>The actual problem with the 2013 Mac Pro was operational. They decided to build it in the US. They made a big, high-tech factory with a large degree of automation. That's a great way to build a high volume product. It's a terrible way to build a $3000 niche computer.
Which is why I think the recent Apple has Tim Cook's operational focus all over it. They couldn't close it down but they had to sell it as long as they could trying to amortised the cost. Same with MacBook Pro Keyboard, they were stubborn and cost focus to try and itch out another generation. Just because of the cost involved.
You could see Steve Jobs doing it differently, bring an MBP home to use it, ( As he used to call himself low cost Beta Tester ) saw the problem himself, demand it be fixed within 4 weeks, or get a new team to design a new Keyboard.
I think he cares about product quality way more than numbers on balance sheet. He might publicly dismiss it, ( very likely ), but quietly he would have the team working on a new keyboard and ship it, only to sliently provide extended warranty to MBP at a later date.
This cost minimization seems quite strange when every year people were anxious for a new Pro. How hard it is to make the trashcan bigger and put in more airflow? (Bigger fans with the same RPM.)
And sure, it might cost some, but Tim should count lost profit (opportunity costs) too.
>How hard it is to make the trashcan bigger and put in more airflow? (Bigger fans with the same RPM.)
My guess is that because they tried to manufacture and assemble in US, so they had very high automation for the TrashCan, which also meant these automation are likely not flexible enough to change the design. I don't think the Mac Pro was about cost though. Because Mac Pro unit shipment would not have made up for that investment anyway. I think it was merely an exercise for Apple's operational supply chain. And Apple's design team had lack of time and had to focus on many other more important issues. That was why it took so long. Basically the design department in Apple were not scaleable.
Design bandwidth limitation is pretty plausible. (I have no idea how hard it is to change automation, but my guess is not that hard/expensive. After all assembly robots are not custom built, they are probably programmed like the simpler CNC machines.)
Plus on top of that probably in Apple's hivemind the cost of coming out with something bad is more than the opportunity cost of missed profit.
Which is why I think the recent Apple has Tim Cook's operational focus all over it. They couldn't close it down but they had to sell it as long as they could trying to amortised the cost. Same with MacBook Pro Keyboard, they were stubborn and cost focus to try and itch out another generation. Just because of the cost involved.
You could see Steve Jobs doing it differently, bring an MBP home to use it, ( As he used to call himself low cost Beta Tester ) saw the problem himself, demand it be fixed within 4 weeks, or get a new team to design a new Keyboard.
I think he cares about product quality way more than numbers on balance sheet. He might publicly dismiss it, ( very likely ), but quietly he would have the team working on a new keyboard and ship it, only to sliently provide extended warranty to MBP at a later date.