Ok, it's true, Apple don't owe me anything. I bought kit off them, it's fabulous and I have been able to make a living using it. I just think it is a mistake if Apple neglect what I consider the more cutting-edge of the market, they would lose all that influence among creatives, scientists and so on. Hard to put a share value on that but I would think there should be room for one part of the company to work on this part of the market.
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
Ok, it's true, Apple don't owe me anything. I bought kit off them, it's fabulous and I have been able to make a living using it. I just think it is a mistake if Apple neglect what I consider the more cutting-edge of the market, they would lose all that influence among creatives, scientists and so on. Hard to put a share value on that but I would think there should be room for one part of the company to work on this part of the market.
Then those products do generate profit.
I submit the halo effect from the MP is dwindling and replaced by other devices which introduce people to Apple (iOS devices, the iPad are the gateways).
I agreed with you. I don't think Apple loses money on the MP, they do not make lots of it because they do not sell it in large volumes, but I heard somewhere that MP make the largest profit PER UNIT of all products they sell. That's because we know they overprice several items inside that machine.
That said, beyond profits Apple is smart to understand content creators need that machine and lots of people use the Apple ecosystem around the MP. It would be a mistake dropping completely the pro market.
My belief is that they might re-invent the Pro desktop at some point. iMac doesn't count because lack of expandability and AIO solution.
Read what I wrote again. Every thing you mentioned can be done on a Mac Mini or iMac.
-creative work
-developing for iOS
You're foolish if you think it can't. Are there some projects that it can't be used for? Certainly. But there are also projects that your Mac Pro can't be used for.
----------
And there's audio and video work that can't be done on your Mac Pro. What's your point? You're talking NICHES of NICHES. Edge cases and the like are the exception, not the rule.
Don't worry, they'll replace it with a smaller version.
In case you didn't take the hint...
See, on Steve's desk, on his right next to his gigantic screen...
In case you didn't take the hint...
See, on Steve's desk, on his right next to his gigantic screen...
I've always personally loved the case design. All these years later since the first G5 and it's still beautiful and modern looking.
I personally dropped my desktop PC when I switched to a MacBook Pro two years ago. And at the time my MacBook Pro was a step down in processing power.
And now I'm on a Macbook Air, and it's another step down. But I find myself needing serious processing power less and less.
As for expandable storage, well thunderbolt really makes detachable storage very attractive again vs a desktop with 1tb drives shoved in it.
And I've actually personally found my storage decreasing. I was originally saving tons of movies on hard drives and music, but I find myself streaming more and more via the internet that I decided to delete half my collection into oblivion as most of it can be streamed in HD anytime I want. And with Verizon Fios I can still download any movie in about 3 minutes time, so why bother wasting storage space anymore. There is no need.
The cloud is solving a lot of local computing problems.Of course I know, no internet no access. But how much of what you're storing is really important in a no internet situation?
I personally dropped my desktop PC when I switched to a MacBook Pro two years ago. And at the time my MacBook Pro was a step down in processing power.
And now I'm on a Macbook Air, and it's another step down. But I find myself needing serious processing power less and less.
As for expandable storage, well thunderbolt really makes detachable storage very attractive again vs a desktop with 1tb drives shoved in it.
And I've actually personally found my storage decreasing. I was originally saving tons of movies on hard drives and music, but I find myself streaming more and more via the internet that I decided to delete half my collection into oblivion as most of it can be streamed in HD anytime I want. And with Verizon Fios I can still download any movie in about 3 minutes time, so why bother wasting storage space anymore. There is no need.
The cloud is solving a lot of local computing problems.Of course I know, no internet no access. But how much of what you're storing is really important in a no internet situation?
I agree about 95% only because there are always exceptions but yeah..the computer industry completely changes like every 18months if not faster, you get a new Mac and it does your work amazingly well but next year the demands you put on your Mac end up doubling and then tripling, etc. I can't imagine upgrading every 10 years...a decade of using a computer would barely hold up to my web browsing needs let alone even proxy editing.
Thank God you made that post! I tried to play 5k RED back on my MBP (13" C2D) and the program straight up crashed...not sure that needs any more explaining.
Yeah its annoying seeing Apples website now a days...they use MacBook Air's for all of the examples with the MacBook Pro being displayed for things like Final Cut Pro X..
This^^^
I hate hate hate bandwidth constraints of peripherals like Hard Drives and the Super Drive...I'm pissed Apple didn't put USB 3.0 in because I literally have no fast connection options apart from taking out my Optibay and going to eSATA or attempting to find solutions for the now dead Firewire. Why did Apple have to kill off Firewire?! I know I know Intel politics got involved when Apple started putting in Intel CPU's but it was such a solid concept. They should have built off Firewire instead of creating Thunderbolt yet another deviation that I can't use
Another thing, ok I admit it I use Final Cut Pro X but only because I just don't have the time to learn something more "pro" nor do I really have the use yet. But I make a 10 minute HD/2k video and it takes 85 minutes to export on my MacBook Pro C2D...that's just unacceptable for anyone doing pro work so I can see the need for Mac Pro's.
I whole heartedly agree! Everyone calling these machines "overkill" does not seam to have personal experience at all or at least not nearly as much for the people pro Mac Pro (haha)! Go to RED's website and look at the work flow, its super biased towards being easy to work with but if you actually pay attention you'll see his dual Mac Pro set up with the special RED graphics card which can NOT be put in an iMac, at least not tell thunderbolt GPU enclosures become common which I still feel is not as convient as internal PCI..Why do dome people get to tell other people what is and isn't overkill for them? To each his own for god's sake!
Don't worry, they'll replace it with a smaller version.
In case you didn't take the hint...
Image
See, on Steve's desk, on his right next to his gigantic screen...
LOL that is an awesome photo!
And if you are used to driving to work in a new Mercedes, you can still get there is an Escort, but the trip wouldn't be nearly as pleasurable now, would it?
----------
To a great extent computers are a personal choice. It is not up to anyone to tell anyone else what is or what is not good enough for them to use. If choose to run 10 Mac pros is parallel to surf the web, then it's my own business and my own money. In the end the decision Apple makes will come down to dollars made and to a very small extent good will towards the community. I am hoping they find a satisfactory replacement strategy that in their eyes will bring new PC customers across the line and be more adaptable than anything on the current non MP lineup.
Not just that. I'd argue IF it's not making enough money AND if killing the model wouldn't mean too many other lost mac/apple sales (users having to switch their "work" machine to PC, then going with PCs for other machines in the family, others in the company doing more basic work, recommendations, etc) AND lost software sales AND lost development/reduced mac software options.
Not to mention the general public perception of Apple. Even if someone is fine with an iMac and would never need MP, there's still the psychological aspect of that model being available. It's fuel for the old "macs are just toys" argument, whether that argument is true or not some people will believe it.
As you said, if the premise from the original story is correct. I don't believe there's any evidence it is.
That's funny, I've yet to read an argument supporting that in this thread.
All we know is that the MP is not a big seller. But it doesn't have to be a big seller, it just needs to be profitable. And it is likely that the design costs are much less than Apple's other models, meaning less need to be sold to cover R&D. Also, wouldn't it make more sense to compare the amount of money made by the various models than the number that are sold? After all, doesn't Apple make about the same from one $3000 MP as selling five $599 mac minis?
It's entirely possible that Apple isn't making much on MP (or losing money).
It's also entirely possible that Apple is making enough on MP that it's worthwhile to continue selling them. It's also possible that sales aren't great but they could get a significant improvement with tweaks to the product line. We simply don't know.
But what we do know is that hypothetically if Apple were to dump the MP there are users who can't do their work on other Apple models, and some would have to switch to windows. And I'd argue that is bad for Apple and its stockholders.
1st Post
1st off, this is my 1st post on this forum, although I have read the articles and discussions here for years.
I too am distraught over this rumor. I run my own recording studio that I started in my basement in 1984 with an Ortari 8 Track analog tape deck, and currently to a 2,000 square foot facility that uses Mac Pro's running Pro Tools HD. And yes, I also use a Xserve with dual g5s and (2) g5 cluster nodes. The server current has total storage of over 25 TB.
I also use an old early 2008 Mac Pro at home (a studio pull from one of the units I replaced in the fall of 2010.
I'm not going to even try to respond to the ridiculous fanboy rants here about using a iMac, or (worse yet) Mac Mini's. If you don't understand why there is no way in the world those are realistic solutions, please try not to comment. Uneducated comments make you sound ignorant and uninformed...
Apple is absolutely turning it's back on Pro customers - I am already faced with replacing my server with an entirely new platform (probably UNIX) and soon, I suspect, I will need to replace the process Macs with Windows 8 PCs. Do you really think I'm going to keep a Mac in my house too, or recommend them to anyone?
I (and many other pros) need RAW Horsepower. I could care less how beautiful the Mac is, or how elegant it is, or if it's sexy - delicious , or Oh so Tasty.... I'm sure, from reading the posts here, many fanboys will disagree with my choice to move to ugly, crappy, clunky, and boring beige boxes. But ya know, ... I got a feeling at least MS, Avid, and the PC makers of the world will not desert us. I have a living to make - a job to do - a service to provide which consists of just a tad more than what Jobs said "most of us use computers" for at the iPad Launch - - namely "Enjoying our photographs", "surfing the web", "checking email", and "enjoying our music collections"....
Let's face it, Apple is doing EXACTLY what Jobs said he was going to do in 1996. "Milk the Mac for all it's worth and then move on to the next big thing"... The next big thing is the iToys. I'm glad Apple is making lots of profits - but that doesn't help me, and other pros and users who have faithfully used the platform longer than many on this forum have been alive...
1st off, this is my 1st post on this forum, although I have read the articles and discussions here for years.
I too am distraught over this rumor. I run my own recording studio that I started in my basement in 1984 with an Ortari 8 Track analog tape deck, and currently to a 2,000 square foot facility that uses Mac Pro's running Pro Tools HD. And yes, I also use a Xserve with dual g5s and (2) g5 cluster nodes. The server current has total storage of over 25 TB.
I also use an old early 2008 Mac Pro at home (a studio pull from one of the units I replaced in the fall of 2010.
I'm not going to even try to respond to the ridiculous fanboy rants here about using a iMac, or (worse yet) Mac Mini's. If you don't understand why there is no way in the world those are realistic solutions, please try not to comment. Uneducated comments make you sound ignorant and uninformed...
Apple is absolutely turning it's back on Pro customers - I am already faced with replacing my server with an entirely new platform (probably UNIX) and soon, I suspect, I will need to replace the process Macs with Windows 8 PCs. Do you really think I'm going to keep a Mac in my house too, or recommend them to anyone?
I (and many other pros) need RAW Horsepower. I could care less how beautiful the Mac is, or how elegant it is, or if it's sexy - delicious , or Oh so Tasty.... I'm sure, from reading the posts here, many fanboys will disagree with my choice to move to ugly, crappy, clunky, and boring beige boxes. But ya know, ... I got a feeling at least MS, Avid, and the PC makers of the world will not desert us. I have a living to make - a job to do - a service to provide which consists of just a tad more than what Jobs said "most of us use computers" for at the iPad Launch - - namely "Enjoying our photographs", "surfing the web", "checking email", and "enjoying our music collections"....
Let's face it, Apple is doing EXACTLY what Jobs said he was going to do in 1996. "Milk the Mac for all it's worth and then move on to the next big thing"... The next big thing is the iToys. I'm glad Apple is making lots of profits - but that doesn't help me, and other pros and users who have faithfully used the platform longer than many on this forum have been alive...
What video or audio work. List 'em. Not sure where this thread started but laptops and mac minis just aren't much of a computer. Obvious processing aside, how do they hook up to Fibre nets? How fast is their internal raid? How's the cluster rendering? Graphics cards? I mean seriously there's no argument. Aside from also that very few pro communities / companies seem to give a damn about thunderbolt yet. Perhaps if Apple had put out a professional editing app, but since they didn't, and since most of us are looking at Premiere or Avid, there doesn't seem to be much hurry to make the expansion cards and such, especially if Apple is going to ditch the MP and the people that would be buying Premiere and AJA and Matrox and BlackMagic are all jumping ship to Windows. I mean, if there isn't pro software requiring OSX, and there also isn't a pro box capable of handling all the pro software with all the RAM and Processing required, they why are they going to stay on OSX? And with that in mind who is going to put development of hardware and software as a priority? Matrox, AJA, BlackMagic, they're all toying with stuff, but you can tell they're in a hold. FCP X and the MacPro are their AppleTV at the moment. It's a hobby while they focus on their core biz over there at Windows land.
I'm quoting you in full because it's well worth it for people to read it again.
Thank you for posting a clear and concise explanation of why Apple will never abandon the Pro market. They may change the form factor of the Mac Pro, or even rename it, but the line itself won't be killed off. Here's the thing, guys. Profit is profit, and while everyone would love it if every single market they were in was as profitable as the iPad, it's just not realistic. As long as the Mac Pro makes profit, even if it's not a whole lot of profit, killing off the line doesn't increase Apple net revenue, it lowers it, because those customers will get what they want/need from another company. This is quite distinct from the MacBook, which cannibalized from the MacBook Air and MacBook Pro lines. Apple can kill a MacBook because those customers will buy other Apple products instead so there's no loss of revenue, and they can make their other product lines more efficient (efficiency, in economics, means you get more profit).
They didn't kill off the miniMac because there is no other product Apple sells that meets the wants/needs of miniMac customers. As a miniMac customer, I can tell you without a doubt had they not updated their line I would have bought a small low powered linux desktop instead to meet my needs.
They won't kill off the Mac Pro because there is no other product that meets the wants/needs of Mac Pro customers. The Mac Pro makes (small) profits for them, so it's here until something changes.
Like any good business, Apple is constantly evaluating all of its markets and product line, looking to expand into new markets, make their products more efficient, and minimize opportunity costs. I have no doubt the Mac Pro, along with every other product, is constantly discussed in high level meetings to see if it's worth continuing to make. The existence of these discussions say nothing at all about Apple's decisions, but we can have the same discussion ourselves and see that the Mac Pro remains a good product. Perhaps it needs a new form factor, perhaps it needs different model to replace it and address aspects that the Mac Pro currently lacks, but one thing we cannot say is that Apple currently has another product that can replace it. Nor can we say that Apple should kill off a (somewhat) profitable market, since to do so would lower their overall profit, not raise it.
The only justification for killing the Mac Pro is if the opportunity cost was too high, but I see the halo effects from Mac Pro customers and Mac Pro design methodologies helping Apple a lot more than if they just took all those engineers in the Mac Pro division and stuck them on making better iPads. The Mac Pro encourages more Mac OS X and iOS users, encourages sales of high end Apple-made software, and gives Apple greater design experience that trickles down to their lower end machines.
And, it is their flagship line. It's where they get all their credibility as a good computer engineering company. They're not making just cheap toys, they're making serious computers, and that lends prestige to the rest of their products. Dismantling their Pro market would have all sorts of repercussions, but perhaps the most damaging would be to their reputation.
I think a new form factor is likely, eventually, but I'm not sure what that would even look like. Open up a Mac Pro, and it's a thing of beauty inside. I've never seen a more organized, well-thought-out internal design. This is a case where functionality surpasses form, which is what the Pro market wants. It's a dream to work in, for nearly every aspect of hardware upgrade or replacement. Some small internal changes would make sense but the external case is what allows the whole thing to happen. If you make it smaller, things get cramped inside. You could eliminate the optical bays, but I think Pros are still using optical discs and don't want to give those up quite yet. You could eliminate some ports, but which ones are Pros ready to give up? You could reduce the number of hard drives, but woah there, Pros need all of them and don't want to deal with lots of externals. You can't give up the huge fans, heatsinks, and power supply either, since Pros need power and those things come along for the ride. You surely can't give up all those RAM slots either.
Apple may figure out a way to reduce the size of the thing, while maintaining its functionality and ease of use, and they'd certainly want to since it would save on material and shipping costs, but the people screaming for a smaller Mac Pro are probably not using Mac Pros as Pros do.
Last edited:
My point is that you claimed any of that work could be done on an iMac or mini, which is demonstrably false.
There are arguments to be made why they could discontinue the MP but given the current state of technology and what users are doing, "nobody needs MP, iMac is good enough" is about the weakest one I can imagine.
I own my iToys ONLY because I have a Mac Pro (and other macs). If Apple cuts the Mac Pro they will be abandoned...
Discontinuation of Mac Pro line would be a mistake from apple in my opinion.
This machine is the only really customisable one from the macs especially for the screens. There are lot of professionals requiring high quality screens using macs, which have invested in OSX running software.
In this case, I am talking about my own practice (radiology) where the use of mac pro with eizo medical screens and FDA approved OsiriX software represents a very interesting alternative to very expensive dedicated and labelled "Medical" workstations.
obviously, it is this software that introduced me to the mac world and iOS machines (just iPhone). The discontinuation of the mac pro line would make the medical usage of OSX obsolete (do not try to make me use an iMac, even with 2 thunderbolt ports for diagnostic purpose. The screen of the iMac is simply horrible to me).
It would force us to reconsider the global use of OSX and Osirix - what I would deeply regret. I used to appreciate the ease of use of OSX and the integration of professional and daily computer use made OSX an interesting combination.
As stated by someone else, thunderbolt IS NOT an alternative to PCIe, at best not yet.
Discontinuation of the pro line would make me look to linux and cheaper machines, when I'll have to replace my early 2010 MBP.
Unfortunately, most of the professional medical workstations run windows, and integration with my laptop would require reconsidering of the entire software ecosystem.
With the main reason to use OSX gone (OsiriX), I'll have to make some math to check if the jump back to windows/linux would be more expensive at the long term or not.
Maybe I should have made this math before. Whatever.
We have scheduled some machines buy for 2012 budget, including one mac pro and eizo screens (money should be available around march). If mac pros disappear until there, well, we will have a budget problem.
In my opinion, the so-called "post-pc" era is not yet there. The only difference is that people who did NOT used a computed ten years ago, do now buy a toy called iPad because they want to check their Facebook status.
Professionals who did use a computer ten years ago still use a computer today, with new software requiring more CPU resources. iPad will never replace a full-tower desktop computer for the one simple reason that it is not customizable, not powerful enough.
For all these reasons, discontinuation of the mac pro line would be a mistake from apple in my opinion. Maybe they do not sell enough. Maybe. But it maintains a coherence with all other apple products, making mac pro users buy also MBP, iPhone, or even MBA - I was even considering buying an iPad for reading purposes (scientific literature is pdf or epub format) using papers 2 for my huge collection of pdfs. Well, I'll also have to reconsider that.
This machine is the only really customisable one from the macs especially for the screens. There are lot of professionals requiring high quality screens using macs, which have invested in OSX running software.
In this case, I am talking about my own practice (radiology) where the use of mac pro with eizo medical screens and FDA approved OsiriX software represents a very interesting alternative to very expensive dedicated and labelled "Medical" workstations.
obviously, it is this software that introduced me to the mac world and iOS machines (just iPhone). The discontinuation of the mac pro line would make the medical usage of OSX obsolete (do not try to make me use an iMac, even with 2 thunderbolt ports for diagnostic purpose. The screen of the iMac is simply horrible to me).
It would force us to reconsider the global use of OSX and Osirix - what I would deeply regret. I used to appreciate the ease of use of OSX and the integration of professional and daily computer use made OSX an interesting combination.
As stated by someone else, thunderbolt IS NOT an alternative to PCIe, at best not yet.
Discontinuation of the pro line would make me look to linux and cheaper machines, when I'll have to replace my early 2010 MBP.
Unfortunately, most of the professional medical workstations run windows, and integration with my laptop would require reconsidering of the entire software ecosystem.
With the main reason to use OSX gone (OsiriX), I'll have to make some math to check if the jump back to windows/linux would be more expensive at the long term or not.
Maybe I should have made this math before. Whatever.
We have scheduled some machines buy for 2012 budget, including one mac pro and eizo screens (money should be available around march). If mac pros disappear until there, well, we will have a budget problem.
In my opinion, the so-called "post-pc" era is not yet there. The only difference is that people who did NOT used a computed ten years ago, do now buy a toy called iPad because they want to check their Facebook status.
Professionals who did use a computer ten years ago still use a computer today, with new software requiring more CPU resources. iPad will never replace a full-tower desktop computer for the one simple reason that it is not customizable, not powerful enough.
For all these reasons, discontinuation of the mac pro line would be a mistake from apple in my opinion. Maybe they do not sell enough. Maybe. But it maintains a coherence with all other apple products, making mac pro users buy also MBP, iPhone, or even MBA - I was even considering buying an iPad for reading purposes (scientific literature is pdf or epub format) using papers 2 for my huge collection of pdfs. Well, I'll also have to reconsider that.
Agreed. My concern is that this rumor has the potential to be what happens when a business thinks in terms of OLD SCHOOL product SILOs...they overlook the significance of cross-fertilization and synergy that's enabled between product divisions.
Exactly my thought, as soon as TB appeared without the Mac Pro being the very first product updated.
That's ~half of what my thoughts have been. What would probably work for (hopefully!) a lot of professionals would be (NOTE: assumes that a downsized system is a given) with the following key attributes:
- Two internal 2.5" SSDs (Boot Drive & Scratch)
- Two internal 3.5" HDDs ... a 'bulk storage' RAID 0 (internal). Project backups can go external.
- Basic GPU capability on motherboard
- One PCIe slot (for those who need more GPU, etc)
What differentiates this from the mini ... uses 3.5" drives, not 2.5";
What differentiates this from the iMac ... integral RAID 0 and the PCIe Expansion;
What differentiates this from the current Mac Pro (besides the reduced expandability inherent in the assumed 'smaller' mandate) ... SSD slot is built in (finally!) & other expansion areas are slimmed down because they can be offset by a TB driven external.
The basic principles I'm applying here is that one shouldn't hamstring a product's performance potential (eg, lack of SSDs, running of 2.5" drives), while at the same time also recognize that the first tier of performance upgunning is shouldn't force one to immediately go external with a Thunderbolt chasis.
Agreed. Frankly, if Apple were to license the OS, they could easily allow this hole to be filled with 3rd party Hackintoshi...but I don't necessarily believe that they'll open this door.
The other alternative is to "wish upon the cloud" in terms of outsourcing a job there to rent CPU clock cycles. That would be a decent business plan approach - - if not for the fact that bandwidth speeds in the USA are horribly slow, which still favor local processing of a job. For example, when I go out on a photo shoot, it isn't unreasonable for me to come back with 100GB worth of memory cards ... how long is that going to take to upload across even a reasonably fast broadband connection? Answer: across a 15 Mbps connection, you're talking a solid 16 hours, and a 45Mbps T3 ... it's still 5.3 hours.
The approach to this question is something that I posted a solution to here a few years ago which is basically to have one's own "Cloud At Home" for processing jobs to, which figuratively could be a rack of minis in the hallway closet...running locally on a Gigabit Ethernet connection should be able to get halfway close to its 125Mbps rating ... but even that's still 2 hours.
Sure, Promise on TB does look to be pretty nice, but so too is its current priced tag. Compare the cost of (iMac + Promise TB) to a Mac Pro before deciding.
We all have our list of technologies for what we think would work reasonably well for our own individual needs.
For example, a lot of the work being done on the 'Pro' scale tends to gobble up storage capacity (in addition to RAM & CPU), so I'd not like to see any downsize from 3.5" HDDs to 2.5" HDDs. Yes, I know that we did move down from 5.25" drives years ago and that 2.5" certainly is coming eventually, but 3.5" HDDs are very much a commodity and affordable...and since there aren't 2TB 2.5" drives around today, the "size" trade-off question isn't a 1:1 ratio of 2.5" to 3.5", but is basically twice as many 2.5" drives versus 3.5" ... and don't forget that for externals, this also means twice as many cables and power supplies too.
True, but it is also time to invoke "Something Steve Said":
"PCs are going to be like trucks. They are still going to be around." However, one out of x people will need them."
- Steve Jobs, June 2010
The Mac Pro is my truck. And I need a new truck. And probably another one after that.
I'll believe that it will still be running as silently as the PowerMacs / Mac Pros have been performing for me, week in & week out when I see it. And that also applies to all of those TB externals ... which (presently) can't be located more than 3 meters away.
It appears to be a jetisson of their influential core customers, which is what concerns me greatly. Yes, OS X is still a glass of ice water in Hell, which is why I'm willing to go drop $4K for a big box every few years ... but a "Not At Any Price" marketplace declination forces a reconsideration of my tools. That's part of the reason why I chose Adobe Lightroom over Aperature a couple of years ago: simple risk management for my business interests, in order to be less vulnerable to Apple's whims.
Personally, I've decided: "No iPhone 4S until there's a new Mac Pro".
-hh
Last edited:
There's people out there who did billboards on an G4 800 eMac. Did it suck? Yeah it sucked. But it got done.
I just don't think people are really paying attention here. Current desktop class processors are close to matching unreleased Server class $1000+ CPUs easily. When Ivy Bridge desktop processors drop at 20% faster than current and future gen server class processors, the value of producing a sub $2000 ivy bridge desktop workstation makes total sense.
I can't justify a machine built with server CPUs just to get a full length GPU PCI-E card. I really hope Apple recognizes that desktop quality CPUs are the new workstation quality CPUs, while everyone else is going laptop.
You seem confused about various things such as the difference between consumer CPUs and Xeon CPUs and the differences in price.
Here is a challenge. If you are in the US, then I want you to build me this machine for a quarter of $4,148.
I also want direct access to technical support and global repair/replacement for up to 3 years.
One 3.33GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon Westmere W3680
3GB (3x1GB) DDR3 ECC SDRAM
1TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5870 1GB
Sound Card
Firewire 800 ports
DVD Writer
Keyboard
Mouse
Operating System
So your budget is $1037
If you are in the UK then I want you to build this computer for me for £850 pounds.
It's going to be tricky once you check out how much this CPU costs.
You'll struggle to find the W3680 new these days so please look for a similar chip that will give me similar performance and has similar specifications. I expect the machine to score around 15,500 in 64 bit geekbench.
Thanks,
But does not change the fact that as time goes on the more powerful machines allow more more and more complex models to be done. I know in engineering the limiting factor is they can get close but still there are limitation of how exact one can get due to the time it would take to calculated it. More powerful the computer the better and larger your models can get in a reasonable amount of time.
In 3D rendering same theory applies.
Fair enough.
I still think companies, and bloggers, should not be so twitchy about market trends. It's good to be nimble, but Netflix screwed themselves completely by jumping into the cloud in a poorly understood, planned, and executed way. Blackberry also just took a tremendous hit with cloud unstability. There are several similar stories over the last few years. The idea that Apple should become a commodities-only company like Sony was, at the drop of a hat, doesn't seem right to me. Sony had to diversify to reinvent itself and *added* computers to its product portfolio. So I worry a little bit about Apple's lunge to being a cloud services provider (especially after they screwed up MobileMe so badly), or making a lunge move like scrapping Mac Pro (hopefully a rumor only). Some product divsersity is good. The Mac Pro line is lagging? I have an 8-core, 2.93 GHz, late 2009 with a 5870, 12 GB RAM, 2.6 TB storage in three drives for physics simulations. It's a great product. Snow Leopard is a dream with Grand Central managing those cores. The entire Xcode dev kit included in the price (the equivelent Visual Studio setup would add about $2000 to any PC). Before shelving the product line, from which Apple can't return, maybe look at ways to better market it & reduce price point. Right now, Apple doesn't "market" the Mac Pro at all.
Last edited:
Yes, but again, some of these 3D rendering/engineering modelling tasks are peeking and not requiring Mac Pro hardware-level anymore. Stuff is getting sent to distributed environnements as working locally becomes more and more limited and local clients that have tons of processing power are less and less required.
Some tasks will always require Mac Pro like hardware. The thing to keep in mind is that Apple will not sustain it forever as the niche becomes smaller. Look at the Xserve to see that.
Would be a stupid move
God, I hope they don't. There may be a day when a laptop can crunch video and big files like my Mac Pro, but I haven't seen it yet.
God, I hope they don't. There may be a day when a laptop can crunch video and big files like my Mac Pro, but I haven't seen it yet.
You are 100% correct and well stated.
For those like myself that do heavy 3D work, this will never be enough as I can fully take advantage of anything new that comes out for faster computing, be it CPU, GPU, memory, storage, etc. One system is often not enough either, but how many out there have small render farms and spend $5-10K per system is the question for Apple to answer soon. I hope I am not forced to move to all Windows 7/8 machines, but whatever gets the job done is what I will do.