Apple's Mac Pro business practices scare me

[Shademaster]

I own a small 3D studio (10 people) and sadly we are not going the macpro way anymore. The 2008 models were absolutely great for their price/value. As stated before, the difference between a normal macpro nowadays and a corei7 are way too great.

We are now running PC's with overclocked i7's. All machines have maxed out PC spec's with 12gbram, multiple drives, 850 watt corsair PSU, nice graphics cards. All these machines perform above our expectancies. We even went so far as to sell our 2 remaining iMac's so we could trade them in for 2 DIY core i7's.

We do very processor/memory intensive work with all of our machines constantly rendering and being use to the max. To be honest we don't feel the difference between our 2008 macpro's (8x3.0ghz with 12gbram) and our new i7's that are 5 times cheaper than one macpro.

If I look at this the business way a MacPro is not an option in our production environment.

Currently we are debating a switch to windows 7 including all of our licenses.

I now have 10 very happy people sitting behind i7's, we get enough number crunching power from them that we do not need a renderfarm anymore and it cost us as much as 2 decked out macpro's.

Sorry but considering the pc option I would be extremely stupid as to choose for a macpro in it's current form again.

 

[GoKyu]

Re: The OP wanting a Mac Pro for home use.

Quick background: I was a PC user since the late 80's, and started building my own PCs in the early 90's. Bought my first Mac in 2008 (see specs in sig.)

I'm a home/power user, but I don't use the computer professionally to make my living, and yet I still bought the most expensive Mac you could get at the time. Why?

I was tired of having to upgrade and maintain my computer just to have it run well. Defrag the hard drives, optimize the registry, Antivirus/Antispyware constantly running in the background, many apps in the taskbar giving me additional functionality...all added up to a slower machine, slower boot times, having to reboot more often = big waste of time.

My Mac Pro is SILENT (not too many PCs can make that claim), FAST, has plenty of extra horsepower for the times I decide to push it harder than I normally would, and best of all, it's really proven itself to be quite future-proof for my needs. January will mark the 3 year point, and I can easily see myself using it for at least another 1.5-2 years beyond that, if I don't decide to sell it first and make back enough for a solid downpayment on a newer model.

Do Mac Pros cost a lot? Sure. Are they worth every penny for a home user who wants a solid, silent, stable machine that will last for years? Definitely.

Let me end by saying: If I keep this machine for 5 years, that averages out to around $480 per year. That can *easily* cover the expense, time and yes, hassle of looking online to find parts, order, wait for them to come in, and finally install them. It's just not worth it to me anymore to build my own. I'm happy to let Apple build something that I'm happy with and that will last a long time.

 

[harlem]

Re: The OP wanting a Mac Pro for home use.

Quick background: I was a PC user since the late 80's, and started building my own PCs in the early 90's. Bought my first Mac in 2008 (see specs in sig.)

I'm a home/power user, but I don't use the computer professionally to make my living, and yet I still bought the most expensive Mac you could get at the time. Why?

I was tired of having to upgrade and maintain my computer just to have it run well. Defrag the hard drives, optimize the registry, Antivirus/Antispyware constantly running in the background, many apps in the taskbar giving me additional functionality...all added up to a slower machine, slower boot times, having to reboot more often = big waste of time.

My Mac Pro is SILENT (not too many PCs can make that claim), FAST, has plenty of extra horsepower for the times I decide to push it harder than I normally would, and best of all, it's really proven itself to be quite future-proof for my needs. January will mark the 3 year point, and I can easily see myself using it for at least another 1.5-2 years beyond that, if I don't decide to sell it first and make back enough for a solid downpayment on a newer model.

Do Mac Pros cost a lot? Sure. Are they worth every penny for a home user who wants a solid, silent, stable machine that will last for years? Definitely.

Let me end by saying: If I keep this machine for 5 years, that averages out to around $480 per year. That can *easily* cover the expense, time and yes, hassle of looking online to find parts, order, wait for them to come in, and finally install them. It's just not worth it to me anymore to build my own. I'm happy to let Apple build something that I'm happy with and that will last a long time.

ofcourse its going to be future proof, you said yourself you don't use the machine on a professional basis. Heck even a 8 year old computer could still surf the net and run photoshop.

Also i'm still a PC user (but looking to buy a MacPro for professional work and my boss has agreed to pay half of the machine i would never pay 4000$ out of my pocket for a pretty basic computer with these kind of specs) and yes pc's do need some maintenance but ive been using PC's forever and i only do maintenance once a year...and my computer runs super smooth. never quite understood how Mac users always use the "ooo windows machines need constant taking care off" its more a fan-boy comment than a realistic one if you ask me...have you guys even ever used windows7, i'm saying Steve Jobs has you guys fooled. Mac is good but be a bit realistic here, the hardware is pretty much crap if you consider the price tag. Sometimes i wonder if they use solid gold computer parts, its that ridicules.

my first ever time i used a mac, i kid you not, it was in school and i had the thing frees on me. so long for fairy tales that macs dont crash and can't get buggy.

Yes i'm in the market for a Mac, but refuse to be ignorant a claim that Mac is the best thing out there, it has its flaws and good points just like a windows machine. side note is that Macs are double the price.

 

[kolax]

..it's really proven itself to be quite future-proof for my needs. January will mark the 3 year point, and I can easily see myself using it for at least another 1.5-2 years beyond that, if I don't decide to sell it first and make back enough for a solid downpayment on a newer model..

That point is meaningless. Any computer with the same specs will fall into your category of future proof. In terms of value for money.. that doesn't apply here. Of course you can start arguing the construction of the thing will maybe make it last longer, but there's little argument there too since decent PC cases don't cost that much.

If I built the same specced PC as your Mac Pro at the same time you bought it, then my PC would also fall into your point about being future proof.

Any arguments about cost of the thing resulting in future proofing are moot.

 

[harlem]

That point is meaningless. Any computer with the same specs will fall into your category of future proof. In terms of value for money.. that doesn't apply here. Of course you can start arguing the construction of the thing will maybe make it last longer, but there's little argument there too since decent PC cases don't cost that much.

If I built the same specced PC as your Mac Pro at the same time you bought it, then my PC would also fall into your point about being future proof.

Any arguments about cost of the thing resulting in future proofing are moot.

+1

 

[lemonade-maker]

That point is meaningless. Any computer with the same specs will fall into your category of future proof. In terms of value for money.. that doesn't apply here. Of course you can start arguing the construction of the thing will maybe make it last longer, but there's little argument there too since decent PC cases don't cost that much.

If I built the same specced PC as your Mac Pro at the same time you bought it, then my PC would also fall into your point about being future proof.

Any arguments about cost of the thing resulting in future proofing are moot.

Meaningless is a bit harsh. PCs are so cheap it often makes more sense to buy a new one and use the older one for a different purpose rather than upgrade the os and keep using it as is. Running windows 7 on a 4 year old pc that came with xp pretty much sucks. Running 10.6 on a Mac that came with 10.4 doesn't suck much.

 

[mBox]

I own a small 3D studio (10 people) and sadly we are not going the macpro way anymore...

Makes good business sense if you have an open budget. I budgeted for new Mac Pros so Im screwed till they release something. I cant switch that to anything else and not even iMacs
We have Windows boxes doing most of our rendering here (rman mostly) and they deal with the brunt of the 3D. The Macs are mostly for Adobe apps and that we need upgrading. Id like to update to AE CS5 so we can at least take advantage of the overpriced RAM we purchased
If anything, this article should be more of a wake-up call that us prosumers/pros are not getting a timely update let alone the price

 

[kolax]

Running 10.6 on a Mac that came with 10.4 doesn't suck much.

Let's not forget all the Macs that have PowerPC chips that came with Tiger. Do they run Snow Leopard? No.

 

[lemonade-maker]

Let's not forget all the Macs that have PowerPC chips that came with Tiger. Do they run Snow Leopard? No.

A 4 year old Mac is intel.

 

[eponym]

Agreed about the i5 but why should you use Xeon for a single-CPU machine instead of i7?

i7s are not server-grade processors. They don't support ECC RAM.

 

[eponym]

And sorry to burst your bubble, but the server-grade component price jump isn't limited to Apple.

3 members of my team just spent over $2K (before taxes) for Dells with 2.4 GHz (iirc) Xeons. And they'll tell you they were worth every penny because they need those small benefits that are useless to consumers and pro-sumers.

 

[Gomff]

Yet another thread about how you can get four PC's for the price of one Mac Pro.

Please just go ahead and buy your windows box and be happy then, stop polluting the forums with the same old whining diatribe. Yes, we know.....Apple don't offer the best value for money when it comes down to Hardware. Sadly, they happen to sell (in many people's opinion) the best operating system which only runs smoothly on their machines.

Deal with it!

Yawn.

 

[iCole]

I'm tired of the whole 'apple is overpriced' stuff. I think a lot of ppl look at Apple products in the wrong way. (ok, The Mac Pro is prolly overpriced because of its getting old, i dunno, and the mini is prolly too.)

Every product in the Apple line has a place. For example :

The mini is supposed to be an ultra small and energy sufficient little box that still is performant enough. Don't compare it to bigger boxes.
The iMac is a stylish all-in-one, with everything build in, great cooling, great screen, very quiet, etc... please don't compare it to an ugly ass all-in-one.

If you go Apple, you go for an easy accessible computer and a well designed one. I probably can do everything on my gamepc too, but then i have to miss the fast bootup times of my mac, the stability of the OS, the clear screen, and the overal great look in my living room. Yeah, if you want pure specs, then why bother with Apple? It all depends on what you are willing to spend your money on.

edit : I think every product has unique value. A Mac mini tower wouldn't be a succes, because it wouldn't make sense. You can easily build a windows tower, get all parts cheaper and run your games much easier.

 

[harlem]

Every product in the Apple line has a place. For example :

The mini is supposed to be an ultra small and energy sufficient little box that still is performant enough. Don't compare it to bigger boxes.
The iMac is a stylish all-in-one, with everything build in, great cooling, great screen, very quiet, etc... please don't compare it to an ugly ass all-in-one.

.

thats where i stopt reading...so we have to take your writings serious?

 

[brentsg]

i7s are not server-grade processors. They don't support ECC RAM.

He was buying it for home use and willing to go with an i5. So the question about why he'd even consider the single Xeon is valid.

 

[brentsg]

thats where i stopt reading...so we have to take your writings serious?

Huh? You don't like LED backlit IPS panels?

 

[PeterQVenkman]

Yet another thread about how you can get four PC's for the price of one Mac Pro.

Deal with it!

Yawn.

He did deal with it, and got twice the performance for the price.

Huh? You don't like LED backlit IPS panels?

He doesn't like yellow LED backlit IPS panels.

 

[chaosbunny]

He doesn't like yellow mirror LED backlit IPS panels.

I hope you don't mind, but I had to extend that.

 

[Gomff]

He did deal with it, and got twice the performance for the price.

Really? Did he really? He didn't get OS X. Probably had to install Antivirus and then has to sit through various scans a few times a month, not to mention Windows updates that take forever. What will that machine be like in a year, particularly if he doesn't re-install windows in that time? My bet is that it will take twice as long to boot, and will be subject to random Hard drive grinding sessions where even opening an explorer window takes forever.

Seriously, I can't say this enough times.....Buying a Mac is only half about the hardware, the rest is about OS X. It's about still being able to do other stuff while you're moving big files around in the background, and doing system updates when it suits you rather than your computer. The virus thing may or may not be over played but I know my OS X installation doesn't have any. What's more, it started life as a Leopard install 2.5 years ago, was since upgraded to Snow Leopard (rather than a fresh install) and it still boots quickly, runs fast and keeps out of the way while I do my work.

Processors and hard drives have to get a lot faster than they are now before windows can Match OS X for productivity in my view. Windows carries the extra weight of registry clog, bloatware, random applications you don't remember installing sitting in your system tray and virus / anomalous threat "protection" from Symantec or one of those other god-awful parasitical companies that prey on the ignorance and insecurities of the average PC user.

Try opening the task manager and looking at processes in Windows, and try to work out what the hell all of those things are that suck the juice out of the CPU.....It's virtually impossible to tell what's going on after you've been running a windows system for a few months, whether a process is legitimately accessing the internet or whether it's a key logger, or a worm or some sort of ad-ware using your bandwidth to send back personal information to some amoral marketing entity.

Bollocks to Windows and PC boxes, I'll pay the extra thanks.

 

[GoKyu]

yes pc's do need some maintenance but ive been using PC's forever and i only do maintenance once a year...and my computer runs super smooth. never quite understood how Mac users always use the "ooo windows machines need constant taking care off" its more a fan-boy comment than a realistic one if you ask me...have you guys even ever used windows7...

I don't consider myself a fanboy - I've only been using Macs for a couple of years, and still know WAY more about PCs than I know about Macs at this point.

I'm not saying PCs need *constant* maintenance, but rather *regular* maintenance...once a month or so (maybe a little more often if you use it all the time.) This comes from 20+ years of using them every day.

I loved Windows 2000 and XP, and I think Win7 is finally a worthy upgrade. Vista is what actually made me switch, and at this point, I just prefer the way that OS X works (I'm also very used to using Linux and AfterStep (NeXTStep clone), which is the basis for OS X anyway, and another reason I like this OS so much.)

my first ever time i used a mac, i kid you not, it was in school and i had the thing frees on me. so long for fairy tales that macs dont crash and can't get buggy.

One thing I particularly don't like about Apple is their marketing slogans. All this "magical" stuff is really out of left field. I'm also not too big on them always crowing about how "thin, light and beautiful" everything is - sure their products look great, but you'd have to be pretty shallow to fork out the money for their machines based more on those features than on how well they perform. I'm sure some people get sucked in by that though.

Any computer system has its own strengths and weaknesses, and while it's true that *Windows viruses* can't really affect OS X, that doesn't mean that Macs can't get viruses - it's just with the UNIX subsystem it's much harder to write viruses for the platform.

A few more points about why I chose the Mac Pro:

1. Form Factor: I'm used to the PC tower setup, because I have several internal hard drives and enjoy the easy access inside the machine. I'd rather not have 4 or 5 external drives all over the place (and have way too many USB devices already...) Unfortunately, Apple doesn't give me any other option than a Mac Pro if that's what I'm looking for. You can count me in the group that would love for them to make a headless mid-tower of some sort. Laptops have really surged in popularity though, and that offers even a less chance of them ever making one (however remote the chance was before...)

I really don't care for the all in one design, because if something happens to the screen, you're out a computer until it gets fixed (or if you're out of warranty, call it cheaper to just have to buy a monitor than to pay $1000+ for a repair/new iMac.)

2. Choice of screen: As with the all in one above, I'm not big on Apple's love of glossy screens. It's not as good for the main reason I use Photoshop, which is color-correcting images. The current Mac mini would certainly be powerful enough for the things I do, but again, the form factor is the other main issue why I don't want one.

Gomff: +1, you really nailed it!

 

[iWolf00]

I will pay premium price to keep with Mac

What a bad comparison thread starter made; it is very obvious that you care much about price and neglect everything else! beside you were comparing workstation vs desktop; and there are a lot of difference between them or they would combine them into one category long time ago if there were having the same functionality.

People who are using mac are not ignorant; they love mac that the reason why they do like to stick with it for premium price

Last, Comparing 2 inch bulky laptop that has a lot of plastic with very annoying reflective screen against a sleek laptop that has best design, performance and has the lightest weight is unfair. Again this comparison is from PRICE perspective; A good example is mercedes and honda, both are carz and both can take you to your destination, but mercedes gives you luxury, power, design and safety that Honda lack; and people pay premium price to get mercedes. The same story can be with Mac against other brands.

 

[apolloa]

Oh dear, you first state this:

Umm...I have had Mac Pros and have built my own machines. .

Then state this:

Ugh...you're calling me ignorant? Right, I use my machines for email and internet. I don't do system and web dev, HD video editing, music composition...none of those things.

Your not ignorant, just incredibly stupid. Your telling me that you have owned a Mac Pro and ONLY used it for emails and the internet? And then you come on here and you feel qualified enough to state as a fact it's crap and is underpowered? Oh hell, yeah, gosh those dual Xeons must REALLY struggle with your web pages mate...

Why in the heck would I settle for a 2.66 quad i7 920 for 2500 dollars?! That is ABSURD. That machine IS extremely underpowered when you could build a hex 3.33 for the same price on the PC side, and overclock it to 4ghz, easily I'm sure. All those "pro apps" you mention like the Adobe suite? Better on Windows 7. FCP is behind the curve. So where does that leave Mac users like us?

Hang on a minute? I thought this was the MAC RPO forum, what the HELL has the iMac got to do with this???? You can't state the Mac Pro is underpowered then suddenly change to the iMac in the same argument. If you want to discuss the imac please go to the imac forum. So are you telling is that Adobe runs better on an overclocked PC then an iMac??

You're not getting it. The Mac Pro is underpowered relative to a similarly priced PC. That would be "extremely underpowered." Your "purpose" of the Mac Pro is right out of marketing and ignores the reality of the situation: It's currently creamed by the quad iMac (if we are talking base standards here). Do you get that? Just because it's "branded" a workstation and uses ECC memory, doesn't mean it's the best, most reliable machine money can buy. It's certainly not.

This is all drivel frankly, you quite obviously haven't a clue what you are talking about and can't decide if your talking about the iMac or the Mac Pro, a business can buy a dual Xeon 2.93, this will spank the iMac i7, otherwise the iMac i7 is better value as it's far cheaper then a base Mac Pro but more powerful so that kind of throws your whole expensive argument out of the water.
And do you have physical proof that Adobe Suite runs better on Windows 7 then? I doubt it. Yet another factless claim, just YOUR assumption.
You clearly do not understand what a Xeon processor or a workstation actually is, it's also clear you just pick up on all the negative comments posted on this forum like stating FCP is 'behind the curve' I'm sure I've read that in other posts, and FYI the BBC for one use it, yeah it's really rubbish

 

[MythicFrost]

That's right folks. Anyone who is seriously thinking of buying a Mac Pro is either too rich or too ignorant. There is no real difference between a 2.66ghz Xeon processor over a Core i5 2.66ghz. It's only Intel's way to extort more money over business owners who want "security over savings". Please name me a few cases where the retail version of the CPU is vastly inferior to the "server" version that it necessitates a near $800 premium for the same performance.

I'm really shocked by the fact that Apple continues to screw people over in this area, charging a ridiculous $1800 premium for their desktop computers for absolutely no reason. There is no way you can realistically convince me that the OS or the case is worth nearly $2000.

There is a huge difference, Core i5 doesn't support Hyper-threading. It's been nearly a year and a half since the last Mac Pro update, and Apple doesn't reduce the price as time goes on, so they seem ridiculous now, but they wouldn't have been when they were released. Also, if you buy the RAM and hard drives from OWC you get them significantly cheaper.

Your entire argument is too long to pull apart, but very flawed. I'd like to see links to these machines you posted about.

 

[slughead]

Your not ignorant, just incredibly stupid. Your telling me that you have owned a Mac Pro and ONLY used it for emails and the internet? And then you come on here and you feel qualified enough to state as a fact it's crap and is underpowered? Oh hell, yeah, gosh those dual Xeons must REALLY struggle with your web pages mate...

Calm down dude. This isn't soviet russia. It's his money, and with it he'd like to not get ripped off. Just because you don't feel he needs it doesn't mean he doesn't deserve it for the price he pays.

That's the only part of either of your posts I read so I donno if I agree/disagree on anything else, I just thought I'd throw in my two cents on that.

Also: *You're

 

[iCole]

thats where i stopt reading...so we have to take your writings serious?

Ya ok, screen yellowing is not a feature dude