I suspect the only way they would discontinue the Mac Pro is if sufficient organizations stop buying them. It would then be hard to argue that many would care or that their voices would matter.
We may not get a choice though, given the direction Intel is moving. The enterprise hardware is moving to large core count system, far more than what the software used in workstations is capble of using. As the core count increases, that means either everyone will have start using desktop parts for workstation duty, or go with basically a terminal and run the software from a cloud.
If we end up with desktop parts (i.e. the i7-9xx and Xeon 35xx parts are both LGA1366, and extremely close in design, as ECC is the primary difference in features), the cost of competing systems (say Apple vs. Dell,...) may end up with more of a price difference than there is now, as they could shave on memory (use non ECC), and the other components will be approximately par (presuming very similar capable components used).
That cost difference could drive organizations to begin to rethink their software platform, and plan an OS/application shift. Money talks afterall, even in large entities with budgets individuals could only dream of (even if for a single system, when you put everything together, such as networking,...).
The cloud method would be a mess for workstation users IMO, as it would mean we'd need much more bandwidth (i.e. large data files passed between the system and server), and the pay-per-use marketing strategy will be expensive. The cheaper system would quickly be offset by the monthly costs spent on the ISP and software fees for a given period of time.
A much more reasonable approach is to continue the product line with minimal investment and high prices to ensure it remains profitable.
I agree, but the end may be coming, as Apple can't control what chip makers (all of 2 right now, as the other stuff based on ARM is nowhere near capable enough ATM). If they go with Intel desktop parts to keep the line going, they'd want to put in as little as possible, yet keep the margins high enough that it will price the system past the competition.
In such a situation, parity will be obvious in terms of hardware, and the price difference will be much harder to explain away/swallow. Software investments would likely be the primary reason for staying, but users, particularly larger entities, would start looking at new software under a different OS to save on costs (plan out a switch to coincide with new hardware at some point).
As I understand it, Adobe has no love for Apple, and 3D applications are already better under windows. For some reason, I'd expect this to continue, as Apple seems difficult to work with, even from a software developer's POV. And if they decide to jump ship Apple, there will be no choice anyway, regardless of hardware concerns.
It's just not looking all that good to me.
