I agree. Is the Mac Mini so special it can't be updated by a small team periodically? Nope. It is in fact a quite mainstream machine, nothing too special about it.
The uniqueness in the Mac Mini lies in Mac OS. No laser sharp focus is needed for incremental hardware updates.
The Mac Pro has unique hardware, but between major redesigns it does not need any incredibly hard work. Just incremental improvements.
I find it absurd too that a company with so much cash in the bank cannot keep a few people performing incremental improvements on their product lines. The Mac Pro for example, is hopelessly outdated now.
I think they underestimate the compound effect of an ecosystem. Several little products, even if they don't bring in insane revenues such as iOS, can help attracting key users which are those that drive innovation. It also contributes to the overall experience of regular folks. For example, by discontinuing screens or routers, things are not as seamless as they once were.
"It is in fact a quite mainstream machine, nothing too special about it." The mini introduced a form factor that has since been emulated so often that it seems less special than it was at first, but it was something new. Small computers extant back then were larger than the mini. Most were based on the Mini ITX motherboard design, introduced in 2001, and all of them looked like boxen (ugly). The mini's dimensions gave it a non-computer look. It might seem plain now, a very simple form, but that was the genius of it. To allege that it's mainstream and not special, something to be incremented, is to cast it as just another box, a mere container. To Apple, it's an optimum solution to both engineering and aesthetic challenges. Maybe they resist the idea that it is just a box, and that is why they don't just increment the internals.
The Mac Mini was special over a decade ago. It's now just commodity hardware in an aluminium unibody. There are a multitude of competing machines from Intel, Gigabyte, Asus, Zotac and others. There is absolutely no reason why Apple couldn't redesign the Mac Mini chassis to take an industry-standard NUC motherboard and offer a refresh every 12 months.
I won't buy Apple hardware any more because I don't want to be locked into their ecosystem. I don't want to be subject to the whims of a "tastemaker" who decides that I don't need PCIe or USB or a headphone jack. I don't trust Apple not to neglect a key platform for years.
Apple can afford to lose me, because iPhone sales are equivalent to the GDP of some countries. If at some point that golden goose starts looking unhealthy, they might regret pissing off their most loyal customers. They might suddenly realise that the creative professionals who were a cornerstone of their brand have abandoned them.
As of today, the Mac Pro has gone 1137 days without an update. Three years is an eternity for a music producer or a video editor to go without fresh hardware. The introduction of 4K video has only exacerbated the issue, as has the fiasco of FCPX.
A lot of people feel deeply betrayed by Apple. People who would happily give Apple $10,000 every couple of years for a fully loaded Mac Pro. People who have bought every Apple desktop since the Macintosh. People who are role models in their fields. People whose choices define the term "industry standard". Can Apple afford to alienate those people?
Neither Apple nor Google seem to be applying many of the principles outlined in that article.
To me this is just a sign of broken management. Apple has a minimal product line. Not being able to refresh products regularly is unacceptable. Furthermore, they don't have a complete ecosystem anymore which has an impact on the whole experience.
Google is also broken, but in a different way. They are stuck in a perpetual cycle of release-abandon products, with some insane duplicities. For example, Hangouts/Allo/Duo.
Google has discontinued the much praised Google Reader, plus replaced open Google Talk by closed Hangouts. Also released Allo & Duo, confusing everyone. A royal mess.
Apple is unwilling to update Mac Pro & Mini frequently. They have also discontinued their screens (and third party USB C ones are not working well) and also discontinued all their routers.
I actually feel the same way. I wanted to buy a Mini in 2014, to upgrade from a 2012 model, but the new one was no better than the one I had, at least not in the ways that were important to me. My comment was about the psychology of Apple. I do wonder if their engineers don't see Apple computers as containers, as boxes. They abandoned the cheese grater Mac Pros, the most box-like in design (and best for users). Maybe Jonny Ive et al resist the slippery slope of their computers being seen as commodities. There could be wisdom in that. The Apple brand relies on the perception of design virtuosity. But I agree, they should have had more in the pipeline. Let's hope they get back to the drawing board and make up for their neglect.
The uniqueness in the Mac Mini lies in Mac OS. No laser sharp focus is needed for incremental hardware updates.
The Mac Pro has unique hardware, but between major redesigns it does not need any incredibly hard work. Just incremental improvements.
I find it absurd too that a company with so much cash in the bank cannot keep a few people performing incremental improvements on their product lines. The Mac Pro for example, is hopelessly outdated now.
I think they underestimate the compound effect of an ecosystem. Several little products, even if they don't bring in insane revenues such as iOS, can help attracting key users which are those that drive innovation. It also contributes to the overall experience of regular folks. For example, by discontinuing screens or routers, things are not as seamless as they once were.