Why do so many here *discourage* others from buying a Mac Pro?

[noushy]

MacPro Users

I think what we really should be looking at is who really buys this machine and what are they doing with it.

The first group is truly professionals, video editors, audio editors, software developers, and scientists/engineers who need massive computational power in a desktop computer.

The second group is enthusiasts who either love owning computers, multitask with more than one operating system, may have multiple monitors (which many of you do), or who just love having the best, most reliable, and easiest to use desktop under 10k.

The third group is probably people who either work in a field where these computers are used, and receive one through work, or who like having an upgradeable tower, and feel the consumer level machines do not make the grade.

The smallest group is people who just want bragging rights, and will spend the money either way. This group could not support the MacPro by themselves, but depend on everyone else to drive the volume of sales to profitable. These are the same people who buy up all the latest computer hardware after just purchasing the latest and greatest 6 months ago. (I am a hybrid that falls into all of the above).

Besides I love Apple, ever since owning my first Apple II+ back in 1981. I will always have at least one desktop Mac, and a high powered Mac Notebook. So what, if it makes you happy, you can afford it, and truly recycle your older machines go for it. I tend to sell or give my older machines to close friends and family, and typically have an upgrade path planned out.

Peace,
Noushy

 

[SLR2009]

I think what we really should be looking at is who really buys this machine and what are they doing with it.

The first group is truly professionals, video editors, audio editors, software developers, and scientists/engineers who need massive computational power in a desktop computer.

The second group is enthusiasts who either love owning computers, multitask with more than one operating system, may have multiple monitors (which many of you do), or who just love having the best, most reliable, and easiest to use desktop under 10k.

The third group is probably people who either work in a field where these computers are used, and receive one through work, or who like having an upgradeable tower, and feel the consumer level machines do not make the grade.

The smallest group is people who just want bragging rights, and will spend the money either way. This group could not support the MacPro by themselves, but depend on everyone else to drive the volume of sales to profitable. These are the same people who buy up all the latest computer hardware after just purchasing the latest and greatest 6 months ago. (I am a hybrid that falls into all of the above).

Besides I love Apple, ever since owning my first Apple II+ back in 1981. I will always have at least one desktop Mac, and a high powered Mac Notebook. So what, if it makes you happy, you can afford it, and truly recycle your older machines go for it. I tend to sell or give my older machines to close friends and family, and typically have an upgrade path planned out.

Peace,
Noushy

Agreed! I would be in the second group. Mabey a bit in the 3rd as well.

 

[jmpage2]

Yes, there's a technology gap, but that doesn't mean that its a market gap too. Yes, there is a difference.



Considering that 70% (and growing) of the Macs sold by Apple are currently laptops, this only leaves 30% for the desktop market.

The bottom line is that even if we as enthusiasts prefer conventional desktops, the conventional desktop market is nevertheless dying.

And FWIW, the PC market isn't too far behind the Mac: sales of laptops there just broke the magical 50% number.

Well, that 50% desktop slice that's shrinking is still an enormous market to tap, one worth billions of dollars. Certainly I agree with you that where Apple has really shone and taken market share is in the portables area, between the iphone and MBP they are doing quite well in this space.

It still leaves a multi billion dollar desktop market for those who require more computing power than a laptop and/or have multiple machines.

If Apple decides they don't want this market it would at least be nice to see them offer some kind of bare bones system that one could use to fit the niche, even if it was only orderable as a BTO type of arrangement.

 

[DeepCobalt]

For the original poster, I had the same question and I think it ultimately comes down to two things.

1st reason - you've stated it, penis envy basically.

2nd reason - I think what a lot of folks here are afraid of (me included, no doubt) is a massive change in demographic for the mac pro. If you skew the demographic to far towards "people that will never utilize the mac pro for it's intended purposes (i.e. using it for "consumer" needs like email and word processing, vs. using it for "pro" needs like broadcast design or as a video editing solution),then the poduct line will skew towards that demographic as well, which will lead to 'pros' getting shafted. Therefore, members will discourage the practice of buying a mac pro for less than intended usage cases, simply to 'keep the gene pool pure' in Apple's line of pro machines.

There's no need to worry for Reason 2. All indicators (Gartner Group and several others) are showing that the average consumer buys a laptop and far prefers it to any sort of desktop: reasons being portability, no cables, easy to set up, you don't actually need a desk, etc. The only people buying the desktop format are (1) real power users, (2) gamers, (3) Mac enthusiasts, and in the 3rd World (4) a cheaper option (this is going away though, as laptops are getting cheaper and cheaper).

 

[SnakeOiler]

Well, that 50% desktop slice that's shrinking is still an enormous market to tap, one worth billions of dollars.

I think demand for the desktop computers may have shrunk but I believe the desktop market is still expected to increase, just at a slower rate.

 

[kabunaru]

I've noticed so many people on this forum criticize others for buying a Mac Pro... somehow challenging their need for power, etc. or not making "adequate" use of the CPUs.

I have news for you--the market for all desktop computers, across all brands is shrinking every year!!! If there are fewer and fewer buyers of the Mac Pro, it will (a) disappear from Apple's lineup completely, and/or (b) get increasingly expensive (like the new upgrades have shown).

Developing/offering the Mac Pro ain't cheap! If the economies of scale aren't there, it will become ever more costly until it disappears completely.

MORAL: ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO BUY ONE!!! So what if they're just fans of the product and won't use all of it. As someone mentioned before, professional drivers aren't the only ones buying Ferraris. Enthusiasts buy them too--or people who are just plain stinkin' rich.

As a simple as it could be answer:
Many people think Mac Pro is overkill.

 

[CaptainChunk]

In researching to build an edit suite, I was discouraged from purchasing a Mac Pro by a few video professionals I spoke to... basically, they advised that a 17" MBP was plenty capable for FinalCutStudio2, and that I wouldn't need anything beyond 8GB of RAM unless I was doing 3D work. These guys are also very close friends of mine, so I don't think it was because of jealousy. I think it really was with the best intent.

Sure, the MBPs can handle FCS2, but speaking as a professional video editor myself, you run into limits relatively fast on a laptop. The inability to add additional internal hard drives, expansion cards (capture cards, hardware RAID, interfaces, etc.) and not to mention the comparatively limited processing power when it comes time to render high-resolution video are all factors.

 

[miniConvert]

Intel's new tech is too expensive right now. I'm sure that within months the prices will drop, but right now I think it's a bad time to buy a Mac Pro unless you really need one.

I'm all for being an early adopter - been there, done that - but you have to draw the line somewhere. These are incredibly expensive machines at the moment when speccing the higher clocked processors (which, lets face it, is where all the action is going by the benchmarks) so my school of thought is buy now if you need, wait if you want, otherwise get something else

 

[snberk103]

Needs change over time and as ease with a new platform or machine becomes what you're used to, people might want to start trying new things out, stretching their machines a little more, maybe expanding certain components.

There is also an environmental and total cost of ownership argument. I'm not one to encourage people to buy sealed computers that can't be upgraded, and are essentially fit for the scrapheap if their screen goes while out of warranty, for instance.

Besides, I used to own what Apple called a 'super-computer' in the brochure. This super-computer was the dual G4 1.4. But that awesome machine, brand new in 2002, lived a lot longer and was of far more use for longer than an iMac of the same vintage. This is what you get when you spend more. My philosophy is to always spend the most on a computer I can possibly afford once I've chosen the form factor because I don't always know when I'll be buying another one again, especially with Apple's weird directions with some of their machines.

So yeah, if you can genuinely afford it, get the Mac Pro. It'll only be fit for playing Tetris on after six years or so anyway.

Very good advice, on several levels..... If more people heeded this advice, they would a) have a better computing experience in the long run, and b) throw a lot less e-waste away.

 

[hexonxonx]

I think it's a warning about buying something so expensive when an iMac or mini would fit their processing needs.

However some people want/need the expandability of the pro. I know I do, but I don't need the processing power of the pro. Already have monitors and HDs.

Plus I think some people think the mac pro shouldn't be used for basic tasks and only pro users should buy a pro. I think if it's your money, do as you want.

Exactly. That's what I did. I bought it mostly for the stirage capacity and then for the speed that it can rip DVDs.

If you want a Mac pro, buy one.

 

[-hh]

Well, that 50% desktop slice that's shrinking is still an enormous market to tap, one worth billions of dollars. Certainly I agree with you that where Apple has really shone and taken market share is in the portables area, between the iphone and MBP they are doing quite well in this space.

It still leaves a multi billion dollar desktop market for those who require more computing power than a laptop and/or have multiple machines.

Wellllllll....

I think that there's two problems with this approach.

The first is the $64K question: do people really need the extra horsepower of a desktop today?

If true, then they wouldn't be abandoning the desktop in droves for notebooks.

But since they are bailing from desktops, what this essentially means is that the amount of horsepower available in contemporary notebooks passes the "Good Enough" test, most of the time (eg, most consumers).


The second is a recognition of not only market segments of desk-vs-lap, but also of sub-segments within each of these, which is delimited by NPD group based on price.

To this end, Apple reportedly owns the "expensive" market. Here's a cite from May 2008 (10 months ago) that says that Apple owns 66%:

http://apple20.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/05/19/report-apples-market-share-of-pcs-over-1000-hits-66/

Granted, this report is a bit misleading, since it is an incomplete data set because it was limited to US retail brick & mortar sales.

Nevertheless, what it does bring into question is the business case viability. If Apple already dominates a market segment with what they have now, how much of an effort is justified to "clean up" the remainder?

Particularly when the winds of change are saying that its a rapidly shrinking market?

The reality here is that we may very well need to ask the question: what will be the next Desktop Mac model that Apple ELIMINATES?

If we run some financials, Apple grossed roughly $10B last quarter. If we assume the major divisions each did 1/3rd (I thought I read this somewhere), it means that the Mac division did around $3.3B...and 30% of that (the desktops only) would be roughly $1B.

With Apple reportedly cleaning up with 70% of the $1000+ USA desktop PCs, this means that the total 'expensive' desktop market is only (1/.70)*$1B = $1.4B, of which Apple already is getting $1B, so only $400M per Quarter left on the table, which times four quarters means a market upside potential of only $1.6B/year. Factor in the ongoing decline in desktops and 2009 is probably no better than $1.5B, 2010 around $1.25B and 2011 arguably $1B so the 3 year payback period SWAG has a potential of ...optimistically... $4B, if we assume that Apple somehow hits a home run and drives itself from a 70% to a 100% USA market share for the 'expensive' segment.

IMO, its not likely, but even the status quo will continue to make the lunch bags at Dell, HP and Microsoft nervous.

If Apple decides they don't want this market it would at least be nice to see them offer some kind of bare bones system that one could use to fit the niche, even if it was only orderable as a BTO type of arrangement.

Sure, but let's be honest: invariably, what most of us really want is to have our shiny new toy without it busting our budget. As such, no matter what the price Apple picked, we would have liked it to have been another $500 cheaper.

And what this also gets into is one more reason why Apple needs to be concerned about an afforable "Enthusiast" desktop tower, and what it ultimately boils down to is their longer term business cases.

Thus, in addition to the above questions on how much growth is viable for the segment (if any), there's also a 'Lessons Learned' factor from the days of the Apple 7500-8500-9500 series. What I'm specifically referring to is that these Mac computers also had their CPU on a daughterboard, just like the current Mac Pro models, which allowed for hobbyists (and businesses) to perform low cost incrimental upgrades instead of buying new computers from Apple. Sure, this is good for the consumer ...but only in the short term, since in the long term, it means fewer sales of complete systems by Apple, which means fewer units to amortize fixed development costs across (etc), which in the long run means higher prices charged back to consumers.

Fewer sales means a longer period until break-even which means an even slower rate of major product refreshes ... are you sure that this is what you want?

-hh

 

[Supaklaw]

Exactly. That's what I did. I bought it mostly for the stirage capacity and then for the speed that it can rip DVDs.

If you want a Mac pro, buy one.

Agreed, same reasoning here. I want expandability. I want the ability to upgrade. I want my own choice of graphics card. I want to upgrade drives as technology advances, including BluRay. And I do rip DVDs, or convert files to MP4 quickly. And game. And use Photoshop (I use it at work but am not a power user at home).

I could "live" with an iMac or Macbook... but in 2 years I'd be forced to upgrade anyway, and that value is lost. I bought the Mac Pro under the assumption I'd keep it 5 years minimum... so really, it's not overkill from that perspective... it's a long term investment but you pay out a lot up front.

 

[Boneoh]

IMO it's like having a committee design a horse. Thats how the camel came about.

There are lots of folks here with a wide variety of needs, wants, budgets, experience, and opinions! Getting to a consensus would be like herding cats

Each person's reality comes from their own perspective.

 

[kellen]

I have a feeling everyone will forget this thread the next time someone asks if they need a mac pro or what computer should they get.

If its not your money, why complain?

 

[hexonxonx]

I have a feeling everyone will forget this thread the next time someone asks if they need a mac pro or what computer should they get.

If its not your money, why complain?

There have been other threads like this in the past as well. When some people here hear that the toughest job that my 8 core will ever do is ripping a DVD, they say what a waste. Maybe for them, not for me. I bought mine last June with a bonus check from my job. It paid for the entire thing plus some left over. I have two 1TB drives so far that are filled with iTunes purchases and I love the idea that this thing has two more 2TB ready for more. It and my 23" ACD are my television set. I don't own an HDTV let alone a Blueray disk player and I don't plan on getting one anytime soon, don't need one.

I have an iMac that I use to copy all the same content over to as backup and I've already had to hand two 1TB drives off of the thing and will have to get a third soon. It's taking up allot of room with those drives. Mac pro has them all inside.

 

[MCHR]

I don't chase people away from a Mac Pro, but the lines of "Power User" and "big powered machine" are becoming really really blurred.

For example, four years ago, a G5 was kind of the standard machine to run Adobe suite and most web apps depending on size of the files. Now, you can run those apps on a MBP or iMac, unless you are doing billboards or need colossal memory. I "nearly" fall into that category, but I enjoy having a machine for many years, don't work in a portable way, and use a lot of peripherals.

This new lineup is almost too much power, unless I begin making the shift into animations or heavy 3D use, which is possible.

Which Mac? Mac Pro, but in 80% of the time, I may only use the processing power of the single chip. Yet I plan for future proofing. No clear answer fir these questions.

 

[designed]

Something in these "who truly needs Mac Pro and who doesn't" discussions reminds me of how the similiar thing has been going on with DSLRs for a few years now. The prosumer class has moved upwards quite rapidly, even though they might only use the pro-class camera and the 'absolutely-rare-fantastic-lenses-made-by-the-elder-of-the-village-somewhere-in-the-slopes-of-Fuji-mountain-using-ancient-techniques' for a few dozen holiday shots per year.

In my opinnion the professionals should take quiet comfort in the fact that their tools actually pay for themselves while the prosumer pays for his/her toys with money earned elsewhere. It's a funny world, this capitalism

 

[fernmeister]

I don't chase people away from a Mac Pro, but the lines of "Power User" and "big powered machine" are becoming really really blurred.

For example, four years ago, a G5 was kind of the standard machine to run Adobe suite and most web apps depending on size of the files. Now, you can run those apps on a MBP or iMac, unless you are doing billboards or need colossal memory. I "nearly" fall into that category, but I enjoy having a machine for many years, don't work in a portable way, and use a lot of peripherals.

This new lineup is almost too much power, unless I begin making the shift into animations or heavy 3D use, which is possible.

Which Mac? Mac Pro, but in 80% of the time, I may only use the processing power of the single chip. Yet I plan for future proofing. No clear answer fir these questions.

Good post.

There are a lot of "professional" music situations where an iMac or MBP is more than powerful enough. For a lot of people the price difference between an iMac and a MP would be better spent on software, good monitors, good interfaces, good preamps, etc. Moreover, the marginal difference between one generation of MP and another doesn't make a great deal of difference for music production.

 

[RebootD]

People like me are the 'gappers' who need more ram for print/web/photography than the imac gives us (and 4GB chips are expenisve as **** so that is not an option right now wtih the iMacs) but don't need a dual proc XEON machine with 'server parts'.

I need ram more than I need high clock speeds but the iMac doesn't deliver that option, the 4core MP is crippled to only 8GB and that leaves the true desktop starting at 3,200 before ram + 2nd hard drive.

I know I may be in the tiny creative segment that isn't 3D/Video (who the MP is a steal of a deal compared to Dell and other workstations from different manufacturers) but right now I'm considering trying to pick up a discounted 2x 2.8 or even go back to building PCs to save money. I can write it off over 5 years but I still have to come up with the funds first.

 

[nanofrog]

People like me are the 'gappers' who need more ram for print/web/photography than the imac gives us (and 4GB chips are expenisve as **** so that is not an option right now wtih the iMacs) but don't need a dual proc XEON machine with 'server parts'.

I need ram more than I need high clock speeds but the iMac doesn't deliver that option, the 4core MP is crippled to only 8GB and that leaves the true desktop starting at 3,200 before ram + 2nd hard drive.

I know I may be in the tiny creative segment that isn't 3D/Video (who the MP is a steal of a deal compared to Dell and other workstations from different manufacturers) but right now I'm considering trying to pick up a discounted 2x 2.8 or even go back to building PCs to save money. I can write it off over 5 years but I still have to come up with the funds first.

If you can wait, larger capacity DIMM's will show up, possibly coinciding with Intel's Official Release date of March 29. It's possible to see up to 16GB versions.

A DIY build may also be a decent option, but you're the only one who can determine that. It's the route I've taken this time. Currently, I'm using an i7-920, but will replace it with a W3570 when they ship.

 

[petermcphee]

There have been other threads like this in the past as well. When some people here hear that the toughest job that my 8 core will ever do is ripping a DVD, they say what a waste. Maybe for them, not for me. I bought mine last June with a bonus check from my job. It paid for the entire thing plus some left over. I have two 1TB drives so far that are filled with iTunes purchases and I love the idea that this thing has two more 2TB ready for more. It and my 23" ACD are my television set. I don't own an HDTV let alone a Blueray disk player and I don't plan on getting one anytime soon, don't need one.

I have an iMac that I use to copy all the same content over to as backup and I've already had to hand two 1TB drives off of the thing and will have to get a third soon. It's taking up allot of room with those drives. Mac pro has them all inside.

I agree with the above post. It seems like, if you can afford one, why not buy one?

 

[noushy]

Pricing/Memory and official Intel launch

It seems we all agree and disagree. In these tough economic times, everyone is concerned about overall cost. I agree that once the official launch of the Xeon 55XX series takes place next week, we will see many many more memory options. I will not be long before 4gb dimms drop to a somewhat reasonable price (say $200 or less). I am waiting to purchase 6 of these, but not at $500-$700 as the price is right now.

As for the systems, I cannot complain. Through my arrangement, I received a substantial discount (paid under 5k for a 2.93 8core with 1tb hd, 6gb ram, airport, applecare). But if I had to pay the retail or biz price, would have bought the 2.66 8 core.

Peace,
Noushy

 

[jjahshik32]

It seems we all agree and disagree. In these tough economic times, everyone is concerned about overall cost. I agree that once the official launch of the Xeon 55XX series takes place next week, we will see many many more memory options. I will not be long before 4gb dimms drop to a somewhat reasonable price (say $200 or less). I am waiting to purchase 6 of these, but not at $500-$700 as the price is right now.

As for the systems, I cannot complain. Through my arrangement, I received a substantial discount (paid under 5k for a 2.93 8core with 1tb hd, 6gb ram, airport, applecare). But if I had to pay the retail or biz price, would have bought the 2.66 8 core.

Peace,
Noushy

I think for the 4GB DIMMS to drop in price, the 6GB DIMMS needs to appear probably first. Probably wont happen until sometime late next year.

 

[Tallest Skil]

I think for the 4GB DIMMS to drop in price, the 6GB DIMMS needs to appear probably first. Probably wont happen until sometime late next year.

Or never, seeing as no company is ever going to make a 6GB DIMM...

Seriously. What the crap?

 

[jjahshik32]

Or never, seeing as no company is ever going to make a 6GB DIMM...

Seriously. What the crap?

Never say never, their bound to come out with bigger DIMMS as time moves foward. Notice how the 2GB DIMMS dramatically dropped in price once the 4GB DIMMS came out.

Same thing happened with since the last 20 years. Are you seriously thinking or saying that it'll stop at 4GB DIMMS? Heck no!! What do you think Snow Leopard is preparing for?!?