If The Mac Pro is Dead - What next?

[MacsRgr8]

I don't think so. If they wanted to kill it, they'd kill it. There isn't any reason to wait on a discontinuation announcement.

Agreed.

The Xserve was discontinued after it had *missed* the obvious update.
IF Apple doesn't update the Mac Pros with the new Xeons and once Dell and HP workstations are being shipped... then you can assume Apple will announce the end of the Mac Pro.
But not before it has missed the obvious update.... Apple has a few months yet.

 

[wafl iron]

If Apple announces that the Mac Pro is EOL, I will buy a 2010 MP from the refurb pages, and continue using that unit for a minimum of 3 years (AppleCare) and probably 5 or 6 years.

if apple was going to announce mac pro EOL they would have done so a long time ago so they could get this guy's money before he spent it on Dell

 

[BornAgainMac]

I HIGHLY doubt apple would ever allow that. It would be cool, but I just don't see it happening.

Why not? Most of the revenue is from iOS. If it was still 2002 then I would agree. If Apple just wants to sell air notebooks and Mac Minis and iMacs and leave someone else to do the Mac Pro, it will hardly matter to them.

Right now, it is possible that the Mac Pro will be dropped and then Apple will make zero. So having Dell and HP create the Mac Pro, they will bring in some money and still keep the customers happy.

 

[zephonic]

Why not? Most of the revenue is from iOS. If it was still 2002 then I would agree. If Apple just wants to sell air notebooks and Mac Minis and iMacs and leave someone else to do the Mac Pro, it will hardly matter to them.

Right now, it is possible that the Mac Pro will be dropped and then Apple will make zero. So having Dell and HP create the Mac Pro, they will bring in some money and still keep the customers happy.

Oracle would be a more likely partner as some speculation last year suggested.

The question then isn't "Why Not", but "Why would they?". I don't see how this scenario would be beneficial to Apple.

 

[smali]

Boy, that prompted a bizzarre vision:

A matt 27" retina display whose cabinet is ~8" thick.

Yeah, its an iMac with a Mac Pro glued on its back


-hh

A bizarre vision indeed...


(excuse the crappy p'shop job lol!)

 

[deconstruct60]

if apple was going to announce mac pro EOL they would have done so a long time ago so they could get this guy's money before he spent it on Dell

Doesn't make any sense if the Mac Pro growth as even been flat for the last 7 years. If it is even a positive 0.25% growth rate then the number of people next year in that 5-7 year old range and want to buy "one last Mac Pro" will be larger than it is this year. If it flat it is the same number of people.

It is only if the Mac Pro has been rapidly dying of (e.g., negative 25% year-over-year decline) that pulling the trigger sooner rather than later is a bigger return. For instance when the 2010 (but bought in 2011) owners get to their 5-6 mark it would likely not be a time to delay the EOL.

That isn't the current context. Mostly either have early adoptors who bit early on 2006/2007 EFI32 units ( the v0.0 product) or folks coming off the initial real 64-all-the-way-down model. That's probably y-over-y growth and hence no need to cancel early.

 

[deconstruct60]

Oracle would be a more likely partner as some speculation last year suggested.

Oracle would be a horrible partner as a hardware "subcontractor". Who ever made that up needs to cut back on the drugs. Oracle hardware is oriented around selling Oracle software. Not Apple software. It is about as likely as Apple starting to sell Windows boxes. The model that Oracle is implementing is to copy Apple's systems model, but in the enterprise (i.e., $100K-10M) system space.

Neither Dell nor HP would not work either, but at least they don't have a complete competing software stack to sell. They do have a "Unix" alternative to sell already though and extremely deep dependencies on Windows. The "clone wars" are over. Done. Apple isn't going back there.

 

[tamvly]

Oracle would be a more likely partner as some speculation last year suggested.

Apple doesn't need a partner here (other than Intel). And having worked at Oracle for several years and knowing Larry, this assertion makes little sense to me.

 

[goMac]

Oracle would be a more likely partner as some speculation last year suggested.

The question then isn't "Why Not", but "Why would they?". I don't see how this scenario would be beneficial to Apple.

Za-wha?

Since when was Oracle in the desktop PC business?

More on topic: If Apple doesn't care about the Mac Pro, there is nothing to suggest they would care enough to give the pro line to another company.

I would hope they license OS X to Dell or something, but I just don't see it ever happening. It violates the holy directive from his Jobsness about licensing OS X, and again, it assumes they care.

 

[wickedking94]

Lol at these threads. The OP specifically said he didn't want this turning into a debate on whether or not the MP would live, but a discussion on what you will do assuming it's dead. There's probably 2 people who addressed that topic.

Okay, Mac Pro is dead, I buy an fully loaded 27" iMac. Pretty straight forward.

 

[dagomike]

If PCIe Thunderbolt boxes actually work, that could be the stake in the heart of the Mac Pro.

Frankly, I wish Apple would release a mini-tower i7 with a couple 16x and an 8x PCIe slots. And then a couple drive bays. That would be an affordable Pro-sumer model that would attract iMac buyers and satisfy most the needs of pros.

 

[GermanyChris]

Because only in that configuration does the Mac Pro come close to being 2x faster than the iMac.

Hence, in the $$$ per Benchmark point, the top end std. Mac Pro scores 20283 at USD5'000, and the top end iMac scores 11581 at USD2'200.

I hope the Mac Pro remains. It is a cool machine, but the argument of expandability dissapeared with Thunderbolt, and if/when the iMac get a six/eight-core CPU and some decent graphics, so will the performance issue. So, if we see a Mac Pro refresh, I think it will be the last one.

but I can ubgrade my HD's internally and not have the external box..graphics cards have not come out for TB yet and when they do it won't be even close to pci x8 let alone x16. PCI 3 will most likely be out for this mac pro which won't mac it into the iMac for a bit..They just not as comparable as you'd like them to be..

 

[-hh]

A bizarre vision indeed...
[url=http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7085/7028044547_320862fc28_z.jpg]Image[/url]

(excuse the crappy p'shop job lol!)

Love it!

Here's an even lousier Photoshop tweak, to move the optical bay & switches onto the front panel...

...and for the more serious industrial designers, to what degree could the back case thickness be realistically reduced, such as if the PCIe bays and 3.5" HDDs were to be given an approrpriate rotation?

(Or is that out of the question just due to the optical bay?)

-hh

 

[G4er?]

My fear is Apple will release a new MP but it will be a Mac Pro-X machine. All dumbed down and features removed in the "interest" of appealing to greater masses of people. Less is not more when it comes to Mac "PRO"!

True but there are plenty of Mac users like me where the Pro is overkill but the mini isn't enough. I will never own an all in one.
I take that back. If an all in one was the photochop of the Pro and iMac with the slot and ports on the front it would at least be much more useful than the real iMac.

 

[Lesser Evets]

THE MAC PRO ISN'T DEAD.

It lives on forever... in our hearts.

A bizarre vision indeed...
[url=http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7085/7028044547_320862fc28_z.jpg]Image[/url]

(excuse the crappy p'shop job lol!)

haha They could seriously reduce the size of the Pro from what it currently is, especially by reducing amount of PCI slots, get rid of one optical, turn the other sideways, and trim down the whole memory card area. I've been digging around in mine for a couple weeks and notice how open it is in there and how they arranged hardware in such an accessible design. It could be effortlessly optimized down into half that space.

 

[FluJunkie]

There are parts of the Mac Pro I can't get in an iMac, and would even struggle to get with a Hackintosh (ECC RAM for example). Beyond that, I don't much like the idea of using a Hackintosh for actual work - too much "I need to fix it" time if it does go down.

So I'd probably use out the next 2 or 3 years of my Pro, spend a lot more time in a Linux VM, and then make the switch to Dell, HP or Lenovo.

 

[smali]

Love it!

Here's an even lousier Photoshop tweak, to move the optical bay & switches onto the front panel...

...and for the more serious industrial designers, to what degree could the back case thickness be realistically reduced, such as if the PCIe bays and 3.5" HDDs were to be given an approrpriate rotation?

(Or is that out of the question just due to the optical bay?)

-hh

Lol that's good!

The thing is while we joke about this HP have already solved this problem with their new iMac like workstation:

http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z1_features.html#.T3Xbt2CN5GE

Only thing it's missing is the ability to have dual xeon processors. It's not as pretty as an iMac but it still looks good and solves a lot of the problems people have with the iMac currently.

 

[twietee]

Love it!

Here's an even lousier Photoshop tweak, to move the optical bay & switches onto the front panel...

...and for the more serious industrial designers, to what degree could the back case thickness be realistically reduced, such as if the PCIe bays and 3.5" HDDs were to be given an approrpriate rotation?

(Or is that out of the question just due to the optical bay?)

-hh

+1
please gimme a matte finish and aluminium bezel

 

[-hh]

Lol that's good!

The thing is while we joke about this HP have already solved this problem with their new iMac like workstation:

http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z1_features.html#.T3Xbt2CN5GE

Only thing it's missing is the ability to have dual xeon processors. It's not as pretty as an iMac but it still looks good and solves a lot of the problems people have with the iMac currently.

A single Xeon is probably okay for my Photoshop needs, as it looks like they've managed the thermals better than the iMac...

...thought I'd never say this, but ... just how Hackintoshable is this particular HP likely to be?

+1
please gimme a matte finish and aluminium bezel

Sorry, but that aluminum is only going to be offered as an anodized case....

... Bondi Blue ... yellow ... orange ... lime green ... purple ...




-hh

 

[twietee]

want some more crappy ps?

hey that's actually quite fun...instead of an ImacBackpack:










software is dated, though

 

[deconstruct60]

Za-wha?

Since when was Oracle in the desktop PC business?

Since Oracle bought Sun, there is remnants of an argument that Oracle now has deep workstation history. Dormant workstation DNA. Sun (before concentrating on super-sizing hardware) was in the workstation business. If Oracle was a different company that dormant DNA might reawaken and it would "perfect fix" for the workstation Mac Pro to find a home in.

The drug problem is that Larry has no intention whatsoever of waking up that dormant DNA. Oracle bought Sun because :

a. don't have to partner with HP/Dell/etc. to deliver their integrated/"appliance" solutions. ( Exadata , Exalogic , Exalytics , etc. )

b. compete head-to-head with IBM/HP for more holistic "big iron" sales. (i.e., take larger fraction of corporate IT budgets. ) in shops that don't want to buy an integrated solution. Charging 25% per year for software support and 20% per for hardware support brings in more money than just software support.


c. Deep overlap between Oracle shops and Suns shops, for historical reasons.


d. figured they could milk Java for alot more money than Sun was. (e.g., tap deeper into Smartphone revenue streams. )


One of the first Sun hardware products Oracle nuked with the acquisition was the remnants of the workstation line up Sun still had. The only "desktops" left are the SunRays (really local keyboard/monitor terminals to an OS instance hosted inside a bigger box elsewhere ). Not particularly indicative of a good partner to move a workstation to.

More on topic: If Apple doesn't care about the Mac Pro, there is nothing to suggest they would care enough to give the pro line to another company.

It isn't about "care". It is holding onto the overall Intellectual Property. Is there any hardware product that Apple has "spun off" ( Newton almost escaped but was pulled back in and killed). Claris (now Filemaker) was given a long leash ( wholly own subsidiary ) but never technically spun-off.

If it doesn't work they'll box it and it will be like the scene from Raiders of the Lost Ark where it is stored in some "Warehouse 13"-like facility.

I would hope they license OS X to Dell or something, but I just don't see it ever happening. It violates the holy directive from his Jobsness about licensing OS X, and again, it assumes they care.

It isn't some voodoo religion. If some clone vendor ( Dell) gets into trouble with the product one of the first tricks they are going to pull out of the bag is cut price and cannibalize upper end iMac sales. Why should Apple give another company a tool to suck money out of Apple's pocket?

Likewise if Apple made the clone vendors sign contracts that said their products could not fall below Apple's products (e.g, must always be more than $300 above an iMac) , incur all of the charges of modifying OS X for their box ( OS X would be more expensive on this box) , incur the majority of the increase support costs (but still meet Apple standards for delivery ) , and limit their part selection to Apple's approval ...... I suspect no clone vendor would sign that for the expected number of machines to be sold. (it would be a smaller market than what the current Mac Pro's sell into).


Appealing to clones in some subset of the Mac market has even bigger problems than setting the whole market to clone mode.

 

[quasibinaer]

I was asking myself that 'what if' aswell. I´m a photojournalist and currently on a mid 2009 MBP and cant stand various things things about it anymore. Probably First World problems, I know, but still an issue when I´m working.
I basically need a second Computer that´s my workstation when I´m not on the road. The MBP currently pulls double duty and my current setup of external drives is a complete mess. Working on several hundred 20MB+ RAW files over USB 2.0 (even FW800) is a slow and painful experience, I tell you.

So what to buy if they EOL the Pro? Another Laptop is out of the question, just like the mini. An updated 27" iMac (didn´t they just announce some new i7s?) might have enough power but then there´s that godawful glossy display. I could solve that with a 2nd display via TB, which would be ugly though. In the End, it might come down to it, but I don´t want to give in just yet. Hackintosh is out of the question for me, as is Windows. I had sinful thoughts about switching just for work (Lightroom looks basically the same on both systems) but then sense came back to me.

If I had any say in it, I´d love Apple to do a complete redesign. As much as I like the current case, it´s due for a redesign. Maybe slimmer, but defo still a tower. Two basemodels, one (desktop!) i7 and one Xeon, both expandable (core-wise) via BTO. Having the i7 in the lineup would save people who want power but dont need servergrade hardware from having to buy into ECC RAM and all that. Prosumers and gamers being a classic example. Think of it as a beefed up iMac, with PCI Slots, user-replaceable drives - but without the display. And those who need 12-core power can still buy the fancy Xeon flavour.

I really hope they dont EOL it. That would be a shame. I also hope they update it soon, I need one by July...

 

[cocacolakid]

...If Apple doesn't care about the Mac Pro, there is nothing to suggest they would care enough to give the pro line to another company.

I would hope they license OS X to Dell or something, but I just don't see it ever happening. It violates the holy directive from his Jobsness about licensing OS X, and again, it assumes they care.

I think it is almost a lock Apple will not license OS X out again, at least not in the next few years. Think about it from Apple's point of view - company X builds unreliable machines and Apple gets a black eye from it.

It makes no sense. Especially when these are the customers that are spending big bucks.

I also think that Apple is making so much money on iOS that they can afford to prop up the Pro line even if it's not a giant cash cow. After all, such a huge percentage of the creative fields use Mac Pros that to abandon that, and risk they turn to Windows or some other OS, would eventually hurt Apple.

 

[wisty]

Here's one reason why not - almost every Mac Pro owner will also buy a Macbook (Air / Pro), an iPhone, and probably an iPad.

If you need a workstation, you'll get a HP / Dell. Then you'll want a Toshiba laptop, so you can use the same software (not switching between Mac / PC versions). You won't have a Mac computer, so why not try an Android phone, which is bound to be cheaper?

 

[Jack40]

Mac pro is dead!!!!

I think Mac pro is dead , cause Apple didn't announce new Xeon EP workstation unlike other such as HP.
I need Thinderbolt so I'll buy a workstation PC with the new MSI Z77-GD-80 the only thunderbolt motherboard equipped for workstation Intel Ivy bridge
I dislike Apple has discontinued Mac Pro and I say **** off Apple!