Mini Updated, Mac Pro Ignored!

[Orange™]

:rolleyes:

Well, maybe this means that the next Mac Pro will have an HDMI cable too.:p

[TheLOGICalone]

Way to stay positive, however I'm ********** pissed, i mean ATLEAST DROP THE PRICE, WTF!

[Ravich]

Wouldnt a price drop suggest that the update was a long way off?

[ValSalva]

The rumor all along is that the hexacore Xeons would not be available until late June. Still time left. I think the fact that Apple redesigned and released the Mac Mini in the midst of iPhone mania bodes well for a new Mac Pro in the next couple to few weeks.

[parakiet]

Way to stay positive, however I'm ********** pissed, i mean ATLEAST DROP THE PRICE, WTF!

we alrdy got that one

[Labaguette]

Stores are down again, let's hope a bit :)

[the editor]

well its all speculation from here, no MacPro release but a MacMini release could mean a few things:

1. CPU intel shortage as said before.
2. MacPro is a long way from being ready, but i'm guessing there will be a new design, we can be pretty sure about that i think since they gave the MacMini a new makeover, MacPro might be a bit smaller in size.
3. The French rumor that MP' isn't going to be released untill the end of september - October.
4. There is just not going to be a MacPro update in 2010.

[ValSalva]

Stores are down again, let's hope a bit :)

I've got my fingers crossed ;)

[Techhie]

The rumor all along is that the hexacore Xeons would not be available until late June.

This has continually been proven false. The parts are available, it's Apple's move.

[Icaras]

Store is back up. No new Mac Pro. :(

[keewe]

austrian store is still (or again) down...

[anim8or]

I for one have been among the doubters about Apple's intentions for the amc pro but with this 'silent' update i have som erenewed hope...

I think that the Mac Pro will see a 'silent' update in the coming weeks.

[telequest]

At least this confirms that Apple still cares about Macs, even a "headless" desktop Mac – albeit a tiny one. Anything that sustains/expands the universe of machines running the MacOS is a good thing for Mac Pro users (current or prospective). Not every new or updated product runs the iOS. And it shows that there are active engineering teams at Apple not solely devoted to creating portable devices.

It also demonstrates that Apple will continue to release low-profile products (ones without lots of "magic" buzz flying around them) silently, without fanfare, without regard to any specific public event. They'll hit the Apple Store when they're ready to ship – no sooner, no later – even in the middle of the latest iPhone, iPad or iWhatever launch.

So yeah, the wait for the new MP is a pain, but I think this helps to show that we're getting there.

[ildondeigiocchi]

The waiting times for a Mac Pro update are getting out of hand. Simply put, it's ridiculous. They better have great options when they're released... especially in the GPU sector.

[the editor]

the question is not if Apple is still continuing or interested in releasing a new MacPro. without a doubt there is ofcourse going to be a new MP in the future...the question is "
When" will we be seeing a new MP, and when will Apple be a bit more customer friendly and stop being so damned paranoid when it comes to official statements on upcoming releases. Its not as if Apple is still the major player when it comes to Computers...everybody knows Macs are far behind the competition...really far, one would think Apple would try to secure there position by being a bit more straight to the point instead of having customers frustrated because they can not plan very expensive purchases or have customers hijacked because they couldn't leave the platform if they wished to because of software investments...nothing left to do but wait and look out for an update that is most likely going to be a rip off anyway. Look at the MacMini "upgrade" it coasts 1150Euro's:eek: ...keep it up Apple your only destroying your own business, in 5 years from now these silly out of control prices and minor upgrades aren't going to cut it, heck at this pace in 5 years from now i expect Macs to still run on 2013 technology.

To be honost Apple should just focus on Itoys instead of computers for pro's, i think its proven that the only thing Pro in a Mac Pro or Macbook Pro is the word "Pro", by today's standards all these machines are pretty much basic setups.

[rnauman821]

the question is not if Apple is still continuing or interested in releasing a new MacPro. without a doubt there is ofcourse going to be a new MP in the future...the question is "
When" will we be seeing a new MP, and when will Apple be a bit more customer friendly and stop being so damned paranoid when it comes to official statements on upcoming releases. Its not as if Apple is still the major player when it comes to Computers...everybody knows Macs are far behind the competition...really far, one would think Apple would try to secure there position by being a bit more straight to the point instead of having customers frustrated because they can not plan very expensive purchases or have customers hijacked because they couldn't leave the platform if they wished to because of software investments...nothing left to do but wait and look out for an update that is most likely going to be a rip off anyway. Look at the MacMini "upgrade" it coasts 1150Euro's:eek: ...keep it up Apple your only destroying your own business, in 5 years from now these silly out of control prices and minor upgrades aren't going to cut it, heck at this pace in 5 years from now i expect Macs to still run on 2013 technology.

To be honost Apple should just focus on Itoys instead of computers for pro's, i think its proven that the only thing Pro in a Mac Pro or Macbook Pro is the word "Pro", by today's standards all these machines are pretty much basic setups.

... Why would they change their business model if it clearly works. Their stock has never been higher and they have never sold more units before. Your logic falls completely against any business reason.

Apple keeps their lips tight as part of their selling strategy. People obsess over the idea of a new product coming out that when apple finally does release it, everyone and their mother pulls the trigger on impulse. Honestly though, it works and it works well.

And no, Apple usually doesn't have the absolute fastest or biggest anything. But, this also means they don't see the falling out when the latest or greatest has bugs or problems. Their build quality is top notch it almost everything they make is pleasing aesthetically.

The reason prosumers stick with Apple despite their shortcomings is sheer lack of competition. Apple makes a superior software product in OSX (more debatable now that Win7 is here). They don't use cheap plastics or poor engineering in their products which means I can count on my machine to last me. This idea in the general personal computer industry is unused. Most companies but apple product a product at absolute bottom dollar with razor thin margins. However quality suffers because of this and creates poor customer interactions with the product stamped with their name all over it. Make it right the first time and if it takes a little more, charge a little more. In the end people will be happier and much more loyal; this is the focus Apple has used for years and will for the foreseeable future.

[xgman]

Blehhhhh!!! . . . . . :(

[apolloa]

:rolleyes:

Well, maybe this means that the next Mac Pro will have an HDMI cable too.:p

Here's a more accurate way to look at it. Mini updated, Mac Pro NEXT. :rolleyes:

[xgman]

Here's a more accurate way to look at it. Mini updated, Mac Pro NEXT. :rolleyes:

The way things are going, the Air, TV, imac and usb cables will get upgrades before the MP. I've officially lost all hope for a summer update. In any case it's just as well they didn't go live today because the store is impossible to get an order through right now because of the iphone pre-orders.

[Tonytownsend]

Here's a more accurate way to look at it. Mini updated, Mac Pro NEXT.
Ha watch it will be the Air

[Cindori]

I think its a good thing they updated mini; it shows that just because no mac were shown at WWDC, it does not mean it's not far away. This means that the game is still going, and next tuesday could be it.

[Eidorian]

I have a feeling the iMac is next before the Mac Pro.

[the editor]

... Why would they change their business model if it clearly works. Their stock has never been higher and they have never sold more units before. Your logic falls completely against any business reason.

it clearly doesn't work, look at the last year Apple is getting more and more negative feedback from customer, especially on the updates. the way apple is doing business is just ripping people off. I could tell you a few stories about Apples ridiculous policy's and way of doing business but i'm sure they are very easy to find surfing the web.

The only reason Apple is selling so much is because its a hype, point blank. it has nothing to do with providing the best quality there is for customers or best customer care. the thing with hypes is that they don't last that long.

Looks as if 80% of Apples customers got there head up Jobs *$s


And no, Apple usually doesn't have the absolute fastest or biggest anything. But, this also means they don't see the falling out when the latest or greatest has bugs or problems. Their build quality is top notch it almost everything they make is pleasing aesthetically.

What a load of crap, next your going to tell me Macs are bug free? I had my fair share of crashes and bugs with mac computers as-well as windows systems. the "Mac is the best" is getting old.

i got to agree that everything they make is pleasing aesthetically...but what good is a Ferrari with a Toyota engine, In other words, why would you by something that looks good but lacks performance, especially when your paying an extreme lot of money for it.

[J the Ninja]

Oh God, car metaphors already?

In any case, I think this is good news. It shows Apple is not only still interested, but HOLY &%*$*% %&^* the new Mini has an awesome case! I'm really looking forward to the MP update now. Just gonna be another few weeks.

[Vylen]

Each person has their own experiences with a Mac...

My iMac was recently crashing (good ol' kernel panics) but I bothered to read the error log after the 5th crash (heheh) and it was a 3rd party driver. Got no problems now.

Also.. this supposed increase of complaints/negative feedback from customers. Well, I don't think this is unusual at all. With an increase in sales of Apple hardware, it would be in fact weird if there was no increase of negative feedback.

[Dr.Pants]

Oh God, car metaphors already?

Sometimes its the only way people can communicate.

At anyrate, the Mac Pro will probably be silently updated here in the coming months. Meanwhile, professionals needing a machine won't hesitate to buy if they need it.

[ValSalva]

I have a feeling the iMac is next before the Mac Pro.

You're probably right. On June 20th it is the eight month mark from when the iMac was last updated. But the Air could be first too :rolleyes:

[Icaras]

You're probably right. On June 20th it is the eight month mark from when the iMac was last updated. But the Air could be first too :rolleyes:

But also the iMac has been going through an 8-11-8-11 month update cycle, so I doubt the iMac will be updated in the summer.

[the editor]

Meanwhile, professionals needing a machine won't hesitate to buy if they need it.

speak for yourself...i don't buy the current setup

[jjhny]

Let's not do the typical "thread hijack" to other models. There is a place for laptop and consumer machines already. We pro users are already irritated enough.

That said, this bodes well for the Mac Pro - it means they are updating the machines without saying anything before launch.

I would also bet that 10.6.4 may have newer drivers for the MacPro's graphic card offerings.

It would not surprise me if the MacPros appear next Tuesday - Apple will have enough hexacore chips and it would follow that they do release it.

From now on it appears that there will not be much in the way of special announcements for the computer division from Apple. They will just appear.

[ValSalva]

Let's not do the typical "thread hijack" to other models. There is a place for laptop and consumer machines already. We pro users are already irritated enough.

That said, this bodes well for the Mac Pro - it means they are updating the machines without saying anything before launch.

I would also bet that 10.6.4 may have newer drivers for the MacPro's graphic card offerings.

It would not surprise me if the MacPros appear next Tuesday - Apple will have enough hexacore chips and it would follow that they do release it.

From now on it appears that there will not be much in the way of special announcements for the computer division from Apple. They will just appear.

Agreed. The only pessimism I have for a new Mac Pro is the dearth of rumors about it. The Mac Mini update of today was widely rumored.

I can certainly do without the fanfare and just have the Macs released.

[Plutonius]

Stores are down again, let's hope a bit :)

Read the other article. The online stores for Apple and others are going down due to iPhone 4 pre-ordering.

[Plutonius]

Agreed. The only pessimism I have for a new Mac Pro is the dearth of rumors about it. The Mac Mini update of today was widely rumored.

I can certainly do without the fanfare and just have the Macs released.

The only things you can say for sure are

1) The new MPs will be faster then the previous gen.

2) The new MP's will be more expensive then the previous gen (the pricing on the minis seems to indicate that non-US customers will be hit with a larger increase.)

3) People will rant about the price and
a) say they are getting a PC
b) say that they are building a hackintosh.
c) scramble around to buy last year's model at a small discount.
d) not get the new MP which they have been waiting on.

The new MPs will come out and most people will not be happy.

[Eidorian]

You're probably right. On June 20th it is the eight month mark from when the iMac was last updated. But the Air could be first too :rolleyes:With the deadzone that WWDC was, I was seriously expecting a silent update on the mini or iMac this week.

[Concorde Rules]

Upgrade to what?

Hardly any new CPUs are available.

My guess will be an shift of CPU down one step, addition of the 6 core chips, a 5870 and that will be your lot.

Nothing to wait up for.

[Ravich]

I find it hard to believe that in the computing world, nothing of interest for MP users has been developed in the last 15 months.

[Murray M]

I want more car metaphors

[mattbatt]

The only things you can say for sure are

1) The new MPs will be faster then the previous gen.

2) The new MP's will be more expensive then the previous gen (the pricing on the minis seems to indicate that non-US customers will be hit with a larger increase.)

3) People will rant about the price and
a) say they are getting a PC
b) say that they are building a hackintosh.
c) scramble around to buy last year's model at a small discount.
d) not get the new MP which they have been waiting on.

The new MPs will come out and most people will not be happy.

I agree and unfortunately think I may be one of those people.

I'm in a tight spot with my dual G5 dead on its second motherboard.

When PC manufacturers are including an i7 980x 6 core for around 2k that is relatively easy to overclock to 4Ghz and one has the all the GPU options, like the Nvidia 485, man, Apple looks lacking.

My bet is the 6 core will start at 2.66ghz around $3299 which is crazy, especially when the 3.33 ghz is what you need to compete with last years 8 core models.

On cinebench, only the overclocked 4 ghz chip was outperforming current 2.93 octo's.

We all know software still, and ESPECIALLY FCP, is having a hard time tapping into all the cores. Apple needs to be giving its customer's the upper Ghz clock speed, fast 1600 mhz ram and needs to drop Xeon from single socket desktops (that would save a lot of money on our end).

At the end of the day, we are talking about Apple being extremely expensive, and I am a fanboy. All I know is that the octo's in 2008 were a great deal if you looked at performance per dollar even compared to PC workstations.

With the advent of the i7, PC desktops now have the performance of workstations for half the cost.

Apple needs to have more of a "desktop" Mac Pro - the current ones are all the pricing of workstations.

[chaosbunny]

Upgrade to what?

Hardly any new CPUs are available.

My guess will be an shift of CPU down one step, addition of the 6 core chips, a 5870 and that will be your lot.

Nothing to wait up for.

Sure, there is nothing to update. 3gb ram (max 16 gb), a 640 gb hd and a pitiful graphic card is perfectly normal for a 2300 € machine. I'll gladly pay 500 € for OS X & sleek design, I'll even gladly pay 1000 € for OS X & sleek design, but almost 1500 € is a bit much for me.

[xgman]

Agreed. The only pessimism I have for a new Mac Pro is the dearth of rumors about it. The Mac Mini update of today was widely rumored.



This is the only rumor I have seen lately from WU today:

"While Tuesday's update to the Mac mini was welcome, Wu said he is still waiting for refreshes to the Mac Pro desktop and ultraportable MacBook Air notebook. He expects those updates to come soon, as signs of pending changes from supply chain sources have indicated to the analyst.

Rumors of a Mac Pro update have persisted for months. The new desktop is believed to adopt Intel's latest Core i7 processor with six cores. In March, AppleInsider reported that Apple is expected to release a major update to its Mac Pro workstations in June, along with a larger version of its LED Cinema Display.

The last major refresh to the Mac Pro equipped it with its Nehalem Xeon processors, with a high-end eight-core Mac Pro offering two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5500 chips. Earlier this month, Apple quietly upgraded that to a potential maximum 2.93GHz eight-core system."

[xgman]

With the deadzone that WWDC was, I was seriously expecting a silent update on the mini or iMac this week.

Huh? I guess you didn't read the news this morning? (mini released?) maybe you meant the air, but if they release a new i-mac lineup before the Mac Pro, that would be it for me. I'd go back to windows and wouldn't look back. There already isn't much of a gap between the imac and MP and another update to the imac? Anyway I highly doubt it, but the way Apple has been moving lately, anything goes. I'm not sure what Steve Jobs has against Pro's lately, but maybe they just loose money on the Mac Pros development line or something. :(

[Icaras]

This is the only rumor I have seen lately from WU today:

"While Tuesday's update to the Mac mini was welcome, Wu said he is still waiting for refreshes to the Mac Pro desktop and ultraportable MacBook Air notebook. He expects those updates to come soon, as signs of pending changes from supply chain sources have indicated to the analyst.

Rumors of a Mac Pro update have persisted for months. The new desktop is believed to adopt Intel's latest Core i7 processor with six cores. In March, AppleInsider reported that Apple is expected to release a major update to its Mac Pro workstations in June, along with a larger version of its LED Cinema Display.

The last major refresh to the Mac Pro equipped it with its Nehalem Xeon processors, with a high-end eight-core Mac Pro offering two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5500 chips. Earlier this month, Apple quietly upgraded that to a potential maximum 2.93GHz eight-core system."

Great. More from the Wu-ster.

[strausd]

The only things you can say for sure are

1) The new MPs will be faster then the previous gen.

2) The new MP's will be more expensive then the previous gen (the pricing on the minis seems to indicate that non-US customers will be hit with a larger increase.)

3) People will rant about the price and
a) say they are getting a PC
b) say that they are building a hackintosh.
c) scramble around to buy last year's model at a small discount.
d) not get the new MP which they have been waiting on.

The new MPs will come out and most people will not be happy.

You have no proof that the pricing will go up. The hexacore chips cost the same amount as the quad core chips in the 2009 model when they were put in. And since Apple hasn't lowered the price of the MP even though the price of the chip has gone down, they could put the hexacore chips in without any increase in price, which is more likely to happen than a huge price increase.

[TennisandMusic]

You have no proof that the pricing will go up. The hexacore chips cost the same amount as the quad core chips in the 2009 model when they were put in. And since Apple hasn't lowered the price of the MP even though the price of the chip has gone down, they could put the hexacore chips in without any increase in price, which is more likely to happen than a huge price increase.

They do? I thought the hex's STARTED at a grand. The quads started around 300 when they came out.

[Eidorian]

You have no proof that the pricing will go up. The hexacore chips cost the same amount as the quad core chips in the 2009 model when they were put in. And since Apple hasn't lowered the price of the MP even though the price of the chip has gone down, they could put the hexacore chips in without any increase in price, which is more likely to happen than a huge price increase."Enjoy the new 6-core Mac Pro starting at $3,499."

[Wild-Bill]

Meanwhile, professionals needing a machine will end up overpaying for outdated hardware.

Fixed that for you. ;)

[Salavat23]

I have a feeling the iMac is next before the Mac Pro.

They don't have anything to upgrade the iMac with. They may, however, bump the iMac's C2D to a Core i3.

[Eidorian]

They don't have anything to upgrade the iMac with. They may, however, bump the iMac's C2D to a Core i3.There's a thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=827715) for that.

[PeterQVenkman]

"Enjoy the new 6-core Mac Pro starting at $3,499."

I won't buy at that cost! ;) I can get a Core i7 980x PC with 9 GB of Ram, bluray, and a massive video card for under $2000 from HP. Or if I want an ugly as sin gamer case, I can get it overclocked to almost 4 Ghz with USB 3 from cyberpowerpc.com at the same basic price.

The last major refresh to the Mac Pro equipped it with its Nehalem Xeon processors, with a high-end eight-core Mac Pro offering two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon 5500 chips. Earlier this month, Apple quietly upgraded that to a potential maximum 2.93GHz eight-core system."

I think Wu is wrong on his past updates. Apple had the 2.93 octo at release, didn't they? It was the quad that got a new option to jump 3.33 a while back.

[Dr.Pants]

speak for yourself...i don't buy the current setup

Yep. Neither do I. The only reason I got my 2009 machine was because The Price is Right™


Meanwhile, professionals needing a machine will end up overpaying for outdated hardware.

Fixed that for you. ;)

Just like the mac mini owners who just got an "update" ;)

[xgman]

I think Wu is wrong on his past updates. Apple had the 2.93 octo at release, didn't they? It was the quad that got a new option to jump 3.33 a while back.

Something like that, but at this point I'll take made up rumors just to keep my mind on the prize, and off of crappy alternatives. I am really loosing patience on this one.

[antster94]

In my opinion they haven't updated the Pro because its simply doesn't fit in with their brand image. All the products they have recently updated are small, fun and cool. I think they are neglecting the professional market.

[strausd]

Didn't the last rumor say late June? If so, then we still have a few more weeks... But after that I'm gonna say screw it.

[xgman]

In my opinion they haven't updated the Pro because its simply doesn't fit in with their brand image. All the products they have recently updated are small, fun and cool. I think they are neglecting the professional market.

Well then let us go. Open up OSX to PC's and I won't look back.

[PeterQVenkman]

Well then let us go. Open up OSX to PC's and I won't look back.

I would be in total heaven, but I won't hold my breath for that! ;)

[InfoSecmgr]

it clearly doesn't work, look at the last year Apple is getting more and more negative feedback from customer, especially on the updates. the way apple is doing business is just ripping people off. I could tell you a few stories about Apples ridiculous policy's and way of doing business but i'm sure they are very easy to find surfing the web.

The only reason Apple is selling so much is because its a hype, point blank. it has nothing to do with providing the best quality there is for customers or best customer care. the thing with hypes is that they don't last that long.

Looks as if 80% of Apples customers got there head up Jobs *$s



What a load of crap, next your going to tell me Macs are bug free? I had my fair share of crashes and bugs with mac computers as-well as windows systems. the "Mac is the best" is getting old.

i got to agree that everything they make is pleasing aesthetically...but what good is a Ferrari with a Toyota engine, In other words, why would you by something that looks good but lacks performance, especially when your paying an extreme lot of money for it.

Good sir, are you MAD? You need to find a new forum my friend. Maybe take a break. Have a beer. A nice romantic night out, perhaps? Go do something that doesn't involve computers or arguing with people online. As others have pointed out, your logical falls short. I'm sorry, but it really does. I can see you being upset about the Mac Pro, that's fine. But to say Apple's strategy isn't working? Wow. How long have you been an Apple user? Were you there in 1996 when they were about to go under? They just surpassed MS for goodness sake in terms of market cap. So, to say it doesn't work is just inviting flamers.

[Cavepainter]

I don't understand all the talk here about updating the imac before the Mac Pro.... I mean, the i7 is already about as fast as the entry level Pro anyway, do they really want to leave the Pro model in the dust with an even FASTER imac? That would be downright embarrassing. (That would lead me to believe that this really is the EOL for the Pro, which now, with the silent Mini update, I doubt, but more likely it would lead me to believe that the Pro redesign wont be coming until next year.) Steve Jobs did say to "just wait."

Having said that, if they update the imac, I think I'm done waiting for the almighty, precious Mac Pro and I'll definitely just get the imac. Its already a great deal. Hard to believe ANYONE buys a new 2.66 Pro anymore anyway.... except for a very very narrow customer base.

...I want a t-shirt like Nike's "JUST DO IT" only with the Apple logo and "JUST WAIT"

[J the Ninja]

Yep. Neither do I. The only reason I got my 2009 machine was because The Price is Right™



Just like the mac mini owners who just got an "update" ;)

Core i3 or graphics that aren't dogsh*t. Pick one.

[strausd]

June 22 or June 29

[deconstruct60]

This is the only rumor I have seen lately from WU today:


Sounds alot like Wu just reads macrumors (and the buyers guide ) / arstechnica / appleinsider .

An i7 Mac Pro ... yeah right. If Apple is going to hold the Mac Pro over $2400 price point using i7's doesn't really buy much.

If there is wide belief that Apple is going to radically lower Mac Pro prices .... the mini just jumped $100 . Chasing the rest of the PC market on declining selling prices is nowhere on Apple's "top 25" things to do right now. Over an extended set of years they may have to budge, but for right now the are not likely to move at all.

[Dr.Pants]

Core i3 or graphics that aren't dogsh*t. Pick one.

Eh, good point. I'd say why not both, but then we'd have a $1k mini.

[xgman]

I would be in total heaven, but I won't hold my breath for that! ;)

if it were just the MP market, they might just do that and make allot of money on software sales, but I'm sure they do actually make money on the macbook and imac lines, so this isn't going to happen.

[xgman]

Sounds alot like Wu just reads macrumors (and the buyers guide ) / arstechnica / appleinsider .

An i7 Mac Pro ... yeah right. If Apple is going to hold the Mac Pro over $2400 price point using i7's doesn't really buy much.

If there is wide belief that Apple is going to radically lower Mac Pro prices .... the mini just jumped $100 . Chasing the rest of the PC market on declining selling prices is nowhere on Apple's "top 25" things to do right now. Over an extended set of years they may have to budge, but for right now the are not likely to move at all.


yeah, I think it has all just been wishful thinking. If it ever does come out, I do expect significant increases in price except for the stripped down base models.

[deconstruct60]

You have no proof that the pricing will go up. The hexacore chips cost the same amount as the quad core chips in the 2009 model when they were put in.

Only in some cases and toward the upper end.

3500 series ( http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=39717)
3600 series ( http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=48311 )

3520 $284 |||| 3620 <does not exist yet>
3540 $562 |||| 3640 <does not exist yet>
3580 $999 |||| 3680 $999

5500 series (http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=39565 )
5600 series (http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=47915 )

5520 $373 |||| 5620 $387 ( $14 price increase)
5550 $958 |||| 5650 $996 ( $38 price increase)
5570 $1386 |||| 5670 $1440 ( $54 price increase)


The inference that the prices have not increased is based on one single example on the top end of the single processor package only line which is woefully incomplete.

I wouldn't expect Apple to "eat" any of the 5600 price increases. If Apple has to wait a couple of months until Intel will give them a special contract price at the old levels I suspect they might have done just that.

The prices on the "so old it has lost major value" Xeons from last year has not gone down. That means the new stuff, in general, came in at higher prices.

[strausd]

Only in some cases and toward the upper end.

3500 series ( http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=39717)
3600 series ( http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=48311 )

3520 $284 |||| 3620 <does not exist yet>
3540 $562 |||| 3640 <does not exist yet>
3580 $999 |||| 3680 $999

5500 series (http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=39565 )
5600 series (http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?series=47915 )

5520 $373 |||| 5620 $387 ( $14 price increase)
5550 $958 |||| 5650 $996 ( $38 price increase)
5570 $1386 |||| 5670 $1440 ( $54 price increase)


The inference that the prices have not increased is based on one single example on the top end of the single processor package only line which is woefully incomplete.

I wouldn't expect Apple to "eat" any of the 5600 price increases. If Apple has to wait a couple of months until Intel will give them a special contract price at the old levels I suspect they might have done just that.

The prices on the "so old it has lost major value" Xeons from last year has not gone down. That means the new stuff, in general, came in at higher prices.

Since Intel's estimated prices on the 5500 series and 5600 series are very similar, do you think the prices of the next Mac Pro will be significantly higher?

[deconstruct60]

My bet is the 6 core will start at 2.66ghz around $3299 which is crazy, especially when the 3.33 ghz is what you need to compete with last years 8 core models.


Why would Apple want to make the replacement for the old quad compete with the 8 ? It is much more natural to make the new single processor package model compete with the old one. Likewise the new dual processor package model compete with the old one.

So 6 and 4 cores line up versus old one that was only 4 cores. Similarly a 12 and 8 core line up versus a

Irrational that the vendors are going to try to double performance in a single generation step... just not going happen. Intel isn't going to price it that way and neither is Apple when they don't have to.



We all know software still, and ESPECIALLY FCP, is having a hard time tapping into all the cores.


Then fix the fraking software. No reason what so ever to distort your hardware line up and pricing strucuture because some software package is lagging. That is a warped world view.





Apple needs to be giving its customer's the upper Ghz clock speed, fast 1600 mhz ram

going to pay for all that. It is always strange when "the prices are too high" is coupled with "use higher price parts."



and needs to drop Xeon from single socket desktops (that would save a lot of money on our end).


No not really going to save much. This is just the new hidden form of a " lower part cost mini tower so I can avoid buying an iMac. " tract. That is not improve the Mac Pro that is "create a new product line".

Right now Apple can use the same board for both Single and Dual variations (both can use a 5000 series chipset). If go with the i7 will have to split the boards. One would have to go x58 and the other would still be 5000 chipset.

So the costs go up: the inventory management/logistics goes up, the number of boards sold goes down (already likely shrinking volume... that just makes it worse),

There is only a limited amount of manpower that Apple is going to devote to Mac Pro development. If you increase the amount of manpower required only going to increase pressure to pull the plug on the lineup. Could very well end up with a single package (SP) only option being offered (nuke the DP option). That's backwards, IMHO. The DP is the core of what the Mac Pro is aimed at. The SP is just a minimal impact variation that offers a bit more product range. The range is still going to be limited. Apple has no intention of filling every single niche.


i7 isn't killing of Xeons. The 3680 is priced exactly the same as the i7 980x. Unless put huge value on overclocking ( not sure how many serious pros are huge fans of that for anything other than a box going to throw away in a couple years. ) there is no value add.

What is critically missing is the rest of the 3600 line up. If Intel's long term intent is that the "extreme" i7 replace the Xeon 3xxx line up then why drop a 3680 at all ? If they flush out the line up as they grow 32nm capacity then all this i7 stuff goes by the wayside.

[billakay]

My (completely uninformed, talking out of my a**) guess is Mac Pro soon, with Magic Trackpad included :-P

[deconstruct60]

significantly higher?

Not significantly higher. But the open question was whether they'd be higher. That chart suggests that it could go up. The parts are more expensive, why is Apple going to "eat" that loss in margin (if hold the price constant)? Apple doesn't eat lower margins so that Intel can make higher ones. If Intel goes for higher profits, Apple goes along for the ride; it is the customer that pays.

Apple buys processors in lots much bigger than a 1,000. So they can go into a haggling process with Intel for a better deal. That is a small enough different it may get haggled off. One sales trick it to tack on a premium that are will to give away just so customer walks away thinking they got a "deal".
If Apple paid 'list' last year and then haggles back down to the old 'list' pricing then a chance would not be an increase.

Typically in Configure-to-order Apple tacks 40% on top of whatever Intel is changing though. 40% on top of even small increases will still be an increase.

P.S. similar thing in case of entry MBP 15" . Before it didn't have a discrete GPU. Now it does. The defacto Parts costs went up... so did base price. Wouldn't count in drop in hard drive and memory costs covering the gap. Apple has pressure to show growth there in terms in added value year over year. May use newer parts there are similar cost level to last year.

[Techhie]

Core i3 or graphics that aren't dogsh*t. Pick one.

One wonders how Apple manages to secure that many (out of production) C2D chips for their never ending supply of circa-2008 "updates". :rolleyes:

[xgman]

One wonders how Apple manages to secure that many (out of production) C2D chips for their never ending supply of circa-2008 "updates". :rolleyes:


this one made me laugh . . . .

[deconstruct60]

One wonders how Apple manages to secure that many (out of production) C2D chips

Errr,

http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=26548

Perhaps because they are not out of production? See all the ones with prices next to them?

Intel isn't going to shutdown C2D for at least another year or so. Intel is still selling Celeron M's (http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=3799 )

[xgman]

I know we are probably getting closer, but for some reason it seems farther away than ever to me. :(

[Techhie]

http://ark.intel.com/ProductCollection.aspx?familyId=26548


My bad. ;)

[Plutonius]

You have no proof that the pricing will go up. The hexacore chips cost the same amount as the quad core chips in the 2009 model when they were put in. And since Apple hasn't lowered the price of the MP even though the price of the chip has gone down, they could put the hexacore chips in without any increase in price, which is more likely to happen than a huge price increase.

Of course I don't have pricing for the next gen MP but this is Apple we are talking about. People had the same conversations when the last gen came out and said that "based on the price of the processor/components, the price would not go up". They were wrong and I think you will be also. Apple will raise the price of the MP when it finally comes out and I believe it will be a hefty increase (especially for machines sold outside the US).

[deconstruct60]

(especially for machines sold outside the US).

That has everything to do with non US currencies collapsing. Like Intel increasing component costs.... why is Apple going to take hit in margins because currency went down?

I suppose someone is going to propose that Apple dynamically adjust prices as the Euro flops around. That's goofy. They make can make a projection as to what the average rate is going to be then price to that so that offering price remains constant. If there is cushion in their estimate... that's OK because likely expanding retail store openings in area anyway.


It would be crazy for Apple to price Mac Pros ( and there other products) based on the spot market for components (and even more so on weekly/monthly current markets which are even more looney toons when looked at through small periods of time). No serious business customer nor most consumers want to put up with the uncertainty that introduces. Apple is a big company their pricing should take the lumps and bumps so that get a fixed price over an extended period of time. Fixed prices make purchasing decisions that take time to get approval go more smoothly.

[mattbatt]

Why would Apple want to make the replacement for the old quad compete with the 8 ? It is much more natural to make the new single processor package model compete with the old one. Likewise the new dual processor package model compete with the old one.

So 6 and 4 cores line up versus old one that was only 4 cores. Similarly a 12 and 8 core line up versus a

Irrational that the vendors are going to try to double performance in a single generation step... just not going happen. Intel isn't going to price it that way and neither is Apple when they don't have to.

I am not talking about what best suits Apple: all my points are about what best suits me for video, value, performance. Call me selfish, but when I am spending over 3k, I should care about what I am getting.

If it were your money, I guess I would make excuses too.

The facts are that the 6 core 3.33Ghz can nip the heals of the 8 core 2.93 current gen and surpass it if it is overclocked to 4ghz.

The other fact is that HP and others (or you can build it yourself) are offering complete systems with a 3.33ghz 980x for under $2500 (often $1999).

This is America, where the consumer has free choice and is able to voice their opinion and dissatisfaction.

While people argue "why do you need that" or "Apple has xyz for doing what it is doing" I am saying, "Why aren't people thinking about competition?" If the iphone was slower with less features than the Andriod and cost twice as much, Apple would get an earful and lose their market-share.

Apple knows how to compete when they want to.

The Macintosh has never had anything near 10% worldwide market-share, so why should they compete? It makes it frustrating though.


Then fix the fraking software. No reason what so ever to distort your hardware line up and pricing strucuture because some software package is lagging. That is a warped world view.

Well sure, that is what 10.6, CUDA, OpenCL and other collaborations are about and are supposed to do. But this is well known: software does not scale and will never scale to perfect parallels across cores. High Ghz is always felt in the day-to-day tasks as well as navigation within an app.

FYI: I have been personally talking to a senior developer at Adobe whose name is in the Photoshop splash page when launching: she gave me some great inside info about what really goes on with the math, cache and processing of daily work with Photoshop. 2 cores is about it for usage in CS 5 (you will see more cores working, but they juggle the data around. ALSO, when a core waits for RAM, it will show a peak performance [I did not know that] even though it is not processing any data!!).

She also said radial blur is the one thing that scales great across all cores because of the math symmetry. Did you know that currently, no application can scale text and typing across more than one core? (Indesign fans and typesetters read this!)

The engineer told me it is impossible. I don't know why, but ya, I found out a lot of cool info.

Also, each core in your computer should have a min. of 1 GB RAM but now the standard is 2. So this future 6 core chip should have 12 GB of Ram with the computer.

Who wants to bet that Apple doesn't even ship it with 4GB??

FCP needs to catch up now with PPro CS5 - Adobe taps into the GPU like never before while Apple laid off a lot of people from the FCP division. I'm also thinking about switching to the CS 5 master suite (since I use CS for design and layout anyway).

Another real life example of Apple not staying modern with the Pro market.


going to pay for all that. It is always strange when "the prices are too high" is coupled with "use higher price parts."

Again, we all know third party RAM is cheaper than buying it through Apple. But at least they can give us some higher performance RAM - PC's do and this new chip wants it (with its larger and faster cache, fast RAM is a MUST!)


No not really going to save much. This is just the new hidden form of a " lower part cost mini tower so I can avoid buying an iMac. " tract. That is not improve the Mac Pro that is "create a new product line".

Right now Apple can use the same board for both Single and Dual variations (both can use a 5000 series chipset). If go with the i7 will have to split the boards. One would have to go x58 and the other would still be 5000 chipset.

So the costs go up: the inventory management/logistics goes up, the number of boards sold goes down (already likely shrinking volume... that just makes it worse),

There is only a limited amount of manpower that Apple is going to devote to Mac Pro development. If you increase the amount of manpower required only going to increase pressure to pull the plug on the lineup. Could very well end up with a single package (SP) only option being offered (nuke the DP option). That's backwards, IMHO. The DP is the core of what the Mac Pro is aimed at. The SP is just a minimal impact variation that offers a bit more product range. The range is still going to be limited. Apple has no intention of filling every single niche.


i7 isn't killing of Xeons. The 3680 is priced exactly the same as the i7 980x. Unless put huge value on overclocking ( not sure how many serious pros are huge fans of that for anything other than a box going to throw away in a couple years. ) there is no value add.

What is critically missing is the rest of the 3600 line up. If Intel's long term intent is that the "extreme" i7 replace the Xeon 3xxx line up then why drop a 3680 at all ? If they flush out the line up as they grow 32nm capacity then all this i7 stuff goes by the wayside.

Again, who cares about the trouble Apple has to go through or if they need to use 2 different boards: drop the price, enter into the competition, stop beating loyal customers over the head with hyped up prices, delayed new products and the promotion of toys!

[Umbongo]

Right now Apple can use the same board for both Single and Dual variations (both can use a 5000 series chipset). If go with the i7 will have to split the boards. One would have to go x58 and the other would still be 5000 chipset.

You're confused over this. Core i7 and Xeon 3500/3600 processors only work on single socket boards, which are X58. 5500 and 5600 series processors will work on both X58 and 5500/5520 boards. Which is why Apple currently use a system that allows two different daughter boards to be plugged in.

Apple won't use Core i7, as you indicate, as there is no reason to when there are Xeon processors with the same specifications + ECC memory support at the same price, and there is a larger range of SKUs available.

[dwarnecke11]

Call me crazy, but I predict a unibody Mac Pro redesign. The question is - can they maintain the ease of expandability with a unibody enclosure?

Better yet, a price drop on the low end to make it a viable alternative to a high-end iMac.

For sure they can make it more compact. The cheesegrater look is not needed since modern processors don't run nearly as hot as the big G5s the case was originally designed for.

[ValSalva]

Call me crazy, but I predict a unibody Mac Pro redesign. The question is - can they maintain the ease of expandability with a unibody enclosure?

Better yet, a price drop on the low end to make it a viable alternative to a high-end iMac.

For sure they can make it more compact. The cheesegrater look is not needed since modern processors don't run nearly as hot as the big G5s the case was originally designed for.

Isn't the unibody design primarily to keep a mobile device rigid and yet light? How would a Mac Pro, as desktop, benefit from a unibody design? Can you imagine the size of the hunk of aluminum from which it would need to be machined? It would be the most expensive case to mass produce ever. I can't see any chance of that happening.

[jjahshik32]

Isn't the unibody design primarily to keep a mobile device rigid and yet light? How would a Mac Pro, as desktop, benefit from a unibody design? Can you imagine the size of the hunk of aluminum from which it would need to be machined? It would be the most expensive case to mass produce ever. I can't see any chance of that happening.

The same could be said about the mac mini as its not a portable device such as the macbook/macbook pro. So I can see the Mac Pro receiving an updated unibody enclosure or at least something that looks like it. Either way, there will be a side door to the Mac Pro so its not really a unibody, it kind of has a unibody already...

[VirtualRain]

Call me crazy, but I predict a unibody Mac Pro redesign. The question is - can they maintain the ease of expandability with a unibody enclosure?

Better yet, a price drop on the low end to make it a viable alternative to a high-end iMac.

For sure they can make it more compact. The cheesegrater look is not needed since modern processors don't run nearly as hot as the big G5s the case was originally designed for.

Define "unibody"? What do you mean by that (before I call you crazy).

I expect a price drop for an entry level quad if/when there is a refresh.

Compact and expansion are trade-offs. Most people here want more expansion, not less.

The cheesegrater makes for very efficient and effective through air cooling which translates to low speed fans and lower noise.

BTW, I'm no expert on the G5 PPC CPU's but I believe their TDP was significantly lower than the Intel processors, so the case design is actually holding up very well in light of the added heat being produced by the CPU's. Modern graphics cards also produce a lot more heat and consume a lot more power than they did 5 years ago as well.

[deconstruct60]

You're confused over this. Core i7 and Xeon 3500/3600 processors only work on single socket boards, which are X58. 5500 and 5600 series processors will work on both X58 and 5500/5520 boards. Which is why Apple currently use a system that allows two different daughter boards to be plugged in.

I thought I had seen diagram which placed the chipset on the motherboard. Can't find it now though so sorry about that. Intel official chipset support list suggests it they are separate pairings. Found a picture on anandtech with the CPUs removed from the daughtercard with a chip under a smaller heatsink. that's probably the Northbridge chipset.

That's makes for lots more stuff (PCI , DMI , etc. ) to route off the card though, but at slower speeds than QPI.

[bzollinger]

I am not talking about what best suits Apple: all my points are about what best suits me for video, value, performance. Call me selfish, but when I am spending over 3k, I should care about what I am getting.


If it were your money, I guess I would make excuses too.

The facts are that the 6 core 3.33Ghz can nip the heals of the 8 core 2.93 current gen and surpass it if it is overclocked to 4ghz.

The other fact is that HP and others (or you can build it yourself) are offering complete systems with a 3.33ghz 980x for under $2500 (often $1999).

This is America, where the consumer has free choice and is able to voice their opinion and dissatisfaction.

While people argue "why do you need that" or "Apple has xyz for doing what it is doing" I am saying, "Why aren't people thinking about competition?" If the iphone was slower with less features than the Andriod and cost twice as much, Apple would get an earful and lose their market-share.

Apple knows how to compete when they want to.

The Macintosh has never had anything near 10% worldwide market-share, so why should they compete? It makes it frustrating though.




Well sure, that is what 10.6, CUDA, OpenCL and other collaborations are about and are supposed to do. But this is well known: software does not scale and will never scale to perfect parallels across cores. High Ghz is always felt in the day-to-day tasks as well as navigation within an app.

FYI: I have been personally talking to a senior developer at Adobe whose name is in the Photoshop splash page when launching: she gave me some great inside info about what really goes on with the math, cache and processing of daily work with Photoshop. 2 cores is about it for usage in CS 5 (you will see more cores working, but they juggle the data around. ALSO, when a core waits for RAM, it will show a peak performance [I did not know that] even though it is not processing any data!!).

She also said radial blur is the one thing that scales great across all cores because of the math symmetry. Did you know that currently, no application can scale text and typing across more than one core? (Indesign fans and typesetters read this!)

The engineer told me it is impossible. I don't know why, but ya, I found out a lot of cool info.

Also, each core in your computer should have a min. of 1 GB RAM but now the standard is 2. So this future 6 core chip should have 12 GB of Ram with the computer.

Who wants to bet that Apple doesn't even ship it with 4GB??

FCP needs to catch up now with PPro CS5 - Adobe taps into the GPU like never before while Apple laid off a lot of people from the FCP division. I'm also thinking about switching to the CS 5 master suite (since I use CS for design and layout anyway).

Another real life example of Apple not staying modern with the Pro market.




Again, we all know third party RAM is cheaper than buying it through Apple. But at least they can give us some higher performance RAM - PC's do and this new chip wants it (with its larger and faster cache, fast RAM is a MUST!)




Again, who cares about the trouble Apple has to go through or if they need to use 2 different boards: drop the price, enter into the competition, stop beating loyal customers over the head with hyped up prices, delayed new products and the promotion of toys!

+1
+1
+1
+1

That's four points I fully agree with.

What is up with people not demanding more from Apple? I don't want to hear about thier margins and profits, and why they'll offer us a $2500 tower with 2GB of RAM (amongst other things).:mad:

At this point I'd be happy if Apple simply stayed in the game! Right now they're way behind and charging a premium!:mad:

It's us, the customer that should be helping Apple give us what we want, not making excuses or rationalizing what they are/have been doing.

If they introduce the base model SP MacPro with a 2.66Ghz proc I'll be pissed! 2.93Ghz should be the base. For those of us that don't need 8 or 12 cores, we'll be getting screwed if they flip us the 2.66 as a starting point.

[deconstruct60]

Call me crazy, but I predict a unibody Mac Pro redesign.

The Mac Pro has been unibody for a very long time. When Apple uses "unibody" it isn't actually one piece. The bottom typically screws off the rest of the assembly so there are multiple parts. Mac Pro's skin already has rigid significantly large sheets of aluminum making up the structural load bearing elements the system.

There aren't cross (across the width) structural support elements in the middle of the interior. The "unibody" approach is one that moves the structural support elements to the edges to free up more internal volume. The primarily interior barriers still left in the Mac Pro are more so for thermal separation and airflow control.

Buying thicker blocks of aluminum only to mill and through more of it away would only drive the case cost higher. It is already a very high cost case.

[Eidorian]

I won't buy at that cost! ;) I can get a Core i7 980x PC with 9 GB of Ram, bluray, and a massive video card for under $2000 from HP. Or if I want an ugly as sin gamer case, I can get it overclocked to almost 4 Ghz with USB 3 from cyberpowerpc.com at the same basic price.I'm surviving with my Core i5 750 right now. Though 2010 has been a pretty boring year when it comes to computer hardware in general.

The Core i7 970 should spice things up with a possible sub-$500 Gulftown. Thankfully Sandy Bridge on Socket B2 is still going for 2H 2011. There's some life left in LGA 1366. P55 is dead though. Very dead.

[apolloa]

Just like the mac mini owners who just got an "update" ;)

Well speaking as someone who has JUST finished setting up their brand new laptop (It's a beast!!) I think I would be excited, IMO the new Mini looks like Sex!!! It's stunning!! So I really can't see Apple keeping the same old Pro case now?

[VirtualRain]

Well speaking as someone who has JUST finished setting up their brand new laptop (It's a beast!!) I think I would be excited, IMO the new Mini looks like Sex!!! It's stunning!! So I really can't see Apple keeping the same old Pro case now?

Having looked inside the previous gen Mini, I'm absolutely stunned that they were effectively able to cut the volume of the enclosure in half - it was already crammed with stuff that was super small. The new mini is a marvel of engineering in my mind, especially when you consider the AC/DC power supply is integrated! :eek:

While I'm sure they could sex up the Mac Pro case a bit, I'm not sure what else they could do design wise. Smaller isn't really an option unless you start sacrificing cooling performance and expansion. I guess we will see.

[dwarnecke11]

I guess I would define unibody as one main structural piece of aluminum wrapping around all six sides, at least in some capacity. Picture the current iPod shuffle which is a solid piece except for a removable panel on the clip side. The current Mac Pro design, while having all aluminum, has some breaks which could be eliminated. Heck, even the aluminum Apple remote is one seamless piece - I have no idea how they shoehorned the circuits in there!

I'm not saying it's a great idea, I'm just saying it's a possibility.

[strausd]

Of course I don't have pricing for the next gen MP but this is Apple we are talking about. People had the same conversations when the last gen came out and said that "based on the price of the processor/components, the price would not go up". They were wrong and I think you will be also. Apple will raise the price of the MP when it finally comes out and I believe it will be a hefty increase (especially for machines sold outside the US).

I just don't think there will be a significant price increase like everyone else is saying. People have been saying that the entry point for 2 six-core CPUs will be above 6K which makes absolutely no sense to me when there is a $14 difference between the CPUs. Sure, the prices may go up a bit, but not $2,700. I think Apple knows their price for the Mac Pro is bad enough and to do that would be ridiculous. I don't know if you are someone who believes that, but if you do go for it, you have your own opinion. But it would be stupid to raise the price $2,700 when the price difference of the part is $14. My guess is that the price of the 12-core system will only be a hundred or two difference from that of an 8-core system.

[strausd]

Having looked inside the previous gen Mini, I'm absolutely stunned that they were effectively able to cut the volume of the enclosure in half - it was already crammed with stuff that was super small. The new mini is a marvel of engineering in my mind, especially when you consider the AC/DC power supply is integrated! :eek:

While I'm sure they could sex up the Mac Pro case a bit, I'm not sure what else they could do design wise. Smaller isn't really an option unless you start sacrificing cooling performance and expansion. I guess we will see.

The only thing I could see them doing is giving it a black Apple logo, like on the Mini, iMac, and cinema display.

[Icaras]

I'm beginning to understand what Steve meant by saying "Wait" and "bringing us to the next level".

I have a feeling that the Mac Pro will follow suit shortly and will get a similar case design treatment as well. It is, afterall, the last Mac in their lineup that hasn't yet received a facelift.

[brendu]

at least they didnt put a dual core atom in it

[deconstruct60]

I am not talking about what best suits Apple: all my points are about what best suits me for video, value, performance. Call me selfish, but when I am spending over 3k, I should care about what I am getting.


There is a distinct different between being overly self centered , myopic , and selfish and wanting to get value for you money. Not every vendor has to offer something for you. What should be looking for is vendors who are aligned with the value propositions you are looking for. ideally should be looking for win/win. Where vendors offers what they want to offer and you get what you want to get.


Apple offers balanced, well made workstations. They also don't lowball on price. They don't do "loss leader" boxes where one product line is suppose to subsidize another. Their value prop is also that they make enough money so can be reasonably confident will be around 4-6 years from now.

If don't care about balance or well made then should be looking elsewhere.

I'm not making excuses for Apple. I'm point out why Apple should not make bonehead offerings. Such as ....


The facts are that the 6 core 3.33Ghz can nip the heals of the 8 core 2.93 current gen and surpass it if it is overclocked to 4ghz.


Why should Apple hold back from offering a 2010 version of the same tech that the 6 core 3.33GHz is offered at? There is no rational justification for that. If going to offer a 3680 follow on then why not offer a 5650 dual one. The 5650 will beat both the 2.93 current gen and the overclocked version. ... without overclocking (which is likely to kill off the usable lifetime of the machine). If gets faster results has high value then they have delivered higher value offering with the next generation.

In short, to measure whether next gen is better value prop than last you compare the exact same product offerings between generation. A "high" SP to a next gen "high" SP . A "low" DP to a next gen "low" DP. Basing it on apples to oranges and cross product line comparisons mainly just servers to obfuscate the comparisons.

Most of these "Apple should build discount mini tower" tangents are primarily about creating apples to oranges comparisons and then ifso-factso tada Apple has to create a mini tower. They totally blow off the real core issues to try to make a point through misdirection and hope to loose enough folks along the with to form a mob.

When compare apples to apples ( similar workstations which have similar quality, parts, and balanced performance characteristics ) there isn't this huge gulf in prices (differences yes but not huge typically). So it isn't about Apple charging waaaaaaay more than other vendors their size it is really about Apple sticking to a set of offerings that doesn't cover everybody possible and their distant 3rd cousin.



This is America, where the consumer has free choice and is able to voice their opinion and dissatisfaction.


You can voice it I'm just puzzled why think going to accomplish anything. Most of these apples-to-oranges tangents often boil down in the end to "apple should shot itself in the foot so that I save more money" after strip off the misdirections. It is not a win/win situation. It is a "I should win so they should loose" one.



Apple knows how to compete when they want to.


Again Apple is competing. Not against everyone else's whole entire line up. They select certain products offerings and then compete against those equivalent subsets. They are also not following a strategy where set up anymore cannibalization against their own products than is required.

It tends to work quite well since they are doing better than almost all of their competitors.



The Macintosh has never had anything near 10% worldwide market-share, so why should they compete? It makes it frustrating though.


Frustrating for whom? Apple is sitting on a giant stack of money. The folks who are looking for matches between what they want and Apple's design approaches are happy. The frustrated folks are those who are telling Apple to change their business policies and have no justification as to why that would be beneficial in a win/win context.


High Ghz is always felt in the day-to-day tasks as well as navigation within an app.
....


More GHz for faster menu selections ? Seriously? A better storage I/O set up would likely to just as good of a job in most cases. There is no "torque" required so that kind of lightweight stuff.

Chasing after highest GHz typically has folks blowing off other attributes to engage in the GHz war. They blow off memory size (not speed size so that can get as much as possible off the storage) and storage i/o ( again so can get things as quickly as possible off the storage ). It is a balance of all three that counts.



.... and processing of daily work with Photoshop. 2 cores is about it for usage in CS 5 (you will see more cores working, but they juggle the data around. ALSO, when a core waits for RAM, it will show a peak performance [I did not know that] even though it is not processing any data!!).


No joke on the high number of noops. That is exactly why SMT/Hyperthreading works. Folks are on average under utilizing the core(s). So more GHz just means on average just increasing the under utilization.

And when the other cores don't juggle the data around ....... the 2 main ones would achieve as much throughput.

There is no non trivial algorithm that is 100% parallel 100% of the time.



Who wants to bet that Apple doesn't even ship it with 4GB??


I would. More likely the default will be 6GB (SP) and 12GB(DP). 4GB/8GB (with 1 GB DIMMs) is misguided because would be killing off benefits the 3 memory controllers give you. Only really want to fill that 4th slot when backed into that situation.

a. the price of 2GB DIMMs has fallen so huge price increase to go with them instead of the 1GB ones. Second, it demonstrates a value increase between old/new.

If keep 1GB DIMMs more whining about how should have dropped price.

b. It is more balanced since newer Xeons have bigger L3s makes sense to keep the L3/memory average balance the same.

c. Have done it on MBPs. Now coming standard with 4GB.


The primary blocker on going from 3GB to 6GB would be them bumping the hard drive default size up far enough (640GB -> 1TB) that the year-over-year price drop savings was totally used up on that or got partially eaten up by Intel's price hikes. That isn't the best choice for balance though.

The only reason to keep 1GB on the update is that know most folks were going to run off and replace them anyway so just ship with smallest, cheapest set. That's not an "added value prop" position though.


There should be enough "extra" space on the SP daughtercard for Apple to drop a version with 6 slots perhaps this time. Use the space were the other processor and 4 slots are in the alternative version. However, can see how they may stick with the somewhat copy and replicate Package + 4 on both and max reuse on this update.




FCP needs to catch up now with PPro CS5 - Adobe taps into the GPU like never before while Apple laid off a lot of people from the FCP division. I'm also thinking about switching to the CS 5 master suite (since I use CS for design and layout anyway).


Switching software because better fit. Imagine that.


stop beating loyal customers over the head with hyped up prices, delayed new products and the promotion of toys!

Loyal customer... What Apple owes you something on your next system because you previously bought one?

I understand the never owned folks but if have bought a Mac Pro the value prop now is about the same as it has been since they firmed up the boundaries between product lines.

[deconstruct60]

+1
If they introduce the base model SP MacPro with a 2.66Ghz proc I'll be pissed! 2.93Ghz should be the base. For those of us that don't need 8 or 12 cores, we'll be getting screwed if they flip us the 2.66 as a starting point.

It is unlikely Intel is going to release a 3620 (or equivalent) at 2.93GHz while setting the price at $284 . To get into the 2.90+ GHz range with any of the 3500 series offerings you were at least paying $562 for the unit. That isn't likely going to get any cheaper for the 3600 series. Setting your expectations otherwise is just setting yourself up for disappointment.

Apple is likely to "eat" $200+ per box to make a bunch of users happy ... keep believing that is going to happen.

With 5600 series, the clock rate on the bottom offering Apple likely to use, 5620, jumped to 2.40GHz (from 2.26 for 5520). So perhaps Intel won't juice the lower differences quite as much this time with updated 3600. If add the same delta, the 3620 would come in at 2.8GHz. That is close enough to 2.93GHz to add essentially the same value, but still keep the lower component cost. You get a bump in GHz and L3 cache size. Both of those should help squeeze out better performance.

Right now, Intel doesn't offer a 3620 or 3640 which is a much bigger blocker than anything Apple is doing (or not doing ; depending upon your perspective).

[Plutonius]

That has everything to do with non US currencies collapsing. Like Intel increasing component costs.... why is Apple going to take hit in margins because currency went down?

I suppose someone is going to propose that Apple dynamically adjust prices as the Euro flops around. That's goofy. They make can make a projection as to what the average rate is going to be then price to that so that offering price remains constant. If there is cushion in their estimate... that's OK because likely expanding retail store openings in area anyway.


It would be crazy for Apple to price Mac Pros ( and there other products) based on the spot market for components (and even more so on weekly/monthly current markets which are even more looney toons when looked at through small periods of time). No serious business customer nor most consumers want to put up with the uncertainty that introduces. Apple is a big company their pricing should take the lumps and bumps so that get a fixed price over an extended period of time. Fixed prices make purchasing decisions that take time to get approval go more smoothly.

I agree 100%. With the Greek currency down to junk bond level and other EU countries in trouble, it looks like Apple and other companies are predicting the Euro will collapse and are pricing their products accordingly.

[Vylen]

I would think its pretty obvious why things like scaling can't be spread across multiple cores - scaling is a linear transformation and with most maths, you can't suddenly split it into separate concurrent equations. Do one operation before you can do the other - it's as simple as that really.

And an increase of processor speed isn't everything - everyone should understand that now. There's a lot of bottlenecks in both hardware and software. Plus, an increase in efficiency in individual components are meaningless if the pathways that connect these components are crap - simple example, why do you think RAM is always so close to the CPU? But assuming these are all top-notch, it's again, meaningless if the software is crap - and I'm talking about the Operating System here. Cause it's the OS (or more precisely, the kernel) that decides how to manage memory, for example.

Keep in mind that program data is stored in memory - accessing menu's in your wonderful GUI apps is something that requires both memory and CPU's to work together to function.

Of course, it doesn't help though if you don't have enough RAM and the OS is using paging - you might be unlucky enough to have the part of program data that handles menu code paged to your HDD, cause then your OS has to page some other memory, get the menu segment out of your HDD and put it back into RAM.

Anyway, I could keep ranting on, but I've forgotten what my point was... lol
Give yourself a cookie if you read through this entire thing ;)

[Plutonius]

I just don't think there will be a significant price increase like everyone else is saying. People have been saying that the entry point for 2 six-core CPUs will be above 6K which makes absolutely no sense to me when there is a $14 difference between the CPUs. Sure, the prices may go up a bit, but not $2,700. I think Apple knows their price for the Mac Pro is bad enough and to do that would be ridiculous. I don't know if you are someone who believes that, but if you do go for it, you have your own opinion. But it would be stupid to raise the price $2,700 when the price difference of the part is $14. My guess is that the price of the 12-core system will only be a hundred or two difference from that of an 8-core system.

I think you will see a minimum of a 10% (I'm predicting 15%) increase in price. That is more then a $100-200 change.

One thing I think I'm safe in predicting is that nobody will like the pricing.

[strausd]

I think you will see a minimum of a 10% (I'm predicting 15%) increase in price. That is more then a $100-200 change.

One thing I think I'm safe in predicting is that nobody will like the pricing.

Haha generally people think most Apple products are over priced anyways. And I think the main reason there was a big price difference in the 2008 8-core model compared to the 2009 8-core model was the increase in RAM. The 2008 model started with 2GB RAM and the current 8-core model with 6 GB. A 4GB module from Apple costs $500, the exact price difference between the 2008 and 2009 model. People have said to expect a big price difference this time because there was one that time. However, if there is a big price difference, it should not be because of the new six-core processors. If it was a 15% increase, that would make the starting Mac Pro at almost 3K, I don't think they would do that. Why do you think they would raise it all 15%?

[ValSalva]

I'm beginning to understand what Steve meant by saying "Wait" and "bringing us to the next level".

I have a feeling that the Mac Pro will follow suit shortly and will get a similar case design treatment as well. It is, afterall, the last Mac in their lineup that hasn't yet received a facelift.

The MacBook Air is due too. I'm still hopeful the 29th of this month will be the day for the new Mac Pro. Hopefully SJ will prove that the Newsweek mock Mac obituary was completely wrong.

[Dragonforce]

The new Mac Mini is in fact the new Mac Pro. ;)

[mattbatt]

There is a distinct different between being overly self centered , myopic , and selfish and wanting to get value for you money. Not every vendor has to offer something for you. What should be looking for is vendors who are aligned with the value propositions you are looking for. ideally should be looking for win/win. Where vendors offers what they want to offer and you get what you want to get.


Apple offers balanced, well made workstations. They also don't lowball on price. They don't do "loss leader" boxes where one product line is suppose to subsidize another. Their value prop is also that they make enough money so can be reasonably confident will be around 4-6 years from now.

ok, let's make this simple, you mention comparing apples to oranges: currently, the Apple to PC comparison is a valid one - they are all using the same internal parts! Before Apple switched to Intel, yes, Ghz clock speed, CPU even GPU were different, but now the only difference is the OS, motherboard, case and Price.

I don't know about you, but a fancy case and better OS (motherboards are motherboards) should not equal $1000 + price increase!

We are talking about high end desktop/workstation machines using SP 6 core chips (I personally am not going to buy the DP). So for me, as a diligent technical consumer, I should expect at least that Apple will be competitive with the price, RAM and GPU offering for configurations.


Most of these "Apple should build discount mini tower" tangents are primarily about creating apples to oranges comparisons and then ifso-factso tada Apple has to create a mini tower. They totally blow off the real core issues to try to make a point through misdirection and hope to loose enough folks along the with to form a mob.

You forget when Apple used to offer various desktops and workstations based on the PowerPC (6100-9500 series). They had intermediate desktops.


Most of these apples-to-oranges tangents often boil down in the end to "apple should shot itself in the foot so that I save more money" after strip off the misdirections. It is not a win/win situation. It is a "I should win so they should loose" one.

I am still confused with how comparing a high end PC workstation with the same Intel 6 core chip, ram, HD, GPU (well, we know the PC will come with a faster stock GPU no question :) ), CD/DVD/Blue-ray (oh ya, Apple won't include a blue-ray burner) - with the same performance -to an Apple MacPro, is comparing apples to oranges? Please educate me. Unless you are looking at the price, then it IS apples to oranges!


Apple is sitting on a giant stack of money. The folks who are looking for matches between what they want and Apple's design approaches are happy. The frustrated folks are those who are telling Apple to change their business policies and have no justification as to why that would be beneficial in a win/win context.

Their stack of money has come from iTunes, iPod and iPhone sales and soon to be iPad sales. Then their mobile division, then iMac sales. MacPro workstations do not account for their stack of $$ Apple knew their computer influence was nothing close to world dominance nor even 10% marketshare, so they created brilliant products with great ideas.

Awesome! I have an iPhone and iTunes. I want a MacPro because my current mac is dead and I do pro work.


More GHz for faster menu selections ? Seriously? . . . Chasing after highest GHz typically has folks blowing off other attributes to engage in the GHz war. They blow off memory size (not speed size so that can get as much as possible off the storage) and storage i/o ( again so can get things as quickly as possible off the storage ). It is a balance of all three that counts.

If you notice, I talked about memory. While you are talking about I/O you remind me: PC manufacturers are including deal-breaker prices for SSD - hmm, another thing Apple is not competing with.

Anyway, sure many Pro users are doing 3D animation and rendering. That will benefit from multiple cores. But what about us video editors and graphic designers? Again, FCP is not using more than 2 cores and needs to be updated. IT IS NOT EVEN 64 bit!! Rendering video does use more cores but there is much to the video process before the final render. Having higher clock speeds as a standard option (unlike last year where they started at 2.26 Ghz), is a good move on Apple's part because it makes everything more snappy and fast.

Not just menus but every click, drag, type, object move, scale, rotate, launch, clip, color correction, effect, ect. Multiple cores and HT don't help most of these everyday tasks that should not be confused with prosumer tasks. No matter how pro you are, you still need to click, drag, select, ect.

Loyal customer... What Apple owes you something on your next system because you previously bought one?

Yup, 20 years with Apple, vocal supporter in various school districts, IT supporter. I currently work in a modern Community College where I have proposed a 200-500k mac lab. Our sister college did that. But I need some support from Apple and I need to be able to justify a half million dollar proposal. Do you understand?

For my personal needs, ya I'm looking at 3k.

[deconstruct60]

And I think the main reason there was a big price difference in the 2008 8-core model compared to the 2009 8-core model was the increase in RAM. The 2008 model started with 2GB RAM and the current 8-core model with 6 GB.

That shouldn't happen this time. Just checked crucial and macsales.com for two reference points. They don't even explicitly offer 1GB DIMMs options for a Mac Pro. These 1GB parts Apple is using in the 2009 money are from a "Moore's law" generation ago at this point (18-24 months). Memory density has gotten to point it 2GB is mainstream. Shipping 1GB DIMMs in 2010 is just being Scrooge McDuck (like on the new mini and new MacBook. Not unusual for them to artificially kneecap the bottom of the respective lines.).

Apple shipping 2 x 1GB in 2008 and 6 x 1GB in 2009 is a 3x increase in components that probably haven't halfed in costs. It is not surprising to see increase because getting more. For 2010 not likely to increase the number of DIMM parts and those specific parts should have dropped in price after 2 (or more) years. In order to justify holding price level, they'll need to increase the inherent value of the components like RAM.

[Umbongo]

Haha generally people think most Apple products are over priced anyways. And I think the main reason there was a big price difference in the 2008 8-core model compared to the 2009 8-core model was the increase in RAM. The 2008 model started with 2GB RAM and the current 8-core model with 6 GB. A 4GB module from Apple costs $500, the exact price difference between the 2008 and 2009 model.

Coincidence. The price rise was either due to Apple losing big discounts on processors (hence using two $375 processors rather than two $800 ones) or them deciding bigger margins were needed. The whole 6GB won't cost Apple more than $200.

[strausd]

Coincidence. The price rise was either due to Apple losing big discounts on processors (hence using two $375 processors rather than two $800 ones) or them deciding bigger margins were needed. The whole 6GB won't cost Apple more than $200.

Just cause it costs Apple $200 doesn't mean they won't sell it for way more, they always do that. And sure, the more RAM may not be the only reason for the price increase, but it probably contributed some. If they don't add more RAM to the next Mac Pro and just substitute each quad for a hexa, then we shouldn't see a huge price hike like the 2008-2009.

[VirtualRain]

Again Apple is competing. Not against everyone else's whole entire line up. They select certain products offerings and then compete against those equivalent subsets. They are also not following a strategy where set up anymore cannibalization against their own products than is required.

It tends to work quite well since they are doing better than almost all of their competitors.

Frustrating for whom? Apple is sitting on a giant stack of money. The folks who are looking for matches between what they want and Apple's design approaches are happy. The frustrated folks are those who are telling Apple to change their business policies and have no justification as to why that would be beneficial in a win/win context.

+1, it's nice to see some other folks here who understand Apple's business strategy.

To others...

Apple is not in the main-stream desktop business. Lots of other companies have that market well taken care of. Apple doesn't want to own the whole market, they want to own certain niche markets, particularly the premium end of those niche markets where all the margin is. By taking just the top 10% of the market, they can own the majority of the profits and have proven to be extremely successful at it.

If the Mac Pro doesn't seem like good value to you, then it's probably not for you and you are one of the 90% of buyers Apple isn't after. It's that simple.

[VirtualRain]

ok, let's make this simple, you mention comparing apples to oranges: currently, the Apple to PC comparison is a valid one - they are all using the same internal parts! Before Apple switched to Intel, yes, Ghz clock speed, CPU even GPU were different, but now the only difference is the OS, motherboard, case and Price.

I don't know about you, but a fancy case and better OS (motherboards are motherboards) should not equal $1000 + price increase!


I know people hate car analogies, but here's a very relevant one...

The Audi R8 V10 uses exactly the same drive train as the Lamborghini Gallardo... yet the Gallardo is $50K more expensive than the Audi. Effectively, only the body (case?) is different. Yet, I'm sure most would agree there are a lot of tangible and intangible differences such as the brand, the buying experience, the support, the choice of materials used, the ownership experience, etc. All of these differences apply as much to computers as they do to exotic cars. Apple is the Lambo of their industry.

[Cavepainter]

Continuing the car analogies (some of us don't mind them, by the way) I would actually liken this to the old 82 Cadillac Cimarron. Same exact platform and drivetrain as the lowly and much much cheaper Cavalier, but with the "extra cheese" of Cadillac badges and intangibles and gizmos that made it sell for a huge premium price. Well, consumers were smart enough to see GM as lazy and the Cimarron as a ripoff and it was a massive failure, and it still is a badge of shame for Cadillac.

Nobody likes it when a big, wealthy company (like GM or Apple) gets lazy with R & D on their established brands and starts taking their customers for granted.

[Icaras]

Nobody likes it when a big, wealthy company (like GM or Apple) gets lazy with R & D on their established brands and starts taking their customers for granted.

I do not think Apple's R&D has suffered at all. They might just not be focusing their R&D on a particular sector of their business, which in this case I guess, could be the Mac Pro.

However the long wait time for this update may actually indicate that Apple has spent signficantly more time and resources on R&D for the Mac Pro actually. We'll just have to wait and see.

[beto2k7]

I believe IMHO that everything sums up in something as simple as.... if you complain about the price then you don't need a mac pro, if you compare a mac pro to any other workstation and scream and yell about how much cheaper the other workstation is... what the hell are you waiting for... go and get the cheaper workstation.

As for me I will gladly pay the premium to get an Apple computer. Why you may ask... easy, Quality Build, Reliability, Warranty, OS, among others... but that again is just me.

[exodius]

Having just today helped a friend pic out a PC for his own use (mostly browsing, communication, and some amateur photo processing and video editing), we picked out a $1k Dell machine that would probably suit his needs very well. Thinking about it, there's nothing Apple offers that really compares. It's probably more powerful than the Quad Core Mac Pro, but that's 18 months out of date, and even then not much more powerful. The 27" iMac comes close, just a bit below, but that 27" screen doesn't come cheap.

I use professional photo editing software, run physical simulations, and play games. My 6-year-old dual G5 is showing its age but does pretty much everything except stream HD flash video and be as responsive in Aperture as I'd like. Not bad for a computer that's technically obsolete as of Snow Leopard. My friend asked me what kind of computer I would buy, so I priced together the parts on NewEgg.com with what I expect the updated MacPro to have.

I assume two things: after this long, Apple knows it needs to put in some significant upgrades into the line to make it competitive. Apple has in the past tried to stay at the forefront of technology, so I think this is a safe assumption. Also, Apple competes with a segment of the PC market for workstations and knows that it can't sell Pro machines based on name alone. (Apple doesn't seem like a company that plans on screwing over its consumers for short term gain; they know the need cool credibility with iPhone, iPod, and MacBook users to keep the profits coming.) If the Mac Pro is on it's way out, I don't think Apple will end it with a suicidal price hike AND sub-optimal hardware.

So, before mentioning the price, a few features in particular I was looking for, to make a fair comparison between my guess at a Mac Pro and what's available to the PC workstation.

- USB 3.0 (cool new technology)
- FireWire (can't abandon it)
- 4+ SATA drive slots
- i7 980x (six core) chip [okay, it's likely apple will use the 5600 chip, but this is as fair a comparison as it gets]
- optical audio out
- RAID options

Now some differences:

- the PC has eSATA, I doubt Mac Pro will (why? Not really needed)
- PC has a bluray burner, Mac Pro probably won't (which is actually fine by me)
- Mac Pro has better access in the case (while not a big selling point to me, aesthetics do matter for more than eye candy)
- PC has four 500 GB drives (we all know Apple overcharges for RAM and Hard drives)
- PC has 8 GB RAM, Mac Pro will probably start with 6 GB (see above)
- i7 vs 5600 (counts for something, but I can't quantify it)
- Mac Pro will probably have dual monitor outs; PC has one DVI out
- PC has 1GB video card, Mac Pro will probably have 512 MB
- Mac Pro will have optical audio in and out, and probably some more. PC has just basic in/out with optical out as an extra

In short, this PC has a bit more in most departments, but nothing too big. RAM and Drives can be bought separately. I personally can't tell the difference between a good and bad video card by looking at the graphics. And finally, as I said, my G5 is still running fairly strong basically seven years after being a top-of-the-line model. (I'm only considering buying a Mac Pro because I have the disposable income.) My now-10 year old G4 dual processor isn't good for much, but it's been running for a year now as a server and still can handle a lot of basic tasks like email, manage downloads, and so forth. The $1k PCs my friends get, which are good deals, are in need of serious upgrades after about three years and are pretty much trash after about five.

The cost? $2540 Just about the same as the current Mac Pro entry model. Yes, this PC is a bit souped up. No, I didn't take into account the education discount I personally would get on a Mac Pro ($200 or more). At what I'm paid at work, assembling the parts would probably be an equivalent of about $200 lost income (which isn't really fair to factor in, but still.)

I conclude two things.

1) New Mac Pros, if they come out any time soon (summer, but not winter) will probably see a small price hike. Once you've ventured into the $2k+ range, a few hundred dollars here or there generally isn't going to be a deal braker.

2) Apple could update the Pro line if it wanted to. They could over-price now and price drop later. We've been waiting for a reason. It's probably a bit of both putting in great features and keeping the price from going up too much.

As much as I'd love to buy a new Mac Pro, I'm starting to see how waiting isn't that bad an idea. My 3-year old MacBook isn't going to play Portal 2, but I have a PlayStation for that. Also, with any luck, my next computer after this one won't even have transistors it in anymore.

[strausd]

- PC has 1GB video card, Mac Pro will probably have 512 MB


I'm not so sure the new MP will have only half a gig of RAM in its GPU. There is a possibility that the basic GPU will, but I think the BTO option, the one that you can have them put in with MDP and not ones like the GTX 285 or FX 4800, will have 1GB. Macs are starting to become more involved in gaming and Apple knows it, and thats why, IMO, they will have a 1GB GPU BTO option for the new MP.

[VirtualRain]

Continuing the car analogies (some of us don't mind them, by the way) I would actually liken this to the old 82 Cadillac Cimarron. Same exact platform and drivetrain as the lowly and much much cheaper Cavalier, but with the "extra cheese" of Cadillac badges and intangibles and gizmos that made it sell for a huge premium price. Well, consumers were smart enough to see GM as lazy and the Cimarron as a ripoff and it was a massive failure, and it still is a badge of shame for Cadillac.

Nobody likes it when a big, wealthy company (like GM or Apple) gets lazy with R & D on their established brands and starts taking their customers for granted.

Yeah GM and Dell actually have a lot in common when it comes to marketing the same **** in different ways (Alien and XPS come to mind) but I personally don't see Apple fitting into your analogy. They have a lot more in common with any given German auto brand in my mind. When I implied Apple was like Lambo I think I was being way to generous by implying any competitor of theirs is like Audi. :)

I don't know how you can honestly say that Apple is lazy in it's R&D. :confused: The Mini refresh is actually a marvel of engineering in my mind and I think has changed many peoples expectations here about what to expect from a Mac Pro refresh.

[Icaras]

I'm not so sure the new MP will have only half a gig of RAM in its GPU. There is a possibility that the basic GPU will, but I think the BTO option, the one that you can have them put in with MDP and not ones like the GTX 285 or FX 4800, will have 1GB. Macs are starting to become more involved in gaming and Apple knows it, and thats why, IMO, they will have a 1GB GPU BTO option for the new MP.

Agreed. I think 1GB will be there.

With the huge release of Steam this year, not to mention the entire collaboration between Valve, Apple, and nVidia is a clear sign and motive that graphics power in Macs will be taken more seriously going forward.

[Icaras]

I don't know how you can honestly say that Apple is lazy in it's R&D. :confused: The Mini refresh is actually a marvel of engineering in my mind and I think has changed many peoples expectations here about what to expect from a Mac Pro refresh.

Yea, I was actually going to point out the new Mac Mini specifically as a perfect example of excellent Apple R&D. Let's not forget all the technological innovations the new iPhone has too (for example the stainless steel band as part of the wireless antenna system is pretty genius IMO). We could keep talking all day about other positive results of their R&D: the iPad, the recently re-designed iMac, hell, even iAd.

One thing is for sure. I hardly think their R&D is lacking.

[strausd]

I think that they just like to take their time with R&D. In a way, people at Apple are perfectionists and want their products to be exactly what they imagined them instead of ending up saying that something is just "alright" or that something "won't make a big difference." Just my opinion.

[Cavepainter]

Yeah GM and Dell actually have a lot in common when it comes to marketing the same **** in different ways (Alien and XPS come to mind) but I personally don't see Apple fitting into your analogy. They have a lot more in common with any given German auto brand in my mind. When I implied Apple was like Lambo I think I was being way to generous by implying any competitor of theirs is like Audi. :)

I don't know how you can honestly say that Apple is lazy in it's R&D. :confused: The Mini refresh is actually a marvel of engineering in my mind and I think has changed many peoples expectations here about what to expect from a Mac Pro refresh.

I certainly agree, Apple has some of the best industrial designers and engineers in the business in their ranks working on many products.... BUT apparently, almost none of them are working on the Mac Pro anymore! What have they been doing in the Mac Pro department for the last 450-odd days?


(I would be more than happy to be proven absolutely dead wrong by a stunning, amazing update..... next Tuesday!)

[mattbatt]

I know people hate car analogies, but here's a very relevant one...

The Audi R8 V10 uses exactly the same drive train as the Lamborghini Gallardo... yet the Gallardo is $50K more expensive than the Audi. Effectively, only the body (case?) is different. Yet, I'm sure most would agree there are a lot of tangible and intangible differences such as the brand, the buying experience, the support, the choice of materials used, the ownership experience, etc. All of these differences apply as much to computers as they do to exotic cars. Apple is the Lambo of their industry.

I love cars but I don't think this is a valid analogy. A person does not need a Lambo or an Audi to get to point B from A; a simple pinto could do it.

People buy cars as extension of their personalities, luxery, and carrying capacity (but then we would need to bring SUV and trucks into the analogy which you didn't).

However, video production owners, editors, animators, graphic artists, ect. need a Mac Pro or comparable PC workstation to get from point A to B (iMac's with glossy screens and without eSATA, ability for capture cards and basic upgrades prove not worthy for our profession).

I am not one of those guys always having to have the latest and greatest - I used my 2003 G5 until 2009, but I would need to buy its third mother board to get it running again. 3 motherboards!! So, the quality control and "Apple only uses the best silicon and expensive parts" doesn't bode well with me. Can you at least hear my side of the story?

I used to believe Apple was the quality control expert but 4 months of communicating with Apple support without so much as any type of help or discount is disconcerting (they offered a $100 discount but then revoked it when then found out I work for a college).

Before you blame me for complaining about such an old computer, I did the research and filed with insurance. After proving 35-40% of G5 motherboards failed, they thought it was a major issue as well. Apparently Apple won't even admit that to me: they should of recalled those motherboards.

Also, Apple only gives a 90 day warranty for major $1,000 repairs? What gives??! My buddy got a year with his HP replacement motherboard. 1 year would of covered me too (since the replaced motherboard lasted about 10 months - but of course I was 'sorry out of luck').

Another reason that I want to make sure before I buy that Apple will take care of their users. The G5 was officially shelved as obsolete this week. I'm not just looking for a fast 1 year life computer, I'm looking for something to last me many years.

Let me put it this way: running CS4 and FCP suit 2 with 3.5 GB RAM and fast hard drives, I could play back HD video realtime and do all my design needs plus batch edit RAWS from my 21 MP Canon 5dmkII pretty easily and also batch all my h.264 into ProRes 4:2:2 fine as well. On a 7 year old computer.

[VirtualRain]

I love cars but I don't think this is a valid analogy. A person does not need a Lambo or an Audi to get to point B from A; a simple pinto could do it.

People buy cars as extension of their personalities, luxery, and carrying capacity (but then we would need to bring SUV and trucks into the analogy which you didn't).

However, video production owners, editors, animators, graphic artists, ect. need a Mac Pro or comparable PC workstation to get from point A to B (iMac's with glossy screens and without eSATA, ability for capture cards and basic upgrades prove not worthy for our profession).


Yes, but believe it or not, some people buy computers for more than just getting from A to B and this is what Apple is catering to. As I said above, if all you care about is getting from A to B (or GHz and GB), there are plenty of other companies that cater to the basic needs. Don't expect Apple to provide you a Pinto. That's Dell, and HP's forte.

I am not one of those guys always having to have the latest and greatest - I used my 2003 G5 until 2009, but I would need to buy its third mother board to get it running again. 3 motherboards!! So, the quality control and "Apple only uses the best silicon and expensive parts" doesn't bode well with me. Can you at least hear my side of the story?

I used to believe Apple was the quality control expert but 4 months of communicating with Apple support without so much as any type of help or discount is disconcerting (they offered a $100 discount but then revoked it when then found out I work for a college).

Before you blame me for complaining about such an old computer, I did the research and filed with insurance. After proving 35-40% of G5 motherboards failed, they thought it was a major issue as well. Apparently Apple won't even admit that to me: they should of recalled those motherboards.

Also, Apple only gives a 90 day warranty for major $1,000 repairs? What gives??! My buddy got a year with his HP replacement motherboard. 1 year would of covered me too (since the replaced motherboard lasted about 10 months - but of course I was 'sorry out of luck').

Another reason that I want to make sure before I buy that Apple will take care of their users. The G5 was officially shelved as obsolete this week. I'm not just looking for a fast 1 year life computer, I'm looking for something to last me many years.

Let me put it this way: running CS4 and FCP suit 2 with 3.5 GB RAM and fast hard drives, I could play back HD video realtime and do all my design needs plus batch edit RAWS from my 21 MP Canon 5dmkII pretty easily and also batch all my h.264 into ProRes 4:2:2 fine as well. On a 7 year old computer.

What was the point of this? You've lost me.

[mattbatt]

What was the point of this? You've lost me.

My point is:
1. I'm a prouser, not just a fanboy ogling over the latest and greatest specs. I have real-life work to be done that requires a MacPro.
2. Apple products fail too and their customer service and extended warranty by no means justify their greater price. Some things should of been recalled.
3. Apple shares the same internal parts now as PC workstations, the same pro software (Adobe CS 5), and Apple's pro video software is lacking (I have said this in other threads). Not justified for the greater price.
4. I want a computer that will last me a long time, I got by with the G5 fine when it worked.
5. I firmly believe that it is reasonable to ask Apple to offer what everyone else is offering without jacking up the price or cutting features (standard HD, RAM, blue-ray, base Ghz). Where is Job's motto for setting trends and industry standards when it comes to the MacPro? Seems like they are behind industry standards - far behind.

[brianfast]

Apple's quality control is way out of line with the Macbook Pros they currently sell. The screen lid is often out of line with the rest of the body.

[VirtualRain]

My point is:
1. I'm a prouser, not just a fanboy ogling over the latest and greatest specs. I have real-life work to be done that requires a MacPro.
2. Apple products fail too and their customer service and extended warranty by no means justify their greater price. Some things should of been recalled.
3. Apple shares the same internal parts now as PC workstations, the same pro software (Adobe CS 5), and Apple's pro video software is lacking (I have said this in other threads). Not justified for the greater price.
4. I want a computer that will last me a long time, I got by with the G5 fine when it worked.
5. I firmly believe that it is reasonable to ask Apple to offer what everyone else is offering without jacking up the price or cutting features (standard HD, RAM, blue-ray, base Ghz). Where is Job's motto for setting trends and industry standards when it comes to the MacPro? Seems like they are behind industry standards - far behind.

If this is what you truly believe, why do you want a Mac Pro then? I presume it's because you have a healthy investment in OSX software? If so, then why don't you consider a used 2008, or a refurb 2009 quad. Why do you need a 6 core machine? Especially coming from a G5? Your software probably need a major upgrade now as well... so this might be a good juncture to consider a shift to PC.

As for #5, I still maintain that Apple is not interested in making a product like everyone else that just gets people from A to B. They cater to a more discerning clientele who wants a better experience and who is willing to pay a premium for it. Apple may not be the fastest computer, it certainly won't be the cheapest, but for many it will still be the best.

So while it's perfectly reasonable for you to ask them to offer what everyone else is offering... it's perfectly reasonable for them to refuse and pursue whatever market segement they want.

I for one, am grateful they are not offering what everyone else is offering, and that's why they got my money.

[TennisandMusic]

If this is what you truly believe, why do you want a Mac Pro then? I presume it's because you have a healthy investment in OSX software? If so, then why don't you consider a used 2008, or a refurb 2009 quad. Why do you need a 6 core machine? Especially coming from a G5? Your software probably need a major upgrade now as well... so this might be a good juncture to consider a shift to PC.

As for #5, I still maintain that Apple is not interested in making a product like everyone else that just gets people from A to B. They cater to a more discerning clientele who wants a better experience and who is willing to pay a premium for it. Apple may not be the fastest computer, it certainly won't be the cheapest, but for many it will still be the best.

So while it's perfectly reasonable for you to ask them to offer what everyone else is offering... it's perfectly reasonable for them to refuse and pursue whatever market segement they want.

I for one, am grateful they are not offering what everyone else is offering, and that's why they got my money.

Hey I like Apple as much as the next guy here, but that part I bolded is how Apple markets the products. They want you to believe you are discerning and special if you buy their stuff. It's not who they cater too, they cater to people who have a need to feel superior. Just look at their ads. Don't fall for it. Apple just makes consumer electronics like everyone else.

[Eidorian]

Hey I like Apple as much as the next guy here, but that part I bolded is how Apple markets the products. They want you to believe you are discerning and special if you buy their stuff. It's not who they cater too, they cater to people who have a need to feel superior. Just look at their ads. Don't fall for it. Apple just makes consumer electronics like everyone else.I reminds me of the iPride 3G vs. 4G comic.

[mattbatt]

As for #5, I still maintain that Apple is not interested in making a product like everyone else that just gets people from A to B. They cater to a more discerning clientele who wants a better experience and who is willing to pay a premium for it. Apple may not be the fastest computer, it certainly won't be the cheapest, but for many it will still be the best.


I don't understand how asking for good included HD space, RAM and a medium to high speed starting point for CPU Ghz as well as a possible blue-ray player would hurt - or at least not "cater" to the users best experience- for professional mac pro clientele. Please explain that.

Ok, in other words, how will providing less for more help?

And yes, I will be upgrading software but I am waiting to see what Apple will offer hardware wise to see if they will retain my heart. You also need to know I use both platforms everyday and have been a mac user for 20 years (I'm 27 yrs old and definitely computer enthusiast).

I preach mac all the time, so it has taken some frustration to drive me to be this vocal.

[VirtualRain]

Hey I like Apple as much as the next guy here, but that part I bolded is how Apple markets the products. They want you to believe you are discerning and special if you buy their stuff. It's not who they cater too, they cater to people who have a need to feel superior. Just look at their ads. Don't fall for it. Apple just makes consumer electronics like everyone else.

I guess it depends how you define marketing... but product is one of the four p's of marketing (along with price, promotion, and place). And Apple's products also possess an unmatched level of refinement in design, material selection, and software elegance. The new Mac Mini is a perfect example. The new iPhone is another. The iPad another. Only Sony can come close to Apple in hardware, but Sony is saddled with Microsoft's crappy bloated OS. No other computer manufacturer I've encountered can match Apple here. So its' not just marketing fluff.

Now the Mac Pro is lagging in specs, at least for now, but it's internals are still a marvel to behold for anyone that's ripped open a PC, or even built their own PC with a mind for cable managements, silent cooling, and overall aesthetics.

So it's more than marketing.

Let's face it, if there was no appeal to owning a Mac, no one would be in here whining about the product, they would just go and buy a PC.

I don't understand how asking for good included HD space, RAM and a medium to high speed starting point for CPU Ghz as well as a possible blue-ray player would hurt - or at least not "cater" to the users best experience- for professional mac pro clientele. Please explain that.

Ok, in other words, how will providing less for more help?

And yes, I will be upgrading software but I am waiting to see what Apple will offer hardware wise to see if they will retain my heart. You also need to know I use both platforms everyday and have been a mac user for 20 years (I'm 27 yrs old and definitely computer enthusiast).

I preach mac all the time, so it has taken some frustration to drive me to be this vocal.

I can only conclude your #1 problem with the Mac Pro is that it costs more than you'd like to pay since all of the specs you are concerned about (HD, RAM, CPU, and BR) can all be added BTO or aftermarket.

Since you've been a Mac user for 20 years, and surely paid a premium for a G5, I'm almost certain you don't need me to explain to you what Apple's pricing strategy is and that it's unlikely to suddenly change with the 2010 refresh. :p

[TennisandMusic]

I guess it depends how you define marketing... but product is one of the four p's of marketing (along with price, promotion, and place). And Apple's products also possess an unmatched level of refinement in design, material selection, and software elegance. The new Mac Mini is a perfect example. The new iPhone is another. The iPad another. Only Sony can come close to Apple in hardware, but Sony is saddled with Microsoft's crappy bloated OS. No other computer manufacturer I've encountered can match Apple here. So its' not just marketing fluff.

Now the Mac Pro is lagging in specs, at least for now, but it's internals are still a marvel to behold for anyone that's ripped open a PC, or even built their own PC with a mind for cable managements, silent cooling, and overall aesthetics.

So it's more than marketing.

Let's face it, if there was no appeal to owning a Mac, no one would be in here whining about the product, they would just go and buy a PC.


Umm...the part about just going and buying a PC? That's exactly what the vast majority of the people of the world do. Windows is over 90% market share I believe?

The stuff about software elegance, design, material selection? All kool-aid. May I ask what your profession is? There is no magic in Apple software. More "elegant" is absolute rubbish. Yes they design nice looking machines, often at the cost of functionality (read current iMac's and even Mac Mini's...core 2 duos still??). Their material selection for the innards is below the quality of what you can get in parts purchased at Fry's for PC. There is no way an Apple OEM board compares well to an Asus, Gigabyte, or EVGA board. You really should check out the difference. Again, you show fanboy colors by calling Microsoft's OS "crappy and bloated." Windows 7 screams (to use a Steve Jobs favorite). Have you used it? It runs faster than Snow Leopard on Apple's own hardware, and is very well done. Not sure where you can even begin to call it "crappy and bloated" considering it beats SL for speed and functionality. Maybe not GUI attractiveness, but that's about it. It sounds like more fanboy ranting, and not really reasoned analysis.

Obviously you are free to believe what you want, but there are a number of things that Apple is not doing very well, and certainly worse than others. But they do have wildly successful marketing and branding to back up nice looking products. That's really what it comes down too. They are able to get a very small segment of the population to buy their stuff and pay way more than their real value. Heck, I'm in that group, the difference is I am willing to admit I overpay for it, and that they fool a lot of simple minded people with marketing that appeals to ego and superiority complexes, and I know it's all bunk. It's ok to admit you like Apple AND that they do some pretty messed up stuff. It's just "things". It's not who YOU are as a person. No need to vehemently defend them when they are ripping people off, or doing a poor job in some area.

P.S. I've built tons of machines and owned Mac Pros. The innards of the Mac Pro are not a marvel.

[VirtualRain]

Umm...the part about just going and buying a PC? That's exactly what the vast majority of the people of the world do. Windows is over 90% market share I believe?

The stuff about software elegance, design, material selection? All kool-aid. May I ask what your profession is? There is no magic in Apple software. More "elegant" is absolute rubbish. Yes they design nice looking machines, often at the cost of functionality (read current iMac's and even Mac Mini's...core 2 duos still??). Their material selection for the innards is below the quality of what you can get in parts purchased at Fry's for PC. There is no way an Apple OEM board compares well to an Asus, Gigabyte, or EVGA board. You really should check out the difference. Again, you show fanboy colors by calling Microsoft's OS "crappy and bloated." Windows 7 screams (to use a Steve Jobs favorite). Have you used it? It runs faster than Snow Leopard on Apple's own hardware, and is very well done. Not sure where you can even begin to call it "crappy and bloated" considering it beats SL for speed and functionality. Maybe not GUI attractiveness, but that's about it. It sounds like more fanboy ranting, and not really reasoned analysis.

Obviously you are free to believe what you want, but there are a number of things that Apple is not doing very well, and certainly worse than others. But they do have wildly successful marketing and branding to back up nice looking products. That's really what it comes down too. They are able to get a very small segment of the population to buy their stuff and pay way more than their real value. Heck, I'm in that group, the difference is I am willing to admit I overpay for it, and that they fool a lot of simple minded people with marketing that appeals to ego and superiority complexes, and I know it's all bunk. It's ok to admit you like Apple AND that they do some pretty messed up stuff. It's just "things". It's not who YOU are as a person. No need to vehemently defend them when they are ripping people off, or doing a poor job in some area.

P.S. I've built tons of machines and owned Mac Pros. The innards of the Mac Pro are not a marvel.

Dude, you are a living paradox. I don't understand you at all. On one hand, you've purchased a Mac, but I've run into you enough around here to safely say you are the most vocal and staunch detractor I know. You slag Apple and the Mac at every opportunity.

If your ideal PC is an Asus motherboard, in a Thermaltake case, running Win7, then I really don't know why you purchased a Mac, why you still own it, and why you hang out in a Mac Pro enthusiast forum. You need help man. You should be over at XtremeSystems (http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/index.php?). :confused:

Anyway, we've debated this at length almost too many times to count now.

[ZennZero]

P.S. I've built tons of machines and owned Mac Pros. The innards of the Mac Pro are not a marvel.


Me too, and many of those PCs have been in high-end $200+ cases. Structurally, the internals of the Mac Pro are easily among the best for organization and build quality (and aesthetics, for what that is worth). Having said that, they are a pretty big PITA to work on.

[mattbatt]

I can only conclude your #1 problem with the Mac Pro is that it costs more than you'd like to pay since all of the specs you are concerned about (HD, RAM, CPU, and BR) can all be added BTO or aftermarket.

Since you've been a Mac user for 20 years, and surely paid a premium for a G5, I'm almost certain you don't need me to explain to you what Apple's pricing strategy is and that it's unlikely to suddenly change with the 2010 refresh. :p

Ya, lets all see what happens here (hopefully soon). Now this may seem controversial, but I do have the money and in fact, insurance gave me money that should cover a base new model. I will then be using my own money to buy the medium grade model (which I expect to be $3200). However, I also think about those people who don't have money laying around or insurance to cover burned out motherboards - I think of people who are paying well over $1,000 more for something with similar specs.

I also think anyone who buys the current model from the apple store at that price is sadly being ripped off.

It's like this (you guys used a car analogy here is my music analogy - sort of): I'm looking for a new guitar tube amp and am selling my fender HRD. It goes for about $599 at the main stores new. Well I go into a local music shop (well known), and they have the 'vintage' model (same tubes and voicing but just looks tan). The owner even said it is the same amp.

Their price?

$999.00

I was shocked. Especially since I bought mine used for $400 :p

I'm just saying, in this economy when people are losing houses and jobs, saving money should be important. We trade our time - our lives - for a dollar amount, that time we can never get back. So when I say "Apple costs an arm and a leg' it sort of is a literal statement :D

[apolloa]

You know, the negativity you guy's are showing Apple in all these threads is probably the same amount of negativity I currently have towards the English football squad, however whilst mine is based of facts and poor performance, yours is based on nothing at all...

[mattbatt]

You know, the negativity you guy's are showing Apple in all these threads is probably the same amount of negativity I currently have towards the English football squad, however whilst mine is based of facts and poor performance, yours is based on nothing at all...

fact: late 2008 technology being sold as current and for top dollar.

$3700 for a 3.33Ghz quad core when the new 6 core is shipping and PC workstations are charging $2000.

[Cavepainter]

You know, the negativity you guy's are showing Apple in all these threads is probably the same amount of negativity I currently have towards the English football squad, however whilst mine is based of facts and poor performance, yours is based on nothing at all...

My condolences on the Brit's less than spectacular play so far in the World Cup. But sometimes thats just the way the game works.... If it makes you feel better, the US squad today, after being behind 2-0, had a storybook, come-from-behind, end-of-game, game-winning goal nullified by a ref, which resulted in a tie, thereby jeopardizing a comfortable second seed in their pool and possibly the team's opportunity to advance.

But anyway, back on topic, I can only speak for myself, but my issues with Apple on the Pro model pretty much come down to price. Reiterating what has already been said here before (again and again!), a 2009 product should not have a 2010 price tag. In technology, prices should come down over time to reflect the value. Is the Mac Pro fast? Yes. Is it a great deal anymore? No.

A dusty 2009 car sitting on a dealers lot should not be the same price as a 2010 model thats sitting in showroom out front. Nobody wants last years model unless the price has a reduction. Why is that such an unpopular concept here?

Remember, we're not talking about a company we need to feel sorry for because they are barely staying afloat. Apple is absolutely bursting at the seams with cash right now. And thats great. I've liked their products for almost 12 years now, and I love OSX. But if they buck convention, and do the UNTHINKABLE, that is- to drop the price on a 450 day old model, and throw a small number of their most loyal pro users a bone, its OK, folks, relax- it will not make them file Chapter 11.

The argument put forth on here over and over again is "Well, Apple historically doesn't reduce their prices as the model ages, so why should they now?" In a lousy economy with double digit unemployment, I humbly suggest Apple buck convention. Really, what exactly are some people here really arguing for, anyway? Do you actually WANT Apple to not price competitively? Do you not want them to give you a better graphics card next year than the one they offer today? Do you really want Apple to do this on all their product lines?

How do we as customers of any Apple products win, here?

[apolloa]

fact: late 2008 technology being sold as current and for top dollar.

$3700 for a 3.33Ghz quad core when the new 6 core is shipping and PC workstations are charging $2000.

And so what? It's hardly evidence that Apple has stated it will stop selling the Mac Pro is it. Which is what I'm getting at.

[Icaras]

So since the iPhone won't be releasing this Tuesday, rather a Thursday, does anyone here think this Tuesday may be in the clear for the Mac Pro at last?

[the editor]

So since the iPhone won't be releasing this Tuesday, rather a Thursday, does anyone here think this Tuesday may be in the clear for the Mac Pro at last?

no:D

[Icaras]

no:D

Great, thanks! I thought I was going crazy for a second there :D

[underblu]

... Why would they change their business model if it clearly works. Their stock has never been higher and they have never sold more units before. Your logic falls completely against any business reason.

Apple keeps their lips tight as part of their selling strategy. People obsess over the idea of a new product coming out that when apple finally does release it, everyone and their mother pulls the trigger on impulse. Honestly though, it works and it works well.

And no, Apple usually doesn't have the absolute fastest or biggest anything. But, this also means they don't see the falling out when the latest or greatest has bugs or problems. Their build quality is top notch it almost everything they make is pleasing aesthetically.

The reason prosumers stick with Apple despite their shortcomings is sheer lack of competition. Apple makes a superior software product in OSX (more debatable now that Win7 is here). They don't use cheap plastics or poor engineering in their products which means I can count on my machine to last me. This idea in the general personal computer industry is unused. Most companies but apple product a product at absolute bottom dollar with razor thin margins. However quality suffers because of this and creates poor customer interactions with the product stamped with their name all over it. Make it right the first time and if it takes a little more, charge a little more. In the end people will be happier and much more loyal; this is the focus Apple has used for years and will for the foreseeable future.


Apple's stock is at an all time high because they changed their business model from essentially a PC Box maker with an integrated OS to a mobile devices and media distribution company.

Frankly, Apple could have made substantial inroads into the corporate PC market especially given Microsoft's misteps with Vista had Apple been a little more forthcoming and professional in dealing with the IT departments at these companies. Having worked with many large corporate IT departments I can tell you they absolutely require clear visibility going forward from their vendors as it pertains to technology upgrades. For the most part they have little patience for Apple's secrecy, the cult of Steve Jobs, etc. (Small creative firms Apple's core Pro customers would also benefit from this visibility)

Again at this point in time it matters little to Apple as long as throngs of iPhone and iPad users continue to download billions of apps and songs and wait breathlessly for the latest refresh from Stevie.

[xgman]

Apples new pro line philosophy seems to be: to see how long can they can stretch out these updates before loosing the market share entirely. :rolleyes:

[Full of Win]

Apples new pro line philosophy seems to be: to see how long can they can stretch out these updates before loosing the market share entirely. :rolleyes:

Welcome to the New Apple Consumer Electronics! I wish Apple would tell us what we already know; they have given up in the professional market. Their 'pro' 30 inch ACD has not been updated in 4+ years, their pro video software still runs on 32 bit Carbon, the case design for the 'pro' desktop has not been redesigned in 7 years, they have cut loose X-Serve RAID, and they discounted the design awards at WWDC (or shall I say WWiOSC).

The writing is on the wall - they don't care about this market segment.

[Deepshade]

You know, the negativity you guy's are showing Apple in all these threads is probably the same amount of negativity I currently have towards the English football squad, however whilst mine is based of facts and poor performance, yours is based on nothing at all...

They may play like ****, but least they've been updated in the last year and a third and you know they're gonna be about for some time to come.

[hugodrax]

Actually the insides of a Mac pro are remind me more of the insides of high end workstations. back when you would pay 25 Grand for a workstation.

Even the Dell precisions which sell around Mac Pro price points, the insides look cheap with all kinds of messy wiring and cheaper build quality inside.

There is a significant build difference.

[hugodrax]

Apple's stock is at an all time high because they changed their business model from essentially a PC Box maker with an integrated OS to a mobile devices and media distribution company.

Frankly, Apple could have made substantial inroads into the corporate PC market especially given Microsoft's misteps with Vista had Apple been a little more forthcoming and professional in dealing with the IT departments at these companies. Having worked with many large corporate IT departments I can tell you they absolutely require clear visibility going forward from their vendors as it pertains to technology upgrades. For the most part they have little patience for Apple's secrecy, the cult of Steve Jobs, etc. (Small creative firms Apple's core Pro customers would also benefit from this visibility)

Again at this point in time it matters little to Apple as long as throngs of iPhone and iPad users continue to download billions of apps and songs and wait breathlessly for the latest refresh from Stevie.

Corporate PC users buy dells HP because you can get them for 380 bucks in bulk. And supporting applications such as Exchange server/office/sharepoint,etc.. really run best natively in windows.

Apple will never be able to compete in the corporate market. They are better served staying smaller and winning the consumer market which is a much larger segment and more profitable as well.

Microsoft/dell/hp can keep the corporate markets. And how is dell stock doing for investors?

[ValSalva]

Actually the insides of a Mac pro are remind me more of the insides of high end workstations. back when you would pay 25 Grand for a workstation.

Even the Dell precisions which sell around Mac Pro price points, the insides look cheap with all kinds of messy wiring and cheaper build quality inside.

There is a significant build difference.

Agreed. I was amazed the first time I saw the inside of a Mac Pro. I used to think the Voodoo PC wiring and interior jobs were amazing. The Mac Pro even puts them to shame.

[xgman]

You know to respond to some of the "you are showing negativity towards apple" posts, I currently own a mac pro, macbook pro, 3 iphones with an iphone 4 on the way, an ipad, an ipod, and my so has an imac and an ipod touch. So I clearly support Apple, and do feel that I am entitled to "whine" or "bash" or whatever you want to call it, about a slow Mac pro updating cycle, especially seeing as how the Mac pro costs more than all that other stuff put together.