Is Apple still serious about the professional market?

[Eidorian]

Honestly I am personally in a hard place as I really want to use OSX and continue working on iPhone (and perhaps iPad) software, as well as taking advantage of some of their other features, but...they are producing crap machines right now...it is incredibly disheartening to see the direction they are going.

Which is why my money still sits in my pocket. I'm more of a hardware person than a professional to be honest. I do remember the days of the single processor Power Mac G5 starting at $1,499 and then the iMac G5 ALS creeped up there. A short while later you're pushed to $1,999 for a tower and then the Mac Pro managed to compete well against the dual socket machines. We come into 2009 and suddenly it's an afterthought. It feels like they threw darts to price the single socket Nehalem Mac Pro.

I'll stick with my Late 2007 MacBook.

 

[mabaker]

soLoredd, I feel you right there with "Apple Computer" but do consider the fact that even back then they had these patents pending for some kind of "mobile phone device", and some quirky new phones like this one:

http://www.kirps.com/web/main/_blog/all/confirmed-apples-1983-phone-handled-cheques.shtml

So in my view what they are doing now is merely following a vision Steve Jobs had. No, don't get me wrong, I do have some issues with Apple and Steve and some of their products and the way they're handling it, but what I think is import to do is to put the things we have now in perspective. They had to do A in order to get to B and I do kinda think that B was the iPhone experience, not some kind of desktop computer.

And about my comment concerning Apple's nicer way of making money - just that they do get under your skin with some of their products and the attention to detail in software. Hence you do give your money more willingly away. I don't think I have ever spent money as willingly for a MS product (software or hardware) as I had for Apple.

 

[JoeG4]

Let me try my attempt at this one, being a (somewhat) unbiased person that has owned a bunch of Apple machines over the past decade (and has been using Windows even longer).

* In the old days, the iMacs were small, cheap machines that used 3 year old hardware. (If not worse). They had 15" poor quality CRT screens, and started at around $699 (sometimes more). The Power Macs started at $1499, and while the $1499 machine was seldom had the raw power of a $1499 PC, it offered things the $1499 PC usually didn't, and that was nice.

While these old iMacs and Power Macs have long since been forgotten (for the most part), if you find one it'll probably still fire up and work (though, the DV era iMacs had lousy hard drives).

* Today, the iMac is a high end consumer product. It starts at $1099 and goes to a bit over $2000.

However, there's 2 iMacs - the 21.5" which is the spiritual replacement of the old G3 iMacs (homely, low end hardware), and the 27", which is available with an i5 or i7 (high end consumer hardware, but you can buy a $700 Asus tower with better components overall).

The Mac Pro didn't, and never really replaced the Power Mac because the Power Mac started at $1499 and there's never (to my memory) been a Mac Pro that cost under $2000.

My problem is the low end Mac Pro uses a $300-400 CPU that you can get, slap into a machine with a $250 motherboard, and off you go.. with a machine that has more RAM slots and can take a better video card.

Also, I don't trust them! Apple lost me with the G5s and their tendency to randomly crap out after 3-4 years.

 

[lemonade-maker]

Which is why my money still sits in my pocket. I'm more of a hardware person than a professional to be honest. I do remember the days of the single processor Power Mac G5 starting at $1,499 and then the iMac G5 ALS creeped up there. A short while later you're pushed to $1,999 for a tower and then the Mac Pro managed to compete well against the dual socket machines. We come into 2009 and suddenly it's an afterthought. It feels like they threw darts to price the single socket Nehalem Mac Pro.

I'll stick with my Late 2007 MacBook.

A Dell Precision T7500 with a 2.66 Xeon 5550, 2gb ddr3, 250 gb drive, a weak ati card and redhat I just bought today for a developer for $2819 with my $408 discount. Apple is $2499 for a similar config machine (a bit better hd, ram, and case are nicer). You are unhappy about the price but it is very competitive with other manufacturers.

I'd really like to know where you get your numbers. Seems bogus to me.

 

[disconap]

People seem to forget OS 7.5.3, the end of OS 9, and how crap OS X was until at least 10.1 and really a little bit longer than that.

Not to discount the rest of your points but that's sort of like saying "Why buy a Ford? The Pinto sucked." We're talking in terms of now, not then, and OSX has been the superior OS since 10.2. And really, 7.5 and 9.2.2 were both pretty solid for what they were, which was something TOTALLY different than modern computing.

Which, and again not to discount any of your other argument, is still not saying you should or shouldn't buy a Ford, you just shouldn't let the Pinto be a factor in that decision.

The most interesting thing about Windows is that XP is still, to this day, a very usable OS. That's impressive considering how long it's been around (it would be the equivalent of 10.1 being the Mac standard right now, which would be ridiculous to most of us).

 

[Eidorian]

A Dell Precision T7500 with a 2.66 Xeon 5550, 2gb ddr3, 250 gb drive, a weak ati card and redhat I just bought today for a developer for $2819 with my $408 discount. Apple is $2499 for a similar config machine (a bit better hd, ram, and case are nicer). You are unhappy about the price but it is very competitive with other manufacturers.

I'd really like to know where you get your numbers. Seems bogus to me.

Xeon W3520 vs. Xeon X5550

I've noticed you do this when you post price comparisons. You'll face off a Gainestown on the Dell against a Bloomfield on the Mac Pro.

 

[lemonade-maker]

Xeon W3520 vs. Xeon X5550

I've noticed you do this when you post price comparisons. You'll face off a Gainestown on the Dell against a Bloomfield on the Mac Pro.

The price with that proc was $2486. Wasn't available today.

 

[Eidorian]

The price with that proc was $2486

I think the next round is how you knitpick either the expansion capabilities, so you pick the T7500 instead of lower priced single socket models, or possibly FireWire.

Any information on if the T7500 comes in a single socket board when you choose a Xeon UP? Otherwise you are paying to a dual socket board without using the second socket.

 

[disconap]

* In the old days, the iMacs were small, cheap machines that used 3 year old hardware. (If not worse). They had 15" poor quality CRT screens, and started at around $699 (sometimes more). The Power Macs started at $1499, and while the $1499 machine was seldom had the raw power of a $1499 PC, it offered things the $1499 PC usually didn't, and that was nice.

I seem to be on the "one note" team today, but this point is inaccurate. It really depends what you mean by Raw Power; 1-4 gigaflops made it the fastest thing out there on a consumer pro level at the time. Altivec created graphics acceleration that was unbeatable for the time. I used G4s and P3s and later P4s in a graphics environment back then and, even at 1.3+gHz, the P4 couldn't beat out the G4 500mHz. However, if you're a gamer, then even if you could find a game on Mac and Windows, there was no comparison there either, the P4 would easily win out. As the systems have become more all-encompassing on both sides, the OS became the main deciding factor in purchases (this last statement is, of course, my opinion).

Also, the cost difference in the iMac isn't that shocking when you consider inflation, it's really not priced that much higher overall, and you get a lot more now than you did then (the parts for which are more expensive to start with). I'm not defending Apple's current price point, just stating the difference between a dollar in 1998 and a dollar in 2010...

 

[lemonade-maker]

I think the next round is how you knitpick either the expansion capabilities, so you pick the T7500 instead of lower priced single socket models, or possibly FireWire.

Any information on if the T7500 comes in a single socket board when you choose a Xeon UP? Otherwise you are paying to a dual socket board without using the second socket.

You can assume whatever you want. I made the purchase for a developer I depend on. It was her choice. Pretty sure its dual.

 

[Eidorian]

You can assume whatever you want. I made the purchase for a developer I depend on. It was her choice.

I just don't like paying for a dual socket Xeon motherboard if I'm going to only use one processor. Thanks again though.

Maybe that's why there are lower end single socket LGA 1366 Xeon workstations since they only come with single socket boards. That's just a thought.

 

[vladi]

This is serious issue.

My family business in graphic design has relied on Macs since late 80s. Every Mac we've got we've kept it to this day, all 12 of them
Eventually in mid 90s we got our first PCs and just like with our Macs we kept upgrading them every few years (but unlike Macs we never kept the old ones). I was a witness as PCs were closing the gap in graphic design and desktop publishing industry in last 10 years.

My point is that I got my work done no matter if I worked on PC or Mac. I do have opinion on both of them and I have to say that there is always something that one does better than another.
When using Adobe software Macs always had greater performance and somewhat better stability compared to Windows but they suffered from bad interface and some illogical solutions. For example Mac interface required you to maximize your document to avoid clutter on desktop interfering with your work. By doing that you always had pallets kind of getting in a way of your document. Yes it's such a small thing compared to performance issue on PC but it always had me going. They finally fixed it with CS4 (it took them forever but better than never) and now I have to say that its close to a perfect for a Mac user.

Except the fact that Adobe fixed performance issue with Windows and not only did they just fixed it but they surpassed it with Photoshop 64bit implementation. And for some reason I find Illustrator and InDesign running on Windows as smooth as on OS X. So gap between PCs and Macs is now definitely closed when it comes to Rasters, Vectors and Layout.
Now questions are: Is Mac Pro still the standard for graphics and desktop publishing? Yes but so is the PC. Is Mac Pro worth the premium over PC? I am not so sure. For a fact if I was starting the business today and I had limited resources i would go for Windows.

Apple completely dropped the ball with Adobe. Apple does not have their own alternative in graphics or layout to pair Adobe (unlike in video and audio) and they will never have so my greatest fear is that they will just let it die. Kind a like if we can't have it neither will Adobe. I hope I am wrong but CS5 will give Windows even more features and even better performance compared to OS X than what has today.


Apple is definitely shifting the focus to consumers and for their good I hope they don't loose ground in video editing and audio production like they did in graphic design and video compositing.

What might be the solution to this and how can Apple improve the relationship with professionals? I am not sure but if we take a look at the iPod as their most successful product in history and it's business model we can see that is completely opposite of what Mac Pro stands for and what professionals expect form Apple.
Its cheaply made, it has horrible sound reproduction and on top of that it uses compressed audio that sounds bad to begin with and it relies on inhouse solution only (that's iTunes), no third party support is available.
Just like every audiophile stays away from iPod and ridiculous MP3s, most professional 2D digital artists would do the same and stay away from Apple if Apple applies this business model to their future Macs.

Like I said this is serious and we didn't even touch other issues like BD.

 

[TennisandMusic]

There is some utter, utter rubbish in this thread, but I really can't be bothered to quote any of it.

I use Windows 7 x64 and Snow Leopard on a DAILY BASIS. And 10.6 is more stable, better to use and generally more polished.

If it wasn't for this bloody Mac Pro 2009 bug it would be perfect, if a little expensive.

I could have built a PC for half the money and more speed but the amount of time i'd have to spend messing around bug fixing I couldn't care less*.

* People will probably disagree with me on this, but i'll let you in on something. I've used Macs and PCs SIDE BY SIDE ON A DAILY BASIS for 10+ years now. I STILL use Windows 7 and 10.6 side by side. Mac OS is SO much more pleasant to work on its silly. W7 looks very pretty but other than that the networking is hopeless the printer setup honks back to XP days and its just generally XP with some pretty features, some improvements but no real strides forward in terms of usability. I find myself in XP more than I do W7 sometimes... (And I use both!)

But this is another Windows OS X debate, you use what you want and if others disagree so what, your money, do what the hell you like with it...

I've used OSX side by side with Windows for years as well and...well I'd have to say I disagree with what you're saying. In fact when I installed Windows 7 on a Mac Mini last year I was amazed at how much "snappier" it felt (sorry Steve). Yes, I do think OSX looks slicker and is nicer to use in some respects, but it's really behind the times in a lot of ways, and does feel slow and buggy quite often. I think it helps to not be emotionally attached to one platform or the other, it makes evaluating them much easier.

 

[Umbongo]

You can assume whatever you want. I made the purchase for a developer I depend on. It was her choice. Pretty sure its dual.

You bought a dual socket system with a single processor. If you don't intend on adding a second processor at a later date there is no performance difference to a T3500 with a Xeon W3520. That is the only reason to buy it like that.

Non-discount prices are:
T3500 2.66GHz = $1,299
T5500 2.66GHz = $3,230
T5500 2.66GHz x2 = $4,960

So you might want to change your order.

 

[nanofrog]

And about my comment concerning Apple's nicer way of making money - just that they do get under your skin with some of their products and the attention to detail in software. Hence you do give your money more willingly away. I don't think I have ever spent money as willingly for a MS product (software or hardware) as I had for Apple.

It used to be a good marketing campaign + nice overall customer experience (i.e software and hardware integrated well, and the QC was high enough that most were happy). Now though, it seems the customer experience has dropped off notably. It's not gone, but not what it once was.

A Dell Precision T7500 with a 2.66 Xeon 5550, 2gb ddr3, 250 gb drive, a weak ati card and redhat I just bought today for a developer for $2819 with my $408 discount. Apple is $2499 for a similar config machine (a bit better hd, ram, and case are nicer). You are unhappy about the price but it is very competitive with other manufacturers.

I'd really like to know where you get your numbers. Seems bogus to me.

You chose the wrong machine. The T-7500 is meant to be a Dual Processor system, and using it with a Single processor, though possible, is a waste. The board is more expensive, as is the CPU on it.

Xeon 55xx used in the T7500 vs. Xeon W35xx in the Quad MP. Not a valid comparison at all.

If you only wanted a SP system, you should have gone with a T3500 model. Those use the same Xeon W35xx parts available in the MP Quads (and a few other clocks as well). And getting it over the phone is the cheapest way to buy one, which I and others have mentioned before.

Any information on if the T7500 comes in a single socket board when you choose a Xeon UP? Otherwise you are paying to a dual socket board without using the second socket.

That system is a DP board. It can run a single 55xx Xeon, but it's a waste.

I just don't like paying for a dual socket Xeon motherboard if I'm going to only use one processor. Thanks again though.

That's what the T3500 is for. I also like the Sun Ultra 27, as it's a very comparable machine.

I've used OSX side by side with Windows for years as well and...well I'd have to say I disagree with what you're saying. In fact when I installed Windows 7 on a Mac Mini last year I was amazed at how much "snappier" it felt (sorry Steve). Yes, I do think OSX looks slicker and is nicer to use in some respects, but it's really behind the times in a lot of ways, and does feel slow and buggy quite often. I think it helps to not be emotionally attached to one platform or the other, it makes evaluating them much easier.

I've noticed more than a few other members that have stated they've had more issues with SL than Windows. Previously, that would have been unheard of.

But as it's been mentioned before, Windows may be better for some things, and OS X for others. Ideally, if that level of detail is needed, run a dual OS and/or VM.

 

[lemonade-maker]

You bought a dual socket system with a single processor. If you don't intend on adding a second processor at a later date there is no performance difference to a T3500 with a Xeon W3520. That is the only reason to buy it like that.

Non-discount prices are:
T3500 2.66GHz = $1,299
T5500 2.66GHz = $3,230
T5500 2.66GHz x2 = $4,960

So you might want to change your order.

I would if it were available, hasn't for a few months. We only buy T7500 dells. Makes IT life simple. The point is, they are comparable system at comparable prices. If Apple didn't have a daughter card, it would be dual socket as well.

 

[nanofrog]

I would if it were available, hasn't for a few months. We only buy T7500 dells. Makes IT life simple. The point is, they are comparable system at comparable prices. If Apple didn't have a daughter card, it would be dual socket as well.

Avaibility of the T3500's aside, I suspect the same install image would work on both models, as the only part that would have to be different, is the chipset. And Intel has a chipset driver that works with both anyway.

Assuming that's the case, it could have saved the company substantial funds if the purchase quantity is high. And if it's not (low quantities), your IT dept. should have the time available to generate a separate image in a worst case scenario. Something just doesn't feel right to me.

 

[lemonade-maker]

Avaibility of the T3500's aside, I suspect the same install image would work on both models, as the only part that would have to be different, is the chipset. And Intel has a chipset driver that works with both anyway.

Assuming that's the case, it could have saved the company substantial funds if the purchase quantity is high. And if it's not (low quantities), your IT dept. should have the time available to generate a separate image in a worst case scenario. Something just doesn't feel right to me.

You are probably overthinking it. The mandate is to purchase a T7500 and the budget is $3500. Pretty simple. I just want code.

 

[leekohler]

Apple hasn't been serious about the pro market for a long time now. I think they're eventually going to lose the design/advertising market if they don't start getting more serious. I would hate to see that happen, but I fear that's what will happen. My company has been all Apple for at least 17 years. They're beginning to think they need to switch to Windows, given the expense of Mac Pros. I would hate to see that happen, but I already know of a few companies who've given up on Apple already.

 

[snouter]

People seem to forget OS 7.5.3, the end of OS 9, and how crap OS X was until at least 10.1 and really a little bit longer than that.

Not to discount the rest of your points but that's sort of like saying "Why buy a Ford? The Pinto sucked." We're talking in terms of now, not then, and OSX has been the superior OS since 10.2.

Yes, but it really feels like people use the Pinto argument against Windows.

Windows went to NT kernel. OS X went BSD. That really solved "crash all the time problems" for both platforms.

I only brought up OS 7.5.3 and the end of OS9 to remind people that Apple had a crash all the time phase too. And 10.0 was pretty much worthless as well.

But yes, this is now, and these are great times to be in computers. Awesome hardware and software options at generally great prices for both platforms.

 

[leekohler]

This is serious issue.

My family business in graphic design has relied on Macs since late 80s. Every Mac we've got we've kept it to this day, all 12 of them
Eventually in mid 90s we got our first PCs and just like with our Macs we kept upgrading them every few years (but unlike Macs we never kept the old ones). I was a witness as PCs were closing the gap in graphic design and desktop publishing industry in last 10 years.

My point is that I got my work done no matter if I worked on PC or Mac. I do have opinion on both of them and I have to say that there is always something that one does better than another.
When using Adobe software Macs always had greater performance and somewhat better stability compared to Windows but they suffered from bad interface and some illogical solutions. For example Mac interface required you to maximize your document to avoid clutter on desktop interfering with your work. By doing that you always had pallets kind of getting in a way of your document. Yes it's such a small thing compared to performance issue on PC but it always had me going. They finally fixed it with CS4 (it took them forever but better than never) and now I have to say that its close to a perfect for a Mac user.

Except the fact that Adobe fixed performance issue with Windows and not only did they just fixed it but they surpassed it with Photoshop 64bit implementation. And for some reason I find Illustrator and InDesign running on Windows as smooth as on OS X. So gap between PCs and Macs is now definitely closed when it comes to Rasters, Vectors and Layout.
Now questions are: Is Mac Pro still the standard for graphics and desktop publishing? Yes but so is the PC. Is Mac Pro worth the premium over PC? I am not so sure. For a fact if I was starting the business today and I had limited resources i would go for Windows.

Apple completely dropped the ball with Adobe. Apple does not have their own alternative in graphics or layout to pair Adobe (unlike in video and audio) and they will never have so my greatest fear is that they will just let it die. Kind a like if we can't have it neither will Adobe. I hope I am wrong but CS5 will give Windows even more features and even better performance compared to OS X than what has today.


Apple is definitely shifting the focus to consumers and for their good I hope they don't loose ground in video editing and audio production like they did in graphic design and video compositing.

What might be the solution to this and how can Apple improve the relationship with professionals? I am not sure but if we take a look at the iPod as their most successful product in history and it's business model we can see that is completely opposite of what Mac Pro stands for and what professionals expect form Apple.
Its cheaply made, it has horrible sound reproduction and on top of that it uses compressed audio that sounds bad to begin with and it relies on inhouse solution only (that's iTunes), no third party support is available.
Just like every audiophile stays away from iPod and ridiculous MP3s, most professional 2D digital artists would do the same and stay away from Apple if Apple applies this business model to their future Macs.

Like I said this is serious and we didn't even touch other issues like BD.

What he said. Apple better be careful not to shoot themselves in the foot here. All their lines should be important to them, but it seems they aren't. When professionals like myself and this poster feel this way, you know there's a problem. 12 years ago, you'd never get me to use a PC, now I'm about to install Windows 7 on my MacBook. That's not the way to do good business with professionals, Apple.

 

[TennisandMusic]

And about my comment concerning Apple's nicer way of making money - just that they do get under your skin with some of their products and the attention to detail in software. Hence you do give your money more willingly away. I don't think I have ever spent money as willingly for a MS product (software or hardware) as I had for Apple.

Wow, COMPLETE disagreement with you on this point. This is actually where Apple's major failings occur. Lack of attention to detail in both their hardware and their software. Just read about all the issues people have with their various "pro apps" and machines. Look at how goofy the iLife suite really is.

No, Apple gets the bigger picture and generalities down pretty good, and lets all of the minor niggling issues that really bring down the experience to linger for ages, or sometimes forever.

Just look at my last large post to see all of the "details" Apple is (or "are" if you are across the Atlantic)completely missing the boat on.

 

[nanofrog]

You are probably overthinking it. The mandate is to purchase a T7500 and the budget is $3500. Pretty simple. I just want code.

I simplify it to:
SP Nehalem = T3500
DP Nehalem = T5500 or T7500

There are cases where the IT argument is quite valid, particularly in large quantities of machines, but I don't think this is one of them. I really do think a single image could be used on all three of the above models (of the same year), and it would certainly be the case for the DP systems, as it's likely the same board.

 

[snouter]

I was a witness as PCs were closing the gap in graphic design and desktop publishing industry in last 10 years.

Windows Professional 2000 was the first Windows OS you could rely on. When it was released, Apple was about to switch to OS X and later on from PPC to Intel.

Those disruptions were a huge opportunity for Windows to get a foothold.

Also, remember that Adobe did not release Intel native software for over a year. And since then, it's fair to say that Adobe give Windows the same preference it USED to give Apple.

There was a time when if you said Photoshop, you implied Mac. That was a long time ago.

Apple is definitely shifting the focus to consumers and for their good I hope they don't loose ground in video editing and audio production like they did in graphic design and video compositing..

Maybe Apple never was as committed as we think they were? Apple bought Final Cut Pro from Macromedia BEFORE Adobe bought Macromedia. They did it to kill off Avid systems which could be close to $100,000 at the time. Apple later bought Shake.

What if Adobe bought Macromedia and also got Final Cut Pro? The Apple Adobe relationship would most certainly be different.

Since Apple bought FCP and shake, maybe they'll sell it off one day? Maybe they even see it as getting in the way of what they want to be involved with now. I mean, look how they seized the Blu-Ray opportunity.

 

[Eidorian]

I simplify it to:
SP Nehalem = T3500
DP Nehalem = T5500 or T7500

Intel likes to use "UP: uniprocessor" for single socket systems.

The UP and DP processors tend to be nearly identical short of SMP or having the second QPI link enabled nowadays for the DP ones. MP (4 sockets or more) tend to be rather different.

I know you already knew that though.