Once again, I recommend watching the extremely on-point video “the grand theory of Apple” which I feel does an excellent job of explaining how Apple thinks and works.
I think it’s increasingly clear that there is a general misunderstanding as to how Apple works. I realise there is an increasing trend amongst the Apple critics, where they cover an industry, then they attempt to draw a link to Apple from time to time. I feel this tends to lead to error and inaccurate analysis, because you are comparing Apple too much to other companies, and you are not allowing Apple’s unique attributes to speak for themselves or recognise how Apple is able to set themselves apart from the competition.
Instead, I feel that the more effective way is to approach these topics from Apple’s perspective. Begin with Apple, and then look outwards at different industries.
Apple is more than just a computer company. It’s counterintuitive to view the current state of the Mac lineup as a proxy of the general state of innovation at the company. If anything, I would argue that it’s precisely because Apple is focusing so heavily on wearables that their Mac line appears to have languished.
Ultimately, Apple is a company focused on making technology more personal by removing barriers that stand in the way between the product and the end user. Examples of these include replacing Touch ID (which requires an action) with Face ID (which for certain tasks, requires no action beyond looking at your phone), and the Apple Watch placing a screen on your wrist, thereby reducing the need to keep taking your phone out of pocket when you want to do something.
Moving forward, it makes sense that Apple will continue to focus more on wearables (possibly at the continued expense of the Mac), because technology is now at a point where it is now feasible for Apple to do so. As such, I wouldn’t too optimistic about the state of the Mac moving forward, even if it seems like 2019 was the year Apple started to pay more attention to it.
If anything, I would support this even, because it means more resources being dedicated to the other aspects of the Apple ecosystem that I do use and benefit from.
Airpods are meaningful innovations....
Meaningful would be the Watch, with the health features. That is meaninful!
Airpods are actually meaninless. Again your comments show complete ignorance since your can do NOTHING with the airpods except listen. Computers you can design, create, work, play etc. So they will be actually needed and use more than Airpods.
It is truly quite funny, how die-hard Apple fans bend over to excuse Apple of the lack of design and innovation on the computer line up.
Just as the Apple Watch is a miniature computer you wear on your wrist, the airpods are miniature computers you wear in your years. The new noise-cancelling features in the AirPods Pro is but a portent of how Apple is able to use its control over hardware and software to marginalise entire industries who are simply not equipped to deal with threats like this. Just like how the Apple Watch has made Fitbit (a glorified pedometer) irrelevant, and how the iPhone made the blackberry look antiquated.
As mentioned in the video above, the main purpose of the Mac is to push Apple’s mobile devices forward. That’s why you don’t see Apple doing a product like the Surface Studio because they already have the iPad for that. Conversely, Microsoft doesn’t have a portfolio of mobile products to push forward. That’s why they are doing all these weird hybrid designs in an attempt to create a new product category that will hopefully stick, but so far, the market’s reception seems to have been rather lacklustre.
FIrst it is NOT an impractical idea. That is why I said the external design idea was much better than the iMac, except that it runs Windows.
Still, the Surface Studio idea is in design years ahead of the iMac. The sad thing, it used to be the other way around, that Microsoft copied every idea Apple did.
The surface studio is a niche product which will appeal to only a small market because for most users, a giant touchscreen that you can raise / lower is a white elephant that just isn’t worth the premium you have to fork out for it. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t have its uses, but Apple as a company isn’t interested in serving niche markets.
Secondly, Apple also releases impractical devices. Every entry level computers that have unusable specs (128SSD with 8Gb RAM), heating problems and the iMac still ships with 5400rpm drives.
I don’t think you understand what the word means.
Practical hardware? Like the MBP 2016+ that you can barely type and NOT upgrade?
I mean practical hardware like the Apple Watch and AirPods, which have sold tens of millions of units.
Or that Apple turned the computers into disposable non-upgradable appliances? Oh... Please enlighten all of us of what is practical about not being able to upgrade the computer? it creates more trash and it only benefits Apples, since you are force to upgrade at obscene ridiculous SSD and RAM pricing. Way practical!
Whether you can upgrade a computer or not has nothing to do with practicality, not least because not everyone is going to do so even if their computers allowed for it.
Or maybe as practical as the Mac Pro trashcan massive design failure?
Or maybe about the lame upgrade of the new Mac Mini that after 4 years they use the same enclosure that had lot of heating problems?
I notice that all your examples seem to fixate entirely on the Mac lineup, while ignoring every other product that Apple does sell. I will address this in greater detail below.
YOu can compare the iPad to the Surface tablet. But Comparing the iPad to the Surface Studio is complete nonsense and truly shows how little you understand about design and innovation. Once again, the Surface Studio "idea" and features are great ideas that may not have been greatly executed. But it shows the potential of what can be done with a desktop computer. Something that Apple forgot to do for over 10 years. And as I said, in the past it used to be the other way around where actually Apple showed the way of new trends in design.
And just because something can be done doesn’t mean that it should.
In many ways, the surface studio is reminiscent of the surface pro and the surface book. Like I have said before, it is this obsession with the Mac lineup in a vacuum which blinds Apple critics like yourself to what Apple has accomplished, or where it is headed.
The surface pro and surface book were attempts by Microsoft to merge the laptop and tablet form factors in one hybrid design, but in reality, they have always made more sense as laptops than tablets (not least because Microsoft has yet to come up with a compelling UI and ecosystem for tablet form factor devices).
Same problem with the Surface Studio. I am not sure who the target market is. At first glance, digital artists seem like an obvious choice, but for the price, you may as well just get an iMac and a Wacom tablet. It’s design makes it even more heat-constrained than the laptop (since the innards are effectively houses in a Mac-mini form factor. It’s pretty apparent when you look at the YouTube reviews and there is noticeable lag when drawing on the screen with the stylus on all but the maxed-out model.
I can’t imagine someone hunching over the studio with their elbow propped on the screen as a great experience. It makes sense as a giant tablet but not as a desktop. Compared to the iMac, which is a great all-purpose desktop at a very affordable price (again, partly due to compromises such as the 5400 HDD).
Which brings me back to the iPad. When it comes to enabling creatives, the iPad is more affordable and less intimidating. Anyone can pick up a tablet, download Procreate and start sketching away. No need for expensive, specialised hardware that tethers you to your desk.
At the end of the day, the Mac does not represent the future at Apple (though some might argue that it is what will enable this brave new world that Apple seeks to usher in). It is also currently the furthest from Apple's vision of what truly "personal" computing ought to look it, and so it receives an amount of attention commensurate with its place in this pecking order.[/QUOTE]
