Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple’s 2016 in review

chuqui.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 408 posts

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#161

Post by adamlett »

erichocean wrote: post #86

Apple is a company that is following the process they learned when Steve ran the show, without any clear understanding of why that process exists. As a result, they are unable to adapt to adapt that process to the external world while remaining true to the underlying principles. What you see is the predictable result: ossified thinking couple with a rigid adherence to "what makes them great". all criticism falls on d…

Apple is a company that is following the process they learned when Steve ran the show, without any clear understanding of why that process exists

Apple created Apple University years before Steve died, to understand clearly why they became so successful. They even hired a top professor from an Ivy League university to run it.

Whatever ails Apple these days is not caused by them not understanding how they became great. It's caused by the lessons of the past not being applicable to the reality of today.

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#162

Post by Lio »

caconym_ wrote: post #126
wineisfine wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The shift is the pure neglect towards the dev community. Something that most likely would not have happened so blatant and fast under Jobs. It is also completely not necessary that making great phones excludes a company from making at least decent upgrade cycles in their computer hardware. Why should one exclude the other?

How do you figure "pure neglect"? What are the features you're missing in the current Mac lineup? Which products from other manufacturers make a meaningful improvement on Apple's offering for "devs"?

Well a computer with enough GPU performance to work with VR would be a nice start. Apple don't currently have anything available other than hacking an eGPU set up together.

The "current" Mac Pro is over 3 (4?) years old now. Users can't upgrade it because of the proprietary GPU cards and Apple don't seem able to keep it relevant themselves.

It's difficult to have a professional relationship with a supplier where the best options for macOS are either a dodgy Hackintosh or a used 2012 Mac Pro with a new GPU.

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#163

Post by [deleted] »

panic wrote: post #5

How do they fix this? They need to do more talking — and even more listening — with their users. Engage with the influencers. Sit down and find out what their developers need that the current products don’t offer. Find out what is making their users unhappy. Asking people what they want will give you predictable results: complaints about any kind of change and positive feedback about shiny-looking features that demo…

[deleted]

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#164

Post by Apocryphon »

bangonkeyboard wrote: post #102
loosescrews wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Steve was a notoriously hard person to work with. Realistically, anyone who Steve was likely to name as his successor would be a follower, someone who went along with whatever Steve said and told him what he wanted to hear. What Apple needed was another person like Steve, but unfortunately, by letting Steve select that person, they ended up with someone completely unlike Steve.

> What Apple needed was another person like Steve... They had one. Tim fired him.

What makes Forstall so great? If he's truly worthy of that comparison, perhaps Apple should buy him along with Snap; it would be hilarious if Snapchat turned out to be the NeXTSTEP of this generation.

Wouldn't Fadell be just as good?

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#165

Post by IBM »

seanmcdirmid wrote: post #113
BinaryIdiot wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you think MBPs have problems, it's nothing compared to the issues I've had with Surface. Microsoft really needs to execute much better in addition to creating innovative experiences, firmware and driver meltdowns aren't fun. See, I've had the exact opposite experience with my Surface. Most of the people I know much prefer MacBooks but are exploring the possibility of switching to something in the surface line. I…

Has the Surface Book stabilized yet? I really want to buy one but I keep hearing about their issues. My S3 is probably an abandoned puppy now but works really well... when it is working at all. MBPs are still the best computer one can get for a rock solid Windows experience; even the surface book trackpad (supposedly precision?) seems to not really compare to what comes on a MBP, and touch doesn't often fill in the g…

This might answer your question. Written by a Mac user attempting this switch.

https://medium.com/@searls/warm-takes-on-microsofts-surface-...

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#166

Post by Lio »

mrmondo wrote: post #64
redler wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're in luck: Maximum-speed horses are indeed still available.

Indeed, if you have the money - you can buy racing speed horses and in many countries it's still legal to ride them on the road while abiding standard road rules and avoiding highways. (The term 'Enterprise Horse' came to mind and I had a giggle)

Enterprise Horse you say?

You want a Suffolk Punch boiy[sic][1]!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suffolk_Punch

[1] boiy, or some spelling there of, is how old fellas round these parts (Suffolk, England) like to refer to each other. :)

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#167

Post by hellofunk »

lowbloodsugar wrote: post #8

In 2009 I bought my first Apple product: an 8GB 13" MacBook Pro that cost $3000 ($1000 for the extra 4gb, like a dumbass). Quite soon after I got an iPhone 3GS. Now every computer in the house (family of four) is an Apple. Every phone is an Apple. Even AirPlay was an influencing factor in selecting a hi-fi receiver (HTR7065). Apple TVs sit next to actual TVs. Yesterday I replaced our fleet of TimeCapsules and Airport…

Forgive my ignorance but what is a Luma? I tried googling it but seems to be a common term.

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#168

Post by Strom »

jakelarkin wrote: post #37

the brand new Macbook Pro has last-generation Intel CPUs. I remember when Jobs announced one of the first Intel Macbook Pros with chips that no other manufacturer had even been given the chance to ship yet.

Kaby Lake quad-core CPUs aren't a thing yet, so Apple is still shipping the most advanced quad-core CPUs available even today.

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#169

Post by gutnor »

Fnoord wrote: post #116
Reedx wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. I imagine this is (at least in part) why Blackberry and Palm didn't invent the iPhone. Prior to Apple's entry, how many people were saying what they wanted in a smartphone was to remove all those buttons?

> Prior to Apple's entry, how many people were saying what they wanted in a smartphone was to remove all those buttons? Except 1) Apple weren't the first innovating in that regard. I don't know who was, I just do know Nokia was experimenting with Nokia 770 and Nokia N800 in 2005-2006. True, they weren't smartphones, but they were going in the right direction. Without many buttons. The Nokia N810 had a keyboard, and t…

He is correct. Blackberry was the leader of the smartphone and the keyboard was his best loved feature.

Sure there were other smartphone, Apple wasn't the first, etc But thinking that people would just go 180 was just extraordinary. Apparently people were ready to sacrifice quite a lot for the huge screen of the iPhone.

Re: Apple’s 2016 in review

#170

Post by pherq »

krackers wrote: post #87
quasse wrote: post #6

The day Apple makes a power cord that doesn't have a cable sheath with the consistency and durability of silly putty is the day I will recognize them as back on track. It's a small detail, but the power cord is the one part of the computer that users have no choice but to interact with every day and they've been ignoring the problems with them for the better part of half a decade. Every Mac at work either has detache…

I read somewhere that the problem is two-fold: the design department's hesitation to use any sort of strain relief and the softer type of coating that is supposedly more eco-friendly.

Eco-friendly becomes something of a joke if you need to buy a significant extra number of them...
Post reply on HN