Apple wasn’t renamed when Steve Apple passed the baton. /s
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.
Top Stories: Tim Cook's 2026 Exit?, Mac Pro on Hold, and More
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You’re mostly incorrect. Apple didn’t please the shareholders. Apple pleased the customers and the customers bought. Now if you want to go about disparaging the customers because you feel they are within the “Apple reality distortion field” and bought lackluster products please feel free.
How much of that is the natural consequence of a maturing market sector? Early in a sector's evolution something like the original iPhone can create major distortion; now we argue over whether a folding screen would be desirable (I don't want one). And Apple historically doesn't go for the high diversity product portfolio Microsoft has.
Imagine what a nightmare that would be for Apple employees. Jobs was infamous for brutally direct criticism of people; imagine working at Apple and every day around quitting time, a frowning Jobs face materializes on your screen to ask how you changed the world today.
Whether by design or the Law of Unintended Consequences, Apple's minimalist approach has led to modularizing desktop computing. Some of this is a consequence of notebooks now acting as primary desktop computers much of the time. The kind of built-in ports/expandability you describe has been relegated to external docks and external drives.
On the one hand, now you can replace part of your system (e.g.: upgrade an M2 MacMini to an M4Pro MacMini) and keep using your display (unlike an iMac), external storage and dock. On the other hand, I miss the option to load up spare internal drive bays.
At least on the Mac side of things, this has taken away much of the advantage of a dedicated desktop computer, other than saving hundreds due to lack of a built-in display.
Tim Cook is the worst thing to ever happen to Apple in terms of innovation. (Note to Cook defenders: astronomical record profits is not the same thing as innovation.) However, Cook retiring doesn't automatically mean Apple will start innovating once a new CEO comes in. The new CEO is likely going to be John Ternus, who is currently the Senior Vice President of Hardware Engineering. Apple's innovation in hardware has stagnated ever since Steve Jobs passed away. Ternus has cooperated with Cook to ensure customers get as little as possible in terms of hardware to the point where they can get away with it so that profits are not negatively impacted.
Ternus might be like Cook in terms of prioritizing shareholders over customers. He might run Apple based on the advice of management consulting firms similar to McKinsey, which is a firm that soulless MBA degree holders like Cook idolize.
If innovation and user-friendliness is the top priority, then what Apple needs is for Scott Forstall to return and be given the position of CEO. That strategy worked when Steve Jobs returned to Apple and became CEO in 1997.
NeXT was one of the most innovative companies in computing history. If NeXT hadn't existed, Apple wouldn't have aquired NeXT in 1997, and thus Apple would've gone bankrupt shortly after, and wouldn't exist today. Jobs founded NeXT. Forstall started his career at NeXT in 1992 and stayed after it was acquired by Apple. He was the closest thing Apple had to another Jobs, but Cook recklessly fired him.
Ternus might be like Cook in terms of prioritizing shareholders over customers. He might run Apple based on the advice of management consulting firms similar to McKinsey, which is a firm that soulless MBA degree holders like Cook idolize.
If innovation and user-friendliness is the top priority, then what Apple needs is for Scott Forstall to return and be given the position of CEO. That strategy worked when Steve Jobs returned to Apple and became CEO in 1997.
NeXT was one of the most innovative companies in computing history. If NeXT hadn't existed, Apple wouldn't have aquired NeXT in 1997, and thus Apple would've gone bankrupt shortly after, and wouldn't exist today. Jobs founded NeXT. Forstall started his career at NeXT in 1992 and stayed after it was acquired by Apple. He was the closest thing Apple had to another Jobs, but Cook recklessly fired him.
Moving from Intel works for everything but the Mac Pro. The entire draw of the Mac Pro was expandability, with Apple Silicon that is gone.
No more GPU’s (and as good as their “performance per watt” is, Apple GPU’s cannot compete with RTX GPU’s performance), no more Memory Upgrades, Storage Upgrades, etc.. Buying the Mac Pro always came with an understanding the product had room to grow and expand with your needs. They killed that and in doing so, forced those consumers to Windows and, to some extent, Linux.
That’s why you’re starting to see some VFX studios run on Ubuntu or an Arch distributions.
No more GPU’s (and as good as their “performance per watt” is, Apple GPU’s cannot compete with RTX GPU’s performance), no more Memory Upgrades, Storage Upgrades, etc.. Buying the Mac Pro always came with an understanding the product had room to grow and expand with your needs. They killed that and in doing so, forced those consumers to Windows and, to some extent, Linux.
That’s why you’re starting to see some VFX studios run on Ubuntu or an Arch distributions.
Apples 1 billion + customers who repeatedly buy apple products and services disagree with this “assessment.”
Go Apple!
...which is why I built a Hackintosh tower. It is by far the quietest, most powerful and stable MacPro that I've ever owned or used. Thunderbolt hotswap and local node work. When I wanted to swap-out the RX580, I easily replaced it with an RX6600 without having to buy another disposable noisemaker.
We don’t really need a Mac Pro as a massive tower anymore. With Thunderbolt 5 you can connect most accessories you’d ever use.
For example, major audio interfaces have been available as Thunderbolt for awhile now. You can get Thunderbolt to PCIe enclosures and obviously Thunderbolt storage systems are commonplace.
I find it funny people always complain about expandability with Macs (particularly storage prices) when there’s a great selection of external storage options available.
An M5 Ultra Studio with several TB 5 connections would satisfy the vast majority of users.
All Apple needs to do for the niche crowd is provide support in the way of drivers/SDK for things like external GPUs. I think this is better than making a massive tower with a MB to add cards when only a tiny fraction of users need this capability.
For example, major audio interfaces have been available as Thunderbolt for awhile now. You can get Thunderbolt to PCIe enclosures and obviously Thunderbolt storage systems are commonplace.
I find it funny people always complain about expandability with Macs (particularly storage prices) when there’s a great selection of external storage options available.
An M5 Ultra Studio with several TB 5 connections would satisfy the vast majority of users.
All Apple needs to do for the niche crowd is provide support in the way of drivers/SDK for things like external GPUs. I think this is better than making a massive tower with a MB to add cards when only a tiny fraction of users need this capability.
There's an irony here. Apple is famous for minimalist design, a mindset reflected in years of iMac sales, especially back when the MacMini was seldom updated and the MacStudio had yet to exist. Ah, the 27" iMac, without all those cables cluttering the desktop. And look at the M4 MacMini, such a cute little aluminum brick!
Well, I've got an M4Pro MacMini, and yes, in and of itself, it is a cute little aluminum brick, much smaller than a tower enclosure. But...sitting beside it is a CalDigit TS3+ dock (vertically oriented), and running off it are 2 external USB-C SSDs. So the aggregate 'mess' in terms of desktop footprint really isn't so different, and there are more cables.
At times an external enclosure device is more expensive, as the vendor has to pay material costs for the housing (or the buyer has to buy one). Thunderbolt external SSDs often have heat issues; that's been discussed elsewhere. Even Thunderbolt 5 can't handle the full speed some late model SSDs are capable of, though granted TB5 is quite fast (at least till the SSD's cache is filled).
Here's a thought exercise; take someone with a 'Hackintosh' in a PC tower who wants to add some storage that needn't be portable. Would he likely buy external drives when he has empty drive bays in that tower?
If Apple sold the current MacStudio 'as is,' but released a 'MacStudio+' tower for $150 more but with 4 empty SSD bays and user upgradable SSD storage, which do people think would sell better?
Upgradable ssd - thats the problem
why would apple do that for 150usd mote only… to lose control over ssd upgrades which are priced out of this world in apple walled garden
Finally an end to Apple being a non creative, more of the same company. Hope those holding the ropes have a creative, tech oriented creator of wow products in their sights.
Well I agree with your statements in the first paragraph, I believe you went off the rails in your closing statement. I find no reason to interject "mostly white and mostly guys" unless you're just a wokester or racist and that the only problem wrong with the world is the need for more diversity, and young dolts with their watered down college educations to take the lead.
Anyone notice how our education system is being dismantled? Have folks read about the freshmen showing up at colleges with less than mediocre math skills (not even algebra competent)?
I think we are creating lots of "village idiots" who will not be able to design a brown paper bag for groceries. But they will be put in charge of formerly successful companies that are now loosing their way. Some one flashes a shinny object and the the boss goes off the rails chasing said object (Apple car anyone?).
The MacPro was the top of the tech pile for Apple until it wasn't. The new shinny object (M series chips) has all of the attention now. But there is a limit to miniaturazation. I doubt we can get smaller than a molecule. Then what?
I think we are creating lots of "village idiots" who will not be able to design a brown paper bag for groceries. But they will be put in charge of formerly successful companies that are now loosing their way. Some one flashes a shinny object and the the boss goes off the rails chasing said object (Apple car anyone?).
The MacPro was the top of the tech pile for Apple until it wasn't. The new shinny object (M series chips) has all of the attention now. But there is a limit to miniaturazation. I doubt we can get smaller than a molecule. Then what?
That strategy worked because Jobs had founded NeXT, whereas Forstall never did anything of the sort.
Apple has no reason whatsoever to appoint him as its next CEO instead of Ternus, who, by contrast, has enjoyed a stellar career at Apple.
You may also be overlooking the reasons Forstall was dismissed—among them, the Maps fiasco he refused to apologize for.
Had Cook not fired him back then, other talented people who made Apple successful would likely have left.
I’m not sure where the Forstall myth comes from. The moment he no longer had Jobs to rein him in, he seemed to lose the plot.
It's well known that Tim prioritized finances over product development, focusing on stock buybacks to increase shareholder value and paying dividends with money Steve would have put into R&D. I'd argue that if a product focused CEO like Steve was at the head of Apple we'd have seen more groundbreaking products even if the company wasn't worth as much on paper. I mean look at the Mac Pro languishing. The Intel iMac not getting a new case at all, and had they not gone to Apple Silicon, they said they would still use that same old case. The Mac Mini was ignored for years. The Apple Watch was a product of Jonny Ive. All while they have increased service revenue dramatically.
The only reason apple can do stock buybacks and pay dividends (and Steve is dead you don't know what he would do in 2025) is because apple is pleasing their customers and bringing in record revenue. It's irrelevant whose products it was, they are all Tim Cooks since 2011. Hardware and services. It was a brilliant strategy to grow services.
I haven't really looked into Tim's time at Apple but, I don't really know what else Apple could do that's innovative.
From the perspective of the average user, you have a watch, a phone, a tablet, a streaming box, and desktops/laptops that all are supposed to work well together. And for the most part, they do. The iPad for example is just a slab computer with few buttons and has features for drawing and notetaking and could be used for other tasks as well. I'm not saying the iPad is perfect and couldn't be improved but I don't know what else new could be added to that.
Same thing with their smartphones, it's a phone with various apps you can use and it's a nice camera. What else is there for the iPhone? And it's not unique to Apple either; I don't see a lot of innovation from any major tech companies. A lot of those companies are also super focused on services more than products. It's why so many software companies want you to pay a subscription for software you bought once back in the day.