Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Tim Cook: Apple 'Spending an Enormous Amount' on 'Macs of the Future'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Stop being deliberately obtuse. You know very well what the poster meant is a machine:
- That does not have a built in monitor.
- Has a discrete graphics card that is user upgradeable after purchase.
They want a machine that is a regular desktop computer but without the expensive professional graphics cards, Server processor, or ECC RAM the new Mac Pro has. The iMac is not a traditional desktop computer, it's an All-in-One (i.e. a laptop computer built on the back of a monitor too big to be portable). The main market for the AIO is consumers who would be perfectly suited with a laptop performance-wise, but don't really plan on taking the computer anywhere to start with. It also has the added benefits of being easy to set up since you don't have to connect the computer and other components together (it's pretty much the same as the original iMac in this regard), and it takes up less space than a desktop machine. It's an "appliance computer", a "mom computer", but it's not a replacement for what the poster is asking for.
I like it when folks try to pretend this type of machine has no market simply because Apple does not offer it. A desktop mini-tower is the most popular form factor of Windows PC, which is still what 80%+ of people are buying when it comes to computers. Stop trying to explain away this form factor's popularity and funnel these users into a Mac Mini, or an iMac, instead claiming that it's the machine they really want. It's not. And to say otherwise makes you look like a bunch of kool-aid drinkers with no balls to ask for what you really want in a PC because Apple must Know Best.
You don't use the word "spend" if it's an investment. And you don't neglect to call it an investment if you're serious about what you're doing.
It's in Apple's best interest to focus on making great products that they believe people will love, rather than trying to mindlessly appease Wall Street analysts and armchair analysts. Yes, investors in the company are important, but if Apple's focuses on the aforementioned activities and hits the ball out of the park with great products, the stock price will skyrocket. Apple, keep doing what you are doing, and don't mind the naysayers...
Annual version of OS X are a buggy mess. I don't know where you were on earlier version of OS X (Windows, I presume) but I've never had so many incompatibilities upgrading from the previous version - ranging from Mail not working with gmail down to a reworked network stack that was just different enough to give me all sorts of grief.
And another thing you're missing is that the 17" was a pros dream machine. Just like they pissed off any Mac Pro users, they also pissed off the MacBook Pro users who actually used it like a pro machine.
And the sad reality is, the "pros" are usually the geeks who tell others what to buy. It's how it's been for years. And when your geeks no longer think Apple's in your interests, you lose them. Even if they still buy your stuff, the brand loyalty is gone, and if keeping the 17" around for brand loyalty is what it takes, they should have.
And really, can you explain what makes the rMBP "terrifically exciting"? Because all I see is a thinner spec bump'd version of the same laptop I had in 2006. And missing a few features since 2006.
I still have a vague hope they will bring it back as a halo product. i.e a product that improves brand image by its awesomeness even if not many buy it.
They sold 50,000 17" per quarter (before it was cancelled) which is a drop in the ocean compared to other apple products but still justifies itself as a product line.
(To be honest I fear you may be right but my inner Andy Dufresne is telling me to hope
)
Each of the products that could be called "halo" products (iPod, iPhone) were and are highly profitable products. The 17" can hardly be called a halo product, as it is one of the most expensive products in the line-up.
I'm not sure there is a real definition of "halo", but realistically these are cheaper products that serve as a stepping point to the more expensive products in the product line: iPod -> MacBook -> iMac.
Why would Apple even try?
----------
News just out, according to Gartner: Samsung PC sales in the UK dropped by 88%. Yes, that's eighty eight percent. Apparently they are leaving the market. (Apple sales increased by 24%).
----------
This will create how many new customers exactly?
No, Windows laptops outsell Windows desktops by a comfortable margin.
Mac laptops outsell iMacs, Minis and Pros by a large margin and iMacs outsell Minis and Pros by a large margin.
Apple is not going to put research money into a small, unprofitable niche that appeals to a few hobbyists and doesn't serve their purposes.
People have been arguing about this for YEARS. Face reality - if it made sense for Apple to do it, THEY WOULD BE DOING IT.
----------
Justifies it to who? To you? Perhaps. To Apple? Clearly and obviously not.
They're more likely to introduce a 17-inch iPhone.
Let's hope they start spending more and more on ... OS X. It'd be awesome if we ended up getting better releases.
What if it is powered by the A7 processor? You would be a fool to think that Apple does not have OS X running on their 64-bit ARM processor. What other reason would Apple have for making OS X Mavericks and iOS7 the minimum OS versions for the latest iLife, iWork, Final Cut Pro X, and Aperture updates? I expect Logic Pro to require OS X Mavericks with its next version/update.
I wonder how soon Apple will eliminate the MacBook Air line after the Retina MacBook gets released.
Don't earnings come from new products?
----------
For the record, only one operating system initiative failed (Copland), during the '90s. The MacOS was quite "real" up to that time, and well after. The clone licensing experiment was also a huge disaster. Apple was essentially competing with itself for several years. No surprise that it didn't work out well.
Let's hope we get 10.10 that maybe if it gives us a new UI we also get mainly bug fixes. How awesome would that be? Two releases in a row that move to mainly fix bugs.
At least for the time being: battery life. And even (comparatively) non-complicated multi-boot into iOS when needed.
I myself wouldn't get it as I use tons of third-party mostly video transfer / editing apps, some of them very old, that are unlikely to ever get compiled for ARM.
----------
Cool username you have
And, of course, I 100% agree. The current lineup is pathetic for a die-hard MBP 17" fan like myself.
At least for the time being: battery life. And even (comparatively) non-complicated multi-boot into iOS when needed.
I myself wouldn't get it as I use tons of third-party mostly video transfer / editing apps, some of them very old, that are unlikely to ever get compiled for ARM.
----------
Cool username you have
And nobody who uses bootcamp.
I just see the benefit of battery life being outweighed by basically giving up all the apps.
Getting out of Wall Street is the only way to deal with Wall Street.
----------
Jony Ive needs to be removed from software authority entirely.
----------
Jony Ive needs to be removed from software authority entirely.