

Tim Cook confirms updated Mac Pro coming in 2013 - mattjaynes
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/12/06/12/tim_cook_confirms_updated_mac_pro_coming_in_2013.html

======
droithomme
This is big news because it means the machine will be nearly 4 years between
updates. The current machine, its huge physical size, yet its weak
configuration, and its absurd pricing, are insulting to professional users.

Apple is either clueless or is having serious problems maintaining competent
hardware engineers despite them being the second wealthiest corporation in
human history and sitting on a massive war chest. Instead of hiring the talent
they need, obscene bonuses are delivered to executives since Jobs died.

The question is, why are they having trouble finding designers? I have heard
various accounts from people, as well as rumors, that their pay is below
industry standards. Also, certain jobs are not stable with Apple hiring people
for consultant like specialized positions at employee wages, tying them to
insidious contracts, and then dismissing them when their niche skills are no
longer needed. It is also reported to be an abusive place to work where
employees are belittled and insulted and their contributions not acknowledged.

~~~
jsprinkles
Apple being as wealthy as it is implies, to the contrary, that it is not
clueless.

~~~
phaus
Your statement sounds sensible, yet I can't seem to reconcile it with the fact
that Justin Beiber is one of the wealthiest musicians of his time.

~~~
jsprinkles
Even if Justin Beiber himself is clueless (and I don't think he is), the
people around him are experts at creating a product that appeal to their
target demographic. The most successful stars that, to you, seem to create
shitty music are those that actually have the most clever people handling
them.

~~~
phaus
I would classify his handlers as manipulative, not clever. I would classify
Justin himself as clueless, largely due to his apparent immaturity that he
constantly exhibits, but I'm sure he'll be pretty sharp when he grows up. We
were all young and clueless at one time.

As for my previous statement, it was mostly a joke.

------
ghshephard
I'm wondering who this news really impacts. Do Pro Users actually update their
desktop systems more than once every four years? My Dell Precision 650 (Circa
January, 2004, cost $4300 back then - top of the line workstation at the time)
- is precisely as productive today, as it was when I was using it 8 years ago.
The apps all run just as fast, I get the same amount of work done, I don't
really have any need to upgrade to something newer. With the exception of
operating system patches, it's mostly the same software.

Now - I _want_ a newer system, but, if you asked me whether, at the end of the
day, my work output would be any different, or whether I would just be
happier, I would have to answer the latter.

Instead of HN commentators feedback about how old the Apple platform is, I'm
wondering whether they could comment on how the USB 3.0 + Thunderbolt + Retina
Display upgrades they wanted will make a very real difference to their
productivity. That would make for some useful reading, if it's the case.

It's not my sense with Pro Users that it is - and their tools will continue to
work just as well for now. I think the Pro market is just different from the
"upgrade every year or two" consumer market.

Also interesting, would be feedback from Pro Users who have decided that Apple
not upgrading more frequently, will result in them changing platforms, and,
what platforms they will change to - and why.

~~~
tibbon
I myself couldn't afford (and didn't need) a Mac Pro several years ago.
However, I could _really_ use one now. I'd buy one of the existing ones, but
man... I really feel like a sucker paying so much for a system that's clearly
lacking in a lot of spots, to know that I'll be upgrading in a year. And the
current pricing feels absurd (although normally I feel Apple pricing is fine,
right now the Mac Pro isn't a great deal).

It could be argued that a real "pro" would make their money on it either way,
but I myself am sitting more in the "prosumer" market. I make videos for
Youtube, but I don't really make much money on them... but I really enjoy
doing it. The workflow on my Macbook Pro right now with 1080p is just painful.

~~~
ghshephard
Right - I can't imagine spending any of their _own_ money on a Mac Pro. If you
are a gamer, you go build one of your own systems, or have someone like JNCS
(who built my gaming PC). If you are Joe Average consumer, you buy an iMac for
the home.

Hard to see anyone but a Pro User (for whom dropping $5K on a machine that
just gets the job done, and sits their for five years doing it, is the goal)
buying the MacPro. It left the sweet spot for personal purchases of Macs (if
it was ever there) a couple years ago.

------
fiatmoney
I don't understand why you would trust a company whose product roadmap
consists of a single cryptic email, with the tools you use to maintain your
livelihood.

~~~
mikek
Are there other computer manufacturers that publish a public product roadmap?
I'd be curious to see one of these.

------
rhizome
I'm gonna be cynical-guy and ask if there's any indication that this is
anything other than CYA, since "later next year" tells me work is only just
beginning. Were there any leaks or rumblings before the backlash?

Regardless, this would seem to be a very uncharacteristic stumble for Apple in
the expectations-management department.

~~~
dasil003
No, there were rumors circulating for a while about secret teams and major
upgrades in the work. If there redesigning the whole thing then it could be a
big job and maybe they are waiting for certain components to get to where they
want them to be.

The remarkable thing about this email is that Apple _never_ pre-announces
things. And just the other day they said something about doubling down on
secrecy. I think what happened here was a tremendous swelling negative rumor
mill that Cook figured would cost Apple more in terms of pro defections than
they would lose from current buyers waiting. For Microsoft that's just another
day at the office, but for Apple it's extremely rare.

~~~
rhizome
_The remarkable thing about this email is that Apple never pre-announces
things._

Exactly.

------
jsprinkles
Does anybody else think secretive companies annoy customers more than open
ones? A lot of bad feelings could have been avoided yesterday were this public
information, without Tim having to e-mail someone to break it. There was a
genuine rash of anger, obviously (from the HN coverage), and just taking a few
moments to say what's in the pipeline, while very not Steve, would have made
this situation a lot better.

It's not just Apple I've noticed this with. Maybe it's time we rethink secrecy
from a product development standpoint? Does it _really_ give your competitors
an advantage to know what you're working on in the days of the Internet? Is
this something that business types have put thought into, since secrecy seems
to be the status quo?

I can understand new products entirely, but a simple update to their Mac Pro
is something they could just say, publicly, with little recourse, to reassure
its small (and dedicated) fan base.

~~~
dasil003
I think _Apple_ annoys people more than other companies. It's something of a
lightning rod. Should they be more open about product roadmaps? Past
performance would seem to indicate know. It doesn't matter if people are
annoyed if they're selling out everything like hotcakes.

~~~
jsprinkles
My comment was a generality. For example, if Apple (or any company) tomorrow
published:

    
    
        Q1 2013 (tentative)    iOS 6.1
        Q2 2013 (tentative)    Mac Pro update
        Q3 2013 (tentative)    iOS 6.2
    

Does that give competitors a leg up on them, genuinely? What does Apple gain
from being secretive? Is it just status quo thought at this point that is
keeping companies thinking secretively? I understand new products being a
surprise, that's kind of cool, but does it hurt Apple to be a bit more open?
Is there some competitive advantage I'm missing?

Say you're Dell. You see Apple is working on a Mac Pro update. Does that
change your priorities at all, strategically? Does it matter to you? Now Apple
working on a game-changer, that I understand, but a simple update? Why keep
that secret? What do competitors gain from knowing every little detail of what
Apple is up to?

I'm trying to figure out Steve's reasoning, since I'm not terribly versed in
business, and this generally seems to be a business decision. It's especially
epidemic in IT, where all of us are writing cool software, but nondisclosure
prevents us from sharing with competitors except in special circumstances. So
instead of advancing the state of the art, we're all reinventing the wheel
because our prior wheel inventions are nondisclosured to the prior company.

I just don't get secrecy.

~~~
willfulwizard
Giving out that sort of information would change some amount of people from
just buying now to waiting for the new product. That's nice from a customer
standpoint but bad for Apple.

Consider:

1) Less outdated inventory moved.

2) More problems keeping up with new product demand, which Apple already can't
do.

3) More customers think about the question of buy now or wait when making a
purchase. This doesn't sound like a lot, but Apple strives for the simplest
possible buying experience.

~~~
dasil003
Don't forget:

4) The freedom to release or not release anything at any time.

