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

[kemal]

Apple are likely trying to come up with something fresh and insanely great for the mini. And they can't. Same goes for the Mac Pro and iMac. The only innovation has come in airflow. They should have just kept up with the intel processor release schedule while having a skunk works focus on the innovation.

 

[AlxM]

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.

I’ve been wanting this for years. I’d love to be able to buy a copy of macOS and run it on custom PC hardware.

 

[teohyc]

I’ve been wanting this for years. I’d love to be able to buy a copy of macOS and run it on custom PC hardware.

If Apple does that, they can't compete and sell their hardware.

 

[Ethosik]

In the media, that is.
In terms of actual operations (design, development, provisioning) a company of Apple’s size should be able to launch 10 Mac Pro’s on a yearly basis.
Look what other companies a fraction of its size can accomplish.

The other question is how viable the eGPU vision is, pricewise.

I like Macs and would love that idea. But lets take our emotions out of the argument here. People complaining need to take some business classes to understand.

As a shareholder, who demands that Apple make as much money as possible, why would you be happy with Apple devoting resources from iOS and other areas when Macs only make up for around 10% of their revenue? This is the problem with public companies. I think Apple is the most "customer service" aware public company around, but they still need to maximize their profits and go where the money is. As in iOS. They could hire more people for Macs instead you might say? Why would you (as a shareholder) be happy to hear Apple hired 1,000 people to work on Macs, when they could have hired 1,000 people for iOS instead? Remember, it is Apple's business responsibility to maximize profits and revenue.

 

[DesertNomad]

I like Macs and would love that idea. But lets take our emotions out of the argument here. People complaining need to take some business classes to understand.

As a shareholder, who demands that Apple make as much money as possible, why would you be happy with Apple devoting resources from iOS and other areas when Macs only make up for around 10% of their revenue?

Because every iOS app is developed on a Mac.

 

[Abazigal]

If you acknowledge that (1) Tim Cook took a massive decision to shift away from a successful business model structure* & (2) since said shifting Apple has repeatedly undertaken decisions that have - hmmm, how can I politely put this without upsetting the delicate Apple apologist in you - hiccupped, then as CEO Tim Cook's leadership bears some (not all) responsibility. Furthermore, is it so "hate"ful and does it make me a "madman" for questioning and criticizing his role as CEO?

This is why I say "context matters".

Steve's way of running Apple was largely predicated on him being the visionary and telling people what he wanted to see in a final product. The entire company revolved around him, and his style of management worked, so long as he was the one in charge, and so long as Apple was not that big that effectively being micromanaged by 1 man became unsustainable.

As such, I don't expect his successor to run Apple in exactly the same manner as he did, especially when it's clear that Tim Cook is not the product visionary that Steve was (that role now belongs to Jony Ive), nor does he have Steve's leadership style or temperament. That's a recipe for disaster when you are trying to be someone you are not. How many Steve Jobs do you know in this world? The closest person I can think of is probably Scott Forstall (that man had ambitions to be CEO of Apple), but we know that the other executives at Apple couldn't work with him (especially Jony Ive), so it was either him or them, and ultimately letting him go was the lesser of two evils.

To your second point, yes, Apple has had its fair share of missteps, and I am not trying to find excuses for them or handwave them away. What I do find to be counterproductive however, is to simply zero in on each and every one of these issues and nitpick on them in a vacuum, while completely ignoring the bigger picture.

You cannot say that Tim Cook has been a failure in leading Apple simply because of some Macbook keyboard issue while ignoring that as of end 2016,

• The iPhone installed base has grown by 500M users.
• The iPad installed base has grown by 175M users.
• The Mac installed base has grown by 50M users.
• Apple introduced Apple Watch, the company's first wearable product. Approximately 18M Apple Watches, a device positioned as an iPhone accessory, have been sold to date.
• Apple is earning more than $6B per year of revenue through app sales via the App Store.
• Apple successfully made the difficult jump from a paid music download model to streaming and is approaching 20M paying Apple Music subscribers.
• Apple continues to push forward with Apple TV. The company is approaching 10M units sold since the device was updated in 2015.
• Apple continues to develop key services including Apple Pay, Messages, and Maps.

and that since then, Apple has gone on to become more profitable, which shows that in spite of all their missteps, people are still buying Apple products.

Source: https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/12/6/milking-the-iphone

So if you want to grade Tim Cook, you have to look at all his accomplishments and missteps in their entirety, not cherry pick minor details and conclude that he has been a failure, just because your laptop keyboard failed. Here is one example of how one evaluation might go.

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2017/1/19/grading-tim-cook

And there is still the larger issue of people "raving like madmen" in threads which have nothing to do with the Mac at all, and it doesn't seem like this will let up anything soon. You tell me - how is that supposed to be productive or conducive to the main discussion at hand? I am not Tim Cook, I have nothing to do with the design decisions which go on at Apple, yet I am suffering for it nevertheless.

So I don't blame Apple. That is squarely on each and every one of you who has done so, and who will continue to do so regardless.

I find this notion/argument that Steve Jobs approach would not have been successful today ludicrous and revolutionist history because Apple was quite literally the biggest company on the face of the planet, and as far as I'm concerned he had to navigate harder obstacles - I mean Tim Cook's Apple Watch vs Steve Jobs iPhone as just one of many examples.

It's also worth noting that the Apple of today is way larger than back when Steve was at the helm.

I stand by my initial assertion - Steve Jobs was the right man to run Apple back then, just as Tim Cook is the right man to run Apple now, for all the reasons that I have stated above.

 

[Ethosik]

IOS dev machine -> get Imac Pro 5 grand to sell 99 cents. Marvellous yeah. Opps 66 cent .. 30 percent margin cut.

And if your app is good, a million of those sold will be more than enough to make up the purchase of that Mac and 100 future Macs!
[doublepost=1529336836][/doublepost]

Because every iOS app is developed on a Mac.

So you are saying that you NEED 18 cores or 32+ GB of RAM, or an NVIDIA GPU to develop an app? I am still using an old Mac mini to develop apps and it performs just fine.

 

[LordVic]

In the media, that is.
In terms of actual operations (design, development, provisioning) a company of Apple’s size should be able to launch 10 Mac Pro’s on a yearly basis.
Look what other companies a fraction of its size can accomplish.

The other question is how viable the eGPU vision is, pricewise.

.
This is one of the areas where Tim has epicly failed to manage Apple well. Regardless of other aspects, he's seems like he's just incapable of delegation of duties an ensuring that all the departments can operate semi-autonomously.

Apple is a lot bigger than it was back during the Jeve STobs days, but Cook is still operating it where all major design, implementation and final decisions goes through the same small group of executives. Apple seems to be doing it's best work under teams that aren't directly led by this group. Apple's silicon team is probably the best and most innovative, and it's probably the most hands off from Tim and Co. "Make the fastest silicon possible" and stepped away.

However, whenever Tim and the Cabal get focused on a specific product, Everything else seems to languish. When Apple was focusing its attention at the Watch. Nothing really happened in the rest of the company other than incremental upgrades to internals of the iPhone. When attention went back to the MacBook Pros, attention stopped on other things.

Tim has to realize that large corporations don't run like Apple does for a reason. When you're the size of Apple, you need more reactiveness than a small group of 6-10 people can provide. You need large departments with semi-autonomous leadership that you trust to be able to make product decisions while you're focusing on other things. between Cook, Ive, Schiller, they do not seem to be capable of diversifying themselves enough to be able to do multiple product updates at the same time.

 

[admbarry]

Sadly, I couldn't agree more...

When Tim Cook remarked (in late 2015) that "I think if you're looking at a PC, why would you buy a PC anymore? ... No really, why would you buy one?" while he was praising the iPad, it got me concerned as to where Apple's focus was at (I'm aware that "PC" in this regard could be interpreted as a computer running Microsoft Windows, but the way it felt to me, he could just as well have said laptop/desktop computer), and the time since that has unfortunately just confirmed my initial interpretation.

For me, for many years, getting a new laptop used to be a no-brainer, but Apple hasn't provided a product which made me want to update since I bought my current 13" Retina Macbook Pro (late 2013). I miss the ambition and solid, thorough design decisions which Apple used to represent. Please, Apple - give me back my no-brainer option!

 

[Ethosik]

This is why I say "context matters".

Steve's way of running Apple was largely predicated on him being the visionary and telling people what he wanted to see in a final product. The entire company revolved around him, and his style of management worked, so long as he was the one in charge, and so long as Apple was not that big that effectively being micromanaged by 1 man became unsustainable.

As such, I don't expect his successor to run Apple in exactly the same manner as he did, especially when it's clear that Tim Cook is not the product visionary that Steve was (that role now belongs to Jony Ive), nor does he have Steve's leadership style or temperament. That's a recipe for disaster when you are trying to be someone you are not. How many Steve Jobs do you know in this world? The closest person I can think of is probably Scott Forstall (that man had ambitions to be CEO of Apple), but we know that the other executives at Apple couldn't work with him (especially Jony Ive), so it was either him or them, and ultimately letting him go was the lesser of two evils.

To your second point, yes, Apple has had its fair share of missteps, and I am not trying to find excuses for them or handwave them away. What I do find to be counterproductive however, is to simply zero in on each and every one of these issues and nitpick on them in a vacuum, while completely ignoring the bigger picture.

You cannot say that Tim Cook has been a failure in leading Apple simply because of some Macbook keyboard issue while ignoring that as of end 2016,

• The iPhone installed base has grown by 500M users.
• The iPad installed base has grown by 175M users.
• The Mac installed base has grown by 50M users.
• Apple introduced Apple Watch, the company's first wearable product. Approximately 18M Apple Watches, a device positioned as an iPhone accessory, have been sold to date.
• Apple is earning more than $6B per year of revenue through app sales via the App Store.
• Apple successfully made the difficult jump from a paid music download model to streaming and is approaching 20M paying Apple Music subscribers.
• Apple continues to push forward with Apple TV. The company is approaching 10M units sold since the device was updated in 2015.
• Apple continues to develop key services including Apple Pay, Messages, and Maps.

and that since then, Apple has gone on to become more profitable, which shows that in spite of all their missteps, people are still buying Apple products.

Source: https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2016/12/6/milking-the-iphone

So if you want to grade Tim Cook, you have to look at all his accomplishments and missteps in their entirety, not cherry pick minor details and conclude that he has been a failure, just because your laptop keyboard failed. Here is one example of how one evaluation might go.

https://www.aboveavalon.com/notes/2017/1/19/grading-tim-cook

And there is still the larger issue of people "raving like madmen" in threads which have nothing to do with the Mac at all, and it doesn't seem like this will let up anything soon. You tell me - how is that supposed to be productive or conducive to the main discussion at hand? I am not Tim Cook, I have nothing to do with the design decisions which go on at Apple, yet I am suffering for it nevertheless.

So I don't blame Apple. That is squarely on each and every one of you who has done so, and who will continue to do so regardless.


It's also worth noting that the Apple of today is way larger than back when Steve was at the helm.

I stand by my initial assertion - Steve Jobs was the right man to run Apple back then, just as Tim Cook is the right man to run Apple now, for all the reasons that I have stated above.

Also, we cannot be 100% sure how Steve would react to the current state of computer technology. He would probably do the same thing that Tim is doing by only giving 10% of the focus to Macs.

 

[alien3dx]

I like Macs and would love that idea. But lets take our emotions out of the argument here. People complaining need to take some business classes to understand.

As a shareholder, who demands that Apple make as much money as possible, why would you be happy with Apple devoting resources from iOS and other areas when Macs only make up for around 10% of their revenue? This is the problem with public companies. I think Apple is the most "customer service" aware public company around, but they still need to maximize their profits and go where the money is. As in iOS. They could hire more people for Macs instead you might say? Why would you (as a shareholder) be happy to hear Apple hired 1,000 people to work on Macs, when they could have hired 1,000 people for iOS instead? Remember, it is Apple's business responsibility to maximize profits and revenue.

if you said this , steve job very sad man . Steve Job bring the company from 0 dan ouch . Come back product style and sucess then hmm . I remember 2010 , only acer and apple support first ddr3 ram .

 

[LordVic]

Apple are likely trying to come up with something fresh and insanely great for the mini. And they can't. Same goes for the Mac Pro and iMac. The only innovation has come in airflow. They should have just kept up with the intel processor release schedule while having a skunk works focus on the innovation.

I think the Mac Pro should have been the "Mac Mini" update we're looking for. If Apple had released the "garbage can" Pro, as the New Mac Mini, with desktop class i5/i7, with a gaming GPU option, it would have been the killer SFF desktop replacement.

But as a "pro" workstation intended for serious number crunching at a ridiculous pricepoint? of course it was doomedto fail.

 

[jinnyman]

If it's true that Apple does not care about mini and mac pro, discontinue already and get it done with.
I'm really getting tired of Apple's marketing gimmick. It's really funny when they removed all the traditional ports on mac and earphone jack in iphone for the sake of removing old stuff and advance while they keep spinning disk and charge extra for ram and ssd upgrade. By looking at this only, one can conclude that Apple's marketing is scam.

 

[LordVic]

If it's true that Apple does not care about mini and mac pro, discontinue already and get it done with.
I'm really getting tired of Apple's marketing gimmick. It's really funny when they removed all the traditional ports on mac and earphone jack in iphone for the sake of removing old stuff and advance while they keep spinning disk and charge extra for ram and ssd upgrade. By looking at this only, one can conclude that Apple's marketing is scam.

Apple's in a particular pickle regarding their computer linup. As easy as it would be to say "Just get rid of" those products that don't necessarily do well, Apple has to remember (And likely does) that the MacOS linup is INTEGRAL to the entire ecosystem.

As of right now, there are no other platforms to develop iOS programs on. if you want to hit the iPhone or iPad market with a program, you must have an Apple computer. if you start cutting out the Mini or the Pro, those people who rely on these platforms will no longer have a device option to support the App, services and platforms running on iOS.

Apple has to be careful here not to cut off too much of their own product category, or hurry up and devise a way to allow iOS to develop apps the same way you can on MacOS.

 

[villicodelirant]

Apple's marketing is scam.

All marketing basically is, isn't it.

 

[zen]

If Apple does that, they can't compete and sell their hardware.

Which is exactly what needs to happen. They've shown they can't compete. So... don't.

macOS is still the best OS there is, so let's pair it with the best hardware in the world (which Apple do not make).

 

[Nieval]

This is why I say "context matters".

So if you want to grade Tim Cook, you have to look at all his accomplishments and missteps in their entirety, not cherry pick minor details and conclude that he has been a failure, just because your laptop keyboard failed.

Jesus Christ man, the mental gymnastics on display here are quite simply incredible, I salute you. I see you trying to change the principles we're discussing by inserting words like "cherry picking", "minor", "Cook is a failure", etc. If I may say, classic troll behaviour, trying to put words in my mouth. Also, I'm not denying that Apple has been successful under Cook.

Let's try to stick to the issue at hand, kindly, could you please just answer my question, which I will simply further for the sake of making it easier for you to admit the truth:

As CEO of Apple does Tim Cook deserve criticism for Apple's mistakes under his tenure, especially when some of those mistakes stem directly from his reshuffling?

Spare me the essay and links, please.

 

[Abazigal]

Also, we cannot be 100% sure how Steve would react to the current state of computer technology. He would probably do the same thing that Tim is doing by only giving 10% of the focus to Macs.

My guess is largely the same, albeit with fewer hiccups. For example, the Apple Watch didn’t really take off until watchOS 3, with Apple doubling down on fitness. Steve might have seen the end product as “common sense” and skipped that first year of “trial and error”.

Though if we want to stick to facts and stay away from hypotheticals, Apple is way larger and more successful than it has ever been, and have even thoroughly enjoying my iOS devices (iPhone, iPad, pencil, AirPods, Watch, Apple TV), both for work and leisure. I find that I am quite liking this new Apple, and am excited to see what Apple has in the pipeline with regards to their iOS line.

Jesus Christ man, the mental gymnastics on display here are quite simply incredible, I salute you.

But kindly, could you just answer my question, which I will simply further for the sake of making it easier for you to be a admit it:
As CEO of Apple does Tim Cook deserve criticism for Apple's mistakes under his tenure, especially when some of those mistakes stem directly from his reshuffling?

Spare me the essay and links please.

Not the sort of criticism that I am see here in this forum, and certainly not the vitriol and hatred being spewed in his direction (with the rest of us forum members being caught in the crossfire).

I agree that he does deserve criticism. I disagree with the manner in which the members here have chosen to go about it. And I resent what that has turned the forums into.

 

[Ethosik]

Apple's in a particular pickle regarding their computer linup. As easy as it would be to say "Just get rid of" those products that don't necessarily do well, Apple has to remember (And likely does) that the MacOS linup is INTEGRAL to the entire ecosystem.

As of right now, there are no other platforms to develop iOS programs on. if you want to hit the iPhone or iPad market with a program, you must have an Apple computer. if you start cutting out the Mini or the Pro, those people who rely on these platforms will no longer have a device option to support the App, services and platforms running on iOS.

Apple has to be careful here not to cut off too much of their own product category, or hurry up and devise a way to allow iOS to develop apps the same way you can on MacOS.

It wouldn't surprise me if Apple announces a way for Windows developers to compile and test without a Mac. Which I would LOVE. Not because I want to leave the Mac, but because Visual Studio on Windows with Resharper is the best programming experience around. Visual Studio on the Mac is not very good IMO. Xcode is just okay.

 

[villicodelirant]

So you are saying that you NEED 18 cores or 32+ GB of RAM, or an NVIDIA GPU to develop an app? I am still using an old Mac mini to develop apps and it performs just fine.

Neat.

So, you ever get frustrated by builds taking several minutes and test suites running for half hours?

If your answer is "yes", you are probably losing money and don't know it.
If your answer is "no", you are probably losing money and don't know it (or your app is a simple 10KLOC one-man project).

Apple has to be careful here not to cut off too much of their own product category, or hurry up and devise a way to allow iOS to develop apps the same way you can on MacOS.

Why on Earth would you use an iOS device as a developer workstation and/or build server?

Just kill the Mac already and port the toolchain to Windows and Unices.

 

[Mack813]

I wanted to upgrade my 2014 air and once i started looking at apples lineup i couldnt justify getting rid of my air.

Now im thinking about upgrading the SSD in it to 512 or lower and may just hold out until apple makes a laptop as good as the air again.

I cant do that regular macbook with a dongle way over priced

 

[Abazigal]

.
This is one of the areas where Tim has epicly failed to manage Apple well. Regardless of other aspects, he's seems like he's just incapable of delegation of duties an ensuring that all the departments can operate semi-autonomously.

Apple is a lot bigger than it was back during the Jeve STobs days, but Cook is still operating it where all major design, implementation and final decisions goes through the same small group of executives. Apple seems to be doing it's best work under teams that aren't directly led by this group. Apple's silicon team is probably the best and most innovative, and it's probably the most hands off from Tim and Co. "Make the fastest silicon possible" and stepped away.

However, whenever Tim and the Cabal get focused on a specific product, Everything else seems to languish. When Apple was focusing its attention at the Watch. Nothing really happened in the rest of the company other than incremental upgrades to internals of the iPhone. When attention went back to the MacBook Pros, attention stopped on other things.

Tim has to realize that large corporations don't run like Apple does for a reason. When you're the size of Apple, you need more reactiveness than a small group of 6-10 people can provide. You need large departments with semi-autonomous leadership that you trust to be able to make product decisions while you're focusing on other things. between Cook, Ive, Schiller, they do not seem to be capable of diversifying themselves enough to be able to do multiple product updates at the same time.

So you are telling me that Apple needs to copy the management style of other companies far less successful than themselves?

 

[Mack813]

Man Cook has had a lot of interview lately im surprised no one tried to ask about his way ahead for the mac lineup in those interviews.

Tired of all the speculation

 

[LordVic]

My guess is largely the same, albeit with fewer hiccups. For example, the Apple Watch didn’t really take off until watchOS 3, with Apple doubling down on fitness. Steve might have seen the end product as “common sense” and skipped that first year of “trial and error”.

Though if we want to stick to facts and stay away from hypotheticals, Apple is way larger and more successful than it has ever been, and have even thoroughly enjoying my iOS devices (iPhone, iPad, pencil, AirPods, Watch, Apple TV), both for work and leisure. I find that I am quite liking this new Apple, and am excited to see what Apple has in the pipeline with regards to their iOS line.

you constantly conflate financial success with product success. They are not equal nor are they the same.

For example, After the MacBook Pro's redesign came out, that quarter, Apple announced "record profits for the mac category". Profits were great indicator right?

Except product volume decreased. The record profits that quarter came from a fairly sizable increase in MSRP, which grew the margins. This is just part of evidence that indicates that the revenue/profit number and motivation doesn't indicate what you constantly think it does.

There are other places that Apple's started to slide as well. Even after that initial revenue increaes, the Mac linup numbers returned to average last quarter.

the iPhone numbers are also interesting. While the iPhone X was the largest single selling device last year, the iPhoneX + Iphone 8 still sold less in combination than the iPhone 7 sold last year in the same quarter.

iPad sales have also gone down and this has been a trend the entire time Tim has been leader, despite adding the "pro" models which are high profit and revenue leaders.

Just because there's been revenue/profit growth while he's leader doesn't prove what you think it proves. The same coudl have easily been said for Ballmer over at Microsoft. He grew the company when Gates stepped down. Under Ballmer Microsoft was pretty much the largest it had ever been. Very few people consider the bean counter ways he led by as successful long term strategy for Microsoft. While Cook and Ballmer are grossly different people and how they manage, I'm just using it as anecdote that company size and revenue don't necessary reflect always as positively on leadership as some de-facto evidence that the companies direction is good. Nevermind that companies that are as large as we're talking about tend to have performance lag, where it takes several years of iterations of disappointment before people start walking away.

The question is, has Apple's current operation started that trend? Nobody really knows, that's why everytime the numbers for the year are launched these days, the stock bounces up and down wildly. the stock owners for the most part are still unsure of Apple's future direction. They have kept doing well, But there's "doom and gloom" about reliance on the iPhone and the lack of attention elsewhere. if the iPhone were to suddenly lose 30% of it's sales, that would grossly impact the entirety of Apples bottom line, likely by more than 30% of it's revenues.

 

[Queen6]

\what it comes down to. Say you're a CAD designer and you're competing for a project. it takes you a week to put together the project because you'reon the 2017 MacBook Pro, but you're competing against someone on the most recent XPS with the 8xxx CPUs and it only takes him 4 days to finish.

this is the reason why there needs updates.

I'm not calling for a complete chassis redesign every year. But Apple should be performing yearly (at minimum) hardware internal refreshes on ALL their computers

Exactly and why Apple is now excluded from many industries; too unpredictable, too slow to update, too obsessed with making it's computers thinner at the cost of usability, performance and now reliability...

Q-6