The End of Apple's Professional Presence Is Here

[Tutor]

.. you won't get anything in a PC you can't get in a MP.

Except more add-ons and greater tweakability at a lower price. The quality that comes from Apple is fabulous. If Apple wasn't so fixated on control and realizing a nose-bleeding profit margin on everything that they sell (even the line of systems most relied upon by the faithful who never wavered from them until Apple aspired to become greenback competitors of Exxon and price their professional lines accordingly, this thread (and others like it) would just seem to be nightmares from which we'd all awaken, happy with the realization that Sandy (then Ivy) Bridge Mac Pros were soon coming just around the corner. Intel hasn't helped either. Isn't capitalism great?

 

[strausd]

Except more add-ons and greater tweakability at a lower price. The quality that comes from Apple is fabulous. If Apple wasn't so fixated on control and realizing a nose-bleeding profit margin on everything that they sell...

Without the current control Apple has over its products, I do not think they would have the same quality they do now. Look at Android and Windows as examples. They do not have as much control on their OS. Thus, it suffers. A Samsung Galaxy S II has a faster CPU and more RAM than an iPhone 4S, yet the iPhone 4S beats it out in benchmarks.

As for the "lower price," I do not totally agree. When the 2010 MPs came out, the same system through HP or Dell would have costed more, have less RAM, and a worse GPU. Then consider the quality of the MP, the customer service options (genius bar), the far superior OS (in my opinion), and resale value.

My biggest issue is when it comes to laptops. The average consumer does not know much about the specifications of a computer. They only look at cost and screen size. People need to compare like terms. I remember looking up an HP laptop with the same CPU as a MBP and it was only $300 less, worse GPU, made out of plastic, and just looked ugly. Consider the OS, to many people that would be worth the little extra, as would the GPU and better build quality. The better build quality means a longer lasting computer. So if the HP lasted 3 years and the MBP lasted 4, consider how much you would have paid each year, that changes it up a bit. Then consider resale value of the MBP. You go out and buy a brand new HP that is only $300 cheaper or sell your old Mac and get a few hundred. I was able to sell a 4 year old MBP for $400 two months ago. This would more than make up for the price difference. And sorry for the rambling there

 

[Nostromo]

Personally, I will never buy a mac mini or imac. In a few months I plan to upgrade from my mac pro 1,1. If there isn't a new mp available, I will hold my nose and buy a pc. I've been an apple customer for 17 years.

What else would one want to do in that case?

But I don't think Apple is already on iCloud 9. The Mac Pro is dying rumor is being revived every year when Apple drags its feet in updating.

Now Apple might use it to clear the warehouses from left-over Mac Pros and get them ready for the new model.

Mac Pros had always problems with the updating. Remember when there was no decent graphics card available a few years back?

Killing the Mac Pro would set loose such a wave of contempt that Apple cannot afford. On the contrary, in the post-Steve era we could even see a revival of the pro segment.

 

[Jason black]

He was right!

 

[theusualsuspect]

He was right!

LOL. Thanks Jason.

 

[xgman]

The Mac Pro is dying rumor is being revived every year when Apple drags its feet in updating.

Now Apple might use it to clear the warehouses from left-over Mac Pros and get them ready for the new model.

No, I really think they are rethinking the form factor or at least the depth of the current line.

 

[goMac]

No, I really think they are rethinking the form factor or at least the depth of the current line.

And such a thing wouldn't be the end of the world. As much as I like having dual processor machines, I'd be willing to settle for a single processor i7 based machine.

It's the removable parts and graphics that are really not negotiable. It's not acceptable to have downtime while the Apple store services my machine because the hard drive died, and I need a few slots to install my own GPUs.

 

[xgman]

Good write up here at Diglloyd:

http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20111101_1-EndOfLifeMacPro.html

 

[wallysb01]

And such a thing wouldn't be the end of the world. As much as I like having dual processor machines, I'd be willing to settle for a single processor i7 based machine.

It's the removable parts and graphics that are really not negotiable. It's not acceptable to have downtime while the Apple store services my machine because the hard drive died, and I need a few slots to install my own GPUs.

See, I think if we see any change with this refresh away from Xeons, at least in part, it will be that the SP systems just use the i7s, but we will still have the DP Xeons Mac Pros. I think this switch will be more likely with the following going into Ivy Bridge Xeons, however. Once we have Ivy Bridge and 8 core desktop processors, the only real need for a workstation for light-medium threaded apps will come from RAM and HD limitations. So, we may see some sort of transitional Mac Pro generation with i7 SB SP options and Xeon DP options. This would be the last refresh before the Mac line under goes some sort of shift. Which may be towards dropping the Mac Pro and DP systems and giving us a more traditional tower, or some sort of of Mac Pro Mini. My crystal ball says that doesn't happen until 2014, at the earliest, however, with the transitional DP Mac Pro's final refresh coming in 2013 with Ivy Bridge Xeons.

I still think Apple will offer something with more power and expandability than an iMac, and be headless, but it will probably not be the Mac Pro we know now.

 

[Steelgrave]

As for the "lower price," I do not totally agree. When the 2010 MPs came out, the same system through HP or Dell would have costed more, have less RAM, and a worse GPU. Then consider the quality of the MP, the customer service options (genius bar), the far superior OS (in my opinion), and resale value.

That's why I ended up with my MP as opposed to a Dell server. A similarly specced Dell was just over $800 more than my MP was last summer (2010). That was also without an OS.

I remember very similar threads announcing the end of the Mac Mini when it took so long for an update. I also remember the "death" of the macbook air. Oh look they both got major changes are are hot sellers.

People need to calm down. There are no CPU's available until Q1 2012, not to mention a lack of videocards with Thunderbolt in them. (I'd guess ATI 7xxx may get that, but in Q1 2012 as well last I heard)

 

[xgman]

People need to calm down.

The again, the squeaky wheel gets the grease! Can't hurt. You never know.

 

[deconstruct60]

And such a thing wouldn't be the end of the world. As much as I like having dual processor machines, I'd be willing to settle for a single processor i7 based machine.

If one of the two is nuked it is the single package version that probably should get to the boot. The $2,499-$3,200 price range would be handed over to the iMac team and the starting base price of a Mac Pro would jump to the $3,500-3,700 range.

Chasing the single (or dual ) core GHz junkies is the wrong move.

A Dual Package Mac Pro with E5 2600's could offer up 4 16x PCI-e slots and lots of cores for those who have high "torque" loads they need to haul.
All of the folks yelping about how then need 4 slots and every core they can get their hands on wlll be happy (except at the increase in price but at the upper end of workstation market Apple is slightly lower than Windows PCs anyway. An increase would just bring parity. Slightly above would just be "normal" like the other Mac products. )


The 1-2 core workloads that are blocked on and/or don't need I/O and are chasing CPU based benchmarks .... just let them go. Those folks are highly composed of the folks who just want to buy the cheapest box strapped around the fastest CPU they can buy at the minimal system cost.

Killing off the SP version is backwards.

 

[deconstruct60]

There are no CPU's available until Q1 2012, not to mention a lack of videocards with Thunderbolt in them. (I'd guess ATI 7xxx may get that, but in Q1 2012 as well last I heard)

They don't need videocards with TB on them. Just put an embedded video card on the motherboard (or CPU/Memory daughtercard ). Attach that GPU to TB Display Port pins and you have a "all PC systems supply video" complaint configuration. Tack on the embedded video cost to the purchase price and move on. Ta-da the Mac Pro has a GPU on the motherboard just like every other Mac model. Problem solved. No non standard , higher mark-up required video card needed.


For Mac OS X server configurations you sell the Mac Pro with no PCI-e slots filled ( that's added value for a server). Likewise if still selling single package versions then can knock $250 off the basement entry price by again selling with no slots filled. If Mac Pro pricing started at $2,299 they'd sell a few more. That's the critical issue. Selling more.

The "no slots filled" versions actually creates a larger market for 3rd party Video card vendors to sell into. Rather than just the "my card is too old" or "need 3-6 monitors " crowd. One reason there are not more 3rd party options is again there are not enough customers buying.

 

[Tsuchiya]

I really hope the rumours aren't true and that Apple will continue to make and support the Mac Pro.

For them to kill off my dream Mac when I'm so close to buying it will be truly upsetting.

 

[goMac]

If one of the two is nuked it is the single package version that probably should get to the boot. The $2,499-$3,200 price range would be handed over to the iMac team and the starting base price of a Mac Pro would jump to the $3,500-3,700 range.

Chasing the single (or dual ) core GHz junkies is the wrong move.

I don't really care if they change directions, as long as they don't mess with my PCI Express slots.

 

[AppleDroid]

And such a thing wouldn't be the end of the world. As much as I like having dual processor machines, I'd be willing to settle for a single processor i7 based machine.

It's the removable parts and graphics that are really not negotiable. It's not acceptable to have downtime while the Apple store services my machine because the hard drive died, and I need a few slots to install my own GPUs.

I think the market for a compact i7 desktop is an even smaller margin for sales than the current Pro so why would Apple create it?

There's really only two outcomes here.

1. Apple continues to make Mac Pro's
2. Apple tells us to buy an iMac

 

[deconstruct60]

Good write up here at Diglloyd:

http://macperformanceguide.com/blog/2011/20111101_1-EndOfLifeMacPro.html

Indeed the knocks are the iMac are.....

1. Not enough memory capacity.
iMac -- 4 memory slots
SP MP --- 4 memory slots
DP MP --- 8 memory slots

If maximizing differences ... DP has twice as many.

2. High Performance PCI-e Cards.

iMac -- 16x PCI-e lanes off CPU package.
SP MP -- 40x PCI-e laness of CPU package (sandy bridge & up)
DP MP -- 80x PCI-e lanes off CPU packages

4 x 16 = 64 lanes.

If maximizing differences ... DP has twice as many.


3. Reliability.

iMac -- 1 CPU package
SP MP -- 1 CPU package
DP MP -- 2 CPU packages

redundant leads to higher reliability.



As the CPU packages subsume more and more of what was formerly North and Southbridge functionality having two packages is going to allow you to put a gap between those systems and the single package systems. It is not just about cores and their associated clock speed that is a major difference.

For those users that need a "compute cluster in a single box" the DP are better selection to continue. The offset Apple will probably make is that the profit per unit is likely going to have to go up to boost growth. That somewhat puts it on a pricing death spiral but that can last many years.

Apple only needs years for the TB ecosystem to flush out , stabilize , and move to higher speeds (20, 40 or 100 Gb/s ). And Moorse law will still be turning single CPU packages into more capable "compute clusteters" (only on a single package; not a whole box. )

 

[goMac]

I think the market for a compact i7 desktop is an even smaller margin for sales than the current Pro so why would Apple create it?

There's really only two outcomes here.

1. Apple continues to make Mac Pro's
2. Apple tells us to buy an iMac

If I replied to this with what I want to say, I'd be in trouble... But I don't think it's that simple. Despite what AppleInsider says, margins probably aren't as important as people think. Other factors are.

 

[khollister]

Screw all of this - I decided today to embrace my MP for the foreseeable future regardless of where Apple is going, so I just ordered a W3680 CPU (3.33 hex core) and 24 GB of RAM to upgrade my 2010 3.2 quad that currently has 12 GB RAM.

This puppy is going to have to last me for at least 2-3 more years. I'll reevaluate when Haswell ships. It already is fast enough for most suff and the extra cores will accelerate the Photoshop filters I use (that already light up all 8 cores in the quad) as well as give me more tracks/bigger VI's in Logic.

If I eventually move to a Ivy or Haswell MBP, I can use this monster as a VEPro slave.

 

[deconstruct60]

Screw all of this - I decided today to embrace my MP for the foreseeable future regardless of where Apple is going, so I just ordered a W3680 CPU (3.33 hex core) and 24 GB of RAM to upgrade my 2010 3.2 quad that currently has 12 GB RAM.

Meanwhile, back at Apple HQ where they are counting the votes (systems bought) on whether customers like the Mac Pro or not, the vote count went up by zero.


This is as systemic problem for the Mac Pro. Rumor of cancelling generates some 2000 posts. Sales go up zero.

Not saying everyone needs to run out and buy one now. But unless there is something to offset the longer than average buying cycle the Mac Pro is going to remain on thin ice .

 

[thekev]

And such a thing wouldn't be the end of the world. As much as I like having dual processor machines, I'd be willing to settle for a single processor i7 based machine.

It's the removable parts and graphics that are really not negotiable. It's not acceptable to have downtime while the Apple store services my machine because the hard drive died, and I need a few slots to install my own GPUs.

Even if you have something like pro care, it can take a long time to get a machine back from Apple. It's hit and miss with them. I agree with a mac pro if you have your boot drive backed up, you can just swap in the backup version and be up and running in a few minutes. With graphics cards you can have a new one shipped overnight. If it's a display problem, "some" of the professional display manufacturers offer superior turnaround times and many people use more than one display anyway so they can just send out the one that needs warranty servicing (if you aren't buying a display from Apple a normal warranty is anywhere from 3-5 years ). So yeah it is a much higher potential compromise on downtime due to tightly packed components and more potential failures that would require the machine to go in for servicing rather than a diy solution.

The "no slots filled" versions actually creates a larger market for 3rd party Video card vendors to sell into. Rather than just the "my card is too old" or "need 3-6 monitors " crowd. One reason there are not more 3rd party options is again there are not enough customers buying.

It won't make gamers buy mac pros when they're better served by PCs. For cad/3d content creation you're a bit limited on OSX in several ways. There aren't decent quadro or even firepro options. Whenever nvidia has released a quadro on OSX it's had major driver complaints. 3ds max still owns a portion of that market and that will never run on OSX. CAD programs are still a bit limited on OSX. Anyway the only people who would pay for these are the video editors who buy a simple upgrade now. These manufacturers aren't going to bother with the custom drivers for a very small increase in numbers.

I think the market for a compact i7 desktop is an even smaller margin for sales than the current Pro so why would Apple create it?

Probably the best case scenario there would be seeing such a mac in corporate environments that make bulk purchases. If they owned such a market, these kinds of sales could float the machine. I doubt we will ever see this happen.

This is as systemic problem for the Mac Pro. Rumor of cancelling generates some 2000 posts. Sales go up zero.

You know as well as I do that the extended hardware refreshes especially at the $2500-3500 range (the westmere 8 core was a bleh upgrade from the previous one) does a lot to stifle sales. Intel realized they were holding things up, and the w3680 now sells for $600. The price of that machine hasn't budged. The other parts haven't seen a mid cycle refresh or anything that shows a continued support for the product line. They could run the line as is until intel will no longer supply them with parts, but the interest in paying for it would still decrease over time.

 

[DisMyMac]

I still believe the largest threat to the Pro is Apple's paranoia about image... "focus" they call it.

 

[G4er?]

I think the market for a compact i7 desktop is an even smaller margin for sales than the current Pro so why would Apple create it?

Well I happen to be one that is looking for a Mac just like that compact i7 desktop. I will not spend money for a castrated mini or an iMac. I could get a Mac Pro but that is really overkill for my needs.

 

[vitzr]

Killing the Mac Pro would set loose such a wave of contempt that Apple cannot afford. On the contrary, in the post-Steve era we could even see a revival of the pro segment.

You're right. Only Steve could piss off legions of customers with no push back or accountability. He could get away with anything he wanted. Zero consequences but instead heaps of praise from the worshipers.

Tom Cook, thankfully is not a narcissistic self absorbed, arrogant man.

He's much more likely to take a smart, measured approach, and do the right thing.

What a great relief

 

[initialsBB]

He's much more likely to take a smart, measured approach, and do the right thing.

Like looking at the sales number and killing it you mean ?