MP 7,1 Is the new Mac Pro too niche?

[chabig]

As I said, back in the day the Mac pro was more of a general desktop used by many, now its a much higher end machine for a lot fewer.

So you're basically reopening the never-ending discussion of what the word 'Pro' means. Get over it. It's just a marketing term. Apple offers a range of Mac offerings from low-powered laptops, to super fast all-in-ones, and the new Mac Pro happens to be "the Most Powerful Mac ever!"

As for being niche? Yeah, probably. If you draw a business school graph with numbers shipped on the vertical axis and compute power on the horizontal axis, you ought to see something like a bell curve. Both the low end and high end machines should be niche, by design.

 

[Grandpa2]

I know there's a lot of discussion going on regarding the price and I don't want to debate that here, but rather regarding who exactly is this Mac Pro intended to be for?

Back in the day, the power mac (pre-intel) and even the early Mac Pros were sold to consumers, hobbyists, prosumers and full professionals. As time went on, it seems apple was pushing the Mac Pro to the more higher end users even the trash can Mac Pro was targeted to more of the professional, but what professional?

I mean we have Dave Lee, and he's clearly not the intended target yet he does a lot of video editting, and he's a fairly popular Ytber. Linus of LTT on the flip side seems to fit the bill maybe a bit more and he's planning on buying one.

Overall with the cost coming in over 12k for a full mac pro setup, what type of market is there for these machines? Are Apple's competitors selling high end workstations offering more (or less?) then what apple has? I think and I could be wrong but similar type workstations include maintenance/service contracts to keep those high end computers working. I don't think apple has that, but I could be wrong.

As I ramble on, I guess one thought regarding the Mac Pro, did apple make a mistake in targeting the ultra highend with this model, and sales will be fewer then if they designed a desktop/tower computer that could fit the needs of prosumers, and/or hobbyists.

[doublepost=1559753863][/doublepost]In 2015 I replaced my 2 vintage 2010 mac pros with iMacs with extra storage, etc. I did this at the recommendation of the Apple Store salesperson who told me that my usage needs would be satisfied after we discussed what I needed. I do a lot of photography work using adobe software and other plugins, make books and slideshows and do a lot of storage and editing. He was right as I have been perfectly satisfied. I view the macPro as a commercial product used by very high usage companies and employees as well as private business individuals. What they are doing with this redesign sounds like it will really take these users to a different level.

 

[Infinite Vortex]

My problem with the new Mac Pro, as well as the XDR display, is that its realistically only for a handful of people. We all want that level of performance but are unable to handle that level of price… for everything. This means they'll only sell a "handful" of them. In only selling a handful of them the updates will be slow and far between which will further marginalise sales.

What will exacerbate slow overall sales is that Apple has made it painfully clear is their support for products that doesn't have sustained mega-sales levels they lose their stomach for it. Look at the time to get to this MP update… look at the time for the last Mac mini. Because of this people will be significantly hesitant.

Don't get me wrong, the new MP needs to exist. The thing is that there also needs to be something between a Mac mini and the new MP. Without a middle level product people, the bulk of people, will either gravitate to something that isn't right for them, giving cause for complaint, else they'll go elsewhere. Same goes for the XDR display… its $5,000+ or bust.

What Apple seems to not understand is that people don't always want premium/luxury all of the time. They're happy to buy it when it suits but will push back against having to bleed for it all of the time.

And the ecosystem is only worth so much. I have broken the ecosystem with my smartphone and tablet and the likelihood of Apple getting any money from me through to 2030 is rather quite small as I will see the ecosystem with fear rather than hope and anticipation. No matter how good an iPhone/iPad may become I'll respond to them like an ex-smoker to a cigarette.

 

[chabig]

The thing is that there also needs to be something between a Mac mini and the new MP.

Seems like the iMac Pro is right in that space, though it's not headless.

 

[Zellio]

[doublepost=1559753863][/doublepost]What they are doing with this redesign sounds like it will really take these users to a different level.

If by 'next level' you mean to the next level at the bank, sure

 

[Infinite Vortex]

Seems like the iMac Pro is right in that space, though it's not headless.

The fact that it isn't headless is *on top of* the fact that it can't be user-disassembled and/or updated nor maintained.

 

[Falhófnir]

They have definitely eschewed prosumer & enthusiast markets to focus solely on, to be honest, probably big studios and businesses. That's who this is aimed at, not even middling level productions like pro Youtubers who can quite comfortably get by in an iMac Pro at best. Maybe once a lot of the costs have amortised they will release one with regular core i5s and memory for the enthusiast market?

 

[TheSkywalker77]

I mean we have Dave Lee, and he's clearly not the intended target yet he does a lot of video editting, and he's a fairly popular Ytber. Linus of LTT on the flip side seems to fit the bill maybe a bit more and he's planning on buying one.

Can't forget Marques Brownlee, I can definitely see him buying one of these.

 

[LFO8]

The fact that it isn't headless is *on top of* the fact that it can't be user-disassembled and/or updated nor maintained.

Exactly. That is the #1 reason I will never go for an AIO. The #2 reason is I don't wan't my screen and desktop computer to be glued together into one thing. I have an iPad and a MacBook for that.

Let me be clear, I absolutely love the design of the new Mac Pro and everything the have done to it. I just won't be able to buy it and that bums me out

 

[sracer]

I know there's a lot of discussion going on regarding the price and I don't want to debate that here, but rather regarding who exactly is this Mac Pro intended to be for?

Back in the day, the power mac (pre-intel) and even the early Mac Pros were sold to consumers, hobbyists, prosumers and full professionals. As time went on, it seems apple was pushing the Mac Pro to the more higher end users even the trash can Mac Pro was targeted to more of the professional, but what professional?

I mean we have Dave Lee, and he's clearly not the intended target yet he does a lot of video editting, and he's a fairly popular Ytber. Linus of LTT on the flip side seems to fit the bill maybe a bit more and he's planning on buying one.

Overall with the cost coming in over 12k for a full mac pro setup, what type of market is there for these machines? Are Apple's competitors selling high end workstations offering more (or less?) then what apple has? I think and I could be wrong but similar type workstations include maintenance/service contracts to keep those high end computers working. I don't think apple has that, but I could be wrong.

As I ramble on, I guess one thought regarding the Mac Pro, did apple make a mistake in targeting the ultra highend with this model, and sales will be fewer then if they designed a desktop/tower computer that could fit the needs of prosumers, and/or hobbyists.

Although you didn't want to debate the price, the price is inherent in the question of it being too niche. If this thing was priced at $2500 would you question the niche-ness of it?

 

[mavericks7913]

Yes, too niche.

Mac Pro 2019 is def not for 2D professionals. There are tons of people demanding a modular Mac desktop and yet Apple didnt listen. Be aware that there are few professional works require a mid-end computer. Both iMac and iMac Pro are nice but neither of them are desktops and the cooling performance is still unreliable.

 

[cardfan]

What didn’t belong at that event? It was clearly Mac Pro. Otherwise the usual casual bloggers were there to want to know about iOS. The curious at home or work streamed as well.

This isn’t a consumer product. It’s not aimed at consumers. You saw racks in the video. It’s enterprise. It’s big studios.

I’m sure windows vendors makes their own enterprise versions and I never lost sleep wondering if I could get one to run Doom or whatever. Because frankly I don’t know about them. They don’t promo these at consumer events.

This is apples problem. It’s not really a Mac Pro. It’s a Mac enterprise. We really shouldn’t be seeing it at a consumer event. The favorite refrain on here the past few days is “you aren’t the target”. Heck I’m still waiting on a Mac Pro because that wasn’t it.

 

[mBox]

The 2019 Mac Pro is designed for the type of person who would be buying a Dell T7920 or HP Z8 series if not for a need/want to use OSX.

I tried to price out a Dell for Maya/Resolve work.
I can easily hit 12K USD (16K Canadian).
I work with a fully loaded Z840 (clients) for RED/Resolve work and he paid well over 10K CAD for that one (4 years or so ago).
Sure its a niche, but that all depends on your lifestyle I guess.
I've put well over 80K in my RED camera ecosystem, I guess that's a niche market too
[doublepost=1559757271][/doublepost]

What didn’t belong at that event?

WWDC is a Consumer event?

 

[CWallace]

I know there's a lot of discussion going on regarding the price and I don't want to debate that here, but rather regarding who exactly is this Mac Pro intended to be for?

I believe it is for video production teams for whom the cost of the hardware (computer and cameras) are one of the smallest line items on the final bill to bring their production to market. Even if they spent $45,000 for a maxed-out Mac Pro and monitor, they'll get many years out of it. Same with the tens of thousands they spent on their cameras and audio equipment.

What they spent on each shoot in terms of crew transportation and housing costs to more exotic locales could easily run into the tens or even scores of thousands of dollars. So in comparison, the hardware is a "bargain" due to it's useful life.

I am sure there are "wedding photographers" and "YouTubers" who can swing a Mac Pro and they might buy it for bragging rights or because they've made the financial calculation and the workflow performance improvement is such that the machine's cost pays for itself quickly enough to financially justify the investment. But such a machine has a much bigger impact on their bottom line in the Purchase Year than it does for whom I believe is it's target market.

Back in the day, the power mac (pre-intel) and even the early Mac Pros were sold to consumers, hobbyists, prosumers and full professionals.

Rightly or wrongly, Apple now sees the iMac, iMac Pro and MacBook Pro as the "right" computer for those people. They no longer see the Mac Pro as the "catch-all tower" it was back in 2006 and the PowerMac days.

As time went on, it seems apple was pushing the Mac Pro to the more higher end users even the trash can Mac Pro was targeted to more of the professional, but what professional?

I believe the 2013 Mac Pro was still a "prosumer" machine, if no longer and "enthusiast / hobbyist" machine due to it's lack of external expandability and replaceability.

As I ramble on, I guess one thought regarding the Mac Pro, did apple make a mistake in targeting the ultra highend with this model, and sales will be fewer then if they designed a desktop/tower computer that could fit the needs of prosumers, and/or hobbyists.

I fully expect that a fair bit of the cost of the new Mac Pro is the design and the components to allow it to scale as high as it does. The most-powerfully scaleable workstations from other Tier One (HP, Dell, Lenovo) vendors start at prices within a $500 to $1000 of the Mac Pro.

Of course, those vendors also offer lower-tier towers that cannot scale to anything near what the Mac Pro does (and to be fair, those vendors 'Mac Pro-level' models can scale well beyond what the Mac Pro can), which is what much of the distress about the 2019 Mac Pro is focused on. A machine that can only support 6-8 cores instead of 16-28 and gigabytes of RAM instead of terrabytes. Can accept one gaming or workstation card instead of two. A single SSD instead of two in a high-performance RAID configuration.

There is also complaints about the base level equipment, but to be honest, even if it was a 10-core CPU, 64GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD and a Vega Workstation card for $5999, it would still cost too much. It would just be ludicrously expensive instead of insultingly so.

 

[cram501]

Yes. Too niche. It was a mistake to not address the high end consumer on the low end.

I'm sure it will sell well initially. We'll see in a few years if the platform stagnates again because of lack of interest/sales. That will indicate whether it missed the mark.

 

[mBox]

That will indicate whether it missed the mark.

Or overshot it

 

[johnbono]

Although you didn't want to debate the price, the price is inherent in the question of it being too niche. If this thing was priced at $2500 would you question the niche-ness of it?

Nope. And therein lies the problem. Apple built the equivalent to an S-class Mercedes. So expensive that very few people can afford it, and therefore less profitable than the slightly less expensive E class. They don't have a desktop in their lineup that can cover that huge market. The Imac Pro doesn't really fit because it doesn't have the expandability of the Mac Pro and it has issues with thermal throttling. At $6K the mac pro really is too expensive, especially when you look at the weak video card and SSD. I think the design is great, actually, just that the entry point is way too high. At $4K I think they'd have had a huge success. Maybe if they had gone with a CPU daughter card instead of a complete MOBO, or had a dual socket design or something for greater expandability. FWIW, I'm a PC guy more than a mac guy, but I think they missed out on a big chunk desktop/tower market with what they built.

 

[mBox]

It's funny how everyone is taking a shot at what Apple isn't doing.
Last I checked, reading the future is still at its infancy

 

[MacDaddyPanda]

I don't believe Apple is making this too niche. This product category has always been marketed to the professional market hasn't it? The entire WWDC presentation clearly defined this as a professional commercial grade device. The slides clearly show their target audience. They compare for example the $5k monitor to $40K reference monitors. Something only a film production studio would purchase. Apple has chosen to sell/market this to commercial grade content producers. They clearly itemized every component that industry professionals wanted in the tower. That is clearly the demographic purchasing this type of system. Even in previous iterations the pricing was at a level not targeted at non-professionals. To me this product category has always been targeted at professionals. And the prosumer made up less of the market for this product and instead they have the other "pro" models for those markets at lower price points.

 

[Jyby]

Science Rules!

 

[wallysb01]

It amazes me that people can't fathom people spending $6,000 instead of $3,000 on a tool that will be used 40+ hours a week to drive revenue. As a contractor and consultant I've seen more waste per employee from a lot of companies of all sizes.

Totally agree. If you're using the Mac Pro professionally they are incredible value for money. I'm still running my 2019 cMP into the ground every day and it's still an extremely capable machine. I bought the mid-range model on launch and between now and then have only spent a couple of grand on upgrading the GPU, CPUs and installing an SSD. The ROI is so good on this machine that it isn't even worth thinking about.

I will gladly drop a few extra thousand on a new Mac Pro in the knowledge that it is a ten year investment that can be upgraded way beyond the base spec. Same with the new display, it's not exactly for me (I'm a graphics/3D/vfx guy not working in Hollywood) but for the couple of extra grand it costs I will absolutely be having one of those, knowing that the image quality is the absolute best I can get.

The issue here isn't the ncMP's value in isolation. Rather the ncMP exists in a competitive market. For a lot of small to medium scale users a similar functionality can be had for ~$3K. Who wants to light an extra $3K on fire simply because "its a tool you use for 40+ hours a week"? So is the $3K machine, after all. Its called marginal opportunity cost, that's what drive choices.

 

[apolloa]

The new Mac Pro was designed by a new team, the team is made up of deep computing scientists, ex artists and video editors and 3D artists from big companies, in other words real professionals, they will be working in all Apples ‘Pro’ devices down to the iPad Pro.

They have built the new Mac Pro to be powerful and future proofed.

It is built for these actual professionals, people where time is literally money, that’s no niche market really but quite a big one where they will spend a LOT to save time and make even more back!

I personally think the new Mac Pro nails its target market perfectly.

Contrary to the popular belief of self proclaimed ‘professional’ You Tubers, the new Mac Pro has NOT been made for them despite their complaining and moaning about the new machine because they can’t, or don’t want to afford it, it’s been made for actual proper real professionals.

 

[bobob]

However, now they can offer literally one of the most powerful readily-available workstations on the planet... there is very little that now can't be accomplished on an Apple computer (vs Dell, HP, etc.), and maybe that's enough for Apple.

There is that.

 

[Thysanoptera]

It's funny how everyone is taking a shot at what Apple isn't doing.
Last I checked, reading the future is still at its infancy

I'll try:

--------------------------
Six months after its release, Apple, Inc's high-end 2019 Mac Pro is still struggling to become a serious contender in the workstation world, but it has found an enthusiastic cheering section among power hungry Apple users looking for upgrade. The rollout of the Intel Xeon powered Mac Pro was Apple's clearest message to date that it wanted to play hardball with the big boys of the workstation community. Yet that effort appears to be less than an overwhelming success, Apple insiders and analysts said, because even Apple underestimated the ferocity of the workstation market.
Product manager Frank Casanova said that while Mac Pro can compete with machines such as single CPU Dell 7920 and HP Z8 it has trouble keeping up with their dual CPU configurations. The performance of the Mac Pro Vega GPUs is nothing to apologize for, but Nvidia GPUs are real screamers.
...
Analysts said the Mac Pro series faces the perception that Apple is no longer a leading-edge firm. "Apple hasn't come out with a ground breaking technology in years" said Jim Poyner, an analyst at Dallas-based William K. Woodruff & Co.
...
---------------------------
Computerworld, issue from Sep 10, 1990. Six months after release of overpriced Macintosh IIfx, 5 years after Steve Jobs departure from Apple, seven years before Apple was at the brink of bankruptcy. Text word for word, just computer names changed.

 

[apolloa]

Here’s one example no one will ever think off..

South Park, the team have their own offices, it has a fairly big team and they work to incredibly tight schedules, to help them out they have a very big array of racks of computers and render farms because they make it in Maya and other programmes now.. that’s one potential customer for systems like the new Mac Pro, to them 40k is worth it for one machine if it saves them time. No idea if they are still making new episodes though?