A market of size what?
If they wanted to supply for every market, that makes 20 million different markets since everyone's needs are different.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple 'Questioning' the Future of its Mac Pro Line?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
A market of size what?
If they wanted to supply for every market, that makes 20 million different markets since everyone's needs are different.
Perhaps they are not scrapping it, but will do something to merge it into a 4 tier xserve rack type system????
What is 100mbit TB? mbit is not a bandwidth, it is simply an amount of memory, correct? I assume you are referring to 10 Gb/s (1.6 GB/s) TB? and the move to 100 Gb/s TB?
100 Gb/s optical TB won't even be here (optimistically) until 2020? So why the rush to get rid of the MP?
I believe those are about $1000 a pop though, correct?
why hasn't anyone used the most over-worked word in the Apple lexicon?
And that word is "ecosystem".
The Mac Pro is at the top of the Apple ecosystem. Make it extinct, and you may discover that its value to the ecosystem was far more than its per-quarter profits.
You get it (although you didn't say "ecosystem"). I'm not sure that Apple gets it, though. MBA Tim and the bean counters might not get it.
Or - they may get it, but have a plan for IOS everywhere and no more Macs.
Several comments have suggested the ECC's value is to reduce the number of crashes.
That's minor. ECC's value is that it makes the chances of a memory error corrupting your database nearly zero. What if a single bit error adds $2,097,152 to the balance of your checking account? What if it shows up as an extra $32,768 charge on your credit card?
____________
Two problems here - one obvious, and one not quite as obvious but just as serious.
The obvious one, and it's surprising that Cringely was clueless, is that you can't connect two Apples with a TBolt cable.
The second one, and one that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned after so many pages - is that putting a TBolt port on a MacBook or iMac or MiniMac doesn't do anything to keep it cool.
There are lots of posts here and on other fora complaining that the "laptop-based" Apples get hot and noisy when they're busy. Are people really considering running 24x7 render farms with these systems - when from posts it seems that they can't even play a Flash video without ramping the fans to "takeoff power"?
I think that the Mac Pro is humonguous - but it's cooling system can keep 32 threads cool without making much noise.
What a great idea - I've never heard of making an Apple mini-tower before....
Just kidding, of course.
And that word is "ecosystem".
The Mac Pro is at the top of the Apple ecosystem. Make it extinct, and you may discover that its value to the ecosystem was far more than its per-quarter profits.
You get it (although you didn't say "ecosystem"). I'm not sure that Apple gets it, though. MBA Tim and the bean counters might not get it.
Or - they may get it, but have a plan for IOS everywhere and no more Macs.
Several comments have suggested the ECC's value is to reduce the number of crashes.
That's minor. ECC's value is that it makes the chances of a memory error corrupting your database nearly zero. What if a single bit error adds $2,097,152 to the balance of your checking account? What if it shows up as an extra $32,768 charge on your credit card?
____________
Two problems here - one obvious, and one not quite as obvious but just as serious.
The obvious one, and it's surprising that Cringely was clueless, is that you can't connect two Apples with a TBolt cable.
The second one, and one that I'm surprised hasn't been mentioned after so many pages - is that putting a TBolt port on a MacBook or iMac or MiniMac doesn't do anything to keep it cool.
There are lots of posts here and on other fora complaining that the "laptop-based" Apples get hot and noisy when they're busy. Are people really considering running 24x7 render farms with these systems - when from posts it seems that they can't even play a Flash video without ramping the fans to "takeoff power"?
I think that the Mac Pro is humonguous - but it's cooling system can keep 32 threads cool without making much noise.
What a great idea - I've never heard of making an Apple mini-tower before....
Just kidding, of course.
Last edited:
I love your style of thinking. I seriously hope this the way Apple goes, towards modularity. In the future, this modularity could even apply to the MBA, MB Pro & iPad line. You want more CPU, GPU, & storage, just daisy chain through Thunderbolt.
With optical cabling, Thunderbolt's potential is 100Gpbs. Once that happens there's no need for internal expansion.
Don't you know *LTD* ?
He will drop to his knees with his hands in the air and swallow the whole load that apple gives him with his hands in the air.
And ask for more.
No, the software doesn't have to be rewritten. Chaining two minis through TB in theory would be exactly the same adding the second set of CPU's onto tho same logic board.
XGrid is required when you connect two computers through I/O like USB or Ethernet. TB is not an I/O. It's a PCI-e expansion. Anything sitting on TB behaves the same way as they sit on the logic board.
But not today. Today the bandwidth is low. But in couple of years it'll be good enough.
Workstation-class equipment has needs that can't be faked by daisy-chaining laptop-class equipment. Either you need the power or you don't. If you need it then you have to buy this class of equipment that is almost at the same level as server-class equipment.
The list of add-ons you can't attach to a Mac mini is very long. Even if there was a third-party market for SAS controllers and SDI add-on card that would work through Thunderbolt, how would you ever attach something that approaches two NVIDIA Quadro cards connected through SLI?
This is the same as considering either the Mac mini or the Mac Pro as server-class equipment. They aren't there by a long shot, I'm afraid.
Knock off the price of the Mac Pros by 50 percent and you'd see sales pick up. They are ridiculously overpriced for the specs and affordable mostly by corporate buyers. And corporate buyers need to buy PC rack mounts to run Windows servers and virtual farms. Except for a few high end hobbyists and video editors and such, most regular people will go for the more affordable iMacs and MacBooks.
To be honest, I would have thought that Apple of all companies could afford to spare some resources catering for their "Pro" audience. Are they really losing money by investing in new upgrades from time to time? It's not like it's a "casual" consumer machine requiring periodic upgrades to appeal to the mass market.
I'm genuinely disappointed to hear of this to be honest, I think the Mac Pro is a fantastic option for those wanting the Macintosh experience but need the flexibility of a regular desktop machine. I'm hardly a "Pro" user myself, but the MP is an attractive option as it's a powerful desktop with multiple internal drives, and upgradable parts.
I'm genuinely disappointed to hear of this to be honest, I think the Mac Pro is a fantastic option for those wanting the Macintosh experience but need the flexibility of a regular desktop machine. I'm hardly a "Pro" user myself, but the MP is an attractive option as it's a powerful desktop with multiple internal drives, and upgradable parts.
Ecosystem
At the very least, Apple should consider the MacPro as another hook into the Apple Ecosystem. If there are no more MacPro's and I'm forced to buy a PC tower for my work, I may also stop upgrading my MacBook Pro, my Mac Mini, and my iPhone.
At the very least, Apple should consider the MacPro as another hook into the Apple Ecosystem. If there are no more MacPro's and I'm forced to buy a PC tower for my work, I may also stop upgrading my MacBook Pro, my Mac Mini, and my iPhone.
wouldn't be such a disaster from a user perspective if they made a decent screen on the iMac... The mini is just too underpowered, and they have apps like Aperture that require serious power, and while a spec'ed iMac will do it, the screen is rubbish for pro photographers or others... and what about 3d...!!
LOL Apple are in the business of gaining MORE users, not losing users to the PC side by removing a full product range like the Mac Pro.
Calm down. Apple isn't about to ditch its fastest and most powerful machines and alienate the entire pro industry - audio engineers, 3d artists, high end graphic designers, science, research & development, render farms etc.
Calm down. Apple isn't about to ditch its fastest and most powerful machines and alienate the entire pro industry - audio engineers, 3d artists, high end graphic designers, science, research & development, render farms etc.
There are probably a lot of Mac Pros being used by professionals with Pro Tools, Media Composer, Logic Pro, Premiere Pro, and Final Cut Pro. Fortunately a lot of veteran video editors are switching to Media Composer and Premiere Pro en masse, so they don't really need Mac Pros anymore. They can go to a Windoze machine.
Avid announced that Pro Tools 10 is the last TDM product (maybe RTAS, too), so these professionals can start looking at upgrading their systems to Windoze machines, too.
Logic Pro will probably become GarbageBand Pro just as Final Cut Pro became iMovie Pro, so there's nobody in this realm who really needs a Mac Pro. A lot of Logic users are already going to (or back to) Pro Tools anyway. No sweat if they cut on a PC, it's the same thing.
So overall, this is a good time to announce the possibility of phasing out the Mac Pro as professionals are switching out of Mac software anyway, now they can dump the hardware, too.
Avid announced that Pro Tools 10 is the last TDM product (maybe RTAS, too), so these professionals can start looking at upgrading their systems to Windoze machines, too.
Logic Pro will probably become GarbageBand Pro just as Final Cut Pro became iMovie Pro, so there's nobody in this realm who really needs a Mac Pro. A lot of Logic users are already going to (or back to) Pro Tools anyway. No sweat if they cut on a PC, it's the same thing.
So overall, this is a good time to announce the possibility of phasing out the Mac Pro as professionals are switching out of Mac software anyway, now they can dump the hardware, too.
My 2010 MacBook Pro in my sig currently has Chrome with about 15 tabs open and Outlook 2011, it is being forced to use the Intel integrated GPU, fans are set to full 6000RPM and it's current temp according to SMC Fancontrol is around 58 Degree C!!
If I play a You Tube HD video fill screen it soon gets HOT. So yes, using a mac Mini? to work like a Pro machine will make it sound like a jet engine and as hot as a toaster, hey the iToaster is born!!
As for the Ecosystem, totally right but you can make Apps on any Mac. I thought most people just use iMacs or PC's?
Why on earth would you imply that a Mac Pro and an iMac do the same job? There is a lot more to computers than processing benchmarks. Mac Pros and iMacs are totally different concepts meant for different uses.
Any PCI-e card you install in your Mac Pro today, can in theory be connected to a Mac mini, today. You'd just need a power supply and a case to host the card.
The bandwidth of TB is not enough to give you the same speed. That's the only difference.
This is why no one buys the mac pro.
Its a ripoff.
300 dollar cpu (apple pays no where near this much btw)
100 dollar motherboard (again apple pays less)
25-35 dollar memory
75 dollar hdd (being generous you can find them cheaper.
110 dollar gpu
100 dollar case (apple probably spends less)
60 dollar power supply
20 dollar cd drive
Around 800 dollars worth of parts if you bought them personally. No? lets give it the benefit of the doubt and pretend the mother board and case cause 200 a piece and the memory was 50. Its still only a 1000. That 1000 still has hefty margins. Where is this extra 1500 going.
Now lets take it a step further. Lets say they replaced that aging nehalam and replaced it with a sandy bridge i5 (this would kill the quad mac pro.
That would drop the price of the motherboard and the cpu significantly. Put that in a mid sized case and now the case is also cheaper. The experience would be great and they would be at a good price if they were around 900-1000.
All in ones don't make good pro machines because the price performance ratio flat out sucks. For some reason apple think that the mac pro needs to have that same crappy price performance ratio.
Its a ripoff.
300 dollar cpu (apple pays no where near this much btw)
100 dollar motherboard (again apple pays less)
25-35 dollar memory
75 dollar hdd (being generous you can find them cheaper.
110 dollar gpu
100 dollar case (apple probably spends less)
60 dollar power supply
20 dollar cd drive
Around 800 dollars worth of parts if you bought them personally. No? lets give it the benefit of the doubt and pretend the mother board and case cause 200 a piece and the memory was 50. Its still only a 1000. That 1000 still has hefty margins. Where is this extra 1500 going.
Now lets take it a step further. Lets say they replaced that aging nehalam and replaced it with a sandy bridge i5 (this would kill the quad mac pro.
That would drop the price of the motherboard and the cpu significantly. Put that in a mid sized case and now the case is also cheaper. The experience would be great and they would be at a good price if they were around 900-1000.
All in ones don't make good pro machines because the price performance ratio flat out sucks. For some reason apple think that the mac pro needs to have that same crappy price performance ratio.
Last edited:
Well, I hope not. iOS is a very interesting proposal, but I don't see it replacing the MAC OS in a professional yet level for many years.
I think Tim is a smart guy and will maintain the Mac Pro market alive even though it is not what makes the killing $$$ for Apple anymore.
But Adobe Premiere Pro CS5.5 can use NVIDIA Quadro cards to speed rendering today and some Autodesk and Blackmagic solutions require HP workstations today. I'm afraid Apple will soon be exiting the workstation market as SGI and Sun did a few years ago. All that will be left are Dell and HP workstations running either Windows or Red Hat Linux.
How on earth would you conclude that I implied a Mac Pro and iMac do the same job from that post.
----------
If they exit the market before the chaining becomes a viable option, they'll lose maybe some people on the road, who might get back on track later on.
+1
I've had an iMac for a few years now, but I want an expandable machine.
Sure we can hook external HDD's up outside the case with good speeds using TB, but they're still way overpriced.
Also, I don't want to have many peripherals outside the computer, I want it all in 1 box. A box in which I can open and expand with ease.
Cooling is another concern, I'm sure some users punish their Mac Pro's with constant high-CPU loads, I'm doubtful that an iMac can successfully stand the test of time under those conditions.
You have a point there. If Apple equipment is state-of-the-art users may pay "too much" for it in order to have all of the other Apple benefits. However if the internals are just OK or run-of-the-mill then money is better spent elsewhere.
This comes from a site that has constantly predicted the death of the Mac Mini and the Macbook Air - and how wrong were they?
Well the MacBook Air has replace the MacBook as "the" consumer notebook product, with Apple hinting that is the start of thing to come with Pro machines eventually becoming like the Air.
Meanwhile the Mac min get o whole new look, is the only Mac to have HDMI and now has a server option.
Well the MacBook Air has replace the MacBook as "the" consumer notebook product, with Apple hinting that is the start of thing to come with Pro machines eventually becoming like the Air.
Meanwhile the Mac min get o whole new look, is the only Mac to have HDMI and now has a server option.