Has Apple lost their mind? March 8th Event Disappointment

[Feyl]

What does your CPU usage and memory pressure in Activity Monitor look like when you're getting lag? Also, any chance you've got a USB-C dongle connected with an ethernet port? One of the more common Realtek ethernet chipsets found on dongles is missing a hardware-accelerated driver for macOS, meaning it can take up a lot of spare CPU cycles.

Given that this is the first time I've ever seen complaints about UI lag on an M1 Mac (and I know several people who own one, and use one myself), this sounds like either a hardware defect or usage issue rather than a universal problem with the OS. Even at 120 Hz, I've never seen my M1 Pro 14" stutter or drop a frame. Hopefully with some troubleshooting your machines can run similarly smooth!

You can try as you want but the OS is just not good enough. And there’s plenty of people complaining about the UI performance. I have many Macs and it’s the same. The M1 Macs are just a little bit better in this aspect.

And using your Mac at the native resolution is a different thing. I’m using my Mac mini with the 27” 4K LG monitor and macOS is making some mumbo jumbo with the scalling and as a result it renders much higher resolution than it needs to to properly render the UI. You don’t have this problem in Windows because it handles this in a much better way. And that’s why even a decade old PC is much smoother. macOS is just not good with external monitors, especially if you don’t use a specific kind of monitors. I can’t understand why is it such a big problem for Apple to improve this. They just don’t want to I think.

 

[tdar]

No disrespect to anyone but too many people don’t think. The transition to Apple Silicon has been thoughtful and logical.
They started with consumer machines, 13 inch MacBook Pro and the Mac mini, then added the consumer all in one Desktop 24 inch iMac. Next they did the “Pro “laptops. And now they are adding in the “pro” desktops. First the studio, and then the pro.
Yesterday, they accomplished many things at one time. A 3 for 1 SKU reduction. Adding a whole new type of Mac. Showing off their technical sophistication, with a processor that has never had anything in history of computers that’s built like it is.
The Apple Silicon Mac lineup is like the product it’s self. Different.
It’s a whole new thing and it’s being done a whole new way.

I got a Mini on launch day. And so I have been here to see the whole thing. The people who have trouble are the ones who can’t understand that it’s not the old Mac but a entire new one. I tell people to check their experience and expectations at the door. Because it’s not like what you have used in the past. Apple is right. It’s better. And I am not a fan boy. If it was not better then I would say so.

So what do we have:
A mini for consumer desktop without a monitor, and an iMac for consumer desktop with a monitor. 2 laptops for the “pro” market.
A Studio for 2 different types of people. A M1 Max for the people who need more than a mini but not as much as a Ultra. This is the iMac 27 replacement. And the new thing,a ultra replacement for the iMac Pro. But each is much more than what it replaces.
Next as noted is the Pro.
I would caution you to not expect it to be what you have had but to be what it can be reimagined. Did you hear about that Mac Pro and a half size case? I expect that is your new Mac Pro. And the “old “ one is going to hang around for a while- with a big big update. Intel scalable Xeon. A server chip in your desktop.
Remember yesterday when Johnny said the M1 Max was hiding a secret. It still is. Because they can do two dies like in the Ultra, but they can also do four dies. That’s what you will see in the mini pro,or the small pro or the Apple Silcon pro.

There’s nothing to be upset about. This is the most amazing transition any company has ever performed to their lineup in the history of computing. Yes we would all like things to be cheaper than they are. But as you can learn at any store you go to, they aren’t. My only complaint, as a person who runs windows even more than macOS, is that there are no PCs that are even close.

 

[darngooddesign]

The most disappointing is the end of the larger iMac—I have a 2019 and would have considered an upgrade to the M1 if they made a 32" version. I use an Apple for work, but it's mostly non-graphics-intensive work—the iMac was the perfect solution.

Now it's just like a PC—you have to buy the computer and monitor separately—and if you want an Apple, it's going to be at least 150% of the price increase. If you want similar specs with a Mac 27" monitor, you'll have a 6k rather than 5k one, but it'll cost more than double what the iMac did.

I don't know enough about Apple's business to know if this will hurt them—but how many $2000 (including $400 stand!) 27" displays are they going to sell? Non-professional Apple users will just buy Mac Minis and 3rd-party monitors. And people will presumably upgrade less frequently—I'm still using my 4-year-old 3rd-gen iPad Pro 12.9"

I had an Apple II Plus as a child, and stayed with Apple through the late 1990s, when the price differential became so steep that I began building my own overclocked PCs. I tried some MS-compatible tablets until eventually the far-superior iPad brought me back to Apple.

But with these kind of insane prices I think I may soon consider going back to PCs—Apple is not only incredibly expensive now, but "It Just Works" has become a bit of a joke. The iPhone is still the sine qua non of smartphones, but it's over $1000 now.

What's the buy-in for someone switching to Apple now, who wants my basic setup? $3000+ for a Mac Mini and Sudio Monitor, $2500 for the iPhone and 12.9 iPad Pro, and $500 for the Watch—then throw in an Apple TV and a couple needed accessories and it's close to $7,000 before tax. That's pretty insane.

You aren't describing a basic setup.

Basic is the iPad Air; an iPhone 13 the carrier basically gives you on contract, maybe add $100 to upgrade it a little; the Mac mini with 3rd party display or MacBook Air or 24" iMac; a $20 BT mouse which lasts a year on a AA battery; the $280 Apple Watch SE; etc.

 

[bluecoast]

Why would a client respond to me quicker based on what computer I own?

If you’re showing a complex model w/ physics and you can show it & make changes in real time without having to re-render it.

I’m trying to get at the MS is very complex demanding tasks that most of us will not ever be using our computers for.

 

[alectrona6400]

As successful as Apple is right now, I sense a variation of a "mid-90s era" coming.


(Please stop quoting this. I know, I was wrong.)

 

[JMacHack]

As successful as Apple is right now, I sense a variation of a "mid-90s era" coming.

Yeah they have a large array of products, but there were other factors that 90’s Apple had that hurt them. System 7 was a dinosaur, Copland was going nowhere, their clones were eating into their sales, and their CEO wasn’t the brightest crayon in the box.

I think they’ll be fine in this case with a wider product stack.

 

[Realityck]

As successful as Apple is right now, I sense a variation of a "mid-90s era" coming.

The AS Macs are all way more capable then Power PCs or a bit earlier Centris/Quadra models. All using Motorola processors. They had way too many Mac models if that's what you meant?

 

[alectrona6400]

Yeah they have a large array of products, but there were other factors that 90’s Apple had that hurt them. System 7 was a dinosaur, Copland was going nowhere, their clones were eating into their sales, and their CEO wasn’t the brightest crayon in the box.

I think they’ll be fine in this case with a wider product stack.

Yeah, forgot about that too. But yes, the massive array of products does bring some of that energy in.

The AS Macs are all way more capable then Power PCs or a bit earlier Centris/Quadra models. All using Motorola processors. They had way too many Mac models if that's what you meant?

Yeah, more mac models. Also you could easily emulate Mac OS 9 and some versions of X via QEMU on a mid-range Intel PC. You can also use that dumpster fire known as PearPC if you feel wild enough, lol

 

[kc9hzn]

As successful as Apple is right now, I sense a variation of a "mid-90s era" coming.

I dunno, Apple’s biggest issues in the mid-90s were 1) software stagnation (cooperative multitasking, lack of modern OOP development language, lack of an ability to drive software updates), 2) poor communication of machine SKUs and poor differentiation (how many different Performa model numbers were literally the same hardware just with different bundled software?), 3) lack of focus (everyone tried to squeeze all their projects into Copland, which resulted in #1, not to mention go nowhere ideas like the Pippin), 4) the clone market that nearly killed Apple, 5) significant technological debt (Newton ran something completely different than Macs, then there’s A/UX, and none of these technologies could address the issues Apple had with #1 or #2). At best, you could maybe say today that Apple has too many SKUs, but it’s still far fewer than they had back in the mid 90s (after all, Apple was selling both the 9500 and the 8500 at the same time, never mind that both of them served the same “higher range tower with expandability” market).

Edit: And today’s Mac SKUs typically have good differentiation.
MacBook Air: entry level laptop
MacBook Pro 13”: need more ports or faster CPU than the MBA, but still need portability
MacBook Pro 16”: need a full blown Pro laptop and are willing to carry the weight
Mac mini: low cost desktop Mac, at a few different hardware points
iMac: desktop design, slightly higher end than the Mac mini, great family computer or great business computer if you don’t want a tower or other computer occupying cubicle space
Mac Studio: very capable prosumer or professional machine, all around general “pro” targeted (very much like the iMac Pro’s target, actually).
Mac Pro: high end workflows (video editing or rendering or the like) that benefit from significant GPU and CPU parallelization or hardware expansion, rack mountable.

The iPad you could argue is lacking in product differentiation, and the iPhone is even more lacking in product differentiation (not much separates the 13 Pro from the 13 Pro Max). But the Mac definitely has strong differentiation, possibly the best in the industry.

 

[alectrona6400]

I dunno, Apple’s biggest issues in the mid-90s were 1) software stagnation (cooperative multitasking, lack of modern OOP development language, lack of an ability to drive software updates), 2) poor communication of machine SKUs and poor differentiation (how many different Performa model numbers were literally the same hardware just with different bundled software?), 3) lack of focus (everyone tried to squeeze all their projects into Copland, which resulted in #1, not to mention go nowhere ideas like the Pippin), 4) the clone market that nearly killed Apple, 5) significant technological debt (Newton ran something completely different than Macs, then there’s A/UX, and none of these technologies could address the issues Apple had with #1 or #2). At best, you could maybe say today that Apple has too many SKUs, but it’s still far fewer than they had back in the mid 90s (after all, Apple was selling both the 9500 and the 8500 at the same time, never mind that both of them served the same “higher range tower with expandability” market).

Conflict averted, not everything came to mind when I wrote that. LOL

 

[Macative]

The only complaint about the Mac Studio is that there isn't a $1599 model that comes with an M1 Pro. They could have done this, for people who were looking for the performant Mac mini. They didn't, because they don't want to give away these chips for less than $2K.

The display is the real embarrassment, after so many years of rumors of Apple making an affordable consumer display. $1599 for an iMac panel with no iMac. Three different models with 3 different stand options, not interchangeable. No discount for the VESA model that doesn't come with a stand. There is no way this display should be more than $999 without a stand, and more more than $1299 with any stand.

 

[alectrona6400]

I feel like 3rd party monitors could easily do the job without having to cost a fortune. Speaking of standless Studio Displays, there was one. Just had to wait a few years for the stand to fall off, though.

 

[dawnrazor]

You’re literally work to pay off that device though. Then when the Mac Pro comes out it even more? Saving an hour here or there is cool and all but unless your client is Disney, or similar, it makes little since to drop this amount of money when a newer MBP can save you thousands.

Like I said nobody needs these things and not a lot of corporations allow you to bring your own devices into work.

100% disagree with everything you say… and yes one of my clients is the house of the mouse….

I don’t work to pay off the gear… that kind of investment can be paid off relatively quickly… if you keep busy. By having a machine that saves me time means I actually end up changing my clients less. That’s crazy I hear you whine… No. If I can change my clients 7 hours for something they expected to take 8 hours, they are more likely to come back and repeat business is the key… conversely if I charge my clients 9 hours for a job they wanted to take 8 hours then they may very well look elsewhere for their next gig… and that’s it, at the professional level I operate at, you can’t cut back on quality, you can’t cut back on your rates so the only choice is cut back on time… and that literally is everything, spend the money get the fastest you can afford to buy and do the work… 2-3 years do it all again…

Why haven’t I got a Mac Pro… I almost pulled the trigger on one, but the rumours of Apple Silicon gave me pause and I’m glad I did, do I wish I had an Intel Mac Pro over the last couple years… a solid yes, I could really have done with it on several Arri RAW projects I have worked on… but I’m so glad I didn’t buy one in light of the Mac Studio and the promise that a Silicon Mac Pro is on it’s way… that’s got to be at least twice as fast as a maxed out Mac Studio…. and unfortunately twice the price….

 

[johngordon]

I think you're the perfect target market for the Mac Studio. Someone that is looking for a Mac Pro but find the Mac Pro too expensive. The Mac Studio actually answered the questions of many people looking to get a Mac Pro.

The problem is, consumers looking for a 27" iMac (or upgrading from one) are being ignored. These consumers won't need the power of the Mac Studio, but they would want larger screen than the 24" iMac. In Apple's presentation, Apple basically told these people to spend even more money for a Mac Studio and Studio Display, which contradicts the whole point of an all-in-one iMac.

So Apple hits some and misses some.

Maybe, although I still think there will be a 27” iMac. But probably pretty similar to the 24” rather than the touted iMac Pro.

 

[Macative]

As successful as Apple is right now, I sense a variation of a "mid-90s era" coming.

I don't know how comparable to the 90's it is. Apple's problems they have today are because they're so successful and not hurting for business at all. They no longer have to care about their software quality being unimpeachable, because no one's is any better, and the odds of you leaving their ecosystem no matter how low the quality dips is practically nil. And they no longer have to make the machines that customer's ask for either. They only have to make the machines that maximize profit, and that's what they do. So much of Apple today is anti-customer while pretending to be the opposite. I don't know what kind of long term effect that has. It would please me to think that being so anti-customer would negatively affect them in the long run, but I'm not seeing any evidence of it actually happening. Yet.

 

[JMacHack]

The display is the real embarrassment, after so many years of rumors of Apple making an affordable consumer display. $1599 for an iMac panel with no iMac. Three different models with 3 different stand options, not interchangeable. No discount for the VESA model that doesn't come with a stand. There is no way this display should be more than $999 without a stand, and more more than $1299 with any stand.

I agree here, the display is a flop. I think the most egregious part was selling the height adjustable stand as a separate $400 option, no matter how “premium” it feels.

There’s also no downstream Thunderbolt ports, just two more usb-c ports which doesn’t eliminate the need for a 3rd party dock. The least they could’ve done is provide a single downstream tb port, maybe even a couple usb-a ports and an ethernet port (perfect for an iMac or MacBook companion!)

I’m not sure what the a14 is even doing, I don’t think there’s local dimming zones on it so what’s that processing power for besides Center Stage?

It seems like most of the work went into the speakers, which are nice, but in a desktop environment people have options for hi-fi systems, and let’s face it, people buy a monitor for the screen, not the sound.

 

[ian87w]

Maybe, although I still think there will be a 27” iMac. But probably pretty similar to the 24” rather than the touted iMac Pro.

Maybe once we are on the M2 cycle, but definitely not this year. Apple even told 27" iMac owners to upgrade to the Mac Studio instead in the keynote.

 

[JMacHack]

I don't know how comparable to the 90's it is. Apple's problems they have today are because they're so successful and not hurting for business at all. They no longer have to care about their software quality being unimpeachable, because no one's is any better, and the odds of you leaving their ecosystem no matter how low the quality dips is practically nil. And they no longer have to make the machines that customer's ask for either. They only have to make the machines that maximize profit, and that's what they do. So much of Apple today is anti-customer while pretending to be the opposite. I don't know what kind of long term effect that has. It would please to me think that being so anti-customer would negatively affect them in the long run, but I'm not seeing any evidence of it actually happening. Yet.

Call us “iSheep” next.

 

[johngordon]

Well I was going to purchase a new imac 27 this year.

Given apple has dumped this product (with zero communication to customers) I guess thats not going to happen.

I am sure as **** not spending twice the money for a Studio set up.

Mac minis are unreliable and I wont be buying another ...every one I have had have problems....Problems starting up the attached screen and keeping keyboard and mouse attached. Just annoying every day.

I started using mac back in the days of windows vista (truely rubbish)...but now W10 is vastly better and reliable. My W10 pcs with fabulous 32 inch screens never miss a beat.

Guess Apple is telling me I am not their type of client and I should *** off.

Have they dumped it?

 

[darngooddesign]

...And they no longer have to make the machines that customer's ask for either. They only have to make the machines that maximize profit, and that's what they do.

I guess that's why Apple released the powerful and quiet Pro laptops people asked for; the Mac Mini Pro (Mac Studio) people asked for; and the upcoming even more powerful MacPro people asked for.

 

[alectrona6400]

Yep, unfortunately they have dumped the 27-inch iMac!

 

[johngordon]

Maybe once we are on the M2 cycle, but definitely not this year. Apple even told 27" iMac owners to upgrade to the Mac Studio instead in the keynote.

Maybe once we are on the M2 cycle, but definitely not this year. Apple even told 27" iMac owners to upgrade to the Mac Studio instead in the keynote.

To be fair, I missed them saying that.

I guess it might be quite interesting to know the demographic of 27” iMac owners. It wouldn’t surprise me if the demographic of “consumers with a 27” iMac” is actually pretty small. I had one for my work, and of the few people I knew who have ever had one purely for home/family use had the smaller one.

I appreciate that is purely anecdotal though. But again, it wouldn’t surprise me if Apple had data on what the typical 27” iMac user wanted. And it likely is something a bit more Pro, but not a Mac Pro price point. They even tried it with the iMac Pro, but this is maybe going that but further.

 

[Macative]

I guess that's why Apple released the powerful and quiet Pro laptops people asked for; the Mac Mini Pro (Mac Studio) people asked for; and the upcoming even more powerful MacPro people asked for.

Pretty sure no asked for the high end Mac mini to start $1999.

 

[alectrona6400]

If the next Mac Mini's base price goes over $1000, I'll scoff.

 

[ahurst]

I’m using my Mac mini with the 27” 4K LG monitor and macOS is making some mumbo jumbo with the scalling and as a result it renders much higher resolution than it needs to to properly render the UI.

Ahhh, there we go. Was wondering if it was a question of how many pixels you were pushing. I went from a non-retina 27" iMac to my current 14" MBP with its internal display, so I can't speak to how well macOS does external 4k. I'd be surprised if the new Mac Studio + display shows the same issues, though: I think there were some growing pains with the original M1 and external monitor support that have improved in the M1 Pro/Max chips and should hopefully be in good shape here too.

You don’t have this problem in Windows because it handles this in a much better way.

I think it's a matter of preference. I personally really dislike the Windows approach to DPI scaling: it works fine for newer apps that are written to support it, but for a wide range of utilities, older apps, windowed games, etc. you get an unpleasant experience with all sorts of blurry windows and scaling issues. The macOS approach of "always 2x scaling" feels a lot less clunky to me in practice.