Then clearly, you didn't read the second one.
I have read it. Multiple times ( about every time someone pops up and swears that it says something that it do not I at least skim of not re-read it again). I haven't though read "into" it what I want to be there. I read to comprehend what's been said.
It is extremely telling that all you have is some variation on an ad hominem attack ( a failure upon my ability to read and comprehend ) as opposed to a quote from the article. The closest part to a handwaving references to something non existent and future on products is
"... But the Pro Workflow Team isn’t just there to fix current bugs. It’s also empowered to make improvements on future products, like the Mac Pro. ..."
https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/
Which the first part is telling because the focus of the article has been about how one of this teams primary missing is getting more performance and less bugs out of current applications. However, "improvements on future products" is inconsistent with apps that doesn't exist yet. Future versions of apps/hardware that don't exist yet perhaps not there is no skew toward "audio and video apps that didn't yet exist". The next version of LogicX doesn't exist yet but LogicX does exist.
This group is primarily looking at Apple stack, but they are looking at a subset of 3rd party stuff.
"... we find it and we go into our architecture team and our performance architects and really drill down and figure out where is the bottleneck. Is it the OS, is it in the drivers, is it in the application, is it in the silicon, and then run it to ground to get it fixed.” ...
...He stresses that it’s not just Apple’s applications that they’re testing and working to help make better. Third-party relationships on this are very important to them and the workflow team is helping to fix their problems faster too. ...
"
The outside consultants they hire to do directed projects are working on things that probably need to be completed.
"... They sit doors away from the engineering team running through real footage and mixing real tracks to figure out what’s working and what’s not. And they use a mixture of software, not just Apple’s first-party stuff. ..."
But it is a huge leap that all of these projects require only a Mac Pro. (especially when the contracted for projects probably needed to be done completed by a certain point in time). The "Pro Workflow" group generally works on things that better enable the whole product line. A bug fix is going to help on any Mac. Some chokepoint in a system library is probably a chokepoint on multiple Macs.
While they do work with other folks stuff, it is probably delusional to think that the folks selected don't significantly use at least some Apple apps significantly in their workflow. Apple isn't going to pay someone alot of money to primarily sit around and optimizing AVID , Adobe , or someone else's stuff. If the bug/throttle point is in someone else's code (or someone else's hardware) Apple really brings nothing special to the solution path in those cases. Where there is a nexus point of stuff primarily owned by apple that's the subset that this workflow team with most likely spend most of their time. That is where they can make a difference.
Some new application spinning up where most of the bugs/changes need to be made in 3rd party code... there is little impact that team is going to have in that context.
