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.
What would you do if apple discontinued the Mac Pro?
- Thread starter Fesco
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Can you link any sources to this?
It would be an interesting read.
I can't, this is all through verbal contact, and I can't cite my sources for privacy reasons. From what I know, very shortly after the announcement was made, certain departments at Apple began cold calling some major customers to encourage resistance to the move. There was clear disagreement between some departments and upper management, and they were attempting to rally customers.
The XServe, like the Mac Pro is a halo machine that touches (and boosts) a lot of departments. There was a lot of unhappiness when the XServe was cut.
Who knows... it's just a hypothetical... who rebukes a hypothetical with "no, it's not going to happen, ever, cause it's stupid" without answering the simple question.
It's like people here are in denial or something of an event that isn't actually happening.
I could actually imagine the engineers doing this.
I realize this, but management tends to only look at the revenue and margins in my experience for larger entities (smaller organizations can better see the value of some things past raw quarterly figures, such as trickle down R&D effects, ...). If it's not performing to their idea of profitable, it's not an issue to them to let it go.
This is my concern over the MP, as the margins Apple brings in keeps climbing (as does the price in order to generate it). Sales numbers are almost certainly declining from the earlier Intel systems ('06 - '08), as the enthusiasts aren't buying as often as they would at previous price points (based on statements of MR members that stated they were priced out of the MP market, and the fact Apple won't split the numbers per product line). From what I read here, it's also having a negative effect on some of the independent pros (state it's getting too expensive to remain Apple customers, particularly for those that can get better usability from other platforms due to faster update cycles).
As the sales numbers drop, economy of scale will reverse as a result, and continue to push retail pricing higher. Eventually creating a perfect storm if you will, where management will say "it's not meeting profitability goals any longer, so it's EOL".
I can seriously see Apple's management trying to use an Mac as their software development platform, despite any protests over their engineering depts.. Especially if equipped with LP for a faster storage solution (faster than SATA or 1G Ethernet, unless Intel includes 10G in the ICH by that time). Or even going to PC's as they can hack their own OS to run on it (they own the IP afterall...
).I realize this, but management tends to only look at the revenue and margins in my experience for larger entities (smaller organizations can better see the value of some things past raw quarterly figures, such as trickle down R&D effects, ...). If it's not performing to their idea of profitable, it's not an issue to them to let it go.
This is my concern over the MP, as the margins Apple brings in keeps climbing (as does the price in order to generate it). Sales numbers are almost certainly declining from the earlier Intel systems ('06 - '08), as the enthusiasts aren't buying as often as they would at previous price points (based on statements of MR members that stated they were priced out of the MP market, and the fact Apple won't split the numbers per product line). From what I read here, it's also having a negative effect on some of the independent pros (state it's getting too expensive to remain Apple customers, particularly for those that can get better usability from other platforms due to faster update cycles).
As the sales numbers drop, economy of scale will reverse as a result, and continue to push retail pricing higher. Eventually creating a perfect storm if you will, where management will say "it's not meeting profitability goals any longer, so it's EOL".
I can seriously see Apple's management trying to use an Mac as their software development platform, despite any protests over their engineering depts.. Especially if equipped with LP for a faster storage solution (faster than SATA or 1G Ethernet, unless Intel includes 10G in the ICH by that time). Or even going to PC's as they can hack their own OS to run on it (they own the IP afterall...
Apple is a little more big picture than that. The Mac Pro is a key component of serious Final Cut systems, or scientific work, which has always been a big push for Jobs.
Remember, back in the day, the Pro users were the ONLY ones keeping Apple alive. Apple has already proven there is a profit in only building pro machines for pro users. Machines like the blue and white G3 were proof of this. These days I believe the profits they make from pro users are larger than they were back then. Does Apple make a lot more money from iPods? Sure. But the Pro division is still very profitable.
The XServe devision? If the 10k units a year rumor was true, it probably wasn't even efficient to keep a production line around. The Mac Pro sells a lot more units than that.
The Mac Pro is kind of a linch pin. It's the only piece of hardware left that can run a lot of Apple's professional apps fully. Yes, I'm aware there is the 27" iMac. No, it doesn't have dual GPUs, 6 monitor support, fiber channel, raid, 12 cores, PCI Express slots, etc. The iMac is not a Mac Pro substitute and it never will be. Yes light peak is coming, but at 10 gigabits a second it still doesn't have the bandwidth to do those things.
The iMac replacing the Mac Pro is laughable, and even Apple knows it. Pro users need the large core count at the very least, and the low profile iMac will never have that.
Apple will look towards abandoning the Mac, but honestly? When they start moving to iOS in 10 years, the first machines that will go are the low end machines that can be replaced by iOS devices. I honestly think machines like the Mac Pro will be the last ones standing, not the first to go.
I can see that the MP does well in the creative professional market, but I don't really see it with the scientific side (more common to see 'nix based workstations for the truly heavy stuff). I only recall a couple of MR members that do, and are in the medical field (and one wasn't using it for imaging or simulations, but more day-to-day things like patient files IIRC).
If you can link some companies, universities,... that use MP's in their scientific and engineering Dept's., I'd appreciate it (trying to gain some sense of scale).
Yes, that was the case then. But the market's changed since then as well. That doesn't mean I don't think the workstation and server markets are going away (quite the opposite actually for servers, but workstations aren't really growing from my perspective - look at the push for cloud computing for servers, and the stagnation of the engineering employment market to see my perspective here).
But the consumer side has taken off for Apple, and it's in their best short term interests to follow it (generates the highest quarterly profits by group). As a result, the pro side has taken a seat at the back of the bus, and the XServe just got thrown off.
So they're not unwilling to do it if they think it's necessary (not stuck on nostalgia or customer loyalty for a niche group/product in their lineup).This is my point.
I don't believe the MP's sales figures have sunk that far yet, but it's closer than many may think due to the rise in MSRP (I'm using recent history as a guide = expect the pricing to continue to rise for subsequent model releases). There's a point where pro market will have to re-evaluate their system costs (not just the hardware), and this will be driven by the rise in costs.
Software expenses can easily out-cost the hardware, and this will extend the period of time pro users are willing to stay on board the USS Apple (can allow the market to last just a bit longer). But mix in say a software upgrade cycle + new system simultaneously, then the prospect of jumping ship becomes more feasible if the equipment and software on another platform have features the OS X side doesn't, and more so if the costs are lower.
As I said, it's not a 100% guarantee if Apple keeps a lid on their greed (price increases), but the right conditions are forming that could cause professional users to do the unthinkable - jump ship. And that would eventually end the MP.
There's another aspect too, that's not in Apple's control (affects pricing). Production costs, namely future CPU pricing from Intel (enterprise parts are expected to climb IIRC), but also Foxconn (if they ever decide they want to make a real profit on the MP, and not do the final assembly for less than their cost).
I'm not saying the iMac is a true replacement, but will work for Apple's software development needs (not graphics intensive). There was something a few months ago they've already cut Final Cut Pro developers, and the GPU choices on the MP are a comparative joke with the rest of the professional world (outdated consumer grade parts v. true professional graphics cards). Apple could have spearheaded professional cards by adding the necessary support to FCP. But they haven't as I understand it.
So it can be seen in a light that they're not all that interested already (I realize part of it has to do with development time and other resources, but if they were truly dedicated to the professional market, they'd have done more than they have in the last 5 years' worth of Intel based MP's, particularly graphics).
Sandy Bridge LGA1356 (LGA2011 too), will actually have 8 cores on one die. Not so laughable in terms of CPU power at all.
Granted, I'd prefer to see this part in the MP, and I do expect this will happen. Take a look here, as it shows the different Sandy Bridge sockets and cpu's that fit them.
Intel's roadmaps show that an 8 core consumer grade part will be available by 2014 (Haswell architecture), and dropped into an iMac (bit earlier in enthusiast desktop parts, but are slightly modified Xeons - I mean true, inexpensive consumer parts, such as the LGA1155 socket in use now). They could also go with a better GPU if they wished, and use an external storage solution via LP (what current LP is good for IMO).
I prefer slots and options too, but Apple would be able to use such a system in-house for their code development needs.
And when have they ever listened to their customers anyway?
We'll have to wait and see, but I think there's more than you're considering.
And hopefully Apple will, if enough people get majorly pissed off inside and out, after 18months or so bring back a newer, better designed RackMac...
Last time I checked the Mac Pro was a Unix based workstation. It beggars belief how many people outside the scientific community seem to forget that all OS X is is a pretty front-end to BSD UNIX (Terminal FTW) - all over my Uni (heavily scientific based, in fact 80% of the offered courses are a Science at least) people are using Macs for research (and weirdly, going around the Comp Sci. Dept, its about 30% Mac, 30% Linux, 20% SunSPARC/Solaris, 20% everything else).
I only got a Mac because of the Mac Pro's ability as a graphics & video workstation. I had a 9600/300 PowerPC Mac for a few years, but other than that, I was PC-based. I use Adobe suites instead of Final Cut and such, but only because I'm used to them (since Premiere 4.2), and I've stayed Adobe because Apple hasn't done anything to improve Final Cut in so long. I considered buying Final Cut Studio, but since decided I'll only do so if they release a major update, as the current product offers nothing above the Adobe suite, and thus would be a waste of money.
It seems to me that Apple's recent growth in profit from the iProducts would enable them to bolster the professional products without concern for the fact that they may be losing a little profit amongst those products. If I were in charge, I would look at +$5 billion in iSales plus -$100 million in Mac Pro and XServe sales = +$4.9 billion in sales overall, and be happy with that. I don't know the real numbers, so I made those figures up, but the point is that profit is profit, and who cares if one branch goes down for a while when the company is swimming in an ocean of money? How is it any different than Subaru throwing millions of dollars into a rally team, for example? It boosts the company image and prestige, being able to say they make the best machines a consumer can buy, but geez, they have to put some resources into it!
If Apple gives up the pro line, we're left no choice but to move forward with other options, and for now, that means PC stuff. I personally believe Apple will continue to build Mac Pros until something is invented to make them obsolete, and I also believe that is exactly what Steve Jobs is trying to do.
Yeah, the MR forums are not a great cross section. Mac Pros are HEAVILY used in high end academics and science.
I'll take a look around. Most of my knowledge is first hand (out of my many hats I've worn, I used to work in education.)
Yes, that was the case then. But the market's changed since then as well. That doesn't mean I don't think the workstation and server markets are going away (quite the opposite actually for servers, but workstations aren't really growing from my perspective - look at the push for cloud computing for servers, and the stagnation of the engineering employment market to see my perspective here).
But the consumer side has taken off for Apple, and it's in their best short term interests to follow it (generates the highest quarterly profits by group). As a result, the pro side has taken a seat at the back of the bus, and the XServe just got thrown off.
Again, even though the consumer side has taken off, the pro side hasn't exactly collapsed. It's still a profitable division. Apple would be making less money if they cut it, and it would probably be the end of Final Cut Pro.
I think a lot of the rising tower costs have been due to Apple abandoning consumer towers. If we're talking in mid nineties terms, Apple is moving people who were on the 7X00 line over to all in ones, but keeping the 8X00 and really the 9X00 lines around.
Consumers used to buy towers when they were the only option. Now that Apple is producing reliable all in ones, consumers don't have to buy towers they never needed to begin with. That doesn't mean that pros are going to switch away from towers, and Apple knows this.
(And yes, I remember the Power Mac 5X00 line was all in one. Those things were unreliable pieces of crap that were mostly sold to education. In fact, their successor, the Power Mac G3 All in One was ONLY sold to education.)
Another thing to keep in mind is that Apple has basically 0 R&D costs on the Mac Pro. From what I've heard, they basically ship Intel an empty Mac Pro case and tell Intel to fill it with components. It's not costing Apple anything to maintain the Mac Pro line.
From my contact with Apple, I don't think they see the Mac primarily as a development platform for iOS software at all. There is the understanding that the Mac will always be around at the high end. No one is going to be cutting movies on an iOS device.
As I mentioned, Apple doesn't really have any resources on Mac Pro development because their development cycle basically consists of telling Intel to build a new Mac Pro.
Sandy Bridge LGA1356 (LGA2011 too), will actually have 8 cores on one die. Not so laughable in terms of CPU power at all.
Take a look here, as it shows the different Sandy Bridge sockets and cpu's that fit them.
Intel's roadmaps show that an 8 core consumer grade part will be available by 2014 (Haswell architecture), and dropped into an iMac (bit earlier in enthusiast desktop parts, but are slightly modified Xeons - I mean true, inexpensive consumer parts, such as the LGA1155 socket in use now). They could also go with a better GPU if they wished, and use an external storage solution via LP (what current LP is good for IMO).
Which is still slower than a 16 core machine doing video encoding.
I have a lot of stories I can't really talk about, maybe someday, but I think this "Apple doesn't care about their customers" attitude is a load of crap. Especially in the Mac division. I would say there are people who know about a lot of issues customers have (like say, the Mac Pro GPU situation), and they're working hard to change things.
I'll take a look around. Most of my knowledge is first hand (out of my many hats I've worn, I used to work in education.)
Since I was doing Uni Open Days last year, I can confirm that in the UK: UEA, University of Bath, University of Bristol and the University of Cambridge all have Macs in use for Science, or at least all did in the period Sept 09 - Sept 10 (so probably still do now since people dont change platforms much) - so there are 4 institutions right there.
And then let the software gurus go write the fastest drive code known to man just to prove that Mac OS X truly is the most advanced OS on the planet... at least in terms of Apples Measurements - or maybe they leave it to the interns
+1 ... common sense prevails ...
The Mac Pro will be scrapped when ... The Creative Industries such as Graphic Design, Photography, Printing, Marketing and Advertising ... all disappear on the same day for good.
I hope so, because at the current rate, I'll be moving back to PC when this Mac Pro needs replacing.
They wont do that any time soon. Because the mac pro is the best mac for productive individuals. The imac may be awesome and powerfull but wont do the job for really heavy buisness. But i have to say a high-end imac is also pretty sweat
Go to Newegg and build an extremely fast hexcore, 12GB memory, 2x 128GB SSDs in raid 0, the next to fastest Nvidia card and a BD burner for around $2.5K. How much Mac Pro will $2.5K get you?
Same answer as if they never made a Mac Pro, I wouldn't buy one. When my 2010 quad needs to be replaced in four or five years I'll look around and get what's appropriate.
If Apple is out of the pro market by then I'll go with Windows. While I use Aperture 3 for photographic management I do my photographic work with Photoshop CS5. I don't want to be platform limited.
Windows 7 works really nice and although I think that Mac OS both feels and looks good to operate I can do everything using Photoshop Windows that I can do on a Mac. Lightroom could substitute for A3 without to much trouble.
I'd hate to see pro oriented Mac hardware go away but that's Apple's decision, not mine.
No one is - it's a hypothetical question used to create a discussion; which is the basis of an internet forum. It seems that you are the one who is taking it too seriously... chill
I don't really need a Mac Pro (nor do a want a computer quite that large) but I want more than the iMac and Mac mini provides. So I'm sitting and waiting and not buying anything. That wouldn't be the case if a mini-tower or expandable consumer Mac existed.
I could hook up external devices to a mini to sort of try to get what I want but I would rather have the neater package of having those things internal.
The Mac Pro will be scrapped when ... The Creative Industries such as Graphic Design, Photography, Printing, Marketing and Advertising ... all disappear on the same day for good.
It's actually much simpler!
The Mac Pro will be scrapped when ... Apple decides to do so!
Everything else is just speculative.
What would I do when the day comes? I'll be fine with without a workstation. All my Pro does is office work, even a Mini could do that.
Not quite sure here.
It's been a while since I was in a University Science or Engineering dept., but last I was, it was all PC's and Unix workstations (Unix workstations = Sun or Silicon Graphics ought to be a big clue here... ). The Apple products could be found in English and various Arts Depts.But professionally (which is recent), most of the really heavy lifting I've seen is still done on PC's of some sort (namely under Unix of some flavor). It could even be a US v. UK or education v. corporate thing, as I recall budgets were always a serious limitation for the technical areas - corporate and education both her in the US (not just systems, but expensive software and other lab equipment and supplies).
I'd appreciate it.I'll take a look around. Most of my knowledge is first hand (out of my many hats I've worn, I used to work in education.)
For now Yes. But I'm talking what's possible in the next few years. I keep spotting complaints about FCP (yet they tend to like it overall), but if it slides in quality of execution and ease of use, it's another log on the fire so to speak. As the human resources are allocated more and more to the consumer devices, their time on the professional areas will be limited, allowing both bugs and fewer features to filter through each revision.
Combine more problematic usability and less for the money, users will get pissed. Add yet the increasing costs of the hardware, users will be more willing to at least research jumping ship, and go if appears to work in their favor. It's a chain of events that have to coincide I'm referring to (domino effect/cascade failure), not a single cause. But the evidence is there to support that way of thinking right now IMO, unless Apple makes a sudden change in their attitude towards the professional users (stop milking their pro products, and actually deliver something users' won't be able to do without).
I'm only going as far back as the fist Intel based MP (anything older is ancient in computer history, and isn't relevant due to the differing tech used).
So the 2006 - 2008 MP's used by enthusiasts, ..., (non pros), were still professional machines whether they earned a living with it or toyed around. The 2009 and newer systems have gotten more expensive. Yes, you can still get a base MP for $2500 (I like round numbers), but it has half the cores than the 2008 base system, and uses cheaper processors (base v. base).
Yes, pros need the expansion and power.
My point is, the costs are getting out of hand, and the quality is getting lower (both software, including firmware, and hardware bugs are increasing). Look at the audio bug, and how long that took to get fixed. This wouldn't have been the case in the past. Other platforms are catching up, if not exceeding what's possible under Apple (cross platform or similar software if not available in a cross platform).
Put it together, and the potential is there for Apple to further lose sales on the MP to other platforms (aside from the fact they knew the iMac would cut into the MP's sales).
Another thing to keep in mind is that Apple has basically 0 R&D costs on the Mac Pro. From what I've heard, they basically ship Intel an empty Mac Pro case and tell Intel to fill it with components. It's not costing Apple anything to maintain the Mac Pro line.
According to the 2009 boards, the manufacturer ID is Foxconn, not Intel. Yes, it's based on Intel's reference designs, but Apple still has to pay the ODM to design and make the parts and final assemble them into a finished product. So economy of scale still applies.
This aspect is just paying money for the most part (Apple still does the industrial design, and gives a basic set of features/specs). But it's not a full design and BOM (as is with the consumer products, such as the various devices they sell - they even acquired PA Semi to make their own chips for this segment = extreme clue as to how dedicated they are to this particular segment).
I meant in terms of code development (system firmware and drivers for OS X).As I mentioned, Apple doesn't really have any resources on Mac Pro development because their development cycle basically consists of telling Intel to build a new Mac Pro.
But I don't think you're really taking the cost of a pair of Xeon Octad CPU's will cost from Intel (Intel's pricing is going up - in this case, think worse than the current Dodeca systems), and especially the result Apple's margins will increase the final MSRP. It's going to be horrible, and out of budget for many. Even large corporations are going to look extremely hard at whether or not it's going to be a financially viable system (increased productivity to justify it).Which is still slower than a 16 core machine doing video encoding.
I'm thinking in terms of management, not the engineering staff. Big difference in my experience.
Not quite sure here.
But professionally (which is recent), most of the really heavy lifting I've seen is still done on PC's of some sort (namely under Unix of some flavor). It could even be a US v. UK or education v. corporate thing, as I recall budgets were always a serious limitation for the technical areas - corporate and education both her in the US (not just systems, but expensive software and other lab equipment and supplies).
I'd appreciate it.
For now Yes. But I'm talking what's possible in the next few years. I keep spotting complaints about FCP (yet they tend to like it overall), but if it slides in quality of execution and ease of use, it's another log on the fire so to speak. As the human resources are allocated more and more to the consumer devices, their time on the professional areas will be limited, allowing both bugs and fewer features to filter through each revision.
Combine more problematic usability and less for the money, users will get pissed. Add yet the increasing costs of the hardware, users will be more willing to at least research jumping ship, and go if appears to work in their favor. It's a chain of events that have to coincide I'm referring to (domino effect/cascade failure), not a single cause. But the evidence is there to support that way of thinking right now IMO, unless Apple makes a sudden change in their attitude towards the professional users (stop milking their pro products, and actually deliver something users' won't be able to do without).
I'm only going as far back as the fist Intel based MP (anything older is ancient in computer history, and isn't relevant due to the differing tech used).
So the 2006 - 2008 MP's used by enthusiasts, ..., (non pros), were still professional machines whether they earned a living with it or toyed around. The 2009 and newer systems have gotten more expensive. Yes, you can still get a base MP for $2500 (I like round numbers), but it has half the cores than the 2008 base system, and uses cheaper processors (base v. base).
1) The 2008MPs base model was actually a single processor model for less than the standard 8-core (you could specifically select to go down to 4-cores).
2) Im in a University Science department as of 6 hours ago (Well, actually its many many departments, and since we have no formal english or arts department, they all have to be used for scientific computation) and I saw plenty of Macs on plenty of desks, ranging from a Mac Pro in Physics all the way down to a couple of old G4 towers in the computer science building. (And this is just from the main thoroughfare - the computer science building has plenty of Macs in it on the inside as well).