-
What if there actually IS a new Mac Pro?
-
[Craig Seeman] “revealing a roadmap isn’t always a great “selling point” unless one likes the roadmap revealed. I certainly can’t speak for others but HP saying they won’t support Thunderbolt is just one such example for me.”
But that’s just the point, if you know that HP isn’t using TBolt and if that’s important to your workflow, you can then make an informed decision. When I ask a question I can’t expect every answer to be yes, but I can expect to get an answer.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Craig Seeman] “Actually I think Apple behaves consciously, not capriciously although some not like their business model.”
I don’t think Apple bought Proximity Artbox with the intention of killing Final Cut Server three years later.
If they did, shame on them for selling an enterprise solution to customers that they had no intention of supporting 36 months later, and shame on us for supporting a company that values their customers’ businesses so little.
[Craig Seeman] “I wouldn’t be surprised if Apple want’s to “reserve the right” to change things in very short time frames which would mean revealing roadmaps could be problematic.”
Like how promoting 64-bit Carbon, seeding it to developers, then suddenly killing it could scramble Adobe’s development and leave Photoshop CS4 stuck as a 32-bit app on the Mac?
[Craig Seeman] “Also revealing a roadmap isn’t always a great “selling point” unless one likes the roadmap revealed. I certainly can’t speak for others but HP saying they won’t support Thunderbolt is just one such example for me. By the same token, hearing Asus, Acer, Lenovo reveal a roadmap supporting Thunderbolt is something I find encouraging as might Thunderbolt peripheral developers as well.”
Publishing a roadmap is not about simply selling a product today. It’s about building trust with your customers so that they know they can count on a relationship with you.
If you know that publishing your roadmap is going to cost you sales because people won’t like what they’re hearing, maybe you should reconsider your plans.
By the way, HP hasn’t announced they won’t support Thunderbolt. They’ve announced they’re not supporting it now, but they are “still looking into it” [link]. Personally, I would have liked an absolute yes or no answer, but I’ll take open honesty, even if it’s uncertain, over secrecy.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Herb Sevush] “Some of us prefer the illusion of concern. If I’m going to invest my money with you I want you to look me in the eye and lie to me, tell me that you value me. A plan may not be worth the paper it’s printed on, but it’s a worth a whole lot more than the promise you never made.”
Hmm. To be lied to rather than not spoken to.
OK, whatever makes you feel most comfortable.
-
[Craig Seeman] “The ATI 1900 supported OpenCL but the ATI 2600 did not? “
The X1900 never supported OpenCL. My guess is in keeping with the sloppy launch of FCPX, that card was omitted from whatever plist tells the App Store what is and isn’t supported hardware. That it was corrected in 10.0.1 underscores that idea.
That’s the only thing that restricts App Store distribution, not the app itself and its dependencies, but a check of the host system prior to install. You can install FCP7 on a G5 if you modify the scripts in the install pkg. You’ll find parts of it not working properly, same as you would with FCPX on hardware that does not support OpenCL.
[Craig Seeman] “Apparently the Intel HD 3000 isn’t OpenCL either but ti works.
OpenCL-capable graphics card or Intel HD Graphics 3000 or later
(bold emphasis added by me).”OpenCL can be used in addressing both GPUs and CPUs. From what little I could find out there, OpenCL on OS X can address the CPU if it supports AVX, which debuted on Sandy Bridge, home of the HD 3000. My guess (again) is that the engineers told the marketing guys “just tell them they need an HD 3000 or Open CL GPU”.
[Craig Seeman] “There is a difference when a piece of hardware can’t run something vs a piece of hardware Apple feels no longer meets their idea of acceptable results and they, block the installation. Apple shouldn’t have to “support” what they don’t want to, but if something works good enough for the end user, they shouldn’t block the install. I know there are are FCPX users who managed to get it on unsupported systems by copying over the install from another system (thanks to self contained apps) and they’re OK with the modest performance they’re getting. “
This is the App Store protecting users from themselves. You’re saying Apple should sell software to customers who don’t have the hardware to properly run he software, and then just shrug and say caveat emptor when those customers deluge them with support calls? The whole point of the App Store is to take the guesswork out of buying apps. It shouldn’t sell you something you aren’t equipped to run.
[Craig Seeman] “Engineer may decide what’s qualified but blocking the user who may be OK with working on an “unqualified” but functional system is coming from another place.”
Damned if they do, damned if they don’t.
Best,
Andy -
[Darren Durbin] “I don’t disagree at all with your wider point that hp ( for example ) do a far better job of communicating with customers, with planned EOL cycles, superior support and transition arrangements, but we’ve been burned many a time with rugs being pulled from under us, and a roadmap doesn’t stop that happening.”
Of course not, roadmaps are not set in stone. Things can happen and roadmaps change and that’s ok. But at least it shows goodwill and the intention to communicate. And it shows some respect for the people dropping money on the table for your product and building their livelihood on it.
-
[Frank Gothmann] “Things can happen and roadmaps change and that’s ok. But at least it shows goodwill and the intention to communicate. And it shows some respect for the people dropping money on the table for your product and building their livelihood on it.”
OK.
So, obviously you aren’t going to buy anymore Macs.
What recent roadmap led you to Windows/HP?
-
[Herb Sevush] “But that’s just the point, if you know that HP isn’t using TBolt and if that’s important to your workflow, you can then make an informed decision. “
There’s two potential problems. HP may lose potential customers so it may not be good for them. Alternately HP changes course due to market conditions and then you feel betrayed (and may be impacted economically) by making a decision based on information that turned out differently.
-
[Craig Seeman] “HP may lose potential customers so it may not be good for them.”
How could they loose customers? If Tbolt is important to your work flow, your not going to be a customer of theirs no matter what. The only difference is they haven’t kept you waiting and guessing. So while you won’t be a customer for a current workstation, you also won’t have a negative connotation about them and you won’t have any problem being a customer of theirs for a product that does fit your workflow.
[Craig Seeman] “Alternately HP changes course due to market conditions and then you feel betrayed (and may be impacted economically) by making a decision based on information that turned out differently.”
Precisely why I want the plan announced publicly; with a public deceleration they will be more likely to fulfill it, knowing the PR consequences. Nothing can protect you totally from getting screwed, but this public pressure does increase the likelihood of a better outcome.
If Microsoft lays out a plan and then doesn’t follow thru, they have to acknowledge the failure and deal with the fallout. Apple just shrugs and says, “hey we never promised you a rose garden” and avoids all responsibility. Who has more pressure to deliver in that situation, which way do you have better odds?
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf -
[Walter Soyka] “Publishing a roadmap is not about simply selling a product today. It’s about building trust with your customers so that they know they can count on a relationship with you.”
Roadmaps only has value if it means the company rigidly chooses to follow that roadmap.
Much as your examples do illustrate. Apple reserves the ability to switch as they see fit.
I’m not so sure revealing a roadmap is any better. It presents a different set of problems to the company that reveals it and finds out it damages their business by sticking to it or damages their business by having to veer from their promise.If you’ve been following Google’s WebM public roadmap only to find that thye actually did not remove support for H.264 in Chrome, that Mozilla (FireFox, etc) indicated they may have to capitulate and support H.264 as result of WebMs failure, in part because Google didn’t follow with removing it from Chrome, not pushing it in Android, Adobe not supporting WebM in Flash after saying they would. So the revelation of roadmaps… not followed, resulted in a collision so to speak. So much for the value of roadmaps revealed.
Roadmaps are a double edged sword. Revealing them may be no better than not.
-
[Darren Durbin] ” we’ve been burned many a time with rugs being pulled from under us, and a roadmap doesn’t stop that happening.
“Without going into details, I’d point to whats been going on with Google and to some extent Adobe about their WebM roadmap and what that’s done to Mozilla (FireFox), whose strategy was counting on the roadmap.
Generally roadmaps can damn a business if they stick to it and can damn a business if they decide not to. I don’t see any inherent advantage to revealing a roadmap. What a roadmap is not, is a contractual obligation to follow it. What a roadmap is not, is an assurance that roadmap will be “successful.”
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up