Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

[SvK]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

I really am.

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.
How does the MAcPro fit in with that vision?
It doesn't.

They don't make money from them either.

ps: I got 5000.00 ready to spend on a new MacPro with thunderbolt...but I'm not sure they will exist.

best,
SvK

 

[Umbongo]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

I really am.

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.
How does the MAcPro fit in with that vision?
It doesn't.

iOS works because it has content and the Mac Pro is still part of that content creation world.

They don't make money from them either.

What makes you say that? The two base models have huge margins and none of the upgrades lose Apple any money.

 

[goMac]

^ that

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.

Steve Jobs never said that. He said his mission is to replace the low end PC (with the Macbook being the first victim.)

iOS will eat Macs from the bottom up, not the top down.

 

[ActionableMango]

I'm tired of people saying this.

In Apple's Back to the Mac event, they pointed out 33% of Apple's revenue is from Macs. It's about 22 billion dollars. They said if Mac were it's own company, it would be #110 on the Fortune 500. Mac Pros, especially the base model, probably have huge margins. There is no need or desire to throw that profit away.

The PC/MAC are not going anywhere any time soon. Apple continues to invest in their PCs. They just started a new initiative called the App Store which gets them a cut of all mac software sold through it...it's a pretty big deal. They continue to release new models across the line. They continue to update their apps. They continue to update OS X and its underlying technology.

I know SJ wants to kill the optical drive, a much smaller goal, and we aren't even there yet, much less killing off the PC.

 

[VirtualRain]

I don't think the Mac Pro is on the brink of extinction, but it is becoming less relevant.

Thunderbolt, Quad core CPU's, decent GPU's and SSD options in other Macs are able to address a lot of computing needs that could previously only be met with a Mac Pro.

The case for a Mac Pro is getting more fringe all the time.

 

[Glen Quagmire]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

I really am.

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.
How does the MAcPro fit in with that vision?

How does the MacBook Air fit in with that vision?
How does the MacBook Pro fit in with that vision?
How does the Mac mini fit in with that vision?
How does the iMac fit in with that vision?

Is Apple going to stop making computers?

They don't make money from them either.

Do you have any evidence for this?

ps: I got 5000.00 ready to spend on a new MacPro with thunderbolt...but I'm not sure they will exist.

So you're a time traveller? What are next week's lottery numbers?

The reason why there are no new Mac Pros yet is because the next version of Intel's Xeon chips have not been released yet.

 

[SvK]

You are missing my point,

Now that the minis, imacs, airs, and mac book pros are blazing fast,
the customer base for a MAcPro Desktop is ever shrinking....

....I dare say it is now limited to ProAudio and FilmEditing and not much else.

All the other disciplines can be achieved nicely with Imacs, etc.


best,
SvK

 

[LizKat]

~snip~
I know SJ wants to kill the optical drive, a much smaller goal, and we aren't even there yet, much less killing off the PC.

Apple should take some of that cash pile and wire up the boondocks, because Verizon, AT&T and Frontier are just not going to do it. They are perfectly comfortable with the turf carved up the way it is right now. Everyone is screaming for more bandwidth but the providers are focused on (nice PR brochures about nextgen tech and) caps and throttles. If they can so abuse their urban and exurban captives, then the destiny of rural areas --and of machines with optical drives in them-- wiil be slow to change, unless something comes along to disrupt what has become the norm for these noncompeting behemoths.

Not all computer manufacturers are going to be so quick to eliminate ALL low-end models with optical drives. Apple might not care if some urban dude has to step up to the MBA, but they should mind the boondocks if they really like that halo effect around the school market, so much of which has wired schools but underserved or unwired homes.

Realistically speaking, Apple might not find their margin high enough on low end machines with ODD to care whether there's any kind of notebook machine halo from school-provided MacBooks. So that could translate in the end to a niche market for PC makers selling computers to Mom and Dad in the boonies. Apple is not going to make a $300 MBA or a $400 Macbook with an optical drive.

As far as Mac Pro goes, I agree that demand for machines like that in content creation will keep that machine getting upgrades for awhile yet. Can't beat all the heat issues in the smaller forms yet anyway, when it comes down to really having to turn on the power. A lot of progress has been made, yes. But the larger form is so much more forgiving when it comes to expanding function. Apple would not want to miss an opportunity for a next thing just because they had to worry about how to stuff it into something that fits in an interoffice envelope before they could bring it to market. It's in their long term interest to have the big machine skills and supply chains up to date.

 

[musicguy7]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

I really am.

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.
How does the MAcPro fit in with that vision?
It doesn't.

They don't make money from them either.

ps: I got 5000.00 ready to spend on a new MacPro with thunderbolt...but I'm not sure they will exist.

best,
SvK

I just bought the exact same comp as you, 2010 quad a day before lion was announced this week. I noticed you are using Logic 9 which is what I use as well. I got tired of waiting for the refresh, which is most likely at the end of this year. How big Logic projects can you run on your comp before it craps out?

 

[G4er?]

Apple should take some of that cash pile and wire up the boondocks, because Verizon, AT&T and Frontier are just not going to do it. They are perfectly comfortable with the turf carved up the way it is right now. Everyone is screaming for more bandwidth but the providers are focused on (nice PR brochures about nextgen tech and) caps and throttles. If they can so abuse their urban and exurban captives, then the destiny of rural areas --and of machines with optical drives in them-- wiil be slow to change, unless something comes along to disrupt what has become the norm for these noncompeting behemoths.

Not all computer manufacturers are going to be so quick to eliminate ALL low-end models with optical drives. Apple might not care if some urban dude has to step up to the MBA, but they should mind the boondocks if they really like that halo effect around the school market, so much of which has wired schools but underserved or unwired homes.

This is where Apple has erred. There are lots of places and lots of people that can't get or afford high speed internet. Basically Apple is throwing those parts of the US and that part of the population under the bus by getting rid of ODDs and physical software sales. Plus there are lots of people that just like owning a physical copy.

 

[jnpy!$4g3cwk]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

ps: I got 5000.00 ready to spend on a new MacPro with thunderbolt...but I'm not sure they will exist.

Seriously, relax. There are no appropriate Sandy Bridge CPUs available from Intel yet, for whatever reason. Intel pushed the mobile and mobile-like desktop and very-low-end Xeon Sandy Bridge chips out first. Higher-end chips are not shipping from Intel yet -- nothing Apple, or anyone else, can do about it. Any new Mac Pro that came out now would be a marginal increase using Westmere-based chips. I guess Apple could come out with a silent upgrade if they wanted, but, Apple seems to be looking to go all Sandy Bridge for its new products, so, you will have to wait a few more months. Send your complaints to Intel.

 

[goMac]

You are missing my point,

Now that the minis, imacs, airs, and mac book pros are blazing fast,
the customer base for a MAcPro Desktop is ever shrinking....

....I dare say it is now limited to ProAudio and FilmEditing and not much else.

All the other disciplines can be achieved nicely with Imacs, etc.

But this has always been the case.



Seriously. I'm not getting this. What has changed? Photoshop always ran just fine on the iMac since the very first iMac.

 

[SvK]

I just bought the exact same comp as you, 2010 quad a day before lion was announced this week. I noticed you are using Logic 9 which is what I use as well. I got tired of waiting for the refresh, which is most likely at the end of this year. How big Logic projects can you run on your comp before it craps out?

Hi...

I run Logic fairly bare bones, since I want to be able to change projects really fast. So most of my sample-streaming is taken care of outside of Logic within Vienna Ensemble Pro (which streams back into Logic) I do orchestrals hence I use circa 50 gig of RAM for streaming samples from Vienna and EW...The EW samples are on a slave 24gig RAM 17quad PC which pipes back into the MAcPro via light pipe.

The reason I need to do this on a slave PC isd because the random-read speeds of SSD drives suck on MAC vs. PC (streaming samples is all about random-read speeds) AND I can't utilize revo-drives X2 on the MACpro since the drivers do not exist.

best,
SvK

 

[VirtualRain]

But this has always been the case.



Seriously. I'm not getting this. What has changed? Photoshop always ran just fine on the iMac since the very first iMac.

To me the significant changes are:

- 4 Hyperthreaded cores available on laptops, mini's and iMacs means that the multi-threaded performance of these consumer computers now exceeds the capability of all but the most specialized software

- Thunderbolt delivers high-speed mass storage expansion to a computer of any form factor... a feature that was previously only available in the Mac Pro.

Both of these developments in the latest updates to Apples consumer computers are relegating the need for a Mac Pro to fringe workloads.

 

[goMac]

To me the significant changes are:

- 4 Hyperthreaded cores available on laptops, mini's and iMacs means that the multi-threaded performance of these consumer computers now exceeds the capability of all but the most specialized software

- Thunderbolt delivers high-speed mass storage expansion to a computer of any form factor... a feature that was previously only available in the Mac Pro.

Both of these developments in the latest updates to Apples consumer computers are relegating the need for a Mac Pro to fringe workloads.

But this relationship has always existed.

First iMacs shipped with 233 mhz G3 processors standard. Low end Power Mac G3 was a 233 mhz G3.

B/W G3 Powermac had Firewire for mass storage. iMac DV had Firewire for mass storage. Powerbook G3 had Firewire for mass storage.

Yet both lines continued on just fine.

Again, I'm not seeing this change in computing. The consumer machines and the pro machines have always had this overlap for the last two decades. Why are we freaking out about it now?

The Mac Pro is designed for workloads where improvement can always be had. By definition, quad core consumer machines don't change this.

 

[chrono1081]

Starting to doubt a future MAc Pro..

I really am.

Steve Jobs's mission is to kill the PC.
How does the MAcPro fit in with that vision?
It doesn't.

They don't make money from them either.

ps: I got 5000.00 ready to spend on a new MacPro with thunderbolt...but I'm not sure they will exist.

best,
SvK

This paragraph has absolutely zero merit at all.

When did Steve say his mission was to kill the PC?

Apple is a hardware company, how do they not make money from the Mac Pro?

I never understood the purpose of these drama threads.


The Mac Pro definitely has a spot. I for example don't do video editing but I make games. I need three monitors to fit the three screen hoggish programs I run at the same time and iMacs can't do that. I need a ton of storage (my internal bays are full and I have multiple external raid arrays) as well as the ability to upgrade graphics cards. Mac Pros won't be going anywhere because there are a lot of people like me out there who use Macs.

 

[WardC]

The Mac (Macintosh computers) made up 18% of Apple's total revenue in the last quarter. In their conference call, it was mentioned that the majority of Mac sales were MacBook Pro computers. That leaves less than 50% being desktops, and of those over 97% are likely iMacs and Mac Minis. That would mean that a very small fraction of one-tenth of one percent of Apple's revenue is from Mac Pro sales. The cost of building the Mac Pros is very high, mostly due to the high costs that Intel charges for their processors (The two processors in the 12-core Mac Pro cost about $3000 total). The Mac Pro is probably the smallest market Apple is really concerned with nowadays. You can see my posts in other threads about this, but I think the Mac Pro's days are numbered right now.

The new Thunderbolt display is advertised as: "The ultimate docking station.
With built-in Thunderbolt and MagSafe connections, the new Apple Thunderbolt Display transforms any Mac notebook into a complete desktop workstation." It is advertised as the "Perfect companion for your Mac notebook"

No mentions of compatibility with Mac Pro, or mention of a Mac Pro. When you look at the Mac OS X Lion website photos, you will see no photos of the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is the lowest-selling computer that Apple sells.

The future as far as Apple concerned with right now is in the iPhone, the iPad, and notebooks. That is where they are focused. The desktop platform is slowly being sidelined for solutions that provide more portability, because that is what the majority of consumers want, and pay for. Apple is becoming a consumer-based company. The writing is already on the wall.

 

[goMac]

No mentions of compatibility with Mac Pro, or mention of a Mac Pro. When you look at the Mac OS X Lion website photos, you will see no photos of the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is the lowest-selling computer that Apple sells.

The future as far as Apple concerned with right now is in the iPhone, the iPad, and notebooks. That is where they are focused. The desktop platform is slowly being sidelined for solutions that provide more portability, because that is what the majority of consumers want, and pay for. Apple is becoming a consumer-based company. The writing is already on the wall.

Again, I'm not seeing the difference here. What was the last machine to move to Intel?

There have already been a multitude of reasons given why the Mac Pro is later to update. The Mac Pro is rumored for update next month.

Seriously, we have these threads every year. We had this thread last year, and in 2009. Each time saying the Mac Pro was never going to get an update ever again based on someone's gut feeling and "Apple not caring about Pros."

The cost of building the Mac Pros doesn't matter because they make a profit on them. That makes about as much sense as saying BMW is about to leave the car market because BMW cars are very expensive to make.

 

[THX1139]

What makes you say that? The two base models have huge margins and none of the upgrades lose Apple any money.

You're forgetting about research and development. When you consider that, plus the cost of custom components and then add in how many machines they actually sell, you start to see the problem. Apple makes a much better profit off their iToys, especially when you consider how interconnected they are to the whole content/software distribution model. MacPros are just exclusive and expensive machines that create content with narrow margins. The iPad/iPhone/iToys drive content and consumer software sales and have more profit per unit. Plus they outsell the professional line by at least 10 fold. If you were running a multi-billion dollar company that has to answer to a board of directors and investors, where would you put future development? Yeah... good bye MacPro. If not now... then within the next 2 years. Mark my words.

I edited this to add a comment about the recent release of Final Cut X. A successor to Final Cut Pro with was discontinued. They pretty much neutered the application to better suit the amateur and prosumer market. What does that tell you?

 

[THX1139]

This paragraph has absolutely zero merit at all.

Pretty much the same thing could be said for your entire post. Steve didn't say anything about discontinuing their professional line of computers, but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the direction Apple is going. It's a slow but sure progress towards a consumer device/content driven company.

And you developing games on the Mac? Well, good for you... but you are an extreme minority. Especially when you look at the sales driven by the iToys. And even if they did dump the MacPro, they could still say their laptops are powerful enough for most professional situations, especially now that they have integrated Thunderbolt and it's ability to run multiple displays.

 

[zephonic]

So most of my sample-streaming is taken care of outside of Logic within Vienna Ensemble Pro (which streams back into Logic) I do orchestrals hence I use circa 50 gig of RAM for streaming samples from Vienna and EW...The EW samples are on a slave 24gig RAM 17quad PC which pipes back into the MAcPro via light pipe.

The reason I need to do this on a slave PC isd because the random-read speeds of SSD drives suck on MAC vs. PC (streaming samples is all about random-read speeds) AND I can't utilize revo-drives X2 on the MACpro since the drivers do not exist.

That is why I'm on the fence as well. Most of this software is reported to run much more efficiently on Win7. Add to that the MacPro's retarding update cycle, the premium pricing for what is effectively last year's hardware, Apple's preoccupation with all things "i"...

I love OSX, it is truly an artist's environment, but the arguments in favor of the MacPro are beginning to run a little thin.

 

[VirtualRain]

But this relationship has always existed.

First iMacs shipped with 233 mhz G3 processors standard. Low end Power Mac G3 was a 233 mhz G3.

B/W G3 Powermac had Firewire for mass storage. iMac DV had Firewire for mass storage. Powerbook G3 had Firewire for mass storage.

Yet both lines continued on just fine.

Again, I'm not seeing this change in computing. The consumer machines and the pro machines have always had this overlap for the last two decades. Why are we freaking out about it now?

The Mac Pro is designed for workloads where improvement can always be had. By definition, quad core consumer machines don't change this.

In the Intel era, I suggest that creative professionals were bottle-necked by single and dual core CPU's and a lack of high-speed storage expansion (eg RAID not FW800 drives). Until recently, the Mac Pro which has always been available with 4 cores or more and RAID options, has had a lot of appeal to creative professionals who wanted to get the most out of their software.

Now, however, every computer across the Apple line can outperform most creative professional software. There's only fringe cases that demand 6, 8 or 12 cores and therefore, I see less demand for Mac Pro's for now. At least until software takes another quantum leap in saturating existing hardware.

2 years ago, there was a huge benefit moving from a MacBook Pro to a Mac Pro for Photoshop. Not any more.

 

[goMac]

In the Intel era, I suggest that creative professionals were bottle-necked by single and dual core CPU's and a lack of high-speed storage expansion (eg RAID not FW800 drives). Until recently, the Mac Pro which has always been available with 4 cores or more and RAID options, has had a lot of appeal to creative professionals who wanted to get the most out of their software.

Now, however, every computer across the Apple line can outperform most creative professional software. There's only fringe cases that demand 6, 8 or 12 cores and therefore, I see less demand for Mac Pro's for now. At least until software takes another quantum leap in saturating existing hardware.

2 years ago, there was a huge benefit moving from a MacBook Pro to a Mac Pro for Photoshop. Not any more.

I don't think there was. Photoshop never really used more than two cores, and even then it's multicore usage was fairly limited. And this has been the case for a long time. Again, nothing new here.

I don't know if 6, 8, or 12 cores are fringe cases. You're talking about science, video editing, pro audio, and development, which already were the primary market for pro users.

I don't think Photoshop ever required a Mac tower. Ran just fine on my old Powerbook G3. Again, same situation as always.

(I'll also note that the Powerbook G3 actually shipped with the same range of CPU speeds as the Power Mac G3, all the way up to 400 mhz. Again, Power Mac line survived just fine.)

 

[Ravich]

You are suggesting that competing with the PC has nothing to do with maintaining a presence in professional studios?

Interesting.

 

[goMac]

You are suggesting that competing with the PC has nothing to do with maintaining a presence in professional studios?

Interesting.

Not sure who you're addressing, but Apple has already said iOS isn't competing with the Pro machines.

Makes sense if you think about it. How would Apple replace their Pro applications with iOS? Why would Apple keep the machines that could be replaced by iPads *cough*Macbook*cough* and dump the machines that could not be replaced by iPads?

The logic is entirely backwards.