Mac Pro Now Unavailable for Purchase from European Apple Online Stores

[friedmud]

So, I'm a professional that uses a maxed out Mac Pro with three 30" monitors all day... and I would normally say that there is no way an iMac could do what I need.

But you know what? There really is no reason Apple couldn't make an iMac with 12 hyperthreaded cores, 24GB of RAM, professional graphics that support three monitors and four 500GB solid state drives in RAID0. Yes, that really is what's in my Mac Pro.

The likelihood of Apple making such a machine however... is fairly low...

And if you think that no one "needs" such a machine. You are WRONG (I happen to have all "24" cores spinning as I type).

[jonnysods]

Please let it be. Bring the new ones out!!

[aloshka]

Originally Posted by ScholarsInk

Return of the Cube.

I always used a desktop workstation (mac pro) until I got the rMBP. Now I realized that I will drop a bit of performance for the sake of portability. I don't do video editing but am a huge enterprise application developer (.net, etc). So my VM's run SQL, Oracle enterprise DB, visual studio... I run 3-4 vms at a time and I'm surprised how well the rmbp is handling it. Granted I do see a difference between my six core and rMBP. Mostly memory and cores. Really wish they had something like the cube, but now i'm wondering, will i ever go back to a workstation?

BTW, i cannot sync all my stuff, ever...

[M-B-P]

Originally Posted by prowlmedia

Hmm,

I have 64GB Ram 12Core, 3 Displays - 6TB on board + 256 ssd drive. + 2gb 285GTX ( hacked PC custom boot rom thing )

It's kinda quick. And handle 24 thread rendering.

and as the other guy said... if you have to ask why, then you don't need to know

Just out of pure curiosity, what do you use that much power for. Not being sarcastic or anything.

[Fatalbert]

Originally Posted by Raftysworld

Why would anyone ever need a Mac Pro? An iMac does everything a Mac Pro does, but in a smaller, sleeker, more portable case.

Come back when your iMac has 4 hard drives, upgraded RAM, 2 GPUs, and 8-12 processor cores.

----------

Dem Europeans and their fear of slow-moving, low-torque, plastic fan blades behind metal mesh

[scaredpoet]

Originally Posted by bearcatrp

Come on apple. Just announce your going to EOL the dam thing and get it over with. Move on folks!

Well I can tell you one thing for sure: some of us already have. Where I work, we just put in an order to replace all of our 5 year old Mac Pros... with a different platform.

Hated to do it, but we've waited way too long for an update. It's now at a point where changing our workflow became less of a burden than waiting for an update that never comes.

Still keeping my iMac though.

[ChrisA]

Originally Posted by Raftysworld

Why would anyone ever need a Mac Pro? An iMac does everything a Mac Pro does, but in a smaller, sleeker, more portable case.

"Everything?" Technically you are right but the Mac Pro does some things faster than does the iMac. You need the extra speed for things that involve LOTS of data like editing HD video or multitrack audio and in scientific visualizations.

Yes the Mac Pro is an expensive overkill for web surfing and email.

[Slow Programmer]

Do people in the EU have to put guards on their ceiling fans too?

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by zorinlynx

These regulation changes should always grandfather in existing products.

Also, is people sticking fingers into fan blades REALLY such a big problem? And really, if you're that stupid, don't you deserve what you get?

Maybe apple should update their workstation more than once every 3-4 years. Dell updates there atleast 3-4 times a year. The fact that you can buy a mac pro with a 45nm cpu when there are 22nm cpus out is ridiculous.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by AtariMac

Some of us need access to PCI slots. Maybe you don't, but believe it or not we do exist.

That said, with a Thunderbolt PCI expansion kit, you can get that, and still pay less than for a Mac Pro. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple's next pro-oriented Mac makes some use of this.

[Antares]

Het...At least you still get free shipping.

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by KPOM

That said, with a Thunderbolt PCI expansion kit, you can get that, and still pay less than for a Mac Pro. It wouldn't surprise me if Apple's next pro-oriented Mac makes some use of this.

Thunderbolt is not a real solution. What we want is a fairly priced up to date workstation. Not the crap mac pro that apple puts out now thats over priced and uses 3 year old hardware. How about an 800 dollar mid tower system with a desktop 3570k and a decent GPU.

[Lark.Landon]

Originally Posted by wildmac

No, the iMac kiddies need to realize that there are professional uses for a MacPro that their beloved iMacs can't handle. The video guys and 3D guys have already spoken up.

The other issue is simply the lame GPUs. There are a lot of us that don't need the horsepower of 12 cores, but do need a better video option than what the iMacs provide. As has been mentioned in other threads here, a MacMiniPro would be great if it had 2 drives, a changeable GPU, and modern ports.

Yeah, the GPU is absolutely horrible in Macs. Someone has dropped the ball on that one... again...and again...and....oh look...again.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

Maybe apple should update their workstation more than once every 3-4 years. Dell updates there atleast 3-4 times a year. The fact that you can buy a mac pro with a 45nm cpu when there are 22nm cpus out is ridiculous.

And the last time I checked Dell is about to be taken private in a highly risky deal at a fraction of its public offering price from a few years ago.

Apple does need to make a decision, whether to drop the Mac Pro or to support it seriously. Tim Cook did state last year that they will be updating it this year. I'm guessing it will get a radical redesign in an attempt to align it more with their other products.

----------

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

Thunderbolt is not a real solution. What we want is a fairly priced up to date workstation. Not the crap mac pro that apple puts out now thats over priced and uses 3 year old hardware.

It could be a real solution, if Apple has access to the next generation that overcomes some of the limitations of the current generation.

----------

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

How about an 800 dollar mid tower system with a desktop 3570k and a decent GPU.

Not going to happen. Apple doesn't compete in the sub-$1000 full featured PC market. Mac Mini is as close as they get (and that doesn't include a keyboard or monitor). They aren't going to engage in a race to the bottom with the PC OEMs. HP thought about exiting the PC market last year, and Dell has just gone private. Apple isn't going there.

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by KPOM

And the last time I checked Dell is about to be taken private in a highly risky deal at a fraction of its public offering price from a few years ago.

Apple does need to make a decision, whether to drop the Mac Pro or to support it seriously. Tim Cook did state last year that they will be updating it this year. I'm guessing it will get a radical redesign in an attempt to align it more with their other products.

----------



It could be a real solution, if Apple has access to the next generation that overcomes some of the limitations of the current generation.

----------



Not going to happen. Apple doesn't compete in the sub-$1000 full featured PC market. Mac Mini is as close as they get (and that doesn't include a keyboard or monitor). They aren't going to engage in a race to the bottom with the PC OEMs. HP thought about exiting the PC market last year, and Dell has just gone private. Apple isn't going there.

How exactly is it a race to the bottom if it performs better than any imac they offer. The margins on an 800 dollar desktop machine are quite good as well. Its the 300-400 dollar ones that have bad margins. They will lose whatever pro and business market they had left if they don't offer something in that ballpark. Public Schools and colleges have already jumped ship over the past decade. Large deployments are not interested in paying close to 3 grand just to get performance equivalent to a 700-800 dollar desktop and tack that on top of the fact that its pretty much not user serviceable at all. The pc can be upgraded or have defective parts replaced.

[Custommm]

tcook@apple.com

[bobenhaus]

Originally Posted by MacRumors

Image


As noted by 9to5Mac, the Mac Pro is no longer available for purchase from Apple's European Online Stores.

In late January, Apple informed its European distributors that sales of the Mac Pro would cease as of March 1st due to new regulatory requirements that go into effect on that date. At the time, Apple told resellers that it would accept orders up until February 18, a deadline that appears to apply to general consumers as well.

Image

The Mac Pro is no longer able to be sold in Europe because it is not compliant with Amendment 1 of regulation IEC 60950-1. According to information from Apple, the issue has to do with the Mac Pro's unprotected fan blades. Compliance with the new regulation would require fan guards and increased protection of the ports on the electrical system.

Apple's Mac Pro is now unavailable in European Union countries, EU candidate countries, and the European Free Trade Association countries of Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland.

Though the Mac Pro has been discontinued in Europe, resellers are still able to sell remaining product after the March 1st deadline. Apple plans to continue to support existing Mac Pro machines and will supply replacement parts.

Apple has also announced plans to offer a redesigned Mac Pro in 2013, following a minor update in 2012.

Article Link: Mac Pro Now Unavailable for Purchase from European Apple Online Stores

Pay so much money and it comes with a cheap video card. Its a shame if you ask me.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

How exactly is it a race to the bottom if it performs better than any imac they offer. The margins on an 800 dollar desktop machine are quite good as well. Its the 300-400 dollar ones that have bad margins. They will lose whatever pro and business market they had left if they don't offer something in that ballpark. Public Schools and colleges have already jumped ship over the past decade. Large deployments are not interested in paying close to 3 grand just to get performance equivalent to a 700-800 dollar desktop and tack that on top of the fact that its pretty much not user serviceable at all. The pc can be upgraded or have defective parts replaced.

By Apple standards, the margins would be terrible on an $800 desktop PC. Consider that the cheapest Mac Mini, with a dual core processor and integrated graphics is $599. Apple isn't going to make a "Pro-quality" machine for $800.

Apple doesn't care about selling to big enterprises. They are willing to cede that market to Dell and HP. If Fortune 500 companies adopt the iPad and iPhone, that's enough enterprise penetration for Apple. The enterprise market is finicky, demands backward compatibility, and usually stays a generation or two behind. My employer is only just starting to roll out Windows 7.

[iGrip]

Originally Posted by AidenShaw

This is almost unbelievable. Doing a silent rev to add a 50¢ fan blade guard would have made this unnecessary, and avoided scaring the pro users.

Unless "scaring the pro users" was the whole point....

The pro users are scared for good reason, IMO.

----------

Originally Posted by Raftysworld

Why would anyone ever need a Mac Pro? An iMac does everything a Mac Pro does, but in a smaller, sleeker, more portable case.

For that matter, why would anybody need anything more than the MiniMac?

[blackhand1001]

Originally Posted by KPOM

By Apple standards, the margins would be terrible on an $800 desktop PC. Consider that the cheapest Mac Mini, with a dual core processor and integrated graphics is $599. Apple isn't going to make a "Pro-quality" machine for $800.

Apple doesn't care about selling to big enterprises. They are willing to cede that market to Dell and HP. If Fortune 500 companies adopt the iPad and iPhone, that's enough enterprise penetration for Apple. The enterprise market is finicky, demands backward compatibility, and usually stays a generation or two behind. My employer is only just starting to roll out Windows 7.

Umm the mac mini costs more because its a small form factor system requiring the use of more expensive mobile parts. Desktop class hardware is much cheaper. Have you looked at how much mobile cpus and motherboards cost in comparison to a desktop equivalent.

Dual core mobile ivy bridge 2.6ghz $240
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116882

Dual core desktop ivy bridge 2.9ghz $70
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116886

Desktop motherboards are also a ton cheaper.

[iGrip]

Originally Posted by Raftysworld

You guys have actually convinced yourselves that you need 12 cores?

Why don't they just use iPads?

[unobtainium]

Originally Posted by manu chao

Well, yes. The Mac is only about 10% of Apple's revenues. And about two-third of that is portable devices, and among the desktop machines, iMacs probably sell at a ratio of 10:1 compared to Mac Pros. And that is without account for Mac minis. In the end, the Mac Pro is unlikely to constitute much more than 1% of Apple's revenues.

Do we know any actual numbers? I would have guessed that the ratio is even more drastic, like 100:1. How many people actually buy Mac Pros? At least it's one Apple "pro" machine that really lives up to that name. (When it's not years out of date.)

[AppleScruff1]

Originally Posted by friedmud

So, I'm a professional that uses a maxed out Mac Pro with three 30" monitors all day... and I would normally say that there is no way an iMac could do what I need.

But you know what? There really is no reason Apple couldn't make an iMac with 12 hyperthreaded cores, 24GB of RAM, professional graphics that support three monitors and four 500GB solid state drives in RAID0. Yes, that really is what's in my Mac Pro.

The likelihood of Apple making such a machine however... is fairly low...

And if you think that no one "needs" such a machine. You are WRONG (I happen to have all "24" cores spinning as I type).

If they put that inside an iMac it would probably melt.

----------

Originally Posted by appleguy123

Pathetic that Apple couldn't get a new one out in time. It's not like they didn't have a warning.

They probably could have, they chose not to.

[KPOM]

Originally Posted by blackhand1001

Umm the mac mini costs more because its a small form factor system requiring the use of more expensive mobile parts. Desktop class hardware is much cheaper. Have you looked at how much mobile cpus and motherboards cost in comparison to a desktop equivalent.

Dual core mobile ivy bridge 2.6ghz $240
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116882

Dual core desktop ivy bridge 2.9ghz $70
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16819116886

You are comparing list prices. Anyway, Apple doesn't need to buy a separate GPU for the Mac Mini. They would with your hypothetical Pro Mac. And they don't want to cannibalize iMac sales.

Apple's Mac Mini line was a response to the demand for a "cheaper" Mac. Clearly they decided that a desktop device made from mobile parts was the way to go.

The bottom line is that Apple quite correctly predicted about a decade ago that the future of personal computing was in mobile devices. They made a huge bet on the MacBook and MacBook Pro lines over the years, and it paid off.

[Renzatic]

Originally Posted by Raftysworld

You guys have actually convinced yourselves that you need 12 cores?

I love it when people tell me what I need or don't need. Like I could actually do something like this on a piddly ass Mac Mini.

Now I mostly deal with more realtime 3D oriented graphic work, which I do it as a spare time hobby. I can get by on a 4-core machine quite easily, since about the only rendering I do is texture baking. Sure, having 24 buckets would be a nice thing to have, but it'd only mean the difference between 2 minutes or 30 seconds for what I do. It's not exactly making or breaking me.

Thing is, I can understand why some people need 12 cores and a crapton of ram. I'm not going around saying "olol, well I can get by with 4 cores and 8 to 16GB or ram. All you people claiming you need more are stooooppppiiiiddd".

...cuz, you know, doing so would be incredibly closed minded and presumptuous.

Also, I'm making GAAAASSS STATIONS!