Popular Mac Developer Slams Apple for 'Sad State of Macintosh Hardware'

[MrBat]

Tim Cook MUST go. He has no balls. It’s absolutley incredible that no one is saying this. Apple was innovative and lean, now its just a monolithic company with no vision milking the winning formula. iOS has become pure junk, so many bugs it’s hard to keep up with. iOS1 has better auto correct than iOS 11 for goodness sake. Security bugs across all platforms. Minimal updates to Mac hardware. Confusing nomenclature in regards to the iPad. Apple Watch design is stale and competitors are getting much more battery life out of their smart watches. Plus a plethora of other things I won’t bore you with. Bring back Forstall, get rid of cook.

I’d wager money that Cook was waiting for Forstall to slip, and that he took full advantage of the maps situation to get rid of him. 5 years later and Apple maps still sucks. Forstall WAS Apple. Mac OS X was heavily inspired by his work at Next, and iOS was his teams creation. What has cook contributed? I suppose privacy, because he doesn’t want people looking at his dick pics to his boyfriend (not a jab, just keeping it real).

Even more annoying, Tim Cook has weasled his way into supposedly being someone whose opinion on politics and life are messianic. We get it Tim, you’re gay. Can we carry on now with refreshing the Mac hardware?

Couldn't agree more.

 

[Ramchi]

Considering the margins involved, introducing new hardware with radical approaches might cost a bomb (like Mac Pro) and probably attract limited number of consumer professionals. Or, Apple is going along the ARM or its own processors(already Apple has mastered graphics in mobility space with super powerful processors). I also suspect that there will be growing convergence between OSX and iOS wrt MBP and iPad. No point in updating Mac line when big changes are in the pipeline. Mere hardware upgrades at regular intervels might suit OEM licensing models but as a owner of complete ecosystem, it would not be possible to keep pushing both hardware and software, especially when portfolio getting bigger.

I own late 2013 15 inch MBP 16GB RAM,512 GB HDD and I don't see any immediate need to replace it. It just works fine. 10 years is the minimum life time of Mac Books, if you use it properly.

 

[boss.king]

Called "Behind the Mac," the campaign​

highlights creators​

who use their Macs to "make something wonderful.​

Maybe Apple could use their Macs to make some new hardware?

 

[manu chao]

So MacRumors puts "don't buy" ratings on the products supposedly because an update is imminent, but then runs an article claiming that people are frustrated that the products aren't updated fast enough? Doesn't really make any sense. MacRumors obviously thinks the products WILL be updated soon enough to tell people not to buy them.

What a joke...

The label to buy products is purely based on historical averages. Nothing but the release date of previous product versions is used to calculate it. No rumours, no reports influence that 'rating'.

The problem is that the interval between Mac releases varies a lot (days between releases):

iMac: 601 - 147- 215 - 387 - 298 - 577
MBP: 221 - 527 - 294 - 280 - 251 - 247

Compared to the very steady iPhone: 371 - 363 - 365 - 357 - 364 - 353

Thus anything based on averages will be rather inaccurate for Macs.

 

[Abazigal]

People are used to a CEO with power. A CEO is typically hired to lead a company. Usually they are chosen to replace a CEO who is doing a poor job of leading the company.

The success of a company usually depends on how effectively the CEO leads. And when they make enough mistakes, they get fired.

In this case, a very successful CEO lead Apple to the top. And unfortunately passed away. Tim was essentially “willed” the position of CEO by Jobs. Same as some might inherit a piece of furniture.

Tim’s job title is CEO. But Tim’s role is not CEO. Tim’s role is that of delivering official statements (likely written by someone else), and acting as a figurehead much like Tony the Tiger for Kellogg’s.

He presents what the board tasks him with.

The confusion is to be expected. Kind of like the false impression that the Royal Family rules and runs England. We are educated to learn how Kings ruled the kingdoms and countries. So we would expect a King or Queen of England to run the country. But they don’t.

In the same way, we expect CEO’s to run companies. And typically they do. But in this case, Apple is more like England. So people are understandably confused.

See, it's statements like this which make it hard for me to take the haters seriously.

https://www.apple.com/sg/leadership/

Basically, all the VPs and SVPs report to Tim Cook. Tim Cook and his board of executives look after Apple's day-to-day operations, many of the key decisions regarding Apple's strategy are likely determined by a much smaller group of SVPs (including Eddy Cue, Phil Schiller, and Jeff Williams), while the Industrial Design group looks after Apple's product strategy.

Meanwhile, Jony Ive as Chief Design Officer is left to do what he wants, which is basically the exact role formerly held by Steve Jobs. And still people criticise Tim Cooks for not being the product visionary that Steve Jobs was when that role has already been filled (making it a non-issue).

Likening the monumental task of running Apple to that of a figurehead role is frankly quite insulting, and vastly underrates Tim Cook's importance. Yes, Tim Cook is not front and centre like Steve Jobs, but that doesn't make his duties and responsibilities any less important. Different leaders lead in different ways, in accordance with their respective strengths and weaknesses, and there's nothing wrong with that.

To sum it all up, different people are needed at different points in a company history. Jobs was right for his era, but he would have been a disaster for the Cook era. Cook is amazing, and has been responsible for most of the achievements of Apple, but not the initial innovation and concept that Jobs provided. Cook has refined the culture and expanded it, and has done as fine a job as any CEO in American history, if not world business history.
[doublepost=1529151792][/doublepost]

What would I do?

Diversify. Rebalance the revenue streams. Urgently.

Which is what Apple is doing, by moving to position the Apple Watch as the next successor to the iPhone.

You don't move forward by looking back.

 

[dmille6]

"Apple needs to publicly show their commitment to the full Macintosh hardware line and they need to do it now."

No statement made in the last decade can be more true.

for the first time since 2002 i was forced to buy a PC desktop bc Apple really didnt have a that fit my needs.. and with no commentary from the company on if/when hardware was going to come out i couldnt wait any longer.

my budget was 1500-1700.00 i didnt need a imac, and didnt want to buy used equipment. PC works fine.. but i dont enjoy using it.

 

[amegicfox]

to the people who keep saying that Tim is very successful because Apple makes tons of money and will be a trillion dollar company:

Apple makes 90% of it's money on ONE PRODUCT:

the iPhone

the difference is:

- Steve created complete new industries and was always cutting edge in every single product regardless of how much money it was bringing in
- Tim is riding on the iPhone that Steve created and that's it

One was a genius, the other is an idiot

________
1. Tim was even able to ruin the iPhone with an overpriced notched botched jackless touchless $1000+ piece of glass that has a worst screen than the iPhone 6s plus

 

[Val-kyrie]

The MacBooks are not OK. If they were, they wouldn't have so many keyboard issues and Apple wouldn't be the only company which is not offering 6C/12T CPU in their Pro line.

There is some Vulcan/Metal bridging API, I have forgotten the name, this will help a lot if Apple doesn't make some counter-steps (cutting it off).

Well said. By now, Apple should have 4C/8T CPUs in their 13" MBPs and 6C/12T CPUs in their 15" MBPs.

Don't blame Intel, Dell keeps coming out with great hardware, HP keeps coming out with hardware, hell even Microsoft is coming out with great hardware. I'm in the same boat, Apple abandoned me.

Have tried to stay current using Hackintoshs but to be honest, Mac OS is starting to get full of bugs and the possible switch to proprietary ARM will be a deal breaker. I'm not saying that Windows is any better (automatic updates rebooting your machine!), but as a developer/creator, I just want good tools.

How can one of the wealthiest companies in the world, built around the image of creativity, abandon its core users?
[doublepost=1529104782][/doublepost]

Thank maybe they should have added 0.5mm more and made the damn things work. Novelty concepts like touch bar are not enough value to "delay" and saving 0.5mm is not enough value to lose valuable interfaces (sd slot, usb-a)

A recent article on keyboards stated that a comfortable travel depth for touch typists is 1.5-2.0mm. I believe the Dell XPS came in around 1.2mm and the Lenovo X1 Carbon at 1.8mm. Apple came in at 0.8mm.

I’d rather call it their high-end line. “Pro” is really user overused by the entire industry. It’s nothing more than marketing. As for the keyboards some have problems and some don’t. The MBP keyboard is much better than the shallower one on the MacBook. There is still no other machine on the market with 4 TB3 ports besides the iMac Pro. Competitors include 2 at best combined with 2 3.1 Type A porta. While Apple got a lot of criticism for transitioning to USB-C early, that just means these will have a longer useful life. Once everything is USB-C, type A will be good for nothing but old peripherals.

Dell's latest XPS 13 (9370) comes only with 3x USB-C and 1x microSD card reader. They are following Apple's lead and have been widely criticized for it. Most other laptops and ultraportables still come with USB-A in addition to USB-C.

 

[dmille6]

The label to buy products is purely based on historical averages. Nothing but the release date of previous product versions is used to calculate it. No rumours, no reports influence that 'rating'.

The problem is that the interval between Mac releases varies a lot (days between releases):

iMac: 601 - 147- 215 - 387 - 298 - 577
MBP: 221 - 527 - 294 - 280 - 251 - 247

Compared to the very steady iPhone: 371 - 363 - 365 - 357 - 364 - 353

Thus anything based on averages will be rather inaccurate for Macs.

Part of the problem that hasnt been mentioned much in the discussion when comparing iphone releases to computer releases is that apple makes the processors and other essentials parts of the iphone, while for their computer market they are dependant on intel and amd/nvidia. Intel has major manufacturing issues and has pushed back their processor roadmap over and over again. nVidia wont play nice with apple's video driver requirements from what i understand, so that leaves AMD/ATI for graphics. I'm sure throwing intel under the bus about the slow development of computers wouldnt help that already strained relationship.. hopefully this situation will change soon.

 

[Martius]

Thank you for the trip down memory lane. (And your use of the ResEdit user icon makes me wish I’d thought to do that!) We used a lot of the same machines it sounds like. I started with a IIe by day and a IIc by night, thought the IIgs was amazing after using those two, and marveled at the Quadras (and occasionally got to use a 950). I had all the catalogs come to my house and would spend hours looking through them. I even got Apple to send me sales literature every few months. It made me so excited.

Starting in the early 2000s, I upgraded either every generation or every other generation. And now, like you, a 2014 machine is my every day go-to. I’d happily spend the money if there were something that gave me even a quarter of the “wow” factor I used to get. I have a 2017 15” rMBP that sits in a bag or on a shelf most of the time. It’s a little Postgres machine.

Times change, and people have to change with those times. I accept that. What’s sad is that it didn’t “have” to be this way. Apple has too much cash (yes, in business, that really is a thing), and they easily could dedicate the resources to innovating. They simply choose not to. I’m sure it’s a business decision and that the bean counters have crunched the numbers. Some of my classmates from my MBA program years ago work in finance at Apple. I’m sure their analyses were just fine. But sometimes, running a company is about vision and inputs that just don’t fit into even the most elaborate forecasting models.

Alas.

You are right. The thing that I think Mac doesn't need some gimmicks to boost the sales. Apple perfected the PRO laptop design in 2012 MBP and they just could choose to go the way of small design tweaks since than. I understand that those consumer focused products need some killer feature every year, but not the Mac. The Mac is mostly used by people that like the way classic laptop/desktop works. You can plug-in a flash drive, you can download photos from your camera, you can type really fast and use keyboard shortcuts. What Apple needs is polish what they have, improve specs / reliability every year and everybody is happy.

 

[Morgenland]

Apple should just start licensing/selling Mac OS on standard PC hardware and stop fooling themselves and everyone else with hardware. No reasonable person would buy a brand new Mac mini today and think to themselves that they made a smart purchase.

Total nonsense. I'd buy a new Mac Mini right away. Every day I work/suffer professionally with a PC workstation. So in the evening I am happy to be able to create comparative smooth creative workflows just on my old MacMini.
PC is and remains an uncomfortable environment that costs a lot of nerves.

I am pleased about the old MacMini that both operating system and programs (e.g. Final Cut, Adobe Warez and so on) run faster and faster with the same old hardware. Apple invests a lot of skill in improving their system and software, so their old hardware is sufficient for many things.

Whatever. Apple should finally bring new machines to the market. 4K Cinema Display, Mac Mini. And more...

 

[Ramchi]

for the first time since 2002 i was forced to buy a PC desktop bc Apple really didnt have a that fit my needs.. and with no commentary from the company on if/when hardware was going to come out i couldnt wait any longer.

my budget was 1500-1700.00 i didnt need a imac, and didnt want to buy used equipment. PC works fine.. but i dont enjoy using it.

Just bought HP Spectre 360 15 inch 512 GB SSD and i7 8gen, 16GB RAM, 4K touch display for$1450! It comes with all ports, pen, easy to replace batteries. Sold my 3 years old Dell Inspiron 15 7000 series with exactly similar configuration (1 TB HDD) for $700 to replace.

 

[gnipgnop]

Here's a trend that I've noticed on MacRumors and tech sites in general and it basically consists of sheer hypocrisy...

iPhone/iPad: updated every year with an SoC that trounces the competition in benchmarks, but MacRumors and other sites bend over backwards to say "benchmarks don't matter...won't make a big difference in daily use...most users won't notice a difference" etc. when comparing Android phones.

Mac: not necessarily updated every year, Intel CPUs only provide modest boosts in performance and largely focus on performance-per-watt due to popularity of mobile, but MacRumors and other sites bend over backwards to claim slightly better CPU benchmarks make a BIG difference to users and in comparisons to PCs.

So which is it? Benchmarks don't matter and most of the time daily use difference won't be noticeable? Or do changes in benchmarks provide the make-or-break difference? Can't be both at the same time. Sites like MacRumors need to make up their minds on this or lose all credibility in the product reviews.

 

[ljonesj]

My thing is they say it’s cause of intel not provide no chips well they do provide chips it’s just Apple to lazy to ask for engineering samples to get boards rdy to test with like the intel 6 core 8700 released like 2 months later they had to know that releasing they could have been rdy but people would be mad cause they just bought the other it’s the way of computers and they could have had the iMac updated at the beginning of the year

 

[apolloa]

I am referring to consumers. And eventually I can see iPads being able to create apps for iOS. Regardless, the industry is shrinking as consumers move on and this is the inevitable effect. I’m not saying I like it, but that’s where it is going.

It will kill the Mac that’s all, the planet runs on computers despite what Apple is doing and will continue to do so. I can’t see devs working on a 12” screen, or using underpowered tablets trying to make a big 3D game with no support from someone like Maya or 3DS Max.

 

[Dave245]

Here's a trend that I've noticed on MacRumors and tech sites in general and it basically consists of sheer hypocrisy...

iPhone/iPad: updated every year with an SoC that trounces the competition in benchmarks, but MacRumors and other sites bend over backwards to say "benchmarks don't matter...won't make a big difference in daily use...most users won't notice a difference" etc. when comparing Android phones.

Mac: not necessarily updated every year, Intel CPUs only provide modest boosts in performance and largely focus on performance-per-watt due to popularity of mobile, but MacRumors and other sites bend over backwards to claim slightly better CPU benchmarks make a BIG difference to users and in comparisons to PCs.

So which is it? Benchmarks don't matter and most of the time daily use difference won't be noticeable? Or do changes in benchmarks provide the make-or-break difference? Can't be both at the same time. Sites like MacRumors need to make up their minds on this or lose all credibility in the product reviews.

You won’t win! But it seems to me that the goalposts move in Macrumours to suit whichever one hates on Apple the most. It doesn’t matter about benchmarks until Samsung phones out perform Apple’s and then it matters, it doesn’t matter that Apple said the Mac Pro will be updated because on the front page article it says:

“Apple has promised its professional users that a high-end high throughput modular Mac Pro system is in the works, but thus far have no details on when it might see a release”

Yet there is this that confirms 2019 for the Mac Pro https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/

it’s difficult but I now ignore most of the hate comments unless it is something constructive, the one point that most people have is that the Mac mini hasn’t been updated in like 5 years and that is something they should address sooner rather than later.

MacBook Pro was updated last year and is likely to be updated again later this year (probably around October)
MacBook was updated last year and is also likely to be updated later this year (October probably)
iMac was updated last year and is likely to be updated later this year (October again probably)
iMac Pro was introduced last year

Also Apple have a 13” MacBook or MacBook Air (depending on how they brand it) in the works as seemingly as a more budget friendly Mac, this is rumoured to be announced later this year according to Mark Gurman, probably around October.

 

[Beardy man]

My thing is they say it’s cause of intel not provide no chips well they do provide chips it’s just Apple to lazy to ask for engineering samples to get boards rdy to test with like the intel 6 core 8700 released like 2 months later they had to know that releasing they could have been rdy but people would be mad cause they just bought the other it’s the way of computers and they could have had the iMac updated at the beginning of the year

You seem to have a problem with your keyboard. The period key isn't working; it's the one towards the bottom right of the keyboard and looks like this: . I know it isn't a letter of the alphabet but, trust me, it does make blocks of text easier to read.

 

[KPandian1]

You can't decide to be just a software company when your software only runs on your own hardware...

Easily the best summation of everything Apple today.

 

[laz232]

Hmm... I disagree.

I like the stability and longevity of the Mac and i hardware. In our family and business we have Macs that are six, eight, ten, 15 years old. They still run great and do their job. Macs last and that is a selling point.

Quite frankly, you only need so much speed, memory and such for doing 99.9999% of the tasks 99% of people do. The rest is a waste, glam.

I'm more interested in Apple continuing to support legacy hardware and software, making systems that are stable and world rugged and such than adding extra CRU.

Yeah, well in my business I could use a bit more CPU power, USB-A connectors, reliable keyboard and good battery life, but I don't see any of those in the post-2013 MBP models...

I would say for 80% of the tasks that 90% of the people do.

Even run of the mill programs like Lightroom are somewhat slow on most Macs, and once you start running a Windows VM then more CPU and more RAM are real benefits, but outweighed by poor battery life and unreliable keyboards (not to mention very high price points) in the new MBPs.

As for the iMac - I need a laptop for work, but even if I didn't an all in one machine with no on-site support (we don't have Apple stores in my Northern European country) - a built in monitor, which if the older gen iMacs are aguide are image-retention magnets - as well as replaceable SSDs - no way: those are not the compromises that are enticing in a desktop machine

[doublepost=1529153618][/doublepost]

But you would use a full workstation in those cases. Notebooks have never been as capable as desktops and it will always be this way. A notebook is simply for being productive outside of the home or office. They can do more than ever now but nothing can really replace a desktop.

They can in many fields. And they save time in having a single machine rather than being a sysadmin for yet annoothher machine... with the constant application and OS and browser plugin updates... and data syncing... and dev tool updates...

 

[Spizike9]

Glad finally someone in the media has said something. I wish more people would jump on board to actually put some pressure on Apple to put out some hardware.

 

[Bacillus]

See, it's statements like this which make it hard for me to take the haters seriously.

https://www.apple.com/sg/leadership/

Basically, all the VPs and SVPs report to Tim Cook. Tim Cook and his board of executives look after Apple's day-to-day operations, many of the key decisions regarding Apple's strategy are likely determined by a much smaller group of SVPs (including Eddy Cue, Phil Schiller, and Jeff Williams), while the Industrial Design group looks after Apple's product strategy.

Meanwhile, Jony Ive as Chief Design Officer is left to do what he wants, which is basically the exact role formerly held by Steve Jobs. And still people criticise Tim Cooks for not being the product visionary that Steve Jobs was when that role has already been filled (making it a non-issue).

Likening the monumental task of running Apple to that of a figurehead role is frankly quite insulting, and vastly underrates Tim Cook's importance. Yes, Tim Cook is not front and centre like Steve Jobs, but that doesn't make his duties and responsibilities any less important. Different leaders lead in different ways, in accordance with their respective strengths and weaknesses, and there's nothing wrong with that.

To sum it all up, different people are needed at different points in a company history. Jobs was right for his era, but he would have been a disaster for the Cook era. Cook is amazing, and has been responsible for most of the achievements of Apple, but not the initial innovation and concept that Jobs provided. Cook has refined the culture and expanded it, and has done as fine a job as any CEO in American history, if not world business history.
You don't move forward by looking back.

So a CEO can be a blind duck that shouldn’t oversee (or motivate, ignite, coach, inspire, initiate...) meaningful product development, let alone innovation. Thanks for a new definition of teamwork/leadership that we should take seriously

 

[Abazigal]

So a CEO can be a blind duck that shouldn’t oversee (or motivate, ignite, coach, inspire, initiate...) meaningful product development, let alone innovation. Thanks for a new definition of teamwork/leadership that we should take seriously

Well, if Steve Jobs was Churchill, then Tim Cook would be Eisenhower. That’s the closest analogy I can think of at the moment.

 

[dwsolberg]

About 18 months ago, I bought a MBP with touchbar. In my experience, it wasn’t much faster than my 2011 MBP with a SSD, so I get why Apple doesn’t feel the need to update constantly to the newest processor.

However, it’s also the most disappointing Mac I bought, mostly because of the keyboard, but also the battery life while doing processor intensive stuff. I also bought the LG 5K monitor, which is a great screen wrapped in poorly made housing. I’ve got too much invested in my current setup, but I really wish I would have bought the last 2015 MBP instead. So it’s not just the speed of updates, but the choices made when they do upgrade.

 

[Arran]

...
- Tim is riding on the iPhone that Steve created and that's it

One was a genius, the other is an idiot...

I think that's unfair on Tim. Tim's good at his thing: Extracting profits from an ongoing business.

The problem is that Apple lost its paranoid, preemptive "disrupter-in-chief". You know, the guy who understood product, consumers, tech and sales? That role was never re-filled after Steve.

 

[EdT]

I don't care if Tim Cook is making billions for Apple. He may be the very best CEO that Apple ever has, past or future, as far as ROI goes and I don't care. I am interested in buying a computer, not investing in stock.

Why should I buy a Mac computer today? What does it do that any other brand doesn't?