Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'MacBook Pro' started by wozmatic, Oct 11, 2016.
Over 500 days since the last Retina MacBook Pro was released.
Not competitive? Sure.
Not really. Macs can go a long time without a true refresh. I feel that if Apple were to refresh any of their Mac lineups every year like they do the iPhone, they wouldn't make as much money. By giving them at least a year and a half or almost two years, they can catch people who want to upgrade from the last model AND people who have 3-5 year old Macs who want up finally upgrade. As you can see from my sig, I have a 2010 MBP and it's running great. Typing this on it now.
Why is it disrespectful? And honestly, how is this any different from what Apple was doing before? In earlier days, Apple would release new models around every 6 months, but these 'upgrades' constituted simply a slight CPU frequency bump, following Intel's CPU refreshes. More substantial upgrades to the MBP line were still only once per year or once per two years. The CPU Apple uses in the 15" MBP is still perfectly competitive. And the SSD/WiFi modules are still faster than most of the competition.
It's not disrespectful but I guess it's annoying for those who NEED to upgrade from older models. The new one should be here in a few weeks anyway.
Assuming you buy a good quality and well performing Mac Book Pro, there is no need to renew yearly.
That said, if you are up for an upgrade, having a release 'THAT YEAR' is important. You don't want to force the customer to wait with their old system until it's a year you get around to doing an upgrade. You got an old system, why would you expect to have them buy a system you released a year ago, and will update soon?
And as a company, you might want to get fresh products for new people, or upgrade those who have outdated ones. Buying older tech for modern companies, while still paying full price, seems counter productive and just means more costs in the future as you require or desire to refresh again for the same reasons.
So, we have a few things that matter here. What tech do we need, how much money do we want to spend on that. And how fresh or how soon can we get it?
In my personal opinion as long as there is a yearly release, it is either fresh when you buy it, or soon here, and we wait not too long. That way paying full price for the 'old' stuff, which is from the same year still. Or for the 'new' stuff, because it will be here soon, feels a lot more comfortable.
I am about to buy an iMac or MBP, why would I though? My old iMac is ready for replacement, but they are not cheap, why would I pay for hardware from 2 years ago in last years model. When I could wait a bit and get something new.
But yep, Apple will lose a sale or two here if there's no yearly refresh of MBP or iMac. Because I sure as hell am not buying last years stuff, for that money, or wait until some time in 2017 to get it.
I think we're on the brink of getting new laptops and desktops, and that means it is still 'this year' - hence why I personally don't mind waiting.
But sure is weird that a company that sells us courage for being modern and taking steps to the future, is simply (i guess) doing that, because they know they iterate once, and then not upgrade for years. Yes Mac Pro trashbin, I am looking at you and your underpar performance for 4000 euro, you should have been kept pro. Now you're a black mac mini.
Refresh once a year, whenever it is READY. Don't Samsung Note 7 rush it. And I personally don't mind the wait.
Refresh one year in january, and the second year in december, is not a yearly release. That's 22 months difference. NO cheating!
Unless Apple waits last minute or does not schedule a Key Note, I'm not sure where your figuring 'A few weeks for a new model.' October has been the past Mac update. Cook said the Mac was on the horizon. When is the question.
Of course not there are excellent technical reasons that Apple had no control of that have meant there just hasn't been the silicon they need to make a significant update.
Maybe I should have specified WITHIN a few weeks, if rumours are correct. And by that I mean at any point in the next few weeks we could have new Macs.
Apple is a business run for profit. Buy their products or don't buy them, it's your choice, but don't expect them to play along with crackpot mutual respect notions. In other words, grow up.
Disrespect no, absolutely not. Its a business decision, that they're not paying for (Mac sales continue to slide).
I think they tried to skip a chipset generation, then got burned by intel's delay. Other companies decided to keep rolling out new generations as Intel rolled out new chips, apple did not and now they painted themselves in the corner.
But Apple have been burnt by Intel's delays for at least two or three years now.
I think it is a little embarrassing for Apple that they still haven't released a Skylake MBP when the chips have been out for over half a year already. In my opinion Apple should have released an update for the rMBP when Skylake became available and then waited to do the redesign of the MBP with the dynamic function row with Kaby Lake.
Now we are going to get a redesigned MBP with old processors - which is the worst of both worlds.
Why is Apple the only one being burnt by intel's delays? Yes, Intel has dropped the ball but other makers don't seem to have an issue rolling out Skylake and now Kaby lake processors. In the end, its up to Apple to adjust to changing conditions, and not blame some external factors. Consider this, the 15" MBP is still on Haswell, what's up with that, there's no way you can blame intel for that decision
I think maybe we should re-examine the term "disrespect" and how it could possibly apply to consumer goods.
Apple is not the only one being burnt by Intel's delays but Apple is the only one releasing MBPs and this is Macrumors.
I don't blame Intel for Apple being so far behind like you say on the 15inch MBP but it just makes my point clearer which is Apple is a step behind and its hard to fathom why they don't want to lead the pack with the newest processors, it is rather perverse for such a leading tech firm which likes to define consumer electronics.
"Not really. Macs can go a long time without a true refresh."
What should have been done, say, in the last quarter of 2015 or first quarter of 2016, is to "add value" to the existing product line, sort of a "revision B", as they used to do in the past.
That is to say, boost the "low end starter models" from 128gb to 256gb (SSD), and make 16gb of RAM the minimum configuration...
...Yet keep the entry-level pricing the same.
No, that's not "a revised and upgraded motherboard", but it would increase the value of the product to appeal to prospective buyers, without 1) having to re-design the computer and 2) with little real impact on Apple's bottom-line revenues.
Exactly I need to buy a new Mac, my Macbook is eight years old and over the past couple of months has really started to struggle, I've done all the upgrades possible 1TB SSD and maxed out the RAM but my Macbook is just old now. However, I won't buy a MBP which is 500 days old. It's just not good value so I am forced to wait for the new MBPs.
Given that the average update rate of MBP is 317 days according to this very website it is most inconvenient that Apple has not updated its Macbook Pro for over 18 months.
If Apple significantly reduced their prices (like other firms do) for products which are over a year old and a new iteration is known to be coming then I might be tempted to buy this older product. However, no reduction in price and/or no new rMBP means I'm not giving Apple any money for a purchase until things are changed.
I agree, I don't think it's disrespect to the consumers, but after you reminded me of lasts weeks post about the mac sales sliding that made me realize, maybe it's disrespectful to the stockholders?
A big chunk of that sales drop could be the lack of a recent MBP update, in addition to the high retail price.
Looking at direct competition laptops (Dell XPS for example) it has the same specs but $1000 cheaper.
It's likely that some of the the pro user market had made a switch to Dell / Asus due to Apple's high price, and to buy a more up to date product such as the XPS.
B&H Photo already has the 13" retina MBP with a $100 discount - $1,199. How "significant" must the discount be? Apple doesn't do crazy big discounts. Any thoughts about refurbished Macs? The same model I just mentioned is $1,099 refurbished.
Just one simple, one word response: YES
Being so intransparent about the timelines is just showing disrespect to their customer base that have been loyal for many years and just don't know if it is wise to acquire the current offer whereas upgrades might be around the corner.
Not disrespectful, as that would suggest Apple actually care about the computer market.
Mac Pro, Mac Mini, Air, MBP....all shoved in a drawer marked 'not urgent', as Apple know they make more money selling us the same phone every year.
I'm not saying the 15" rMBP's CPU isn't still perfectly competitive at a lower price, but otherwise a knowledgeable buyer can't help but question, why would I pay current prices for previous-generation tech? That's the main problem I see here.
Apple should've updated the rMBP with Skylake chips and 1867 MHz RAM in the spring, this to be the last minor refresh of the current form factor. Then the redesigned model (coming before December) to be given Kaby Lake to start out with. That's how to stay competitive.
But right now, its become clear that Apple's not staying competitive is hurting their sales (Mac Sales Continue to Slide Amid Lack of Updates). So they're not being disrespectful to the customer, but rather to the Mac, and to themselves.
Sounds like a one-sided relationship.
What's most interesting to me is that Apple doesn't mind leaving money on the table. Easy money. Mindlessly easy money. Most businesses don't do that. The board could delegate the task of updating the macbook pros with the latest processors while keeping the same design to any mid level underling.
There would be little to worry about. Customers would whine about a lack of innovation, etc, but surely that would be better than releasing absolutely nothing, right?
--- Post Merged, Oct 12, 2016 ---
It's not disrespectful but more arrogance. They think they have a huge lead in laptops and/or they think laptops are an almost dead product category.
I think that they do have a huge lead in the laptop space simply because of their trackpad and screens. No other windows laptop has a good one and certainly if they have one the price is as high. Now that windows 10 has a bash shell, the OS advantage of mac os x is less important.
Apple is wrong that laptops are a dying product category. An iPad with an external keyboard is more cumbersome, may weigh more, and less ergnomic than their very own macbook. Seems to me that Apple is willing their iPad to become a laptop replacement because it's their darling that they can't seem to accept that most people need in a distant third place to a phone and laptop. I'd even suggest that the apple watch, if it were develop useful health capabilities one day, would vault it ahead of an iPad. An iPad to me fills a need for way fewer people than any of their other three core products. Strictly a nice to have and their declining sales proves it--people are realizing that they simply don't use their ipads after a few months.
--- Post Merged, Oct 12, 2016 ---
Saying that it's "disrespectful" makes you sound pretty entitled. Does anyone here recall signing a contract with Apple regarding the frequency of hardware releases? Just a verbal agreement maybe? They're under no obligation to release anything on any timeline. And given that very few people buy a whole new computer every year and that they've gotten to the point where even a 5 year old machine is far from being obsolete, I don't even think that releasing a new one every year is really necessary. At this point all that's usually offered is a slightly faster and more energy efficient processor each year. It's not like the days when if you computer was a few years old it couldn't run current software. This is why PC/Mac sales are dropping. People don't replace their computers very frequently anymore, so there's not an urgency to put out a new model every year. The only growth is with the hybrid/2-in-1 devices which offer a new experience and functionality.
*Edit to add*
Just look at the poll thread below about what model MBP people have. Almost 60% of those who responded have a model from 2011 or earlier, and this is a forum that attracts Mac enthusiasts. Then people wonder why Apple doesn't feel the need to release a new model every 12 months.