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
Been there. Done that. didn't work out real well.
While this is true, I'll bet that if they discontinued their desktop lines, only made Mac OS X notebooks, and then licensed Mac OS X to third-party manufacturers and system builders but only for desktops, we'd see some pretty cool stuff. Certainly more useful machines than the Mac mini or the iMac, for sure.
While there would be cool stuff it would end the mac computer..
Just keep it the way it is and everything will be fine like always.
Been there. Done that. didn't work out real well.
That's because they didn't maintain control. Outsourcing a few desktop towers wouldn't threaten their core notebook and iMac lines, while producing more revenue and bringing in more Mac users in general. The point is that if Apple doesn't want to do Xserve or Mac Pros or even a tower gaming Mac, they could license someone else to do those specific areas for them. That would make some of us very happy.
I don't buy Macs because I like the hardware choices. I buy them because I prefer the operating system for the most part (no registry and malware are big on the list, although a lack of SLI support and USB3 so far are low on my list). Sadly, a Hackintosh is my only real option in some cases due to Apple's refusal to offer the hardware I actually want. It is Apple that forces the issue of hardware versus OS when the two should largely be mutually exclusive. Apple simply doesn't care what hardware users want (e.g. actual gaming capable video cards, SLI support, USB3, desktop level components in so-called "desktop" machines, etc.) They have been putting their "vision" ahead of consumer feedback for a LONG time now. Some of us only hang around because we don't like Windows. But Windows7 isn't as bad as past operating systems, although I still don't like the malware issues there.
No it's not (meaning there is a professional presence), but from what I've seen, it's only necessary for a small sub-set. Specifically, CAD/CAE that need increased frame rates for 3D work. And really, the only difference between the Quadro's and gaming versions, is that the Quadro's may have a larger memory capacity in terms of hardware. That's it. The rest of it is in the drivers, as they support specialized applications as a means of speeding up specific tasks those applications use on a regular basis.
But for just number crunching, SLI isn't usually needed. Or CrossFire for that matter, as each card is used independently of one another (just splits the load amongst whatever FPU cores in the GPU are available). You can connect the cables, but I don't recall that making a difference in the output.
As per a lack of support, most of that falls on Apple, as the OS has to support it before AutoDesk would be able to support it in their Mac products. Or any other company that could leverage it for that matter.
They're about at that point already with the MP, as Foxconn does all the hardware development and manufacturing.
But I don't see Apple willing to give up OS X or firmware development as a means of securing the rest of their lines, so I'm not too hopeful on such a possibility ATM.
Maybe if all they develop themselves are the iDevices, but it's more like that the MP will follow the XServe into EOL land before licensed development were even to be considered (all the computers would have to be licensed at whatever point such a decision is made, which means all Intel based laptops).
I'd expect laptops to shift over to ARM before that happens, making the MP even more of an Albatross = more willing to EOL this particular product if it even makes it that far IMO.
The iMac is a PITA to access the interior for service & etc. Have you seen the HP Z1? The back tilts up for easy access. Other "All-in-one" solutions have access ports/doors for easy access to drives & etc.
There are thermal issues with the iMac. Adding "more stuff" inside would likely increase the problem without a major rethink.
A tower simply makes more sense. Stick (the iMac's) screen in a separate framework and offer it for sale as well, if you like, but keep the tower.
what most people are forgetting.
iMacs are good. they do the jobs that they were designed for. however the optional extras apple are fewer. this is due to the fact that the housing for the iMac is minimalistic, sleek and streamlined. i'm seeing many people arguing the fact that they can achieve better results from a current iMac by comparing it to a previous model. however if you compared each iMac and Mac Pro from each generation you can still see the fact that the Mac Pro just dwarves the iMac in spec and size. many folks are also forgetting the fact that iMac's were souley made as the space saving desktop for work places, schools and homes. its user friendly minimalistic look also meant that hardly anything could go wrong or anything could be modified. i also realise that the majority of people that are arguing against the mac pro dont actually have the current mac pro. i have been around macs all my life. our family has never purchased a single pc and my brother is a software engineer at apple. we have got the current 12 core 2.93GHz 48gb 3TB HDD and 1024GB SSD. i believe that all mac pros should just be sold with a plinth because frankly it is a prime example of steve jobs' achievements. the fact whether apple should cut the mac pro is entirely unnecessary as most people forget that apple is one of the largest contributor towards the States' Quaternary industry. so in simple; apple are a design company and so cutting a line of mac would only be down to the fact that the line would look outdated. because apple would still make profit even if it just sold 10 macbooks a year, as it outsources all of its materials to china.
iMacs are good. they do the jobs that they were designed for. however the optional extras apple are fewer. this is due to the fact that the housing for the iMac is minimalistic, sleek and streamlined. i'm seeing many people arguing the fact that they can achieve better results from a current iMac by comparing it to a previous model. however if you compared each iMac and Mac Pro from each generation you can still see the fact that the Mac Pro just dwarves the iMac in spec and size. many folks are also forgetting the fact that iMac's were souley made as the space saving desktop for work places, schools and homes. its user friendly minimalistic look also meant that hardly anything could go wrong or anything could be modified. i also realise that the majority of people that are arguing against the mac pro dont actually have the current mac pro. i have been around macs all my life. our family has never purchased a single pc and my brother is a software engineer at apple. we have got the current 12 core 2.93GHz 48gb 3TB HDD and 1024GB SSD. i believe that all mac pros should just be sold with a plinth because frankly it is a prime example of steve jobs' achievements. the fact whether apple should cut the mac pro is entirely unnecessary as most people forget that apple is one of the largest contributor towards the States' Quaternary industry. so in simple; apple are a design company and so cutting a line of mac would only be down to the fact that the line would look outdated. because apple would still make profit even if it just sold 10 macbooks a year, as it outsources all of its materials to china.
Well, obviously, if the Mac Pro is EOL like the Xserve was, then there's no point in building in SLI or CrossFireX support into the OS as none of their other machines will have even the ability to have hardware that would utilize it. That being said, if they do continue it, and if the whole point of the Mac Pro is to have no real theoretical limit on performance, give me my SLI and my CrossFireX, push out as part of a new version of OpenCL and/or Grand Central the ability to utilize these things. That said, the future of both the Mac Pro and the MacBook Pro will be extremely telling in terms of how much any of the practical aspects and features of owning a Mac will matter to Apple in the future. I don't see anything in Mountain Lion so far that should further inhibit any of it.
See the thing I see people forgetting most is that Mac Pros are both (a) more upgradable than iMacs and (b) more reliable by design than iMacs. You can change out your hard drive, your graphics card(s), and your RAM (and theoretically, your CPUs too provided you use the same socket) on a Mac Pro, and while these are removable components on an iMac as well, the procedure to change these things out (RAM excluded) is a nightmare and shouldn't be attempted by someone who doesn't know what they're doing. A Mac Pro on the other hand can be expanded and it doesn't take a rocket scientist, or an ACMT-certified technician to do so. Also, the Mac Pro, has plenty of airflow and cooling for the parts therein...iMacs, with their needless thinness don't, which is why there are more sensors on an iMac than there are on just about every other Mac. It's also why the iMac is the only Mac (save for maybe the MacBook Air) where the main storage device (i.e. hard drive) HAS to be replaced with an Apple OEM drive and CANNOT be replaced by a third party drive. A tangent, I know, but it would definitely stop me from ever buying one for use in a professional environment.
If they take out the Mac Pros, they HAVE to remove the glossy screen on the iMac, because it keeps getting dust and stuff on it, especially if you try to wipe it off. I like the old screens better, even with the image quality, and the high-end processors they use are really good. It looks like they are focusing almost completely on their iPads and iPhones now. I always liked OS X, and if it becomes like iOS again, I might even consider switching back. Even the iPod line is turning into iOS with the 6G nanos.
I really don't like the way Apple keeps us in the dark about what's in store for the MP and when. It's not like they have to worry about the sort of competition that the phones and tablet makers are up to. If anything, the lack of info drives a few customers to PC's. I think this is one reason sales may be down. Lack of communication with your customers and an apparent complete lack of understanding of the professional market.
An article this morning entitled "Steve Jobs originally envisioned Apple Stores as targeting creative professionals" really says a lot. How far it has come from that idea.
An article this morning entitled "Steve Jobs originally envisioned Apple Stores as targeting creative professionals" really says a lot. How far it has come from that idea.
I didn't like that "post-pc" comment at all. I'm seriously nervous about all this, and very slowly over the past few months Ive been coming to terms with the fact that my next pro machine may have to be a pc. I have never personally purchased a pc before but have used them a lot when working onsite. I really don't want to go this route, but Apple is looking more and more like a consumer electronics company, and I don't know if I want to continue to pay a huge premium for a machine in a closed ecosystem when the company is no longer loyal to my interests (high power, expandable, professional computing). Smh.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9B179 Safari/7534.48.3)
Maybe he just meant post personal computer and more cloud computer where we all share the same programmes rather than owning. Could cut down on environmental costs and use of raw materials.
We just have terminals or entry devices to access log Onto the system. Rather than be separate and logging in connecting by programm add ins. The program/hardware is just a key type device.
MaxBlast said:
Maybe he just meant post personal computer and more cloud computer where we all share the same programmes rather than owning. Could cut down on environmental costs and use of raw materials.
We just have terminals or entry devices to access log Onto the system. Rather than be separate and logging in connecting by programm add ins. The program/hardware is just a key type device.
Yea, if I'm going to plunk down several hundred to a thousand dollars worth of software I'd at least like an actual file on an actual drive I actually own and can back up instead of having it on some remote server a thousand miles away.
I'd rather "own" a file on my own computer rather than given access to it.
hi to everyone. I enjoyed following this forum a long time now. Time to hop in....
is it only me that think it´s an alarming signal if every new equipment or software which was announced by third-party companies (Autodesk, BlackMagic, Aja, etc) in the last few month all describes the same, that the product will be compatible with upcoming iMacs and MacBookPros but there is no word about MacPro.
If Apple really shuts down MP, i think they will loose a lot of image among people who depend on the advantages of the MP over the iMacs.
rendering CG on an iMac ist litterally like "hell". you can grill your steak on any iMac which has to perform renderings even my older MP from 2008 don´t really reaches 10° more than in idle-mode.
But we will see.
VtxBr
is it only me that think it´s an alarming signal if every new equipment or software which was announced by third-party companies (Autodesk, BlackMagic, Aja, etc) in the last few month all describes the same, that the product will be compatible with upcoming iMacs and MacBookPros but there is no word about MacPro.
If Apple really shuts down MP, i think they will loose a lot of image among people who depend on the advantages of the MP over the iMacs.
rendering CG on an iMac ist litterally like "hell". you can grill your steak on any iMac which has to perform renderings even my older MP from 2008 don´t really reaches 10° more than in idle-mode.
But we will see.
VtxBr
You should read their requirements.
From Autodesk :
http://labs.autodesk.com/technologies/fusion/system_reqs/
Apple® Mac OS® X v10.6.8, OS X v10.7.2 or later with 64-bit Intel processor
Apple® Mac® Pro 4.1 or later;
MacBook® Pro 5.1 or later (MacBook Pro 6.1 or later recommended);
iMac® 8.1 or later (iMac 11.1 or later recommended);
3 GB of RAM (4 GB recommended)
2.5 GB free disk space for download and installation (3 GB recommended)
Autodesk Inventor Fusion for Mac supports iMac, Mac Pro, and MacBook Pro machines with these graphics cards.
I have been using Apple computers for about 20 years. For many years, Macs were workhorses. Sales were decent, but they definitely were the computer for a niche market; graphic designers, video makers, etc. Apple held this niche solid. It wasn't until 2003 or so that Apple began gain in popularity with other types of computer users, primarily with the new G4 iMacs. This is when owning a Mac became "cool", probably because the G4 iMacs looked cool, too. Apple continued to produce towers all the way to up the current Mac Pro, but outside of the laptops (PB, MB, MBP), the all-in-one desktops (iMacs) were selling like hotcakes. The truth of the matter is that not many people want an upgradable computer.
Sure, upgrading components can put new life into an aging machine, but when you tally up all the money spent upgrading that ailing tower, you could have purchased a new[er] tower with the same amount of money. There have been studies done that show that the overwhelming majority of computer users (Mac and PC) do not bother with after-market upgrades outside of RAM and HD. The only people who regularly update are gamers for the most part.
The G5 Power Mac is the last tower I purchased, and throughout the years I have only upgraded the CPU once, and a graphics card once (both in a G4).
Historically, Mac users where not the "upgrading" type unless it was to a brand new system. I don't even know why Apple still makes Mac Pros, they could have done away with them a few years ago. Those that I know who have need for an upgradable tower are on Windows or Linux. While this not true for all Mac Pro users, but in general, if you have $3K to drop on a computer now, you probably will have $3K to drop on a computer in a few years.
----------
...I also agree that an sc i7 Mac Pro would be a good idea...in the sense that I would mos def want one.
As for the "post-pc" comments; keep in mind that pc means personal computer, in which Macs most definitely are. Both Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs agreed that the World is moving into a post-pc era. They were talking about tablets and other and held devices.
Sure, upgrading components can put new life into an aging machine, but when you tally up all the money spent upgrading that ailing tower, you could have purchased a new[er] tower with the same amount of money. There have been studies done that show that the overwhelming majority of computer users (Mac and PC) do not bother with after-market upgrades outside of RAM and HD. The only people who regularly update are gamers for the most part.
The G5 Power Mac is the last tower I purchased, and throughout the years I have only upgraded the CPU once, and a graphics card once (both in a G4).
Historically, Mac users where not the "upgrading" type unless it was to a brand new system. I don't even know why Apple still makes Mac Pros, they could have done away with them a few years ago. Those that I know who have need for an upgradable tower are on Windows or Linux. While this not true for all Mac Pro users, but in general, if you have $3K to drop on a computer now, you probably will have $3K to drop on a computer in a few years.
----------
...I also agree that an sc i7 Mac Pro would be a good idea...in the sense that I would mos def want one.
As for the "post-pc" comments; keep in mind that pc means personal computer, in which Macs most definitely are. Both Bill Gates and the late Steve Jobs agreed that the World is moving into a post-pc era. They were talking about tablets and other and held devices.
That is a fairly interesting point, although I feel there is almost still a market for pro customers for the Mac Pro. I don't quite see them killing it just yet.
Nah ... you're missing some things here ...
The biggest reason some of us stick with Mac Pro towers has to do with the display!
As has been said so often before, Apple could do pretty well selling a smaller mini-tower or other such configuration. But they seem to have no interest in such a product. Instead, they only want to offer all-in-one solutions with the iMacs and notebooks, or a Mac Mini at the low end.
A lot of Mac "power users" are looking for a machine that allows multiple monitors to be attached, and switched around or upgraded, as needed.
Since I already had a couple of 28" displays, for example, I didn't want to buy yet another one I didn't need as part of the price of a new 27" iMac. I wanted to re-use them with a tower.
Another issue for me is the hard drives. A Mac Pro tower allows 4 SATA drives installed internally. Even the most costly iMac only allows 2 internal drives, and they're very difficult to get to if they crash or need upgrading. To me, it completely negates the benefits of an "all in one" system if you have to start putting in accessories with both power adapters and data cables coming off of them, to get it configured the way you want.
The biggest reason some of us stick with Mac Pro towers has to do with the display!
As has been said so often before, Apple could do pretty well selling a smaller mini-tower or other such configuration. But they seem to have no interest in such a product. Instead, they only want to offer all-in-one solutions with the iMacs and notebooks, or a Mac Mini at the low end.
A lot of Mac "power users" are looking for a machine that allows multiple monitors to be attached, and switched around or upgraded, as needed.
Since I already had a couple of 28" displays, for example, I didn't want to buy yet another one I didn't need as part of the price of a new 27" iMac. I wanted to re-use them with a tower.
Another issue for me is the hard drives. A Mac Pro tower allows 4 SATA drives installed internally. Even the most costly iMac only allows 2 internal drives, and they're very difficult to get to if they crash or need upgrading. To me, it completely negates the benefits of an "all in one" system if you have to start putting in accessories with both power adapters and data cables coming off of them, to get it configured the way you want.
That's a crock, IMO. People buy iMacs instead of the Mac Pro because the Mac Pro is priced out of the stratosphere. I mean really, do you want to spend $3000 to the get the same relative features as the $1800 iMac PLUS still have to buy a monitor? If Apple offered a REASONABLE tower (rather than a workstation level machine) at a similar cost to feature ratio, it'd be a VERY different story, IMO. But because Apple is run by tools, they don't OFFER any such hardware or even a decent set of configurable build options.
I mean seriously, if you're theory held water, why don't you see the same patterns with all-in-ones in the PC world? There are plenty of them available, but people buy mini-towers instead by a huge margin. It's because the all-in-ones are CRAP by comparison (i.e. slow graphics because they get HOT HOT HOT in those slim cases and can't fit full sized hardware most of the time). There is NO point to all-in-ones unless you really have to have a clean looking desk and even then you have to plug in loads of external crap to make them useful (at the very least you need a backup drive).
It's not all about upgrading. It's about being able to build the machine you WANT rather than the pre-made thing they want to sell you. You can't even easily upgrade a hard drive in an iMac unless you want to start piling up external drives (and don't use USB 2.0 because it's slow as hell, so get ready to spend a fortune on a Thunderbolt drive or a considerable premium on FW800). More to the point, you can't usually even GET the sized drive you'd like to have from Day 1 because either Apple doesn't offer such a drive or wants a 3-4x what it would cost to build it yourself if you had the option of just buying the drive and putting it in an empty drive bay. So instead, you have to buy the lowest priced drive they offer and then take the darn thing apart and put in the drive you want and hope you don't break the darn thing in the process since it wasn't really designed to be taken apart at home easily.