4 ms·

These were no experiment. These changes were only a matter of cutting cost. The new butterfly system was cheaper to produce than the old one. Old keyboard desi

These were no experiment. These changes were only a matter of cutting cost. The new butterfly system was cheaper to produce than the old one. Old keyboard design were more complicated. And the keys made from a more sturdy plastic. I have removed and replaced several keys on both kind keyboard and I broke partially 2 key from the new keyboard, using a more fragile plastic but none of the old version, this taking account to the fact that the new key were more easy to remove. The USB-C choice was also about reducing cost. Integrate 2 USB-C is less expensive than integrate 1 power input, 2 thunderbolts, 2 USB 3, 1 card reader, and 1 hdmi output. Removing the MacSafe for the cheap defective usb-c power plug (after 1 year, the cable don't stay stuck anymore in the USB-C, causing the macbook battery to discharge without useur knowledge, and forcing him to push back the cable a least 10 time as day because of the low quality of the component, no matter the cable you used to plug your macbook) was also about cutting cost. On the pretense to changing design and and adopting new trends, the have cut cost by reducing the quality and the number of feature of their computer. That's how they became the richest company in the world.

VvR-Ox 7y ago
In this case they should have done their market analysis properly I think. One of the USP's for Apple devices for me always was the quality of materials and production. Weakening this point of reference by opting for poor quality materials and implementing strange new designs that break fast is poor product management in my opinion. I don't see that behavior in Apple's past so often - the opposite is true. Look at the iPhones for example: The early models had a plastic case and buttons and then they introduces more metal etc. somewhere around the 4/5s. The same happened with their notebooks: They started with cheap plastic cases and upgraded to metal. Nice. There is more products where they excelled at improving the features and the quality. If it is their choice to leave this USP in the dust they will loose customers like me because quality, good materials and stuff like that are very important for some people.

VvR-Ox 7y ago

In this case they should have done their market analysis properly I think. One of the USP's for Apple devices for me always was the quality of materials and production. Weakening this point of reference by opting for poor quality materials and implementing strange new designs that break fast is poor product management in my opinion. I don't see that behavior in Apple's past so often - the opposite is true. Look at the iPhones for example: The early models had a plastic case and buttons and then they introduces more metal etc. somewhere around the 4/5s. The same happened with their notebooks: They started with cheap plastic cases and upgraded to metal. Nice. There is more products where they excelled at improving the features and the quality. If it is their choice to leave this USP in the dust they will loose customers like me because quality, good materials and stuff like that are very important for some people.