Apple Spokesperson Confirms New Mac Pro Designs Likely Coming in 2013 [Update: Not iMac]

[bobright]

If the iMac comes out in 2013 then there would be no reason for Tim Cook to clarify the Mac Pro was releasing then, since the original statement would have held true as it was (that both were being released in 2013).

It would also look bad on Tim coming directly from him in that he's trying to mislead customers into thinking the iMacs would come sooner when they really weren't beng released till next year. I'm pretty confident and feel good they will be released before 2013 after hearing those comments that's for sure.

 

[foolfodder]

Interestingly enough, at 2.4 12 cores, SSD boot and 6 TBs of storage the MP came quite a bit cheaper than the Dell/Hp competitors. Missing Thunderbolt and USB3 but whatever, with 6 TB of storage I will never have to rely on anything external for active workflow. Glad the ecosystem will survive. Looking forward to see what they produce next year. If the new MacBook Pro is now the benchmark for quality, it should be good.

I've just to speced out two machines on the basis above. The Dell was £3,817, the Apple £4,579. I'd be interested to find out what our different results are due to. Possibly because I'm using £s or because Dell seems to have pretty random pricing at a guess. The Dell also has what I assume to be a better, professional-grade graphics card.

 

[G51989]

I've just to speced out two machines on the basis above. The Dell was £3,817, the Apple £4,579. I'd be interested to find out what our different results are due to. Possibly because I'm using £s or because Dell seems to have pretty random pricing at a guess. The Dell also has what I assume to be a better, professional-grade graphics card.

I got the same result as well. The dell I configured also had good GPU options, aka not a 3 year old POS, SATA III and USB 3

The fact of the matter is, even this " New " Mac Pro is CRAZY outdated for what your paying for it.

 

[toke lahti]

I am wondering about the inner workings of Apple.

Was it Jobs who wanted a gadget company and decided to ax the Mac Pro and the 17" MBP?

Product development takes time, so this would explain why there's still no Mac Pro.

Then, come Tim Cook, he decides to step on it, get FCP X ready, buys high-end professional audio software, and then gives the Mac Pro the long needed reboot.

How does this sound? Tim Cook, the good guy, rolling back Steve Jobs' mistakes?

This would make it reasonable, but not acceptable.
This is not a facelift, this is plastic surgery trying to stitch up burned face.

Pretty funny that pro people here are reliefed that only the 3rd worst case happened. They didn't axe MP away (like FCSupgrade or 17" MBP?) or it didn't disappear from store (like FCSfull or 17" MBP?) to appear again in the future.

Just wondering still that is Cook really in charge or is all board members pro Pro?
Cook had been CEO 9.5 months before this new-but-outdated MP appeared.
If the whole board was pro-MP, it could have appeared much sooner. Did they wait for WWDC just to hide embarrassing update as much as possible?
IS this new change of course made something like 2 months ago?
AFAIK biggest problem with MP has always been GPU and no chipset of new ports will make that go away. Maybe the resurrection of MP started too late to get any drivers for new GPU.

Of course this does not mean Apple will be pro Pro in the future. This MP update was as small as update can be. Axing 17" is much more negative act, so overall we are still below freezing point.
Being pro-Pro means that you care about small segments and let those pros spread the halo, which will lead to multiple sales.
MP's segment can't be much bigger than 17" MBP, nevertheless they decided to keep MP, but axe 17".
Maybe 17" will come back when they manage to cut down the expenses on retina display, maybe they think they know better than pros what pros need.

I think you can parse that to mean: "later... (sometime) in 2013", not "late(r) in 2013". So it could be January for all we know. In fact, I'm thinking they just hedged by floating that vague time frame, and if the hardware gods are favorable, it could be sooner than next year.

Apple is at the mercy of Nvidia and AMD/ATI to produce a Mac version of their cards with Thunderbolt. The video card industry just standardized on including Mini-Display-Port. Apple likes to lead, and they may have dangled themselves a bit on this one.

I don't believe that making those drivers is so hard. All new laptops have new drivers, so making just one more can't be very hard.

 

[Cristian123]

I got the same result as well. The dell I configured also had good GPU options, aka not a 3 year old POS, SATA III and USB 3

The fact of the matter is, even this " New " Mac Pro is CRAZY outdated for what your paying for it.

The comparison I did comes out cheaper in dollars, even allowing the Dell 2.2 Ghz processor vs. Apple's 2.4 Ghz on the 12-core models:

Apple
2.4 Ghz 12-core
500GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB Sata drives
Two ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
32GB Ram

$6549 (The Apple business store sold it to me for under $6000)

Dell
2.2 Ghz 12-core
256GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB drives
32GB Ram
Dual 512 MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 300
$7,653

The Mac is well over $1000 cheaper with the 2.4 Ghz processor vs. the 2.2 processor in the Dell on the 12-core options. What am I missing here?

 

[ICEMAN-sven]

Some idea

I had a idea. I have no Mac, all my PC are Wintel. But I think that Apple thinks the same we me.

One of my PC is the gaming machine, in this is a Intel LGA 1366 Bloomfield CPU, practical the same as in the current Mac Pro. I wanted to upgrade to Sandy Bridge E(P). But the Platform(X79/C600) is bad and the CPU not that faster, if you do not count the additionally core's. Ivy Bridge E(P) will be the same.

So I will waiting for Haswell E(P) with a proper chipset, hopefully with QuickPath Interconnect and not the slow DMI. And Sata III on all ports, USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt support.
And Apple will be waiting too. I am still hopeful, that Intel kill the Ivy Bridge E(P) on the roadmap and fasten the Haswell E(P) roll out.

 

[Umbongo]

The comparison I did comes out cheaper in dollars, even allowing the Dell 2.2 Ghz processor vs. Apple's 2.4 Ghz on the 12-core models:

Apple
2.4 Ghz 12-core
500GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB Sata drives
Two ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
32GB Ram

$6549 (The Apple business store sold it to me for under $6000)

Dell
2.2 Ghz 12-core
256GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB drives
32GB Ram
Dual 512 MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 300
$7,653

The Mac is well over $1000 cheaper with the 2.4 Ghz processor vs. the 2.2 processor in the Dell on the 12-core options. What am I missing here?

1. The dell processors are newer, more expensive and a lot faster.
2. Dell charge more for upgrades as they are serving the enterprise who will pay it. You can easily negotiate with sales reps.
3. Dell are at the start of a cycle selling systems whose components are in limited supply.
4. You don't mention Apple care? Dell offer 3 year nbd warranty as standard with other options.
5. A Dell system (T5500) with the same older specs (Westmere 2.4x12, 8GB, cheap GPU, but 500GB drive and 3 yr warranty) is $2,999 vs. Apple's $3,899 sans Applecare.

If you buy upgrades yourself you could easily have got better performance added to a Dell system for less than the Mac Pro. Now you got a good Mac pro for money you were happy spending and end of the day got OS X on a solid, proven box. It's just a little outdated so slightly slower than the latest PCs and a theoretical Mac that doesn't exist yet. So that's great for you, seriously. You got what you wanted.

Look at it from another point of view though, one many have, where the goal is to get a 12-core workstation, SSD boot drive, 3x2TB drives, 32GB of RAM and dual graphics cards. $2,500 from Dell gets you a 2.0GHz 12-core - faster than 2.4GHz 12-core Mac Pro; $400 for a 512GB Crucial M4; $360 for 6TB storage; $200 for 32GB Hynix 1600MHz DDR3. That is under $3,500 and leaves a lot of room for graphics cards compared to the prices you are talking about; or more memory, storage or faster processors. Now of course piecing it together isn't for everyone, totally understandable. Neither is using a non OS X operating system. However you can get computers with equal or much better hardware performance for a lot less and many are happy to go that route and many others will use it as a basis for how they feel about Mac Pricing, whether a realistic solution or not.

 

[danielsutton]

New Macs!

I am excited about next year's refresh of the Mac Pro. This gets me wondering not only about the workstation class Mac Pro itself, but what Apple is thinking about re: servers. Yes, the XServe was discontinued, and Apple began pointing people toward Mac Mini and Mac Pro servers, but I can't see this as a permanent fix. I continue to think that Apple created a stopgap server hardware offering while they think down the road and are going to release a more substation offering alongside the new Mac Pro systems. Will it be rack-mountable? Will Apple create a server hardware / software system that will be able to host private iCloud solutions so that people wary of outsourcing their data can host cloud solutions on-site? Interesting stuff... I am wondering...

 

[theelysium]

The rumor is the new case will be redesign with rack mounting capabilities.

 

[thekev]

The comparison I did comes out cheaper in dollars, even allowing the Dell 2.2 Ghz processor vs. Apple's 2.4 Ghz on the 12-core models:

Apple
2.4 Ghz 12-core
500GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB Sata drives
Two ATI Radeon HD 5770 1GB
32GB Ram

$6549 (The Apple business store sold it to me for under $6000)

Dell
2.2 Ghz 12-core
256GB Solid State Hard Drive (boot)
3 Additional 2 TB drives
32GB Ram
Dual 512 MB NVIDIA Quadro NVS 300
$7,653

The Mac is well over $1000 cheaper with the 2.4 Ghz processor vs. the 2.2 processor in the Dell on the 12-core options. What am I missing here?

You don't seem to understand price structuring on either side. People on here complain about "Apple tax" on things like ram and peripherals. They've pointed out identical specs can carry different prices when ordered through Dell, HP, etc. It's more productive to compare base configurations. Whenever you go away from them, you're paying for the configuration as well as the part itself. I can show you how to configure a 12 core T5600 for $3k or less on there, and they're not the same cpus at all. You're comparing 2 different generations of hardware unless you went to the T5500. Your comparison here is completely irrelevant. On a couple generations, Apple came out cheaper. The 2008 comes to mind. This one they're way more expensive. for slower hardware (look up the cpus themselves, not raw clock speeds out of context).

So I will waiting for Haswell E(P) with a proper chipset, hopefully with QuickPath Interconnect and not the slow DMI. And Sata III on all ports, USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt support.
And Apple will be waiting too. I am still hopeful, that Intel kill the Ivy Bridge E(P) on the roadmap and fasten the Haswell E(P) roll out.

Typically in the server/workstation hardware sector, chipsets run for longer refresh cycles. I've wondered if they'll just run the same hardware for two year cycles basically cutting out the tick cycles in such hardware. Either way, I am highly doubtful that we'll see those haswell chips next year.

 

[xbjllb]

If a shop needs a machine. They'll buy a machine. It's individual users who will be forced to hold on for another year.

If a shop needs a machine, if they have any brains at all running it, they'll buy something else, anything else. That way their rear is covered if Apple Computers continues to disappear because they'll have at least one employee up on other systems and software.

 

[robains]

This is some seriously funny stuff.

Most of the folks I know (and don't know -- ever visit Creative Cow forums) that work in heavy duty workstation industry (the real world with real deadlines) have moved on and transitioned over to something other than Apple. We can't sit and wait for Apple, that's financial suicide in so many ways. 3+ years to update a MacPro workstation when the rest of the world provides hardware updates as soon as they are released (about every 3-6 months).

As far as Rack Mount servers, yeah right, so Apple are moving into the "server" market?? A market they've progressively moved out of and don't really have any "mature" software to work on real servers??

As far as I can tell, the remaining MacPro die-hard fans aren't "Deep in the trenches" users, they are more casual users, students, and some trying to squeeze out a living with side work -- certainly not 24/7 (and yes the hours can be that long) power users, folks that use C4D day in an day out or render video all day and night or work with other 3D rendering software and/or interact with 3D capture devices or ... and the list goes on and on.

Funniest part are the folks claiming "not much has changed in the computing industry" -- that has me wondering if they use a workstation at all??? If you haven't noticed a "real change" in computing hardware in 3 years, then you probably don't do much with your computer.

I mean look at this thread title with "Likely Coming in 2013" -- I've heard better rumors from the Inquirer.

It's a shame, I like OSX but without more frequent commitment from Apple (even if we assume rumor is true, every 3 years just doesn't cut it), it's just not a smart business decision to continue with MacPro line.

 

[theelysium]

I hv to disagree, maybe in your trench you are leaving Apple, but in other trenches we've moved to iMacs.

The res of us are waiting... I do agree that Apple is seriously dragging butt on the updates for NO reason.

Yes, the rack mounted patient was found and it has been designed. If it comes to life.....

I use their server software and it is up to par with the computiton. I think you need to take another look whats not up to par is the hardware & lack there of!

 

[mBox]

This is some seriously funny stuff.

Most of the folks I know (and don't know -- ever visit Creative Cow forums) that work in heavy duty workstation industry (the real world with real deadlines) have moved on and transitioned over to something other than Apple. We can't sit and wait for Apple, that's financial suicide in so many ways. 3+ years to update a MacPro workstation when the rest of the world provides hardware updates as soon as they are released (about every 3-6 months).

Then you dont know most in this industry

 

[robains]

I hv to disagree, maybe in your trench you are leaving Apple, but in other trenches we've moved to iMacs.

The res of us are waiting... I do agree that Apple is seriously dragging butt on the updates for NO reason.

Yes, the rack mounted patient was found and it has been designed. If it comes to life.....

I use their server software and it is up to par with the computiton. I think you need to take another look whats not up to par is the hardware & lack there of!

iMac just isn't powerful enough for what we do. We've got 6 Core i7-3960 @ 5Ghz with 690GTX Kelpers (BTW, thanks to whomever for the Adobe CS6 tweak I found on this forums to make them work) that are running circles around our 12 core MacPro's for 1/3 of the cost of the MacPro. The beauty of having C4D and CS6 is that it's relatively easy to compare performance since both applications run on OSX and Windows.

mBox,

There are some holding out (minority), but I'm very confident in saying MOST have moved on ... there are some hanging to their 2D work, but for 3D and rendering video it's rare to find a MacPro or iMac ... certainly not as a primary workstation anyway -- even the smaller shops have either folded or merged or migrated.

Looking at a 42% decline over the past 10 years for video Post Production (source is IBISWORLD) -- which is part of the reason Apple tossed in the towel. Going "slow" just isn't a luxury any more and "now" is often too late.

But if you aren't into 3D world and video post production and stay within 2D world or just do 2 channel Audio work at low sample rates, then sure current MacPro will work. In fact, most our left over MacPro's are now dedicated to Audio work exclusively, 5.1, 7.1 and 192KHz samples

But for many of bigger hitters, they're using rooms full of AMD Opteron servers because they are so cheap and reliable with typical cost of single 12 x 8 core Opteron server (96 CPU cores - $250 per 8 core CPU - in a single 2U rack mount) at $5000-$6000 (pending how much RAM is put in it - 256GB to 512GB which is very cheap) -- sure this is for off loading final renders but again, no OSX to found anywhere.

Even for smaller video production shops (the few that are left) it doesn't make much business sense to hang on to Apple ... very few can wait 3 years for a "New" MacPro.

 

[mBox]

...There are some holding out (minority), but I'm very confident in saying MOST have moved on ...

That's stating the obvious. I for one don't use Macs for any Maya/Renderman work. The hold-outs I was referring too are the ones that are deep with their Mac tool-sets.
Sorry I just read too many posts with "chicken little" mentality when it comes to Apple centric options.
I know a lot of post houses that have moved on by hanging on to their Mac Pros but adding iMacs and other options such as HP's Z820s.
My facility isnt there yet since we just loaded up with 6 more MPs
Ive always thought that a smart shop would use what works.
Not all of us are determined to get the faster and beefiest system just cause they can.
We have to cater users that want to be on Apple OS for their creative purposes.
A faster but un-stable Windows box (yes I have a ton for Maya here) is not what most designers I work with requires

----------

But if you aren't into 3D world and video post production and stay within 2D world or just do 2 channel Audio work at low sample rates, then sure current MacPro will work. .

2 Channel? Our Pro Tools HD set-up can do more than just 2 channels And please explain why our Avid MC/Symphony system runs on the Mac?

 

[robains]

That's stating the obvious. I for one don't use Macs for any Maya/Renderman work. The hold-outs I was referring too are the ones that are deep with their Mac tool-sets.
Sorry I just read too many posts with "chicken little" mentality when it comes to Apple centric options.
I know a lot of post houses that have moved on by hanging on to their Mac Pros but adding iMacs and other options such as HP's Z820s.
My facility isnt there yet since we just loaded up with 6 more MPs
Ive always thought that a smart shop would use what works.
Not all of us are determined to get the faster and beefiest system just cause they can.
We have to cater users that want to be on Apple OS for their creative purposes.
A faster but un-stable Windows box (yes I have a ton for Maya here) is not what most designers I work with requires

----------

2 Channel? Our Pro Tools HD set-up can do more than just 2 channels And please explain why our Avid MC/Symphony system runs on the Mac?

Oops sorry, yeah ... audio works just fine for the most part on a Mac ... we've had a few issues at high sample rates with many tracks, but there is usually a work around.

Tool-sets (both software and additional hardware) often far exceed workstation costs, so I can understand the being "stuck" with a problem. But that can also be viewed as a valuable lesson, but for some it sadly means they close shop and not to mention the 3rd party folks that have invested in a product for OSX exclusively.

As far as stability, Logic Pro on our Macs had all kinds of problems until Apple finally addressed them ... but so has Cakewalk's Sonar (but again fixed). I'm not finding either OSX or Windows to be any more or less stable if you know how to maintain and manage them both. But if I had to pick which OS is easier to maintain, I'd have to say Windows. Reason being that when OSX goes bad it more often than not, requires an Apple update to fix it (this means waiting and waiting and waiting and hoping and waiting and hoping). On the Windows side, when something goes bad it's almost always a hardware driver problem and fixes are usually quickly available from the vendor.

Ive always thought that a smart shop would use what works.

Agree 100% -- get the tool that gives you the best ROI, in my case time is money and creative expression -- a job can never be done "too fast". In your case, it sounds like you need to have deliverable's that are specifically for OSX client base? In my world, this is almost always NEVER the case any more.

As far as creativity, you don't need the best of anything to be creative. But, what fast workstations do for one who works in the digital medium is provide the ability to take their creative ideas and experiment with them at a far faster pace. In my experience, the more time to experiment (aka faster workstation) often delivers more creative results. One thing I do know about creative people, they do have A LOT of ideas.

 

[mBox]

...In your case, it sounds like you need to have deliverable's that are specifically for OSX client base? In my world, this is almost always NEVER the case any more...

Nope our deliverable s are not platform specific. Broadcast NTSC/HD, Web, Digital Signage and even the small form factor (iPad, iPhone and Android) toys dont care what platform we spit it out off.
God I wish it was 4K Film since Im knee deep in RED clips here
But that is another story.

 

[robains]

Nope our deliverable s are not platform specific. Broadcast NTSC/HD, Web, Digital Signage and even the small form factor (iPad, iPhone and Android) toys dont care what platform we spit it out off.
God I wish it was 4K Film since Im knee deep in RED clips here
But that is another story.

RED, yum -- I have a soft spot for RED ... probably the cost to performance ratio! Have been doing a lot of Canon 5D 5.6K res RAW 3D lately.

 

[xgman]

it's just not a smart business decision to continue with MacPro line.

Nor, in reality, is it a smart business decision for Apple to continue with it either. Unfortunately for us, that probably suits them just fine. This whole 2013 thing sounds like an idiotic business decision to me. I mean it is clear they are trying to move away from the desktop line. Why wait 3 years and then bring back something your trying to get rid of?

 

[mBox]

Nor, in reality, is it a smart business decision for Apple to continue with it either. Unfortunately for us, that probably suits them just fine. This whole 2013 thing sounds like an idiotic business decision to me. I mean it is clear they are trying to move away from the desktop line. Why wait 3 years and then bring back something your trying to get rid of?

Well no one's forcing anyone to wait.
Apple is obviously not in the business to please everyone.
But then we are also to blame.
Most of us cry for an advance answer on their plans (road map so to speak) and if when they do, we all cry foul.
If it happens it happens.
My budget plan from 2 years ago was full filled this year with Mac Pro's.
Now I have to do one for the next three years.
Simple, just dont use the word Mac Pro

 

[theelysium]

I'm not defending Apple! It's an absolute joke that they have not updated the machine. Either they have something big up their sleeve or they are dropping enterprise all together... I hope it's the latter!

I would like to see Linux step up and start making substantial machines to mass market!

 

[G51989]

I'm not defending Apple! It's an absolute joke that they have not updated the machine. Either they have something big up their sleeve or they are dropping enterprise all together... I hope it's the latter!

I would like to see Linux step up and start making substantial machines to mass market!

Linux is an open source OS, there is no " Linux company " that makes computers, just operating systems.

With the current state of the Mac Pro, Lack of modern GPUs and I/Os. And new CPU, many people are already going the way of a Windows/Linux Workstation.

 

[robains]

I'm not defending Apple! It's an absolute joke that they have not updated the machine. Either they have something big up their sleeve or they are dropping enterprise all together... I hope it's the latter!

I would like to see Linux step up and start making substantial machines to mass market!

The more I think about this "rumor/article" or whatever it is, the less real it seems to be ... it just doesn't make any sense at all, not even for Apple.

The market for "Pro" is small, but it's also very lucrative, it's not like Apple were losing money in this market. Given Apple's current resources I can't understand why they would NOT want to continue and even push forward the "Pro" market ... if nothing more it gives Apple a "Pro" image rather than a cheap China made mobile iGadget image. And considering Apple spent $933 Million last year on advertising alone, it would seem to me keeping the "Pro" image is a relative bargain.

But, I think you are right, it might be better for all that Apple do stay out of the Pro market as Apple's "way" is to get "control" over everything ... and that concept just doesn't work in the Pro arena.

So maybe Apple is really doing the Pro market a favor by EOL MacPro and Pro software. Never thought of it that way ... interesting.

 

[theelysium]

Linux is an open source OS, there is no " Linux company " that makes computers, just operating systems.

With the current state of the Mac Pro, Lack of modern GPUs and I/Os. And new CPU, many people are already going the way of a Windows/Linux Workstation.

I know that, but the product needs direction and focus. That's why I think Linux needs a mass market approach. Like android...