8 ms·

I wish Apple would just admit the trash can Mac Pro was a mistake and bring back the "cheese grater" Mac. Some people just need or want a beefy desktop built w

I wish Apple would just admit the trash can Mac Pro was a mistake and bring back the "cheese grater" Mac. Some people just need or want a beefy desktop built with upgradable components (in addition to a laptop). Or, crazy idea here, they could licence their OS if they don't want to make pro gear anymore.

manmal 10y ago
Licensing could easily eat up their laptop revenues though.
- sleepychu 10y ago
  You think? With what, the chinese clones? I don't mind using macOS, it's a pretty nice experience, definitely nicer than windows but when I buy an Apple machine the thing I'm buying is definitely the hardware and I'm not convinced the clones do a good enough job of matching that, can I get 14 hours of battery life from the leading air-clone?
  - alex_hitchins 10y ago
    I am a Windows, Linux and macOS user (plus some PcBSD for good measure). I wonder why you much prefer macOS over Windows? I would agree that Apple have got 4k/retina displays done and that is much, much better than Windows. Is there anything else that you can identify as an advantage?
    - martin-adams 10y ago
      I did the transition from Windows to Mac last year after many years of having both and hating OSX while loving Windows. Now I love it. The event that changed everything was getting a 34" Ultrawide monitor and the Mac experience was just so much more solid and respective of the screen space. I can't quite put my finger on it but I felt more in control. I have a Surface Book on my desk, but my Macbook Air is what I use daily. For me, Mac wins with: - Predicable window management - everything stays where you put it - Tidier fonts and app bevels so it doesn't waste screen space - Access to apps like Sketch - No UI delays when using Adobe Premiere, despite the less capable hardware - definitely an issue on Windows - Much better command line support (not used the Windows Linux subsystem) - Apps are easier to handle and less bloatware - Notes app that is actually helpful - Fast with an SSD - absolutely rubbish without (my mac mini is unusable) - I have gotten used to clicking the window first, before it doing something in that app - so fewer accidental actions But, I do still love Windows, it wins on the following: - Better graphical support (ok, hardware specific) - Windows Explorer is much better than Finder for me - Window snapping is easier (but might be also frustrating, can't put my finger on it) - I can open multiple calculator instances - Wider app support, but less of an issue these days for what I use Windows does have a lot more bugs, such as incorrectly scaled cursors in Premiere, or apps that a impossibly small or stupidly large when using a non-retina second monitor.
      - alex_hitchins 10y ago
        That's really interesting, thanks for taking the time to give a detailed reply. I love the iOS platform, it just works and has never failed me (I am leaving iTunes out of this). However, even with the scaling/DPI issues I find Windows 10 fast and easy to use. It must be biased as I've used Windows more, but I thought I'd love macOS more than I do, having loved my iPhone & iPad experience. I do always have to put the taskbar at the top of the screen, but that I think goes back to my Amiga Workbench days!
      - NTripleOne 10y ago
        >- I have gotten used to clicking the window first, before it doing something in that app - so fewer accidental actions Jeez is that an actual thing on OSX? That would just make it feel unresponsive to me.
        srssays 10y ago
        Not entirely. For text fields and buttons, clicking them will usually work even if their window is in the background. But clicking them will also focus the background window. If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through.
        macintux 10y ago
        > If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through. Whoa. I had no idea!
        NTripleOne 10y ago
        >If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through. Damn, is there any equivalent functionality (be it integrated or third party) for windows? I'd love to be able to run games in fullscreen exclusive mode without having them lose focus every time I want to look at a different chrome tab on my secondary display.
    - sleepychu 10y ago
      My desktop computing happens on Windows because I need graphics card support (games at home) and because my work pc is windows. I chose the Macbook Air for my travel machine because it's extremely light, it's battery lasts more than a day and macOS is unix-y, I initially planned to install debian on it but I couldn't convince myself that the power management would be as good so I left macOS on it. Window management is vastly superior in my opinion, I frequently just full screen everything and swipe between the full screens, this is particularly notable in my case since I almost exclusively use the keyboard (get bad RSI from mice) Updates feel like they have much less friction. But basically it comes down the underlying unix-y system. I'm never going to do serious development on a laptop but if I pick up a macOS machine it has the unix core tools that I need to get stuff done, vim, ssh etc. (Though there are some pain points mostly they're fixed by brew for machines I'll use for any length of time). Also, I helped someone set up Parallels the other day on their MBP and tried out air drop for the first time, show me friction-less 4GB ISO copying OTA between Windows laptops that aren't on the same network!
  - manmal 10y ago
    I wouldn't mind buying something like a Xiamo Air if it had native MacOS support. I'd be picky about display quality though. I've never gotten more than 7h of usage out of my new 2016 MBP 15".
- criddell 10y ago
  As long as it doesn't hurt the iPhone, do they really care?
mtgx 10y ago
Yeah, the "throw-away" $5,000 Mac Pro wasn't such a good idea.
mrweasel 10y ago
>Some people just need or want a beefy desktop built with upgradable components (in addition to a laptop). Apple is a hardware company. What you're suggesting doesn't make business sense for Apple. They rely on being able to sell new hardware. Allowing upgrades wouldn't make sense. A laptop last for five years, for most people, being able to slap in extra memory, a new graphics card or just a new SSD would "rob" Apple of a sale of a new computer for an additional two or three years.
- konradb 10y ago
  This might be all completely true but doesn't regard mindshare or loyalty. Apple has historically had a fanatical fan base, and should be spending a small fraction of their huge cash reserves to make sure they keep a fanatical fan base.
  - ansible 10y ago
    Yes, Apple could license their operating system to just one high-tier desktop hardware company, and ensure that the power users will stay in the Apple ecosystem. Somebody who will sell a high-end desktop system with: dual-socket Xeons, gobs of ECC memory, lots of storage, multiple 16x PCIe slots, and a very limited selection of high-end graphics cards. That would satisfy the power users, and wouldn't cost them anything.
    - mrweasel 10y ago
      They would pay the same price Microsoft does to support random hardware. More importantly, it also wouldn't gain much. As others pointed out, the high-end workstation is barely a business for Apple. Sure they are losing customer, but compared to the hoards of students buying Apple laptops or iPhone customers, it not really an issue.
- 8draco8 10y ago
  They have so many patents on hardware that they could licence the system and clones would still not being able for example to have Apple like touchpad, touchbar screen, MagSafe or even continuity (they could block it for licensed hardware). They will not do that because they realise that they fantastic, proprietary features means nothing to average pro user. Stuff like that is nice to have but more important than that is to be able to run all needed applications reliably. Currently on Macs are only iOS devs and people that hate Windows. That second group could go to linux only if there would be Adobe Suit available on it.
mhandley 10y ago
If Apple doesn't care about high-end desktops anymore (and it certainly seems that way), they could only license MacOS to third parties for desktop use. This wouldn't cannibalize their laptop sales, but would keep power users in their ecosystem. In the end they'd probably sell more laptops too.
- slantyyz 10y ago
  >> If Apple doesn't care about high-end desktops anymore I think Apple makes high end computers for consumers now. They just don't cater to special audiences like they did before, which is unfortunate for people who don't want computers that cater to consumers (i.e., content creation pros, developers, etc). I can't blame Apple for following the money, but it is what it is, I guess.
nness 10y ago
Not so crazy, Apple licensed their OS before, and then ended up paying-out the clone manufacturers contracts years later then they first released OSX. The model worked for Microsoft in the 80's (I bet the Big Blue is still kicking themselves for that one), but I don't feel confident it'd guarantee their survival now. For one, the operating system isn't nearly as separate of a concept anymore -- it's all the ecosystem.
- wastedhours 10y ago
  It's one of the main things I see resulting from the Touch Bar - for me, it's more about Apple ensuring there's a natural connect between the software and hardware, making any kind of separation impossible.
- vinceguidry 10y ago
  If you're worried about Apple's survivability, I suggest you dig deep for where your model of how the world works broke. Microsoft beat Apple for a decade, then Apple beat Microsoft. Both companies are still around, making fortunes. Even Yahoo's still around.
lloeki 10y ago
The mistake isn't the trash can Mac Pro (which is a perfectly fine machine that 100% fits my use case), it's not keeping it up to spec down the road (I'd buy one today if it was, even knowing I won't upgrade it for then next 3-5 years)
- soccerdave 10y ago
  The mistake was the trash can, they locked themselves in to a physical design that doesn't allow upgrading easily. Graphics cards come in different shapes and sizes.
  - chiph 10y ago
    If they had sold enough of them, there would be a market for Mac Pro-shaped graphic card upgrades. Swapping out the AMD FirePro D300 looks to only need a Torx screwdriver set, so certainly do-able by a user.
mpweiher 10y ago
> crazy idea here, they could licence their OS Another one to chime in that I don't consider this crazy...any more. It didn't work the first time around partly because the cloners had much smaller volume and could therefore always scoop Apple on the most profitable high-end gear, which didn't have component availability. The licensing model was always a gamble, with the hope that the loss of margin would be offset by an increased base. The problem was that it was "bet the company" stakes at the time, and when it didn't quite work out as hoped they had to shut it down or shut down the company. Now the Mac line in general and the pro line in particular is a sufficiently insignificant part of the overall business that they could afford the gamble.
- snuxoll 10y ago
  The question is whether the licensing fees + revenue from the app store would be enough to offset Apple's ludicrous hardware margins. Their market is shrinking, but it's still a profitable line of business for them since, just like the iPhone, their margins are way higher than the competition.
headShrinker 10y ago
> Or, crazy idea here, they could licence their OS if they don't want to make pro gear anymore. Maybe some are too young to remember 'Power Computing', the company that licensed MacOS in the 90s. That was juuuuust before Apple ran in to major problems, and had to file bankruptcy. The first thing Jobs did when he came back was borrow 55 million dollars from Bill Gates and buy back all the licenses and shut down production of all mac clones. One of the only true things Apple has is its reputation for quality. You want to bleed that out, you would do it by allowing clones, thus bringing about the destruction of the brand as a whole.
- iainmerrick 10y ago
  Power Computing clones were great, though. I had one and it was very reliable, excellent value for money. They were built like PCs and at the time, PCs were a lot better-made in many respects than low-end Macs. (High-end Macs were nice but very expensive, and still not as fast as high-end PCs.) A clone program now would have a totally different dynamic, since Apple is incredibly successful rather than close to bankruptcy. I still don't know if it would make business sense for them, but for Mac users like me it would be absolutely terrific.
- mhermher 10y ago
  Sell the licenses directly to consumers then? Their reputation doesn't take a hit that way. Just sell it on a "use at your own risk" basis and just let people have it who want to use it on their own builds. I figure the support for the bazillion possible hardware configs would make it a nightmare though.
- Keyframe 10y ago
  Or they could license the OS and review the products from licensees(?) before they ship out. Make a test balloon and license to 5 or 10 hardware manufacturers, offer them a reference design and review and run with it.
- dctoedt 10y ago
  > Apple ran in to major problems, and had to file bankruptcy. Apple never filed for bankruptcy protection. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/051115/7-bankrupt-companies-came-back.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/051115...
Bluestrike2 10y ago
I agree, though I think persuading Apple's decision makers--particularly those who were present for the clone program in the 90s--would be hard as hell. It was a poorly designed program, and allowed clone makers to beat out Apple on price and speedy updates with new hardware. And those who remember it at Apple probably remember all of the problems it threw at the company's feet back then. Personally, I think letting the trash can linger on for over 3 years is a pretty loud indicator that Apple's not exactly concerned with the line and that, internally at least, they're well aware of just how big a mistake the design was. Of course, it's possible that it's just a reflection of far larger problems with how the company views and supports its Mac engineers.[0] Plus, the Mac Pro's manufacturing here in the US is problematic for the company. That little political ploy can't be easily reversed, especially with the anti-trade FUD that's so prevalent now. If Apple were willing to acknowledge the problems, they could certainly design a restrictive licensing program that would allow third-parties to build Macs that target higher-end professionals without cannibalizing their consumer lines too much while avoiding some of the problems from the 90s. Strict design requirements for case aesthetics, limitations on software bundling, and other requirements could be used to limit third-party machines to high-end machines to avoid eating their consumer and laptop sales. Not that I expect it to happen, or even be considered. But something has to change if Apple wants to keep their hold on creative professionals who are now either being forced to switch, doing extensive upgrades on their old Mac Pros to bide as much time as possible, or building Hackintoshes 0. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/how-apple-alienated-mac-loyalists https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/how-apple...
nsxwolf 10y ago
The design would have worked just fine if they'd supported it. They won't sell you an SSD upgrade, which is absurd. The design should have made CPU and GPU upgrades possible, even if they were only available from Apple, but those never materialized.
AlexandrB 10y ago
> Or, crazy idea here, they could licence their OS if they don't want to make pro gear anymore. This is already worked like gangbusters for them for monitors: http://www.macworld.com/article/3169308/macs/apple-stores-stop-selling-the-lg-ultrafine-5k-display-after-wi-fi-interference-issues.html http://www.macworld.com/article/3169308/macs/apple-stores-st...

manmal 10y ago

Licensing could easily eat up their laptop revenues though.

sleepychu 10y ago
You think? With what, the chinese clones? I don't mind using macOS, it's a pretty nice experience, definitely nicer than windows but when I buy an Apple machine the thing I'm buying is definitely the hardware and I'm not convinced the clones do a good enough job of matching that, can I get 14 hours of battery life from the leading air-clone?
- alex_hitchins 10y ago
  I am a Windows, Linux and macOS user (plus some PcBSD for good measure). I wonder why you much prefer macOS over Windows? I would agree that Apple have got 4k/retina displays done and that is much, much better than Windows. Is there anything else that you can identify as an advantage?
  - martin-adams 10y ago
    I did the transition from Windows to Mac last year after many years of having both and hating OSX while loving Windows. Now I love it. The event that changed everything was getting a 34" Ultrawide monitor and the Mac experience was just so much more solid and respective of the screen space. I can't quite put my finger on it but I felt more in control. I have a Surface Book on my desk, but my Macbook Air is what I use daily. For me, Mac wins with: - Predicable window management - everything stays where you put it - Tidier fonts and app bevels so it doesn't waste screen space - Access to apps like Sketch - No UI delays when using Adobe Premiere, despite the less capable hardware - definitely an issue on Windows - Much better command line support (not used the Windows Linux subsystem) - Apps are easier to handle and less bloatware - Notes app that is actually helpful - Fast with an SSD - absolutely rubbish without (my mac mini is unusable) - I have gotten used to clicking the window first, before it doing something in that app - so fewer accidental actions But, I do still love Windows, it wins on the following: - Better graphical support (ok, hardware specific) - Windows Explorer is much better than Finder for me - Window snapping is easier (but might be also frustrating, can't put my finger on it) - I can open multiple calculator instances - Wider app support, but less of an issue these days for what I use Windows does have a lot more bugs, such as incorrectly scaled cursors in Premiere, or apps that a impossibly small or stupidly large when using a non-retina second monitor.
    - alex_hitchins 10y ago
      That's really interesting, thanks for taking the time to give a detailed reply. I love the iOS platform, it just works and has never failed me (I am leaving iTunes out of this). However, even with the scaling/DPI issues I find Windows 10 fast and easy to use. It must be biased as I've used Windows more, but I thought I'd love macOS more than I do, having loved my iPhone & iPad experience. I do always have to put the taskbar at the top of the screen, but that I think goes back to my Amiga Workbench days!
    - NTripleOne 10y ago
      >- I have gotten used to clicking the window first, before it doing something in that app - so fewer accidental actions Jeez is that an actual thing on OSX? That would just make it feel unresponsive to me.
      - srssays 10y ago
        Not entirely. For text fields and buttons, clicking them will usually work even if their window is in the background. But clicking them will also focus the background window. If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through.
        macintux 10y ago
        > If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through. Whoa. I had no idea!
        NTripleOne 10y ago
        >If you don't want to focus the background window -- or you want to use an element that can't be used if the window is backgrounded -- then holding 'cmd' will pass the click through. Damn, is there any equivalent functionality (be it integrated or third party) for windows? I'd love to be able to run games in fullscreen exclusive mode without having them lose focus every time I want to look at a different chrome tab on my secondary display.
  - sleepychu 10y ago
    My desktop computing happens on Windows because I need graphics card support (games at home) and because my work pc is windows. I chose the Macbook Air for my travel machine because it's extremely light, it's battery lasts more than a day and macOS is unix-y, I initially planned to install debian on it but I couldn't convince myself that the power management would be as good so I left macOS on it. Window management is vastly superior in my opinion, I frequently just full screen everything and swipe between the full screens, this is particularly notable in my case since I almost exclusively use the keyboard (get bad RSI from mice) Updates feel like they have much less friction. But basically it comes down the underlying unix-y system. I'm never going to do serious development on a laptop but if I pick up a macOS machine it has the unix core tools that I need to get stuff done, vim, ssh etc. (Though there are some pain points mostly they're fixed by brew for machines I'll use for any length of time). Also, I helped someone set up Parallels the other day on their MBP and tried out air drop for the first time, show me friction-less 4GB ISO copying OTA between Windows laptops that aren't on the same network!
- manmal 10y ago
  I wouldn't mind buying something like a Xiamo Air if it had native MacOS support. I'd be picky about display quality though. I've never gotten more than 7h of usage out of my new 2016 MBP 15".
criddell 10y ago
As long as it doesn't hurt the iPhone, do they really care?

mtgx 10y ago

Yeah, the "throw-away" $5,000 Mac Pro wasn't such a good idea.

mrweasel 10y ago

>Some people just need or want a beefy desktop built with upgradable components (in addition to a laptop). Apple is a hardware company. What you're suggesting doesn't make business sense for Apple. They rely on being able to sell new hardware. Allowing upgrades wouldn't make sense. A laptop last for five years, for most people, being able to slap in extra memory, a new graphics card or just a new SSD would "rob" Apple of a sale of a new computer for an additional two or three years.

konradb 10y ago
This might be all completely true but doesn't regard mindshare or loyalty. Apple has historically had a fanatical fan base, and should be spending a small fraction of their huge cash reserves to make sure they keep a fanatical fan base.
- ansible 10y ago
  Yes, Apple could license their operating system to just one high-tier desktop hardware company, and ensure that the power users will stay in the Apple ecosystem. Somebody who will sell a high-end desktop system with: dual-socket Xeons, gobs of ECC memory, lots of storage, multiple 16x PCIe slots, and a very limited selection of high-end graphics cards. That would satisfy the power users, and wouldn't cost them anything.
  - mrweasel 10y ago
    They would pay the same price Microsoft does to support random hardware. More importantly, it also wouldn't gain much. As others pointed out, the high-end workstation is barely a business for Apple. Sure they are losing customer, but compared to the hoards of students buying Apple laptops or iPhone customers, it not really an issue.
8draco8 10y ago
They have so many patents on hardware that they could licence the system and clones would still not being able for example to have Apple like touchpad, touchbar screen, MagSafe or even continuity (they could block it for licensed hardware). They will not do that because they realise that they fantastic, proprietary features means nothing to average pro user. Stuff like that is nice to have but more important than that is to be able to run all needed applications reliably. Currently on Macs are only iOS devs and people that hate Windows. That second group could go to linux only if there would be Adobe Suit available on it.

mhandley 10y ago

If Apple doesn't care about high-end desktops anymore (and it certainly seems that way), they could only license MacOS to third parties for desktop use. This wouldn't cannibalize their laptop sales, but would keep power users in their ecosystem. In the end they'd probably sell more laptops too.

slantyyz 10y ago
>> If Apple doesn't care about high-end desktops anymore I think Apple makes high end computers for consumers now. They just don't cater to special audiences like they did before, which is unfortunate for people who don't want computers that cater to consumers (i.e., content creation pros, developers, etc). I can't blame Apple for following the money, but it is what it is, I guess.

nness 10y ago

Not so crazy, Apple licensed their OS before, and then ended up paying-out the clone manufacturers contracts years later then they first released OSX. The model worked for Microsoft in the 80's (I bet the Big Blue is still kicking themselves for that one), but I don't feel confident it'd guarantee their survival now. For one, the operating system isn't nearly as separate of a concept anymore -- it's all the ecosystem.

wastedhours 10y ago
It's one of the main things I see resulting from the Touch Bar - for me, it's more about Apple ensuring there's a natural connect between the software and hardware, making any kind of separation impossible.
vinceguidry 10y ago
If you're worried about Apple's survivability, I suggest you dig deep for where your model of how the world works broke. Microsoft beat Apple for a decade, then Apple beat Microsoft. Both companies are still around, making fortunes. Even Yahoo's still around.

lloeki 10y ago

The mistake isn't the trash can Mac Pro (which is a perfectly fine machine that 100% fits my use case), it's not keeping it up to spec down the road (I'd buy one today if it was, even knowing I won't upgrade it for then next 3-5 years)

soccerdave 10y ago
The mistake was the trash can, they locked themselves in to a physical design that doesn't allow upgrading easily. Graphics cards come in different shapes and sizes.
- chiph 10y ago
  If they had sold enough of them, there would be a market for Mac Pro-shaped graphic card upgrades. Swapping out the AMD FirePro D300 looks to only need a Torx screwdriver set, so certainly do-able by a user.

mpweiher 10y ago

> crazy idea here, they could licence their OS Another one to chime in that I don't consider this crazy...any more. It didn't work the first time around partly because the cloners had much smaller volume and could therefore always scoop Apple on the most profitable high-end gear, which didn't have component availability. The licensing model was always a gamble, with the hope that the loss of margin would be offset by an increased base. The problem was that it was "bet the company" stakes at the time, and when it didn't quite work out as hoped they had to shut it down or shut down the company. Now the Mac line in general and the pro line in particular is a sufficiently insignificant part of the overall business that they could afford the gamble.

snuxoll 10y ago
The question is whether the licensing fees + revenue from the app store would be enough to offset Apple's ludicrous hardware margins. Their market is shrinking, but it's still a profitable line of business for them since, just like the iPhone, their margins are way higher than the competition.

headShrinker 10y ago

> Or, crazy idea here, they could licence their OS if they don't want to make pro gear anymore. Maybe some are too young to remember 'Power Computing', the company that licensed MacOS in the 90s. That was juuuuust before Apple ran in to major problems, and had to file bankruptcy. The first thing Jobs did when he came back was borrow 55 million dollars from Bill Gates and buy back all the licenses and shut down production of all mac clones. One of the only true things Apple has is its reputation for quality. You want to bleed that out, you would do it by allowing clones, thus bringing about the destruction of the brand as a whole.

iainmerrick 10y ago
Power Computing clones were great, though. I had one and it was very reliable, excellent value for money. They were built like PCs and at the time, PCs were a lot better-made in many respects than low-end Macs. (High-end Macs were nice but very expensive, and still not as fast as high-end PCs.) A clone program now would have a totally different dynamic, since Apple is incredibly successful rather than close to bankruptcy. I still don't know if it would make business sense for them, but for Mac users like me it would be absolutely terrific.
mhermher 10y ago
Sell the licenses directly to consumers then? Their reputation doesn't take a hit that way. Just sell it on a "use at your own risk" basis and just let people have it who want to use it on their own builds. I figure the support for the bazillion possible hardware configs would make it a nightmare though.
Keyframe 10y ago
Or they could license the OS and review the products from licensees(?) before they ship out. Make a test balloon and license to 5 or 10 hardware manufacturers, offer them a reference design and review and run with it.
dctoedt 10y ago
> Apple ran in to major problems, and had to file bankruptcy. Apple never filed for bankruptcy protection. http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/051115/7-bankrupt-companies-came-back.asp http://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/051115...

Bluestrike2 10y ago

I agree, though I think persuading Apple's decision makers--particularly those who were present for the clone program in the 90s--would be hard as hell. It was a poorly designed program, and allowed clone makers to beat out Apple on price and speedy updates with new hardware. And those who remember it at Apple probably remember all of the problems it threw at the company's feet back then. Personally, I think letting the trash can linger on for over 3 years is a pretty loud indicator that Apple's not exactly concerned with the line and that, internally at least, they're well aware of just how big a mistake the design was. Of course, it's possible that it's just a reflection of far larger problems with how the company views and supports its Mac engineers.[0] Plus, the Mac Pro's manufacturing here in the US is problematic for the company. That little political ploy can't be easily reversed, especially with the anti-trade FUD that's so prevalent now. If Apple were willing to acknowledge the problems, they could certainly design a restrictive licensing program that would allow third-parties to build Macs that target higher-end professionals without cannibalizing their consumer lines too much while avoiding some of the problems from the 90s. Strict design requirements for case aesthetics, limitations on software bundling, and other requirements could be used to limit third-party machines to high-end machines to avoid eating their consumer and laptop sales. Not that I expect it to happen, or even be considered. But something has to change if Apple wants to keep their hold on creative professionals who are now either being forced to switch, doing extensive upgrades on their old Mac Pros to bide as much time as possible, or building Hackintoshes 0. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/how-apple-alienated-mac-loyalists https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-12-20/how-apple...

nsxwolf 10y ago

The design would have worked just fine if they'd supported it. They won't sell you an SSD upgrade, which is absurd. The design should have made CPU and GPU upgrades possible, even if they were only available from Apple, but those never materialized.

AlexandrB 10y ago

> Or, crazy idea here, they could licence their OS if they don't want to make pro gear anymore. This is already worked like gangbusters for them for monitors: http://www.macworld.com/article/3169308/macs/apple-stores-stop-selling-the-lg-ultrafine-5k-display-after-wi-fi-interference-issues.html http://www.macworld.com/article/3169308/macs/apple-stores-st...