No new Mac Pro

[-hh]

It has been suggested that Apple had sales data indicating that the majority of the macpros remained stock for the duration of their initial lifecycle (i.e. first owner), and only a small number of users would upgrade their machine....

There's potentially a lot of problems with this alleged set of "data".

Granted, this isn't to say that there haven't been gobs of machines which have gone into University computer rooms which have remained 'plain vanilla', but by the same token I can say that many tower Macs that I've deployed (including personal ones) have typically been given a robust set of hardware when they were initially set up, but that this includes 3rd Party products that weren't bought from Apple.

For example, on a personal 2012 cMP, the first time that it "Phoned Home", it reported that it had 24GB RAM and four (4) hard drives ... even though when purchased from Apple, it didn't have that much RAM and only one (1) drive bay filled.

Now who here really believes that Apple's data management systems are sophisticated enough to systematically go cross-compare ... and track by serial# ... the original hardware build specifications to what it actually first booted up with? To do such a thing costs time & money, so I really doubt that their 'hardware tracking' metrics are this sophisticated.

 

[askunk]

You forget my favorite: "It is the best [.......] we have ever made."

Yeah. I am wondering if there has ever been a company presentation with somebody saying "this is our new generation hardware. It is good, although not as good as the previous generation"

Cut the ...litany, Phil!

@

 

[sevoneone]

Now who here really believes that Apple's data management systems are sophisticated enough to systematically go cross-compare ... and track by serial# ... the original hardware build specifications to what it actually first booted up with? To do such a thing costs time & money, so I really doubt that their 'hardware tracking' metrics are this sophisticated.

I do. Apple's internal GCRM software tracks a lot of information about every serialized piece of hardware they sell globally. Drop in a serial number and it tells you exactly how that machine was equipped when it left the factory, whether it was standard configuration or build to order. It also knows every single registered owner name, apple id and contact info is provided. I have no doubt Apple can very efficiently track this info. Those crash reports people opt-in to send to Apple include a complete system profile including the serial number.

 

[-hh]

I do. Apple's internal GCRM software tracks a lot of information about every serialized piece of hardware they sell globally. Drop in a serial number and it tells you exactly how that machine was equipped when it left the factory, whether it was standard configuration or build to order. It also knows every single registered owner name, apple id and contact info is provided. I have no doubt Apple can very efficiently track this info. Those crash reports people opt-in to send to Apple include a complete system profile including the serial number.

Oh, I don't really doubt that they have the raw data ... my doubt is on just how actively they're applying the data with analysis, which means that the key question is the 'how': if you don't ask the correct questions from your data, you don't get the relevant insights.

Similarly, if you deliberately dodge, you can come up with misleading statistics.

For example, Phil's claim this week on how wonderful the sales have been for the new MBP's ... but did you catch the hidden qualifier in his wording?

 

[Flint Ironstag]

I do. Apple's internal GCRM software tracks a lot of information about every serialized piece of hardware they sell globally. Drop in a serial number and it tells you exactly how that machine was equipped when it left the factory, whether it was standard configuration or build to order. It also knows every single registered owner name, apple id and contact info is provided. I have no doubt Apple can very efficiently track this info. Those crash reports people opt-in to send to Apple include a complete system profile including the serial number.

No doubt in my mind that Apple is expertly mining this data.

 

[Keith Rondinelli]

I think it's safe to assume once and for all that Apple doesn't really care about "pro" users anymore. They're firmly and irrevocably in the business of designing and manufacturing gadgets for college students. The trash can felt like a bone we got thrown, and I've been disappoint with it. It works, it's fast, but the fact that I can't switch out the GPUs is a major disappointment. I want to be able to use GPU renderers in my 3d and motion work, and none of them support AMD cards. I think I'll have to finally switch to Windows. The "touch strip" Macbook isn't any innovation, its a gimmick. The latest iOS is a bit of a disaster. Why would they take the "Swipe to unlock" function and change it? This isn't a "feature", it's an arbitrary change that makes the phone less friendly and usable, and forces me to relearn a gesture that, over the course of four or five phones and many years, had become second nature. And what did I get in exchange? The ability to put animated emojis and doodads in Messages? It's all gimmicky crap, no new innovations.

 

[F1Mac]

it's an arbitrary change that makes the phone less friendly and usable, and forces me to relearn a gesture that, over the course of four or five phones and many years, had become second nature.

While I didn't mind "slide to unlock", the new iteration doesn't even require a gesture, you put your thumb on the home button and that's it. No big deal for me. /OT

 

[Keith Rondinelli]

While I didn't mind "slide to unlock", the new iteration doesn't even require a gesture, you put your thumb on the home button and that's it. No big deal for me. /OT

Well, I've had the new OS for about four weeks, and I still "swipe" to unlock it, forgetting it's changed. Rather than unlocking, this swipes to a useless screen of widgets and notifications. I then have to press the home button to unlock. My point isn't that it's any harder to do, in theory—it in fact may have be easier—but that it's an arbitrary change to something that was already ingrained. I'm forced to relearn something that had become second nature, which is annoying and serves no purpose. It's like if you'd been turning the key in your car away from you to start (clockwise if looking at the ignition) suddenly it was counter-clockwise.

It's these little "updates" that justify shelling out for new phones or installing a new system, and at this point they seem pointless. Either you're making it better or your spinning your wheels, and they're clearly spinning wheels.