Apple 'Questioning' the Future of its Mac Pro Line?

[mox358]

I don't think we'll see the Mac Pro die completely... simply because it is too important to those industries that produce content FOR Apple's cash cows iDevices. Apple is smart - they know without content (like magazines, music, movies, and apps) the iPhone, iPod Touch and iPad would be worthless.

That doesn't mean the Mac Pro won't see changes - it could very well be in for a radical overhaul that's not as classic tower-esque as the current design. But I can't believe they would throw away that creative market, which can make or break their money-printing iOS unit. Microsoft has never cared for the creatives like Apple, and I don't think that will change.

 

[subsonix]

This is nothing personal, but I have to say it anyway: Get over it. You belong to an insignificant minority of Apple's customers. The Pro customers WERE keeping Apple alive many years ago, but since the dawn of iOS, that clientele is no longer important for Apple. And that's the end of the fairy tale.

Your post does not make any sense, the birth of a new product category does not magically make the current one insignificant. They should be able to keep and maintain two or more categories simultaneously, also keep in mind the potential for growth in the computer sector for Apple.

 

[musser]

IF this is true...

...it may indeed be the beginning of the end of Mac, as we know it. After all those years of screaming at PC'ers telling me 'Mac will soon die.' Now, this... Apple's causing it themselves. If Apple ends up making only televisions and phones, then we ARE truly near the end. Apple: please don't succumb to only the masses. We professional Mac users made you. Don't you dare forget us! I'm now thinking that FCPX was your 'Dear John letter.' You're about to screw the pros, aren't you? Shame on you if you do.

 

[brentsg]

Every drive bay in my MacPro is used, and I do not want to have to house them all externally.

This and the GPU issue is what it really comes down to. I have several Apple machines, but the Mac Pro is the workhorse. I don't see myself using a Mini, I definitely won't own an iMac for my purposes.

Even though I know I'm in the minority, this would probably push me back into the Windows space. I definitely won't be "split" again, from an OS standpoint.

 

[Chaos123x]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

Reference monitor runs through thunderbolt with solutions from Aja and blackmagic. As for for RED footage it runs fine on a older computer than mine without a special graphics card...

 

[damir00]

Criticizing ideas is what leads to proper debate.

He didn't criticize an idea, he called another poster names.

That doesn't lead to proper debate, that leads to more name calling.

 

[iChrist]

Even though I know I'm in the minority, this would probably push me back into the Windows space. I definitely won't be "split" again, from an OS standpoint.

Very true friend. I agree and is part of Apple marketing I think. To move old thinkers off of Apple product to give Apple brand more power.

 

[AppliedMicro]

The Mac Pros currently are one of the few (only?) price competitive computers that Apple produces

I don't think they are the only price competitive computers Apple makes.
Quite the contrary. MacBook Airs and Mac mini are probably competitive just as well to their PC counterparts, if you look at performance in their respective form factors (whether you need or like that particular form factor is a different question).

The Mac Pro might be competitive in price compared to its PC/workstation equivalents.
But currently it's hardly competitive in price to Apple's own iMac line anymore.
...unless (I repeat myself) you absolutely need the Mac Pro's expandability.
...which (I repeat myself again) only a small minority needs.

The Mac Pro is competing (and might be competitive) in its small niche - a niche that I wouldn't be sure whether Apple still wants to compete in...

 

[swagi]

That's of course slightly exaggerated, but whether you like it or not: Only a tiny (but undoubtedly vocal) minority of Apple's customer base needs 4TB of storage, let alone a Mac Pro.

The Mac Pro going the way of the Xserve wouldn't surprise me at all.
Cause the same is true for the Mac Pro what Steve Jobs said about the Xserve:

"Hardly anyone was buying them."

I can absolutely see Apple retiring the Mac Pro in the near (if not imminent) future. It has the longest release cycle in Apple's lineup and has been the worst Mac in terms of price/performance value for quite some time - unless you absolutely need its expandability. The latter now being available for other Macs via Thunderbolt, too.

I'd expect many "creative professionals" to first scoff at the idea - but then nevertheless move to iMacs, expanding externally, and replacing them more often (but at a lower price point) than previous Mac Pros. The others... Apple won't really care about them, they're making too much money by focusing on mobile devices.

So basically you are advocating people who make their living on their workstations to question their decisions?

I mean, in all honesty, how could you come up with this insane stuff. Business wise people using MacPros need faster processing. This has nothing to do with "It renders my XYZ .mkv rip faster" but with say color correction on untouched HD content.

Basically in this type of working field render times really mean a lot. Not to say that you really advocate people to move from their high class color corrected external displays to some "throw away your display every year with your iMac when you upgrade" attitude?

I personally don't work in that area, but from the main business standpoint I dare to say that it is complete business nonsense to pay for a display that you throw away with every upgrade cycle.

You could argue that the main rendering may be done on servers and you don't need that fast client to do your work - but alas Apple also killed of the high performance server side of OS X.

Basically this decision would definitely kill Macs in the movie environment and in 3D artistry. This is where render times count in for money. An no one in their sane mind would really think this to be a feasable option IMHO.

Stated from someone with absolutely no stake in the forementioned area but with some business sense. Or to put it the other way: Given you really make your living on this stuff, getting more projects done in the same amount of time pays off for the Mac Pro. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[wikus]

He didn't criticize an idea, he called another poster names.

That doesn't lead to proper debate, that leads to more name calling.

He questioned/criticized his STATEMENT as ignorant and arrogant.

Not sure how that is a personal attack.

 

[iBug2]

This is nothing personal, but I have to say it anyway: Get over it. You belong to an insignificant minority of Apple's customers. The Pro customers WERE keeping Apple alive many years ago, but since the dawn of iOS, that clientele is no longer important for Apple. And that's the end of the fairy tale.

Apple still likes the iMac, MacBook Air, iPhone and iPod customers. Whatever is outside of that spectrum (including the Mini, yes) is no longer a priority. Their business is now with the HOME users that can AFFORD the premium price. Sad but true. And if you don't like it, switch the system.

Nonsense. iMac, mini, MBP, these are all used by professionals in many design studios. They are not just for home. End of story. The amount of pro's who definitely need a Mac Pro is getting smaller and smaller every day. So it's not about Apple abandoning the pro market at all. It's about the pro market abandoning Mac Pro.

 

[balamw]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

At my last job I bought two Mac Pros as convenient engineering workstations running Windows Vista/7 64 bit. They were great in that I could set up a box with >16 GB of RAM in a heartbeat. Swing by the Apple store and one call to OWC beats waiting a week for a custom Dell workstation, and last time I did this the Mac was quicker to set up and get running at full speed.



B

 

[gugy]

Most professionals that use desktop macs are using iMacs at this point. So the majority does not need Mac Pro to do the job they are doing. The problem will be for those few who definitely need a Mac Pro. I also hope they don't drop the Mac Pro line, but it's absurd to think one needs a Mac Pro to create content. Most don't.

Absurd?

iMac is a nice machine but lots of professionals need the power to develop and create certain kinds of content. Also the lack of expandability is a huge drawback for many people.
Keep in mind the AIO nature of an iMac is also something a lot of people dislike.
I for one love multiple displays, expandability and the processor power. Am I the only one or few? I hardly believe that. The film/video industry, 3D work, editing etc. Lots these folks rely on MacPro and need it big time.

 

[Spanky Deluxe]

I don't see this happening. The Mac Pro may only account for a small number of sales but since the move to Nehalem technology, it has a *huge* profit margin compared to the other models. Since it is also effectively just a regular type PC, the costs to modify it for future technology is minimal. All they have to do is create a new logic board for newer CPUs. Everything else is off the shelf or uses exactly the same machining tools as the current (and last four years worth of) Mac Pro.

Killing the Mac Pro would be daft from a business stand point. It would alienate a small but financially liquid number of customers and businesses and would lead to a smaller profit due to firstly the loss of customers and secondly the loss of a proportion of customers who would buy iMacs or Mac Minis with significantly smaller profit margins.

 

[superrcat]

Finally a rational post.

Let me counter that with another rational point. Many people are not really thinking about Mac OS X Server as a product, or how Xserve was discontinued and Mac Pro or Mac mini with Snow Leopard Server were the migration paths. The later of those two paths was framed in the context of a small business or a workgroup of 50 people.

Simply put, Mac mini is not a viable hardware platform for a large business or enterprise environment. Hardware in data centers require parts to be hot swappable. Alternatively, Mac OS X Server can be virtualized, but with a max of 8 GB of memory on the host, that doesn't bode well for performance of the virtuals. You can't plug a fiber channel connector into a Mac mini. Sure there is the new Promise SANLink, but why should I spend $1000 on a device that is just a Thunderbolt wrapper around a Fiber card, just to connect to a Mac mini? That leaves a lot of organizations unable to integrate their existing parts on hand into the system or gives more reasons not to integrate Mac mini into an existing heterogenous infrastructure.


If there is to be continued penetration into the enterprise market, then the need to keep Mac Pro available is essential to the adoption of Mac OS X Server.

 

[Freyqq]

Apple considers desktops and servers "content creation" systems. Apple is increasingly a content distribution and consumption firm. Their high end systems and software and operating systems are optimized for content creation, but their business model is not. Hackintoshes are only a partially viable solution. What is needed is hang-on value added systems to a Mac "head end". Don't forget the cloud is Apple's high processing requirement future. Relearn client server compute schemes. Hackin-addon box?

Rocketman

While that may be true, if there are no content creation devices, then there will be nothing to consume.

 

[twoodcc]

i really hope that this isn't true.

 

[damir00]

If Apple is making good coin selling these things, they won't be dropped.

If they don't make good coin selling these things, they will be dropped, and missed by very few people.

Everything else is farts in the wind.

 

[iBug2]

Absurd?

iMac is a nice machine but lots of professionals need the power to develop and create certain kinds of content. Also the lack of expandability is a huge drawback for many people.
Keep in mind the AIO nature of an iMac is also something a lot of people dislike.
I for one love multiple displays, expandability and the processor power. Am I the only one or few? I hardly believe that. The film/video industry, 3D work, editing etc. Lots these folks rely on MacPro and need it big time.

When you say "lots", you still mean a minority of professionals who use Macs. You are not the only one, but there are much more professionals who don't need the stuff you need. That's the point.

So it's bollocks to claim that all professionals need a Mac Pro. People need to say it over and over to realize that only a small percentage of professionals need a Mac Pro these days. Too bad if you are one of them and if Apple cans it.

 

[theSeb]

Correct. I believe it was Virginia Tech. They had built a super computer using G5 Power Macs linked together and I recall that they updated it with Mac Mini's recently.

Apple doesn't need to build a purpose designed Pro computer when the Mac Mini can satisfy most of the market. The niche that remains can be served by stacked Mac Minis. The more powerful your computing needs, the more Mac Mini stacks you add.

Need a new video card? OSX already supports multiple and even switching on the fly. Add a video card stack daisy chained into the Mac Mini stacks. Have a special interface for factories or other manufacturing devices? Build that card into a stack with Thunderbolt I/O instead of PCI.

If you're a traditionalist and you want a tower, buy enough Mac Minis and you'll have one

And how will that tower look with cables everywhere? It kind of defeats the simplicity by design thing that apple has been trying to instill into their products.

 

[Ryth]

So it's not about Apple abandoning the pro market at all. It's about the pro market abandoning Mac Pro.

QFT. Lots of pro users are fine with a top of the line iMac or MBP 15" or 17".

With the power of the machines now, you really don't need these Mac Pros anymore except for a very very niche market and that market Apple might just move away from.

 

[hleewell]

Now if apple would double the size of the mini to allow full size hard drives and a decent processor, I would get one in a heart beat!

Bring back the Cube: upgradeable RAM & HDD bays
I will upgrade from Mac Mini

 

[Mr. Gates]

i really hope that this isn't true.

It really can't be.

How could they be considered a real computer company at that point?


The Mac Pro is an Amazing computer. Don't worry. They said this about the iPod too.

 

[filmbuff]

This is my prediction:

The Mac Pro line is starting to seem aged. Like it or not a tower computer doesn't fit into Apple's sleek and sexy image. I think what they are going to do is ditch the current Mac Pro and revamp the iMac line to include iMac Pro, much like the Macbook -> Macbook Pro. There will be a regular iMac with the current specs and the pro version will be available with Xeon processors and multiple graphics cards. The HDDs, RAM, and graphics will most likely still be user upgradable but other stuff will have to be added externally. Prices for the Pro line starting at $3500.

 

[*LTD*]

Just one more thing to add to the long list of Apple giving the middle finger to pros.

Lets face it Apple does not care about the people who kept them afloat in the dark days.

Apple owes nothing to anyone. Especially not out of sentimentality. Those people you are referring to are no more special than anyone else. And market dynamics have changed in leaps and bounds since those "dark days."

Apple needs to service the most profitable markets. Nothing personal. Biz is biz.