7 ms·

I'm in the same boat this author is. It's disappointing to see the desktop market lagging so far behind. For all of the 68k/PPC years, we could at least say "di

I'm in the same boat this author is. It's disappointing to see the desktop market lagging so far behind. For all of the 68k/PPC years, we could at least say "different architecture" and Intel hadn't caught up. Now we're all Intel, and it's Apple that isn't keeping up. It's frustrating, and I'm not necessarily a "Pro user" anymore at all. I have a current generation Mac Mini, and it's over 2 years old now. What I can buy from the Apple Store right now for the same price is what I got 2 years ago. I wish I know what Apple was thinking. One would have thought that the "iPhone halo effect" was something that they would have wanted to give momentum to. Instead people are looking at Windows units again.

devNoise 10y ago
You touch on what I miss about the old days from Apple, the "speed bumps". Apple used to make updates to the Macs a bit more often then they do these days. A lot of the time the updates weren't much more then a slightly faster CPU and maybe a new graphics. I don't expect completely new designs every year, but it boggles my mind why Apple won't put in better CPUs that are pin compatible with their motherboards.
- cmurf 10y ago
  I think it boggles our mind because of cognitive dissonance. The answer is a George Carlin They Don't Care About You rant, but we don't want to think of Apple as being that crotchety, but are merely distracted.
CPLX 10y ago
> I wish I know what Apple was thinking. It's literally incomprehensible. Just make a really good fast desktop computer. They're one of the largest companies in the world now with essentially unlimited financial resources, and decades of core competency in making high end desktop computers. So like why don't they just fucking do it.
- valuearb 10y ago
  And they clearly make substantial profits on the Mac line, so again why don't they just fucking do it?
  - CPLX 10y ago
    Even if they didn't who cares? For example, every motor vehicle manufacturer has an unprofitable racing effort and generates interesting concept cars and special editions to fill out the line. Apple can have a flagship line that's break even or worse to anchor the high end. It's literally inexplicable, and I think framing it in the rational actor model is a mistake, it's best explained as a fuckup.
    - throwaway55523 10y ago
      I wish I could upvote this (and your other comments) 100 times. Amazing high quality machines will keep the design and dev community on Mac for years to come, churning out the apps that help to make the iPhone ecosystem work. Bleeding power users to alternative systems creates vulnerability. These arguments would be the same for Microsoft circa 2007. Why should Microsoft care if the designers, developers, and tastemakers hate their products? They've got so much lock-in that people will be forced to use their stuff forever. Wheee, we're invincible. We all know how this turned out. I'm running up against low memory issues on my 16gb MBP lately. I absolutely cannot responsibly update my Apple product right now because of the 16gb limitation on the MBP. It does matter! I'm getting ready to bite the bullet and go back to Linux desktop.
  - derefr 10y ago
    My theory is that they strongly believe PCIe-over-Thunderbolt (now -over-USB-C) will obviate all need for internal expandibility/upgradability, and they went all-in on a form-factor (the garbage-can Mac) to take advantage of that... and then the market has stubbornly refused to co-operate by releasing Thunderbolt peripherals equivalent to internal components. So they're playing chicken with said market, probably under Intel's repeated promises to make it happen.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

devNoise 10y ago

You touch on what I miss about the old days from Apple, the "speed bumps". Apple used to make updates to the Macs a bit more often then they do these days. A lot of the time the updates weren't much more then a slightly faster CPU and maybe a new graphics. I don't expect completely new designs every year, but it boggles my mind why Apple won't put in better CPUs that are pin compatible with their motherboards.

cmurf 10y ago
I think it boggles our mind because of cognitive dissonance. The answer is a George Carlin They Don't Care About You rant, but we don't want to think of Apple as being that crotchety, but are merely distracted.

CPLX 10y ago

> I wish I know what Apple was thinking. It's literally incomprehensible. Just make a really good fast desktop computer. They're one of the largest companies in the world now with essentially unlimited financial resources, and decades of core competency in making high end desktop computers. So like why don't they just fucking do it.

valuearb 10y ago
And they clearly make substantial profits on the Mac line, so again why don't they just fucking do it?
- CPLX 10y ago
  Even if they didn't who cares? For example, every motor vehicle manufacturer has an unprofitable racing effort and generates interesting concept cars and special editions to fill out the line. Apple can have a flagship line that's break even or worse to anchor the high end. It's literally inexplicable, and I think framing it in the rational actor model is a mistake, it's best explained as a fuckup.
  - throwaway55523 10y ago
    I wish I could upvote this (and your other comments) 100 times. Amazing high quality machines will keep the design and dev community on Mac for years to come, churning out the apps that help to make the iPhone ecosystem work. Bleeding power users to alternative systems creates vulnerability. These arguments would be the same for Microsoft circa 2007. Why should Microsoft care if the designers, developers, and tastemakers hate their products? They've got so much lock-in that people will be forced to use their stuff forever. Wheee, we're invincible. We all know how this turned out. I'm running up against low memory issues on my 16gb MBP lately. I absolutely cannot responsibly update my Apple product right now because of the 16gb limitation on the MBP. It does matter! I'm getting ready to bite the bullet and go back to Linux desktop.
- derefr 10y ago
  My theory is that they strongly believe PCIe-over-Thunderbolt (now -over-USB-C) will obviate all need for internal expandibility/upgradability, and they went all-in on a form-factor (the garbage-can Mac) to take advantage of that... and then the market has stubbornly refused to co-operate by releasing Thunderbolt peripherals equivalent to internal components. So they're playing chicken with said market, probably under Intel's repeated promises to make it happen.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]