User Name
Password
AppleNova Forums » Speculation and Rumors »

WWDC rumors - crickets?


Register Members List Calendar Search FAQ Posting Guidelines
WWDC rumors - crickets?
Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5  Next Last Thread Tools
Kickaha
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
 
2015-06-02, 17:12

Ok, I'm bummed. Years past there were insanely wonderful conversations regarding WWDC announcements. We'd dive into APIs, extract binary dumps, get into ridiculous arguments over what 'is' is, and so on. Sites were dedicated to the rumors not just of what banks were signing on to Apple Pay, but what technical details we could expect, and extrapolate those into (often wrong but always fun) future road plans.

Wha hoppen?

Did the industry age, or did we?

Where are the hip yoots discussing these esoterica, or is it a legacy page from an age gone by?

Or did Apple finally plug their leaks using teams of highly trained iNinjas?
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2015-06-02, 18:04

i think it's a combination of AN being quieter and the iOS ecosystem maturing and bringing fewer huge surprises. and, yeah, things leak more, too.

i'm totally okay with iOS 9 being a Modifier Cat-style "under the hood" release. i hope 10.11 is, too.

i'm most curious about the new apple tv.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-02, 21:15

Just us old farts left, Kick, and a few youngsters.

Why post a paragraph of fun and argue-drama when you can tweet three words, twat another six, and post a picture of your noodles and broccoli to Snapperchat or Picturepages or some silly crap like that.



And with Paul on hiatus hiding from Star Wars spoilers, Brad taking a Calgon moment and Dr. Mad Mad flung into deep space there's just not much left to bitch about.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
thegeriatric
geri to my friends
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Heaven
 
2015-06-03, 05:02

By "old fart" do you mean as in long time member of AN? or just old as in age? Thinking about it I may actually qualify in both categories!!

I used to be undecided.....But now I'm not so sure.
No trees were harmed in the sending of this message. However, a large number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-03, 10:23

Yes. That.

I'm 45 and been on the forum for 11 years. I qualify as both an old fart and an old AN fart, especially in this age of Twatterboxing and Pickflipping. While I don't much care for such things, I am pretty good at kermudgering and photogrumping, although I think geezergriping is still outside my area of expertise.

As far as WWDC is concerned, the usual suspects are in order*. iOS 9 will make its debut, as will OS 10.11 Sequoia. I am convinced both will be focused on improved security, bug fixes, code efficiency, CPU performance, stability and power management. I am also convinced that both will try to improve device-to-device syncing and iCloud BS (both of which are lacking, IMO. Apple TV will get overhauled and introduce an SDK/store/controller and we will hear about content deals that will make the likes of CableOne and Comcast quiver in their boots. No new computer hardware will be announced, although I think the Mac Pro may get an update.

Now, if you'll excuse me, my old-ass pipes (or is that old ass-pipes) need venting!

* Figured I'd drop this in for Kickaha's benefit.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)

Last edited by kscherer : 2015-06-03 at 11:13. Reason: Don't know my OS versions
  quote
alcimedes
I shot the sherrif.
 
Join Date: May 2004
Send a message via ICQ to alcimedes  
2015-06-03, 10:33

Apple is focused on iterative change right now. No one is expecting anything significant.

10.10 was a step back from 10.9 in many ways, and just getting 10.10 as functional as 10.9 would be progress.

All the Apple software releases lately have been them pairing down usability and utility while adding partially baked cloud services.

I guess I'm expecting more half assed software, and nothing new on the hardware front.

(no new iMac, no new PowerMac, no new laptops, no new mini, no new apple TV)

Maybe? a display that will probably cost $1,200.

What is there to be excited about?

Google is your frenemy.
Caveat Emptor - Latin for tough titty
I tend to interpret things in the way that's most hilarious to me
  quote
Frank777
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
 
2015-06-03, 11:01

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post
Wha hoppen?

Did the industry age, or did we?

Where are the hip yoots discussing these esoterica, or is it a legacy page from an age gone by?
We got tired of hoping Apple would fix the Finder and the filesystem.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-03, 11:15

A stand alone 5k display would be fancy, but knowing Apple there will only be a 27" version @ $1500, which will kill it before it gets started. There will need to be a 5k 27" in the $1200 range and a 4k 21" in the $800 range in order for it to be a successful product.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
709
¡Damned!
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Purgatory
 
2015-06-03, 11:44

I predict that the Thunderbolt 3/USB-TypeC announcement will be the only thing in tech that I geek over this month.

Like alc & robo say, fixer-upgrades to OSs. No new Mac hardware. Maybe some sales numbers for the Watch? I doubt it though. I couldn't care less about a streaming music service and Apple TV would have to be something big to hold my attention. So no, I'm really not that excited about WWDC this year. Doesn't mean I'm not going to watch, mind you, there's always the possibility for a surprise or two.

So it goes.
  quote
kieran
@kk@pennytucker.social
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
 
2015-06-03, 12:15

It'd be awesome if there were more things announced with USB-C. My MacBook's port is getting lonely.

Definitely interested in seeing what comes for the AppleTV.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-03, 14:49

I think the USB-C stuff will be announced by 3rd parties, not by Apple, just as they tend to leave cases etc. to 3rd parties. This will be good for consumers, since adapters/accessories will likely be much cheaper and of good quality (generally). Apple has already announced a few accessories to jumpstart the market and I don't expect any others.

FYI: Watch those 3rd party USB-C chargers. Fool things tend to burn stuff down.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
Dutch Pear
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
 
2015-06-03, 14:57

I fully expect a triumphant unveiling of the PowerBook G6. About bloody time for it! A little birdie sent me blurry elevator pictures of plastic-wrapped PowerBook-sized boxes. Thus proven.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-03, 15:48

Nice!

I remember those.



We need Paul to mock us up some fake iMacs or something so we can get some good, old fashioned rumors started.

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2015-06-05, 10:06

Once multiple sources confirmed that a new Apple TV would not make an appearance I lost interest.
  quote
RowdyScot
Ice Arrow Sniper
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Great Bay Temple
Send a message via AIM to RowdyScot Send a message via Skype™ to RowdyScot 
2015-06-05, 10:32

I'm hoping it is some sort of sign, but the iWork suite had a public page saying many features will be returning/improved. It's just iWork for now, but maybe, just maybe, that's a sign of a different trend on the software front to at least restore lost functionality.

Authentic Nova Scotia bagpipe innards
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2015-06-05, 11:23

Quote:
Originally Posted by RowdyScot View Post
I'm hoping it is some sort of sign, but the iWork suite had a public page saying many features will be returning/improved. It's just iWork for now, but maybe, just maybe, that's a sign of a different trend on the software front to at least restore lost functionality.
I'm not even sure why Apple still entertains iWork. They clearly don't care about it.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2015-06-05, 12:17

These days all Apple cares about is making things smaller, whether the item really need to be or not. Software? I don't think they put much thought into it beyond iOS.
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2015-06-05, 13:03

Quote:
Originally Posted by PB PM View Post
These days all Apple cares about is making things smaller, whether the item really need to be or not. Software? I don't think they put much thought into it beyond iOS.
just weird.... biggest company in the world.... most profitable company in the world..... they could literally throw $50 million at iWork and make it incredible and it would be a rounding error on their financials.

That's what I just don't get about their software struggles. It is interesting to me how even in a giant company like that, if the leadership isn't engaged with a segment of the business it will falter.
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2015-06-06, 12:34

Because they're not actually that giant of a company. Giant in profits, yes, but they're pretty focused. Just "throwing" money at a problem to fix it isn't something they've ever been keen on doing.

Microsoft, for example, has 128,000 employees, and they'll get 17,000 more when they buy Salesforce. Oracle has 122,000. But excluding retail staff, Apple only has 46,400 employees, fewer than even the similarly lean Google. By that count, Apple is just four Yahoos, and yet they make an advanced desktop operating system, an advanced mobile operating system, the best phones and tablets in the world, a full line of personal computers, and they run the biggest music/movie/app storefront out there.

As an iWork user, I would like it if iWork were more of a priority…but not if it meant Apple started losing focus and just started to "throw $50 million" here and there. Because focus is one of the biggest reasons I think Apple has been so successful. The idea that they should just "throw $50 million" at things is a Google move, or a Microsoft move. See what sticks. Can half of it later. I wouldn't want Apple to become that sort of company.

Why did Apple make iWork in the first place? They never made iPhotoshop or iDesign, even though those are closer to their other "pro creative" apps. It was probably a strategic hedge against the possibility that Microsoft would stop making Office for Mac, which seemed far more important in the first half of the oughts. These days, it's an alternative to Google Docs. But $50 million wouldn't make iWork a huge business for Apple. $500 million wouldn't. It's just not something that's going to be a huge growth driver for them, so I can understand it not being a huge priority.

and i guess i've known it all along / the truth is, you have to be soft to be strong
  quote
Dave
Ninja Editor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
 
2015-06-06, 14:23

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kickaha View Post
Ok, I'm bummed. Years past there were insanely wonderful conversations regarding WWDC announcements. We'd dive into APIs, extract binary dumps, get into ridiculous arguments over what 'is' is, and so on. Sites were dedicated to the rumors not just of what banks were signing on to Apple Pay, but what technical details we could expect, and extrapolate those into (often wrong but always fun) future road plans.

Wha hoppen?

Did the industry age, or did we?

Where are the hip yoots discussing these esoterica, or is it a legacy page from an age gone by?

Or did Apple finally plug their leaks using teams of highly trained iNinjas?
Two reasons:
  • I haven't heard anything of significance to me. Mostly I'm hoping for news on where Apple's going to take Swift. In particular:
    • The Generic system seems pretty immature to me:
      • Why can't I write code like: "func foo <T, U where T != U>(bar1:T, bar2:U)"?
      • Why can't we write "typealias IntArray = Array<Int>"?
      • Why do I have to explicitly declare which types conform to any given protocol? Shouldn't the compiler be able to figure that out? Like this:
        Code:
        protocol CanAdd { func + (Self, Self) -> Self } extension Int : CanAdd {} // <-- Why do I have to say this? Ints can already satisfy the requirements.
      • Not so much a maturity issue, but related to my previous wish-list item, it'd be great if we didn't have to restrict generic parameters at all:
        Code:
        func foo<T, U>(x:T, y:U) { ... bar(x,y) ... }
        and the compiler would just figure out that T and U must be restricted to types such that the function "bar(T,U)" exists.
    • I'd like a way to declare an array of fixed length, and have said length be part of the type. That way, I could write this bit of code:
      Code:
      func crossP<T, AT:Array<T> where AT.length == 3>(lhs:AT, rhs:AT) -> AT {...}
      without having to check that lhs and rhs were both 3-element arrays, and would I know that the answer has 3 elements as well. Tuples don't fit the bill because you can't iterate through them and you can't write "var x = Tuple<Int>(count:3)"
    • Related to my previous wish-list item (I think), this:
      Code:
      struct Matrix<Dims:[Int], T> {...} func * <[N,M]:[Int], [M,P]:[Int], T>(lhs:Matrix<[N,M],T>, rhs:Matrix<[M,P], T>) -> Matrix<[N,P], T> {...}
      would be fantastic! Although I haven't yet figured out how to create the obvious backing datatype yet: an array that's nested n-levels deep:
      Code:
      func NestedArray<T, U>(count:Int, t:T.self) -> [u] {...} var d = 3 var x = NestedArray(d, Int) // same as [[[Int]]]() d = 1 var y = NestedArray(d, Int) // same as [Int]()
      (of course, you'd want a different storage mechanism for sparse matrices).
    • I'd be great if there was a way to allow Tuples to conform to protocols. I've come across a few cases where "var x = [(Int, Int) : Int]()" would've come in handy, but I can't because "(Int, Int) doesn't conform to Hashable", even though all its constituent types do.
    • It seems like with the language's emphasis on functional-style programming and non-mutability, they're missing a lot of opportunities for auto-parallelization.
    • I understand (I think) why they disallow overloading the assignment operator ("="), but allowing it for different types, like "func = <T, U where T != U>(inout lhs:T, rhs:U) {...}" could be quite useful.
  • Apple's been pissing me off lately with their focus on:
    • Smaller/lighter/thinner... What happened to faster? I get that the current (it's not really "new" at this point) Mac Pro is a beast for stuff that runs on the GPUs, but the dual CPUs of the 2012 Mac Pro are theoretically faster* (combined, of course). That's right, the stock high-end Mac Pro you can buy now has less raw CPU performance than the one from three freakin' years ago... Granted, the 2012 model can only achieve that performance if you can manage to keep all twelve of its cores fed (vs just six cores on the current model), but the potential is still there. On the laptop front, if they weren't so focused on weight and size, they'd either be able to make them cheaper, or have room for parts that consumed more power, the cooling to protect them, and the batteries to keep it all running. And while Thunderbolt is great for laptops, PCIe is still faster. Why can't the workstation-class machine have some? When Thunderbolt was first announced, the very first usage scenario that popped into my head was "With everything sitting right on the bus like that, this'll be great for compute clusters!" Does Apple support using it that way without the overhead of going through the IP stack? Of course not! That would make things faster... (Yes, I know, "it's not as simple as that", but, call me crazy, I'm assuming that a protocol designed with a focus on "reliably, connecting the world, on a network whose status can depend on wars and the weather, over miles of sometimes iffy cabling that can't easily be fixed" is not the best way to achieve a "high-bandwidth & low-latency connection, within one climate-controled area, over short distances, where bad wires can be easily replaced".)
    • I like Apple's current approach towards iOS, I really feel like they're letting down those of us who want "the power" of a real workstation OS. Mac OS X should fit the bill perfectly... the power of UNIX, coupled with Apple's usability, ought to be unstoppable.
I think Apple's let iOS's success go to their head a bit in terms of what a workstation OS needs to be. My 2008 Mac Pro started rebooting every few minutes last night... It calmed down after maybe half an hour, but I still don't know what happened. If that machine dies on me, I'm not sure what I'll do (aside from trying to wait for Skylake to come out). Twice now, I've essentially doubled a computer's usable life by replacing a slow/dead video card (my current 2008 Mac Pro, and my old 2x800MHz G4), so iMacs kinda scare me. OTOH, a new Mac Pro is bloody expensive (though, worth it if it lasts as long as my previous macs have). And both options are single CPU (I keep having this hope that someone will tweak the scheduler so that up to n-1 CPUs could be dedicated to one app... Think of how much simpler thread synchronization would be if a programmer knew that certain other threads wouldn't ever be interrupted, that they had the CPU's entire cache to themselves and could actually write code to take advantage of the fact that non-trivial datasets could be kept in cache until all their threads were done reading from it and then load the next dataset... it's music to my brain... Oh! And, this would require new hardware I think, what if the CPU exposed all its registers when it was in this mode? That could help).

So where do I stand on all things Apple that matter to me?
  • Smartphones: I don't see myself ever leaving iOS. This is a device I'm going to use to potentially save my life, or someone else's, by calling for help; I want its ecosystem to be locked down. Google/MS don't seem to get that. Plus, Android is too fragmented for my tastes... I want the OS vendor, not the service provider (AT&T) or hardware vendor (Samsung, etc) to be in charge of security updates, and I don't want to spend enough to get one that isn't locked to some custom build.
  • Light-Duty Office Stuff and Tablets: For web sites, email, mild word-processing, etc, I'm still an OS X fan. For tablets (which is the same kind of usage, for me at least) I like iOS just fine. Since this isn't the lifeline that I consider my phone to be, I'd jailbreak it in a heartbeat if I didn't have to worry about an OS update borking half my apps, but having the notification center on the lock screen added a lot of the features I wanted anyway. That said, Android is still too fragmented, Windows Mobile (or whatever they're calling it now) doesn't do anything discernibly better (that I can tell), and having the same OS as my phone is handy.
  • Workstations: I really feel like Apple's dropping the ball here, both in terms of hardware and software. For instance, why in the bleeping world is OS X's OpenGL stack still stuck at 4.1? That was released way back in 2010! I'd understand if 4.5 support wasn't quite ready for 10.10, but come on! At least give us 4.4! If my Mac Pro really is dead/dying... What I want, hardware-wise, is dual/quad CPUs, enough PCIe slots for at least two powerful GPUs, ECC RAM, and Thunderbolt (plus the "standard" stuff like GbE, USB, etc). Apple's current offerings are at best 3/5. Depending on how things are going in the hackintosh community, I may have to building my own. I'm a little wary of that path because I don't want to jump through hoops to upgrade the OS, but if I can affordably get to 4/5 or 5/5... I might be willing to risk it.
I don't know... Maybe I'm the only one who cares about all this stuff...

* 2x of these http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?....40GHz&id=1252 vs 1x of these http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu.php?....50GHz&id=2066

When I was a kid, people who did wrong were punished, restricted, and forbidden. Now, when someone does wrong, all of the rest of us are punished, restricted, and forbidden... and the one who did the wrong is counselled and "understood" and fed ice cream.
  quote
kscherer
Which way is up?
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Boyzeee
 
2015-06-06, 14:25

iWork was dumbed down so it could achieve feature parity with the iOS/web versions. That's all. Now, when a new thing is added, it's added to all three. In other words, iWork for Mac doesn't get a new feature until the iOS/web version can support the same feature.

While this line of thinking is just hunky-dorey for the "mobile" crowd, the desktop crowd is forced into one of three camps: 1) Use the old version of iWork; 2) Switch to MS Office; 3) Suck it!

I fall into the first camp. Too many features gone because "Waaaaaaa, my iPad doesn't have that" and a complete CSS fail in the current version have forced me to stick with the old monkey. Way better software.

I agree with both sides, though. Apple really needs to fix the desktop version, but they risk alienating the mobile users if they do. Too bad the iWork team doesn't have the same exact focus that the OS teams have: One version for the desktop, one version for mobile with certain elements of compatibility built in.

What I'd like to see is for iWork Mac to have a "mobile mode" that disables features not supported on the iOS version. If you know your document needs to be accessible on iThings, you click the "Mobile Compatibility" button and BAM! Unsupported features are disabled. Or, if you're like me and don't give two craps about iOS, you just delete that button from the menu bar and pretend it doesn't exist!

Yep, that's what I would do!

- AppleNova is the best Mac-users forum on the internet. We are smart, educated, capable, and helpful. We are also loaded with smart-alecks! :)
- Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God. (Mat 5:9)
  quote
Ryan
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Promise Land of Trustafarians
 
2015-06-06, 14:28

Some of those features you're asking for in Swift would murder compile times, especially being able to infer that generics are bound by the existence of another function. The closest example I can think of in other languages would be typeclasses from Scala and Haskell—the implicit search resolution in Scala is known to seriously slow down the compiler.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2015-06-06, 14:42

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
Because they're not actually that giant of a company. Giant in profits, yes, but they're pretty focused. Just "throwing" money at a problem to fix it isn't something they've ever been keen on doing.
If Apple is unwilling to expand their workforce to properly support all the projects they are working on, then maybe it is time for them to start reducing the number of projects they are working on?

Apple has two choices that would improve the quality of their products overall, 1) Reduce the number of products in terms of hardware and or software or 2) hire more staff to develop the range of products they want to make and support.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2015-06-06, 15:49

Robo's numbers are wrong unless he is omitting retail. Apple employs 66K people in the US alone, 98K across the world.
  quote
Robo
Formerly Roboman, still
awesome
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Portland, OR
 
2015-06-06, 16:08

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
Robo's numbers are wrong unless he is omitting retail. Apple employs 66K people in the US alone, 98K across the world.
I am:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
But excluding retail staff, Apple only has 46,400 employees
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2015-06-06, 16:38

That doesn't make very much sense to me because you are omitting part of Apple's core support structure and visible branding. It's telling how Apple Stores and the employees who operate them are so huge, they amount to the majority of its workforce. When do we start selectively omitting sanitation/janitorial, security, IT, HR, etc. because they aren't creators?

Last edited by Eugene : 2015-06-06 at 16:51.
  quote
Dave
Ninja Editor
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bay Area, CA
 
2015-06-06, 18:41

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan View Post
Some of those features you're asking for in Swift would murder compile times, especially being able to infer that generics are bound by the existence of another function. The closest example I can think of in other languages would be typeclasses from Scala and Haskell—the implicit search resolution in Scala is known to seriously slow down the compiler.
Oh, yeah, I know... That's why I said that one wasn't a maturity issue. Incremental compilation would help (I think), but it's still non-trivial. Honestly, most of why I want it comes down to the lack of a "MathType" protocol in the standard library (which I forgot to add to my list).

Still, it'd be nice to not have to bother.

When I was a kid, people who did wrong were punished, restricted, and forbidden. Now, when someone does wrong, all of the rest of us are punished, restricted, and forbidden... and the one who did the wrong is counselled and "understood" and fed ice cream.
  quote
PB PM
Sneaky Punk
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Send a message via Skype™ to PB PM 
2015-06-06, 19:38

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eugene View Post
That doesn't make very much sense to me because you are omitting part of Apple's core support structure and visible branding. It's telling how Apple Stores and the employees who operate them are so huge, they amount to the majority of its workforce. When do we start selectively omitting sanitation/janitorial, security, IT, HR, etc. because they aren't creators?
I agree that retail staff are important to Apple's model, but I think Robo excluded them because they have nothing to do with the aspect of Apple that we were discussing, which is software and hardware development.
  quote
Eugene
careful with axes
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Hillsborough, CA
 
2015-06-06, 23:07

I don't think MS or Google really throw away money at projects either. Google in particular is very quick to shutter projects that aren't working out as envisioned. The one major example I think supports this argument is Microsoft buying Nokia's handset business. A desperation move after giving Apple and Google a 2-year headstart.

All the same, Apple is a retail juggernaut and they throw billions at that aspect of their brand.

Last edited by Eugene : 2015-06-07 at 00:15.
  quote
Brave Ulysses
BANNED
I am worthless beyond hope.
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
 
2015-06-07, 03:11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robo View Post
Because they're not actually that giant of a company. Giant in profits, yes, but they're pretty focused. Just "throwing" money at a problem to fix it isn't something they've ever been keen on doing.

Microsoft, for example, has 128,000 employees, and they'll get 17,000 more when they buy Salesforce. Oracle has 122,000. But excluding retail staff, Apple only has 46,400 employees, fewer than even the similarly lean Google. By that count, Apple is just four Yahoos, and yet they make an advanced desktop operating system, an advanced mobile operating system, the best phones and tablets in the world, a full line of personal computers, and they run the biggest music/movie/app storefront out there.

As an iWork user, I would like it if iWork were more of a priority…but not if it meant Apple started losing focus and just started to "throw $50 million" here and there. Because focus is one of the biggest reasons I think Apple has been so successful. The idea that they should just "throw $50 million" at things is a Google move, or a Microsoft move. See what sticks. Can half of it later. I wouldn't want Apple to become that sort of company.

Why did Apple make iWork in the first place? They never made iPhotoshop or iDesign, even though those are closer to their other "pro creative" apps. It was probably a strategic hedge against the possibility that Microsoft would stop making Office for Mac, which seemed far more important in the first half of the oughts. These days, it's an alternative to Google Docs. But $50 million wouldn't make iWork a huge business for Apple. $500 million wouldn't. It's just not something that's going to be a huge growth driver for them, so I can understand it not being a huge priority.

You are making an incredible amount of excuses for a company that has more cash on hand and growing than they know what to do with.

You are also ignoring the incredible staff growth that they have had over the last 5 years.

Your argument falls apart the minute that apple continues development on a product they don't put the appropriate resources towards in order to be great and successful. In my opinion they have far too many of those on the software side of things right now. Either cut them or give them the appropriate attention and resources. It's not like apple has displayed some kind of incredible discipline and focus here.
  quote
Posting Rules Navigation
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Page 1 of 7 [1] 2 3 4 5  Next Last

Post Reply

Forum Jump
Thread Tools
Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rumors about HULU warehouse13 General Discussion 13 2010-10-27 03:19
With all these rumors... T2dak668 Speculation and Rumors 3 2006-02-26 04:57
Rumors of a New Ad Campaign defaultmike Speculation and Rumors 30 2005-01-30 04:11
Rumors = Purchasing Now Is A Big Mistake? Mr. X Purchasing Advice 25 2005-01-03 22:58


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:29.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2024, AppleNova