Apple Readies Camera-Focused Pro iPhones, New iPads, Larger MacBook Pro (bloomberg.com) 79
An anonymous reader writes: Apple will launch three new iPhone models in an event next week. Two will be called "Pro" models and will replace the iPhone XS and XS Max. A third phone will replace the iPhone XR and will include dual cameras, Bloomberg reported Thursday. The Pro iPhones will feature triple rear cameras that will include a wide-angle lens, support for higher resolution photos, better low light performance, and better video recording capabilities. These Pro phones will also support reverse wireless charging similar to what Samsung offers with the Galaxy S10. This will allow the phones to charge the AirPods when used with their wireless charging case. Other details include a new, multi-angle, Face ID sensor which will allow the phone to sense your face while lying flat on a table, better waterproofing, and new shatter-resistance technology. Bloomberg doesn't specify which of the new models these features will come to. All the phones will reportedly include a faster A13 processor, as well as a new Matrix chip that could benefit computer vision and augmented reality performance. Outside of a new matte-colored finish, the Pro phones will look broadly similar to last year's models. 3D Touch has reportedly been dropped from all of this year's models and replaced with the Haptic Touch system that debuted with the iPhone XR last year.
Apple is also planning to release new 11-inch and 12.9-inch iPad Pros this year. Bloomberg says these will feature "upgraded cameras," although it doesn't mention whether they will have more than one camera on their rear. Faster processors are also expected, but their overall appearance will apparently remain the same. Bloomberg claims that Apple will discontinue its existing entry-level 9.7-inch iPad in favor of a new 10.2-inch model. Apple's 2019 MacBook Pros Bloomberg's report also corroborates previous rumors about Apple launching a new 16-inch MacBook Pro this year. The new laptop will reportedly be similar in size overall to the existing 15-inch MacBook Pro, but will be able to include a bigger screen because of a reduction in the size of its screen bezels.
Apple is also planning to release new 11-inch and 12.9-inch iPad Pros this year. Bloomberg says these will feature "upgraded cameras," although it doesn't mention whether they will have more than one camera on their rear. Faster processors are also expected, but their overall appearance will apparently remain the same. Bloomberg claims that Apple will discontinue its existing entry-level 9.7-inch iPad in favor of a new 10.2-inch model. Apple's 2019 MacBook Pros Bloomberg's report also corroborates previous rumors about Apple launching a new 16-inch MacBook Pro this year. The new laptop will reportedly be similar in size overall to the existing 15-inch MacBook Pro, but will be able to include a bigger screen because of a reduction in the size of its screen bezels.
It's still a pinhole camera (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:It's still a pinhole camera (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
High end phone cameras are actually some of the best available, at least for most people.
Better than point-and-click cameras. Better than the automatic modes on many DSLRs. For the average punter who doesn't know much about photography a decent phone camera is more likely to produce a good image, especially in difficult conditions like low light.
Unless it's an iPhone, they suck in low light.
Smartphone cameras vs "real" cameras (Score:4, Informative)
High end phone cameras are actually some of the best available, at least for most people.
No they are not great cameras. They are Good Enough cameras that do a good job on what most people care about most of the time.
Better than point-and-click cameras.
No they really aren't - they're just more convenient. The Sony RX100 (a modern point and shoot - yes they still exist) has better optics and better image quality than pretty much any smartphone on the market. It also has a 24-200 optical zoom lens, 24megapixel images, can shoot over 20fps, etc. But the reason nobody cares is because smartphones have Good Enough image quality for the most common use cases. But they definitely have their limits. They suck in low light, they can't handle fast moving action well, their ergonomics are terrible, they can't zoom meaningfully, their resolution is comparatively low, etc.
What smartphones do very well and "real" cameras suck at is in being very easy to use and sharing photos at a reasonable price point. Traditional cameras are absolutely TERRIBLE at doing this and they are very expensive. Seriously they suck at being easy to use and the camera makers seem utterly clueless about this point. Their menu interfaces look like something an intern did in his spare time (Sony's are especially bad) and the concept of sharing photos is utterly lost on them. They think image quality is the only thing that matters when that is clearly not true. They still think using SD cards is a sensible way to move files about for all use cases. There is literally no way for me to just have photos automatically upload via wifi like my smartphone does if I want that. And when I do connect to wifi it's a huge hassle. Smartphones take Good Enough photos, make it super easy to do simple edits and super easy to share - and that is all most people care about most of the time. I have some pretty fancy high end camera gear and I don't bring it out just just casual photography most of the time because it has WAY too much overhead and is too clumsy to use if I don't need top shelf image quality. My smartphone is Good Enough most of the time.
Better than the automatic modes on many DSLRs. For the average punter who doesn't know much about photography a decent phone camera is more likely to produce a good image, especially in difficult conditions like low light.
Demonstrably untrue. I could hand you my Sony A9 and even if you were a complete novice you would get better image quality than from a smartphone much of the time, especially in challenging conditions like low light. And stuff like wildlife or sports photography is nearly impossible with a smartphone if you care at all about the results. The eye autofocus on modern mirrorless cameras is nothing short of amazing and it can handle conditions a smartphone wouldn't dream of. Seriously, I leave it on auto a fair bit of the time and get very good results. The laws of physics are quite unforgiving when it comes to optics and it shows in a smartphones limitations. My big glass and large sensors just can do things that no smartphone can which is why serious photographers still bother with it in spite of it being a pain in the ass to use and bulky to carry. My full frame sensor can gather more light and detail than your smartphone. My lenses have FAR better optics. Yes there is a learning curve to get the most out of them but even amateurs can get really good results these days.
Unless it's an iPhone, they suck in low light.
I have an iPhone. It sucks in low light, at least compared to my "real" cameras. It's not even a comparison. A full frame camera with a 55mm1.4 lens will walk all over any smartphone on the market and that's not going to change because physics is a harsh mistress.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
The Sony RX100 scored 70 on DXOMARK. https://www.dxomark.com/sony-r... [dxomark.com]
Pixel 3 scored 101 and it's not even the highest rated smartphone: https://www.dxomark.com/google... [dxomark.com]
When you compare the images they shot with the Pixel 3 to the ones on the Sony RX100 web site that they offer as examples, the Pixel is clearly the better camera.
Re: (Score:1)
Benchmarks (Score:2)
The Sony RX100 scored 70 on DXOMARK.
You realize you are basically making the same (wrong) argument that wine lovers make when they compare scores from Wine Spectator, right? It's a benchmark and a flawed one at that. DXOMARK isn't some objective reality that tests all conditions and capabilities and circumstances. It tells you very little about real world performance. It's a bench test under limited conditions and arguably a bad one at that. Even android focused publications think it is worthless [androidcentral.com] for comparing cameras. If you think DXO
Re: (Score:2)
I'm aware of the limitations of the benchmark. My point was merely that phone cameras are good and competitive with dedicated sub-DSLR models.
Re: (Score:2)
I always take my little Canon IXUS with me on vacation because it can zoom and works better in low light than my iPhone 6. It usually shoots better pictures than the iPhone although in bright sunlight the difference is small. But there's not always bright sunlight outside. So I agree with sjbe: smartphones make (very) decent pictures but a real camera is always better, because of physics.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
If focus peaking is available, you can manual-focus as accurately as you want on a monitor. My "big camera" is an Olympus OM-D, but I find phonecams great for "social" shooting. Phones are so ubiquitous that people don't see them, while an SLR stands between you and the subject.
Sony Eye-AF (Score:2)
Are you actually finding the eye autofocus on the mirrorless accurate?
Yes. It's extremely accurate and works shockingly well. BUT it's only good for humans and for some types animals. Officially dogs and cats but I can confirm it does work with some other animals. On people it is astonishingly good - sometimes too good as it can grab focus on an eye of a bystander if what you are photographing doesn't have any eye to grab. I occasionally have to turn it off for that reason. Only a few models support the animal eye-AF and not all of them are equal. The Sony A9, A7R4, A6
Re: (Score:2)
Tip: my Canon IXUS can increase she magnification of the part of the object it focuses on, which is handy mainly for macro pictures. But last time when In wanted to photograph some small ants it kept focusing on larger stuff around them. I "fixed" that by first letting it focus on my finger, pressing the shutter button halfway to fix the focus and then moving toward the ants and focusing manually by moving the camera. That worked!
Re: (Score:2)
Selfies (Score:2)
"Real" cameras cant take selfies very well. And that seems to be the #1 thing that people care about.
They can do it very well but it's a big headache and they aren't really designed with that in mind. Vloggers do it all the time but you usually need some extra gear to make it practical and to do a good job. External monitors, gimbals, etc. Not really worth it for most random people taking generic selfies on an impulse. The phone does a good job (usually) and is much easier to use. That's my biggest beef with "real" cameras is that they've focused all their energy on image quality while almost complete
Re: (Score:2)
All that is true but it's still not "right".
In terms of raw lens/AF/sensor ... yes, just about any decent P&S blasts a phone cam. But!!!
A typical P&S is hampered by the manufacturer trying to sell features on their higher end cameras...as opposed to an iPhone (etc.) that doesn't have any higher line to cannibalize. Add this to the enormous amount of automatic processing that phones do by default the "average user" will get better pictures in many, if not most, situations using their cell phone ins
Point and Shoot cameras (Score:2)
A typical P&S is hampered by the manufacturer trying to sell features on their higher end cameras...as opposed to an iPhone (etc.) that doesn't have any higher line to cannibalize. Add this to the enormous amount of automatic processing that phones do by default the "average user" will get better pictures in many, if not most, situations using their cell phone instead of a mid-tier P&S.
This is exactly why the P&S market has largely disappeared. Camera makers didn't appreciate that they needed to make their cameras MUCH easier to use to compete with the Good Enough smartphone cameras which are FAR more convenient. P&S cameras needed to be able to do things that smartphones cannot AND be super easy and convenient. They sort of managed the first trick but utterly failed on the second one. And the big interchangeable lens cameras also suck at being easy/convenient to use and are
Re: (Score:2)
Actually my 2008 iPhone 4S is extremely good at low light.
I have shot in kitchen from like 4 yards away on a big cockroach (in Thailand). If you zoom in you can see the hairs on its legs and its stomach.
However I'm pretty sure your camera is even better.
My Lenovo Yoga Book form 2016 however just sucks ... takes ages to even get he camera sharp, photos of sunsets etc. have the wrong colour and no contrast.
No comparison (Score:2)
Actually my 2008 iPhone 4S is extremely good at low light.
No it isn't if you compare it to a proper full frame camera with fast glass. It only seems good because you don't have something to compare it to. Not saying your phone isn't impressive but it there are levels to this. You simply cannot get enough light to the sensor to compete with a full frame sensor (36mm x 24mm versus a about 4mm x 6mm on the phone). The physics of it are unambiguous. You'll have to crank the ISO through the roof on your phone to get a respectable image and have to have a much slow
Auto mode (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Who the Hell uses AUTO mode on a D-SLR?
Once in a while I might use Auto ISO mode, but that's about it.
About 80% of owners, above 90% if you're talking about tourists.
Jokes aside, the people using default auto on their cell phone (filters don't count) is probably 99%.
Re: (Score:2)
Who the Hell uses AUTO mode on a D-SLR?
Once in a while I might use Auto ISO mode, but that's about it.
I tend to live in my SLR's A mode: select an aperture suited to the current lens and surroundings, and I consistently get the best images.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course it will depend on how often you need to do that Serious Job.
You can still use that swiss army knife for serious work, because it is a job that you may need to do once a year, and you cannot justify the price of getting that perfect tool for the job.
I would love to get a power box planer for my workshop. However for $500, Ill stick with my $20 hand planer. because I don't do much planing of wood.
If you are a photographer then your phone may not be a good tool. If you take photos for insurance, or
Move the camera to the case (Score:2)
they need to increase the SIZE of the image sensor instead of stuffing more megapixels into each one of them, or, placing MORE tiny sensors.
Doing that requires the camera get thicker. Quite a bit thicker. You aren't going to put a full frame sensor into a smartphone. If you really need a substantially bigger sensor (most people don't) then get a "real" camera.
That said I've LONG suggested that they move the camera out of the phone itself and into the case or add a second (better) camera into the case. Then if someone wants to carry a thicker case to get a better lens (or bigger sensor) then they can do that. I could see myself doing that a
Re: (Score:2)
I totally agree with this, but this would require Apple to support the idea of the phone as a "platform" with modular expandability.
IMHO, this kinda-sorta was happening with the old 30 pin connector, but once they moved to lightning and its secure chip embedded in all cables they really managed to kill off any kind of modular platform support.
My wild ass guess is this is about preventing people from upgrading only the parts they care about (camera, storage, whatever) and keep buying new phones to get any in
Re: (Score:2)
Doing that requires the camera get thicker. Quite a bit thicker. You aren't going to put a full frame sensor into a smartphone. If you really need a substantially bigger sensor (most people don't) then get a "real" camera.
That said I've LONG suggested that they move the camera out of the phone itself and into the case or add a second (better) camera into the case. Then if someone wants to carry a thicker case to get a better lens (or bigger sensor) then they can do that. I could see myself doing that at times. Have the built in lens but then have the case with a better/bigger camera built into it and some way of working elegantly with the phone. Then if I don't need the bigger camera I don't have to always carry it. Win/win for everyone. Plus you could have room for a bigger battery, 3.5mm jack, or whatever other features you might prefer that aren't on the base smartphone.
You mean like this: https://www.amazon.com/Sony-Sm... [amazon.com]
I had (probably still have) one but it's pretty awful.
The physics of light puts limits on how much you can do with lenses and sensors and the physical size of your camera.
They have been increasing sensor size (Score:3)
they need to increase the SIZE of the image sensor
The thing is, Apple has been increasing the sensor size [halide.cam], and probably will again for this next phone the way the prerelease images are looking.
Instead of 3-4 or more tiny sensors, just use a LARGER sensor.
Then you lose the benefit of multiple types of physical lenses without a lot of bother on the part of the user. It's been really useful to have a telephoto specific lens in a phone.
Oh, but that terrible bump sticking out the back
There's already a bump, an
Re: (Score:2)
Or they could put a bigger sensor in with the same size bump as currently exists.
But make the damn phone thicker.
Re: (Score:3)
they could make the entire phone thicker, and fill that increased volume with a larger battery.
I'd buy it.
Re: (Score:2)
they could make the entire phone thicker, and fill that increased volume with a larger battery.
I'd buy it.
Heck, imagine if they went out on a limb and tried puting a dedicated jack for headphones? That'd sure be courageous.
Re: (Score:2)
they could make the entire phone thicker, and fill that increased volume with a larger battery.
I'd buy it.
Heck, imagine if they went out on a limb and tried puting a dedicated jack for headphones? That'd sure be courageous.
And include a 3.5mm to Bluetooth adapter for our wireless earphones.
Re: (Score:1)
I honestly just realized a few months ago that the bump isn't because they think you MIGHT put a case on the phone, it's so that you DO put a case on the phone. They're probably expecting the vast, overwhelming majority of people to put a case on the phone. Some will do it for aesthetics and some will do it to protect the phone, but they're building that bump in because otherwise the lens is recessed in the case, which is a) a waste of space and b) possibly deleterious to image quality because the case will
Re: (Score:2)
I honestly just realized a few months ago that the bump isn't because they think you MIGHT put a case on the phone, it's so that you DO put a case on the phone. They're probably expecting the vast, overwhelming majority of people to put a case on the phone.
If the phones were thicker allowing them to be tougher, then neither the bump nor the case would be necessary and the phone would get greater battery capacity and thermally limited performance as well.
Re: (Score:2)
But people would still want to put a case on the phone. Sometimes for aesthetics, sometimes because they don't believe that the phone is strong enough without a case. You want to build the minimum phone you can if you know people are going to slap a case on it, because otherwise you punish people for wanting to have a case.
Re: (Score:2)
... they need to increase the SIZE of the image sensor instead of stuffing more megapixels
into each one of them...
I mean, not that I don't agree with you, but iPhone has been 12MP since the 6s. Before that, was 8MP Between the 6 and the 4. They are one of the few that emphasizes increasing the quality of the image, not the pixel count.
Re: (Score:2)
As a photographer who uses an iPhone as one of his daily use cameras... Nah. The iPhone works quite well for what it is and for it's intended use.
You want a bigger sensor, get a dedicated camera.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes at any given time, a larger sensor will produce a superior image compared to a smaller sensor. But we're rapidly approaching the point (if we haven't already reached it) where the tiny image sensors on
Re: (Score:2)
If you can control the ISO setting on your phone, you could do fast low-light shooting by taking a series of successive images at ISO 5000 or more in burst mode. Each image would be noisy, but in the absence of subject motion you could stack your burst images in a Photoshop blend that uses Median blend mode to produce a noise-free image. I use this technique in my SLR.
Re: (Score:2)
I have always thought that a more useful camera design for phones in general would be axial, mounted in one side of the body, on the long side of the device, aimed out of the top, rather than out of the back. You would aim the top of the phone, rather than the back, at the subject, looking down at the screen rather than in the direction of the subject.
This design would, at the cost of making the phone slightly wider, allow bigger sensors and better optics. You could have a real optical zoom lens, initially
Release the Mac Pro.... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No...the carry case is for the Titanium Apple Card, so that it won't scratch up, or permanently discolor if you keep it in a leather wallet or it is sits in your blue jeans.
I had no idea (Score:2)
I would have never thought that I would be classed as an amateur phone user, but here we are.
Can someone give an example of a Professional phone user please?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:I had no idea (Score:4, Funny)
You pay Apple $1700 for a phone or you're an amateur. You don't want that, now do you?
Jack? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, like their pro laptop without the ability to change the hard drive? Or RAM? You're barking up the wrong tree, here...
Re: (Score:2)
Haha, like their pro laptop without the ability to change the hard drive? Or RAM? You're barking up the wrong tree, here...
What are you talking about? Every Mac is totally upgradeable! store.apple.com and they'll ship whatever you like. You even get battery replacement with your hard drive upgrade. (and every other component for that matter)
What? You didn't specify *not* changing other parts at the same time and it's "easier" this way.
Same old same old (Score:2)
Preannounce this nonevent? Why?
Re: (Score:2)
To get comments like yours. A page view is a page view - valid complaints are just as lucrative.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, formerly great Apple is reduced to taking what it can get these days.
Not next week (Score:2)
Even the article linked to says the event is next month, traditionally these phone release announcements are in September. Nothing else I could find searching claimed otherwise...
So disappointing .... (Score:2)
Still an Apple user here (thought I have a Windows gaming laptop too). But it really hit me, while on vacation this week, how far Apple has fallen from the "peak days" where I was so excited to drop everything to watch a Keynote speech and find out what cool new surprises they had with product updates.
I had time to kill in the local mall, and I walked right past the new, improved Apple store they put in there, with zero interest in even stepping foot inside it.
I mean, I'm sitting here typing on one of the
Re: (Score:2)
Well, in general, how often do you trade in/upgrad your phones?
Let's see, I went from iPhone 3G to 6s Plus...and that's where I am now, so my current phone is like what 4 years ago?
I'm looking to maybe upgrade in 2020...when they get 5G and I've been reading about some other jumps in new things and improvements there.
So, do you upgrade to new phones more than every 4-5 years?
I feel by the end of my 5 years, I've gotten m
Re: (Score:3)
This just means that the technology matured, so there will be only little incremental improvements, better camera, better CPU, face recognition, and so on.
Re: (Score:2)
But BOTH of these items feel like I overpaid for what I got, and I had to "settle" for them if I wanted to stick with the Mac eco-system I'm so invested in.
Going by the specs, you did overpay for the Apple products.
Compare the specifications for any comparable non-Apple laptop and you will come to the inevitable conclusion that Apple products are simply overpriced for what you get.
With Apple products the trend (compared to non-Apple gear) seems to be that you get less/slower memory, smaller/slower hard drives, and fewer ports. On top of that the build quality appears to have gone down drastically in the last 5 to 10 years.
It's not your imagination- all of Appl
Re: (Score:2)
Compare the specifications for any comparable non-Apple laptop and you will come to the inevitable conclusion that Apple products are simply overpriced for what you get.
It is actually pretty difficult to find another laptop that comes close, e.g. having a solid metal case, lasts 10 years or longer and has OS X preinstalled.
If you find one, send me a message.
Re: (Score:2)
lasts 10 years or longer
Hmmm, maybe I'm mistaken but I doubt there are hordes of people out there using 10-year old Mac laptops.
Re: (Score:2)
You are mistaken.
Perhaps you want to look at the second hand market? They easy still go for $800 and more.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps you want to look at the second hand market? They easy still go for $800 and more.
Why are they trying to get rid of them if they're so great?
Anyway, I went to eBay to see what all the fuss was about, and what I found doesn't seem to support your claim. I found loads of older Macbooks selling in bulk lots for an average of ~$120 per unit. There were a few priced much higher, and guess what? They weren't selling.
Most Macbooks from 2009 to 2013 were easily had for a couple of hundred bucks, again, with a few expensive outliers that didn't have any bids on them- none. Most seemed to be pric
Re: (Score:2)
Why are they trying to get rid of them if they're so great?
Because they bought a new one? Or have already three and want to sell the oldest?
Take your $800 and get something nicer, like a Lenovo Legion Y7000. It has a15.6" display, an Intel Quad Core i5-8300H 2.3GHz up to 4GHz, 16GB DDR4, 256GB PCIe, the GeForce GTX 1050Ti, USB-C, HDMI, Bluetooth, etc etc etc. ... ... no idea
Does it come preinstalled with Mac OS X? Nope
Can it even run it?
You miss the point ...
An equivalent Mac costs about $1000 ... so again:
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
First time I don't care (Score:2)
Last year my iPhone 5 was falling apart and I waited with anticipation (for the last 2 years believe it or not) to see what the great new phone would be... and WHEN it would come out (the screen was literally coming off).
So I upgraded to a brand new ....iPhone 8 last year. Deciding that the phone hasn't really changed all that much (although I'll admit the new portrait feature looks nice). But I took Cheap and Works over Latest and Greatest.
I love it. And really don't care what the new iPhone is. nor w
Re: (Score:1)
It's like buying a used car - works just as good but without the new car smell.
Take it to the car wash and have it detailed. Then put a few "New Car" sent packs in there and let it sit in the sun for a few hours. It will look and smell just like new.
*Disclaimer, that is assuming you didn't buy a junker 15 year old used car where someone taped a plastic bag over the rear window because the glass is gone.
Re: (Score:2)
I bought an iPhone 8 for #1 son when his second-hand iPhone 6 died and he's happy. Except for the lack of headphone jack... :-) Unfortunately it won't be able to get the next iOS :-(
I bought an iPhone XR for #1 daughter when her second-hand iPhone 6 died. She's happy. Have to say, the photos from the XR are really good.
I still have my hand-me-down iPhone 6
What about.... (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
batteries that last more than a few hours
These aren't sexy and they don't sell. I've never had someone ask me "hey what is the latest phone I can get with the longest battery life?". Nope, usually people just want confirmation on a purchase they know isn't worth it but their going to buy anyway, ie "Hey, the [insert phone here] has good battery life doesn't it? It will at least last me throughout the day." To which I say, "I have no idea, if it says that on the brochure, it's probably an exaggeration".
Now maybe if you had two identical phon
Taking bets (Score:2)
How about (Score:2)
Maybe Apple could make a camera with a phone in it.
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe Apple could make a camera with a phone in it.
Rimshot! [instantrimshot.com]
Still no desktop for the average user (Score:3)
Apple keeps showing why its market share is insignificant in the grand scheme of things, and how little it listens to consumers.
Put out a halfway decent desktop, not the $20,000 monstrosity recently introduced, and they will see a wholesale shift away from Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been screaming for this for 20 years. The iMac has killed desktop computing for Apple. They are stuck on this ancient and absolutely stupid idea of an all-in-one computer. I just need a desktop, I have like 4 monitors already, I don't need a 5000$ computer with the monitor attached to it. Just sell me a good quality, fast, modular desktop and I'll drop 2k on it today.
Re: (Score:2)
I've been screaming for this for 20 years. The iMac has killed desktop computing for Apple. They are stuck on this ancient and absolutely stupid idea of an all-in-one computer. I just need a desktop, I have like 4 monitors already, I don't need a 5000$ computer with the monitor attached to it. Just sell me a good quality, fast, modular desktop and I'll drop 2k on it today.
Mac mini [apple.com]?
Re: (Score:2)
They don't want to. That's not their raison d'etre.
The problem is assuming that that's their goal, or even that it SHOULD be their goal. It's not. They're not a luxury brand per se—I think the XDR monitor is a marked signal that they want to be a niche performance brand. They've found little niches where they can command top dollar, and in the case of these Mac Pros, they're probably even the best tool for the job.
Apple tried to play that game once, and they were beat, and nearly disappeared. Now they
Smaller please (Score:2)