Looking at the price and lack of maintainability (in terms of upgrades and fixes) of the new iMac 'Pro' makes me think that the primary user base that Apple is targeting with these products are those that like to be called 'pro' (who also have a lot of money - through their dull but highly paid banking jobs) rather than those that actually are.
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.
Apples use of the word 'Pro'
- Thread starter Applelad
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In terms of price, more often than not, pro gear tends to be expensive.
It's not rare to achieve maybe 90% of a theoretical maximum very cost efficiently, but once you try to eek out the last little bit, price increases exponentially.
Pro gear gets expensive because they go beyond what's cost effective based on the assumption that a professional will use the equipment to generate money.
A hobbyist film maker will by a GH5 and a few lenses and "lose" a few thousand dollars.
A pro film maker buys a RED for $75.000 and then generates $120.000, effectively making the RED a "cheaper" camera.
The peeps and squeaks I hear about "expensive products" mostly come from the indie community—those who want to be pro—and not from those who actually are.
In this case Pro likely refers to "Prosumer", which there are plenty of with regards to the Mac.
I don't see this being a big hit with people that work with graphics, but for those that work with audio, I do expect this thing to sell like hot cakes.
I don't see this being a big hit with people that work with graphics, but for those that work with audio, I do expect this thing to sell like hot cakes.
I thought it stands for proprietary (https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/since-pro-stands-for-proprietary-now.2089804/), because there was news about an ARM processor in it. Is there, btw?
Now I think: it might have the power, but the lack of space/upgradeability/serviceability is a major obstacle to spend this amount of money on the machine. And is this really the thermal design that those components require under constant heavy load? We'll see.
Now I think: it might have the power, but the lack of space/upgradeability/serviceability is a major obstacle to spend this amount of money on the machine. And is this really the thermal design that those components require under constant heavy load? We'll see.
Not all professional users upgrade or fix their own equipment. That is a subset of the professional user community - the people with the talent and skills to do everything. However, many others have much more profitable things to do with their time than repair/maintain their equipment. In organizations of any size, that's what the maintenance (or IT) staff is for. In most of the broadcast and recording facilities I worked in, the repair shop (i.e., access to tools) was locked, to prevent the damage that could be done by well-meaning "professionals."
It's little different than in any other profession. Physicians don't modify or maintain their medical electronics. Fleet bus drivers don't change oil or overhaul engines. Airline pilots don't maintain aircraft. Chefs may touch-up their knife blades with a sharpening steel, but they usually send those blades out to professional sharpeners when a few swipes of a steel no longer cuts it. Skilled CGI artists are rarely capable of writing code or repairing a computer.
It seems simple enough to me. Sophisticated tools spawn both professional users and professional maintainers. Users rarely give a hoot about maintainability/ease of modification. The repair and maintenance staff's convenience takes a back seat to the user's wants and needs. Facility owners like equipment that can do the job without modification/customization, that has a small footprint, and is easily swapped-out with a spare unit if/when repair is necessary (whole-unit replacement). So, if an iMac Pro can do the job right out of the box, at the right price, and will continue to perform satisfactorily for 3-4 years, then they'll buy an iMac Pro.
Last edited:
I (scientist) can't represent all pros, but I can easily imagine that many pros do not want to spend time and fiddle with their computers. Rather, they want to focus on their work.
Personally, I like the possibility that if one day I find the 128GB of RAM in my (i)Mac Pro insufficient and I can upgrade it to 256GB easily, but I won't make upgradability a top priority in my purchase decision. I will do my best in forecasting my need for the next five years or so, buy a suitable computer, stop worrying about the computer and just use it.
Personally, I like the possibility that if one day I find the 128GB of RAM in my (i)Mac Pro insufficient and I can upgrade it to 256GB easily, but I won't make upgradability a top priority in my purchase decision. I will do my best in forecasting my need for the next five years or so, buy a suitable computer, stop worrying about the computer and just use it.
Apple uses the term pro to represent a system which is more capable than their other offerings. It's a relative term which appears to have little to do with the actual definition of the word. That's it, do not try and put any more thought into it.
Last edited:
Interesting. I guess I'm a bit peeved because I make my living as what I would call a 'jobbing' photographer in London (have been for 15 years now) but I can't justify buying one of these - like I couldn't justify buying the trash can before. I make about £50K a year but I know another photographer that makes double me and he's still on the old tower and again bulks at the price of this thing. I guess, it's no big deal for us because we don't really need great power as we are only working on stills but it would be nice have a reasonable upgrade path.
The regular iMac 27" might be a reasonable upgrade path for you if you like the iMac Pro but don't need the power and can't justify the price.
Pro just means professional. According to the dictionary that means that you earn your living in your chosen profession.
Pro has nothing to do with computer specs.
Also there is an insanely over inflated view that pro users tinker and upgrade their machines. That could not be farther from the truth in the real world. For every hundred pro users who work on their own gear, there are thousands who don't.
I know pro cad/design people who don't know a thing about what's going on in their computers, they are just tools to get work done.
[doublepost=1513270910][/doublepost]
To put it in perspective, how do you feel about hasselblad/phase one pricing?
Pro has nothing to do with computer specs.
Also there is an insanely over inflated view that pro users tinker and upgrade their machines. That could not be farther from the truth in the real world. For every hundred pro users who work on their own gear, there are thousands who don't.
I know pro cad/design people who don't know a thing about what's going on in their computers, they are just tools to get work done.
[doublepost=1513270910][/doublepost]
To put it in perspective, how do you feel about hasselblad/phase one pricing?
Last edited:
If it's for your business why would you ever consider buying a computer? You can lease an iMac from around £13/week or an iMac Pro from £35/week. https://www.qubeleasing.co.uk/imac/
Most businesses will lease for three years with AppleCare & then change the system at the end of the lease. They don't care about upgrades or upgradeability. If the system is good enough to do the job at the start of the lease then it will be good enough for the next three years.
This.
At work, the company pays for what I need to get work done, be it a $0.2 pencil or a $200,000 storage solution. These expenses are actually investments; they're supposed to facilitate an even larger income. In my line of work, a need to re-invest into existing hardware midterm would most likely mean that my usage prognosis was erroneous for some reason.
In contrast, at home I pay for sustaining my hobbies, and in many cases what I pay for private toys truly is a pure expense with no relevant income attached to it. It's mainly in this use case extending a product's effective life beyond its warranty period makes economical sense. If Apple would return to allowing this with a pro line of computers as it seems, what they've really done is bend to the wishes of some of their prosumer fans/evangelizers. This doesn't make immediate or short-term business sense, but should rather be viewed as a bet that keeping their more knowledgeable fans happy leads to long-term benefits for the company.
Many have someone who helps to support those systems (even if only friends / family).
I have a couple of issues with the lack of upgradability:
- It forces the buyer to choose the appropriate configuration at purchase time. Sometimes that's not possibly and you risk buying an under powered system or buying more than you need. Given the prices Apple charges for upgrades the latter can be a hard pill to swallow.
- Entry level configurations may not be adequate to run the futures contemporary software leaving no option to improve the system. One system that comes to mind is the MBA with 2GB RAM and 64GB SSD. I wouldn't buy one as it is too limiting. But if I could bump up the memory / SSD then it's something I would consider.
Exactly that. I'm a computer pro+hobbyist so I tinker. A lot. But most people I know who work in IT departments don't care. The company gets them a machine that works. When it stops working, they get another machine immediately. Data is on a network drive so no time is wasted migrating. Reusing the old laptop or, shudder, upgrading machines are at best cost optimisations.
Suppose it takes you a day to upgrade an existing Mac. After all, you need to read up on what works and what doesn't, then purchase it, then power down everything (after double-checking the backups), unplug and open the machine, upgrade, reinstall everything where it was, power up and hopefully it works immediately. Maybe it costs you some hours of a trained technician. One day not invoiced is €400-1000. Then add the costs of material and the technician. Then factor in the risk that you may lose more time when something doesn't work.
A pro focusing on his business would say: I'll just buy that iMac Pro, kit it out sufficiently for 3-4 years and get it over with.
I don't think so. To target individuals who could afford at a minimum $5K on a computer would be a ridiculous business model. There just are not enough people like that in the world where it would be worth Apple's time. Apple isn't small enough where selling 1000s of computers to Uber-wealthy people makes a showing in its bottom line. I'm sure some individuals will buy these but that's not the profit generator -- it's the cranberry sauce for the main dish.
The iMac Pro is targeted to midsize to large organizations with a need for a high powered AIO workstation running Mac OS. Price isn't a huge issue here. Some will lease them from a distributor and the cost ultimately will be buried in the client's bill or project's P&L statement. Other's will pay full boat, they'll get depreciated and written off. Again, the organization won't feel much, if any, of the cost.
PRO means nothing id gess, you can be a "pro' with a 13" laptop making websites.
id gess pro is the same as gamer or RGB is in the normal PC world
but for more costly items.
the one thing that i hope to get from "pro shops" is a much higher level of support, i know some one who is a pro and cost is less important to him but support with no downtime is so he has on site support with instant replacement of computer (with all software setup for him) so he has no downtime in work.
no missed work is more important than cost, but i dont think apple will do that.
im with Chupa Chupa i think it's for large company's and will make there techs happy as there easy to install and replace & harder for users to unplug random things + think of the footprint needed for an imac that may be a big plus for corporate use.
id gess pro is the same as gamer or RGB is in the normal PC world
but for more costly items.the one thing that i hope to get from "pro shops" is a much higher level of support, i know some one who is a pro and cost is less important to him but support with no downtime is so he has on site support with instant replacement of computer (with all software setup for him) so he has no downtime in work.
no missed work is more important than cost, but i dont think apple will do that.
im with Chupa Chupa i think it's for large company's and will make there techs happy as there easy to install and replace & harder for users to unplug random things + think of the footprint needed for an imac that may be a big plus for corporate use.
The only thing "Pro" about their pro line of computers is the price they charge. In most ways, I find my Dell XPS to be more "Pro" in every way - productive, professional, processing power...
I don't think 'Pro' to Apple means anything better nowadays... i reckon they still use this term is uses for anything professionals can do "as well as consumers"... which only indicates the 'term' itself is not meaning anything much to Apple anymore, it once did.
It is no longer just a pro market.
'Pro' can mean more expensive,
Pro probably just means more powerful than the base model. The iPad Pro has more functionality than the iPad, the iMac Pro has significantly better specs over the iPad and so on.
