[jsprinkles]

Does anybody else think secretive companies annoy customers more than open ones? A lot of bad feelings could have been avoided yesterday were this public information, without Tim having to e-mail someone to break it. There was a genuine rash of anger, obviously (from the HN coverage), and just taking a few moments to say what's in the pipeline, while very not Steve, would have made this situation a lot better.

It's not just Apple I've noticed this with. Maybe it's time we rethink secrecy from a product development standpoint? Does it really give your competitors an advantage to know what you're working on in the days of the Internet? Is this something that business types have put thought into, since secrecy seems to be the status quo?

I can understand new products entirely, but a simple update to their Mac Pro is something they could just say, publicly, with little recourse, to reassure its small (and dedicated) fan base.

[jack-r-abbit]

I think this comment is one reason: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4103596

I could really use one now. I'd buy one of the existing ones, but man... I really feel like a sucker paying so much for a system that's clearly lacking in a lot of spots, to know that I'll be upgrading in a year.

Buying electronics is always a gamble of buy now or buy later. Announcing there is an update coming can poach some sales of the current model. I'm sure there is more to it than that. but it can happen.

[dasil003]

I think Apple annoys people more than other companies. It's something of a lightning rod. Should they be more open about product roadmaps? Past performance would seem to indicate know. It doesn't matter if people are annoyed if they're selling out everything like hotcakes.

[maximilianburke]

The people I know who buy Mac Pros keep themselves quite up to date with technological developments. They know when Intel releases a new processor family, they know when nVidia and AMD release a new generation of GPU. They know that when these items are on the market they could easily call up Dell or HP and have a workstation with these components, but they don't want a Dell or HP, they want an Apple. As a result they are annoyed when Apple continues ignoring their flagship product, a product that now is now two generations behind in both CPU and GPU.

They're also typically the type of people that are irked that Apple's geometry shaders run on the CPU and not the GPU.

[jsprinkles]

My comment was a generality. For example, if Apple (or any company) tomorrow published:

    Q1 2013 (tentative)    iOS 6.1
    Q2 2013 (tentative)    Mac Pro update
    Q3 2013 (tentative)    iOS 6.2

Does that give competitors a leg up on them, genuinely? What does Apple gain from being secretive? Is it just status quo thought at this point that is keeping companies thinking secretively? I understand new products being a surprise, that's kind of cool, but does it hurt Apple to be a bit more open? Is there some competitive advantage I'm missing?

Say you're Dell. You see Apple is working on a Mac Pro update. Does that change your priorities at all, strategically? Does it matter to you? Now Apple working on a game-changer, that I understand, but a simple update? Why keep that secret? What do competitors gain from knowing every little detail of what Apple is up to?

I'm trying to figure out Steve's reasoning, since I'm not terribly versed in business, and this generally seems to be a business decision. It's especially epidemic in IT, where all of us are writing cool software, but nondisclosure prevents us from sharing with competitors except in special circumstances. So instead of advancing the state of the art, we're all reinventing the wheel because our prior wheel inventions are nondisclosured to the prior company.

I just don't get secrecy.