Apple’s 2016 in review
chuqui.com
chuqui.com
Asking people what they want will give you predictable results: complaints about any kind of change and positive feedback about shiny-looking features that demo well. You'll end up pulled in a million directions as you try to account for everyone's feedback.
The traditional Apple solution was to give a single idealized user — Steve Jobs — the power to improve his own experience. Nobody can replace Steve, but I think someone (or some group) inside Apple needs to fill this role before their products can become really great again.
You want a Suffolk Punch boiy[sic][1]!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Punch
[1] boiy, or some spelling there of, is how old fellas round these parts (Suffolk, England) like to refer to each other. :)
For anyone wondering what a proper young old boy sounds like I would suggest the following factual and totally legit documentary on the storm of 1987 ...as described by one "Brian from Melton":-
I like the 2016 MacBook Pro. The disappointment I felt was that after such a long wait for the update, I was expecting/hoping for a best of breed laptop, with no real flaws. In day to day use I don't actually think about its various (and widely discussed) flaws so much, and I just get on with using it as a tool to do my work.
The Touchbar is useless, though.
Even that part is mostly wrong. A fast horse can run more than 40MPH which about all you can expect from a car in a city. The main reason most people don't own a horse isn't that a car is faster.
Users ask for things that are obvious. No kidding faster is better. Can we have it cheaper and more reliable too?
If you ask most people in 1870 how to improve those aspects of a horse they'll tell you all about horse breeding but that doesn't get you a car.
Only on flat ground. Make a horse go uphill for a while and he will soon stop if carrying anything. A car, even an ancient one, not so much.
Add to that that cars can maintain a sustained speed as long as they have fuel, and of course cars are much faster than horses all things considered, and of course this is one of the reasons of their adoption - you can get much farther with a car than with a horse in the same amount of time, and it needs less maintenance as well.
> you can get much farther with a car than with a horse in the same amount of time, and it needs less maintenance as well.
But that's not faster. That's endurance, reliability, economy. You're arguing that the tortoise is faster than the hare, but "being faster" isn't how the tortoise won the race.
A slow car can go much more than 40 mph. Both cars and horses may be practically limited by traffic most of the time in crowded urban environments, but cars are still faster, even in most cities, on both peak and practically-attained-average speeds.
"The Model T had a front-mounted 177-cubic-inch (2.9 L) inline four-cylinder engine, producing 20 hp (15 kW), for a top speed of 40–45 mph (64–72 km/h)."
Being faster than horses isn't why cars won. Given the choice between a modern car and a hypothetical horse with the same or higher top speed, most people are still not going to choose the horse.
Oh wait, that's a fancier horse...
Oh wait, that's a fancier horse...
From the OP:
>>> Once they do that, they then need to go off and be Apple, but from a base of knowledge instead of a set of assumptions — assumptions that seem to be flawed and incorrect. But what Apple doesn’t want to do is start building products the way other companies do, because we don’t need “faster horses”, we need Apple to look beyond what users are asking for and figure out what they really need. That’s been Apple’s innovation strength in the past, and right now, it increasingly seems missing from the products they give us.
They need to relearn and engage in user discovery and questioning until they realise what niches they occupy and their use cases and needs.
I doubt Apple's former lead would ever have put out a Mac that needs a dongle to connect to iPhone but not Android. I doubt he'd have killed Apple monitors as an iMac sat next to a black LG is just so damn ugly. iOS, MacOS and current hardware shows, oh so clearly, that once notorious sense of detail and overall direction is long gone.
As is, their idealised user is envisioning all the wrong gimmicky things and missing most of the details. They're trying to play "what would Steve do?" but not being him they can't play that game well.
That just says it all really, doesn't it? Macs simply don't "just work" anymore. I feel like they're making almost random hardware changes
What's wrong with the USB-C to Lightning cable?
http://www.apple.com/uk/shop/product/MK0X2ZM/A/usb-c-to-ligh...
What type of user experience is that?
As a side note: there's nothing wrong with usb-c. I can see why it's an improvement! But the reason apple are pricks is they didn't also throw in a single usb-a port so we can keep using the dozen devices and 30 cables I already own.
It's one for people who pick up the new cable and get on with their lives.
One paper cut issue is solved by buying a cable and they can t get by with their lives on the new or lack their of new hardware.
The current phone does not come with a usb-c cable because it is older than the MacBook Pros and the Laptops don't come with a lightning cable because not everyone that has the laptop has an iPhone. I'm sure the next iPhone will come with a usb-c cable and then people will complain that they can't charge it with their old laptops.
The original iPod was incompatible with many Macs still in use at the time that lacked FireWire ports.
This whole idea goes by the name Jobs to be Done. Intercom has a sick PDF book on applying the concepts to product development: https://www.intercom.com/books/jobs-to-be-done
> Asking people what they want will give you predictable results...
Asking someone about what's making them unhappy is very different from asking them what they want. In my experience, the value in talking to users is in understanding common pain points, not finding solutions.
Any user research will involve interacting with users, but it's not to gather their opinions, which is almost always irrelevant, but to document their behavior, needs and drives.
Users will offer solutions, because that comes naturally, but these need to be turned back into problems before being used. For example,
User: "I want a big button in the middle of the screen that says 'print' and then prints my stuff immediately!"
Researcher:"So you print a lot during your day?"
User: "Yeah, and each time I have to go down a long list of menus, and then I have to reselect the printer each time."
Apple has apparently been able to get by with user studies done on a target group of one (Jobs). However, he's not there any more, and the more time that passes, the more it seems that they haven't been able to fill his shoes.
It also explains why it's shifted from being a computer company that makes gadgets (Jobs) is now becoming a gadget company that happens to make some computers as well (Cook).
In all this, the gates are wide open for Microsoft to score some good points here towards devs.
In 2007 Jobs was using the phrase "post-PC", and by the time he died in 2011, more than half of Apple's revenue was iPhone/iPad/etc.
To me it seems that Cook is just continuing the trend.
Pretty sure in 6 years Jobs would have picked up some new trends, details and directions. Pretty sure we'd not be stuck in some infinte repeat loop. Thinner. Groundhog Day. Repeat.
Why should one exclude the other?
The "current" Mac Pro is over 3 (4?) years old now. Users can't upgrade it because of the proprietary GPU cards and Apple don't seem able to keep it relevant themselves.
It's difficult to have a professional relationship with a supplier where the best options for macOS are either a dodgy Hackintosh or a used 2012 Mac Pro with a new GPU.
GPU is the future of professional computing in many emerging sectors. Apple currently ships no hardware compatible with any of this.
My wife is a professional photographer. Her current photo-editing computer is a Windows 7 desktop with 16 GB of RAM.
We know Windows 7's days are numbered, so we're starting to think about her next editing computer. The two most obvious options are (a) some Apple product, or (b) a computer running Windows 10.
Here are the major criteria for the replacement, which need to remain true for 3+ years after the computer's purchase:
(1) It must legally run current Adobe products. (2) Can support > 16 GB RAM during its lifetime. (3) There must be minimal unplanned downtime. (4) The price can't be exorbitant, relative to a medium-high end PC. TCO should also be reasonable. (5) It must be convenient to transfer photos from her camera's SD card. (6) We'd like to minimize the time and attention we put into initial setup and maintenance.
So the most obvious options (currently) are:
* Apple: MacPro, iMac, or MacBook Pro
* PC: Windows 8 or Windows 10
Here's how I score the options, although perhaps someone will correct me:
(1) Easily satisfied by all options listed.
(2) No MacBook Pro satisfies this. Fast SSD for swap is helpful but sub-optimal.
(3) Windows 10 (non-enterprise) fails this, because of unavoidable updates. MacPro and iMac fail this because (AFAIK) Apple doesn't offer loaners for these during warranty work.
(4) For initial purchase cost, the MacPro is a fail, and the MacBook Pro is nearly a fail. However, all current Apple products are potential TCO fail given the lack of user-replaceable components.
(5) AFAIK the desktop Macs fail this, although connecting an external USB reader should be easy enough. I suspect the MacBook Pro would be more hassle, given its ports/dongles mess.
(6) All of the options should satisfy this criterion well-enough.
As far as I can tell, the winner is a Windows 8 PC.
Why is no Apple product a viable winner, given our criteria?
- Nothing in the current lineup meets all our criteria.
- We don't know if/when something will be added that meets our criteria.
- We're not sure what Apple's longer-term plans are, so we don't want to invest time/money into a PC-to-Apple transition, just to need to reverse it in a few years.
The three issues listed immediately above strike me as a pointless fail in Apple's strategy, at least relative to my wife's business's needs.
There are some points in the business calendar where 1-2 days of downtime is catastrophic. For example, shortly before the deadline for submitting highschool senior photographs to the yearbook publisher.
If we could purchase a version of Windows 10 which allowed her to delay installing updates for 1-2 months until a crunch time is over, that would probably be acceptable.
AFAIK only Windows 10 Enterprise allows that, and I'm not aware of any legal way we can get that.
If we do have to go the Windows 10 route, my contingency plan is to look into setting up a firewall (external to the Windows 10 box) that blocks all relevant Microsoft IP addresses.
Windows 10 is your best answer. It's gonna be supported very long and it's a 99.9% painless upgrade from Windows 7.
Definitely invest in a mid-to-high range PC would be my advice. I have 5-year old i7 3770 CPU and I am yet to find something that makes it choke. Only refreshment I did to my now 5-year old PC was to increase RAM from 16 to 32GB and to get GTX 980 (was 650 before). The PC is flying whatever I do -- and I'm a programmer, trust me I do a lot.
My wife needs her system to be stable during certain points in the yearly business calendar, and an unavoidable, potentially-breaking update is a serious concern.
But why Windows 10 rather than Windows 8? Both will receive security updates for a long time, and (AFAIK) Windows 8 doesn't have the issue of unavoidable pushed updates.
The only real downside I know of to Windows 8 is its bad UI, but I'm told there are 3rd-party shell replacements which approximate the Windows 7 interface.
I can't argue either way though. I as a programmer took the plunge one afternoon around 8 months ago and never looked back. Win10 is superior to Win7 -- my girlfriend's graphical processing software (and part of her games) even started working faster after her upgrade.
All of that is anecdotal of course but strategically speaking, Win10 will be around for much longer.
You bet! all those billions sitting in their coffers and they still couldn't pull their asses to achieve progress. It is like Microsoft of the XP era.
I was pulling my hairs in 2003 cursing at Bill Gates, then switched to Mac until now. But I think the Mac era is over as well and Bill Gates is cool again. He's really great in his humanitarian work.
I'm sure a lot of what Gates is currently doing is praiseworthy.
But to be even-handed, we should also remember the means by which he obtained a lot of the money he's giving away.
He said no one would use phablets and called them the 'Hummers' of phones - this was back when a 5-inch phones were considered huge. He also denigrated 7-inch tablets by saying users would need to file-down their fingers to use them (and yet iPhone users could comfortably use 3.5-inch screens). Apple proceeded to profitably venture into both product categories with the iPhone 6+ and the iPad mini.
We are now in a post-'Post-PC' world: iPad sales have plateaued/slumped over the last couple of years. If there is money to be made selling computers, Apple will sell them regardless of what they said in the past.
The true value of Steve Jobs is the reality distortion field. That's really was is missing here with the new Mac.
All the discutable decisions about the Mac that people complain about are just similar to the trends set under Jobs, the difference is that he would make the people believe that Apple was 100% behind the Mac. There would no need for Jobs to write twice in a month to employee and the press to say that Apple was committed to it.
I'm not sure what is missing exactly, but the MBP failed at delivery rather than feature. For example, did Apple really need to can all their Mac related accessories at the same time, building up a negative climate. They could have rebranded the LG monitor. Somehow give the people a hint that Apple is behind the USB-C, not just picking up and leave it up to the third party to sort out. (which is BTW what Apple has always really done, it just seemed handled better)
Apple strategy is to keep everything secret until they do a big delivery event. They are utterly bad at delivery since Jobs is gone, and the lengthy secrecy they keep around everything is now not building hype, just building apprehension.
That's not the case: back in 2001 post-PC thinking was popular too, and Jobs stood out against it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmvmtmqqbeI . That's evidently why Jobs was so reluctant to make the iPod work with Windows PCs: his whole plan for the iPod was to have it sell his intended Digital Hub, the Mac. He did eventually come around to post-PC thinking of course, but only quite late: even in the D 2007 interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85PMSYAguZ8 he and Gates were quite resistant to it.
I know--so obvious, right? All they needed was another Steve Jobs. Why didn't they think of that, and just go out and get one? I hear they grow on trees.
They had one. Tim fired him.
Wouldn't Fadell be just as good?
Scott Forstall is why the iPhone was the iPhone. Tony Fadell was almost why the iPhone was an iPod.
That is, does Tim see his role now as maximizing revenue from the current position, with the goal being to hand off a healthier company to a "visionary" successor?
My personal answer fluctuates depending on my daily gut feeling about human nature. And how many times sourcekit crashes.
[1] https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-11-04/steve-bal...
Paul Graham wrote about this back in 2012:
"I was talking recently to someone who knew Apple well, and I asked him if the people now running the company would be able to keep creating new things the way Apple had under Steve Jobs. His answer was simply "no." I already feared that would be the answer. I asked more to see how he'd qualify it. But he didn't qualify it at all. No, there will be no more great new stuff beyond whatever's currently in the pipeline. Apple's revenues may continue to rise for a long time, but as Microsoft shows, revenue is a lagging indicator in the technology business.
So if Apple's not going to make the next iPad, who is? None of the existing players. None of them are run by product visionaries, and empirically you can't seem to get those by hiring them. Empirically the way you get a product visionary as CEO is for him to found the company and not get fired. So the company that creates the next wave of hardware is probably going to have to be a startup.
I realize it sounds preposterously ambitious for a startup to try to become as big as Apple. But no more ambitious than it was for Apple to become as big as Apple, and they did it. Plus a startup taking on this problem now has an advantage the original Apple didn't: the example of Apple. Steve Jobs has shown us what's possible. That helps would-be successors both directly, as Roger Bannister did, by showing how much better you can do than people did before, and indirectly, as Augustus did, by lodging the idea in users' minds that a single person could unroll the future for them.
Now Steve is gone there's a vacuum we can all feel. If a new company led boldly into the future of hardware, users would follow. The CEO of that company, the "next Steve Jobs," might not measure up to Steve Jobs. But he wouldn't have to. He'd just have to do a better job than Samsung and HP and Nokia, and that seems pretty doable."
This is a great pitch for an early-stage fund. Sort of like the kind pg peddles :).
(I mostly agree with the analysis, but the bias is worth noting.)
1. The big companies also shutter projects. Minus the "amazing journey" blog post. Their announcements usually have the tone of "Thanks for being part of the gigantic data collection experiment although you wouldn't quite know that yet. Here, take this gratuitous 6 month window to take your data out and then go f yourselves."
2. The security updates, warranty and service and replacement etc also involves occasionally bricking perfectly running systems (ala Windows 10), so it is hardly a comforting thought.
It is the end goal for almost every startup in the current climate.
https://www.harpercollins.com/9780062292988/crossing-the-cha...
Did they ever had a chance against Apple ?
People focus too much on the 'nasty' side of jobs, but it's easy to be nasty, and a lot of people do that, what's hard is having the other aspects that might be more subtle
in his biography (or most likely I read it somewhere else), the group that worked with him had a whole way of presenting things to him, that "made" him go for the best solution. It was a ruse, which he might have been aware or not, but it worked. And of course people were on their feet to present the best products
Jobs had a very finicky way of thinking about products, but I guess that created a dynamic in which other people that worked with him also stood for things that they believed in and that resulted in a balance of qualities that is lacking
Also Apple is not thinking about experience. When they took the floppy disks from the Macs I assume people were more than happy to see they go. Heck even display port has some advantages (you need one tiny interface to plug whatever kind of monitor you want).
Now we get a crapfest of different very similar cables with USB-C with different ports that look the same (charging/display/etc) and we killed an existing interface that for the most part works
And guess what Apple, your Keyboard and Mouse may be wireless and bluetooth but they still need an USB cable to be charged! Which cable comes with it? USB-A
I'm assume Steve would be testing the aerodynamic properties of the latest MB line, if you know what I mean
There were a lot of complaints, even more than you're seeing now.[1][2] At the time it was still the main way people transferred files.
[1]http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB901747560996300000 [2]http://articles.latimes.com/1998/may/11/business/fi-48540
Can't say I've ever been impressed when one of these systems fails to understand me and replies with a human-like response. Feels disingenuous.
You should be able to crawl into your car and sputter "take me cough to the hospital" to which the car vocally responds "Right away" then drives itself to the hospital.
edit: Meaning, this interaction should play out exactly the same as if you had a full time driver/butler whos only job is to sit in the driver seat of your car and wait for your commands.
Honestly I wouldn't be concerned if Apple never make a new category defining product in the rest of their existence. Jobs didn't spend his whole life dedicated to discovering new product categories, that's not how things like the iPod and iPhone happened.
Jobs biggest successes were matters of pure opportunism. Take the iphone. He couldn't have created that product in 2004, the hardware technology wasn't up to it. He was presented with a unique opportunity. A high quality OS core, world class developer and design talent, and mobile hardware that was just becoming powerful enough to run a version of that OS core. It doesn't matter how talented or how visionary he was, without those things all coming together at the right time the iPhone wouldn't have been possible.
People expecting Apple to come up with new products like that on some kind of schedule aren't taking into account how contingent these things are. Without the conditions for a new product category to emerge. Without the many different pre-requisite technologies coming together and without Apple having the right resources available to take advantage of them, these things simply won't happen. They couldn't happen, even with Steve Jobs around.
The received wisdom seem to be that SJ simply willed new products into existence and that somehow Apple should still be doing the same thing. That's magical thinking. But what they should be doing is developing their technologies and assets and applying them to new products and new problems. If that leads them into new product categories, all the better.
Well, revenue is already falling [1].
If you look at the first graph (revenue) you'll see that revenue is declining. Click "Trailing 12 months" to remove the seasonal trends.
[1] https://fairlyvalued.com/company/AAPL
Disclaimer: Fairlyvalued is new tool build by alch- and me.
Except
1) Apple weren't the first innovating in that regard. I don't know who was, I just do know Nokia was experimenting with Nokia 770 and Nokia N800 in 2005-2006. True, they weren't smartphones, but they were going in the right direction. Without many buttons. The Nokia N810 had a keyboard, and that was less well received than its N800 keyboardless counterpart.
2) Apple didn't remove all buttons from the iPhone (power, volume keys were still there). The two important changes were:
A) Removal of the physical keyboard, replaced by a (by then) well working OSD. Working with a capacitive screen.
B) They made 1 main button.
Sure there were other smartphone, Apple wasn't the first, etc But thinking that people would just go 180 was just extraordinary. Apparently people were ready to sacrifice quite a lot for the huge screen of the iPhone.
Leader where? Blackberry was never the marketleader world-wide. That was Nokia, and OS-wise it was Symbian until ~2010 when iOS and Android took off. Nokia was never very popular in US though.
> and the keyboard was his best loved feature.
Sure.
Because on screen keyboards were still using resistive touchscreen with pens. Which is a terrible user experience. Apple used capacitive touchscreen instead, and even though the resolution was low, it worked.
Nokia didn't invest enough in Maemo, and didn't want to adopt Android either. When they finally did go with Maemo, Elop came with plan A. Look at the user experience of Sailfish. That could've easily been Nokia in ~2014...
This sounds dismissive. I get what you're saying but user information is invaluable. I assume you mean, make sure you get information from your customers in a productive way. For example I've never known a dev who wasn't surprised watching a usability study.
"The internet" wanted a better cheese-grater Mac Pro, Apple delivered a shiny, un-upgradable computer.
"The internet" wanted incremental Mac upgrades, Apple added the gimmicky TouchBar to the one Mac model that was still popular.
3D touch, Mavericks' Finder tags, Siri on the Mac, using the watch to unlock your laptop... I feel that Apple's updates are 90% gimmick and 10% substance at this point. I agree that Apple needs to find a new Steve Jobs, but in the meantime, asking customers for feedback doesn't look like it could make matters worse.
That (IMO) was the Jobs difference. He wanted game-changing awesome in everything - the PR, the advertising, the packaging, the launches, the personal story, the ecosystem, the design, and the product internals.
Sometimes he got that very wrong. Mostly he didn't. But I always felt that Jobs was absolutely consistent about the goal, even when his idea of awesome was as much of a miss than a hit. (As at NeXT.)
Cook doesn't understand awesome in the same way. He understands useful, more or less, and he understands incrementally better. But he's not obsessively and addictively dedicated to making things that are unexpectedly cool and insanely great - or at least as insanely great as they can be, given what's possible. Mostly he seems to want to make money by cutting production costs to raise margins - which is fine for a company, but not very exciting for anyone else.
The problem for Apple is that Jobs was one of a kind. Not only is there no one at Apple who can replace him, I'd be surprised if there's anyone in the entire industry. The only two people who are similarly obsessive, effective and obnoxious are Bezos and Musk, and they both have other plans.
And I'm not saying that as a fanboi, because Jobs was clearly an obnoxious asshole for far too much of his life. But credit where it's due - he was uniquely smart and talented.
Apple's best hope might be to keep a very close eye on the AI startup scene and see if they can talent-spot the next major player before he/she gets to billionaire status.
The new versions of macOs provide no added advantage and have a lot of regressions. I used to use Exposé all the time, now I don't because everything slows to a crawl when I activate it.
And I run into severe bugs. For example, when I installed Yosemite and activated Filevault, it managed to corrupt my partition and all my data (luckily I had a backup).
I really wish Apple starts actually hiring good software engineers or at least manage them to work on their OS because right now it's embarrassing. It reminds me of when Windows ME was a thing. If Apple ran the I'm a Mac, I'm a PC ad nowadays they wouldn't have much of a leg to stand on.
And then don't even get me started on their pro apps. Aperture used to be a great app (much better than lightroom), they stopped its development.
The first release of macOS Sierra (10.12.0) was vastly more usable than the first release of MacOS X Snow Leopard (10.6.0). I should know: I transitioned to Snow Leopard on release and practically nothing was running on it. I think it's the only time in my life I reverted to the previous version of macOS... It didn't prevent Snow Leopard to become one of the best OS, in the end.
The problem is that Apple is shipping things that aren't right/ready, but this should be independent from the release schedule.
I'm glad they're settling into boredom - I just want to get stuff done without faffing around. Gone are my days of ndiswrapper for fun and XFree86Config for kicks. Actually, they're probably long-gone for a lot of people....
Does sleep/resume work?
The short version is that the Windows ecosystem is plagued by legacy software (even Windows itself).
A secondary issue are forced updates breaking things, which i've had on two of my 4 windows laptops so far. Finally, the mess of legacy and new settings screens is annoying, but once setup it doesn't matter much, so it only affects the first-run experience.
Aside from those i think w10 is nice. I wouldn't mind replacing my mini with a windows machine, and if apple doesn't update it soon i probably will.
I just got the Kaby Lake XPS 13 Developer Edition. If you want to be cutting edge and "refined", you'll have issues. By cutting edge I mean things like:
XPS13DE ships with Ubuntu 16.04, kernel 4.4. Switching to an external DP/TB3 monitor kernel panics. Switching to 16.10, kernel 4.8 makes Network Manager unhappy.
Using the Kensington SD4600P dock I bought (because the Dell docks are, to all reviews, horrible, and buggy), you can't run multiple displays except through Windows - OS X, Linux, ChromeOS can only drive one.
Not major issues, to be sure - but they do challenge where I want to be, a 'just works' experience (that I -used- to have with Apple, but less and less so recently), neat and polished (it is so nice to just put my laptop in a vertical dock at my desk, plug in a single USB C and get:
- power to my laptop
- 4K DP
- external keyboard, mouse, speakers, etc
all from that one little cable.
Too true. I just tried opening Mission Control on a maxed-out MacBook Pro with Sierra and it took 7 seconds. It's a shame that Snow Leopard isn't compatible with most toolchains now.
I will say Snow Leopard was by far the peak of OS X stability (And with that, probably the best OS I have ever used) but Sierra is far from being bad or unusable for me.
I would start by checking the logs to see whether there's anything obviously failing, running the hardware diagnostics (reboot while holding down the D key – https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201257), and then uninstalling all of the apps which you mentioned that require privileged access since at least Karabiner and Little Snitch are kernel extensions and third-party kexts are notorious sources of bugs for months after a new OS X release.
I think what's happened is that every single developer at Apple has SSDs on their work and home computers so they get wasteful with memory. When iPhoto needs 150% memory to update an index you're not even going to notice that with an SSD, but with an HDD the system can freeze up.
This will eventually resolve itself once every computer has a SSD, but in the meantime the existing Macs with HDDs will be a mess.
I do agree that Apple needs to get better at I/O scheduling – even with an SSD the experience is less responsive than BeOS was on 90s PC hardware — but the animation loop has typically been a reliable diagnostic cue in my experience for distinguishing between swapping / disk failure and other issues.
This is exactly what I've seen. If I catch it early enough and can get the UI to respond to me tabbing to the terminal, I can kill Safari's web content processes or whatever it is that's leaking memory and it goes away.
$ uptime 13:41 up 38 days, 17:01, 6 users, load averages: 2.21 2.01 2.01
Smart user interfaces are practically invisible, created by dozens of tiny accommodations for each situation. The Mac is starting to lose that fit and finish.
I'm very curious to see how Apple plays out in the next few years and will likely look back at this article to compare, if I remember to.
As a developer, I wonder if making a Mac Developer model could be an interesting path, and if it would make financial sense in any way given the idea of "power users".
My point is that Apple knows that laptops are a declining market. Still, the professionals who use MBPs drive adoption of other Apple products.
But maybe I'm just a noob who isn't professional enough to suddenly discover that life just isn't worth it without 32GB of RAM.
This was a very important part of your comment. It's good that 16gb isn't an issue for you, but for some of us, it is.
To me it seems that more people now prefer laptops to desktops and it is annoying to sacrifice performance for portability. The lack of a truly powerful desktop Mac definitely is not helping in this regard either.
That said, I use a 2014 MBP and feel it's already as portable as I need. If the 2016 kept the same thickness but offered 32gb, I would have been happy.
> If the 2016 kept the same thickness but offered 32gb, I would have been happy.
That's not possible with the current chip offerings from Intel though. The Intel CPUs that fit the MBP form factor and other features APple needs only go up to 16 GB RAM. If you doubt this is a pain point for Apple, note that Apple standardized on 16GB RAM out of the box. I'm sure thy'd love to be able to offer 32GB as an up-sell.
Sure they could inflate the MBP form factor an re-design around the chipsets that do offer 32GB RAM, but the chipsets that suit the current form factor and support 32 GB are supposedly due out next year.
That's entirely reversed. Your statement should read:
"That's entirely possible with the current chip offerings from Intel. However, it's not possible with Apple's requirements for form factor and power."
Inefficient programs with shiny GUIs.
OSX + GPU + Chrome + Hipchat alone consume over half of the available memory on my machine right now. And that's just the software which supports my development, no editors, compilers or VMs.
Start to throw in modern editors, VMs (software which behaves very poorly when swapped out), compilers that trade memory space to reduce CPU usage, or a JavaScript heavy website, and you're one errant command away from your machine becoming unusable as it starts swapping like mad.
I have older MacBook Pros that I upgraded the RAM, and upgraded the storage (both capacity and speed), and they still work strong. When I am done with them, I pass them down to my kids.
I'm currently looking at gaming Desktops to replace my current setup because those are the only things with enough horsepower anymore. It sucks because I feel like I'm going to have to divide up a lot of the scripted tasks I have to make my workflow more efficient, given the lack of a real Unix environment on Windows.
Yesterday I replaced our fleet of TimeCapsules and Airports with Lumas. Despite their problems they are still better than the Apple product. Rumor has it Apple isn't working on Airports any more.
Today, I began looking for a replacement for the 2009 MBP, which my 11yo son now uses. I started by looking at Microsoft Surface.
In the present, Apple doesn't meet my needs and as I look to the future, when I will need a new machine, the MacBook "Pro" is more like a MacBook "Bling".
Apple used to be an ecosystem. Now its just incremental phone updates.
Heck, Apple has become the "conservative" choice for a computer that is boring but will work with fewer problems. How we got here I have no idea.
See, I've had the exact opposite experience with my Surface. Most of the people I know much prefer MacBooks but are exploring the possibility of switching to something in the surface line. I know some of my friends had initial issues with the Surface Book but now they love it after much needed updates.
I think sometimes Microsoft pushes hardware out a little too early but, at least in my experience, they always make it a great experience even if it comes after several updates. But like Apple products it's usually best to wait until after the initial kinks work themselves out anyway.
MBPs are still the best computer one can get for a rock solid Windows experience; even the surface book trackpad (supposedly precision?) seems to not really compare to what comes on a MBP, and touch doesn't often fill in the gap. Over the last years, I've always regretted my PC purchases (4), but have never regretted my MBP purchases (3). It is really hard to come up with the courage to try again.
https://medium.com/@searls/warm-takes-on-microsofts-surface-...
Going back to my rMBP for work feels limiting and slow.
There are workflow changes and difference I'm having to work through. They are different systems, after all. But it's been a good experience so far.
I currently own a Surface Pro 4. I love it. I had some issues up front and Windows is still Windows but it's gotten better and so far I love it. I'll admit it's impossible to beat a MBP's trackpad.
But as with everything I've seen folks with basically every opinion on the Surface line. So your mileage may vary.
The SP4 I have is better but still has issues with sleep/hibernation, at least compared to every Mac I have used. With my Macs I can leave them for a week and they will wake up immediately, and still have decent charge. I leave the SP4 for two days and it is dead. Leave it for a few hours and it takes 10 seconds to wake.
I agree with your assessment though. Seems dead.
I think that's a bit more solid than a rumour, though Apple is secretive enough that it could also mean that they're planning a replacement product similar to Alexa, for example.
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/22/apple-sto...
Network is faster but the app is what I really like. Now just roll over grab my tablet and see if the proper kids are at home. Also allows you see if who they said went home actually went home. How long until they figure how I know?
And the software side of those updates is bad.
Apple hardware is probably better than ever. The mechanical engineering and precision involved blows away anyone else in consumer electronics. The new MacBooks and iPhones are truly works of art compared to the cheap injection-molded stuff everyone else is pumping out.
But the software just keeps getting worse and worse.
My iPhone (and those belonging to my friend and family with iPhones) regularly has strange graphics glitches and Springboard crashes. MacOS is a clusterf*ck with tons of poorly-implemented useless "features" and UI glitches.
My suspicion is that Apple is hitting a level of software complexity where the development and maintenance costs of correct code are too high. I believe writing correct software has a super-linear cost; if you have N components in your code, you can expect something like O(N^2) cross-component interactions in your code, because any given piece of existing code is likely to interact with some portion of new code. I suspect Apple will have to change their software engineering practices if they hope to go back to a good level of quality and usability with a reasonable temporal and financial engineering budget.
Nope, just a lack of solid engineers. Anyone worth anything bailed years ago, and they're left with a used car salesman running the show (Craig Federighi). Holy Jesus is that guy a tool.
I want a phone with a flat back that won't rock on a desk without a case. I want a desktop with modern specs. I want a laptop with great battery life.
Sounds like a hardware fault. You should take it to an Apple Store and have them run a complete diagnostic. Heck, the next time you see the graphics glitches, take a picture of the screen, and depending on the nature of the glitch, that alone might warrant replacing the device regardless of what the hardware test comes up with.
And FWIW, I've never heard of anyone else complaining of graphical glitches after upgrading to iOS 10. And if I search for "ios 10 graphics glitches", the only relevant hits are some complaints about minor glitches with the new UI for notifications (I assume that's not what you're talking about, and I also assume these minor glitches have been fixed).
Counter-anecdotally, I've owned a sequence iPhones starting with the 3G, and I've never experienced any serious glitches, ever. I remember Safari used to crash a few times a week on iOS 8, but that's ages ago.
Don't forget the watch, and the advances in dongle technology.
> Now its just incremental phone updates.
Feel free to move to another manufacturer which makes revolutionary upgrades with each release. If you find one.
Or one which matches Apple's phone CPU.I looked back at a review of the 2009 MacBook because I didn't believe RAM was that expensive back then, but I was wrong:
* To upgrade the RAM in the 2.26GHz model, which comes with just 2GB of RAM in its standard configuration, Apple charges an extra $100 for 4GB (a pair of 2GB modules) and $1,100 for 8GB (a pair of 4GB modules). The 2.53GHz model, which ships with 4GB of RAM can be purchased with the optional 8GB of memory for an additional $1,000. *
The last unibody MacBook Pros that I owned, I upgraded to 8GB and 16GB for $35 and $79, respectively.
I see this point made a lot, especially on Hacker News whenever this general topic comes up. I'm just curious: what evidence is there to support this point of view?
I'm as frustrated as the next software engineer that the new Macbook Pros aren't targeted at me or users like me (and that there hasn't been a new Mac Pro in a long time), and my next primary machine may well not be an Apple product when my current Macbook Pro ages out. But I don't really see an argument that draws a line between that fact and a future perception issue for Apple - and that seems to be accepted as gospel whenever the topic of Apple comes up in developer circles. Who are these "influencers" whose opinions purportedly closely align with software engineers' and why do consumers care about them?
Macs or later iPhone, it didn't matter we had to tell everyone that those nice and shiny devices were the real deal and we kept showing and telling until the last potential convert saw the light as well.
I have been buying a new Mac and iPhone almost annually for about ten years now – even (or especially) after 2011 and 2013. I honestly was thrilled by iOS7, I loved it from the moment of its introduction and only saw potential.
All that said, no "OSX" release has made me happier than Snow Leopard unfortunately and I am still convinced that "Losing the Functional High-Ground" by Marco Arment channeled an important message about a pattern most of us likely still see across the whole product line-up even though many things got better since.
Why else have we slowly but steadily stopped recommending Macs over the last two years?
When will that happen to iPhones or iPads? I'm still recommending them left and right but it somehow also is getting harder in a way, especially when people keep losing their safe-in-the-cloud data (in some cases even those precious moments with iPhone – photos).
Unfortunately Apple does seem to need a (kool-aid sober) benevolent dictator with taste and wholistic understanding of their core product/business (what is that going to be btw?).
What I'm asking after, I suppose, is evidence that there are "gazillions" of former "Unix converts" driving significantly more money than I'm estimating here. I still continue to feel like this whole "software developers are influencers" line of argumentation when it comes to Apple products is just wishful thinking crossed with extrapolating from very limited personal anecdotes.
I think the better insight is that our needs, for practicality and occasional updates, are quite common. Its nice to add more memory or disk without needing a new machine. It would be nice to have a replaceable battery in my laptop. Apple is screwing up all these simple things.
People are not buying iPhones to spend the majority of the the time using the built-in native apps of iOS.
It's a small detail, but the power cord is the one part of the computer that users have no choice but to interact with every day and they've been ignoring the problems with them for the better part of half a decade.
Every Mac at work either has detached and frayed around the power connector strain relief, or looks like an extremely precise samurai has made tens of small cuts in the jacket of the cable.
Even if every user was using it wrong I would still call it an Apple issue as their solution is obviously not meeting the needs of their users.
tl;dr they're pretty trash, but maybe so are other chargers.
I’m have to admit being a bit baffled by how nobody else seems to have done what Apple did with the Macbook Air – even several years after the first release, the other notebook vendors continue to push those ugly and clunky* things. Yes, there are vendors that have tried to emulate it, but usually pretty badly. I don’t think I’m unusual in preferring my laptop to be thin and light. (...) I want my office to be quiet. The loudest thing in the room – by far – should be the occasional purring of the cat. And when I travel, I want to travel light. A notebook that weighs more than a kilo is simply not a good thing (yeah, I’m using the smaller 11″ macbook air, and I think weight could still be improved on, but at least it’s very close to the magical 1kg limit)*
People forget that thin, quiet, light, etc are also "function", and more important to some people than function they'll never exhaust in their use cases, like a bleeding fast GPU.
There really is something wrong with the stupid cable. It's unthinkable that any of my other non-apple cables would do this.
Just stop already.
It's fine to say you don't have issues, but if six other people are saying they have issues, and know people with issues, it's rude to write them all off like that.
-----
EDIT: replacing the paraphrased quote to try to avoid unfairly representing the original statement and remove my read of its intent. I had paraphrased it down to ""I assume the people having issues are responsible for those issues" which dropped the bit about perhaps having pets or similar and so put everything on the disrespecting the hardware part.
I've had more problems with Apple cables than any other brand - and Apple tends to make their cables sleeker looking. Coincidence? I doubt it.
At least they've improved from the Wallstreet-era Powerbook G3 chargers, though. I think I went through 3 of those circa 1998. Of course, those machines, and the early G4 Powerbooks, had bigger issues than just that. Dark times in Macland.
(As an aside, how people talk about their device history is a good litmus test of the length of their experience with Apple hardware, thanks to the Intel switch laptop name change.)
Perhaps you had more Apple cables (an obvious branding) compared to any other brand? And your apple cables get more use than others (e.g. on your main laptop, compared to some cable left for years connected to a printer at the office, etc).
Except if you had e.g. an equal number of Dell and Apple machines, etc, or buy branded cables from a single brand.
If you leave out the tape, and you put a bunch of them in a box, this is the ritual for summoning an elder god. (the elder god is always gone by the time you re-open the box, but the non-euclidean tangle they've left the cables in is quite apparent.) Unless you're the kind of person who will happily and patiently sit uncluttering the cables without yanking them for a few hours, you'll damage your stuff extracting them from this class of mess.
For reference: I am actually still using the charging cable that came with my 2009 MBP (via a magsafe2 adapter) with my latest work-issued MBP as the spare adapter in the home office. The cable is a bit grubby, but undamaged and entirely functional.
I have never had an entire Apple charger stop working, though.
This takes about 1 year, 1 year and an half. I never jam it in doors or desks. I do not have pets. I sometimes put it in my bag but I do not wind up the cable to avoid having additional tear on it. I do live part of the year in hot and humid climate (like Japan in summer or South East Asia) which might accelerate the issue.
But honestly, this is a problem, no matter how careful I am, I have to buy new chargers.
Now it doesn't really matter as they just use a standard USB-C cable so you can use whatever brand cable you want.
There's a reason why everyone else uses thicker cables and strain relief.
And it's not because of end-user negligence: it's because of engineering pragmatism.
Although all this is irrelevant since Apple phased out mag safe, the "ears" that hold the cable, and added a removable cable.
Still, Apple's Lightning cables are also extremely vulnerable to bending and abrasion. What makes you think their USB-C cables will be much better?
Non-technical customers who can't afford to buy new cables, or don't know to use better aftermarket cables, are already known to resort to using springs from pens as ad-hoc strain relief: https://www.google.ca/search?q=iphone+charger+spring
Nothing, but at least those can be replaced without having to upgrade the whole power brick.
I'd say half of the Macbook users around me have suffered problems with power brick cables. Specially where the mag safe cable connects to the power brick.
I wouldn't blame it on users though. I've never seen other power bricks so plagued with these problems.
That's a really strange thing, because it's such a well-understood problem and the solution is known. I don't know why Apple makes such lousy power cables, even if they messed up a decade ago, you'd think they'd have fixed it by now.
Apple likes their bright colors too much to do that :)
So your dream will likely come true in a different--yet much better--format.
The second layer of wiring that twists around the core wire is going only in one direction (a simple helix as opposed to a double criss-crossing helix like coax cable). Hence, if you twist the cable in the opposite direction, the helix becomes undone. I suspect that causes pressure on the white plastic insulation, and also leads to some electrical issues that increase resistance, produce heat, and causes the white plastic insulation to become yellow/burnt and to start disintegrating.
The funny thing is that you can abuse the cable in any way or you can be extra careful, but the only thing that will matter is in what direction you coil it. If you don't travel a lot and don't touch it, you're unlikely to notice any problems for years.
I agree with the author's final assessment - "meets expectations with some areas that need improvement" - and I think this is the key.
They are stoking the fire, keeping it burning, but clearly their focus seems to be diminished on their core business.
And even companies of this scale need hyper focus to drive what seem like small but obvious improvements, usually executives are faced with two choices:
(a) Focus on today's business and unlock maximum value in your product line / distribution.
(b) Innovate to turn a corner and plan for tomorrow.
I am surprised at how few people attribute the current challenges at Apple to what I suspect is an internal focus on planning for tomorrow.
How much more profitable is the iPhone going to get? The smartphone market is approaching saturation (2)
So what does the leadership do?
Are laptops, imacs, and apple pro's the future?
No, they barely represent 9% of Apples sales and have been FLAT for years (3)
What about Apple TV & Apple Watch (the "other" category) - those have already grown to 6% of sales - and moving in the right direction.
But is that it?
My suspicion is that Apple / Tim Cook knows something BIG that we don't that they are going to get PERFECT while they still have the cash fire hose of the iPhone to drive the engine.
(1) http://fortune.com/2016/06/08/fortune-500-most-profitable-co...
(2) https://www.cnet.com/news/smartphone-markets-glory-days-are-...
That's what everyone has been hoping for years. That's why I was hung up to the last keynote, up to the last second, hoping for Tim Cook to say "One more thing", and launch a new product line. And the one more thing was, no kidding, Lady Gaga. And everyone is now despairing that there is anything to wait for.
At least we have the emoji bar on the keyboard now.
However, with revenue and profit levels where they are, it's baffling to see them seem to devote less resources in an absolute sense (not just a proportional one) to existing money-makers. Mac laptops are big sellers. iPhones are big sellers. Yet the refreshes get more and more basic, and the software quality seems to be sliding downward. Could they really not fix this without sacrificing future investment? They did it in the past when they had less money to play with, after all...
I'm afraid what Apple is doing is purely looking at figures - if it doesn't sell at least X or account for Y% of revenue, it's discarded. AirPort, gone, displays, gone, 17 inch MBP, long gone.
And yet their R&D budget is still going up (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2016/05/Apple-RD-Spendi...), estimated to become $12 billion in 2017. IDK where it all goes though.
Possible --- but it seems to me much more likely that Apple is just another big company suffering from the classic combination of innovator's dilemma and big company internal politics. What special immunity would Apple have to the problems that bring down every big tech company in its old age?
Tech companies are like people. They get old. If they don't die suddenly, they eventually succumb to general systems frailty and self-aggrandizing cancers. Sure, Apple might be one of those rare 80 year old marathon runners, but why would you expect it to be?
Maybe the world has changed and such opportunities no longer exist. There's more VC money available and more large IT companies pursuing various opportunities. It might be that we simply don't have such overlooked categories any more. Even if they do exist, everybody is watching Apple so closely that it is not likely they could build something major in secret.
What you see is the predictable result: ossified thinking couple with a rigid adherence to "what makes them great". all criticism falls on deaf ears and they'll just continue like this until Tim Cook is gone and they get a product guy back in the heal who can give Apple direction and heart.
Apple created Apple University years before Steve died, to understand clearly why they became so successful. They even hired a top professor from an Ivy League university to run it.
Whatever ails Apple these days is not caused by them not understanding how they became great. It's caused by the lessons of the past not being applicable to the reality of today.
The Jobs-style answer was the all-in-one iMacs and the monitor-as-a-dock, a computer that wants to be seen. The Cook-style answer is to put somebody else's logo right on their product's display case. Madness.
And Apple catering to what you describe as the lowest common denominator is what made them the largest company in the world. If that is a sickness, I wish I could be afflicted by it.
What changed was not so much the world (although it did), but Apple itself. Apple is now a huge company, but it still run as a small one, because that is what allowed them to different and let them to success. But there are reasons why no other large company is run like that, and the bigger Apple gets, the more those reasons begin to compound.
It's not about courage or innovation for innovation's sake, but about making the right decisions. Sometimes that means being boring.
The 2013 Mac Pro is a perfect example of Apple badly solving a problem that wasn't there to begin with. What did Apple smoke? Circular GPUs that can't be upgraded? No PCIe slots or storage space that forces you to use expensive TB noisy boxes with cable all over your desk?
The problem with ignoring this niche is because these users are either developers or big influencers. They help with the ongoing success of the App Store as well as with free marketing.
This is also a big reason why Apple needs to release either an iMac without a screen or a more affordable Mac Pro. The Mac Mini has never really cut it for anything but personal use.
For the 1st time in years, I'm thinking of switching back to Windows since Docker makes development easier now. I'll still get a cheap Mac for personal stuff like Photos, but it'll just be relegated for that.
But big influencers to Joe Q Common Public? No. They will buy what meets their (generally meagre) needs from someone they trust.
At every small business I've ever worked at, everyone praised the MBP highly, and if you didn't have one, you felt like you wanted and needed one.
Especially because it Just Worked™, it was kind of this sleek and powerful tool that only people who know the value of their time had, because they weren't going to waste their time on anything lesser. It was almost a status symbol.
Word of mouth is a powerful thing. It can make and later break a product. I bet that'll happen now.
That said, how can I buy stock in Apple? I'm betting they'll look at dropping sales, realize the above, and make a huge come back with a significantly better MBP and Mac Pro in a year or two.
EDIT: The above question is not rhetorical: how can a simple developer like me with no idea about stocks, throw $100 or $200 at Apple stock in hopes it grows a good amount in the next few years?
I'm not sure who would know better: Apple's marketing team, or a group of developers chatting on Hacker News.
Depending on the level of sophistication in Apple's marketing department, they might have a very clear, well-researched, quantitative model regarding just how much impact our word-of-mouth carries.
I wonder if some of our angst comes from the nagging fear that we (professional developers and photo/video editors) hold less clout than we thought, and that as a result, our tools in upcoming years will be more expensive and less useful.
There are some brokers that are free with some stipulations: https://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/investing/free-stock-trading
I still use a MacBook Pro for most of my development work, but all gaming and video stuff is now PC, and I can't see myself going back. The ability to easily upgrade individual parts on an as-needed basis is just too appealing.
I still prefer MacOS to Windows, but if MacOS is the only thing a $2500+ Mac Pro brings to the table in 2017--compared to 2017 PC hardware--it really isn't enough anymore.
If gaming is a secondary use of your computer, a Mac isn't quite as bad as people make it out to be. Especially if you enjoy indie games, it seems like all of them run on Mac, and most of them have modest hardware requirements. Example: I play a ton of Rimworld, and it runs exactly the same on my modest Mac and my killer PC. It's mostly AAA titles where you miss out.
I finally got to where I wanted a machine whose primary use would be games, and for that case you're correct, a half-decent PC crushes any Mac on any gaming metric.
However, I would never dream of using it for development. One of the games I play is World of Warcraft, and I maintain a few addons, and even just trying to edit Lua files on Windows is a PITA. Atom kind of sucks, and the CLI isn't very good. I installed Windows Subsystem For Linux in order to get bash and git, but it turns out there's no way to open GUI apps from that system, so I have to independently navigate to my projects in both Explorer and the shell. Oh, and Windows doesn't implement enough of Linux so tmux can't actually remember my paths, so every time I reboot, I have to find all of my projects again. And of course Linux symlinks don't work in Windows, and Windows aliases don't work in Linux, so I have a shell script that copies a bunch of the addons into place that I have to run each time because I can't symlink it. Ultimately, it's all just very annoying.
But I have to say, PC hardware has come a long way, not just in terms of performance, but also in build quality and ease of use. The aluminum case I bought looks as good as any Mac Pro tower Apple has made, it has fantastic cable routing so everything's clean and tidy, and tons of options for thermal management--I can run games on ultra quality and my PC is still silent!
It's really too bad we can't have the best of both worlds. But I don't see Apple going towards PC-standard hardware, Windows will probably never be a great Unix, and Linux never quite gets the software adoption it needs to become my desktop OS. I'd love to be proven wrong on any of those, however!
For everyone else the user is a resource that they're selling to advertisers.
They've shown they're willing to stand up for user rights. For this reason alone I hope they continue to be successful.
The Mac (and maybe the AirPort Extreme) are the only Apple products I really care about or depend on.
I'm holding on to my iPhone because Apple have a great strategy with regard to privacy and user rights but I'm not upgrading it because I'm pissed off about the Mac. Pathetic as that is, as a Mac user it's about the only small leverage available.
Sadly, I think Tim knows more about business than me. For every disgruntled, Unix loving, Mac user they loose they'll probably add 10 more iOS users for whom emoji are culturally interesting. :(
It's nice that you have a familiar command structure to work with, but installing software from homebrew/whatever else was always a nightmare. They were nice laptops... but it seems inefficient.
So I maintain 2 laptop. A macbook which I basically use for Skype and office work (and use about twice a month), and a cheap Thinkpad running Linux for dev work. When I need more power, I can pull the drive out of the Thinkpad and throw it in a desktop and it just works.
So... I think it's kind of hard to make a good case for macbooks as ideal general purpose dev machines. And they were really never meant to be general purpose dev machines. They probably work great for Mac/iOS dev and general purpose applications though.
You are mistaken if you think that Apple never intended the Mac to be used for general purpose Unix development though, they used to advertise it for that purpose on the science section of their website, before it was removed.
https://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/apple-drops-science-...
http://www.macworld.com/article/1001970/21osx-unix.html
And an advertisement:
"Sends other UNIX boxes to /dev/null"
http://www.mackungfu.org/vintage-os-x-ad-emphasises-unix-pow...
This was the same that happened to Microsoft when their lets just create machines with a million different providers and slap our OS on top were surpassed by Apple when Steve Jobs came back. The advantages of Apples vertical integration allowed them to push for radical new hardware design aesthetics when that was craved the most. On top of that a completely different way of pushing product in sync with the OS which allowed them to avoid the issues of backwards compatibility which MS struggled with. Today though in many ways the Apple aesthetic have been commoditized and were it haven't Apple just haven't spent enough time improving (looking at you OSX and Mac)
I frankly don't think there is much to do about it for the simple reason that it would require Apple to change it's culture from being a secretive one to being more open. This is where Google have many advantages as it's much more in sync with where the world and technology is heading (Cloud, Deep Learning, web). I don't think Steve would have been able to save Apple either although I think he would have done things a little better.
I am a big fan of apples products and own only that but I can see a future, if things doesn't change were I would easily use ex. Android phone.
As we all know, Apple recovered from its bad release of Maps and revamped iOS, the stock price recovered, and there was much rejoicing. So, it's important to have a sense of perspective about these things.
Apple certainly seems like it has slowed down lately, but they have more resources available to improve the situation than any other company in the world. I suspect the current issues are caused by internal organizational problems rather than a lack of product vision.
Absolutely. If they'd figure out how to scale up such that they're able to fix the most annoying bugs filed via their bug radar, macOS would be a much better product.
The sad thing is that at some point there were more and more bugs and UX problems which I didn't even bother reporting since they were so obvious that everyone using the OS should notice.
So apparently they're not able to scale in that regard. Even completely isolated apps like Preview.app are affected.
So was praise then wrong and overblown? Or is the current wave of discontent wrong and overblown? Or is two years enough time for Apple to underperform and cause a loss in faith?
I think it's a bit of all three, but also a lot because this current unhappiness is driven by developers, who had expected Apple to treat the MBP- much less the Mac Pro- with greater care and respect. 2014 saw the introduction of Swift, and developers were happy.
Worth keeping in mind the last refresh of the Mini performed way worse than the model that existed before it and had all upgradability locked down when the previous model actually championed the fact it could be opened and upgraded.
These Mac updates are not only slow but it's a recurring theme they're performing worse than what came before.
Obviously the latter. Let's see the quarterly results...
Lets see if they are still the most profitable company 5 years down the line.
Joe blow down the street is not going to be buying a machine all the pros hate.
Developer happiness relative to these parts is probably the most right. There was a lot going on for Apple the last few years for developers, and they were happy. The Mac Pro refresh cycle is something that always confuses me, like why would we expect faster refreshes with the new trash can Pro than the cheese grater? The point of that machine is that it's expensive and needs to last a long time. Annual cycles don't support that model. Yes, that means it gets outdated faster, but it's not like Xcode or Final Cut or ProTools or Adobe anything stop supporting the Pro a year after it's released. I have a MacBook Pro for work that has a four year refresh cycle. It sucks to see new, shiny ones coming out that I won't be eligible to get for a few more years (excuse me - next year, it's 2017 now), but that's corporate life.
Almost all my family members are having issues with running out of space on their iPhone. Some even bought additional iCloud to improve storage space only to be completely shocked and pissed to find that iCloud isn't really add additional storage (it is just for synchronization).
On top of this Google is taking serious advantage of Apple's bad execution with a fairly effective marketing campaign.
In some regards the most important thing about your phone these days is the memories you have collected and not so much what operating system or form factor is being used.
My standout is the battery case they released a few years ago. The design of that case is just unspeakably hideous. They need somebody with a Jobsian level of ruthlessness, attention to detail and unified vision to steer the ship back in the right direction. Another example here would be the fact (mentioned in this article) that they effectively copied the rest of the market by providing a larger phone. The Apple of old didn't do this. They didn't really follow market trends, they started them. And then to be flummoxed by demand when people responded so positively to smaller phones is baffling to me.
I wouldn't be surprised if we see some C level leadership changes some time this year.
This. I buy Apple products not because I'm looking for the latest tech gadget. I want something that feels like a work of art. There are too many products, too many sizes, too many options. Jobs would have told whoever suggested an iPhone Plus that he's a shithead moron. Why am I using Fantastical instead of the default Calendar app? I never did this on iOS 6. Go on their website and you see all sorts of crap acquisition products (Beats) they're selling. I don't want Beats I want Apple! I want premium, exclusive, luxury, high-end, polished tech products that work as simple as toasters.
The same with the Mac. It is understandable from the view of the company, that iOS is the bigger thing. But, as the article mentions, the Mac is a vital part of the Apple eco system. And the Mac Pro is a vital part of the Mac eco system. You need to support the professional developers to have all the applications for your "non-professional" customers. The best sign, that Apple was surprised by the public reaction to the new MacBook Pro was, that they reacted by reducing the dongle prices. It didn't seem to have thought that people would object at buying a collection of them at full prices. When I bought my G3 iBook, it came with the necessary dongles included.
Besides the obvious conceptual issues with the current Mac Pro, the biggest sin was not to update its hardware regularly. Same for the Mac Mini. So there needs to be two things done:
- set up senior people for each product to make sure that issues/development for that product/category gets the necessary attention, e.g. people who only care about the mac.
- these people need to make sure that each product is updated in set cycles. The iOS devices as well as the operating systems are updated in a yearly cycle. Maybe not as strict as with the iPhone, this should be applied to all products. The releases might shift a bit on parts availability, but the Mac Pro and the Mini have missed several updates of CPUs/GPUs/other hardware.
One more thing: while it is understandable that the retina MacBook only has soldered on parts, this is less understandable for the MacBook Pro, and not at all for the Mini, iMac or the Mac Pro. How can you design desktop machines like the iMac, where you have to unglue the screen to get to its internals? I still have my G5 iMac, and that was a nicely designed machine. A mac czar could tell upper management, where clever and efficient production methods stop and making a bad product starts...
Current/2016 13" max-spec i7 MBP uses i7-6567U which scores slightly higher (average single/multi-core geekbench results) than the best dual-core Kaby Lake CPU, being the i7-7500U.
But it's a one-time trick. We can't expect them to do it all the time.
You won't, and shouldn't, get preferential treatment for "upgpraded an existing laptop to use the newest model of the same CPU".
(Switching to ARM right now could potentially allow for a nice repeat, though)
Be careful what you wish for.
The primary problem with Sierra with respect to PDFs is that Apple chose to
rewrite the PDFKit framework in macOS 10.12 and it broke a number of things
that PDF-related developers relied upon...
Apple wants to use a common foundation for both iOS and macOS. However, it was
released way too early, and for the first time (at least in my experience)
Apple deprecated several features without caring about compatibility. And to
make things worse, lots of former features are now broken or not implemented at
all, meaning that we had to add lots of workarounds or implement stuff on our
own. And there’s still work left to be done.
10.12.2 introduces new issues (it seems that Apple wants to fix at least the
broken compatibility now) and of course fixed almost none of the other issues.
http://tidbits.com/article/16966Apple appears to simply no longer have that cycle as part of its business DNA, and no longer seems to even understand that is what the computer industry is (or was) about.
I am looking ever more favorably at Windows again.
Latent demand = sales.
It's certainly not due to the effusive praise of the press.
In almost every discussion about this, you will see some people who have actually purchased — unlike the detractors — these machines and are happy with them.
I personally don't see anything bad about the new MacBooks either, except the lack of out-of-the-box compatibility with the new iPhones/EarPods, and their price point in relation to my budget at this current point in time. I will definitely be buying one as soon as I can afford it.
Going all USB3/Thunderbolt only is very good, exciting even, and harkens back to 2 decades ago when the very first iMac came out as the first every USB-only computer. The wide color displays have to be seen in person to be appreciated. The battery problems and GPU glitches have been found to be on the software side, iirc, and some of those issues have already been patched.
I have a Logitech mouse I love, it has a USB connector receiver that sticks 3 mm out of my laptop so I keep it plugged in all the time. The idea of it hanging of some cable adapter is just silly, not even mentioning the fact that you have to buy it.
Or my fancy 27" Apple Thunderbolt display. I had no issue paying the Apple tax because I loved the display and it doubles as a docking station (integrated power adapter). Guess what, it doesn't work with the new laptop. The new display they are selling is made by LG and was not available for purchase until few weeks ago.
Wasn't Jobs the kind of person you were terrified of letting down and doesn't that kind of thing trickle downward?
I don't know if the Apple before Cook and Icahn was different in that, but this is soooo ... dare I say "heyday Microsoft"?
Apple is still making tons of money. Boring but profitable isn't that bad a place to be. It's possible to be boring, profitable, and still be a prestige brand. Look at Rolex.
It didn't work for Aperture, pros generally moved to Lightroom or something else. For macOS either Linux or Windows seems more likely than iOS.
I wouldn't mind knowing who did that, and what their workflow is to model all that stuff.
I think once Apples moves in, they will be inspired to pick things up. It really is an amazing building.
having owned an airport router I no longer see the need as other routers have become just as easy to use. my 1g service from AT&T was a breeze to setup for home use and heavily customize, all from my Mac.
the only bone I have to pick with Apple is the disgraceful product cycle associated with the mini and Pro. If they are going to drop these products then drop them. if they aren't going to do yearly updates then either drop the product or guarantee refreshes so people don't feel like they are buying into a dead end.
finally, damn please get all your products to one connector again and fast and in the mean time adapters should be included when your own products don't interconnect
But Apple is so far behind with the horrid Siri it's laughable. I've used Siri almost daily since 2011 and after using Google Now I cant stand to use Siri as her accuracy is 90 percent if lucky vs. her competitors 100 percent.
They now need to compete on AI. I imagine a lot of their resources are being put in the catch-up-to-Google bucket.
There have been a lot of blog posts saying Apple doesn't know who their customers are. But their products are already accepted by everyone (every group). Their customers are everyone.
I don't understand why their development in that area slowed down so much, when Amazon started much later and was still able to produce the first home assistant. An Apple version of Amazon Echo (Siri for Home) would've been the perfect product to integrate users further in their environment.
Only if Apple is looking not to innovate. Mesh networking has great potential to take off, especially if the software was integrated into iOS. One missing element from mesh is AAA, which Apple could definitely mediate.
My MBP is only 1 year old, waiting to see what comes out of Cupertino later this year before deciding if I'll move away from Apple products for my dev machine.
Some influencers who are not either professional bloggers or iOS devs too please.
They were correct in not naming the iPhone the Granny Smith.
I now measure my 3D render times in seconds not double digit minutes.
There is no doubt in my mind that if the trashcan mac had Nvidia GPUs I would have just saved up and spent over double I spent on this PC even if it had worse performance. I've been a mac user for 17 years and didn't make this decision lightly.
I'm working in Cinema 4D and Octane render (render engine built from the ground up for GPU) with a single GTX 1080, coming from a 2.7 i5 MBP with no dedicated GPU the difference isn't even comparable.
Good idea of what you can expect from a single 1080+Octane is in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGXmsUnbPCM
The industry is at a bit of a crossroads from what I can see, of course huge studios have investments in render farms and CPU based tech but for individuals and <10 person studios it's all moving towards GPU rendering.
Being able to run a renderer on your desktop machine that can show the end result in near real time completely changes your workflow. It's no longer just using experience to make guesses with lighting and materials then waiting minutes to see if your hypothesis was correct.
The only company selling everything is probably Microsoft, where you can buy a laptop from the manufacturer of the OS. But Windows Phones aren't nearly as well supported when it comes to third party apps, so you'll have to go with Google there.
So there's not really any company (except perhaps Microsoft) that can offer a similar experience as Apple used to.
If you have a problem with apple hate, don't comment on it. There are thousands of other threads to reply to instead of adding to the existing dribble.
My last 3 jobs, I've been issued an MBP. I'm not really given a choice, it's just considered standard issue at this point. Should we all just accept things we'd don't necessarily like, or is it alright with you if we have a collective conversation?