I'm really just throwing ideas out there at this point, I raised the same thing about Dell before. I guess the problem here in predicting is there is almost no public information on Xeon sales. A few vague statements here and there and some preface and an article or two when Jon Peddie Research put out a new report, but even less so relating to Apple. We don't know if they sell 10,000 or 100,000 Mac Pro's a year.
You're definitely right on the sales figures of Xeon's, particularly those by Apple. That's why I actually mentioned the distributor channel as a possibility vs. direct from Intel (which requires volume; i.e. volume counted in trays and/or lots).
Yeah that's how I see it. Releasing a week before 2008 Macworld, but waiting for around WWDC 2007 and at 2006 show us that basically that Apple logic doesn't make sense without knowing way more than we do. I think they event thing was more them not having control over Macworld, I mean they set the date of WWDC after all.
I seem to recall that the argument for the change was so they didn't feel forced/obligated to release products on schedules they may not have had full control over.
But underneath that, I also see it as a way to extend development time. The mention of new products (i.e. iPad which as now released), would explain why that additional time is needed.
Another solution of course, is to obtain additional personnel, but that apparently hasn't happened in sufficient quantities. There's pros and cons, but I see the cons out-weighing the pros of keeping the workforce at/about the size it's been for the last few years or so. And I'm wondering if web based products are included in that statement as well, going by the All Things D conference information currently on the front page.
In the end I doubt we will know. If it comes out next week then it is likely strategy, but as we don't know what goes on behind the scenes, what engineering resources they have and how much work is required or what those who get input require (let's not forget some are using the Mac Pro and Xserves to generate large income and also in critical systems.
No, we don't know, nor will it likely ever be. Apple takes their secrecy very seriously.
But there is enough information out that we can make a fairly accurate appraisal of the situation IMO (they're still an electronics company that relies on both human and technological resources - their own as well as others -, as well as the relationship that exists when products are OEM/ODM supplied).
They also have the Apple way of releasing products which no other company seems to use. Apple seem happy to wait and rely on the brand to carry them through quarter after quarter rather than releasing and responding quickly to the competition. They probably don't consider the launch time late if they are making the same sort of profits regardless.
Definitely. They do like to depend on the Brand to sell the products, but in the enterprise market, I can't help but see that as not only a mistake, but a bit arrogant. That market requires the vendor to respond according to need, not what Apple thinks they need, and dictates it.
Unfortunately, this seems to be hurting those who are highly invested in the OS X platform with the recent lack of information, and lowered value perception with the '09 MP and XServe systems (and some expectation of this carrying over).
