Such low sales will only convince Apple even more that they shouldn't have updated the Mac Pro at all. It will end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy.
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.
MP 7,1 Will Apple cave on the 7,1 release?
- Thread starter majus
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Such low sales will only convince Apple even more that they shouldn't have updated the Mac Pro at all. It will end up being a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Is it a high end product ?
Entry iMac Pro : 8 cores , 32GB ram , Vega56 8GB HBM2. , 1TB SSD
High end iMac : 6 cores ( at higher clock ) , 32GB ram , Vega 20 4GB HBM2 , 1TB SSD
Entry Mac Pro : 8 cores , 32 GB ram , 580x 8GB DDDR5 , 0.256 TB SSD
The Mac Pro isn’t higher in a single one of those categories . None of them . That how is that higher at all ?
The Mac Pro has different stuff out of the core computation and storage space . The last is woefully behind . DDDR5 isn’t a high end option ( it is basically an over locked 3 year old base design . ) . The ram is the same and core count + base clocks are basically a wash .
There are more memory slots . Internal PCI-e slots , but that is more a difference than higher .
The top end BTO goes far higher but that is moving the goal posts a bit . The core issue is where the pricing starts not where it maxes out at. That doesn’t solely rationalize an over 100% increase in entry price since 2013 . The range can be different ,but the whole range doesn’t have to be higher .
OCD rigid price non overlap is something that Apple is mapping on . This is a circular premise , the Mac Pro has to cost more than any other Mac because the Mac Pro has to cost more than any other Mac .
Computational performance wise there is no huge $1000 gap there . For capacity there is no gap at all in terms of an increase . There are value/utility gap in terms of internal expansion that have associated Bill of Material (BOM) costs .
The iMac Pro $5k starting is similar a gimmick of simply just being higher than the previous iMac 27” highest BTO price . It went on a chronic sale after the initial demand bubble expired . The Mac Pro entry price is at least as equally contrived after consuming several glasses of Cupertino kool-aid . ( and Apple shifting product ROI risk onto customers ) . The price is high because Apple wants to get paid no matter how they manage the product line .
IMHO , the Mac Pro entry price is high more so just to make up ground loosing because probably leaving even more folks behind than the Mac Pro 2013 did . Apple is switching demographics of which subsets are being left behind in the ‘ never iMac’ camp.
If Apple added updatable RAM to IMac Pro it would be even worse . ( if they want that product to survive the market competition they’ll have to ) .
I realize and understand that a small number of Apple users have this overwhelming desire to see a high end home user desktop PC from Apple, but that is just never going to happen. Even if it did it would still be priced out of reach for most people that want to see that. There is just no need to offer a computer like that. Their high end desktop market is for professionals & businesses, where these sort of prices are a non-issue.
That may be correct today but you have to recognize that historically this has not been true. Both the 5,1 Mac Pro and the earlier PowerMac G5 had pricey-but-still-viable options for high end home users. What you describe is not some immutable state of the universe or even some fundamental aspect of Apple's strategy. It's just what they've chosen to do this time around.
This is at the core of why many users feel dissatisfied with the current Apple product lineup.
There are no comparable PC workstations left at the $3000 price point. People are pinning this on Apple when it's not Apple.
That’s the sales pitch Apple is selling . The other major workstation vendors haven’t announced new systems with W-32xx series processors yet, but I expect them to pull the rug out from Apple’s thin ice story here when they do .
Dell 5820
8 core W-2145
950 W with flex bay
AMD WX7100. ( big Polaris )
32 GB ECC
WiFi
OS drive Intel PCIe fllex bay
Intel integrated RST
256 GB NVMe SSD
No Optical
Standard 1GbE Ethernet .
Total $3,036
( yeah lists at 4K , but zero haggling to get this 3k price )
https://www.dell.com/en-us/work/sho...rationid=7eaa3a48-c663-42df-913c-517b7a8ce861
For real folks buying at one ( maybe two ) systems at a time with no IT department to haggle with Apple ( or others ) with on price ...... Apples prices are thousands off . The whole notion that something reasonable is double the price at 8 cores , 32 GB ram , and some measly 256GB SSD. ‘ has to be ‘ in the $6k range is a ton of hand waving . If this is the depth of Apple’s competitive analysis they are in very sad shape .
Sure there are more 10GbE sockets , more slots ( both DIMM and std PCIe ), thunderbolt sockets , and power supply capacity on the new Mac Pro , but does that have the utility/value at this end of the range ?
Extremely capable systems do exist in the $3-4K zone . That space is only to further fill up as AMD finishes their roll out in 2019 and as Intel gets their ‘last gasp’ 14nm product out the door over the next 8-10 months .
There is value in Apple’s entry configuration but mainly as a tool against being fleeced by Apple high end BTO options . Don’t buy the High end W-32xx models with Apple-Intel $3k over 1TB ram tax . Don’t buy Apple market disconnected $/GB SSD tax . RAM same thing . Probably pretty much same thing to get to decent upper mid range GPU card . Toss lots of parts and replace at more sane pricing .
Last edited:
Common wisdom was that Apple was never going to return to making a slotbox workstation, either. Instead, they made the most slotbox machine they could. The past is not necessarily a good predictor for the future.
Common wisdom by who? The small number of folks that were peddling the "lego boxes" Mac Pro concept for 3+ years? The small set of folks that said Apple was going to solder the RAM , GPU and almost everything else down? The small set that said Apple's slots had to be completely incompatible.
There was some so called 'wisdom' that if it was a slotbox it would show up relatively fast. That was relatively common, but it wasn't particularly well grounded wisdom.
Apple never set those expectations. That was mainly folks taking moves in other systems and myopic pieces of data and running off into hyperbole land. So it wasn't really "common wisdom". There were a loud quadrant of folks who said "no slots , they were leaving". It wasn't common wisdom with them. Apple said they leaned a bit too much on Thunderbolt in 2013 and wanted high bandwidth in the new system ( which pretty much indicates slots are not completely 'out' in new system ). Apple's MPX modules instead of being inpendent lego boxes are largely oversized internally connected using a substantive amount of standard connectors.
Apple had a "small desktop footprint" Pro system in the Mac Pro 2013 and went to a new one in the iMac Pro. The significant block of folks circling the airport were the 2009-2012 hold outs.
Mac Pro 2019 may have the most slots but it also has the most price. The Mini jumped in price. Apple has pushed their average selling prices higher in both the Mac , iPad , and iPhone line ups. They have stopped commentating on volume sales in their quarterly finance calls and have settled on pricing/margin as the standard metric for their product groups. The 'most' slots isn't surprising in the context of Apple seeking to drive up the entry prices over 100%. They were going to need some 'sales pitch' to crank the prices much higher. A challenge to the "slots or leave" folks as to whether slots were valuable enough to substantively pay for.
The combination of pushing the Mac Mini up in price and the iMac being the dominate desktop system coupled to the higher desktop pricing makes it highly unlikely Apple is going to introduce two desktop slotboxes. Apple hasn't had two desktop slotboxes since the turn of the century. Never going to two desktop slotboxes covers decades past where anyone can reasonable see into the future ( what Apple and the market is doing 20 has way too much future tech and future economic dynamics in the way to see clearly). However, over next 5-7 years ... very probably not.
The only 'two' Apple will get to is the "two containers for the same system" with the rack option for Mac Pro. That probably should get the same Model number, because it is probably just a wrapper/container difference and not a OS/firmware difference. However, if the rack variant does relatively well that could fork into two "slotboxes" over time. Rack version picking up a slightly different motherboard over time to make port placement easier, different I/O balance , and different thermals. If that takes off then some "affordable desktop" third model is even less likely. It won't really be return of the XServe as oppose to the relatively large scale arrival on the "Clould hosted " Mac. Multiple tenants in the cloud sharing the higher cost of Mac is just yet another vector to moving the average selling price up (or at least not letting it go down much). And if the cloud hosted macOS business gets large enough Apple could move to add it to their services roster directly.
P.S. At year 3-5 after the Mac Pro 2019 launch those 2019 systems will start to substantively bubble into the used/refurb market. That's the 'affordable' gap filler Apple will probably indirectly provide. If Apple gets to a 2 year upgrade sequence then more used systems will start to flow back into the Mini-iMac-iMacPro user base gaps on a more regular basis. There is a 'hole' in Apple's line up. There is nothing to indicate Apple thinks it is a critically big hole and their balance sheet indicates that there really isn't a substantive one also.
Last edited:
The entry configuration can be utilized as a 'tool' to avoid those ungodly top end prices. There is a pretty decent chance that the "super low volume" is going to be those very top end BTO configurations, not the entry model.
Just avoiding the $3K tax to go over 1TB RAM cap a buyer of the entry model can "save" that $3k to put toward a top end configuration at the higher deployed specs. Relatively that is potentially a 50% savings (relative to base entry price) just to get to the exact same core count if only really need 128-384GB of RAM. There is zero good reason to pay the > 1TB RAM tax if extremely likely never going over 1TB of RAM.
Very similar issue on Apple's > 2TB SSD pricing. It is less crazy now but it is still one of those largely unjustified in value. ( If Apple has better lifetime metrics then should stop hiding them. ).
RAM is in the same boat. If heading for the > 96 GB zone Apple is just waay off the curve from the general marketplace. To point makes some sense do put in tech service time at the beginning just to get around it.
Because the there is decent likelihood that some folks will avoid some of the higher BTO options but still get there with 3rd party options, Apple is just sticking a 'low volume" tax on all models. So they are getting 'something' even if go largely 3rd party.
The Mac Pro may be more of a 'hobby' product than a 'vanity' one. If they go back to Rip van Winkle sleep for 4+ years then it is a 'hobby' product if it stays incrementally above s break even. If the "super low volume" 'tax' on each system is enough then the product could stay profitable "enough" for them to keep it. There is a good chance that Apple is trying to make money at this ( and it isn't some loss-leader , advertising gimmick to get folks to buy other Macs. )
For example, if they put a $500 low volume tax on top of their 25-30% mark-up and sell 25K systems in 12 months, then that's $12.5M. Over two years that is $25M. That should be enough to pay a decent team to help churn out something every two years. If Apple doesn't sell over 50K units in two years, then they just cancel it.
This is probably way less than the number of Mac Pros sold in 2008-2009 era. Some folks are being covered by other Macs so some substantive drop off isn't critical. A more critical number though will be if the number of Mac Pros drops down below the number of yearly folks acquiring hackintoshes . At that point, it won't be a good vanity or hobby product even if short term numbers say it is 'profitable'.
Maybe. That's certainly theory, but not presently fact.
And I doubt any of them are going to drop thousands of thousands of dollars into $3000 territory. I would guess if they do undercut Apple, most will sit in the $5000 range. Enough so that people will complain Apple's pricing is too high, but not enough of a difference to really matter that much.
The Mac Pro 6,1 made people think that Apple would not make another slot box. However, this quote from Craig Fedherighi sums up how Apple felt:
"Mac Pro ... had great Thunderbolt external I/O and we said: ‘This is a great opportunity to change what had been a conventional build a big card rack and slot a bunch of cards in there.’ We said: ‘a lot of this storage can be achieved with very high performance with Thunderbolt. So we built a design in part around that assumption, as well. Some of the pro community has been sort of moving that direction, but we had certainly in mind the need for expandability. If you wanted a great RAID solution in there, it probably made a lot more sense to put it outside the box than actually be constrained within the physical enclosure that contained the CPU. So, I think we went into it with some interesting ideas, and not all of them paid off."
Now that the new Mac Pro has been announced we can see that Apple came to understanding that Thunderbolt expansion alone was not sufficient for the needs of pros. Remember that this Mac Pro roundtable was held just before Apple announced the iMac Pros in April 2017. Apple had made a Mac for pros with thunderbolt expansion that largely failed commercially, they were about to announce another Mac for pros with thunderbolt expansion, but before they did Apple held this roundtable with the press to ensure pros not to worry, that Apple was going to come out with a real pro box (with PCIe slots) real soon now. Still no apology for leaving pros out in the cold all these years.
Nobody is perfect in this world. Apple indeed made some mistakes at times. But in this case I think they are as much on track as they can be. What Apple really does well is market segmentation. I guess most people forget how powerful the iMac, iMac Pro and the Mac minis are. Time has changed and we don't live in an era any more where consumer machines can't be used for professional work. With 8 core CPU's in the consumer Mac and Mac mini, the clear market separation to professional grade old time big towers have been blurred. 2008/2010 was a different era. I think most people don't see that. - So a big NO to the "Cave-In Theory" - Apple did that with full intent from a Market segmentation point of view.
Don't get me wrong, I am sad myself. But the biggest reality check you can do yourself is eBay and the Mac Pro 3.1/4.1/5.1 market. When you check those machines on a regular basis, you will find a very large number of machines that never ever have been upgraded. Many many machines are obviously used by their owners in a stock configuration till the last day of usage. Maybe sometimes a slightly better GPU and an SSD but that's about it. Apple knows this which is the reason why the iMac All-In-One works on the market. This indicates that a large % of the population does not upgrade at all or rarely at most. The Apple Fan Boy Enthusiast and Wedding-Photo-Semi-Pro is the looser in this scenario at first glance, but not really. There is almost nothing left what a powerful maxed out iMac 8-Core from 2019 can't do today. I think people forget that and don't see how powerful the consumer line has become.
Agreed. The number of use cases that require more oomph than a MBP or iMP can provide is small.
The 7,1 MP is aimed at workstation class tasks and, to their credit, Apple came strong on the PSU, PCIe lanes and DIMM slots. Like the 3,1-5,1 cMP towers, the 7,1 should have a much longer useful lifespan than is typical for computer hardware.
FWIW, I doubt Apple will "cave" on the price, though I could see a couple of minor spec bumps and perhaps a jump to 1TB internal M.2 from 256GB to quiet critics. Sure, many people never upgrade internal components. OTOH, the market segment the 7,1 is aimed at includes a lot of people who will source internal components from 3rd parties (RAM for starters) in the initial build. If Apple can't make enough margin on the base configuration, they can't count on making it on BTO systems like they do on the sealed/soldered models. Moreover, if the build quality is as good as we hope, I would consider the price high, but certainly not a ripoff.
The 7,1 MP is aimed at workstation class tasks and, to their credit, Apple came strong on the PSU, PCIe lanes and DIMM slots. Like the 3,1-5,1 cMP towers, the 7,1 should have a much longer useful lifespan than is typical for computer hardware.
FWIW, I doubt Apple will "cave" on the price, though I could see a couple of minor spec bumps and perhaps a jump to 1TB internal M.2 from 256GB to quiet critics. Sure, many people never upgrade internal components. OTOH, the market segment the 7,1 is aimed at includes a lot of people who will source internal components from 3rd parties (RAM for starters) in the initial build. If Apple can't make enough margin on the base configuration, they can't count on making it on BTO systems like they do on the sealed/soldered models. Moreover, if the build quality is as good as we hope, I would consider the price high, but certainly not a ripoff.
Official price cuts on Apple hardware at Apple.com are pretty rare, but as Microcenter and B&H have shown, you just have to watch sales and get your hardware for a discount--the sales tax savings alone at B&H will be substantial. Amazon has also become a reseller, so I say give it time.
As for how long hardware lasts, it just depends on how well the product was engineered and how well it was treated. I recently watched a video of an old, working AIO PC that I owned in 1995. The video was taken in 2013. Not exactly a representative sample, but there are many old electronic devices out there that still work. Just be sure to make backups!
As for how long hardware lasts, it just depends on how well the product was engineered and how well it was treated. I recently watched a video of an old, working AIO PC that I owned in 1995. The video was taken in 2013. Not exactly a representative sample, but there are many old electronic devices out there that still work. Just be sure to make backups!
I think the high cost of the entry level has to do with making the 16 and 24 core options seem like a better deal.
I mean if you could buy the base 8 core model and upgrade the CPU to 16/24 for less than Apple was offering these higher end system, that wouldn't make a lot of sense from Apple's sales prospective.
There is no chance Apple will drop the price of the base system before launch, however, if I were a betting man, I'd bet we'll see the base system drop to $4999.99 within 6-12 months after launch.
I mean if you could buy the base 8 core model and upgrade the CPU to 16/24 for less than Apple was offering these higher end system, that wouldn't make a lot of sense from Apple's sales prospective.
There is no chance Apple will drop the price of the base system before launch, however, if I were a betting man, I'd bet we'll see the base system drop to $4999.99 within 6-12 months after launch.
After 2 month of thinking about the 7,1, I'm now sure I will go the refurbished/used Mac Pro 7,1 way.
My 5,1 runs better than ever and I'm pretty sure Catalina GM will run great for another 1-2 years.
(Even if I have to use the Dosdude patch or some kind of manually patching to get it work)
I think we can get the base model for 3000-4000 $ in 2021.
And with the possibility of upgrading the GPU, RAM etc. it will be my workinghorse for a long time to come.
My 5,1 runs better than ever and I'm pretty sure Catalina GM will run great for another 1-2 years.
(Even if I have to use the Dosdude patch or some kind of manually patching to get it work)
I think we can get the base model for 3000-4000 $ in 2021.
And with the possibility of upgrading the GPU, RAM etc. it will be my workinghorse for a long time to come.
Do what makes the most sense for you, find the system and the price that represents value.
I don't think Apple cares about a price that represents value, I think they make so much money off iOS devices, that they are just throwing us a bone by still even bothering to make general purpose computers.
I think their attitude is, the price is the price, if you buy it great, we make money, and if you don't, too bad, but we'll still make money selling you an iPhone.
The iPhone is the worst thing to ever happen to the Mac and the MacOS. Linux, at this point is a far better OS, and AMD offers far better hardware for people that buy on overall value.
Apple needs to spinoff the iOS and it's devices into a separate company, so the computer division will have to stand on it's own again. So they can get back to balancing profit margins with total units sold.
Desktop sales are never going to be what they were in the late '90, but that doesn't mean it's unprofitable, Apple is just completely missing the entire enthusiast market, and it's the enthusiast that have deep pockets for building desktop systems with high end components.
I totally see your point. But this will never happen.
That's the reason I'm super happy, that Apple finally previewed and announced the new Mac Pro.(Unconsidered from the price)
Before the WWDC, I was so scared of what they could come up with...
I don't think most people consider $2.6K starting prices (adjusted for inflation) "still-viable" options. When you're comparing it to mainstream desktops and hot-rod towers that's still way more than most would pay. All the people who want an xMac and are willing to hack together a Mac could still make a much-cheaper machine.
These new Mac Pros are much higher in price, but the difference for professionals who need them really isn't as big as the gap for people who just want a hobbyist machine.
The argument that enthusiasts have the most money that Apple should be targeting versus professionals is an assertion I don't see a lot of evidence for. It's just that enthusiasts want to believe they're the center of the world, just like pros do.
I don't think anyone misunderstands that you can garage-build a machine for less than Apple could sell it for. But I do think you show some unfamiliarity with "hot rod" enthusiast PC pricing with your comments here.
Dell's enthusiast Alienware starts at $1900 and if you look at more boutique vendors like Falcon Northwest the cheapest starting price of their mid-tier box (before any options) is $2500 and their "recommended" starting spec is over $4k. Previous generations of PowerMac/Mac Pro were comfortably in this range.
People aren't necessarily asking for the creation of an xMac (which I agree is an unrealistic wish). They're mourning the loss of the low end Mac Pro that has historically been available (which is a reasonable position to take).
I haven't seen anyone make this argument. Further, I reject the implication that enthusiasts are the only market segment who would be drawn to a $3-4K Mac Pro. There are business users who would also fit this market segment. Businesses which previously bought Mac Pros and PowerMacs at this price level. Businesses who are left dangling with Apple's current product lineup. To frame this as just entitled "enthusiasts" is inaccurate.
This is an unfair claim and rather inflammatory. Again, I've seen no evidence that "enthusiasts" hold this view at all.
Last edited:
Apple wouldn't be where they are today without the enthusiast community.
Apple wouldn't be a (roughly) trillion dollar company without iPhones, iDevices.
The 7,1 MP is aimed at a segment that no other Apple product can satisfy. To reach that goal, they made choices that were not compatible with a $2-4K enthusiast slotbox.
When the right components are available, and the initial sales rush for the 7,1 has cooled off, I fully expect a refreshed MacMini to fill some of the "hole" in their lineup, perhaps Q2 2020...
In theory, they could re-introduce the cylinder 6,1 with parts appropriate to the thermal envelope and sell it in the $2-4K range - but that seems extremely unlikely. IMO the 6,1 design was a fail because it was supposed to serve as the centerpiece of a Thunderbolt extensible workstation. As an upgrade to the MacMini, it might have been a winner - small, quiet fan, much better cooling architecture than the Mini and lots of ports. Yes, I realize that the cost of developing the cylinder design would have been hard to justify for a lower ASP product - but now that those costs are long ago amortized...
Apple wouldn't be a (roughly) trillion dollar company without iPhones, iDevices.
The 7,1 MP is aimed at a segment that no other Apple product can satisfy. To reach that goal, they made choices that were not compatible with a $2-4K enthusiast slotbox.
When the right components are available, and the initial sales rush for the 7,1 has cooled off, I fully expect a refreshed MacMini to fill some of the "hole" in their lineup, perhaps Q2 2020...
In theory, they could re-introduce the cylinder 6,1 with parts appropriate to the thermal envelope and sell it in the $2-4K range - but that seems extremely unlikely. IMO the 6,1 design was a fail because it was supposed to serve as the centerpiece of a Thunderbolt extensible workstation. As an upgrade to the MacMini, it might have been a winner - small, quiet fan, much better cooling architecture than the Mini and lots of ports. Yes, I realize that the cost of developing the cylinder design would have been hard to justify for a lower ASP product - but now that those costs are long ago amortized...