, quite on the opposite it allows headroom in thermo envelope for variantions of PCI cards and GPUs that a professional user often need.

While we are on the topic of PCI, the lack of slots on the nMP is the biggest reason why it shouldn't deserve the "Pro" moniker. External enclosures are not realistic solution, the cable mess, the need of extra power plugs, and most importantly more interfaces means more points of failure during a production. Workstations have taken the form of a single tower for a reason.

Also the Thunderbolt bandwidth when new was not even close to PCI 2.0 then 3.0. It took 10 years to reach Thunderbolt 3 where an external GPU enclosure can be done without performance compromises.

 

[Samuelsan2001]

I hope you are saying this as a joke, right ?

The possible cMP with dual socket processors, open pci-e slots to use better cards, potentially more ram, will be the same speed ? And noisy ? My cMP never made much noise under the heaviest of loads running 48 hours straight on full blast.

I am sorry but releasing an underpowered system in the name of cool design IS bad design.

No I was quoting your post where you stated that an old design with the same silicon would be faster that is just nonsense.