How so ? The Mac Pro is hardly the only computer they sell (in fact, I'm hard pressed to find a product of theirs that isn't either an accessory, software or a computer).
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
How so ? The Mac Pro is hardly the only computer they sell (in fact, I'm hard pressed to find a product of theirs that isn't either an accessory, software or a computer).
I listened to John Gruber and Dan Benjamin talking about the cost of a Mac Pro vs an iMac, each maxed out, as an example of how expensive a Mac Pro is, $12000 vs $3800. But this isn't at all a good comparison or point. So I made a better comparison- configure a Mac Pro to as close as possible the same machine you'd get with a maxed out iMac, ignoring for a moment any of it's added features and benefits.
Here's the comparison:
iMac 27-inch
2560 x 1440 resolution
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
16GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$3049.00
Mac Pro
One 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
16GB (4x4GB)
2TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple LED Cinema Display (27" flat panel)
$4,823.00
So, is the rest of the Mac Pro worth $1800? Internal RAID storage, PCI expansion, 64GB RAM sleds? Depends on whether you need it or not. So that's the big question. Oh, also, I consider the iMac display like a kit lens on an SLR. I know I would need another monitor, so maybe add another $999, and not having a good redundant storage system is a bad idea, so is $800 enough to cover that? Seems like at least a wash for anybody.
Here's the comparison:
iMac 27-inch
2560 x 1440 resolution
3.4GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
16GB 1333MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x4GB
2TB Serial ATA Drive
AMD Radeon HD 6970M 2GB GDDR5
$3049.00
Mac Pro
One 3.2GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon “Nehalem”
16GB (4x4GB)
2TB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s hard drive
ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
One 18x SuperDrive
Apple LED Cinema Display (27" flat panel)
$4,823.00
So, is the rest of the Mac Pro worth $1800? Internal RAID storage, PCI expansion, 64GB RAM sleds? Depends on whether you need it or not. So that's the big question. Oh, also, I consider the iMac display like a kit lens on an SLR. I know I would need another monitor, so maybe add another $999, and not having a good redundant storage system is a bad idea, so is $800 enough to cover that? Seems like at least a wash for anybody.
Because as I said, all they care about is iOS. Period. I don't want to hear "but they have computers!!!" Lion might as well be the evolution of iOS. They're forcing people into that direction.
Quote from Dorian Gray in The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen: "Empires crumble. There are no exceptions".
Apple will learn the same lesson that eMachines and Gateway did, the same lesson HP almost learned. They can keep on releasing large iPod Touches that are slimmer over and over again and not innovate on anything, and keep pushing on iOS. Eventually they will hit the brick wall that is power computing.
Dont forget. As has been pointed out quite a few times now, the low-end Mac Pro is not priced competitively at all, whereas the high end models are. As the iMac spec only goes so far, a direct, fair comparison cant be made between it and the top-end Mac Pro.
Yeah, they'd never do that. If they told us a new Mac Pro was coming soon, NOBODY would go out and buy the current stock. And they want to move as much of the remaining inventory as possible before launching the new machines.
Love the quote!
I agree with you in part and disagree with you in part.
I agree that Apple seems to be moving toward converging iOS and OSX, although I think it highly unlikely that they would truly merge - iOS just can't do the kinds of things that OSX can. Perhaps it could one day, in which case most wouldn't care--at the end of the day, people don't care HOW things work, as long as they can do anything and everything they want.
I disagree that Apple will stop innovating - I think the corporate culture, for lack of a better term, is set up as far as possible to insure the company continues to innovate and to release new and interesting products, whatever they might be. Yes, the loss of Steve Jobs will have an impact down the road, but it is impossible to quantify it, or to say whether it will be positive or negative.
All that said, I think it would be foolish of Apple to discontinue the Mac Pro. It represents a flagship product in many respects, and is the clearest link to Apple's past. I could see the Mac Pro changing significantly in terms of form, but I think Apple needs a standalone desktop that is more capable than a Mini. I think what has happened is that Mac Pro sales have become a smaller and smaller share of revenue, because they are quite frankly FAR more powerful than almost anyone needs - the pro community (of which I am not a part) excepted. As such, eventually Apple (read: Tim Cook) needs to decide HOW important it is to maintain a flagship desktop that is an obvious direct link to Apple's origins. I hope he does not under-value that. But at the same time, if the research and development costs significantly exceed the expected revenue, I'd understand. I hope it doesn't get there.
I think Apple should split into two companies, mac and istuff, and let each run independently. Or even license the pro line out to a select proprietary single 3rd party, and let the R&D continue on the pro lines without interfering with the grand igadget plans.
Maybe the future is coming
There maybe one or two revisions of what we know of MacPro left. It may be a sad fact to face. But perhaps there is hope.
But I was thinking Apple may be moving to what HP had announced.
PA Semi was looking into "server on a chip" back in 2005. It couldn't compete with established server brands. Now PA is part of Apple. Apple isn't going bankrupt. Apple has the resources to do just about anything it wants to in the range of computing technology. How hard would it be to take a couple A7 or A8s, slap them on daughtercards and toss into MacPro chassis?
There maybe one or two revisions of what we know of MacPro left. It may be a sad fact to face. But perhaps there is hope.
But I was thinking Apple may be moving to what HP had announced.
PA Semi was looking into "server on a chip" back in 2005. It couldn't compete with established server brands. Now PA is part of Apple. Apple isn't going bankrupt. Apple has the resources to do just about anything it wants to in the range of computing technology. How hard would it be to take a couple A7 or A8s, slap them on daughtercards and toss into MacPro chassis?
Problem is that servers based on a large number of low power CPUs are only really suitable for problems that parallelises well. Web serving, searching and database operations are good examples of these - and HP's servers should work well in a data centre.
Apple's desktop software does not parallelise well. This sort of architecture really isn't suitable as a replacement for the Mac Pro.
In 2009, it started to flow rumors that the camera manufacturer of the top brand LEICA would stop all further development of the long-awaited new digital SLR camera Leica R10.
The rumors should unfortunately turn out to be true.
Thus, the owners of tens of thousands of very expensive high quality lenses suddenly were left with almost nothing from the camera manufacturer, which many over a lifetime had supported through thick and thin.
I was fairly new with Leica, but had plans to buy me up in the brand after they had come out with a digital SLR camera.
After Leica "cut the hand" of its R-lens customers, I have not traded a single alternative product from the Leica Company.
If it is true that Apple will stop making Mac Pro, I probably never going to buy a single alternative product from the Apple Company.
The process of orienting me towards other suppliers has already started.
Just a statement from the very Apple Company itself, that the rumor is false, can get me to continue visiting my Mac store.
The rumors should unfortunately turn out to be true.
Thus, the owners of tens of thousands of very expensive high quality lenses suddenly were left with almost nothing from the camera manufacturer, which many over a lifetime had supported through thick and thin.
I was fairly new with Leica, but had plans to buy me up in the brand after they had come out with a digital SLR camera.
After Leica "cut the hand" of its R-lens customers, I have not traded a single alternative product from the Leica Company.
If it is true that Apple will stop making Mac Pro, I probably never going to buy a single alternative product from the Apple Company.
The process of orienting me towards other suppliers has already started.
Just a statement from the very Apple Company itself, that the rumor is false, can get me to continue visiting my Mac store.
Share your sentiments with Apple and/or email Tim Cook: tcook@apple.com as others are doing. It might help.
Xserve, exactly, forgot about that. One of the reasons I'm taking a side route back into AVID and premiere because it is easy to switch back to windows in a few years if Apple doesn't provide us with a real roadmap.
Lion works well on three mac Pro's here but one MaAcBook pro has too many weird permission problems, even with a clean install. The other Macbook Pro's are all fine. Weirdness creeps into OSX
One thing Apple never really got is that some users really want the option to decide for themselves what to do and how they want to do it. One of the things I liked about Windows 2000. But to be honest, so far never regret dropping Windows completely 5 years ago. We will see what happens next.
Lion works well on three mac Pro's here but one MaAcBook pro has too many weird permission problems, even with a clean install. The other Macbook Pro's are all fine. Weirdness creeps into OSX
One thing Apple never really got is that some users really want the option to decide for themselves what to do and how they want to do it. One of the things I liked about Windows 2000. But to be honest, so far never regret dropping Windows completely 5 years ago. We will see what happens next.
A most useful aspect of having it all in a tower is to be able to keep that tower together with other noisemakers in a machine room, safely away from the pristine sound environment of our music studios. Apple you just have to keep this, notebooks will never cut it in professional audio.
They weren't the only ones, as you've discovered.
ARM had to get powerful enough first, but once there, it's been pursued due to the lower costs that will be possible (operations as well as equipment costs = highly attractive to enterprise customers). Though this is great for servers, it's not so much the case for workstations (not much workstation software is truly n core threaded). ARM based GPGPU clusters will help workstation users for raw power, but building one will still be pricey = limited to larger entities. Though it will still become more available to smaller companies through leasing options offered at lower costs (if the software is capable of GPGPU processing).
Not just Apple's, as the majority of workstation suites aren't fully threaded either, and development has been very s-l-o-w. A few specialty applications, but that's about it right now (occasional to see say one or two applications in a suite, but it's less than 50% of the suite).
Just not sure anymore. If I look at the track record it almost seems as though Apple has hit a brick wall for some reason.
What new product have they released since 2009? Nothing except what...the Magic Trackpad? Everything else has just been a redesign of what's already there.
What Apple needs to do is continue to innovate EVERY YEAR with something. Not just a redesign. But additional innovative products. That's what they lack right now. They tried with MobileMe...and failed. Siri was purchased. iCloud is basically the same as what MobileMe was with minor tweaks.
IF they want to kill off the Mac Pro then fine. But they need to have an innovative product to serve that market. And the price needs to be correct for the market.
