Monday, 9 April 2018

Apple releases a red iPhone 8

Apple is doing it again. The company just unveiled a new version of the iPhone 8 and iPhone 8 Plus. It has a bright red enclosure and a black front. A portion of Apple’s proceeds will fund HIV/AIDS grants from the Global Fund.

Other than that, it’s an iPhone 8. You’ll get the exact same features and components as the ones in other iPhone 8 models. The iPhone 8 is also available in gold, silver and (“space”) gray. Alas, there’s still no rose gold option.

When Apple unveiled the red version of the iPhone 7, many people didn’t understand why Apple put white bezels at the front of the device. Red and black seem like a good match. That’s why some people even bought screen protectors with black borders to fix this.

This year, Apple is switching to black. It’s interesting to see that Apple waits around 6 months before launching red versions of its iPhones. It could be a way to foster sales in the middle of a product cycle.

The red iPhone 8 is going to start at $699 with 64GB just like regular iPhone 8 models. There will be 256GB versions too. Pre-orders start tomorrow and you’ll be able to buy it in Apple stores on Friday.

For iPhone X users, Apple is launching a dark red leather folio. Apple is also sharing some numbers about its partnership with (PRODUCT)RED. Since 2006, Apple has donated $160 million to the Global Fund through limited edition iPods, iPhones and accessories.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2GMrhQK

Friday, 6 April 2018

App Store shrank for first time in 2017 thanks to crackdowns on spam, clones and more

The App Store shrank for the first time in 2017, according to a new report from Appfigures. The report found the App Store lost 5 percent of its total apps over the course of the year, dropping from 2.2 million published iOS apps in the beginning of the year to 2.1 million by year-end.

Google Play, meanwhile, grew in 2017 — it was up 30 percent to more than 3.6 million apps.

Appfigures speculated the changes had to do with a combination of factors, including stricter enforcement of Apple’s review guidelines, along with a technical change requiring app developers to update their apps to the 64-bit architecture.

Apple had also promised back in 2016 that it would clean up its iOS App Store by removing outdated, abandoned apps, including those that no longer met current guidelines or didn’t function as intended. That cleanup may have well stretched into 2017, as app store intelligence firms only started seeing the effects in late 2016. For example, there was a spike in app removals back in October 2016.

Then in 2017, Apple went after clones and spam apps on the App Store. Combined with those apps that weren’t 64-bit compatible and those that hadn’t been downloaded in years, the removals reached into the hundreds of thousands over a 12-month period. Apple later went after template-based apps, too, before dialing back its policies over concerns it was impacting small businesses’ ability to compete on the App Store.

To see the App Store shrink, given these clear-outs, isn’t necessarily surprising. However, Appfigures found that removals of existing apps weren’t the only cause. iOS developers weren’t releasing as many apps as they had during the growth years, it also claims.

Android developers launched 17 percent more apps in 2017 to reach 1.5 million total new releases. But iOS developers launched just 755,00 new apps — a 29 percent drop and the largest drop since 2008.

But this doesn’t necessarily mean developers weren’t creating as many iOS apps — it could mean that Apple’s review team has gotten tougher about how many apps it allows in. Thanks to the spam and clone app crackdown, fewer apps of questionable quality are being approved these days.

In addition, some portion of the new Android app releases during the year were iOS apps being ported to the Google Play platform. More than twice as many apps came to Android in 2017 than Android apps coming to iOS, the report said.

The full report also developed into the numbers of cross-platform apps (450,000 are on both stores), the most popular non-native tools (Cordova and Unity), the rise in native development, the countries shipping the most apps (U.S. followed by China) and the Play Store’s growth.

It can be viewed here.

 



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2GXMpH8

Apple voices opposition to Clean Power Plan repeal

The Clean Power Plan is shaping up to be the latest Obama-era legislation on the Trump administration chopping block. In fact, Environmental Protection Agency head Scott Pruitt has been quite open in his intentions to kill the plan focused on cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

Apple is among the first — but likely not the last — of companies to voice opposition to the matter. This week, the company filed a statement with the EPA noting concerns over the potential fallout from rolling back the policy. The note cites both environmental and, likely more importantly in the eyes of the administration, financial consequences.

As the company notes, it’s already made major investments in clean energy, pushing toward 100-percent renewable energy in the US and making similar promises for its work abroad. It’s easy to see how a reversal of a key climate focused initiative would have adverse effects on Apple’s bottom line, in addition to all of the clear negative impact on the, you know, environment.

“As a large consumer of electricity who has successfully pursued a clean energy strategy, we believe the Clean Power Plan codifies and enhances positive long-term trends in the electricity market,” Apple Global Energy Lead Robert Redlinger writes in the statement. “The Clean Power Plan provides a national framework enabling states to ensure that renewable generation resources and more traditional forms of electricity generation are used in an integrated manner to support a reliable and resilient electricity grid.”

Pruitt, meanwhile, has suggested that the Clean Power Plan was an overreach on the part of his predecessors, while Trump has prioritized coal, oil and gas in his own rhetoric. Apple’s statement will be reviewed by the EPA during its approval process.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2EpKgyD

Thursday, 5 April 2018

Apple’s 2019 Mac Pro will be shaped by workflows

A year ago, I visited the Apple campus in Cupertino to figure out where the hell the new Mac Pro was. I joined a round table discussion with Apple SVPs and a handful of reporters to get the skinny on what was taking so long.

The answer, it turns out, was that Apple had decided to start completely over with the Mac Pro, introduce completely new pro products like the iMac Pro and refresh the entire MacBook Pro lineup. The reasoning given at the time on the Mac Pro was basically that Apple had painted itself into an architecture corner by being aggressively original on the design of the bullet/turbine/trash-can shaped casing and internal components of the current Mac Pro. There was nothing to be done but to start over.

The secondary objective to that visit was to reassure pro customers that had not had news of updates in some time that Apple was listening, was working to deliver product for them and, overall, still cared.

Now, a year later, I was invited back to Apple to talk to the people most responsible for shepherding the renewed pro product strategy. John Ternus, Vice President of Hardware Engineering, Tom Boger, Senior Director of Mac Hardware Product Marketing, Jud Coplan, Director of Video Apps Product Marketing and Xander Soren, Director of Music Apps Product Marketing.

The interviews and demos took place over the next several hours, highlighting the way that Apple is approaching upgradability, development of its pro apps and most interestingly, how it has changed its process to more fully grok how professionals actually use its products.

After an initial recap in what they’d done over the past year, including MacBooks and the iMac Pro, I was given the day’s first piece of news: the long-awaited Mac Pro update will not arrive before 2019.

When we got the news that it wouldn’t arrive in 2017, there was some implicit messaging that 2018 was not guaranteed either (we were told ‘not this year’, but not ‘definitely next year). This time around, Boger is succinct: the promised Mac Pro will be a 2019 product.

We want to be transparent and communicate openly with our pro community so we want them to know that the Mac Pro is a 2019 product. It’s not something for this year.” In addition to transparency for pro customers on an individual basis, there’s also a larger fiscal reasoning behind it.

We know that there’s a lot of customers today that are making purchase decisions on the iMac Pro and whether or not they should wait for the Mac Pro,” says Boger.

This is why Apple wants to be as explicit as possible now that if institutional buyers or other large customers are waiting to spend budget on, say iMac Pros or other machines, they should pull the trigger without worry that a Mac Pro might appear late in the purchasing year.

But there have been some other very interesting things going on at Apple since our last Mac Pro update, and they’re shaping the future of all of its pro products.

Pro Workflow Team

In that discussion a year ago, Apple SVP Phil Schiller acknowledged that pro customers including developers were hungry for evidence that Apple was paying attention to their needs.

“We recognize that they want to hear more from us. And so we want to communicate better with them. We want them to understand the importance they have for us, we want them to understand that we’re investing in new Macs — not only new MacBook Pros and iMacs but Mac Pros for them, we want them to know we are going to work on a display for a modular system,” Schiller said.

Now, it’s a year later and Apple has created a team inside the building that houses its pro products group. It’s called the Pro Workflow Team and they haven’t talked about it publicly before today. The group is under John Ternus and works closely with the engineering organization. The bays that I’m taken to later to chat about Final Cut Pro, for instance, are a few doors away from the engineers tasked with making it run great on Apple hardware.

“We said in the meeting last year that the pro community isn’t one thing,” says Ternus. “It’s very diverse. There’s many different types of pros and obviously they go really deep into the hardware and software and are pushing everything to its limit. So one thing you have to do is we need to be engaging with the customers to really understand their needs. Because we want to provide complete pro solutions not just deliver big hardware which we’re doing and we did it with iMac Pro. But look at everything holistically.”

To do that, Ternus says, they want their architects sitting with real customers to understand their actual flow and to see what they’re doing in real time. The challenge with that, unfortunately, is that though customers are typically very responsive when Apple comes calling, it’s not always easy to get what they want because they may be using proprietary content. John Powell, for instance, is a long-time logic user and he’s doing the new Star Wars Han Solo standalone flick. As you can imagine, taking those unreleased and highly secret compositions to Apple to play with them on their machines can be a sticking point.

So Apple decided to go a step further and just begin hiring these creatives directly into Apple. Some of them on a contract basis but many full time as well. These are award-winning artists and technicians that are brought in to shoot real projects (I saw a bunch of them walking by in Apple park toting kit for an outdoor shoot on premises while walking). They then put the hardware and software through their paces and point out sticking points that could cause frustration and friction among pro users.

Ternus says that they wanted to start focused and then grow the team and disciplines over time.

“We’ve been focusing on visual effects and video editing and 3D animation and music production as well,” says Ternus. “And we’ve brought in some pretty incredible talent, really masters of their craft. And so they’re now sitting and building out workflows internally with real content and really looking for what are the bottlenecks. What are the pain points. How can we improve things. And then we take this information where we find it and we go into our architecture team and our performance architects and really drill down and figure out where is the bottleneck. Is it the OS is it in the drivers is it in the application is it in the silicon and then run it to ground to get it fixed.”

This information has allowed Apple to make machines like the iMac Pro more performant, but also to enable creative users to stay in their flow and keep them moving forward. From personal experience, I can say that the times I felt most frustrated as a professional photographer using a Mac is when I had to wait. When you’re taken out of your rhythm, it creates layers of frustration that can add up to you wanting to flee the platform.

“These aren’t necessarily always fundamental performance issues,” notes Ternus. “These aren’t things that you’d find in a benchmark or an automated test flow. You know we have examples where we find something like it’s…a window that a 3D animator uses frequently to make some fine fine tweaks. The windows are not super graphically intensive in terms of processing and stewing but we have found an issue where that window was taking like 6 to 10 seconds to open and they’re doing that 100 times a day, right? Like ‘I can’t work on a machine like this, It’s too slow’ so we dig in and we figure out what it was.

“In that case we found something in the graphics driver was not right, and once you know where to look and you fix it, it completely changes the kind of live-on-ability for that system — the productivity for that user completely changed.”

This kind of workflow analysis has enabled Apple to find and fix problems that won’t be solved by throwing more hardware at them. An in-depth analysis of how workflow is affected by the whole stack of hardware and software has, Ternus says, helped them to really understand the pain points. He stresses that it’s not just Apple’s applications that they’re testing and working to help make better. Third-party relationships on this are very important to them and the workflow team is helping to fix their problems faster too.

“We’ve gone from just you know engineering Macs and software to actually engineering a workflow and really understanding from soup to nuts, every single stage of the process, where those bottlenecks are, where we can optimize that,” says Boger. “And to JT’s point because we build the hardware the firmware the operating system the software and have these close relationships with third parties we can attack the entire stack and we can really ferret out where we are we can optimize for performance.”

But the Pro Workflow Team isn’t just there to fix current bugs. It’s also empowered to make improvements on future products, like the Mac Pro.

Future Plans

“What’s really powerful through this exercise is that it’s helping us to kind of map out where we’re headed,” says Ternus. “Because we’re really like digging in these workflows and figuring out where how are the ways we can improve these in the future and then that can help shape our future plans as well.”

I ask, specifically, whether this means that the Mac Pro will be shaped by this team’s work.

“So it’s definitely influencing the architecture of where we’re going, what we’re planning for,” says Tom Boger. “We’re getting a much much much deeper understanding of our pro customers and their workflows and really understanding not only where the state of the art is today but where the state of the art is going and all of that is really informing the work that we’re doing on the Mac Pro and we’re working really really hard on it.”

I’m also curious about whether the process over the last year has changed the timeline on the Mac Pro. To be blunt: is this the original story arc of the Mac Pro’s development, or are we looking at a roadmap that has a fundamentally different timeline than 1 year ago.

“I don’t think that the timeline has fundamentally changed,” says Ternus. “I think this is very much a situation where we want to measure twice and cut once and we want to make sure we’re building a really well thought out platform for what our pro customers are doing today. But also with an eye towards what they’re going to be doing in future as well. And so to do that right that’s that’s what we’re focusing on.”

While there are no further details on the exact shape that the Mac Pro will take, Boger says that they are still very much in the modular mindset.

“As we said a year ago working on modular was inherently a modular system and in looking at our customers and their workflows obviously that’s a real need for our customers and that’s the direction we’re going,” says Boger.

“Well it’s a need for some of them,” adds Ternus. “I want to be clear that the the work that we’re doing as a part of the workflow team is across everything. It’s super relevant for MacBook Pros, it’s super relevant for iMacs and iMac Pros and in the end I think it helps us in dialogue with customers to figure out what are the right systems for you. There is absolutely a need in certain places for modularity. But it’s also really clear that the iMac form factor or the MacBook Pros can be exceptionally good tools.”

What shape that modularity takes is another matter entirely, of course. I know some people have been pining for the days of internal expansion card configurations with standardized hardware – and maybe that is the way that this will go. But on Tuesday I also got a tour of the editing suites where Mac hardware and software is pushed to the limits, including extensive use of eGPU support, and a different vision emerges.

First, we visit the room where they record new instruments for Logic and Garage Band and then on to an edit bay used by the Pro Workflow Team to put Final Cut Pro through its paces.

Throughout, the idea of modularity was omnipresent. An iMac Pro with two iPad Pros hooked up to it allows for direct control, shortcuts and live access to the Logic manual all while you’re mixing a song on the main device. An eGPU with a MacBook Pro running a live edit of an 8K stream with color grading and effects applied.

External GPUs plugged into MacBook Pros, in my opinion, is going to be an enormous shift in the way that people think about portables. I got a live demo of a graphics stress test running on a MacBook Pro natively, then on one and then two external GPUs. The switching is nearly seamless, depending on the age of the app, and some modern rendering software can use all three in concert. It’s one of those things that works exactly the way you think it would and it leans heavily on Thunderbolt 3.

Whether that informs the shape of individual machines in Apple’s future lineup I don’t know, but it’s certainly the way Apple is looking at the pro ecosystem. It’s not just MacBook Pro, iMac Pro, Mac Pro – it’s the enabling force of eGPUs, it’s iPad Pros as input devices, purpose built extensions and portable workstations. And it’s even iPhone, as Logic and Final Cut Pro are both completely compatible with Garage Band and iMovie. You can start a project and continue it on iOS while traveling then put it right back into your pro machine when you’re back and continue riffing. It’s Apple leaning into its advantages of having control of this stuff to the bolts.

Prommunication

With pros, Apple has three options. It can maintain the same amount of locked down, tight-lipped comes it applies to its consumer products, where it still feels the reveal is everything.

It can utilize a ‘whisper campaign’ of on background commentary, quiet liaisons with the developer and professional communities that filter outward in order to quell rumors or allay fears.

Or, it can choose to engage in a meaningful way with pros on their actual workflows and ingest their pain points as actionable intel that helps them head off issues before they become headlines or Medium posts or viral Twitter threads. That’s what the Pro Workflow Team is all about.

One allegory I see here is when companies hire people to help fix structural problems or improve diversity but then do not empower them to effect change.

In this case it’s heartening to see that there is a straight line between the pros that Apple has hired, the conversations it’s having with contractors who come in to contribute and proactive action taken on products. The work of the Pro Workflow Team is directly affecting the development of the new Mac Pro. And the iMac Pro, and Final Cut Pro and macOS. They sit doors away from the engineering team running through real footage and mixing real tracks to figure out what’s working and what’s not. And they use a mixture of software, not just Apple’s first party stuff.

This also includes liaising with external mainstays like Adobe to figure out what their major pains are and figuring out ways to fix them.

This isn’t the perceived culture of covert insularity in which Apple waits for the complaints to hit critical mass or someone to take it up as a cause before it’s addressed. Frankly, a developer shouldn’t have to complain to someone like me to get a company like Apple to change its mind. They should have their own representatives.

And Apple can still have its reveal. All we currently know about the Mac Pro is that it’s modular and that it’s being shaped by the feedback from those pros in house and external conversations with developers and professional users.

My recent conversations with Apple (including the ones cited in this piece, but not those alone) lead me to believe that they knows they kept going on a path with pro customers that they felt was working long after it had in fact begun to erode. I’m not exactly sure what the timeline was, but given the fact that the Mac Pro won’t arrive until 2019, I’m guessing just before the round table discussion a year ago.

As a side note, by the way, I wouldn’t expect to see any more info about Mac Pro at WWDC in June. Maybe Apple will surprise on that front, but I think for anything further about Mac Pro we’re going to have to wait for next year.

In an interesting confluence of themes, I also believe that they had the same revelation recently in the education market. Apple’s second go round at capturing a big chunk of that market ran aground not on the quality of its hardware or onboard software, but on the tools that were used to deploy and manage that hardware in under-resourced school districts that had already begun to commit to web systems. Apple is starting anew there, as it has begun doing in the pro market over the last year with refreshed hardware and a new approach to addressing performance and operation issues. An interesting note too that when it wanted to figure out how to turn edu around what did it do? Hired teachers and educators to tell them how it works in the real world.

As depressing as it has been to see professionals believe that Apple was getting ready to give them up, I find this an interesting and exciting thing to watch. It is very, very hard for a company like Apple whose reputation is built on myth building, to admit that it was mistaken. And it’s even harder to then change course with billions of dollars worth of revenue at stake.

I’m sure it gives a bunch of people at Apple heartburn, but it’s fascinating for me because I don’t have to pull it off.



from iPhone – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2GzTf65

Apple’s 2019 Mac Pro will be shaped by workflows

A year ago, I visited the Apple campus in Cupertino to figure out where the hell the new Mac Pro was. I joined a round table discussion with Apple SVPs and a handful of reporters to get the skinny on what was taking so long.

The answer, it turns out, was that Apple had decided to start completely over with the Mac Pro, introduce completely new pro products like the iMac Pro and refresh the entire MacBook Pro lineup. The reasoning given at the time on the Mac Pro was basically that Apple had painted itself into an architecture corner by being aggressively original on the design of the bullet/turbine/trash-can shaped casing and internal components of the current Mac Pro. There was nothing to be done but to start over.

The secondary objective to that visit was to reassure pro customers that had not had news of updates in some time that Apple was listening, was working to deliver product for them and, overall, still cared.

Now, a year later, I was invited back to Apple to talk to the people most responsible for shepherding the renewed pro product strategy. John Ternus, Vice President of Hardware Engineering, Tom Boger, Senior Director of Mac Hardware Product Marketing, Jud Coplan, Director of Video Apps Product Marketing and Xander Soren, Director of Music Apps Product Marketing.

The interviews and demos took place over the next several hours, highlighting the way that Apple is approaching upgradability, development of its pro apps and most interestingly, how it has changed its process to more fully grok how professionals actually use its products.

After an initial recap in what they’d done over the past year, including MacBooks and the iMac Pro, I was given the day’s first piece of news: the long-awaited Mac Pro update will not arrive before 2019.

When we got the news that it wouldn’t arrive in 2017, there was some implicit messaging that 2018 was not guaranteed either (we were told ‘not this year’, but not ‘definitely next year). This time around, Bogar is succinct: the promised Mac Pro will be a 2019 product.

We want to be transparent and communicate openly with our pro community so we want them to know that the Mac Pro is a 2019 product. It’s not something for this year.” In addition to transparency for pro customers on an individual basis, there’s also a larger fiscal reasoning behind it.

We know that there’s a lot of customers today that are making purchase decisions on the iMac Pro and whether or not they should wait for the Mac Pro,” says Bogar.

This is why Apple wants to be as explicit as possible now that if institutional buyers or other large customers are waiting to spend budget on, say iMac Pros or other machines, they should pull the trigger without worry that a Mac Pro might appear late in the purchasing year.

But there have been some other very interesting things going on at Apple since our last Mac Pro update, and they’re shaping the future of all of its pro products.

Pro Workflow Team

In that discussion a year ago, Apple SVP Phil Schiller acknowledged that pro customers including developers were hungry for evidence that Apple was paying attention to their needs.

“We recognize that they want to hear more from us. And so we want to communicate better with them. We want them to understand the importance they have for us, we want them to understand that we’re investing in new Macs — not only new MacBook Pros and iMacs but Mac Pros for them, we want them to know we are going to work on a display for a modular system,” Schiller said.

Now, it’s a year later and Apple has created a team inside the building that houses its pro products group. It’s called the Pro Workflow Team and they haven’t talked about it publicly before today. The group is under John Ternus and works closely with the engineering organization. The bays that I’m taken to later to chat about Final Cut Pro, for instance, are a few doors away from the engineers tasked with making it run great on Apple hardware.

“We said in the meeting last year that the pro community isn’t one thing,” says Ternus. “It’s very diverse. There’s many different types of pros and obviously they go really deep into the hardware and software and are pushing everything to its limit. So one thing you have to do is we need to be engaging with the customers to really understand their needs. Because we want to provide complete pro solutions not just deliver big hardware which we’re doing and we did it with iMac Pro. But look at everything holistically.”

To do that, Ternus says, they want their architects sitting with real customers to understand their actual flow and to see what they’re doing in real time. The challenge with that, unfortunately, is that though customers are typically very responsive when Apple comes calling, it’s not always easy to get what they want because they may be using proprietary content. John Powell, for instance, is a long-time logic user and he’s doing the new Star Wars Han Solo standalone flick. As you can imagine, taking those unreleased and highly secret compositions to Apple to play with them on their machines can be a sticking point.

So Apple decided to go a step further and just begin hiring these creatives directly into Apple. Some of them on a contract basis but many full time as well. These are award-winning artists and technicians that are brought in to shoot real projects (I saw a bunch of them walking by in Apple park toting kit for an outdoor shoot on premises while walking). They then put the hardware and software through their paces and point out sticking points that could cause frustration and friction among pro users.

Ternus says that they wanted to start focused and then grow the team and disciplines over time.

“We’ve been focusing on visual effects and video editing and 3D animation and music production as well,” says Ternus. “And we’ve brought in some pretty incredible talent, really masters of their craft. And so they’re now sitting and building out workflows internally with real content and really looking for what are the bottlenecks. What are the pain points. How can we improve things. And then we take this information where we find it and we go into our architecture team and our performance architects and really drill down and figure out where is the bottleneck. Is it the OS is it in the drivers is it in the application is it in the silicon and then run it to ground to get it fixed.”

This information has allowed Apple to make machines like the iMac Pro more performant, but also to enable creative users to stay in their flow and keep them moving forward. From personal experience, I can say that the times I felt most frustrated as a professional photographer using a Mac is when I had to wait. When you’re taken out of your rhythm, it creates layers of frustration that can add up to you wanting to flee the platform.

“These aren’t necessarily always fundamental performance issues,” notes Ternus. “These aren’t things that you’d find in a benchmark or an automated test flow. You know we have examples where we find something like it’s…a window that a 3D animator uses frequently to make some fine fine tweaks. The windows are not super graphically intensive in terms of processing and stewing but we have found an issue where that window was taking like 6 to 10 seconds to open and they’re doing that 100 times a day, right? Like ‘I can’t work on a machine like this, It’s too slow’ so we dig in and we figure out what it was.

“In that case we found something in the graphics driver was not right, and once you know where to look and you fix it, it completely changes the kind of live-on-ability for that system — the productivity for that user completely changed.”

This kind of workflow analysis has enabled Apple to find and fix problems that won’t be solved by throwing more hardware at them. An in-depth analysis of how workflow is affected by the whole stack of hardware and software has, Ternus says, helped them to really understand the pain points. He stresses that it’s not just Apple’s applications that they’re testing and working to help make better. Third-party relationships on this are very important to them and the workflow team is helping to fix their problems faster too.

“We’ve gone from just you know engineering Macs and software to actually engineering a workflow and really understanding from soup to nuts, every single stage of the process, where those bottlenecks are, where we can optimize that,” says Bogar. “And to JT’s point because we build the hardware the firmware the operating system the software and have these close relationships with third parties we can attack the entire stack and we can really ferret out where we are we can optimize for performance.”

But the Pro Workflow Team isn’t just there to fix current bugs. It’s also empowered to make improvements on future products, like the Mac Pro.

Future Plans

“What’s really powerful through this exercise is that it’s helping us to kind of map out where we’re headed,” says Ternus. “Because we’re really like digging in these workflows and figuring out where how are the ways we can improve these in the future and then that can help shape our future plans as well.”

I ask, specifically, whether this means that the Mac Pro will be shaped by this team’s work.

“So it’s definitely influencing the architecture of where we’re going, what we’re planning for,” says Tom Bogar. “We’re getting a much much much deeper understanding of our pro customers and their workflows and really understanding not only where the state of the art is today but where the state of the art is going and all of that is really informing the work that we’re doing on the Mac Pro and we’re working really really hard on it.”

I’m also curious about whether the process over the last year has changed the timeline on the Mac Pro. To be blunt: is this the original story arc of the Mac Pro’s development, or are we looking at a roadmap that has a fundamentally different timeline than 1 year ago.

“I don’t think that the timeline has fundamentally changed,” says Ternus. “I think this is very much a situation where we want to measure twice and cut once and we want to make sure we’re building a really well thought out platform for what our pro customers are doing today.But also with an eye towards what they’re going to be doing in future as well. And so to do that right that’s that’s what we’re focusing on.”

While there are no further details on the exact shape that the Mac Pro will take, Bogar says that they are still very much in the modular mindset.

“As we said a year ago working on modular was inherently a modular system and in looking at our customers and their workflows obviously that’s a real need for our customers and that’s the direction we’re going,” says Bogar.

“Well it’s a need for some of them,” adds Ternus. “I want to be clear that the the work that we’re doing as a part of the workflow team is across everything. It’s super relevant for MacBook Pros, it’s super relevant for iMacs and iMac Pros and in the end I think it helps us in dialogue with customers to figure out what are the right systems for you. There is absolutely a need in certain places for modularity. But it’s also really clear that the iMac form factor or the MacBook Pros can be exceptionally good tools.”

What shape that modularity takes is another matter entirely, of course. I know some people have been pining for the days of internal expansion card configurations with standardized hardware – and maybe that is the way that this will go. But on Tuesday I also got a tour of the editing suites where Mac hardware and software is pushed to the limits, including extensive use of eGPU support, and a different vision emerges.

First, we visit the room where they record new instruments for Logic and Garage Band and then on to an edit bay used by the Pro Workflow Team to put Final Cut Pro through its paces.

Throughout, the idea of modularity was omnipresent. An iMac Pro with two iPad Pros hooked up to it allows for direct control, shortcuts and live access to the Logic manual all while you’re mixing a song on the main device. An eGPU with a MacBook Pro running a live edit of an 8K stream with color grading and effects applied.

External GPUs plugged into MacBook Pros, in my opinion, is going to be an enormous shift in the way that people think about portables. I got a live demo of a graphics stress test running on a MacBook Pro natively, then on one and then two external GPUs. The switching is nearly seamless, depending on the age of the app, and some modern rendering software can use all three in concert. It’s one of those things that works exactly the way you think it would and it leans heavily on Thunderbolt 3.

Whether that informs the shape of individual machines in Apple’s future lineup I don’t know, but it’s certainly the way Apple is looking at the pro ecosystem. It’s not just MacBook Pro, iMac Pro, Mac Pro – it’s the enabling force of eGPUs, it’s iPad Pros as input devices, purpose built extensions and portable workstations. And it’s even iPhone, as Logic and Final Cut Pro are both completely compatible with Garage Band and iMovie. You can start a project and continue it on iOS while traveling then put it right back into your pro machine when you’re back and continue riffing. It’s Apple leaning into its advantages of having control of this stuff to the bolts.

Prommunication

With pros, Apple has three options. It can maintain the same amount of locked down, tight-lipped comes it applies to its consumer products, where it still feels the reveal is everything.

It can utilize a ‘whisper campaign’ of on background commentary, quiet liaisons with the developer and professional communities that filter outward in order to quell rumors or allay fears.

Or, it can choose to engage in a meaningful way with pros on their actual workflows and ingest their pain points as actionable intel that helps them head off issues before they become headlines or Medium posts or viral Twitter threads. That’s what the Pro Workflow Team is all about.

One allegory I see here is when companies hire people to help fix structural problems or improve diversity but then do not empower them to effect change.

In this case it’s heartening to see that there is a straight line between the pros that Apple has hired, the conversations it’s having with contractors who come in to contribute and proactive action taken on products. The work of the Pro Workflow Team is directly affecting the development of the new Mac Pro. And the iMac Pro, and Final Cut Pro and macOS. They sit doors away from the engineering team running through real footage and mixing real tracks to figure out what’s working and what’s not. And they use a mixture of software, not just Apple’s first party stuff.

This also includes liaising with external mainstays like Adobe to figure out what their major pains are and figuring out ways to fix them.

This isn’t the perceived culture of covert insularity in which Apple waits for the complaints to hit critical mass or someone to take it up as a cause before it’s addressed. Frankly, a developer shouldn’t have to complain to someone like me to get a company like Apple to change its mind. They should have their own representatives.

And Apple can still have its reveal. All we currently know about the Mac Pro is that it’s modular and that it’s being shaped by the feedback from those pros in house and external conversations with developers and professional users.

My recent conversations with Apple (including the ones cited in this piece, but not those alone) lead me to believe that they knows they kept going on a path with pro customers that they felt was working long after it had in fact begun to erode. I’m not exactly sure what the timeline was, but given the fact that the Mac Pro won’t arrive until 2019, I’m guessing just before the round table discussion a year ago.

As a side note, by the way, I wouldn’t expect to see any more info about Mac Pro at WWDC in June. Maybe Apple will surprise on that front, but I think for anything further about Mac Pro we’re going to have to wait for next year.

In an interesting confluence of themes, I also believe that they had the same revelation recently in the education market. Apple’s second go round at capturing a big chunk of that market ran aground not on the quality of its hardware or onboard software, but on the tools that were used to deploy and manage that hardware in under-resourced school districts that had already begun to commit to web systems. Apple is starting anew there, as it has begun doing in the pro market over the last year with refreshed hardware and a new approach to addressing performance and operation issues. An interesting note too that when it wanted to figure out how to turn edu around what did it do? Hired teachers and educators to tell them how it works in the real world.

As depressing as it has been to see professionals believe that Apple was getting ready to give them up, I find this an interesting and exciting thing to watch. It is very, very hard for a company like Apple whose reputation is built on myth building, to admit that it was mistaken. And it’s even harder to then change course with billions of dollars worth of revenue at stake.

I’m sure it gives a bunch of people at Apple heartburn, but it’s fascinating for me because I don’t have to pull it off.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2GzTf65

Wednesday, 4 April 2018

Our digital future will be shaped by increasingly mobile technologies coming from China

Since the dawn of the internet, the titans of this industry have fought to win the “starting point” — the place that users start their online experiences. In other words, the place where they begin “browsing.” The advent of the dial-up era had America Online mailing a CD to every home in America, which passed the baton to Yahoo’s categorical listings, which was swallowed by Google’s indexing of the world’s information — winning the “starting point” was everything.

As the mobile revolution continues to explode across the world – the battle for the starting point has intensified.  For a period of time, people believed it would be the hardware, then it became clear that the software mattered most.  Then conversation shifted to a debate between operating systems (Android or iOS) and moved on to social properties and messaging apps where people were spending most of their time. Today – my belief is we’re hovering somewhere in between apps and operating systems.  That being said, the interface layer will always be evolving.

The starting point, just like a rocket’s launchpad, is only important because of what comes after.  The battle to win that coveted position, although often disguised as many other things, is really a battle to become the starting point of commerce.  

Google’s philosophy includes a commitment to get users “off their page” as quickly as possible…to get that user to form a habit and come back to their starting point.  The real (yet somewhat veiled) goal, in my opinion, is to get users to search and find the things they want to buy.

Of course, Google “does no evil” while aggregating the world’s information, but they pay their bills by sending purchases to Priceline, Expedia, Amazon, and the rest of the digital economy.  

Facebook, on the other hand, has become a starting point through it’s monopolization of users’ time, attention, and data.  Through this effort – it’s developed an advertising business that shatters records quarter after quarter.

Google and Facebook, this famed duopoly, represent 89% of new advertising spending in 2017.  Their dominance is unrivaled…for now.

Change is urgently being demanded by market forces – shifts in consumer habits, intolerable rising costs to advertisers, and through a nearly universal dissatisfaction with the advertising models that have dominated (plagued) the US digital economy.  All of which is being accelerated by mobile. Terrible experiences for users still persist in our online experiences, deliver low efficacy for advertisers, and fraud is rampant.  The march away from the glut of advertising excess may be most symbolically seen in the explosion of ad blockers.  Further evidence of the “need for a correction of this broken industry” is Oracle’s willingness to pay $850M for a company that polices ads (probably the best entrepreneurs I know ran this company, so no surprise).

As an entrepreneur, my job is to predict the future.  When reflecting on what I’ve learned thus far in my journey – it’s become clear that two truths can guide us in making smarter decisions about our digital future:

Every day, retailers, advertisers, brands, and marketers get smarter.  This means that every day – they will push the platforms, their partners, and the places they rely on for users to be more “performance driven”.  More transactional.

Paying for views, bots (Russian or otherwise), or anything other than “dollars” will become less and less popular over time. It’s no secret that Amazon, the world’s most powerful company (imho), relies so heavily on its Associates Program (it’s home built partnership and affiliate platform).  This channel is the highest performing form of paid acquisition that retailers have, and in fact, it’s rumored that the success of Amazon’s affiliate program led to the development of AWS due to large spikes in partner traffic.

Chinese flag overlooking The Bund, Shanghai, China (Photo: Rolf Bruderer/Getty Images)

When thinking about our digital future, look down and look east.  Look down and admire your phone – this will serve as your portal to the digital world for the next decade and our dependence will only continue to grow.  The explosive adoption of this form factor is continuing to outpace any technological trend in history.

Now, look east and recognize that what happens in China will happen here, in the West, eventually.  The Chinese market skipped the PC driven digital revolution – and adopted the digital era via the smartphone. Some really smart investors have built strategies around this thesis and have quietly been reaping rewards due to their clairvoyance.  

China has historically been categorized as a market full of knock-offs and copycats – but times have changed.  Some of the world’s largest and most innovative companies have come out of China over the past decade.  The entrepreneurial work ethic in China (as praised recently by arguably the world’s greatest investor Michael Moritz), the speed of innovation, and the ability to quickly scale and reach meaningful populations have caused Chinese companies to leapfrog the market cap of many of their US counterparts.  

The most interesting component of the Chinese digital economy’s growth is that it is fundamentally more “pure” than the US market’s.  I say this because the Chinese market is inherently “transactional”. As Andreessen Horowitz writes – WeChat, China’s  most valuable company, has become the “starting point” and hub for all user actions.  Their revenue diversity – is much more “Amazon” than “Google” or “Facebook” – it’s much more pure.  They make money off the transactions driven from their platform – and advertising is far less important in their strategy.

The obsession with replicating WeChat took the tech industry by storm two years ago — and for some misplaced reason — everyone thought we needed to build messaging bots to compete.  

What shouldn’t be lost is our obsession with the purity and power of the business models being created in China.  The fabric that binds the Chinese digital economy together and has fostered its seemingly boundless growth is the magic combination of commerce and mobile.  Singles Day, the Chinese version of Black Friday, drove $25 billion in sales on Alibaba – 90% of which were on mobile.

The lesson we’ve learned thus far in both the US and in China are that “consumers spending money” creates the most durable consumer businesses.  Google, putting aside all its moonshots and heroic mission statements, is a “starting point” powered by a shopping engine.  If you disagree, look at where their revenue comes from…

Google’s announcement last week of Shopping Actions and their movement to a “pay per transaction model” signals a turning point that could forever change the landscape of the digital economy.  

Google’s multi-front battle against Apple, Facebook, and Amazon is weighted.  Amazon is the most threatening. It’s the most durable business of the 4 – and it’s model is unbounded on two fronts that almost everyone I know would bet their future on – 1) people buying more online, where Amazon makes a disproportionate amount of every dollar spent and 2) companies needing more cloud computing power (more servers), where Amazon makes a disproportionate amount of every dollar spent.  

To add insult to injury, Amazon is threatening Google by becoming a starting point itself – 55% of product searches now originate at Amazon up from 30% just a year ago.

Google, recognizing consumer behavior was changing in mobile (less searching) and the inferiority of their model when compared to the durability and growth prospects of Amazon, needed to respond.  Google needed a model that supported boundless growth and one that created a “win-win” for its advertising partners – one that resembled Amazon’s relationship with its merchants – not one that continued to increase costs to retailers while capitalizing on their monopolization of search traffic.

Google knows that with its position as the starting point – with Google.com, Google Apps, and Android – it has to become a part of the transaction to prevail in the long term.  With users in mobile demanding fewer ads, and more utility (demanding experiences that look and feel a lot more like what has prevailed in China) – Google has every reason in the world to look down and to look east – to become a part of the transaction – to take its piece.  

A collision course for Google and the retailers it relies upon for revenue was on the horizon.  Search activity per user was declining in mobile and user acquisition costs were growing quarter over quarter.  Businesses are repeatedly failing to compete with Amazon and unless Google could create an economically viable growth model for retailers – no one would stand a chance against the commerce juggernaut – not the retailers nor Google itself. 

As I’ve believed for a long time, becoming a part of the transaction is the most favorable business model for all parties – sources of traffic make money when retailers sell things – and most importantly – this only happens when users find the things they want.  

Shopping Actions is Google’s first ambitious step to satisfy all three parties – businesses and business models all over the world will feel this impact.  

Good work, Sundar.



from Android – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2Jm9AsK
via IFTTT

Our digital future will be shaped by increasingly mobile technologies coming from China

Since the dawn of the internet, the titans of this industry have fought to win the “starting point” – the place that users start their online experiences.  In other words, the place where they begin “browsing”. The advent of the dial up era had America Online mailing a CD to every home in America, which passed the baton to Yahoo’s categorical listings, which was swallowed by Google’s indexing of the world’s information – winning the “starting point” was everything.

As the mobile revolution continues to explode across the world – the battle for the starting point has intensified.  For a period of time, people believed it would be the hardware, then it became clear that the software mattered most.  Then conversation shifted to a debate between operating systems (Android or iOS) and moved on to social properties and messaging apps where people were spending most of their time. Today – my belief is we’re hovering somewhere in between apps and operating systems.  That being said, the interface layer will always be evolving.

The starting point, just like a rocket’s launchpad, is only important because of what comes after.  The battle to win that coveted position, although often disguised as many other things, is really a battle to become the starting point of commerce.  

Google’s philosophy includes a commitment to get users “off their page” as quickly as possible…to get that user to form a habit and come back to their starting point.  The real (yet somewhat veiled) goal, in my opinion, is to get users to search and find the things they want to buy.

Of course, Google “does no evil” while aggregating the world’s information, but they pay their bills by sending purchases to Priceline, Expedia, Amazon, and the rest of the digital economy.  

Facebook, on the other hand, has become a starting point through it’s monopolization of users’ time, attention, and data.  Through this effort – it’s developed an advertising business that shatters records quarter after quarter.

Google and Facebook, this famed duopoly, represent 89% of new advertising spending in 2017.  Their dominance is unrivaled…for now.

Change is urgently being demanded by market forces – shifts in consumer habits, intolerable rising costs to advertisers, and through a nearly universal dissatisfaction with the advertising models that have dominated (plagued) the US digital economy.  All of which is being accelerated by mobile. Terrible experiences for users still persist in our online experiences, deliver low efficacy for advertisers, and fraud is rampant.  The march away from the glut of advertising excess may be most symbolically seen in the explosion of ad blockers.  Further evidence of the “need for a correction of this broken industry” is Oracle’s willingness to pay $850M for a company that polices ads (probably the best entrepreneurs I know ran this company, so no surprise).

As an entrepreneur, my job is to predict the future.  When reflecting on what I’ve learned thus far in my journey – it’s become clear that two truths can guide us in making smarter decisions about our digital future:

Every day, retailers, advertisers, brands, and marketers get smarter.  This means that every day – they will push the platforms, their partners, and the places they rely on for users to be more “performance driven”.  More transactional.

Paying for views, bots (Russian or otherwise), or anything other than “dollars” will become less and less popular over time. It’s no secret that Amazon, the world’s most powerful company (imho), relies so heavily on its Associates Program (it’s home built partnership and affiliate platform).  This channel is the highest performing form of paid acquisition that retailers have, and in fact, it’s rumored that the success of Amazon’s affiliate program led to the development of AWS due to large spikes in partner traffic.

Chinese flag overlooking The Bund, Shanghai, China (Photo: Rolf Bruderer/Getty Images)

When thinking about our digital future, look down and look east.  Look down and admire your phone – this will serve as your portal to the digital world for the next decade and our dependence will only continue to grow.  The explosive adoption of this form factor is continuing to outpace any technological trend in history.

Now, look east and recognize that what happens in China will happen here, in the West, eventually.  The Chinese market skipped the PC driven digital revolution – and adopted the digital era via the smartphone. Some really smart investors have built strategies around this thesis and have quietly been reaping rewards due to their clairvoyance.  

China has historically been categorized as a market full of knock-offs and copycats – but times have changed.  Some of the world’s largest and most innovative companies have come out of China over the past decade.  The entrepreneurial work ethic in China (as praised recently by arguably the world’s greatest investor Michael Moritz), the speed of innovation, and the ability to quickly scale and reach meaningful populations have caused Chinese companies to leapfrog the market cap of many of their US counterparts.  

The most interesting component of the Chinese digital economy’s growth is that it is fundamentally more “pure” than the US market’s.  I say this because the Chinese market is inherently “transactional”. As Andreessen Horowitz writes – WeChat, China’s  most valuable company, has become the “starting point” and hub for all user actions.  Their revenue diversity – is much more “Amazon” than “Google” or “Facebook” – it’s much more pure.  They make money off the transactions driven from their platform – and advertising is far less important in their strategy.

The obsession with replicating WeChat took the tech industry by storm two years ago — and for some misplaced reason — everyone thought we needed to build messaging bots to compete.  

What shouldn’t be lost is our obsession with the purity and power of the business models being created in China.  The fabric that binds the Chinese digital economy together and has fostered its seemingly boundless growth is the magic combination of commerce and mobile.  Singles Day, the Chinese version of Black Friday, drove $25B in sales on Alibaba – 90% of which were on mobile.

The lesson we’ve learned thus far in both the US and in China are that “consumers spending money” creates the most durable consumer businesses.  Google, putting aside all its moonshots and heroic mission statements, is a “starting point” powered by a shopping engine.  If you disagree, look at where their revenue comes from…

Google’s announcement last week of Shopping Actions and their movement to a “pay per transaction model” signals a turning point that could forever change the landscape of the digital economy.  

Google’s multi-front battle against Apple, Facebook, and Amazon is weighted.  Amazon is the most threatening. It’s the most durable business of the 4 – and it’s model is unbounded on two fronts that almost everyone I know would bet their future on – 1) people buying more online, where Amazon makes a disproportionate amount of every dollar spent and 2) companies needing more cloud computing power (more servers), where Amazon makes a disproportionate amount of every dollar spent.  

To add insult to injury, Amazon is threatening Google by becoming a starting point itself – 55% of product searches now originate at Amazon up from 30% just a year ago.

Google, recognizing consumer behavior was changing in mobile (less searching) and the inferiority of their model when compared to the durability and growth prospects of Amazon, needed to respond.  Google needed a model that supported boundless growth and one that created a “win-win” for its advertising partners – one that resembled Amazon’s relationship with its merchants – not one that continued to increase costs to retailers while capitalizing on their monopolization of search traffic.

Google knows that with its position as the starting point – with Google.com, Google Apps, and Android – it has to become a part of the transaction to prevail in the long term.  With users in mobile demanding less ads, and more utility (demanding experiences that look and feel a lot more like what has prevailed in China) – Google has every reason in the world to look down and to look east – to become a part of the transaction – to take its piece.  

A collision course for Google and the retailers it relies upon for revenue was on the horizon.  Search activity per user was declining in mobile and user acquisition costs were growing quarter over quarter.  Businesses are repeatedly failing to compete with Amazon and unless Google could create an economically viable growth model for retailers – no one would stand a chance against the commerce juggernaut – not the retailers nor Google itself. 

As I’ve believed for a long time, becoming a part of the transaction is the most favorable business model for all parties – sources of traffic make money when retailers sell things – and most importantly – this only happens when users find the things they want.  

Shopping Actions is Google’s first ambitious step to satisfy all three parties – businesses and business models all over the world will feel this impact.  

Good work, Sundar.



from Apple – TechCrunch https://ift.tt/2Jm9AsK