Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Looks like the end of the road for mac pro

The rest of the Mac line is selling well. Mac sales as a whole has been outpacing PC sales for quite a few quarters now. It makes absolutely no sense for Apple to give away OS X for free. Giving it away would be sacrificing billions in revenue every year.

Only the Mac Pros aren't selling well. Giving away OS X because of that would be like letting a patient die because he needs a toe amputated.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cisco_Kid and Simplicated
pastrychef said:
Did you even read the thread? We are talking about possible discontinuation of the Mac Pro line, not why there hasn't been any updates to it.
Click to expand...

And the reason you guys are talking about that is due to the lack of updates or promotion of the Mac pro, yes?

And yes, i did read the thread.

Same old "waahh there's no consumer-cpu affordable version" and "its missing from some consumer promotion event" stuff that has been carrying on since 2010 (or earlier).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Chung123, Derived and poematik13
throAU said:
And the reason you guys are talking about that is due to the lack of updates or promotion of the Mac pro, yes?

And yes, i did read the thread.

Same old "waahh there's no consumer-cpu affordable version" and "its missing from some consumer promotion event" stuff that has been carrying on since 2010 (or earlier).
Click to expand...

Not one post in this thread has mentioned updates.

If you don't want to see people whining, why did you even click on to this thread? What are you contributing in this discussion?
 
  • Like
Reactions: stevekr and ixxx69
Sydde said:
IBM has been a hardware company since about ever. They were building computers in the '60s and '70s, as well as a bunch of other stuff (I learned to type on an IBM Selectric typewriter, the one with the little ball you could swap out for different typefaces). And a few decades before that, they provided indexing and cataloguing machinery used by the 3rd Reich to keep track of the Jews.

Their only real foray into serious software was OS/2, which came out of a collaboration with MicroSoft. Last I heard, they were beating the drum for Linux, which I guess would be less work for them.
Click to expand...

So if IBM is so big into hardware why are they buying 200,000 MacBooks?

http://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-to-buy-200000-mac-a-year-from-apple-2015-8
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and Derived
In both the WWDC '14 and '15, when Apple talked about their "Mac Lineup", they always showed all Macs except Mac Pro.
So this is really nothing new.

Considering Apple invested in a US factory specifically for the nMP, I think it's safe to say it's not going anywhere soon.

 
  • Like
Reactions: laurim, Derived, poematik13 and 2 others
SoyCapitanSoyCapitan said:
So the Mac Pro dies, but that doesn't mean professional computing dies on the OSX platform. That's where Apple can take advantage of PC user base by allowing them to install OSX.
Click to expand...

So here's the thing. If Apple is going thin client, or legitimizing hackintoshes, they better have it in place before the nMP is canned. As a developer on a large Mac app, the Mac Pro is really the only way we can get our work done. Apple doesn't have a cloud build solution that doesn't rely on having Macs at your location, ideally Mac Pros. The iMac gets utterly destroyed in terms of compile speed by the Mac Pro, and our builds are hours long if not building incrementally. Trying to do nightly builds, plus builds during the day just isn't possible on non-Xeon class hardware at the moment. So losing the ability to get hardware for new hires is not a small problem for us.

I don't disagree with your premise at its surface, but would Apple be willing to leave behind their biggest 3rd party devs? We are a multimillion dollar business just by ourselves, in terms of hardware purchases, I suspect other companies in this area are too. For now, if I was Apple, I'd rather keep servicing the niche. If I can make money, and keep devs on the platform at the same time? Cheaper than the alternative.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision, poematik13 and mburkhard
Cindori said:
Anyone who honestly believes Apple will start releasing OS X for PC's really don't understand Apple at all.
Click to expand...

Anyone who says they can define a company by a strategy they had years ago doesn't understand business. There are a number of things that Apple has done in the last 10 years that defied what their loyal base could have predicted.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision and mojolicious
SoyCapitanSoyCapitan said:
First of all don't use the term 'third world'. It's a Cold War term that isn't used in any legitimate discourse since 1990. The term now used is 'developing world'.

Secondly, please don't patronise us coloured people as being a bunch of dumbasses who can't use anything more complex than a mobile phone. Across Asia and Africa many people are the outsourced employees for media production, coding software, designing websites, and moderating all the junk westerners post on social networks. And we have our own computing and entertainment sectors that are always growing too.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

Though I generally use the word "developing world" or "developing countries" since "third world" is now antiquated (until "developing world" is considered insensitive, and they'll we'll move on to another term), for you to make the jump to what you said is completely uncalled for and you've embarrassed yourself, not RC Mike.

The ironic thing is that I actually think you have a good point about the thin clients (maybe because it's a point I often make myself), and the really ironic part (considering your diatribe) is that the thin client is already here - it's your phone/tablet. It's still a limited version of what you're talking about, but that's the future, not just for the developing world, but everyone (looking 20 years from now).
 
  • Like
Reactions: SoyCapitanSoyCapitan
ixxx69 said:
Though I generally use the word "developing world" or "developing countries" since "third world" is now antiquated (until "developing world" is considered insensitive, and they'll we'll move on to another term), for you to make the jump to what you said is completely uncalled for and you've embarrassed yourself, not RC Mike.
Click to expand...

I had no intention to embarrass Mike, but it is EXTREMELY common for people to talk about the Internet and technology strictly from an occidental point of view that is frequently ignorant of what real people do in Asia or Africa. It's not just forum users, it's even the media who go around spreading tropes like that 'people in developing world only need phones and won't use computers' as if we are all just ignorant illiterate beggars who need biscuits thrown to us by Bob Geldoff and $100 wind up laptops. Remember that one? Even Bill Gates who does so much for developing countries contributed to this myth that Africans just need these little phones to make micro payments with, as if nobody has a bank account, or cash, or a computer or a PayPal account. It's very far from reality. So if you want to call me a diatribe talker go ahead. I speak from experience and can easily muster thousands upon thousands of people in Twitter to tell you they feel the same way.

Computer use is rising very fast across the developing nations. Normally it isn't included in statistics because the sales are all from independent dealers who don't keep accurate records and much of the software is pirated. Internet cafes are also very popular. But things are going to change fast. Free operating systems, thin clients, subscription software and on demand computing is going to put modernity within so many people's reach. This is not even debatable. It's only a matter of time. And when that time comes then you will see that on demand computing will be more powerful than owning a desk side workstation.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: neeklamy and mojolicious
Apple is making so much money off iOS, along with being firmly entrenched in the entertainment business they can easily allow their OS X hardware to slowly slip away. It doesn't garner big screaming headlines that Apple thrives on. It doesn't make them obscene profits, oh sure they're still fat margins compared to other consumer brands of computers, but at the end of the day Apple's all about flash and notoriety.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision
themuseboy said:
So if IBM is so big into hardware why are they buying 200,000 MacBooks?

http://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-to-buy-200000-mac-a-year-from-apple-2015-8
Click to expand...
Kind of OT, but people here who don't know about IBM, its very significant history in computers, and at least some idea of what it does now - you might want to read up on it . That's not to be condescending, but just a larger point to a lot of the folks who like to speculate about stuff around here - if you want to talk about where things are going, it's really helpful to understand where things were and the road to this point in the computer industry.

The short answer to your question is IBM doesn't sell PCs anymore... they're mostly enterprise services now, and as more and more people are bringing Macs into the corporate world, IBM wants to make sure they're part of the solution. I don't know if you read the article you linked to, but as it explains, lots of their own employees want to use Macs, and so they're buying them for employees who want them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Umbongo
themuseboy said:
So if IBM is so big into hardware why are they buying 200,000 MacBooks?
Click to expand...
The "B" in IBM stands for "business": the PC was one of their few forays into consumer-level hardware, which they backed away from when MS licensed DOS, thus pulling out the rug. Notebooks are not something IBM typically gets involved in, it makes sense at this point for them to buy those instead of mucking around with setting up a fab operation just to make a few of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision
pat500000 said:
Oh i know you are advocator of cMP...and I guess somewhat I understood why. I don't doubt your experience in film. Any suggestion from here on out? mac pro 2012 8 core or something like that?
Click to expand...


What do you do to need the power of a nMP or cMP? Unless you're a professional film-maker or 3D/CAD designer, it would seem that either machines are still quite apt.

A trend I've seen lately is that many former cMP users who do a ton of video editing/rendering have switched from the nMP to the new Retina iMac. The performance gap between the fully spec'd iMac and the nMP are too slim for many to justify investing the cost of the nMP. I've not only seen this trend in my own industry (design & heavy-duty illustration) but there've also been plenty of hardcore YouTubers & semi-professional film-makers who've gone that route. Heck, look at this professional/high-end animation studio; they've switched from Mac Pros to iMacs and Mac Minis. And this trend can be witnessed across many creative industries.

I've always used Mac Pros for my professional work. This time around, however, I won't be investing in the nMP simply because it doesn't seem to make much sense anymore compared to a few years back when the Mac Pros were true workhorses and upgradeable without hassle. The actual benefits of working on such a machine were significant and far superior to any of Apple's other offerings. This is no longer the case. The only time I'd consider the nMP as a powerhouse machine would be if I maxed out the 12-core. But then I'd be looking at a cost of $10k and upwards. Add to that at least one decent pro monitor and you're close to at least $12,000. The 64-bit multi-core performance gain you get over the 12-core 2012 cMP is roughly 15% and 19% for the 2010 cMP. That's only addressing 64-bit multi-core performance which is the most significant factor. For me, paying 350% more for a 15% performance gain is not feasible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: foliovision, filmak and Surrat
I did notice the Mac Pro's absence from that photo a few weeks ago, and while I may have raised an eyebrow and muttered something to myself about "neglecting the Mac Pro," I mostly just imagined that it's a reflection of Apple not considering the Mac Pro to be a mass-market model, essential to every image of the product family.

This is assuming the photo has any meaning at all. It could just as easily be the case that it was chosen by a web designer from a set of options, for aesthetic reasons, and that the particular image was photographed without the Mac Pro to craft a light composition over white background. It's a carefully balanced photo (including the placement of the Mac Mini). Adding a large, black object to it would change the feel of the space, and require more overlapping of models. If you compare that photo to all the others on the page with white backgrounds, you'll see that they all have plenty of open space. An overly-cluttered image would not fit the design. It's also why promotional images of the Mac Pro are often shot over dark or black backgrounds, to better balance its dense form and the way light plays off its surface.

That may all sound like a strange, artistic tangent of thought, but I'm a web designer by profession so I have a sense of what goes into graphic design (and responsive web design). Unless a marketing authority at Apple mandated to the designer that every Mac model be represented in that photo space, I don't think it's a reflection of anything more than aesthetics. If Apple plans to discontinue the Mac Pro (which I hope they don't), I doubt product photography would be the first source of evidence. But I guess with Apple, you never know.
 
  • Like
Reactions: poematik13, filmak and ixxx69
Krevnik said:
So here's the thing. If Apple is going thin client, or legitimizing hackintoshes, they better have it in place before the nMP is canned. As a developer on a large Mac app, the Mac Pro is really the only way we can get our work done. Apple doesn't have a cloud build solution that doesn't rely on having Macs at your location, ideally Mac Pros. The iMac gets utterly destroyed in terms of compile speed by the Mac Pro, and our builds are hours long if not building incrementally. Trying to do nightly builds, plus builds during the day just isn't possible on non-Xeon class hardware at the moment. So losing the ability to get hardware for new hires is not a small problem for us.

I don't disagree with your premise at its surface, but would Apple be willing to leave behind their biggest 3rd party devs? We are a multimillion dollar business just by ourselves, in terms of hardware purchases, I suspect other companies in this area are too. For now, if I was Apple, I'd rather keep servicing the niche. If I can make money, and keep devs on the platform at the same time? Cheaper than the alternative.
Click to expand...

This. The nMP is one of the best machines I've ever owned for software development. I definitely wouldn't trade it for any alternative machine people here discuss, certainly not a cMP or any conventional tower that would be too noisy and take up too much space. Unfortunately, it seems most of the Pro users on this particular forum are doing film and video stuff.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mburkhard and filmak
themuseboy said:
So if IBM is so big into hardware why are they buying 200,000 MacBooks?

http://www.businessinsider.com/ibm-to-buy-200000-mac-a-year-from-apple-2015-8
Click to expand...

Because they're not so much into hardware as they used to be, and after they sold their laptop business to Lenovo, they have no products in that space.

I know it's a bit off-topic, but I am kind of baffled by how casually people look back at (say) the 1970-1995 period of computing. IBM was dominant, DEC was chasing them, and Burroughs and Unisys and Honeywell were still in business. One thing all these companies had in common was tight integration between hardware and operating systems and, to a lesser extent, apps. If you were in the IBM big iron space, you used an IBM OS. IBM drives, IBM printers. Same for DEC, although I think there was some room in the PDP-11 line for non DEC OSs.

I'm sure there are studies out there looking at how the tightly-integrated companies lost ground and (with DEC, for example) eventually went under. Even at the PC end, IBM tried to control the hardware -- back in the 80s, there were all sorts of tricks that allowed non-IBM manufacturers to make clones (that was the origin of the term as used in computing). DEC spent a lot of time and money trying to protect its busses/interfaces from third parties, but ultimately failed.

I'm sure there's no simple lesson here for Apple. Key word "simple."
 
  • Like
Reactions: phairphan, mojolicious and filmak
SoyCapitanSoyCapitan said:
Anyone who says they can define a company by a strategy they had years ago doesn't understand business. There are a number of things that Apple has done in the last 10 years that defied what their loyal base could have predicted.
Click to expand...

Least you forget that Apple did try to license out their operating system to third party manufactures. That undercut their own brand, a mistake that Apple does not want to repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: navaira
IBM at one point seemed to want to have a nice tie-in or tried with PC-3270 / a 370-PC that could run and interface easily with MVS/OS370 and 3270 add-on cards, even a Motorolla 68000/68020 and later ene a 68040. Some speculative "loss leaders" to help sell companies on IBM end-to-end software and off-load even DB2 onto the "desktop" with one set of code, with VTAM.

$7,000 for PCs with 68020 along with 80286 at that time. Users running Excel, LOTUS, etc agaist a mainframe was expensive and IBM found ways to sell more hardware. But upgrading a mainframe to accomodate all those new users....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back