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

[Atlantico]

If Apple discontinues the Mac Pro, I won't be surprised - that's sort of the way they've been heading - but I'd be disappointed.

It would be a severe blow to the Macintosh eco-system and to a lesser extent the iOS eco-system.

Apple is a company that is constantly evolving. I don't recognize it as the same company as it was in the 90s, nor do I recognize it as the same company as in 2005 - but one thing has always been their Achilles-heel; namely the inability to focus on more than one thing at a time.

Once it was the Apple II, then the Mac, now iOS - which hasn't been so strange in the past, considering Apple never was that large - but now it is a huge multinational juggernaut, and as other of such caliber it must be able to be many things to many people.

It needs to be both a hardware company and a software company - a computer company and an appliance company. A tech company and a distribution company.

It can't just drop the ball in segments it has already established - at least if it wants to maintain its size, growth, influence and prosperity.

Dropping the Mac Pro would be the end of Apple as a professional computer supplier. It's that simple. It is not disputed that Apple sells more Macs and by extent more desktop Macs and by extent more Mac Pros than it has ever done - but on the other hand it's "yesterday's" business from the mono-focal point of view of Apple.

I think discontinuing the Mac Pro would confirm that Apple is still not mature enough to be a multinational super-corporation and can only do one thing well at any given time - an epic fail - and I'd sell my stocks as soon as the discontinuation of the Mac Pro was a fact.

 

[linuxcooldude]

No professional would use internal storage for projects. That is not flexible and not good for the software running on the macs. No audio facility, editing suites or anything like that uses internal storage.
But they us eSata, PCI cards and Ethernet storage, and that's why the Mac Pro is preferred (and because it's more powerful).

Internal storage is for software applications alone.

In fact I do know some pro's using internal storage. The Mac Pro has room for 4 hard drives.

I don't know anyone who has 4 hard drives full of just applications.

 

[krazygoat]

Try any museum with muti-media, video, and CG installations oh and also photography since you don't consider that art either even though the rest of the art community tends to disagree with ANY of you assertions.

If you are such a luddite who are you posting to a forum about a computer designed for high-end graphics, video, and audio. Go back to finger painting on your cave wall and banging bones together to make pure music and art.

Because they don't exist. In fact, photography suffers a similar problem because it is *derived*.


Alas it is not possible. There is no physical cost to the digital medium that is carried to the final expression. This is perfect erasure, where the means are invisible and unaccounted.


By tone I mean the lack of complete control over a medium. This is the human condition, and without it the expression becomes pure fantasy. Commitment is just that, moving forward without complete control and without complete recourse.


Self recognition is certainly an element of art, but you're mixing two issues. No expression exists outside of space and time, but we're talking about the means of its creation. When not bound by prior marks, further marks provide no depth of intent, meaning or sacrifice. That's why commitment becomes so important.


Read above


Instead, I say you do not understand that art is not just the ends but also the means. So, I ask you show me any 3D contemporary fine artist that is properly recognized as a fine artist, and not just by a bunch of other 3D artists.

 

[AidenShaw]

The XServe was as much for the datacenter (big enterprises still have need of Apple services for client installations) as for smaller shops.

Yes - but the data centre might have tens of thousands of CPUs in thousands of boxes running Windows, Linux and Solaris for the major tasks.

And it might have a couple of Apple OSX servers someplace in a corner for Apple services.

My main point, though, is that XServe wasn't "displaced" by other technology - since Apple didn't support Apple OSX Server on any of the new enterprise technology that was displacing 1U servers in some cases. XServe (and Apple OSX Server) were simply abandoned.

And, by the way, in the data centre that I manage we still have lots of 1U servers. The newer ones are 12 core ProLiant DL360 G7 system with 64 GiB to 256 GiB of RAM and Fibre Channel storage - running ESX or Hyper-V to (as you said earlier) to support lots of virtual servers per 1U. It's about $8K for a 12-core, 64 GiB system.

The 1U server is very much alive and well - but often it's a virtual machine host for many virtualized servers.

 

[coolspot18]

In fact I do know some pro's using internal storage. The Mac Pro has room for 4 hard drives.

I don't know anyone who has 4 hard drives full of just applications.

If only the iMacs had an eSATA port, then we could all have affordable external storage.

 

[808?]

If only the iMacs had an eSATA port, then we could all have affordable external storage.

Exactly.

 

[krazygoat]

You assertion of games was laughable as I already posted. You think we have not progressed from the processing power of Ataris and such?

Resolution has a TON to do with 3D. 3D does not exist as a hologram, it is rendered and displayed, also as resolution increases texture resolution and detail has to increase with it. I did also mention polycounts to your game assertion but once again those polygons and nurds have to be rendered and rendered to a specific resolution and displayed. ALL of that requires MORE processing power not less.

There is NOT one single 3D market that requires less processing than the previous generation. It is always INCREASING. What you are asserting makes no sense.

There's more to 3D than movies. I named 1 example a few pages back.

And frankly, what does resolution have to do with 3D ? Resolution is a factor of final rendering using vertex based models. If you had said polygon count, you might have been on to something.

Did I say all tasks would eventually require lesser hardware ? no. Obviously, some tasks will always require more and more, better and better. What I said is that over time, the number of these will be somewhat lessened by technology/algorithmic advances.

The problem is that Apple is not one to keep shipping a niche product forever. Eventually, they will axe it for more profitable endeavours. The time might be next year, it might not.

 

[nanofrog]

The 1U server is very much alive and well - but often it's a virtual machine host for many virtualized servers.

1U Blades aren't going anywhere in the next few years at least. Particularly with virtualization on the rise, and the plans for more cluster and cloud configurations.

 

[KnightWRX]

And, by the way, in the data centre that I manage we still have lots of 1U servers. The newer ones are 12 core ProLiant DL360 G7 system with 64 GiB to 256 GiB of RAM and Fibre Channel storage - running ESX or Hyper-V to (as you said earlier) to support lots of virtual servers per 1U. It's about $8K for a 12-core, 64 GiB system.

The 1U server is very much alive and well - but often it's a virtual machine host for many virtualized servers.

Last I checked, the XServe couldn't be configured up to those specs in its last iteration. Yet there already were these 1U computers. Not to mention OS X Server is not much of an hypervisor.

The point is, the single server instance 1U form factor was displaced. Apple's offering was a single server instance 1U form factor. Hence it became a niche for people running Mac installations or iPhone deployments. With the iPhone management tools getting ported to Windows and Macs integrating into Active Directory infrastructure... well... the writing was on the wall so to say.

Now if FCPX, lack of a 2011 refresh and more and more "pro" tasks being accomplished on lesser machines isn't enough of a clue for some people as to the eventual (maybe not immediate) fate of the Mac Pro, then I don't know what is.

 

[kustardking]

Try any museum with muti-media, video, and CG installations oh and aldo photography since you don't consider that art either even though the rest of the art community tends to disagree with ANY of you assertions.

If you are such a luddite who are you posting to a forum about a computer designed for high-end graphics, video, and audio. Go back to finger painting on your cave wall and banging bones together to make pure music and art.

Museums are common, and most are simply attractions. Some hold art, others objects of beauty and ugliness, and others only the best that a local community is willing to provide.

Photography is an odd bird, but I did not exclude it. In your excitement you read my statement incorrectly. I point out that it has some of the issues that other mechanically made expressions do. It does, however, take into account the real world.

Any why bother posting? You sound like the sort of person that only likes positive encouragement. I am far from being a Luddite. Also, I'm not arguing against the utility of 3D, I'm saying you can't make art with it.

 

[KnightWRX]

Resolution has a TON to do with 3D. 3D does not exist as a hologram

No, 3D does not exist as a hologram, it exists usually as a bunch of vertexes in a resolution independent coordinate system called a viewport that can then be rendered to a final bitmap image format by a renderer that converts 3D space coordinates and all texture mapping information, stencil buffers, lighting information, shading and blending into pixels to fit the output resolution as selected by the user.

Resolution is a product of the final render, not the actual production of 3D content.

And my games example was laughable ? You're saying a Mac Pro is required to make 3D games for iOS ? For the Nintendo 3DS ? No frankly. 3D software packages can run very well on lesser computers to make very adequate models for these platforms. Not all 3D work requires full fledged workstations anymore, a lot of it can be done for very complex projects that target lesser platforms on lesser computers.

Again, you need to understand that your high-end post work is a niche. These niches are becoming more and more scarce as time goes by as far as the need for Mac Pros go. There will come a time when Apple won't want to fund products for your particular niche.

 

[relbbircs]

Just to be on the safe side I've already sold mine. Thanks, Steve!

I think discontinuing the Mac Pro would confirm that Apple is still not mature enough to be a multinational super-corporation and can only do one thing well at any given time - an epic fail - and I'd sell my stocks as soon as the discontinuation of the Mac Pro was a fact.

 

[AidenShaw]

Last I checked, the XServe couldn't be configured up to those specs in its last iteration. Yet there already were these 1U computers. Not to mention OS X Server is not much of an hypervisor.

The point is, the single server instance 1U form factor was displaced. Apple's offering was a single server instance 1U form factor.

OK - I think that we're on the same page now - if the earlier mentions of "1U" meant "single server instance 1U" we didn't have a real disagreement. The form factor survives, but it's being used in new ways.

BTW, the DL360 1U has 18 DIMM slots for up to 384 GiB of RAM. Its big brother, the DL580 4U, has quad sockets for up to 40 physical cores and 64 DIMM slots for 2 TiB of RAM.

Why doesn't Apple allow OSX Server (and OSX client) to run virtualized on systems like the DL580 and its siblings? The profit margin would be 100% for selling OS licenses.

 

[krazygoat]

Ugh no, first off I work right next to EA, we are doing 3D game development in-house as well and to develop the games, including just the code people are using workstations. While the code could be written and maybe some is on lesser machines coding for the game is NOT developing the game. One of the more popular engines, Unity, requires a beast of a system and you need high-end 3D software to go along with it to actually develop the assets. There are also parts of the system like Bullet physics from Disney, GI rendering, that really bog down a system. And Unity is not even as heavy as Unreal, ID's engine, or other custom platform engines. I would LOVE to see you try and do character design with Maya and Zbrush on a Macbook Air or even more laughable a netbook.

You also seem to forget that phones are increasing their hardware to the level that matches console systems. BUT new console systems and computers will come out for next gen game engines. I don't see anyone playing the current top-end 3D games on their phones yet. It goes up and up on both ends. And the requirements to create that content is even more extreme.

I again never claimed every game uses limited poly counts or that every game doesn't require new hardware. Some of you people really have problems with shades of grey (see that word again, some).

Games are being written and developed on MBAs now, on Netbooks, and they contain "complex" 3D models because frankly what was complex on a high-end PC rig 3 years ago is what runs on the iPhone today and is created on laptops.

----------



The XServe was as much for the datacenter (big enterprises still have need of Apple services for client installations) as for smaller shops. Heck, I'd say smaller shops probably didn't need the capabilities of the XServe, which in the end made it a non-product today in 2009. Smaller shops don't need LOM, they don't need redundant power supplies (because frankly, they only have 1 electric circuit to connect to anyhow, removing a lot of the redundancy). They probably also don't need hot swap hard drives as cooling is not a factor and failures can be replaced with downtime after company hours.

Also, OS X Server was more than a bunch of Apple client management tools. Some of its functions could be replaced with Linux/Solaris and even Windows servers, and these offerings were possible to run on denser systems like Blades/Hypervisors.

Apple of course didn't need the XServe in the end. It was outdated, it was a relic. A simple change of license to OS X Server to enable to run on allowed hypervisors on any generic hardware would have been plenty to retain their spot in smaller shops (heck, VPS services would have been sufficient here) and enterprises.

 

[oiuh151]

If only the iMacs had an eSATA port, then we could all have affordable external storage.

eSATA to Thunderbolt

Problem solved. Thunderbolt is over 3x faster than eSATA.

 

[Nostromo]

One of the tricks out of the bag of sales men is to take the item away from the hesitant, prospective buyer, so it's wanted more.

For now, I'm sure the sales of Mac Pros have increased, and the next Mac Pro will get more attention.

We know Apple is a champion of marketing, and we know it uses rumors as a strategy.

 

[nanofrog]

Why doesn't Apple allow OSX Server (and OSX client) to run virtualized on systems like the DL580?

It would likely cut into their system sales.

 

[Rodimus Prime]

eSATA to Thunderbolt

Problem solved. Thunderbolt is over 3x faster than eSATA.

But for hard drive storage it will be a lot SLOWER because it has to go threw one more thing. Max speed of the hard drive is going to be sata and esata ties right into the sata drivers on the MOBO.

 

[BlingBling]

I doubt they will get rid of these as there is a sufficient pro market for them. Although I reason their not as popular because of cost, $2499 and up!

But I do think they would be more popular if they made a cheaper version (I7 processor, cheaper case design) for the person like me (power user on a budget) who wants to use his existing display and wants the upgrade-ability/expansion of a desktop. I don't need xeons or a fancy case, but I do need a screaming video card and multiple drives.

Right now I have my 2011 13" macbook pro hooked up to my 24" display, but it's too laggy and noisy when doing heavy work. What I wouldn't give for a sub 1500 desktop mac that isn't all-in-one. I suspect Apple thinks I'm in the minority .

 

[Nostromo]

I doubt they will get rid of these as there is a sufficient pro market for them. Although I reason their not as popular because of cost, $2499 and up!

But I do think they would be more popular if they made a cheaper version (I7 processor, cheaper case design) for the person like me (power user on a budget) who wants to use his existing display and wants the upgrade-ability/expansion of a desktop. I don't need xeons or a fancy case, but I do need a screaming video card and multiple drives.

Right now I have my 2011 13" macbook pro hooked up to my 24" display, but it's too laggy and noisy when doing heavy work. What I wouldn't give for a sub 1500 desktop mac that isn't all-in-one. I suspect Apple thinks I'm in the minority .

The low end Xeon processors are not that expensive. It's the mark-up that's so extremely high on the entry level models.

Level the mark-up, and sales would go up.

And a few advertisements wouldn't hurt, either.

 

[firestarter]

But for hard drive storage it will be a lot SLOWER because it has to go threw one more thing. Max speed of the hard drive is going to be sata and esata ties right into the sata drivers on the MOBO.

No.

Firstly it's through, unless you're planning to throw your data around?

Secondly, ThunderBolt is very tightly integrated to the machine's bus, and is essentially just another flavour of PCIe which is what's already used to connect the CPU with the SATA interface chips.

To the SATA interface, it looks like it's connected over PCIe and latency/throughput are similar.

To the OS, the connection looks identical to PCIe, and the exact same SATA drivers are used.

So no, there really should be no speed penalty to speak of.

 

[nanofrog]

But I do think they would be more popular if they made a cheaper version (I7 processor, cheaper case design) for the person like me (power user on a budget) who wants to use his existing display and wants the upgrade-ability/expansion of a desktop. I don't need xeons or a fancy case, but I do need a screaming video card and multiple drives.

If you mean an LGA1366 based i7, they're the same cost per CPU in quantity (same clock frequency and core count) as their Xeon counterparts.

So to make it cheaper (give you want you want), they'd need to use LGA1155, which has fewer PCIe lanes, fewer cores per CPU (vs. a Hex core CPU), fewer SATA ports, and able to handle fewer DIMM slots = lower memory capacity. Which is an iMac in a more standard case to allow for a couple of PCIe slots (1@16x lanes + 1@4x lanes).

 

[Renzatic]

Snip

Snap

I think the problem is you're both are talking about two separate similar things.

Resolution has a direct impact on realtime 3D performance, say in games and whatnot. The higher it is, obviously the more strain you're gonna have on the GPU. In prerendered 3D, the resolution output is solely the job of the CPU. Even in content creation, the CPU is far more important, and performance isn't tied directly to your screen res. Zbrush, for instance, will perform roughly the same at 2560 x 1440 as it will at 640 x 480. All those polygons are being rendered by the CPU, with the GPU only doing assist work.

And yes, you can make games quite easily using an iMac. Content creation there is far more lax, since it's all done piecemeal, then baked down to textures and combined into a low poly scene. You'll want a stout CPU and GPU obviously, but you don't absolutely HAVE to have the highest of high end workstations. Like Epic Games, I think they use bog standard i7s in their pipeline. Maybe even have a few iMacs in there. The most recent revs can handle Max, Modo, Zbrush, and Mudbox easily.

But then you have professional movie rendering, where the CPU is the absolute king. You're gonna have huge scenes of high polygon assets displayed at once, and you're gonna want to get a rendered frame out from one of these dense, high poly scenes in a decent amount of time. For that, you gotta have a slew of powerful workstation grade computers. Here, an iMac will NOT cut it. No ifs, ands, or buts about it. You might have a couple lying around for some content creation, but they'll be the rare exception.

So, you're both right, and you're both wrong.

 

[MythicFrost]

I really hope this doesn't happen. The single processor Mac Pro is a fair bit more expensive than the competition so it doesn't cannibalise iMac sales, yet that fact is probably a strong part of why it isn't selling as much.

 

[firestarter]

I really hope this doesn't happen. The single processor Mac Pro is a fair bit more expensive than the competition so it doesn't cannibalise iMac sales, yet that fact is probably a strong part of why it isn't selling as much.

Why would Apple worry about 'cannibalising' iMac sales? Either way, they get to sell you a computer. With the Mac Pro, they may well sell you an overpriced monitor too.