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.
Is Apple concerned/aware about all the negative comments about the new MP?
- Thread starter compute
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yup, entertaining is the right word for it too.
A few people mentioned Apple stock so I decided to look. In the past every time Apple announced (an actually) new MacPro their stock shot up noticeably. This time it's taken a dive. I wonder if that has anything to do with the MacPro and Cloud-centric designs? I think it does myself.
Correlation does not imply causation.
There has been plenty of news other than the new mac pro - PRISM, happenings in the mobile market, what IOS7 looks like in still images, etc.
Never mind other economic factors like the federal reserve printing press.
The other problem is people would have complained not matter what Apple had done.
if Apple had kept the old tower, people would have complained that it wasn't innovative, wasn't cheaper, etc, etc.
This thread assumes Apple could have done something where no one would have complained.
if Apple had kept the old tower, people would have complained that it wasn't innovative, wasn't cheaper, etc, etc.
This thread assumes Apple could have done something where no one would have complained.
I used to buy G3 and G4 towers, then went iMac when the MacPro was just too pricey then MacBook Pro. Now my needs have changed a little a big beefy desktop may be preferable again.
The MacPro isn't a big seller, though. I think what Apple have done is therefore make a powerful desktop for pros AND a man-who-has-everything consumer product for rich people to surf the web on.
Pros would have been happy with seeing the G5-era shape yet again but with the latest Xeons and Thunderbolt.
The MacPro isn't a big seller, though. I think what Apple have done is therefore make a powerful desktop for pros AND a man-who-has-everything consumer product for rich people to surf the web on.
Pros would have been happy with seeing the G5-era shape yet again but with the latest Xeons and Thunderbolt.
Last edited:
What about semi-pros?
I think the big problem here is that the Mac Pro was a great semi-pro or awesome home user computer. It held everything in one box which is what I like without all the cables. REAL pros don't give a crap about how many cables run around because they already have thousands, whats a few more. They care about speed and the time it takes to render projects that's it. Home users like me care more about storage, blu-ray, graphics for games etc. which made the current pro perfect. The new pro, well that will server the same purpose as a mac mini as far as the stuff I have to buy to make it useable and that is what all the complaining is about. Apple doesn't care about that segment. They don't care about mac gaming at all, never did and with this new mac pro never will. Dual fire pros may be great now but not in 5 years. I finally caved and bought the current mac pro 12 core. The thought of not being able to keep my blu-ray burner, 5 hard drives and graphics card is daunting.
I think the big problem here is that the Mac Pro was a great semi-pro or awesome home user computer. It held everything in one box which is what I like without all the cables. REAL pros don't give a crap about how many cables run around because they already have thousands, whats a few more. They care about speed and the time it takes to render projects that's it. Home users like me care more about storage, blu-ray, graphics for games etc. which made the current pro perfect. The new pro, well that will server the same purpose as a mac mini as far as the stuff I have to buy to make it useable and that is what all the complaining is about. Apple doesn't care about that segment. They don't care about mac gaming at all, never did and with this new mac pro never will. Dual fire pros may be great now but not in 5 years. I finally caved and bought the current mac pro 12 core. The thought of not being able to keep my blu-ray burner, 5 hard drives and graphics card is daunting.
Forum poster are always the vocal, negative minority. The Mac Pro will do great, and the neckbeards can stick to buying their rigs from Dell or Newegg.
Forums all go by the 99/1 rule. 99% of the posts are by 1% of the members. It's a Mac Pro echo chamber.
Forums all go by the 99/1 rule. 99% of the posts are by 1% of the members. It's a Mac Pro echo chamber.
And some forum posters are just insulting, like those who would name any person or business with different needs or preferences than their own as a "neckbeard".
I thought 140 people was a decent sample size for the Mac Pro forum. There is definitely some selection bias but in all the reaction is strongly negative, definitely not just 1% as you suggested.
Three years ago the total macrumor members reached half a million, now probably a lot more. The now 185 people would make it far less then 1%.
Why more now? Apple used to be at the top of their game. Also the forum posts used to be able to be voted up or down, there was a lot of give and take. Now it's all love & peace, don't want to hurt anybody's feelings. The MacRumors forum isn't as fun as it used to be.
I don't believe Apple is worried per se.
What Apple might do is consider the "preview" here as a way of getting marketing feedback which might (most likely not) influence their final product line.
As for me, I am perfectly happy with this new MP given that it is really a Mac (Mini) Pro which suits my needs just fine. As for some heavy duty MP professionals, yeah, they are concerned and rightfully so.
What Apple might do is consider the "preview" here as a way of getting marketing feedback which might (most likely not) influence their final product line.
As for me, I am perfectly happy with this new MP given that it is really a Mac (Mini) Pro which suits my needs just fine. As for some heavy duty MP professionals, yeah, they are concerned and rightfully so.
First off, Statistics don't work that way.
Next, the sample size isn't 185, but (185+110): n=295
Without a variance estimate we really can't do all that much, but we do know that we can make an estimate of the confidence interval. For a 90% CI which produced x=185 (Outcome "old"):
^p = 185/295 = 0.6271
SE = [pq/n]^0.5
= [(0.6271)(1−0.6271)/295]^0.5
= 0.000793 ^5
= 0.0282
p + z{alpha/2}/2SE = 0.6271 + (1.645)(2*0.0282) = [0.53, 0.72]
YMMV, but at basically + 9%, that's a pretty decent estimate of a population (Hint: it isn't how big your Population is, but how big is your Sample, and n=300 isn't shabby). At which point one might realize that the real problem with all of this isn't the sample size but rather that the sample wasn't random, but has a self-selection bias.
At this point, the design is fixed and isn't going to change. The only near-term influence that this feedback can really have is just in three areas: marketing, price point and what accessories may be offered.
For marketing, Apple's silence was sending a message of neglect .. and that isn't just their Mac customers, but also the message being sent to software developers for working on GPU-based code performance enhancements. This pre-announce let them kill two birds with one stone (slow down the defection of the Pros, and to try to light a fire under external software companies to write higher performance code)...and in that view, this maneuver was really more defensive in nature: they've been ignoring this area and the neglect shows.
For price, this is where we get into the debates of if the base Tube is going to retail at $1999, $2999, $3999 or some other price point - - it boils down to a simple question of delivering value to the customer (and perhaps sell more units) --versus-- how much ROI and profit Apple wants to extract from the product.
For accessories, given how historically Apple gave away that TB peripherals market to 3rd parties from Day One, I don't see them jumping back in for what's probably the least popular Mac that they sell ... so all of this is again up to what the 3rd Party companies can deliver on their much smaller R&D budgets.
Be glad that you're not getting screwed. For example, for my own use case, if we assume that the 2013 is going to be sold at essentially the same price points as the 2012, I'd be looking at a +25% increase in capital expenses just to maintain status quo.
-hh
Last edited:
I think the majority of complaints are from people stuck in the past and pissed at Apple for removing the DVD and making storage external, along with expansion cards.
Whether that means the majority are going to stop buying the Mac Pro we'll only know when they go on sale. I don't think it will matter for a lot of people. Upgrades come in cycles and this will mean some will be forced to buy RAID or other storage options and get compatible components but such is life.
If it means a faster computer then most will bite also look at it this way, once they upgrade the next time it could be cheaper as they will just need to replace the main computer and all the storage and other parts will just plug in.
JMHO
Apple is certainly aware
For whatever reason, they survey me about the Mac Pro and my use of it on a regular basis.
I wasn't shy about letting them know about my concerns from a TCO perspective (It is a fail in my book.). Having to add $1,100 dollars (minimum) to the cost to cover the reduced functionality that the 6,1 has is a concern. The Dell workstations are looking like a much better deal - and since I am much more concerned about functionality than design, I was looking at jumping platforms for the first time since I moved to OSX, over a decade ago.
I also let them know that 4 ram slots/12 cores puts them behind in horsepower when it is released, never mind about the future.
As a final note, I told Apple that Sir Idiot-Boy took the wrong approach to the design of the 6,1. Instead of the "Make it smaller, make it less capable" the design philosophy should have been "Bow before the power of my workstation, knaves."
For whatever reason, they survey me about the Mac Pro and my use of it on a regular basis.
I wasn't shy about letting them know about my concerns from a TCO perspective (It is a fail in my book.). Having to add $1,100 dollars (minimum) to the cost to cover the reduced functionality that the 6,1 has is a concern. The Dell workstations are looking like a much better deal - and since I am much more concerned about functionality than design, I was looking at jumping platforms for the first time since I moved to OSX, over a decade ago.
I also let them know that 4 ram slots/12 cores puts them behind in horsepower when it is released, never mind about the future.
As a final note, I told Apple that Sir Idiot-Boy took the wrong approach to the design of the 6,1. Instead of the "Make it smaller, make it less capable" the design philosophy should have been "Bow before the power of my workstation, knaves."
Well put. I sent my own feedback, and so should anyone else who this impacts.
If they had just called it the "Mac Semi-Prosumer" and bundled it with a wedding enhanced iMovie instead of trying to pretend that it was something that it is not it would have been nice. It's like pretending a mini pickup is the same as a F350 when anyone with eyes can tell the difference.
Every single major product announcement Apple has made for well over a decade... at least as far back as the original iPod... has garnered its fair share of negative commentary. And yet almost all of them proved to be tremendously successful.
So no, I really doubt Apple is particularly concerned by this.
So no, I really doubt Apple is particularly concerned by this.
Last edited:
There is rarely more than 100-200 people viewing the Mac Pro forum. You're more than a little off your rocker if you think anywhere near .5M people need to click on the Mac Pro forum, click on that specific thread, and actually submit a vote to provide a decent sampling of the Macrumors' members that give a hoot about any Mac Pro at all.
----------
Winner. Isn't math useful?! Can't really get around the selection bias thing with an inter-web poll.
Double selection bias. Since the forum goers are already negative, The ones who voted negatively are just the more negative of the negative.
Forum users are already heavily skewed to being a bunch of sourpusses. Then you get the sourest of the sourpusses voting. You can't explain that.
