Is Apple still serious about the professional market?

[leekohler]

I might also bring this thought up as the basis for speculation over Apple's decision of how to view their pro users:

I think there is a parallel looking at the fate of the American car industry that has ignored what the market had wanted for years. Eventually when a car buyer switches brands over neglect and being frustrated and angry with a company's product - when that buyer is happy with the new brand that he has purchased, that person will never return - he'll tell everyone how unhappy he was and how happy he now is with his new purchase. Of coarse he'll overstate, or believe that what he has just puchased is so much better - becasue most will rationalize the brilliant decisions that they made.

Multiply this by countless thousands of users and you'll have a sudden loss of sales that you might never recover from. A burned user will not return unless they are also unhappy to the new brand they've bought into.

Apple's star is rising now in gross revenue - but neglect the pro users and their customer satisfaction and those numbers could suddenly reverse dramatically. It took a long time for the car industry's demise, but all the warning signs were there. It might have happened on a slower time frame because people keep their cars much longer than computers.

Apple doesn't have the luxury of time if they fumble the ball on this one.


Mike

p.s.

If Apple is truly putting less and less resources into the pro segment of their business - for the life of me I wouldn't understand why they would risk their brand's "cutting edge" preception by neglect. If it is a financial decsision - that doesn't make much sense when they are sitting on so much cash in the bank. It is not like they are always making huge dividend payouts to the stockholders. It is more like the management is dipping into the stock option trough at the shareholder's expense. But the actual cash on hand is accumulating.

The money is there - and there is no reason to not spend a fraction of it to maintain their premier position of "precieved" quality.

Exactly- when someone like me (who's used Macs since the IIe) is talking about building a hackintosh, something is wrong. I'm not the only person who feels this way- far from it. Brand loyalty only goes so far. Apple has also missed out on the netbook market. I know a lot of people who've gotten Dells and just thrown Mac OS on them or just simply put up with Windows. They got sick of waiting, so they got something else.

 

[Toronto Mike]

I know that I am staying with the G5 that I have using CS4. When my time for upgrading my Adobe product reaches version CS7 - I will be making a decision of whether to stay with Apple.

I'm not a power user. I want a mid-level tower with it's own dedicated video card, and space for two hard drives, with no chimping out on available ram slots. If Apple cannot make such a machine for around $1,500 - $1,700 Cdn$ - then I will be poking the tires in the Windows world. There is no reason why they cannot do this.

As a potential customer I will not accept being told that the iMac is all that is offered for this price range. When they dropped the matte screen for glossy only iMacs - what was barely tolerable for someone that wants more options for expandiblity was not worth putting up with. Apple refuses to listen to a segment of its users that want matte screens. I want to service basic stuff with my computer and not have to have someone replace hard drives (if I understand what others have said about this issue correctly).

I need a mid priced tower with desktop type power, cpu, and expandibily. I don't need special server type of cpu, or the more expensive ECE ram. I use my compter for my business, but cannot justify spending the kind of money for a Mac Pro. It's only a computer, a tool to get work done for an expense that justifies the tasks needing done. It doesn't make sense when you know you don't need that level of power, but you do need enough power above the Mac Mini.

Again, I consider myself a "pro" user (with a small p) - and do not like being pushed into spending way more money than I need to for the power that I require. And then, to have to swallow all the other stuff they throw at you: not including mini display adapters when they are the ones that are putting them on their machines. I think it is insulting.

People can justify Apple's position in this matter all they want to - others will vote with their wallets. The pro will certainly be looking at the price/functionality equation in this economy if that no longer makes sense to them.

Mike

 

[VirtualRain]

That's the problem that Apple might be having when looking at just raw numbers.

My thought is that the value of Apple's professional user is many times their number because the preception of Apple's brand was built from the trickle down effect from the pro users in the creation of hardware and software for the platform.

If Nikon didn't have their top flagship cameras that pros use - no one would precieve that brand as having a higher, and therefore more sought after appeal. Of coarse Nikon sells way more D60s/D80s/D400 than the pro level cameras - but it is the preception of quality, and the trickle down effect of creating the R and D for the pro cameras that make their way to the consumer level cameras and lenses.

I think the same dynamic for Apple exits for Nikon, whether they believe it or not. To focus on just numbers will miss the wider picture of their brand's use and future appeal.

Mike

This makes sense in some industries, but how many Apple customers are even aware that Apple makes a Mac Pro, FCP, Logic, etc.? Likely very few. Honestly, if Apple cut the Mac Pro, FCP, Logic, etc. I suspect it would create a lot of noise around forums like this but 99% of Apple's customers couldn't care less.

The "Pro" people I know that use Apple (one guy owns his own graphic design firm) use iMacs and Macbook Pro's exclusively with Adobe software... with Firewire storage arrays. Even they wouldn't care.

I certainly would hate to see the Mac Pro go the way of the dodo but the continued lack of resources put to Apple's pro market (which is arguably close to zilch) is absolutely related to Apple's strategy and vision. They simply don't see any point investing in it (unlike Canon and Nikon that invest heavily in flagship products). Let's just hope they at least feel it's important enough to maintain.

 

[Eric S.]

Exactly- when someone like me (who's used Macs since the IIe) is talking about building a hackintosh, something is wrong. I'm not the only person who feels this way- far from it. Brand loyalty only goes so far.

I'm not a power user. I want a mid-level tower with it's own dedicated video card, and space for two hard drives, with no chimping out on available ram slots. If Apple cannot make such a machine for around $1,500 - $1,700 Cdn$ - then I will be poking the tires in the Windows world. There is no reason why they cannot do this.

As a potential customer I will not accept being told that the iMac is all that is offered for this price range.
...
I need a mid priced tower with desktop type power, cpu, and expandibily. I don't need special server type of cpu, or the more expensive ECE ram. I use my compter for my business, but cannot justify spending the kind of money for a Mac Pro.

I agree with both of you. I don't use a desktop Mac professionally but I still want an expandable system. I got tired of waiting for a midrange tower to replace my PM G4 that wasn't going to come (I used to buy every other Apple generation and G5 got "skipped"). For now I'm sticking with OS X but without Apple - see sig - but next time around I may be out the door entirely, after 25 years as an loyal customer.

Personally I think that Steve Jobs has always hated the mere idea of third party hardware and software, and had to be forced into opening up the original Mac with a SCSI bus. Now he finally sees an opportunity to return to the "appliance" paradigm with the iPad + AppStore. I wouldn't be surprised to see future Mac and OS releases start to converge toward closed systems whose software is provided only through the Apple-controlled distribution and sales channel, and Macs as we have known them become relics of the past.

 

[leekohler]

I agree with both of you. I don't use a desktop Mac professionally but I still want an expandable system. I got tired of waiting for a midrange tower to replace my PM G4 that wasn't going to come (I used to buy every other Apple generation and G5 got "skipped"). For now I'm sticking with OS X but without Apple - see sig - but next time around I may be out the door entirely, after 25 years as an loyal customer.

Personally I think that Steve Jobs has always hated the mere idea of third party hardware and software, and had to be forced into opening up the original Mac with a SCSI bus. Now he finally sees an opportunity to return to the "appliance" paradigm with the iPad + AppStore. I wouldn't be surprised to see future Mac and OS releases start to converge toward closed systems whose software is provided only through the Apple-controlled distribution and sales channel, and Macs as we have known them become relics of the past.

I may have to talk to you about your hackintosh. I'm most likely going there in a year or so.

 

[VirtualRain]

An off the wall thought...

I wonder if the real market for the Mac Pro is actually not Pro's at all... but PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability (that's actually under-utilized most of the time) but looking for something more refined and different?

Perhaps that's the role for the Mac Pro in Apple's lineup... as a lure for PC enthusiasts to switch.

 

[nanofrog]

An off the wall thought...

I wonder if the real market for the Mac Pro is actually not Pro's at all... but PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability (that's actually under-utilized most of the time) but looking for something more refined and different?

Perhaps that's the role for the Mac Pro in Apple's lineup... as a lure for PC enthusiasts to switch.

There may be some merit here, as when the MP's had a better value, PC enthusiast that wanted to switch would go for the MP. But now, with the the value gone due to the higher prices on the '09's, and the current economy forcing people to be more cautious with their funds, they're looking elsewhere. Such users were probably the largest portion of any growth in the MP's sales.

Now combine the lower sales numbers with the lackluster software, the economics aren't looking as wonderful to the real pro users either. Which means they're taking a look at other platforms, and from what I can tell by posts here on MR, is actually decent enough. So users are starting to seriously consider a switch. As I understand it, Windows is already the better platform for 3D work, and it's not unreasonable to believe that the software will improve to the point it's seen as a better solution as well in other areas.

 

[Eric S.]

I may have to talk to you about your hackintosh. I'm most likely going there in a year or so.

To be honest there are a number of downsides to it. Following a recipe made it not too difficult, but still it was an effort to find a bootloader that worked and the right set of kexts, and still some things don't work that probably should. As a project it's a learning experience but I wouldn't go that route if my livelihood depended on it.

 

[snouter]

An off the wall thought...

I wonder if the real market for the Mac Pro is actually not Pro's at all... but PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability (that's actually under-utilized most of the time) but looking for something more refined and different?

Perhaps that's the role for the Mac Pro in Apple's lineup... as a lure for PC enthusiasts to switch.

I can't help but think that those people are actually attracted to the hardware options of a PC.

Single i7 or dual CPU Xeon?

Overclock or no overclock?

Fanless video card? cheap video card? bleeding edge $600 video card?

mATX or ATX form factor?

$40 case or $200 case

I'm not saying Apple has to offer "everything" but they could most certainly offer more product diversity.

Now that there is no PPC to distract us, we know what hardware is out there and we know what Apple offers us.

 

[Topper]

An off the wall thought...
.
I wonder if the real market for the Mac Pro is actually not Pro's at all... but PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability (that's actually under-utilized most of the time) but looking for something more refined and different?

Perhaps that's the role for the Mac Pro in Apple's lineup... as a lure for PC enthusiasts to switch.

I'm not sure what would make a PC enthusiast to switch to Apple.
If I were used to Windows 7 and knew nothing about OS X, why switch?
As you say "PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability" so why switch?
Get a PC rig with SLI or crossfire and it's no contest, they will beat the hell out of us.

I could see professional person switching to Macs.
For professionals, the Mac Pro is powerful, OS X is a great operating system, and there are many excellent Mac programs.
If/when software is written in 64-bit for SL, then the Mac Pro will really kick butt.
How many professionals care about cost? If your business is thriving at all, you should be able to write-off most of the cost of the Mac Pro and software.

The one thing I can't picture is a Mac professional going over to PC.

For me this thread is interesting conversation but it doesn't matter because as long as Apple makes a Mac Pro, I will be a customer.
.

 

[Robellyn]

The one thing I can't picture is a Mac professional going over to PC.
.

True, I am only an 'amateur professional' , but for the first time since 1998 I am considering doing just that.

I still love my mac's (all eight of them over the years), but unless the new MP's really are something special, I'll be doing the Windows7 thing. I have my eye on a nice i7 920 machine (and with the money I'll save from not going with the MP, I can afford to replace Photoshop and Painter with the Windows versions).

It breaks my heart to go this route (and I'm still hoping that the new machines will change my mind!) but I want a good solid quad core machine without a built in monitor ('cause I use my Cintiq for that), and the 2009 MP's are too much $ for too little.

So I too will wait to see the new MP's (and evaluate Apples direction); if it looks like they are dropping their high-end computers into consumer-gadget obscurity, then my decision is made.

 

[IntelliUser]

So Apple is unprofessional because the Mac Pros cost "too much"?

I don't think so. Considering the Total cost of ownership, I'd say that the difference gets pretty smaller.

 

[Chaos123x]

When was the last update to a Apple Pro product? Hardware or Software?

 

[TheStrudel]

They're all on a predictable cycle...FCS just had one (past summer, basically) and the next is due in a year and a half. Logic's was also recent. 2009 Mac Pros were only a year ago. It's all proceeding on the regular schedule.

 

[leekohler]

True, I am only an 'amateur professional' , but for the first time since 1998 I am considering doing just that.

I still love my mac's (all eight of them over the years), but unless the new MP's really are something special, I'll be doing the Windows7 thing. I have my eye on a nice i7 920 machine (and with the money I'll save from not going with the MP, I can afford to replace Photoshop and Painter with the Windows versions).

It breaks my heart to go this route (and I'm still hoping that the new machines will change my mind!) but I want a good solid quad core machine without a built in monitor ('cause I use my Cintiq for that), and the 2009 MP's are too much $ for too little.

So I too will wait to see the new MP's (and evaluate Apples direction); if it looks like they are dropping their high-end computers into consumer-gadget obscurity, then my decision is made.

I'm getting to that point as well. It makes me sad that Apple seems to want to gouge the pro user for whatever amount they can without offering options. And hey- they can offer whatever they want, but neither I nor anyone else has to buy what they're selling.

Like I said, I've been using Macs since the 80's and this is the first time I've ever considered leaving. What else can you do? I simply don't have $3000 to drop on a tower, and all-in-ones don't work for me.

 

[TSE]

What Apple needs to do is think about what got them where they are today. Professionals got them where they are today. It would be extremely arrogant, stupid, and a bad business choice to ditch the professional market that has been loyal with Apple for little electronic devices that can't be bought as full time machines.

Unless the new Mac Pro comes out and stuns or something new comes out for professionals, and Apple invests more time and money on their software that they have abandoned, Apple is going to lose A LOT of dedicated costumers.

 

[Techhie]

So Apple is unprofessional because the Mac Pros cost "too much"?

I don't think so. Considering the Total cost of ownership, I'd say that the difference gets pretty smaller.

No, purposely extorting a portion of the market that depends on the machines they neglect makes them unprofessional. Most of the pros they are ignoring have been loyal since before they adopted the policies of a consumer-oriented company catering to teenagers.

 

[Eric S.]

What Apple needs to do is think about what got them where they are today. Professionals got them where they are today. It would be extremely arrogant, stupid, and a bad business choice to ditch the professional market that has been loyal with Apple for little electronic devices that can't be bought as full time machines.

Unless the new Mac Pro comes out and stuns or something new comes out for professionals, and Apple invests more time and money on their software that they have abandoned, Apple is going to lose A LOT of dedicated costumers.

I'm with you in spirit, but every time I read a comment like this I think you know the Apple execs know this. They know they risk losing high-end and professional customers, many of whom have been with Apple since the early days. But then they look on the other side and they see potential masses of customers for the pad thingies, billions of downloads from the App Store, and fat deals with the Wall Street Journals, the New York Timeses, the book and magazine publishers, and on and on. And they say well we'll make some efforts to keep the computer professionals happy but we're going to focus on this other stuff over here.

 

[LethalWolfe]

That I am sure is true in the places you go. But move over to the Video side of the world and you will see that more and more Windows is taking over. Broadcasters are moving to Windows in mass due to the cost to performance ratio. Most every TV station or network edits in Windows. You just can not ignore the cost vs other solutions. Dell and HP sell workstations that offer even more power than a Mac Pro and they sell them for less.

Talking about the 'video side of the world' is like 'talking about all vehicles that use an internal combustion engine' because it's so broad that its almost impossible to talk about it in a meaningful way. What part of the video world do you want to talk about? Local or national programming? Commercials & trailers? Feature films? Documentaries? TV shows? Weddings? Event? Corporate & industrial? Video for the web? Is the budget five figures or seven figures?

Most every TV station or network edits in Windows? For many, I dare say most, local TV stations their primary content is news and I wouldn't be surprised if most of them used PCs for post because there are more options for news on Windows than on Mac. W/that being said KCAL here in LA, a CBS affiliate, runs FCP and actually helped Apple field test Final Cut Server. CNN and the BBC also are turning more towards FCP but I think that is more for a cost saving measure than FCP being better than Avid's news offerings.

As for network shows, that totally depends on what company is doing the post as the networks don't usually create the content they air in house. When the show is done it gets laid off to tape, or compressed to certain specs if you are doing a tapeless delivery, and away it goes. As long as it gets delivered on time and to spec the network does care what was used to create it. This is completely anecdotal, but I run into Windows machines so rarely in the post facilities I've been to (both in Los Angeles and Indianapolis) that when I see a PC instead of a Mac I do typically do a double take.

Also, have you priced the Dell and HP workstations that, for example, Avid has recommended to work w/their systems? No one is running a certified Avid setup on a $1000 Dell tower.

CBS is just finishing a move to a Windows based ( XP 64 bit) video server system for the entire network. So every drop of video you see on CBS before long, except for live video, will be from a Windows system and most of it will be edited on a Windows system and a Windows system will run the automation system, It almost goes without saying that a Windows system will run the business side of the house.

Apple has never had a presence in the broadcast server market and just because Master Control uses Windows as the backbone of their content distribution system doesn't mean the content creation was done on a Windows machine any more than a website hosted on a Windows server means the content of that website was created on a Windows machine.

Granted this is the hardware area but I question Apple's commitment to pro users more because of what they've done, or haven't done, w/their software than I do their hardware.


Lethal

 

[Bubba Satori]

I'm with you in spirit, but every time I read a comment like this I think you know the Apple execs know this. They know they risk losing high-end and professional customers, many of whom have been with Apple since the early days. But then they look on the other side and they see potential masses of customers for the pad thingies, billions of downloads from the App Store, and fat deals with the Wall Street Journals, the New York Timeses, the book and magazine publishers, and on and on. And they say well we'll make no efforts to keep the computer professionals happy but we're going to focus on this other stuff over here.

+1 It's that simple.

If every MacPro would generate $100-$200 in some form of subscription or network revenue every month, Apple would be updating them and the prehistoric ACDs twice a year and give you a choice of six different models and all the latest video cards, BD drives and peripherals.

Apple Computer Inc. is gone and not just in name.

$50 billion in the bank.

 

[Gomff]

What Apple needs to do is think about what got them where they are today. Professionals got them where they are today.

Don't know how true this is......Apple's resurgence and transformation into the company it is today started with the first iMac's designed by Jonathan Ive. They then built upon that chic with iPod's, titanium Macbooks & recently the iPhone. The pro Market may have sustained them (at times only just) but I don't think it has ever really given their profits a huge boost like the iMac, iPod and iPhone lines have done.

I agree it's a shame though, I'm a pro 3D graphics user and I really don't like the idea of going back to Windows full time. I don't know of a PC vendor I would trust enough to buy an 8 core (or more) machine from. My current machine is so stable.....I'd prefer to stick with a Mac Pro even when using Windows via boot camp.

 

[VirtualRain]

I can't help but think that those people are actually attracted to the hardware options of a PC.

Single i7 or dual CPU Xeon?

Overclock or no overclock?

Fanless video card? cheap video card? bleeding edge $600 video card?

mATX or ATX form factor?

$40 case or $200 case

I'm not saying Apple has to offer "everything" but they could most certainly offer more product diversity.

Now that there is no PPC to distract us, we know what hardware is out there and we know what Apple offers us.

If the post count of the re-flashed graphic card threads is any indication, then there are a lot of PC enthusiasts who have switched to a Mac Pro.

I'm not sure what would make a PC enthusiast to switch to Apple.
If I were used to Windows 7 and knew nothing about OS X, why switch?
As you say "PC enthusiasts use to having ridiculous power and expandability" so why switch?
Get a PC rig with SLI or crossfire and it's no contest, they will beat the hell out of us.

I could see professional person switching to Macs.
For professionals, the Mac Pro is powerful, OS X is a great operating system, and there are many excellent Mac programs.
If/when software is written in 64-bit for SL, then the Mac Pro will really kick butt.
How many professionals care about cost? If your business is thriving at all, you should be able to write-off most of the cost of the Mac Pro and software.

The one thing I can't picture is a Mac professional going over to PC.

For me this thread is interesting conversation but it doesn't matter because as long as Apple makes a Mac Pro, I will be a customer.
.

I think most would agree that the Mac offers a much more refined and stable computing experience than a PC. Once a PC enthusiast grows out of the tinkering, building, overclocking and all the instability that comes with it (particularly buggy drivers esp. with SLI), I can definitely see the attraction to the Mac Pro as a nice alternative where they don't need to fully sacrifice power and expandability to achieve more productivity.

 

[snouter]

If the post count of the re-flashed graphic card threads is any indication, then there are a lot of PC enthusiasts who have switched to a Mac Pro.

Or desperate Mac users doing anything they can to increase their availability to hardware.

How else are you going to get a 4890 in your Mac? And that's still last years card.

I flashed a Voodoo or two back in the day. For that reason.

I'm just saying, from an "enthusiast" perspective, Macs are def harder to futz with beyond upgrading a hard drive, which is easy in a Mac Pro, a PITA on laptops and iMacs.

Apple sells an open the box, plug it in experience, and they do that better than anyone else. After that, you're on your own.

 

[Amiga2000HD]

I think that, for now, Apple's still reasonably serious about the professional market.

Logic just got the 64 bit update, so it's clear that at least the professional audio package is still an active product.

I think the situation is less clear with Final Cut Studio. FCS 3 was released back in the summer and to many people, it was a disappointing update. The additional codecs and being able to send sequences to Compressor while still being able to edit were welcome items and I think the jury's still out on merging Live Type and parts of Shake into Motion. Billing the timecode window as one of the big new features of a major version revision of Final Cut was just too much though - Avid Media Composer's had that for years and years and years.

I'm not sure what to make of the discontinuation of Shake though. Perhaps Apple bit off more than they could chew, maybe they found the return on investment for a small market not worth it, or maybe it was a long term strategy to merge the technology they acquired when they purchased Shake into other products and wind it down when support contracts for it expired?

The incremental revision of Final Cut Studio makes sense considering the development environment on Mac OS right now. The operating system people at Apple discontinued the 64 bit version of the Carbon API package while development was well under way. This is well known to have thrown Adobe for a loop since they were using it to create the 64 bit version of Creative Suite. The entire CS package has to be rewritten in Cocoa in order to make it 64 bit. Cocoa is also required to take advantage of many of the improvements found in Snow Leopard and new versions of Mac OS going forward. I don't know whether the Final Cut group at Apple was working on adapting the existing code to become 64 bit using the now-aborted 64 bit Carbon frameworks or if they were actively preparing a Cocoa version of Final Cut Studio; if they weren't already doing so, I think it's a fairly safe assumption that they are now.

This undertaking will be a lot of work and will have a long lead time. It also explains why Final Cut Studio 3 was a fairly light upgrade over Studio 2. It isn't surprising that Apple reduced the price of the package since Studio 3 is an incremental upgrade to existing, aging software. I think it'll become more clear where Apple's headed with the professional applications when the next version of Final Cut Studio comes out since the codebase is at a major crossroads of changing underlying technology, where decisions made now will have a major impact on the future of the product.

As far as Mac Pros go, I think there will always be a market for them, but a small market. Laptops, iMacs and Mac Minis cover most of the range of the computer market except for three areas:

1) Luxury market - those who buy expensive, impressive Macs because they want to and the cost of doing so isn't a concern.

2) Hobbyists who want performance and expandability of a tower system but prefer not to go the route of Hackintoshing a PC.

3) Professionals who require the performance and/or expandability of a tower system. A lot of software development, data analysis, and audio and video work can be done on reasonably spec'd iMacs. However, when XCode compile times, Matlab or Labview run times, video compression/rendering etc. times get out of hand, the issue of time-is-money makes the cost of a Mac Pro workstation justifiable.

A Mac Pro workstation is not only justifiable but necessary when breakout boxes are involved:

ProTools HD digital signal processing cards that connect to the various IO boxes.
Avid Hardware Interface Boards to connect the current line of Nitris and Mojo DX boxes.
Aja Kona breakout cards.
Black Magic breakout cards.
...and I'm sure I could find other examples of media capture and playback equipment that requires a tower system to host PCIe expansion cards.

Keep in mind, all the products Avid makes are cross platform and all the products Adobe makes are cross platform if not Windows only. I'm sure Steve Jobs is aware of this and unless Steve Jobs was to make an uncharacteristically poor decision, the Mac Pro product line won't be discontinued. Here's why:

If the Mac Pro's discontinued, all of the media production systems, except Final Cut and Logic, which are already cross platform will become Windows-only because of the requirement for tower systems that can host PCIe host cards.

It is in Apple's best interest for this to not happen because if it does, it'll permit Microsoft to immediately make Apple eat crow by billing Windows as the operating system for creative professionals. The idea that a Mac's a nice toy for home use but when it's time to get down to serious business in the recording studio or edit suite, you need a PC workstation running windows because you can't hook up an Avid or Kona or Digidesign box to Macintoshes anymore would be one hell of a marketing black eye for Apple that Steve Jobs probably doesn't want. To that end, I'm sure Apple won't ignore the pro market too much lest it becomes dangerous.

 

[G4er?]

I like the comments Toronto Mike made about Nikon and car companies.
I'm not a professional user of computers, cameras or vehicles. But I do demand and expect a certain performance from them. When it comes to cameras my choice is Nikon based on past use and the way the camera feels in my hand. Luckily this still seems to be the case. Nikon remains my choice after comparing other brands.
Jeep is my choice of vehicle. I bought Cherokees new in '89 and '01. But Jeep has dropped many of the features that were the reasons I bought those Cherokees. If I can no longer get the things that made me buy Jeep then I might as well shop around. Or not buy new at all.
After buying Macs that let me upgrade and choose components I find the current desktop Mac lineup totally unacceptable. Apple talks of the elegance and cleanliness of the iMac all in one. Then users have to do away with that designed elegance just to have a backup drive. I also don't like not being able to choose things like the monitor. Those Nikon SLR and DSLRs and Jeep Cherokees I've bought offered choices. Whether lenses or 4 wheel drive. I find the Mac mini doesn't offer enough and the Mac Pro really offers too much for me. Something in between is what I need. With the Mac Pro money is part of it but size is the biggest issue for me.
Right now I'm not spending money on a computer hoping a change is coming. I hope the change is coming from Apple and not me going somewhere else.