Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
3) Apple has recently enacted on a plan to screw customers with macs older then 3 or 4 years old. My 1 year old mac pro, again a $4000 mac, did not support open CL in Snow Leopard. The only graphic cards I can get to support open CL, cost over $400 a piece, and I cant run 8 displays with them. (I bought the mac pro with the intent to one day run 8 displays) I mean come on! I decided to wing it with the Gt120, and it gives me mouse errors ALL THE TIME. * mouse jump

ATI writes the 2600 drivers. Apple has nothing to do with them not supporting OpenCL. That's completely ATI's issue. That's assuming ATI made the hardware OpenCL compatible. Regardless, it's not Apple's issue.

You run eight 30" displays and you're using iMovie? WTF?

Edit: Also, I have a 2008 and a 2009 Mac Pro each with a 120 GT and they have no issues.
 
As someone who bought a 2008 Mac Pro almost 1 year and 10 months ago, I'm actually very happy with the way it stacks up against Apple's newest, more expensive machines.

Apple's always been overpriced for video cards, RAM, hard drives as far back as I can remember. I don't see why you think they've somehow lost their roots. When in Apple's history did they ever offer upgrades at reasonable prices? Nothing new here.
 
For those confused about why the 2xxx and 3xxx ATI cards don't support OpenCL, its a hardware issue. The GPUs simply do not support it.
 
He made ill-informed upgrading decisions and is not using the software his computer's designed for. It's his problem.
 
As someone who bought a 2008 Mac Pro almost 1 year and 10 months ago, I'm actually very happy with the way it stacks up against Apple's newest, more expensive machines.

Apple's always been overpriced for video cards, RAM, hard drives as far back as I can remember. I don't see why you think they've somehow lost their roots. When in Apple's history did they ever offer upgrades at reasonable prices? Nothing new here.

Well, the current Apple computers are a bargain compared to what they used to cost. Not too long ago I remember we paid over $10,000 for an Apple computer with less upgrade opportunities and more hassle than we do now ;)

The Mac Pro is serious business, although many hobbyist are buying them.

We bought both the 2006 and 2008 Mac Pro at work and the 2006 models are still going strong for our line of work. The PowerMac G5 though, let's just say they haven't aged with grace.

At home I also have an 2008 Mac Pro which still is a great machine.
 
1) Third party adapters are available.

2) That's not normal for most users. Sounds like something is messed up on your end.

3) Releasing new technology doesn't screw any existing customers.

If you bought bottom of the line graphics card with a high end machine, that's your own problem.

4) Nope, you can keep using the same version.

If you want new features, then get new version. New software versions comes with new features!? Stop the press.
 
I'm not a long time veteran in the Mac computer, but what I've seen in the past two years since I started using a Mac has been anything but impressive. It sure does not meet the lore of its former self.

The joys you long time Mac users enjoyed were before iPods, iPhones iTunes Music Store and a plethora of other ventures they've engaged in. This all takes man power and triaging of resources. One would be surprised at how much effort is needed to make the iPhone/ITMS work in harmony. Like with software, the bigger it gets, the harder it is to keep it lean and efficient. Apple has a lot to contend with these days so missteps in the form of sacrifices are are bound to happen.
 
People have the wrong expectations if they don't recognize the change in the marketing approach that hit the Mac Pro with Nehalem and SL.

Mac Pro is a product segment which went from cash cow to cash out. Apple will squeeze as much bucks out of it for the least bit of development and it looks pretty good for them to be successful with that strategy.

They do not need to make any serious development effort to run Gulftowns in the existing logic boards. So it is a bit of microcode which they will obviously deny to 2009 users. The over pricing will continue to reduce the numbers of sales but keep the margins up.

When they are faced with a decision to kick off a new development for Sandy Bridge to launch in 2011 they will simply add up the cost for that development against the diminishing return. If it looks unfavourable they may pull the plug on Mac Pro in mid 2010. If it looks tolerable we may get one more tick/tock out of the Mac Pro. I would not bet the farm on it.
I'm not sure on the date of when it would happen, but it does seem like this is the direction it's going.

...you have to understand who really uses the Mac Pro. Professional people in many segments of audio and visual fields use these machines for their brute force and good value. Yes, good value on the high-end.
I understand your point, but what you might want to keep in mind, this group comprises a very small market compared to the other lines Apple makes. So the overall profits are tiny in comparison (the portable market for example).

So to keep the profits on par, the margins have to be increased, thereby increasing the MSRP of the systems. Otherwise, when it's figured into the overall margin of the company, it appears to decrease, even though the segment was profitable, and added to the total profit margin of all products. It looks bad on paper as I understand it (i.e. to stock holders).

Eventually, the "value" will disappear, even for the professional market. It's already there for students (seemingly the biggest portion of "hobbyists" you mention, but has a bearing on future sales & the education market Apple's claimed to value so often), and even for small production houses/independent professionals. If it's not there for the latter, it soon will be, and the large houses will eventually follow, as there's even fewer systems sold (increased R&D per unit + profit margin gets added to figure the MSRP). It still has to balance out to be profitable for any user, no matter how big.

There's still plenty of profit in the Mac Pro and there will be for some time. We're fine
For now. But it doesn't appear this will continue to be the case as the market continues to shrink, as the increased prices are running off current users. Fewer people to spread the costs over, as there will be fewer units sold.

It comes down to economy of scale going in reverse.

Yes, people who bought the 2006 Mac Pro got burned a little. The 2009 Mac Pro is expensive. It happens. The rest of us are doing fine, if disappointed with the pace of software upgrades. But software development always falls behind the pace of hardware development.[/QUOTE]
Keep in mind, if Apple's willing to do that to a 3y/o machine, what makes you think they won't do it again?

I wouldn't take it as an anomaly/outlier case. Their profits are based on system sales, so they have to push them on the current line. Even if it means forcing incompatibilities/lack of upgrades to do it.

As someone who bought a 2008 Mac Pro almost 1 year and 10 months ago, I'm actually very happy with the way it stacks up against Apple's newest, more expensive machines.
The '08's are the best band-for-the-money Apple has released, given the current direction (both pricing and upgradeability; no adapters needed for hardware RAID, and the firmware is 64 bit).

Yes, Apple's always been high for things like memory, drives,... But that's a little different than the MDP used in the current graphics cards. Now if a second monitor is needed (same card), you have to get the adapter to do it. It's a little different, as buying the memory,... was a convenience in BTO systems. The adapter is a necessity for those wanting to run a second monitor on the Apple supplied cards.

Well, the current Apple computers are a bargain compared to what they used to cost. Not too long ago I remember we paid over $10,000 for an Apple computer with less upgrade opportunities and more hassle than we do now ;)
The '06 - 08's certainly were. But the '09's and on, not so much. I can't help but look at the current trend, and seeing them get back to $10kUSD again in the near future. Yes, Intel's high end parts are getting more expensive, but the systems are loosing their value due to the increased margins.

It can't sustain that for long. Either the prices will have to come back down, or the line cut. Given the fact it's a shrinking market, the latter seems more probable.

We bought both the 2006 Mac Pro at work and the 2006 models are still going strong for our line of work.
Perhaps not for much longer though. They're already becoming difficult for future graphics cards, and soon will be once OS X gets to Kernel 64 only. Granted, for a corporation, that's easier to figure in. Not so much for small/independents.

The joys you long time Mac users enjoyed were before iPods, iPhones iTunes Music Store and a plethora of other ventures they've engaged in. This all takes man power and triaging of resources. One would be surprised at how much effort is needed to make the iPhone/ITMS work in harmony. Like with software, the bigger it gets, the harder it is to keep it lean and efficient. Apple has a lot to contend with these days so missteps in the form of sacrifices are are bound to happen.
Very true. But it also has to do with the lack of resources, such as not hiring the extra people needed to help with the growth.

Eventually, such compromises are made, and the overall product quality will suffer. It really is that simple. :(
 
I don't know about the 2009 Mac Pro, but Mac Pro sales did hit an uptick in 2008 (arguably due to pent-up demand from a lack of updates, but still).

The video card thing is an issue, I'd agree. On the other hand, only recently has the software become available to make it an issue.

I also don't think  intends to give up performance computing completely, which the recent Mac Pros, though expensive, do fairly well at.

It's a safe place for them to market test newer technologies as well - such as MDP - and see how they catch on.

With regards to MDP, all evidence is that it is, in fact, catching on, as shown with the Radeon 5870 Eyefinity edition. And I think that graphics card will prompt more MDP monitors; Displayport itself has caught on slowly and is now routinely available on newer monitors.

I see all the concerns, but I don't think it's a done deal. We'll all know in a few years, though. Far too soon to exclaim that the sky is falling.
 
This is a whine thread. Started by a usual suspect, I might add. This issue has been discussed to death. There's still plenty of profit in the Mac Pro and there will be for some time. We're fine. Just because your 3 year old machine isn't the cat's meow doesn't mean it's going nowhere.

I don't think serious graphic, photo, or A/V professionals are having trouble with their Mac Pros. I'm not.

Lots of people who use this machine use it at work, too. Don't forget that a lot of the people buying it are companies, not individuals.

Yes, people who bought the 2006 Mac Pro got burned a little. The 2009 Mac Pro is expensive. It happens. The rest of us are doing fine, if disappointed with the pace of software upgrades. But software development always falls behind the pace of hardware development.


Im a professional video editor... and Im having graphic problems with my mac pro using final cut.
 
Eventually, the "value" will disappear, even for the professional market. It's already there for students (seemingly the biggest portion of "hobbyists" you mention, but has a bearing on future sales & the education market Apple's claimed to value so often), and even for small production houses/independent professionals. If it's not there for the latter, it soon will be, and the large houses will eventually follow, as there's even fewer systems sold (increased R&D per unit + profit margin gets added to figure the MSRP). It still has to balance out to be profitable for any user, no matter how big.

I believe that the initial value of the Mac Pro wen't flying out the window when the chip/system price ratio skyrocketed in the 2009 model. If you look at it compared to the 2006 Mac Pro, the MSRP they are trying to charge today is disgusting.
It's true that they are still valued for their upgradability, but Apple has shown that they would much rather you buy a new machine after two years (obviously) than support the old one. If the current trend continues, I think professionals in all fields will have no problem finding alternatives for Final Cut and Logic.
 
ATI writes the 2600 drivers. Apple has nothing to do with them not supporting OpenCL. That's completely ATI's issue. That's assuming ATI made the hardware OpenCL compatible. Regardless, it's not Apple's issue.

You run eight 30" displays and you're using iMovie? WTF?

Edit: Also, I have a 2008 and a 2009 Mac Pro each with a 120 GT and they have no issues.

No, I used iMovie to import footage from my camera before Final Cut supported it. I have the 2008 mac pro 120GT and I have nothing but problems with these new cards.
 
Apple haven't had trouble with profitability for a long time. They've just followed suit of getting bigger and crappier as time goes on. It's a shame, but I suppose not entirely surprising :rolleyes: :(

So what did you expect? That because Apple don't have had problems with profitability in a long time, the board just says "Aaarh okay, we have earned enough money now, lets do something that don't make money, to joy the consumers and then to hell with the stockholders" - I would like to see how long the board, thats makes such a decision, keeps their job!
Or what about stockholders that purchased their stock 2 months ago? They expect to make money of their stock and that can only happen if Apple makes (more) money!

A lot of people here on MR tends to only see it from the consumers point of view! Hell, as a consumer I would love to see new design with all new technology but from a stockholders point of view, then if old technology = more money then old technology it is!
 
I don't know about the 2009 Mac Pro, but Mac Pro sales did hit an uptick in 2008 (arguably due to pent-up demand from a lack of updates, but still).
I think you're right with the updates triggering an upswing in the '08's, but they were also a good value. It was obvious when you looked at the cost of DIY'ing a system or even from other vendors (including the "real" pricing recieved over the phone IIRC). The web pricing is always high from places like Dell, and many have learned that the phone call is worth it. ;) :p

The video card thing is an issue, I'd agree. On the other hand, only recently has the software become available to make it an issue.
The restrictions to choice has been an issue for a long time.

But I agree the GPGPU issues are recent, and further complicated by some of the details in the hardware (i.e. double precision FPU), and who actually released the cards (Apple, or independently by another vendor).

I also don't think  intends to give up performance computing completely, which the recent Mac Pros, though expensive, do fairly well at.
Not yet. But the value is disappearing due to the new pricing schedule. In the end, no matter how good the system is, the cost will win out on whether or not a person/company will continue to purchase new systems.

Software binding will help keep users locked, as the cost of switching is likely more expensive than the machine. But if the software falls in quality (or takes a big price hike), it will be the "straw that broke the Camel's back" as it were. This will be a major factor, especially for larger orginizations, as they don't buy single licenses.

It's a safe place for them to market test newer technologies as well - such as MDP - and see how they catch on.
Definitely. :D

Unfortunately, that's been slipping in the computer industry overall, as the technologies aren't developed the same way as before. For example, the "Super Computer" has slipped drastically. Take a look at Silicon Graphics for example. They've stopped developing their own RISC based systems now, and are Intel based. No innovation there. And they're not the only ones (or only industry for that matter). Simply put, the financial resources just aren't there anymore, and developers are trying to milk their existing designs longer. It slows new technology, and it's happening in both hardware and software. Complexity is part of it too.

With regards to MDP, all evidence is that it is, in fact, catching on, as shown with the Radeon 5870 Eyefinity edition. And I think that graphics card will prompt more MDP monitors; Displayport itself has caught on slowly and is now routinely available on newer monitors.
I'd wait to see that other vendors pick up on it first (MDP). One product is too early to tell, and with desktop/professional systems, it's not needed for critical space constraints (unlike portable/laptop systems).

As you say, the DP has been slow to catch on, and everyone seems to be waiting on someone else to lead (card vs. monitor). It reminds me of the Chicken and the Egg bit. :D But in terms of practicality for desktop systems, the DP makes more sense, as there's already greater support, and they don't suffer the PCB real estate issues that laptops do if it's a good board design (it's a concern, but not as critical as laptops). More can be done with fewer parts now, and DP uses fewer traces than DVI (20pin vs. 29 pin <max = DVI-A>, not including shield). And it is a smaller connector (could allow for addtional features, such as 2x DP + HDMI for example).

I see all the concerns, but I don't think it's a done deal. We'll all know in a few years, though. Far too soon to exclaim that the sky is falling.
Maybe, but the more recent trends aren't boding well. As you say, ultimately, we'll have to wait and see. ;)

But I'm not holding my breath for a miracle either. :eek: :p
 
The '06 - 08's certainly were. But the '09's and on, not so much. I can't help but look at the current trend, and seeing them get back to $10kUSD again in the near future. Yes, Intel's high end parts are getting more expensive, but the systems are loosing their value due to the increased margins.

It can't sustain that for long. Either the prices will have to come back down, or the line cut. Given the fact it's a shrinking market, the latter seems more probable.

Can't say I fully agree. Just try and configure an 8-core Xeon computer from Dell (or other PC equivalent) and the Apple Mac Pro is still an excellent value.

The real problem though is the margins Intel is getting used to get on their high-end Xeon parts.
 
I believe that the initial value of the Mac Pro wen't flying out the window when the chip/system price ratio skyrocketed in the 2009 model. If you look at it compared to the 2006 Mac Pro, the MSRP they are trying to charge today is disgusting.
It's true that they are still valued for their upgradability, but Apple has shown that they would much rather you buy a new machine after two years (obviously) than support the old one. If the current trend continues, I think professionals in all fields will have no problem finding alternatives for Final Cut and Logic.
The value issue seems to be well known. My point earlier is that as the prices increase, users will be more inclined to look elsewhere for systems (if they can justify the software costs associated to switching back to the PC side). Unless they're willing to hack. That has it's own issues, but is technically possible. Even for larger design houses, so long as their IT staff is up to the task (despite their grumblings over it :p).

And then there's the possibility that the FCP and Logic will get buggy, and drive users away. That would be the end of Apple's aura over the graphics industry.

In the end, the financial side of the equation must balance out with any benefits with remaining with OS X/Apple systems.
 
The value issue seems to be well known. My point earlier is that as the prices increase, users will be more inclined to look elsewhere for systems (if they can justify the software costs associated to switching back to the PC side). Unless they're willing to hack. That has it's own issues, but is technically possible. Even for larger design houses, so long as their IT staff is up to the task (despite their grumblings over it :p).

And then there's the possibility that the FCP and Logic will get buggy, and drive users away. That would be the end of Apple's aura over the graphics industry.

In the end, the financial side of the equation must balance out with any benefits with remaining with OS X/Apple systems.

In a world where Apple thinks it is ok to eliminate half of the RAM slots, double the price of the computer (essentially), and not support relatively new hardware, I don't think it is a stretch to think that many firms will be abandoning the Mac Pro in coming years.
 
This may be a classic example Maslow's hierarchy of needs at work.

I can't argue that some of the complaints aired here and elsewhere in this forum are warranted, but you just have to think back to the last time you used a PC to feel much better about it! :eek: ;)

BTW, OP, if you download some of the latest software that Apple wants you to, you may find it resolves some of your problems. :p

In the end, though, there is no denying that Apple is a consumer products company now... they even removed the "Computer" from their name "Apple Computer" some time ago as a bold statement in this direction.
 
This may be a classic example Maslow's hierarchy of needs at work.

I can't argue that some of the complaints aired here and elsewhere in this forum are warranted, but you just have to think back to the last time you used a PC to feel much better about it! :eek: ;)

BTW, OP, if you download some of the latest software that Apple wants you to, you may find it resolves some of your problems. :p

In the end, though, there is no denying that Apple is a consumer products company now... they even removed the "Computer" from their name "Apple Computer" some time ago as a bold statement in this direction.

I downloaded every update and even bought snow leopard(the family pack, because I support apple's development and $20 extra bucks cant hurt). My mac pro has been a nightmare. I admit, its fast, its really really really fast. (last night it exported 30 minutes of HD video in 3 minutes) But its problems out way its rewards. And it is no one's fault but apples. If they advertised it as a gaming machine or a high-powered consumer machine, I would not have a problem with it. But because they market it as a high-end work station, it should run like a high-end work station. I didn't over pay on every part for it because it has an apple logo, I over payed for every part because I thought it was going towards developing the product, which it clearly is not.
 
Can't say I fully agree. Just try and configure an 8-core Xeon computer from Dell (or other PC equivalent) and the Apple Mac Pro is still an excellent value.

The real problem though is the margins Intel is getting used to get on their high-end Xeon parts.
Actually, you can't pin this on Intel. :eek: It's on Apple. ;)

For example, the the E5462 used in the '08's was in either the base Quad or base Octad systems ($958 per at release IIRC, and currently for $792 last I looked in quantity of 1k units). They went for more than the base parts used in the '09's, and still do. Even a single E5462 is more expensive than the pair of E5520's used in the base '09 Octad at it's current quantity pricing! :eek: :D

So take Intel out of your cross-hairs on this one. :p

In a world where Apple thinks it is ok to eliminate half of the RAM slots, double the price of the computer (essentially), and not support relatively new hardware, I don't think it is a stretch to think that many firms will be abandoning the Mac Pro in coming years.
It will come down to other considerations as well though, namely their software investment. It's easier for an individual to do so compared to a corporation, as it's a single license vs. many. It makes a difference. ;)

That said, it doesn't mean they won't run the numbers and think about their future expenditures, and do it if it works out numerically (also includes training to new applications,...).

In the end, though, there is no denying that Apple is a consumer products company now... they even removed the "Computer" from their name "Apple Computer" some time ago as a bold statement in this direction.
Exactly. If that's not a massive hint, I don't know what is. :p
 
Im a professional video editor... and Im having graphic problems with my mac pro using final cut.

You have never given me the impression that you were a professional video editor.

Or a particularly adept Mac user. We have several of both on this forum, and you have never once seemed like one. This causes me to label your thread as something of a whine forum.

Other people are not experiencing the same issues you are, so your problems are anecdotal at best. If you were saying something along the lines of, "Qmaster is buggy and not well-supported," we'd agree. But your problems aren't things the rest of us have witnessed.

Compared with say, nanofrog's more nuanced criticism and explanation, we can't put very much stock in your words.

FYI, it helps if you sound coherent, well informed, or at least type better English.
 
I downloaded every update and even bought snow leopard(the family pack, because I support apple's development and $20 extra bucks cant hurt). My mac pro has been a nightmare. I admit, its fast, its really really really fast. (last night it exported 30 minutes of HD video in 3 minutes) But its problems out way its rewards. And it is no one's fault but apples. If they advertised it as a gaming machine or a high-powered consumer machine, I would not have a problem with it. But because they market it as a high-end work station, it should run like a high-end work station. I didn't over pay on every part for it because it has an apple logo, I over payed for every part because I thought it was going towards developing the product, which it clearly is not.

I realize I was being a smart-ass with my remark about downloading updates... hence the :p

I dunno what to say, there are plenty of examples of people using their Mac Pro's without issue. Sure, not everything works like a dream, but most things actually do for me.
 
Compared with say, nanofrog's more nuanced criticism and explanation, we can't put very much stock in your words.
Nuanced? :eek: Crap. I thought it was blatant. :D :p :p

Seriously though, it all comes down to an educated guess at best (vs. just mad at something and ranting without any sense of reason/support). I look at a trend and see one thing, you may see something else. But hopefully, I've done a decent enough job to try and explain it without it being too long, circular, meandering direction, or complicated. ;)
 
My Macintosh IIfx in 1989 was like $13,000. It was shot from a trebuchet catapult. The fat mac before it was like $5,000, became a fishtank. So many more that were ridiculously priced. All had issues. All computers do. Especially if the user isn't adept at problem solving.

Crying on a public forum won't help.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.