Wait, you don't really mean that, do you?
Diagnostic LEDs -- for example? I can't see through aluminum, and I don't think you can either.
I've worked on plenty of powered-up computers, and seen plenty of well-trained techs do the same (for example, techs from the late great Digital Equipment Corporation). It was a DEC engineer who taught me to use a cable tie to test whether a hidden fan was spinning or not.
Because everybody's guessing, my guess is that it has to do with properly isolating/insulating AC. I've been into tons of boxes (typically not computers) with interlocks that break the AC connection when the box is opened, and of course the Mac Pro doesn't have anything like that.
This (positive interlock) was especially common on old tube TVs (yeah, I'm not young . . . I disassembled my first TV back in the 1950s), even though the charge in their capacitors could easily kill you.
Touching the fan blades? What moron is in charge of these regulations? I don't find my Mac Pro dangerous at all.
Flagship? The pro has never been the apple flagship
My dictionary does list both what I said and what you said,
The naval metaphor is simply that. The term has been adapted for use about consumer products. That's how etymology works.
G4, G5, first few gen Intels were. All Apple would do is compare everything to the pro models. G4/G5 even more so when they were said to be more powerful than x86 machines.
So I wonder how you are intended to troubleshoot problems with a fan if they won't spin with the case open? I just had to work on one over the holidays, where the CPU fan wasn't spinning at all. Oddly enough the CPU wasn't even getting all that hot (3770k), so it would have been interesting if they had a kill switch.
I have a 120mm Delta fan that says otherwise.
when their own legal system allows individuals to successfully sue people and companies for thinks like not putting warnings on cups of coffee that the contents may be hot (Liebeck v. McDonald's Restaurants). It's stuff like that that scares american companies to take preventative measures in case they get sued, I know because I used to work for one.
Yes, I understand all that. Sorry. But the new FCPX users don't need a $4000 MP... I'm using it on a iMac! (BTW take a look at benchmarks that show the high end iMac beats the low end MPs).
But true, honest pros, not wannabes making corporate and wedding videos, using Avid and Premiere don't NEED a Mac, even if they prefer it. A PC or Avid workstation will do fine, if not better right now. That is my point. Not too many bona fide pros use FCPX.
More than a few people are extremely fickle...
Regulatory compliance is something the 2nd largest public company in the world should know how to do.
Yes, but again please show me links of other major vendors (Acer, Dell...) having to retire product in the EU?
Flagship? The pro has never been the apple flagship
To change the HDD while it is running?
They've been fumbling the MacPro for about two years now. When the hardware is so out of date you can't even legally sell it in parts of the world that count as dropping.
I still like my analogy.
Joking aside, I know where most of Apple's profits are coming from today: iPad and iPhone.
Still, I don't see how a company with 137bn in the bank can't use just 100-250 million (that pays for a lot lot of engineers and R&D) to keep its Mac software (iWork and so on) and its Pro line updated.
It would be money well spent. Look how much money they now spend - I would argue squander - on dividends for AAPL shareholders. Under CEO Steve Jobs AAPL never paid a dividend and it didn't hurt.
And you don't need a $4000.00 PC workstation to run Premier Pro.
Actually, the largest by market caps. Four percent more than the second one, which is Exxon.
And Apple just made sure that every Mac Pro sold in Europe will comply with all regulations.
The update frequency is not as important as doing rigid and/or non-focused product update strategies. Those companies primary problem is that they update products with widely different growth rates at that same refresh rates. So if there is some shrinking sub-segment that gets as much R&D resources as a segment that is growing.
That shotgun approach works when there are more growing than shrinking sub-segments and there is little self inflicted cannibalization at the edges of the sub-segments. Update everything and something will stick to the wall and be a high growth winner to cover the losses on the losers sank money into.
Apple tends to prune off the shrinking sub-segments and reallocate more resources to those that have better match to the subset of customers they are targeting. As desktops plateaued Apple expanded the number of laptop subsegments and effectively shrank the desktop/non-mobile ones. That have still bet on desktop/non-mobile segments that are moving up; All-in-one.
The overall workstation market, not just Mac Pro, has been largely comatose over the 2008 recession and the following recovery.
What are you talking about?
A company sitting on over $130B in cash and who just posted record year-over-year sales and profits (over $13B) should be ashamed of themselves for not updating their flagship product. You can't tell me that Apple hasn't made a conscious decision to let this product die. Apple is such a large company and they can't update the Mac Pro to current industry specs for over two years? Something doesn't sound right...
Er... go back to what I wrote. The $4000 price tag is firmly attached to the Mac, not the PC.