Mediocre Software: Other than Pages and Numbers, exactly what Apple-branded software is "mediocre", and exactly why?
Thinness: If you take a look at other mfgs., everyone has that disease. At this point, it's a race to be be paper-thin! And guess what? The average customer DOES want stuff to be thinner and lighter.
Gimmicky features: The TouchBar is anything but "gimmicky". Just because it looks a little too cute when displaying a line of Emojis doesn't mean that's all it's good for!
Abandonment of "professional" hardware: Since the 2016 MBP is solidly, engineering-wise, a HUGE improvement over the 2015 model that everyone is so enamored with, that just does not make sense when you start comparing Apples to Apples. So I just don't get that assertion at all.
I disagree with other manufacturers being as obsessed with thinness. HP's newest Spectre is actually slightly thicker to accommodate the additional ports. I also believe the new XPS 15 is about the same size as its predecessor.
I also put the touch bar in the gimmick category. I personally prefer the extra battery life and physical keys, so maybe that's why I have that opinion. I've read many reviews and posts that disagree with me though.
Personally, at least for my applications, software hasn't suffered. I do know a few people that moved from FCP to Premiere, but I still like Apples options. I also think people have exaggerated the MBP being undespecced. On paper, yeah, but as was evidenced when I bought an XPS, Windows laptops aren't nearly as efficient. I'm sure there are plenty of tests out there that would contradict that statement, but that's been my experience.
The only issue I have with Apple is not updating the Mac Pro, Mini and iMac. I could point to a few other things like not having quick charge for iPhone (which I don't use ... Nexus 6p) and I do think they need to remember that people don't just use iPhones to use iPhones. A lot of people use them cause they have an iMac, or a MacBook and prefer the ecosystem. Not prioritising certain products that are further down the totem pole in profitability might seem like the right thing on paper, but I personally feel allocating more resources than they've done recently would be better for the long term health of the brand as a whole.
[doublepost=1486532062][/doublepost]
A good computer would have a fast processor, a current GPU and more than 16gb of RAM. That's universally accepted as to what makes a computer GOOD.
Apple has none of that.
No doubt you're right that a faster processor, GPU and RAM would be improvements, but I stop short at using the word "universally."
Me and you are the exception, not the norm. 8GB RAM and current GPU/processing speeds are more than sufficient for 99% of Apple's target market.
Most people in the wild, at least the ones I run into, call any non iPhone an Android, have no clue what a Nexus 6p is, couldn't tell you what SSD means, and have no clue what the difference is between their MacBook and my MacBook Pro. The only thing they care about is cost, aesthetics, and that it can accommodate their very basic computing needs.
Despite the Pro in the name, Apple wants nothing to do with a large number of professional users. I think they've made that clear a long time ago.
So for you, it might fall short of what you consider a good computer, but I think the large majority of "pro" users Apple targets would disagree with your assessment.