John Gruber writes today that The Mac Pro Lives. Perhaps more accurately, at least it seems to have a future.
This medium.com article contains a fair balance of pointing out the good and bad of design at Apple under Jonathan Ive. Most people know the good parts, so this image shows a discussion of just two of the worst design decisions made by Apple’s design team. Other bad designs under Apple include pretty much every mouse ever made, the horribly infamous butterfly keyboards, and the trashcan Mac Pro design.
It seems like at some point every design quits thinking about what’s the best for the customer and succumbs to something that looks pretty. As the old saying goes, “Absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
The information about the iPhone 7 performance in this image comes from this post by Jon Gruber. The mind-blowing stats are in the two updates at the end of the image.
A Bloomberg report says that Apple is planning to release a new MacBook Pro that has a narrow OLED screen at the top of the keyboard, which may replace the function keys. In that same article they share this chart, which shows iPad sales compared to Mac sales (which presumably includes all MacBook, MacBook Pro, and Mac Pro models).
Under Tim Cook, Apple seems much more driven by the bottom line than under Steve Jobs. As this loopinsight.com article points out, “The (MacPro) models on sale today (late 2016) have the exact same specs as the very first ones that rolled off the Texas assembly line back in December 2013.”
I don’t think anyone is craving new body styles for MacBook Pro’s or MacPro’s, but modern, up to date processors and displays would be nice. And by not having those things, it makes a person think, “Hmm, I wonder what Windows’ systems look like these days ...”
As I recall, being driven by the bottom line is what got Apple in trouble under John Sculley and Gil Amelio.
For years I've wondered why people buy Mac Pro systems at all. As I wrote in early 2009, performance tests show an iMac is faster than a Mac Pro, so given the fact that a Mac Pro system is much more expensive than an iMac, and doesn't include a monitor, why would anyone buy a Mac Pro?
Every year that I see the performance numbers on Mac Pro systems, I wonder why their disk subsystems are so slow compared to iMacs? Looking at these new 2009 performance numbers from Macworld, I'm again amazed that an iMac is faster working on a Zip archive than a Mac Pro is.