Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

WWDC - Disappointment

ItsTaylorTimes said:
It would most definitely last 10 years I think. The problem is I can build a PC for $3k that will far outperform the Mac Pro I build for $4.5k and also gives me the ability to upgrade the system as new hardware comes out. Apple is still selling their computer at the same price it cost 4 years ago even though its not worth near that much as the hardware is outdated. Hell Nvidias newest consumer market video cards outperform the D700 in raw computing power alone. Apple wants to charge me $1000 to add dual d700's with a total of 3 teraflops of performance. The 1070, for $449, alone has 6.5 teraflops of computing power. If apple adjusted their prices accordingly to what their hardware is actually worth people might not complain as much but no one in their right mind would pay release day prices for this old of hardware.
Click to expand...

That's very different from asking for a computer that can last 10 years.

Through much of Apple's history, there were many times when we were able to build PCs with better specs and less money that what Apple had to offer. I don't see much change here. Sure, we all want to see new hardware and a new tower with PCI-e slots but, let's face it, odds of that happening are about as good as hitting the lottery jackpot.

If you really want high specs with low prices, build a machine and install the OS of your choice.
 
pastrychef said:
Yes, I remember when they played with integrating ZFS. I'm an absolute noob when it comes to file systems but based on what I've read of ZFS, it's a very resource hungry file system.

Out of curiosity, what features would you have added to macOS?
Click to expand...
Ok. Here i go:
New memory management system. Read about the bsd two handed clock algo the mac still uses
Support for virtualization features of modern cpus
Better opengl support
A network filesystem
Spotlight as a network service
Backup that is not a sliced disk image with hardlinks (Timemachine)
File versions that are not a simple SQLLITE DB
standard frameworks for protocols (imap, http, crypto) apples api sucks
Standard user db like ldap to enable proper network user accounts
Proper xpc and sandboxing. Not symlinks in your homedir

I could go on for ages
 
pmau said:
Ok. Here i go:
New memory management system. Read about the bsd two handed clock algo the mac still uses
Support for virtualization features of modern cpus
Better opengl support
A network filesystem
Spotlight as a network service
Backup that is not a sliced disk image with hardlinks (Timemachine)
File versions that are not a simple SQLLITE DB
standard frameworks for protocols (imap, http, crypto) apples api sucks
Standard user db like ldap to enable proper network user accounts
Proper xpc and sandboxing. Not symlinks in your homedir

I could go on for ages
Click to expand...

1. I don't know about the memory management.
2. Virtualization improvements. I'd love to see that too but I don't see it happening anytime soon. They don't even support VT-d yet.
3. OpenGL. lol. We are years behind and, honestly, I'm hoping they just continue to improve Metal instead.
4. Network file system. What's wrong with what Apple is using now? They are industry standards.
5. I believe Spotlight can be enabled over a network.
6. There are other options available. We are far from limited to Time Machine.
7. I don't know about versioning.
8. APIs improve over time. Swift is still very young.
9. Isn't LDAP already in use?
10. I don't know about XPC and sandboxing.

It's quite clear that you truly despise macOS and you really shouldn't use it at all.
 
No offense taken. I don't need you to decide when and why I (have) to use OSX.
Peace. You probably don't earn a living developing.
(No. iOS dev is not even my main job. But I think it's the best dev platform)
 
  • Like
Reactions: tuxon86 and analog900
It wasn't soooo bad, think of all the 13 year olds and under that absolutely loved the the new imessage features announced.
 
sunapple said:
WWDC only does rare major hardware updates like the original - current - Mac Pro, so a spec bump was never to be expected. A new MacBook Pro however...
Click to expand...
The 15" Retina Macbook Pro (plus an update to the rest of the MBP and MBA line) was announced at WWDC 2012, shipping that day. The 13" followed later in the year. Plus they updated the MBA's again at WWDC 2013.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: robeddie and pat500000
My Mac Pro 1,1 > 2,1 is already 10 year old.
Planning to keep it another 3-4 years (with or without Sierra).
Yosemite runs smooth, El Capitan also smooth but it is more strict than Yosemite.
Apple for sure have made Sierra even more strict than El Capitan.

A computer is a tool of creativity and planning to me. If I can do both, whatever the UI/OS, it is functional to me.
The UIs evolve, hardware too, but do we REALLY need what's most recent/new?

I've seen miracles done with old computers and software, it's the "artist" that matter, not the tools.
Same goes to Photography. You can have the best Medium Format DSLR but not the "sense" of art. A disposable camera or a pinhole can take greater photos in the hands of a real photographer-artist.

This is my way of thinking. Apple has failed to deliver what artists-professionals want/need since the death of Steve Jobs. He was the artist inside the company, the rest was/are the accountants. You can't create art with numbers (except fractals).

Cheers!
 
  • Like
Reactions: filmak, sigmadog and pastrychef
Wouldn't those features
VAGDesign said:
This is my way of thinking. Apple has failed to deliver what artists-professionals want/need since the death of Steve Jobs. He was the artist inside the company, the rest was/are the accountants. You can't create art with numbers (except fractals).
Click to expand...

And there's the big problem. Steve understood the need to satisfy the creatives so we had the tools we needed and he had thriving customers that he needed. He wanted function in a great package but today they want a glitzy innovative package with whatever functions they can stuff inside. Pros understand the value of simplicity whereas these guys running Apple and their designers don't seem to get it. Give the customers bling and they will come is their motto.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Beardy man, filmak, Hank Carter and 2 others
JimGoshorn said:
Wouldn't those features


And there's the big problem. Steve understood the need to satisfy the creatives so we had the tools we needed and he had thriving customers that he needed. He wanted function in a great package but today they want a glitzy innovative package with whatever functions they can stuff inside. Pros understand the value of simplicity whereas these guys running Apple and their designers don't seem to get it. Give the customers bling and they will come is their motto.
Click to expand...
If I recall Steve started the war on professionals. Remember that Final Cut Pro was killed and replaced by FCPX (roundly condemned by professionals) under Steve's watch. He wanted the consumer market to the exclusion of all else -pity he couldn't cater to both pros and consumers.
 
msh said:
If I recall Steve started the war on professionals. Remember that Final Cut Pro was killed and replaced by FCPX (roundly condemned by professionals) under Steve's watch. He wanted the consumer market to the exclusion of all else -pity he couldn't cater to both pros and consumers.
Click to expand...

where does iMovie fit into all of this killing and consumering?

like, steve wanted two consumer video editing products? why?
 
flat five said:
2 prosumer video applications?
or
1 consumer and 1 prosumer?

either way.. why did s.jobs want this?
it makes no sense.
Click to expand...
It makes perfect sense:

consumer: Very large market, not demanding, high margin=enormous profits
prosumer: Large market, not too demanding, susceptible to faux "pro" marketing, high margin= very good profitability
hard core pro: Small market, very demanding, not susceptible to Jobs marketing bs (aka reality distortion field), high margin= low profitability

Given these market perceptions, Jobs dropped the hard core pros, pretended to market to pros but with faux "pro" products in order to appeal to the pro aspirations of prosumers and consumers.

I post not to condemn Jobs but not to praise him either. Steve's, and now Apple's strategy, has been wildly profitable but riskier than it need be with its reliance on the mass market consumer. It would be wise, in my judgement, to retain the hard core pros not only as a hedge against a downturn in the mass consumer market but also for marketing/goodwill benefits and as a laboratory of technology that could feedback to the consumer products. Apple has the resources to do it all and with the right leadership should and could do it all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: VAGDesign
Flynnstone said:
Last & useful can be 2 different things. I have a G5 Mac beside me. Bought in 2004. Still runs fine. But not too useful.
But I have a 2010 MacBook with SSD that, I think, runs better that a late model HP ZBook.
Click to expand...

I agree. But I wasn't the one asking for a computer that can last 10 years...
 
msh said:
prosumer: Large market, not too demanding, susceptible to faux "pro" marketing, high margin= very good profitability
Click to expand...

I must be a Prosumer.

I also mistakenly thought that Apple bought LinkedIn, until I was corrected 10 minutes later.

For those 10 minutes, I thought Apple pulled a rabbit out of the hat before WWDC.

These are divergent technology times that will be thought as defining moments later on.

One thought is that Microsoft wants a ready market for their HoloLens in the Prosumer business world.

Apple is not showing up as a player.

Yet.

➰
 
  • Like
Reactions: zephonic
rockyromero said:
These are divergent technology times that will be thought as defining moments later on.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree with this. The old way of doing things is going to be superseded and it makes a lot of folks uncomfortable.

People may think Apple is abandoning pros (and I'm not saying they're not), but perhaps Apple is just looking to the pros of the future?

Maybe they see x86 as a dead end (and frankly, it's hard to disagree); performance increase has slowed down to a near-imperceptible trickle, and is mostly achieved by adding cores and new instruction sets. ARM on the other hand is improving leaps and bounds, and at the rate they're going they could reach performance parity in the not too distant future.

For people coming from Avid or Media 100, FCPX may seem "non-pro" but the next generation may feel differently. If a teenager starts out filming on his iPhone and editing in iMovie, FCPX is a natural next step. Other than a more traditional workflow, what does Premiere have to offer that FCPX doesn't?

If I see how a 16-year old interacts with technology, it is clear to me that the conventions I'm used to aren't necessarily the best fit for him or her. They are going to be the pro users ten years from now, and I can't imagine how their workflow will be and what tools they will need to get the job done.

Apple is skating to where (they think) the puck is going to be. If the puck stays where it is or ends up somewhere else, they're screwed. But I wouldn't bet against them. Yet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flat five, Bubba Satori and BeechFlyer
zephonic said:
I'm inclined to agree with this. The old way of doing things is going to be superseded and it makes a lot of folks uncomfortable.

People may think Apple is abandoning pros (and I'm not saying they're not), but perhaps Apple is just looking to the pros of the future?

Maybe they see x86 as a dead end (and frankly, it's hard to disagree); performance increase has slowed down to a near-imperceptible trickle, and is mostly achieved by adding cores and new instruction sets. ARM on the other hand is improving leaps and bounds, and at the rate they're going they could reach performance parity in the not too distant future.

For people coming from Avid or Media 100, FCPX may seem "non-pro" but the next generation may feel differently. If a teenager starts out filming on his iPhone and editing in iMovie, FCPX is a natural next step. Other than a more traditional workflow, what does Premiere have to offer that FCPX doesn't?

If I see how a 16-year old interacts with technology, it is clear to me that the conventions I'm used to aren't necessarily the best fit for him or her. They are going to be the pro users ten years from now, and I can't imagine how their workflow will be and what tools they will need to get the job done.

Apple is skating to where (they think) the puck is going to be. If the puck stays where it is or ends up somewhere else, they're screwed. But I wouldn't bet against them. Yet.
Click to expand...
but pro workstations should not be held back just to be more thin / have good looks. What if ford replaced there trucks with something like an vw beetle with an towing hitch? How many pros would buy that?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VAGDesign
zephonic said:
Apple is skating to where (they think) the puck is going to be. If the puck stays where it is or ends up somewhere else, they're screwed. But I wouldn't bet against them. Yet.
Click to expand...

I think Apple is skating to where the puck is obviously heading for content consumers. I think they have missed the puck when it comes to content creators.

I get that young people are very adept with the tools they have at hand, but there really is a big difference between what is required to create a YouTube video versus a major motion picture, and I'm not seeing that gap diminishing significantly with Apple's current offerings, or particularly with the direction they are taking their software and hardware. It seems much more consumption oriented, not production oriented.
 
  • Like
Reactions: antonis, Beardy man and VAGDesign
sigmadog said:
I think Apple is skating to where the puck is obviously heading for content consumers. I think they have missed the puck when it comes to content creators.

I get that young people are very adept with the tools they have at hand, but there really is a big difference between what is required to create a YouTube video versus a major motion picture, and I'm not seeing that gap diminishing significantly with Apple's current offerings, or particularly with the direction they are taking their software and hardware. It seems much more consumption oriented, not production oriented.
Click to expand...

I am neither agreeing nor disagreeing with you, but I have heard that before.

I can't do a complete audio production on an iPad, I need my MacPro for that. No argument there, but let's back up here.

As little as twenty years ago people said the exact same thing about the computer. At the time, ProTools was just peeking around the corner (as an evolution of SoundTools), I think it could do maybe two or four tracks of audio recording/editing, and with terrible sound quality at that.

Professionals agreed, A computer is handy for certain audio editing tasks, but it's not going to replace a proper 48+ channel mixing console and multi-track recorder. It's just not gonna happen, Jim. Even when software and hardware became powerful enough to record and edit 16 tracks at the same time, the sound quality remained subpar and people invested in $100K editing stations because ProTools on a Mac just didn't have the professional sound quality for major label releases.

I'm sure you know what happened next. Nowadays ProTools is (if only just) the de facto standard in professional audio, multi-track tape recorders exist only in boutique analog recording studios catering to a niche market (and it is increasingly hard to find tape for those machines) and all the manufacturers of $100K digital audio workstations went out of business.
Computer audio sound quality improved, track count improved, and at some point in the early 2000's regular PC's (and Macs) became more powerful than the bespoke digital audio hardware.

The story today is remarkably similar. Audio pros all agree an iPad (or any tablet/mobile device) isn't gonna replace your MacPro or Windows workstation, the same way the computer was never going to replace a million dollars worth of the best audio hardware in the world.


In conclusion, I don't know whether Apple is moving away from the professional market, moving towards tomorrow's professional market, or whatever. I have absolutely no clue what that will look like ten or twenty years from now, nor whether or not Apple will be catering to it.

But like my sig line says: "The world is ever-changing. Change along with it, or be a sourpuss."
 
Last edited:
And yet, despite all that, some people still prefer vinyl! ;)

Yep. Things have changed greatly over the past quarter century. There's no guarantee things will change as much in the next 25 years, however.

zephonic said:
In conclusion, I don't know whether Apple is moving away from the professional market, moving towards tomorrow's professional market, or whatever. What I do know is that I have absolutely no clue what the professional market will look like ten or twenty years from now, nor whether or not Apple will be catering to it.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure Apple is going where the money is. Right now, that is towards content consumption. This is, of course, just my opinion.

Completely agree with the second half of this paragraph. Nobody can see the future, not even Jony Ive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back