Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mac Pro Build-to-Order Ship Dates Slip as Future Remains Uncertain

Even though I am not a Pro user and dont lie about being one, I think it would be a shame if apple dropped their pro line. It seems the the Mac Pro got apple popular with all of the "Artsy" graphic users which got the company to grow. Sadly though apple seems to be neglecting there alleged "flagship" product. :eek: :(
 
If Apple scrap the Mac Pro, I can see a lot of users migrating to Windows PCs in the future. Not Joe Averages but Pros and Prosumers probably will. It frustrates me that Apple can no longer simplify a product without removing functionality and dumbing it down.

Its almost as though Apple want people to say Macs are toys.
 
Apple's flagship product is the iPhone. It's driving Apple's growth; it gets the most attention internally as well as from the public; and it's generating massive profit. The iMac and the iPod are what began driving Apple's cool status. The MBP has an insignificant halo effect in comparison.

The Mac Pro is hugely useful for specific tasks and cannot be replaced, for those tasks, by other current Apple products. This does not mean that the MBP is the most profitable place for Apple to invest resources. People who think their 'loyalty' to Apple entitles them to MBP improvements are mistaken.

The only people who care whether hugely popular Apple products could be called 'toys' are whiny neckbeards.
 
Carouser said:
Apple's flagship product is the iPhone. It's driving Apple's growth; it gets the most attention internally as well as from the public; and it's generating massive profit. The iMac and the iPod are what began driving Apple's cool status. The MBP has an insignificant halo effect in comparison.

The Mac Pro is hugely useful for specific tasks and cannot be replaced, for those tasks, by other current Apple products. This does not mean that the MBP is the most profitable place for Apple to invest resources. People who think their 'loyalty' to Apple entitles them to MBP improvements are mistaken.

The only people who care whether hugely popular Apple products could be called 'toys' are whiny neckbeards.
Click to expand...

By MBP do you mean MP!?


Anyway, MP won't be killed. I put money on it.
 
BrotherBeagle said:
(This'll sound like a jerk statement, but I really don't mean it as such.)

I find it curious as to how the sentiment is always, "It's okay for those people, but it'll never happen about something I care about."

The truth is, the demise of the Xserve created an affect that has a direct impact on the need for Mac Pros: Many shops voted with their dollars and did not switch over to Pros as a replacement and migrated away from OS X Server as backbone infrastructure.

The problem comes down to trust -- and Apple burnt a lot of theirs up in the professional and enterprise markets by tossing those that needed Xserves cleanly (and unapologetically) under the bus. Their education and enterprise field and sales reps did very little to smooth those waters, either.

I hope this is just rumour fodder. I really hope that Apple does continue providing a professional class desktop. I want to believe that my gut feeling that we're (rapidly) approaching a time where all Apple produces are consumer appliances is wrong.

But considering that Apple's belief that it is okay to inform users that in order to reinstall their "server" class operating system, they need to recovery boot and download over the internet -- No, I don't believe that Apple, as an entity, has any real consideration of their products outside of the living room or travel bag. Perhaps they like the concept of SOHO use, but on the professional stance, they could care less.

As long as you can write iOS apps on an iMac, that's all that matters.
Click to expand...

I think the Xserve was a product without much of a market. A small shop could just use OS X Server and a tower/Mac Mini while the enterprise would hang the 'Macs in the graphics department' off a Windows/UNIX server. That's how it's been for the entirety of the Mac's life. There has NEVER been a Mac enterprise server unless you count the Xserve. Of course, some shops did do innovative things with the Xserve or Xsan but, frankly, these were drop in the ocean.

There were some - possibly crazy - rumours that Apple would buy a significant Unix vendor (most likely Sun) when Mac OS X arrived but that's a tough market and they focused on consumers. I don't think Apple as a major UNIX enterprise vendor would really be a good fit, considering how their other products have developed.

However, Apple has always been a great workstation vendor and the Mac Pro, I'm sure, is safe for a long while yet - even if it becomes a niche product that isn't given much publicity.
 
Bubba Satori said:
Top ten reasons Apple would put Mac Pro's on the Price is right.

10 Somebody in the marketing department has a sarcastic sense of humor.
9 Needed to get rid of the last two Mac Pros.
8 Wanted to find out what people are willing to pay for a Mac Pro.
7 Reminding America that Apple still makes desktop computers.
6 Couldn't find a Pro TV program to display them on.
5 The Price is Right was Steve Jobs' favorite show.
4 Woz has dated all the Price is Right girls.
3 Apple is considering selling Mac Pros on QVC.
2 Drew Carey has more money than brains.
1 Hoped a clueless contestant would blurt out $5,000.
Click to expand...

Great list. It's got to be #9. No doubt. Apple gets a national TV commerical for just the price of a Mac Pro, and they finally get that shelf space back in the warehouse. More room for Smart Covers!
 
vitzr said:
Excellent post, I agree with your well stated points.

I've watched a Boxx perform ray trace rendering at lightning fast speeds and it's quite impressive. Boxx would be my choice for several reasons, not the least of which would be their exemplary support. That's just my take on it.
Click to expand...

I like their dedication and that they build in the US. We will see. I've pretty much used Macs for about a decade at this point, but some of what I'm running these days would run better on Windows anyway.


MacFanJeff said:
A truly high-end workstation is going to be BIG and rather bulky. As a pro 3D artist, I am considering a custom build and moving to Windows due to several reasons that all cost me money and time. But, in regard to the size, it will be a LARGE cube type that is about 2 X 3 X 3 foot. It has all the room I need for things like liquid cooling, temperature controls, pumps, etc.

So, if you ask most professionals like me, we actually want BIG systems for what we use them for and what we put in them.
Click to expand...

You're correct. My point was that I'm not tied to the look or anything as some people on here seem to suggest :p. There is a theory on this board that workstations are a completely dead market. If anything they've probably been slow due to the structure of Intel's updates at times. You mentioned doing 3d work. What does it become? Video game art? Animation? print advertising? Just wondering..
 
Sadly, I think the MP is coming to an end, may not be now, but eventually, it will come to an end. My last tower was a PM G5 DP 1.8, last two machines have been MBP. I work on some pretty big PhotoShop files and now have started working with After Effects & Premiere, and my MBP handles it all. I realize there are people out there that need even more power, but I believe Apple has lost interest in them. For expandability, I believe Apple is relying on ThunderBolt instead of PCIe. Apple pro apps are dying and I think Apple's thinking the MBP and high-end iMac will satisfy most of their "pro" users. I hope that isn't the case, but I feel it is.
 
I don't see any reason to worry...I mean, this probably just means a switch to Sandy Bridge-E. Or better yet, Apple has early access to Ivy Bridge.
 
roadbloc said:
Its almost as though Apple want people to say Macs are toys.
Click to expand...

Ideally, I believe Apple wants to sell a cable box. The fun of dabbling in anything computer-related will be locked out to everyone except licensed programmers.
 
As the exodus from FCP, and sooner or later from Macs, gathers momentum why would that part of the market need the iPhones-iPads-iOS-Cloud lifetsyle? Fair enough, that won't spoil the quarterly results too much in the short or medium term - but ask Nokia and RIM what it feels like once the shine wears off among the trendy consumer market.
 
Apple rip you off if you upgrade the RAM. Anybody with common sense would buy third party RAM, such as Crucial. You'll get your Mac quicker, too :)
 
one of the biggest fallacies around

thekev said:
There is a theory on this board that workstations are a completely dead market.

If anything they've probably been slow due to the structure of Intel's updates at times.
Click to expand...

I'm amazed that so many people believe the crock of crap that it's Intel's fault that the Mac Pro is out-of-date and underpowered.

It's Apple's fault, plain and simple.

Does Intel keep Apple from updating the mobo to support USB 3.0? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from adding a T-Bolt controller? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from supporting SLI and the latest CUDA-enabled Nvidia graphics? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from coming out with a mid/mini-tower with desktop SB processors? No.

Does Intel tell Apple not to put BD drives in the Mac Pro? No.​
There are more items for the list - but the point is that the sheep believe that any improvements to the Mac Pro have to wait for a new Xeon CPU and chipset.
 
Just configured a VERY non-standard Mac Pro and got an estimate of 3-5 days. Really really hope this turns out to be true though, been holding out a long time for an upgrade!!
 
AidenShaw said:
I'm amazed that so many people believe the crock of crap that it's Intel's fault that the Mac Pro is out-of-date and underpowered.

It's Apple's fault, plain and simple.

Does Intel keep Apple from updating the mobo to support USB 3.0? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from adding a T-Bolt controller? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from supporting SLI and the latest CUDA-enabled Nvidia graphics? No.

Does Intel keep Apple from coming out with a mid/mini-tower with desktop SB processors? No.

Does Intel tell Apple not to put BD drives in the Mac Pro? No.​
There are more items for the list - but the point is that the sheep believe that any improvements to the Mac Pro have to wait for a new Xeon CPU and chipset.
Click to expand...


Great. I don't want a $3k Mac Pro with 2008 technology in it (LGA1366 Core i7s).

If you want USB 3 or SATA 3 there are adapter cards for $50. Why on earth would you spend $500+ (Upgrade from a 2009/2010) for just these things?

And not just that, why would you upgrade with the knowledge a SB-E MP is coming soon!?

:confused::confused:

Until Dell/HP etc are shipping for a good month LGA2011 workstations I am not worried about the future of the MP.
 
AidenShaw said:
I'm amazed that so many people believe the crock of crap that it's Intel's fault that the Mac Pro is out-of-date and underpowered...the point is that the sheep believe that any improvements to the Mac Pro have to wait for a new Xeon CPU and chipset.
Click to expand...

We, sheep, don't blame Intel for the Mac Pro being out-of-date.
We, sheep, have nothing to do or say about improvements to the next Mac Pro or when it will be released, but we know from experience that Apple waits for Intel.
 
pimentoLoaf said:
I just simulated an order with lots of bells-and-whistles and got a MUCH shorter delivery date:
Click to expand...
If nothing is announced by end of month, I have to order a dozen for my work.
Would have loved a new model but I have to get all this delivered within our fiscal :(
 
AidenShaw said:
Sandy Bridge is early 2011 - what are you smoking?

And, by the way, check the dates on the graphics cards that Apple ships with the Mac Pros. ...not exactly recent!
Click to expand...

Im well aware, I'm more referring to your comments on USB3/TB/SATA3.

Why would they spend money re-designing the MP just for these things using 3rd party controllers, some of which are known to be utter rubbish? And then who on earth would *buy* these Mac Pro's?

"Does Intel keep Apple from coming out with a mid/mini-tower with desktop SB processors? No."

Why!? Go look at the prices, they are the same. So what is the point? The people who buy these machines would prefer ECC memory, working virtulisation additions (News reports suggest this is in the next stepping (C2) and god knows what else. Who's fault is this? Apples? No. Intels for keeping the prices the same for desktop and Xeon.

See: http://www.eteknix.com/news/sandy-bridge-e-c2-stepping-to-arrive-in-january/


The most sensible time to upgrade the Mac Pro and add SATA 3, TB is when the mobo gets re-designed for the LGA2011 chips. Makes absolutely no financial sense to do so before hand.
 
Last edited:
Clive At Five said:
Do you know how long I've been barking up that tree? So long that my "voice" has been hoarse for probably a year. But here I am again... foolishly, I suppose.
Click to expand...

Can I ask... why?

The chipset and CPU costs are pretty much the same (Go look for yourself, i7-3960 - $999 vs E5-1660 - $1083. There is nothing there that would suddenly drop the cost of the machine.

Smaller case? Less HD/SSD slots? :confused:

So now Apple have to produce two different cases which *could* push up R&D and production costs per unit which *could* completely remove any savings from producing this smaller case.

But then most people who have a Mac Pro have more than two HDs fitted, therefore want the space of the MP as it is.

What about using LGA155?
Needs two different chipsets, is it worth it? *shrug*

I wouldn't buy a SB MP, I'm ready to buy myself a SB-E E5-1650 MP.


So again, I ask, where do these savings suddenly come from to form a 'cheaper' Mac Pro!?
 
Concorde Rules said:
Can I ask... why?

The chipset and CPU costs are pretty much the same (Go look for yourself, i7-3960 - $999 vs E5-1660 - $1083. There is nothing there that would suddenly drop the cost of the machine.

Smaller case? Less HD/SSD slots? :confused:

So now Apple have to produce two different cases which *could* push up R&D and production costs per unit which *could* completely remove any savings from producing this smaller case.

But then most people who have a Mac Pro have more than two HDDs fitted so want the huge space of the MP as it is.

So again, I ask, where do these savings suddenly come from to form a 'cheaper' Mac Pro!?
Click to expand...

Straw man set up, straw man knocked down, congrats. One does not always need the absolute top-of-the-line product (i7-3960). Go on NewEgg right now and price out a modest i7-enabled box. How much does it cost you? Not $3k! I don't need the best CPU or fully-buffered RAM. "So then why not go with one of Apple's consumer alternatives," you ask? Because, I don't need a built-in monitor, nor do I need a Texas-Toast-sized footprint. Most of all, I don't want to pay extra for space-saving, under-powered mobile varients.

What I do need is modest, desktop-grade hardware in a modular form-factor that I can tweak with my own add-ins or upgrades... INTERNALLY, so there isn't a rats nest of wires... and I need a computer that runs OS X. I'd like them to be the same machine.

Apple doesn't. And this may surprise you, but the reason isn't R&D. It's that Apple can't charge $1500 for a computer that would otherwise retail for $800. People are stupid, but they aren't THAT stupid.

-Clive
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back