There isn't a lot to max out with an iMac.
Max it out to 16Gb RAM? Haha.
Max it out with a second hard drive?
The iMac is maxed out right of the box - and like with a credit card this is not good.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Want to save the Mac Pro? Send Apple your feedback!
- Thread starter Demigod Mac
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
There isn't a lot to max out with an iMac.
Max it out to 16Gb RAM? Haha.
Max it out with a second hard drive?
The iMac is maxed out right of the box - and like with a credit card this is not good.
This guy gets it.
You don't have to love Apple's decision, if this is indeed the case, to realize that it might be a fine decision for them. It would suck for some Pro customers, and I hope Apple doesn't do that, but Apple isn't a sentimental company.
Those of us that still find uses and needs for optical media are told by people like you that we should use thumb dirves instead. So now when we say that usb ports should be located for ease of use you tell us we shouldn't use them either. Now we are supposed to go wireless.
I'd like to try to tell my general contractors that specify close out documents on removable media that I'm only going to send them the files by email. I bet I'll get lots of work.
And if there is a reason they hide all the crap behind the computer then why does the Mac Pro have them on the front? Because up until now someone at Apple has had the guts to say that it makes sense and it makes it easier to use.
This is grossly flawed FUD.
Apple is interested in professionals. They are not interested in perpetuating the status quo. There is a huge difference between those two. Professions that grow (in membership and outlook) and adapt to change are where Apple targets their efforts. Professions fixated on legacy software and high sunk cost, legacy equipment with extremely high barriers to entry are not. One of Apple's core missions has always been to make computing more accessible. Not kowtow to the current status quo form of computing.
It is the same disconnect Apple has with highly risk adverse, rigidly regimented IT shops where the "process" is more important than the service.
If the unit number sales of the Mac Pro were growing. Apple would sell them. The most productive feedback that could be sent to Apple is what future features you need to increasing your spending on Mac Pros (something more informative than "cheaper: Apple make less so I can make more" That's not a win-win insight). Or what essential features need to add to iMac to swtich ( mattee screen , etc. )
These feedbacks that don't outline some sort of change (improvement, refinement , etc) don't really tell Apple much more than they already know. They know how many Mac Pros they have sold. Frankly, the "I bought it and it works extremely well... may not buy another for long time" letters aren't going to help in any internal debate about slumping sales figures. What is missing is "if we add these unique features " then the value proposition will go up and can support more sales at current prices.
If it really boils down to folks put the highest premium on is solely encoded in the core Intel chipsets ( cores and I/O lanes) then Mac Pro is toast. There is little value add Apple can make and they will move onto another product where they can put higher value add on. If the contest is who can wrap the most affordable box around the commodity chipset they are going to leave at some point.
Last edited:
If Apple removed the Mac Pro from the lineup, I will poop in mine and ship it back to them. That'll show them.
In that event, would they even deserve free fertilizer to speed around their new circular building? Plus, you'd have to pay shipping.
if people want to save the Mac Pro they need to start buying it, It might be out of reach for some people but if you don't buy the Mac Pro it's going bye bye but let's hope that it's just a rumor going around, if this is true rumor you guys might want to buy one before it get the axe
problem is they make them too good. My 2006 is still running strong. We don't buy them every year like people with i-phones
^^Yes, they last but in business you get new ones every 2-3 years depending on warranty expirations. I probably give them 20-30 Pro sales a year rotationally. Used to give Apple Xserve sales too, oh well.
People don't have to buy them every year but running contests to see who can use one the longest 6 , 7 , 9 , or 10 years helps kill off the platform.
If there is a user base of 500,000 Mac pros then if the average upgrade window is :
yrs ------- upgrades per year
5 -------- 100
6 -------- ~83K
7 -------- ~71K
9 -------- ~55K
10 -------- 50K
Apple is selling around 13M Macs per year these days. 80K would put the Mac Pro in the sub 1% range. If the other macs average 4 years and the Mac Pro averages 6 it will fall behind. If it is 3 and 7 respectively it will fall behind faster. The iPhone, iPad, and iPod rates are immaterial.
Because Apple doesn't require ongoing hardware maintenance agreements/payments, after the 3 years of AppleCare are up your basically a "non customer". If you are not buying and contracts have all expired then you are not doing business with Apple. The "oh Apple I might buy something from you someday" line looses leverage over time.
That's why feedback about what would make your buying cycle shorter (not necessarily shortest) is important.
If Intel is on its "normal" tick-tock schedule then in 5 years the CPU architecture would have been revised at least twice and shrunk 3 times. That new machine is more than significantly faster than the Mac Pro squatting on.
It is not whether the machine as fallen apart into a pile of rubble on the floor. It is built "sturdy" so that it won't fail during the useful lifetime. It should be whether can generate significantly more income with a new box (e.g., workload has increased (in quantity or difficulty) so need bigger box, possible new components do the same. ), not the power supply is flickering every other day and the replacement parts are scarce.
Very interesting point-of-view. IMHO it simply makes no sense.
A company can't be everything to everybody and it's the sign of great management just to so "no". And "no's" are much more difficult than "yes".
Having evolved into the consumer market in such a big way with iTunes and iPod puts resources and return-on-investment for the professional market at risk. Having a better iMac with a matte screen is not the answer.
My personal opinion (for what's is is worth) - we will see a refresh to the Mac Pro. Too many in Hollywood still use this platform for movie post production work and that culture fits nicely with the Apple.
But laser focus and ability to say "no" is the hallmark of great companies that don't fall into the trap of incremental boring product enhancements and ultimately market share reduction. Samples are everywhere including the auto industry that attempted to be everything to everybody and we know what happened.
Send them feedback !!!! DO IT !!!
I've sent them feedback every other day since the disturbing news came out.
I also took the liberty of copy / pasting choice excerpts from Diglloyd's article, particularly the part that says the decision to kill the Mac Pro would be a "strategic blunder" on their part.
I also mentioned in the feedback that, should they follow through with the colossal blunder of killing the Mac Pro, the Hackint0sh community would increase exponentially.
I've sent them feedback every other day since the disturbing news came out.
I also took the liberty of copy / pasting choice excerpts from Diglloyd's article, particularly the part that says the decision to kill the Mac Pro would be a "strategic blunder" on their part.
I also mentioned in the feedback that, should they follow through with the colossal blunder of killing the Mac Pro, the Hackint0sh community would increase exponentially.
This is a bad strategy. My understanding is that the product managers are suppose to read the feedback mail. All of it get read by someone.
Yelping about the same thing every day will only loose its impact over time. Think carefully, look for some win-win (for both sides... not "apple you have to save my business") feedback and send it in.
If we just spam their inbox enough they'll give me what I want is flawed. What you are doing is taking time away from that person's day to deal with real issues and real problems.
[quote
I also took the liberty of copy / pasting choice excerpts from Diglloyd's
[/quote]
1. Digiloyd isn't an Apple executive. If the execs want to kill the Mac Pro you better have some convincing evidence.
2. Digilloyd "analysis" is largely some narcissistic rambling. "If don't treat the highest priced customers ( who aren't buying product at rates comparable to all of your other Mac customers) right then your company is going to collapse". Seriously? One of the fundamental problems here is that these people are NOT buying Mac Pros in sufficient numbers. If don't bow and scrape for the folks not buying Macs, your business is going to collapse. Sure.... highly creditable.
All of this "we creative people matter more than your other paying Mac customers" stuff is just self centered cruft.
The root cause core problem here is not enough people are buying Mac Pros. Don't answer the question of how to grow the user base (no cannablizing the iMacs isn't the answer. It is grow the *whole* Mac user base. ) and will likely loose all the internal debates as to whether to continue or not.
There is a vast array of computers that Apple doesn't build. 1U boxes. (note how Mac sales expanded after discontinued the XServe). The don't build big box servers. They don't build $400 netbooks. They don't build $700 mid-towers. They don't make 17" iMacs. The don't even make a 13" Macbook anymore. There are far more types computers that Apple does not make than they do.
So the argument that they should make the Mac Pro because it is "different from the other Macs" is pretty weak. All of those other computers not being made have equally as long list of "different from those other ones". That the Mac Pro is different I'm sure is pretty obvious to the folks at Apple. There are a relatively fixed set of resources at Apple to make Macs. At issue is why those resources should not be assigned to some other "different" Mac.
Yeah is going to help *cough*. "I'm gong to violate your terms of agreement and/or steal your IP if you don't do what I say" . That's really going to change their minds.
Part of this group of folks are already are cooking up Hackintoshes ( as part of the drop off). Most folks will simply switch over to Windows. Windows already has 60-70+% of the workstation market. It is not like Apple is walking away from some 50-70% market share of overall workstation market. If the Mac Pro is flat or negative growth the workstation market share is shrinking.
Anyone who thinks a Hackintosh is a viable solution never really was a customer targeted by Apple. There may be lots of people who mistakely bought a Mac, but Apple is highly unlikely to change their approach to chase after folks they really didn't target in the first place. Especially, if those folks are not buying the product at a high rate.
Hackintosh is largely composed of
1. tinkers who just want to hack something.
2. folks who want the cheapest box they can wrap around a CPU and GPU card.
Neither one of those is good match to Apples approach to giving people systems (hw + sw combinations) that work.
Glossy shinebox < Hardware calibrated MATTE screen.
4x 1TB HDs running in RAID
Easily swappable drives
Upgradable GPUs (Which I've already done thank you very much)
Etc, etc etc.
My cats pee on everything I have under the desk.
Therefore, I have my Mac Pro and all devices connected to it, - via all of the USB and FireWire ports, - on top of my desk.
So I would say that my Mac Pro is a real desktop, with cool and quiet operation.
As a good all-round display, I use the original 27" screen from Apple.
This one is also cool and nice, and totally without yellow color tint, brown spots or any kind of gray band.
Anyway, - I have sent feedback to Apple, so now I expect that we will keep the Mac Pro.