Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I didn't ask more because it isn't fair to pressure my friend who signed an NDA. He personally helped me purchase my current Mac Pro, so I respect the privacy Apple expects out of him. He added about the Mac Pro that I was going to be glad I had mine and didn't wait

It's a bit worrying when the suggestion is that old Mac Pros will be less disappointing than new Mac Pros? I can't see myself buying another Mac desktop if Apple slowly diminish the Pro line, I'll just eventually install Windows or Linux on my Mac Pro and run it into the ground.

calciumantacid said:
Predictions for WWDC 2013 - Apple announces that OS X 10.9 will be the last Mac-specific OS X, after that OS X "goes to 11" and to the PC. Apple may decide to certify PC vendors or have some sort of curation mechanism to make sure Apple OS experience is not compromised.

Ooh, you sweet talker, I'd love to see OS X set free - but it's not going to happen at this point in time while Apple are riding high. :confused:
 
No he said, something for pros in 2013. Doesn't mean a Mac Pro.

I know we're splitting hairs here but he did mention "Mac Pro" in the email:

Franz,

Thanks for your email. Our Pro customers like you are really important to us. Although we didn’t have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today’s event, don’t worry as we’re working on something really great for later next year. We also updated the current model today.

We’ve been continuing to update Final Cut Pro X with revolutionary pro features like industry leading multi-cam support and we just updated Aperture with incredible new image adjustment features.

We also announced a MacBook Pro with a Retina Display that is a great solution for many pros.

Tim

Source: AppleInsider

It depends how you read it I guess. Besides if they're working on something for pros that is Mac-related, logic says it's a Mac Pro, even it's a different design or something. Still the same class of computer though.
 
Yup. Mac Pro isn't dead. Apple has just been waiting. Thunderbolt 2.0, faster processors etc. I think it's going to be quite a bit smaller. It will still be upgrade able as its the Pro machine. Any reports that say differently are ill informed.
 
That email from Tim Cook is so carefully worded. The only thing he revealed is that they're "working on something really great" for pro users, which could be absolutely anything, like... an iPad Pro :rolleyes:. The title AppleInsider gave their article - "Tim Cook confirms updated Mac Pro coming in 2013" - is a pretty big jump to conclusions and I think it warranted a question mark at the end.

I don't know how much information is expected to leak into media regarding "something really great" from Apple within less than a week of WWDC, but so far all is pretty quiet on that front. Too quiet?
 
Predictions for WWDC 2013 - Apple announces that OS X 10.9 will be the last Mac-specific OS X, after that OS X "goes to 11" and to the PC. Apple may decide to certify PC vendors or have some sort of curation mechanism to make sure Apple OS experience is not compromised.

I think this would be the happiest moment in my computing life if it ever happened. It would be a spectacular move if Apple did it - it'd completely change the home computing landscape. Sadly I just can't believe it'd ever happen.
 
Predictions for WWDC 2013 - Apple announces that OS X 10.9 will be the last Mac-specific OS X, after that OS X "goes to 11" and to the PC. Apple may decide to certify PC vendors or have some sort of curation mechanism to make sure Apple OS experience is not compromised.

Justifications for the speculation:

:apple: Mac OS X has been renamed to OS X and "Mac" branding removed.

:apple: Apple wants to concentrate on mobile. Intel wants to concentrate on mobile (Haswell is all about mobile). Microsoft wants to concentrate on mobile (Windows 8 is all about mobile). It's 2013 and everybody and their dog is crazy about mobile. Existing Macs will get updates but generally desktop products is NOT how you make investors happy in 2013. Reviving the long-abandoned Mac Pro doesn't make any sense in the current context.

:apple: Apple wants to make their own hardware - CPU, GPU, the whole works. But they want to make mobile hardware, not desktop. There's not much merit in designing desktop systems in the near future so they'll concentrate on mobile hardware and iOS. The desktop OS will be an extension of iOS so it will be a win-win for Apple.

:apple: Macs are already PCs. Heck, Mountain Lion is flawless on my 6-year old PC (which I didn't even build for OS X). I had more driver trouble with Ubuntu than OS X.

:apple: PC users are increasingly unhappy with Microsoft (Windows 8...). Now is the perfect time to strike.

:apple: As PC users begin to use Apple's OS they will be introduced into the iCloud/iOS/iDevice ecosystem. They will buy software through the Appstore. They will buy more Apple mobile devices because of good integration with the OS.

Pro customers will get their pro Apple OS systems from 3rd party vendors. Apple takes credit for taking a bold step forward. They can also put a spin on this by saying they can now concentrate on mobile devices (should be great for their stock prices).

Actually...poster has some good points here, all of which will be laughed at by "regulars" here I'm sure. I'm not holding my breath on this, but it's all valid. Not saying Apple always does the "valid" thing, though. Hell I'd buy an Apple certified HP workstation with OS X on it.

----------

Yup. Mac Pro isn't dead. Apple has just been waiting. Thunderbolt 2.0, faster processors etc. I think it's going to be quite a bit smaller. It will still be upgrade able as its the Pro machine. Any reports that say differently are ill informed.

They've been waiting 3+ years?
 
Predictions for WWDC 2013 - Apple announces that OS X 10.9 will be the last Mac-specific OS X, after that OS X "goes to 11" and to the PC. Apple may decide to certify PC vendors or have some sort of curation mechanism to make sure Apple OS experience is not compromised.

Justifications for the speculation:

:apple: Mac OS X has been renamed to OS X and "Mac" branding removed.

:apple: Apple wants to concentrate on mobile. Intel wants to concentrate on mobile (Haswell is all about mobile). Microsoft wants to concentrate on mobile (Windows 8 is all about mobile). It's 2013 and everybody and their dog is crazy about mobile. Existing Macs will get updates but generally desktop products is NOT how you make investors happy in 2013. Reviving the long-abandoned Mac Pro doesn't make any sense in the current context.

:apple: Apple wants to make their own hardware - CPU, GPU, the whole works. But they want to make mobile hardware, not desktop. There's not much merit in designing desktop systems in the near future so they'll concentrate on mobile hardware and iOS. The desktop OS will be an extension of iOS so it will be a win-win for Apple.

:apple: Macs are already PCs. Heck, Mountain Lion is flawless on my 6-year old PC (which I didn't even build for OS X). I had more driver trouble with Ubuntu than OS X.

:apple: PC users are increasingly unhappy with Microsoft (Windows 8...). Now is the perfect time to strike.

:apple: As PC users begin to use Apple's OS they will be introduced into the iCloud/iOS/iDevice ecosystem. They will buy software through the Appstore. They will buy more Apple mobile devices because of good integration with the OS.

Pro customers will get their pro Apple OS systems from 3rd party vendors. Apple takes credit for taking a bold step forward. They can also put a spin on this by saying they can now concentrate on mobile devices (should be great for their stock prices).

sorry but Apple will never let another manufacture make hardware. They have no control plus they have to share the profits. Who do I call when I have issues? HP or Apple? Making hardware is so insignificant in the grand scheme of things. Just Iphone profits could pay for all of Apples Mac hardware. You make some interesting points and I think it will continue on the same path. Meaning you can install osx on PC hardware and the people who know what they are doing will make Hacks. The average person, who is their market now unfortunately would not know what to do with an HP branded machine running osx if there was a problem.

Instead of putting osx on windows machines just take more of the market. Make better hardware, services, and and operating systems. It's that simple. Licensing Mac os is what Killed them in the 90s...
 
Ooh, you sweet talker, I'd love to see OS X set free - but it's not going to happen at this point in time while Apple are riding high. :confused:

Apple have tried to "set Mac OS free" before, way back in the Mac OS 7.5 / 7.6 days.
Problem was that people bought the OS running on non-Apple hardware as it was cheaper. Apple makes money on selling the complete package: hardware + software.
Steve axed that idiotic panic mode ASAP when he returned.

Apple's business model is not Microsoft's. Apple sells complete systems, ready for use according to their philosophy: Hardware, OS, Apps, Services. Together. As easy as possible. Total user experience.

Take one part away and it doesn't stand anymore.
 
Apple have tried to "set Mac OS free" before, way back in the Mac OS 7.5 / 7.6 days.
Problem was that people bought the OS running on non-Apple hardware as it was cheaper. Apple makes money on selling the complete package: hardware + software.
Steve axed that idiotic panic mode ASAP when he returned.

Apple's business model is not Microsoft's. Apple sells complete systems, ready for use according to their philosophy: Hardware, OS, Apps, Services. Together. As easy as possible. Total user experience.

Take one part away and it doesn't stand anymore.

Of course if Apple abandons a market it doesn't matter if the hardware is cheaper, does it?
 
Only if Apple were to abandon the complete PC market...

Right, but that's what's being talked about. If Apple abandon the workstation market, they could simply license OS X out to workstation makers. Much how like when they killed the XServe RAID, they licensed a third party RAID solution to fill the gap.

People undercutting Apple's workstation prices doesn't matter if Apple doesn't make workstations.
 
Right, but that's what's being talked about. If Apple abandon the workstation market,

Not really. Apple slices and dices the PC market. The parts that are growing they track. The parts that are shrinking they cut loose.

If HP considers a HP Z1 part of their workstation line up then the recent rumblings about a limited and more focused on Thunderbolt and external expansion offering is still in the workstation market. It is just not the same subset they had being trying to target.

As usual with most of these "Pros" market dicsussion unless chasing the the highest ends of the market somehow it stops being "Pro" focused. The upper 10% of the market is not the market. The market is the market.


they could simply license OS X out to workstation makers. Much how like when they killed the XServe RAID, they licensed a third party RAID solution to fill the gap.

Pretty poor analogy because XServe RAID's job was to serve up standards compliant blocks to a standards based fiber channel network. There was nothing Apple or Mac specific about that . The interface your used to set the device's parameters was built/oriented toward Apple specific contexts, but the general, day-to-day function of the device was actually quite generic.

Improved standardized of multiple path IO standards made that even more so over time.

The OS X user interface is unique, non-standards based, and proprietary to Apple. It is completely differentiated. It is not so differentiated once get up into the application layer. If users have the same set of apps and application user experience independent of underlying operating systems then Apple would loose on differentiation. That would be the motivator for the exit. Apple doesn't make a difference so doesn't matter. However, high standards implementation isn't really the cause of the differentiation gap.



People undercutting Apple's workstation prices doesn't matter if Apple doesn't make workstations.

In so far that those will also cut into iMac sales it would matter.
 
Pretty poor analogy because XServe RAID's job was to serve up standards compliant blocks to a standards based fiber channel network. There was nothing Apple or Mac specific about that . The interface your used to set the device's parameters was built/oriented toward Apple specific contexts, but the general, day-to-day function of the device was actually quite generic.

That part wasn't the reason Apple certified other components. They certified other components to support them under server support plans with their hardware. Yeah, both XServe RAID and it's replacement were standards compliant, but buying the Apple certified components meant full warranty support.

The OS X user interface is unique, non-standards based, and proprietary to Apple. It is completely differentiated. It is not so differentiated once get up into the application layer. If users have the same set of apps and application user experience independent of underlying operating systems then Apple would loose on differentiation. That would be the motivator for the exit. Apple doesn't make a difference so doesn't matter. However, high standards implementation isn't really the cause of the differentiation gap.

I agree that OS X is unique, but if Apple leaves the super high end market, they're still not losing much by licensing. People who want a full tower won't buy Apple anyway. Apple can at least keep them on OS X on other hardware, keeping the door open to expand the Final Cut Pro market into those user groups.

I can go look for links (none handy right now), but there were several times Steve Jobs considered licensing out OS X to hardware manufacturers Apple wasn't competing with at the time, including OLPC project. I'm mostly just playing devils advocate, but I don't think it would be out of the question.
 
Apple's business model is not Microsoft's. Apple sells complete systems, ready for use according to their philosophy: Hardware, OS, Apps, Services. Together. As easy as possible. Total user experience.

Take one part away and it doesn't stand anymore.

The philosophy is good when you can innovate and deliver an Apple "wow" on all those fronts but Mac Pro hardware is different because it's basically just a PC workstation (sacrilege, I know). It's difficult for Apple to innovate on the desktop so the hardware part of that philosophy is kinda inherently not really there for Mac Pro unless a pretty computer case is enough to endow it with that Apple magic. That's why I'm thinking Apple should be moving forward with the software and services in the pro sector.

The current trend is that the OS is becoming less of a product and more of a platform for services - iCloud, iTunes, iRadio, etc. When revenue from services begins to overtake product revenue it makes sense to make the platform as prolific as possible. At a certain point you basically want to give away your software for free to anyone who'll install. I can dig the "provide a complete experience" philosophy but once there is more cash in services you can bet the OS becomes as free and available as those AOL disks some of us might be old enough to have received in the mail.

Compare to World of Warcraft bringing Blizzard $1 bln annually in subscription fees while the real-money trade volume is at $2 bln annually in the US alone and zooming right past Blizzard's pockets because the business model is to charge for the product and not the services.

I wouldn't ask what products Apple has for the pro segment, there's not much for Apple to innovate there (not like they're about to make their own Xeons), I would ask what services Apple has for the pro users. The future as I see it is where hardware and software are abundant but services are in demand, so it seems Tim Cook's current vision is a bit different. Granted, even in the mainstream segment iServices are in their infancy and competitors' OSes haven't caught up either, so 2013 may be too early to start mass mailing those OS X coasters to every household in the phonebook.
 
For the entire G3 to G5 range BEFORE they switched to Intel chips there was always an entry level, expandable desktop system and at the same time, a Cube/Mac Mini and some flavour of iMac in the "MID range".

When they switched to Intel there was the Mac Pro with dual 2.66Ghz CPUs at £1699 and a built to order model with dual 2Ghz CPUs that "Filled the void" with a lower price tag of £1499.

There IS a void, you're just ignoring it and towing the Apple marketing party line by denying it exists.

All that was before Apple became the lean mean 40% margin making machine it is today. You're convincing yourself there is a void, but according to Apple there isn't. I charted standard & BTO configuration prices... notice the nearly linear standard config price line? Unless there is a paradigm shift at Apple, Mac Pro territory starts at 2499$.
 

Attachments

  • Apple desktop range prices.png
    Apple desktop range prices.png
    57.4 KB · Views: 103
All that was before Apple became the lean mean 40% margin making machine it is today. You're convincing yourself there is a void, but according to Apple there isn't. I charted standard & BTO configuration prices... notice the nearly linear standard config price line? Unless there is a paradigm shift at Apple, Mac Pro territory starts at 2499$.

And it used to start at £1,499 in 2006 for the 2Ghz BTO Mac Pro. Bearing in mind the RAM alone on that system, even by today's prices, was significantly more expensive and that 2Tb 7200rpm drives can be had for around £60 these days. Just based on Crucial's RAM prices alone that's £238.79 for 2 x 4Gb for a 2006 Mac Pro vs £81.59 for 2 x 4Gb for a 2010+ Mac Pro. Apple haven't passed these savings onto their customers.

Don't quote marketing guff, financial "trends" etc... The problem is component cost and inflated prices that don't reflect those costs as well as Apple's push to TELL their customers they either want a laptop, a laptop for your desk or a very expensive and over-priced workstation when a lot of people want a desktop Mac with some user level expansion that isn't warranty voiding. (user upgradable RAM, a few spare drive bays, GPU on a PCIe card, several PCIe expansion slots as well as the standard features in their other systems such as USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt isn't too much to ask without having to spend £2000+).

You can quote all the "Trends" you like, it's data illustrating Apple's ever inflating prices that don't reflect the ever decreasing component costs. It doesn't justify the pricing, it doesn't fill the void in their range that definitely exists.
 
Last edited:
Right, but that's what's being talked about. If Apple abandon the workstation market, they could simply license OS X out to workstation makers. Much how like when they killed the XServe RAID, they licensed a third party RAID solution to fill the gap.

People undercutting Apple's workstation prices doesn't matter if Apple doesn't make workstations.

That logic would only work IF you could confine things to the workstation segment. There would be quite a few iMac, mini, and laptop buyers realising they could get less expensive equivalents elsewhere. All they would have to pay apple for is the software. Yes, apple makes better hardware but that hardware is more expensive so quite a few people would look at you quizzically if you told them that 599 laptop was not a good deal.
 
Last edited:
You can quote all the "Trends" you like, it's data illustrating Apple's ever inflating prices that don't reflect the ever decreasing component costs. It doesn't justify the pricing, it doesn't fill the void in their range that definitely exists.
I may have under-stressed the "according to Apple" part, and I didn't state wether I was in agreement or not with that. I know next to nothing about financial trends or marketing 'guffaw', but putting that chart together made me realise that Apple seem to make damn sure a product meets a very specific price point, and final specs depend on that price point minus the 40% margin (which in my understanding is not analyst blabla, but a Tim Cook commandment). Also I feel you underestimate the industrial design costs in Apple products which are extremely high compared to other companies, it's not just the sum of individual OEM components.

Again, this seems to be Apple's view, that from their perspective there is no gap needing to be filled. If you need more than what the iMac has to offer, that is MacPro territory (at least today) and that starts at 2499$ (at least today). That we all want something more or less or different is just us squabbling on MacRumors.
 
That logic would only work IF you could confine things to the workstation segment. There would be quite a few iMac, mini, and laptop buyers realising they could get less expensive equivalents elsewhere. All they would have to pay apple for is the software. Yes, apple makes better hardware but that hardware is more expensive so quite a few people would look at you quizzically if you told them that 599 laptop was not a good deal.

And if Apple only certified OS X on third party workstations, that wouldn't be a problem.

As far as people hacking that to run on any machine they want? That's exactly what we have today, so no issue there.
 
The Mac Pro is technically the flagship Mac... the most powerful Mac you can buy.

I doubt they would discontinue it; doesn't make any sense. There are many companies that make a flagship product that isn't exactly a mover, but they keep it in their product line for those who need/want it. I expect Apple to keep the Mac Pro.
 
Predictions for WWDC 2013 - Apple announces that OS X 10.9 will be the last Mac-specific OS X, after that OS X "goes to 11" and to the PC. Apple may decide to certify PC vendors or have some sort of curation mechanism to make sure Apple OS experience is not compromised.

Justifications for the speculation:

:apple: Mac OS X has been renamed to OS X and "Mac" branding removed.

:apple: Apple wants to concentrate on mobile. Intel wants to concentrate on mobile (Haswell is all about mobile). Microsoft wants to concentrate on mobile (Windows 8 is all about mobile). It's 2013 and everybody and their dog is crazy about mobile. Existing Macs will get updates but generally desktop products is NOT how you make investors happy in 2013. Reviving the long-abandoned Mac Pro doesn't make any sense in the current context.

:apple: Apple wants to make their own hardware - CPU, GPU, the whole works. But they want to make mobile hardware, not desktop. There's not much merit in designing desktop systems in the near future so they'll concentrate on mobile hardware and iOS. The desktop OS will be an extension of iOS so it will be a win-win for Apple.

:apple: Macs are already PCs. Heck, Mountain Lion is flawless on my 6-year old PC (which I didn't even build for OS X). I had more driver trouble with Ubuntu than OS X.

:apple: PC users are increasingly unhappy with Microsoft (Windows 8...). Now is the perfect time to strike.

:apple: As PC users begin to use Apple's OS they will be introduced into the iCloud/iOS/iDevice ecosystem. They will buy software through the Appstore. They will buy more Apple mobile devices because of good integration with the OS.

Pro customers will get their pro Apple OS systems from 3rd party vendors. Apple takes credit for taking a bold step forward. They can also put a spin on this by saying they can now concentrate on mobile devices (should be great for their stock prices).
Honestly, I am very satisfied with Windows 8. You smokin crack?
 
Honestly, I am very satisfied with Windows 8. You smokin crack?

Windows 8 is very polarizing. Whether you are in the minority or not, Microsoft split their mindshare and made it easier for other operating systems to be accepted in the mainstream. And no, I'm not smoking crack, but maybe you can share next time I'm in the Netherlands. :rolleyes:
 
The Mac Pro is technically the flagship Mac... the most powerful Mac you can buy.

I doubt they would discontinue it; doesn't make any sense. There are many companies that make a flagship product that isn't exactly a mover, but they keep it in their product line for those who need/want it. I expect Apple to keep the Mac Pro.

Yes, in retail they call it a loss leader. The idea is you come into the store for, oh, cheap soda which the store loses money on, but while there you pick up other stuff because you are already there.

The computer equivalent is that, once you have a pro, you are more likely to stay in the mac ecosystem to have things compatible and/or because you like their work. As a plus, you probably will recommend apple to your friends who are looking for one of their other products (especially if you know you will share data with them and/or be their tech support).
 
Windows 8 is very polarizing. Whether you are in the minority or not, Microsoft split their mindshare and made it easier for other operating systems to be accepted in the mainstream. And no, I'm not smoking crack, but maybe you can share next time I'm in the Netherlands. :rolleyes:
No crack altough I can roll a few decent blunts for you when you're here :)
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.