Call to remove "Buy Now" recommendation from Mac Pro

[ps45]

The status should have changed, but from Red to Amber - not Green.

Fine there has been an update, but if the buyer's guide doesn't inject a modicum of editorialism in providing advice to buyers, then it's not of much value.

The advice to people should be that it is not a particularly good buy, but there's not point waiting since an update is not around the corner - hence Neutral.

 

[Liquinn]

I don't believe the Mac Pro is dead. If Apple wanted to kill it, they would've silently done it like they did with the MB Pro 17" instead of the update they did. This tells me two things;

1. This is the absolute final update to the Mac Pro or;

2. There is a much bigger release of the Mac Pro that isn't ready yet due to timing of technologies not being ready yet or technical difficulties.

Guess we'll have to wait for WWDC 2013

 

[WildCowboy]

So why when the first Apple LED Cinema Display was introduced the clock was not reset?

If we all abided by rigid guidelines with no flexibility, we would all turn into robots without critical thinking. Ever heard of exceptional cases?

Not sure what you mean by the LED Cinema Display...the 24-inch introduced in 2008? That's listed as an update.

And we do use a bit of flexibility in our considerations. For example, prior to the introduction of the LED Cinema Display, Apple's displays had very long lifecycles, with Apple periodically reducing prices as the technology improved and they could cut costs. We counted those price drops as updates even though there was no change to the display specs because they signaled that Apple was unlikely to make any further changes for some time afterwards.

People seem to be confusing a crappy update with no update. Our stance remains that Apple is now very unlikely to release another Mac Pro update for quite some time, and that's why this counts as an update for our calculations.

 

[Peace]

What did Apple update on the Mac Pro that wasn't already a BTO option since 2010 ?

 

[d4rkc4sm]

your post is very telling.

you still dont quite get what the uproar over the mac pro is all about. one day you might have a moment of clarity. until then the buyers guide is utterly useless

Not sure what you mean by the LED Cinema Display...the 24-inch introduced in 2008? That's listed as an update.

And we do use a bit of flexibility in our considerations. For example, prior to the introduction of the LED Cinema Display, Apple's displays had very long lifecycles, with Apple periodically reducing prices as the technology improved and they could cut costs. We counted those price drops as updates even though there was no change to the display specs because they signaled that Apple was unlikely to make any further changes for some time afterwards.

People seem to be confusing a crappy update with no update. Our stance remains that Apple is now very unlikely to release another Mac Pro update for quite some time, and that's why this counts as an update for our calculations.

 

[WildCowboy]

your post is very telling.

you still dont quite get what the uproar over the mac pro is all about. one day you might have a moment of clarity. until then the buyers guide is utterly useless

Oh, I get what the uproar over the Mac Pro is about. It's the uproar over the Buyer's Guide that I don't quite get, as it's doing exactly what it's supposed to do.

It's a simple calculation based on Apple's release history...when they make a change to a product, they're not likely to do again for some time, and that average time is what we calculate. As it's implemented, it doesn't account for rumors or the quality of updates...it's about as straightforward as you can get. It's specifically intended as a counterweight to judging things based on rumors.

We'd love to do more to make the Buyer's Guide more comprehensive and draw in both factual and rumor-based information, and it's in our plans, but will take some time.

 

[righteye]

It boggles my mind that people think we're in Apple's pocket.

Anyway, it's already been said by moderators and an editor, but I'll say it again just to make it clear: The purpose of the Buyer's Guide is to use intervals between updates to predict how close we are to the next product update. It does not have anything to say about the quality of Apple's current offerings for a given line.

Apple's Mac Pro update yesterday, regardless of how poor it was, effectively "resets the clock" on the next update. A week ago (and six months ago), we recommended "don't buy" simply because past history suggested that an update was due any time. But it's a different situation today: Now we don't expect another update for quite some time.

It can easily be argued that the "new" Mac Pro is a terrible value with outdated specs, but if you are in the market for a Mac Pro and you can't wait many months (maybe a year) for a new update, you might as well buy now.

Apple removing the "New" tag is strictly a marketing issue...my best guess is they simply don't want to draw attention to how crappy the update is. But an update it definitely is.

Nothings changed so your stance is wrong on this issue,sorry
Not resetting the counter to the non update status is misleading

 

[milo]

Sorry MR, but you dropped the ball on this one. This isn't an update at all, just shuffling around base/bto models and prices. Sure, go ahead and list this in the "updates" list so users get the info, but put the counter back and no way in hell there should be a "Buy now!" Frankly, this is enough to flush any credibility that buyer's guide has down the toilet.

Now even Apple took the "new" off it, if they don't think it's an update you guys look pretty foolish calling it one.

Wikipedia's classed it as an update. Hmmm...

But I'll bet they don't have a counter like MR does along with a bit "BUY NOW!" recommendation. The problem isn't listing the info, it's telling users that a three year old, overpriced machine is something to buy.

 

[Topper]

And we do use a bit of flexibility in our considerations.

No, no, no, no, no you don't, no you don't, no, no, no you don't.
You've just got to be kidding me.
Your mind was made up from the get-go.
OMG! Flexibility. Oh, please.

 

[Flood123]

It boggles my mind that people think we're in Apple's pocket.

Anyway, it's already been said by moderators and an editor, but I'll say it again just to make it clear: The purpose of the Buyer's Guide is to use intervals between updates to predict how close we are to the next product update. It does not have anything to say about the quality of Apple's current offerings for a given line.

Apple's Mac Pro update yesterday, regardless of how poor it was, effectively "resets the clock" on the next update. A week ago (and six months ago), we recommended "don't buy" simply because past history suggested that an update was due any time. But it's a different situation today: Now we don't expect another update for quite some time.

It can easily be argued that the "new" Mac Pro is a terrible value with outdated specs, but if you are in the market for a Mac Pro and you can't wait many months (maybe a year) for a new update, you might as well buy now.

Apple removing the "New" tag is strictly a marketing issue...my best guess is they simply don't want to draw attention to how crappy the update is. But an update it definitely is.

Honestly it perplexes me how this qualifies as an update. Obviously apple doesn't view it as one. It's your site. Feel free to do as you wish, however leaving it as just updated is doing a disservice you your readers.

 

[ytk]

Okay, so the Buyer's Guide recommendation is based strictly on the estimated point in the product cycle, as determined by the average time between updates. So under that reasoning, it doesn't make sense to mark it as "do not buy", because that indicates that an update is near, and based on Apple's historical record, a major update will not closely follow a speed bump.

But neither the specs nor the price point of the Mac Pro substantially changed with this update. A few extra BTO options were added, but that's really the extent of it. So it's not really reasonable, and would throw off the calculations, to call this a new product cycle. So it doesn't make sense to mark it as "buy now" either.

The only thing left would be a neutral, "mid-product cycle" or a yellow, "approaching the end of a product cycle, buy only if you need it". It seems to me that the logical thing to do is to take this new information and use it to make an informed guess about the actual expected length of the current product cycle. This would be a deviation from standard practice, as normally the buyer's guide goes strictly off the average length of time between updates. But given that neither interpreting the recent update as marking the start of a new product cycle or failing to acknowledge it at all makes sense, this case may call for some flexibility. Based on other evidence, it sound like new Mac Pros are expected in about a year, so this would put the Mac Pro about 2/3 through the product cycle. So that would end up being a neutral or yellow, wherever that falls.

 

[Flood123]

Thank you for changing it back to do not buy, but I think the counter really should be put back to where it was. I am sure a lot of folks here would agree. I'm l am sure the a much smaller group would think that I am way off base.
If you really want to know where the mind of your registered users are, put it to a vote. If you don't care what we think, well then there ya have it.

 

[milo]

Thank you for changing it back to do not buy, but I think the counter really should be put back to where it was.

Agreed, good to see MR finally give in but they need to switch this too.

 

[BigPrince]

snip

I think most of us understand roughly "that this is the way the buyer's guide has always operated..."

What is being pointed out is that this mode of operation is no longer as meaningful as it originally was.

 

[valkraider]

No need to fuss so much...

This is the solution.

 

[knightlie]

Nothings changed so your stance is wrong on this issue,sorry

No need to apologise. You are in no position to claim your opinion as fact any more than MR are. You are not forced to agree to MRs recommendation, if you don't accept it, don't buy and move on.


This issue depends on your defintion of "update" - is an update a simple change to the line-up, which the Pro update is, an change of processor, which the Pro update seems to be, or a completely new product.?

Make your own determination, people, because there isn't a solution to this which will suit everyone.

 

[neversink]

Wild Cowboy --- You need to step back a minute and not be so defensive but listen.

This is NOT an upgrade. By stating that this is an upgrade in the Mac Pro line Mac Rumors is misleading people who may be new to Mac Pro or even Mac to go out and buy this antiquated box I prefer to call Mac Amateur.

Shame on you.

Apple took the "new" label off, and you should never have reset the clock from 600 plus days ago.

Your buying guide has become useless and misleading. And it makes people wonder what bones Apple throws you.

Please make the ethical choice.

----------

Your buying guide has become useless and misleading. And it makes people wonder what bones Apple throws you.

Please make the ethical choice.

Well - at least yo put "Do not buy" next to it, which makes the whole thing even more confusing.

I would politely suggest Mac Rumors reverse the clock reset also. Don't be fooled by Apples non-update. Noone familiar with these machines is fooled.

----------

WildCowboy --
Mac Rumors did the ethical thing by stating the upgrade to the Mac pro was still outdated.

If I were MR, I still wouldn't count this as an upgrade, but at least the red dot is there.

 

[WildCowboy]

So as many have noticed, we've made a compromise on the Buyer's Guide page. We still do consider it to be an update for the purposes of predicting when the next update might occur. (And with Tim Cook having said that an update is coming "later next year" that 427-day average update interval might put us right in the range!)

But we have changed the recommendation to "Don't Buy" because the line remains outdated even with the update.

Basically, if you absolutely have to have a Mac Pro for whatever reason, either buy now or be prepared to wait a year.

 

[righteye]

No need to apologise. You are in no position to claim your opinion as fact any more than MR are. You are not forced to agree to MRs recommendation, if you don't accept it, don't buy and move on.


This issue depends on your defintion of "update" - is an update a simple change to the line-up, which the Pro update is, an change of processor, which the Pro update seems to be, or a completely new product.?

Make your own determination, people, because there isn't a solution to this which will suit everyone.

No facts,an opinion which what a forum is for, and Sorry is not an apology its a polite why of saying i disagree and being non confrontational.

 

[Flood123]

We still do consider it to be an update

Even though Apple doesn't. Gotcha. Fully understood. Case closed then. Most folks here don't agree with you. Apple doesn't agree with you, hence they removed the New from the online store. But your opinion of it being an update is the one that matters since its your site so,... I guess there is no sense in arguing. You can't argue with someone the "knows" they are right.

 

[jlgolson]

Even though Apple doesn't. Gotcha. Fully understood. Case closed then. Most folks here don't agree with you. Apple doesn't agree with you, hence they removed the New from the online store. But your opinion of it being an update is the one that matters since its your site so,... I guess there is no sense in arguing. You can't argue with someone the "knows" they are right.

I'm not sure you understand.

Did the Mac Pro get an update?
Did the specs change?
Did the model number change?

If yes, then the counter gets reset.

Leaving the traffic light at "do not buy" was, in Apple parlance, a one time exception.

You can argue with someone who 'knows' they are right -- I'm doing it right now. But you know what they say about arguing on the Internet.

 

[Flood123]

I'm not sure you understand.

You can argue with someone who 'knows' they are right -- I'm doing it right now.

There's LOTS I don't understand. Ask ANYONE. LOL!

AND

Touche- I have to commend that little redirection. I'd have to admit, it only stings cause its true. It was the pot calling the kettle black 100%. I did come off a bit like a horse's *** so I will take my lumps.

I get what you are saying regarding the whole lot. I personally don't think slapping a new model number on 2010 parts and a inconsequential speed bump makes it new. I would love to be convinced otherwise, but it is not your job to do so. The fun part about all this is, it is only the internet and only a difference in opinion. Life goes on. Just because we fail to agree on one issue doesn't mean we won't agree on dozens more.

In Hind site I should have used the word debate rather than argue. It more accurately defines what we have here.

 

[G5isAlive]

If you agree, simply reply to this thread.

For those who have missed the news, the Mac Pro has just been "updated" with virtually identical specs—including no Thunderbolt—to the 2 year old version.

Is the policy at MacRumors simply "if ANY spec at all is bumped up, it gets a "buy now"?

(If iMac were to have an update that consisted of the old model, plus an extra key on the keyboard, would that suffice?)

I agree. I know I am late to the party. And I know Apple has already responded. And macrumors has already responded. But I have been told to be a useful member of the community I have to have 500 posts. Not that this is a gratuitous post. No. Its to lend support to this noble point.

BTW. 2013? Really Apple?

----------

You can argue with someone who 'knows' they are right -- I'm doing it right now. But you know what they say about arguing on the Internet.

I think you mean 'can't argue' yes?

Anyway, I thought you explained your point well. For whatever that's worth.

 

[neversink]

I'm not sure you understand.

Did the Mac Pro get an update?
Did the specs change?
Did the model number change?

If yes, then the counter gets reset.

Leaving the traffic light at "do not buy" was, in Apple parlance, a one time exception.

You can argue with someone who 'knows' they are right -- I'm doing it right now. But you know what they say about arguing on the Internet.

Actually, I'm not sure you understand.

Did Apple say it was "new" and then change its mind. So it's not an update for Apple, but an update for Mac Rumors. Give me a break.

It feels like there is something unethical going on here at Mac Rumors (I hope not); or perhaps it is just that you guys got caught being Apple's fool and it makes you look a bit silly. That's OK. Set the clock back to 600 plus days because Apple itself admits its not a new update (and I know you don't reset the clock at zero every time Apple introduces a minor update to a Mac platform.) Just admit you were had, let the swelling go down, and do the right thing by resting the clock back to 600 plus.

If you don't, you will lose the trust of many Mac Rumor readers and long-time members.

 

[Flood123]

Actually, I'm not sure you understand.

Did Apple say it was "new" and then change its mind. So it's not an update for Apple, but an update for Mac Rumors. Give me a break.

It feels like there is something unethical going on here at Mac Rumors (I hope not); or perhaps it is just that you guys got caught being Apple's fool and it makes you look a bit silly. That's OK. Set the clock back to 600 plus days because Apple itself admits its not a new update (and I know you don't reset the clock at zero every time Apple introduces a minor update to a Mac platform.) Just admit you were had, let the swelling go down, and do the right thing by resting the clock back to 600 plus.

If you don't, you will lose the trust of many Mac Rumor readers and long-time members.

I personally agree that it should be changed , however I genuinely don't feel that MacRumors is in the pocket of Apple nor do I feel that they are aiming to be unethical by misleading it's readers. What we are discussing is semantics. One group feels update means one thing that other side clearly does not. It does suck, but it isn't the end of the world. All this means is that people should be researching more before they purchase and not to count on one source to help you make an informed decision regarding it. Of course this should have been the case regardless.