What would you do if apple discontinued the Mac Pro?

[nanofrog]

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) I'm 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).

1. I tend to think of the 2008 as an Octad, as you had to deselect/downgrade it to a Quad. But it could be seen from either way (lowest base = Quad that's cheaper than the current Quad, or an Octad that's cheaper than the current Octad).

2. Good to know things are/have changed (as I said, it's been awhile since I had that kind of access to University Science and Engineering Depts.). Are they used for actual crunching (i.e. stress model simulations, weather simulations, ... - things that you usually need/want to run on a cluster to get done this century ), or lower level things, such as spread sheets and the like?

 

[chrismacguy]

1. I tend to think of the 2008 as an Octad, as you had to deselect/downgrade it to a Quad. But it could be seen from either way (lowest base = Quad that's cheaper than the current Quad, or an Octad that's cheaper than the current Octad).

2. Good to know things are/have changed (as I said, it's been awhile since I had that kind of access to University Science and Engineering Depts.). Are they used for actual crunching (i.e. stress model simulations, weather simulations, ... - things that you usually need/want to run on a cluster to get done this century ), or lower level things, such as spread sheets and the like?

The physics ones are used for heavy modelling, (they seem to be 50% Mac at least from what Ive seen). The Computer Science ones are used for everything from cutting edge Computer Science research and number-crunching, all the way down to PowerBooks to give lectures off. Im pretty sure that their all pushed pretty hard (For instance Ive seen 1 Mac Pro replaced a year after introduction as it wasnt fast enough - which shows they must be using them for something power-hungry).

 

[nanofrog]

The physics ones are used for heavy modeling, (they seem to be 50% Mac at least from what Ive seen). The Computer Science ones are used for everything from cutting edge Computer Science research and number-crunching, all the way down to PowerBooks to give lectures off. I'm pretty sure that their all pushed pretty hard (For instance Ive seen 1 Mac Pro replaced a year after introduction as it wasn't fast enough - which shows they must be using them for something power-hungry).

I tried to switch over to the MP once I got to the point I couldn't stomach XP any longer (Electronic Design Automation). Unfortunately, it didn't work out. One of the software suites I wanted to run required a 64bit OS, and ran fine under OS X. But the rest of it was Windows based only (not cross platformed, even though by the same vendor), and they need to be run simultaneously. Switching back and forth would have been a PITA, but it didn't work with VM properly either (my plan to get around this little issue).

So I had to run Windows. Then with the addition of the RAID issues I had (external = added expense), it wasn't the best way to go financially.

Fortunately, Vista came out (not the greatest, but did what I needed without as much hassle as XP). Things have been great since I switched to Win 7, so I'm happy.

I tend to run into the issues that most won't run into. I either can't live with it, or the solution is too expensive if it exists (my use is quite specialized compared to the mainstream consumer user, so I tend to find the bugs - as suddenly as hitting a brick wall for some reason... ).

BTW, the need to run full surface scans on HDD's meant for RAID was one of them (prior to installing them to avoid issues). This is how it was discovered that a PC was needed.

 

[lewdvig]

I would happily continue using mine. It's five years old and still going strong.

It only needs to fear newer Pros because I can confidently say its faster than any iMac or MBP.

 

[cutterman]

If Apple stopped selling MP's I bet the Hack market would expand dramatically. Many would pay on the gray market for software and utilities to install OS X on DIY boxes, thus stimulating more development.

After all the Mac "experience" is purely based on OS X. The MP hardware is commodity stuff in a nice looking case.

 

[nerdo]

Getting really tired of how slow FCP gets when doing big projects. Premiere with its real time CUDA (yes working nicely now with my Quadro 4000) effects and editing of Canon files its pretty groovy. But I must admit I still do important jobs in FCP. As for compressor... eeew I hate it. It is a totally reliable workflow and use it a lot on location but anything complicated or batch.. terrible. Using quicktime exports and batching in Squeeze most of the time. This way I can automate FTP uploads etc. all in one interface.

But main reason for looking some where else besides FCP is simply running out of memory and horsepower too often. titles from Motion falling apart because FCP has reached its 3GB limit on 32GB machine..

Oh try out Adobe's compressor, converting any video too H264 will see actual use of all those cores, getting 1600% CPU, instead of the laughable 33% when using compressor.

As for operating systems, there is no such thing as "the best" it is just a point of view. whatever works is the best. and whatever people like will be adopted everywhere anyway.

AVID was most stable on Windows, nice realtime video on a pretty basic PC with Windows 2K. FCP never pulled that off, it is just a tool, if I want to sit on the couch and relax I take my MBP. For private use, sure apple all the way. (7 macs here in a 6 room apartment heh) but for work: whatever works. It is work.. not a religion. People always feel the need to defend whatever platform they choose because somehow they feel it is an attack on their ability to make the right choice. Buy what you need, use what you want. The rest is just wasting time, just be glad we have the freedom to choose.

And yes I just bought a new 8 core and pimped it with a Quadro 400, 32gb memory, 3X 3TB caviars and 1 Crucial SSD. Because that works best for me right now

(for external storage I use 3X QNAP 809, really nice box)

heh - how come your moving to Premiere? (Im a FCP nut... I cant imagine using everything else, and id only switch out of being forced - mainly as I have got far too many Compressor Droplets and FCP addins to migrate across to anything else).. also to the post above about top of the line PCs vs Macs - your right, especially since its what you do with your machine over what you run that matters (Despite OS X being best for Multimedia and UNIX operations over PCs, PCs definitely have the edge in gaming and hardware upgradeability - (Im talking CPUs etc and I know my Pro can go all the way to 12 cores... but you cant do that with an iMac... yet.)

 

[chrismacguy]

Getting really tired of how slow FCP gets when doing big projects. Premiere with its real time CUDA (yes working nicely now with my Quadro 4000) effects and editing of Canon files its pretty groovy. But I must admit I still do important jobs in FCP. As for compressor... eeew I hate it. It is a totally reliable workflow and use it a lot on location but anything complicated or batch.. terrible. Using quicktime exports and batching in Squeeze most of the time. This way I can automate FTP uploads etc. all in one interface.

But main reason for looking some where else besides FCP is simply running out of memory and horsepower too often. titles from Motion falling apart because FCP has reached its 3GB limit on 32GB machine..

Oh try out Adobe's compressor, converting any video too H264 will see actual use of all those cores, getting 1600% CPU, instead of the laughable 33% when using compressor.

As for operating systems, there is no such thing as "the best" it is just a point of view. whatever works is the best. and whatever people like will be adopted everywhere anyway.

AVID was most stable on Windows, nice realtime video on a pretty basic PC with Windows 2K. FCP never pulled that off, it is just a tool, if I want to sit on the couch and relax I take my MBP. For private use, sure apple all the way. (7 macs here in a 6 room apartment heh) but for work: whatever works. It is work.. not a religion. People always feel the need to defend whatever platform they choose because somehow they feel it is an attack on their ability to make the right choice. Buy what you need, use what you want. The rest is just wasting time, just be glad we have the freedom to choose.

And yes I just bought a new 8 core and pimped it with a Quadro 400, 32gb memory, 3X 3TB caviars and 1 Crucial SSD. Because that works best for me right now

(for external storage I use 3X QNAP 809, really nice box)

Heh, you make some excellent points, and it is high time that Apple (1) Rewrites Final Cut Pro properly for FCP8, and (2) Expands Compressors capabilities to be vaguely stable. (For some large batch media jobs I do have a copy of Adobe Media Compressor floating around I use, but I still prefer Compressor as Im just more used to it). Eventually Ill pimp my Quad MP (It needs another 2 HDs, more RAM and eventually itll probably get a second cinema display just so I can have FCP and Motion open together, side by side).

 

[mrsir2009]

Apple is keeping the Mac Pro, and will for a long time to come. However it doesn't seem like the Apple has their heart in it like they do with the frikin' iPhone and stuff...

 

[chrismacguy]

Apple is keeping the Mac Pro, and will for a long time to come. However it doesn't seem like the Apple has their heart in it like they do with the frikin' iPhone and stuff...

Bet this means Middle Management have their hearts in the iPhone etc and are ignoring engineers requests for the Pro because they want to get the iPhone 4S/5/whateveritsgoingtobe out asap...

 

[Transporteur]

...your right, especially since its what you do with your machine over what you run that matters (Despite OS X being best for Multimedia and UNIX operations over PCs, PCs definitely have the edge in gaming and hardware upgradeability - (Im talking CPUs etc and I know my Pro can go all the way to 12 cores... but you cant do that with an iMac... yet.)

Just FYI, unless you replace your daughter board, you can't upgrade your Pro to 12 cores. A single hex is the limit.

 

[gglockner]

And so with today's rumor that Apple may be discontinuing server Mac OS X server, how many people are still certain that there's no risk that the Mac Pro will be discontinued with no replacement?

 

[goMac]

And so with today's rumor that Apple may be discontinuing server Mac OS X server, how many people are still certain that there's no risk that the Mac Pro will be discontinued with no replacement?

XSan was known as an extremely buggy product. It's a tiny bit surprising, but not so much with the death of XRaid. But I don't know of any sysadmins who could actually use it in production environments without kernel panics.

Final Cut Server was a cool product, but it never seems to have caught on. I think this mostly has to do with Final Cut slowly working it's way out of people's workflows due to poor updating.

Mac OS X Server? I doesn't sound like Apple intends to actually cut it. The rumor is they might roll it into OS X client. I could see that happening... just add OS X Server as an add on pack. OS X Server has never sold well as it's own product, but is a pretty strong add in for Mac servers.

Plus you can already install it as an add on to OS X client, it just costs you $500. But think about it... It would make perfect sense for the home server market, and Apple could very nicely compete against Windows Home Server.

 

[chris98vf]

I guess I'd quit saving up and use that space in the office for something nice...

 

[nanofrog]

And so with today's rumor that Apple may be discontinuing server Mac OS X server, how many people are still certain that there's no risk that the Mac Pro will be discontinued with no replacement?

Exactly.

Sadly, they're just getting started it seems, and the MP isn't a sacred cow that they'll see as untouchable. If it's sales figures plummet enough, and they've the ability to get hardware that suits their needs, it'll go just like the XServe.

I realize this isn't what people want to hear or believe, but the historical evidence is staring us in the face.

 

[goMac]

Exactly.

Sadly, they're just getting started it seems, and the MP isn't a sacred cow that they'll see as untouchable. If it's sales figures plummet enough, and they've the ability to get hardware that suits their needs, it'll go just like the XServe.

I realize this isn't what people want to hear or believe, but the historical evidence is staring us in the face.

The Mac Pro existed before their server line, it will continue to exist after. I'm not sure why people think otherwise.

 

[nanofrog]

The Mac Pro existed before their server line, it will continue to exist after. I'm not sure why people think otherwise.

Stop thinking that far back, and look at it again (namely from a $$$ POV), and you'll notice some trends.

They don't have a sense of loyalty to their customers (you'll buy what we tell you mentality rather than listen and provide what customers want). Recent announcements of the cessation of the XServe and current front page article of other enterprise products to meet the chopping block, including software that runs on such systems. Consumer products are the biggest money maker.

Put all this together (and a few other things I missed mentioning), and it's not that far fetched. Particularly when you take into consideration the most important fact of all; Apple's in business to make money first and foremost.

 

[goMac]

Stop thinking that far back, and look at it again (namely from a $$$ POV), and you'll notice some trends.

They don't have a sense of loyalty to their customers (you'll buy what we tell you mentality rather than listen and provide what customers want). Recent announcements of the cessation of the XServe and current front page article of other enterprise products to meet the chopping block, including software that runs on such systems. Consumer products are the biggest money maker.

Put all this together (and a few other things I missed mentioning), and it's not that far fetched. Particularly when you take into consideration the most important fact of all; Apple's in business to make money first and foremost.

The XServe was always an experiment from day 1. It as the AppleTV of the Mac world. Like the AppleTV it had a small, but strong user base. I think it was a mistake to cut it... but...

The Mac Pro sells well. The Mac Pro makes money. The Mac Pro is a line that can be directly traced back about 15 years. It existed before the XServe. It existed before the iMac. It's selling more than it ever did at those times. As a long, long, long time Mac user, I can say absolutely nothing points to the Mac Pro being cut.

You're trying to compare Apple sales to Orange sales here (no pun intended.)

 

[nanofrog]

The XServe was always an experiment from day 1. It as the AppleTV of the Mac world. Like the AppleTV it had a small, but strong user base. I think it was a mistake to cut it... but...

The Mac Pro sells well. The Mac Pro makes money. The Mac Pro is a line that can be directly traced back about 15 years. It existed before the XServe. It existed before the iMac. It's selling more than it ever did at those times. As a long, long, long time Mac user, I can say absolutely nothing points to the Mac Pro being cut.

You're trying to compare Apple sales to Orange sales here (no pun intended.)

Not Apples to Oranges (look a bit broader perspective - i.e. enterprise products in Apple's lineup only, not server v. workstation or consumer products). Based on that, I'm just trying to convey a few points that are warning signs from my perspective.

1. They have no loyalty to keeping a product line that's not making a sufficient profit by their definition (i.e. may yet be profitable, but if the margins get lower than what they're willing to accept, it's still considered a loser = cut).
2. With professional products cut (i.e. software), and a greater number of bugs (software, firmware, and hardware) = decreased usability compared to what users are accustomed to.
3. Price increases are pricing users out of the MP.

Combine these issues, and it doesn't bode well, as it's a recipe for a sales slump. And that will lead to a product cut if it dips below a certain threshold.

Another little issue (not to do with the MP selling or not as per Apple's management), is that user loyalty and distant history are potentially clouding peoples judgement when it comes to prognosticating the future of the MP.

 

[goMac]

Not Apples to Oranges (look a bit broader perspective - i.e. enterprise products in Apple's lineup only, not server v. workstation or consumer products). Based on that, I'm just trying to convey a few points that are warning signs from my perspective.

1. They have no loyalty to keeping a product line that's not making a sufficient profit by their definition (i.e. may yet be profitable, but if the margins get lower than what they're willing to accept, it's still considered a loser = cut).
2. With professional products cut (i.e. software), and a greater number of bugs (software, firmware, and hardware) = decreased usability compared to what users are accustomed to.
3. Price increases are pricing users out of the MP.

Combine these issues, and it doesn't bode well, as it's a recipe for a sales slump. And that will lead to a product cut if it dips below a certain threshold.

Another little issue (not to do with the MP selling or not as per Apple's management), is that user loyalty and distant history are potentially clouding peoples judgement when it comes to prognosticating the future of the MP.

1) The Mac Pro makes more than sufficient profit. The XServe was not.
2) Apple's server products in general are buggy. Apple's pro software is still well supported, and not even in the same league of buggy. (As I mentioned before, XSan is known to cause kernel panics.)
3) Price increases? How long have you been a Mac user? The 2008 Mac Pro prices were the lowest pro machine prices had been for a while.

The state of the Mac tower is the same as it's always been. I remember back in 1998 we still had the same stupid "Why doesn't Apple have the latest graphics card?" topics. None of this is anything new. Nothing implies that Apple cares less about their towers than they did previously.

Seriously, all you recent people need to calm the hell down. This is nothing compared to when Apple used the Rage 128 instead of the Radeon.

Or remember the time back in the Power Mac G4 days when people were complaining the towers were too expensive and Apple needed a consumer tower? Yeah. All. This. Has. Happened. Before.

Mac Pro isn't going anywhere.

 

[nanofrog]

1) The Mac Pro makes more than sufficient profit. The XServe was not.

I'm not saying the MP is not earning a profit now, but that it's not going to stay that way in the not too distant future if the sales volume falls (which there's indicators that show this is actually possible).

2) Apple's server products in general are buggy. Apple's pro software is still well supported, and not even in the same league of buggy. (As I mentioned before, XSan is known to cause kernel panics.)

I've seen posts that would disagree with you (and I can attest to what 10.6.4 did with RAID... it wasn't pretty)...

But I was referring to OS X (10.6.4 & RAID, audio bug come to mind, each with a slow fix), firmware (fixed memory clock in the '09, as well as the optical drive issues with 3rd party drives in 2009/10 systems that still exists, and eSATA wouldn't work with all the firmware releases in the '09's), and drivers (some graphics issues IIRC).

This may be a non issue to you, but for someone that ran into one or more of these issues, it's a hassle (audio bug had a direct relation to system reliability due to the temps).

3) Price increases? How long have you been a Mac user? The 2008 Mac Pro prices were the lowest pro machine prices had been for a while.

For 2006 - 2008, they had a pricing structure that offered a better value than their PC counterparts (meaning workstations with the same Xeon CPUID's, and the rest as close as you could as exact parity is impossible to achieve).

But this changed as of 2009, particularly with the base Quad (not as much of a price difference as you went to DP systems and/or increased the clock frequencies). The CPU's got cheaper, but the Quad's were ~$1k USD more than their equivalents from Dell and the like. Bugs are also taking longer to fix (i.e. audio bug that plagued the 2009's for nearly a year, and took 2x fixes to finally get right). The MP's not a consumer system afterall...

Again, I'm not going back very far to demonstrate the notable shift in focus as seen by the user (would be older internally, but it wasn't known until later when the changes were implemented).

The state of the Mac tower is the same as it's always been. I remember back in 1998 we still had the same stupid "Why doesn't Apple have the latest graphics card?" topics. None of this is anything new. Nothing implies that Apple cares less about their towers than they did previously.

Seriously, all you recent people need to calm the hell down. This is nothing compared to when Apple used the Rage 128 instead of the Radeon.

Or remember the time back in the Power Mac G4 days when people were complaining the towers were too expensive and Apple needed a consumer tower? Yeah. All. This. Has. Happened. Before.

Mac Pro isn't going anywhere.

There's new technology out now, and will be in the near future that's changing the market in ways that's not happened before.

Cloud computing is going to pick up steam, reducing the actual system performance needed on the consumer side. Bandwidth will still be an issue, as that's taking longer to get upgraded (limited availability for ISP tech like FiOS). Intel's indicated that prices will rise on the server parts as a result of market demands to implement cloud computing (increasing core counts per die - Haswell will have 8x cores per; but the pin counts are still increasing = larger parts, so fewer per wafer). But it's still a value due to the performance per system and lower operating costs (low power usage initiatives that result from the smaller manufacturing processes). Exactly what the large scale companies want.

Workstations will still be needed (still requires high performance, and cloud computing isn't viable due to bandwidth availability limitations or high costs if it is), but the larger parts and lower production rates are going to increase costs (not as many enthusiast parts to help use economy of scale as is possible now for SP/UP versions either, as gaming software wants out of the PC side from what I'm seeing).

Combine this increased cost per CPU with Apple's margins, the MSRP will rise. And it's not inconceivable that it will outstrip the independent pro's ability to purchase them in the not too distant future. There's software cost/usability evaluations to consider as well (i.e. the fact that other platforms may have additional features, such as true n core multi-threading implemented already or will before the OS X equivalents). So some may have to chose to jump ship due to cost or even usability issues (cost reasons are more likely IMO, but the usability factor can't be totally discounted either).

 

[wonderspark]

I like my system, but I bought it just before CS5 came out. For me, this changed everything. The whole Apple - Adobe - nVidia - PC love/hate triangle/rhombus has put professional video editing in a position where the PC side has a clear advantage. The Mac side is still fighting to improve, with Audition for Mac being beta tested (finally!), but the hill Mac has to climb is as tall as Mt. Everest.

I'm already planning to at least take a good look at the other ships before I jump off the Apple ship when my machine reaches EOL. This includes considering an Android in place of my iPhone, as well as a new PC build in place of a Mac Pro. If I'm thinking about leaving Apple, despite loving it, I know millions of others are, too.

 

[Apple OC]

If I'm thinking about leaving Apple, despite loving it, I know millions of others are, too.

lol ... millions? ... I have never met even one

 

[wonderspark]

Ok, but I'm telling you I'm one, and I've met one, in person even, who is also moving back to PCs.

 

[goMac]

I'm not saying the MP is not earning a profit now, but that it's not going to stay that way in the not too distant future if the sales volume falls (which there's indicators that show this is actually possible).

I don't really think this matters... Apple's R&D costs on the Mac Pro are basically zero. The sales could drop by 3/4 and it wouldn't matter. The XServe is an entire different bag (of hurt?). If they were only selling 10k a year, they were probably losing money just keep a production line around. Meantime, the Mac Pro is probably easily selling a few hundred thousand units a year, if not more.

I've seen posts that would disagree with you (and I can attest to what 10.6.4 did with RAID... it wasn't pretty)...

But I was referring to OS X (10.6.4 & RAID, audio bug come to mind, each with a slow fix), firmware (fixed memory clock in the '09, as well as the optical drive issues with 3rd party drives in 2009/10 systems that still exists, and eSATA wouldn't work with all the firmware releases in the '09's), and drivers (some graphics issues IIRC).

This stuff happens across ALL Apple products. It's not at all a Pro specific thing. Apparently you missed the complaining when Apple screwed up the SATA on the Macbook Pros. Or when they put defective power supplies in the iMac G5s. Or when they broke dial up networking in 10.1. Or the Apple phone that won't make phone calls. This is more of an Apple in general thing.

This may be a non issue to you, but for someone that ran into one or more of these issues, it's a hassle (audio bug had a direct relation to system reliability due to the temps).

I've had to deal with the NVidia issues on my Mac Pro, but again, none of this points to Apple discontinuing the Mac Pro. These sorts of little-big annoying issues exist on all their lines.

For 2006 - 2008, they had a pricing structure that offered a better value than their PC counterparts (meaning workstations with the same Xeon CPUID's, and the rest as close as you could as exact parity is impossible to achieve).

Which was very unique and never happened back in the G5/G4/G3 days.

But this changed as of 2009, particularly with the base Quad (not as much of a price difference as you went to DP systems and/or increased the clock frequencies). The CPU's got cheaper, but the Quad's were ~$1k USD more than their equivalents from Dell and the like. Bugs are also taking longer to fix (i.e. audio bug that plagued the 2009's for nearly a year, and took 2x fixes to finally get right). The MP's not a consumer system afterall...

Prices adjusted back to where they used to be in the G3/G4/G5 days.

Again, I'm not going back very far to demonstrate the notable shift in focus as seen by the user (would be older internally, but it wasn't known until later when the changes were implemented).

If anything, the 2006 and 2008 Mac Pros were a very unique switch for Apple to low priced workstations. The current Mac Pro prices are inline with what the prices were on the G5's, and in line with other PC workstations, actually. There is absolutely nothing abnormal about the Mac Pro pricing.

The last time I can think of a Mac Pro tower that was targeted at consumer markets, and priced accordingly, was the first Power Mac G3. Ever since the iMac came out, Apple has never made low priced towers. And that was back in 1998. Again, nothing looks out of the ordinary about the Mac Pros...

(Edit: Ok, ok, I forgot about the time they tried the G4 Cube, which sold poorly. Historically, Apple makes their money in the workstation market in the high end, not the low end, further entrenching the Mac Pro. And remember when everyone complained the G4 cube was too expensive despite being cheaper than the Power Mac G4? Yeah, I'm seeing a pattern here. Apple making better sales on the high end of the market.)

There's new technology out now, and will be in the near future that's changing the market in ways that's not happened before.

Cloud computing is going to pick up steam, reducing the actual system performance needed on the consumer side. Bandwidth will still be an issue, as that's taking longer to get upgraded (limited availability for ISP tech like FiOS). Intel's indicated that prices will rise on the server parts as a result of market demands to implement cloud computing (increasing core counts per die - Haswell will have 8x cores per; but the pin counts are still increasing = larger parts, so fewer per wafer). But it's still a value due to the performance per system and lower operating costs (low power usage initiatives that result from the smaller manufacturing processes). Exactly what the large scale companies want.

Workstations will still be needed (still requires high performance, and cloud computing isn't viable due to bandwidth availability limitations or high costs if it is), but the larger parts and lower production rates are going to increase costs (not as many enthusiast parts to help use economy of scale as is possible now for SP/UP versions either, as gaming software wants out of the PC side from what I'm seeing).

Huh? Workstations will be the last to go because they will be the only kind of machines that can't be replaced. If anything, this gives Apple more of a reason to keep selling Mac Pro hardware.

Combine this increased cost per CPU with Apple's margins, the MSRP will rise. And it's not inconceivable that it will outstrip the independent pro's ability to purchase them in the not too distant future. There's software cost/usability evaluations to consider as well (i.e. the fact that other platforms may have additional features, such as true n core multi-threading implemented already or will before the OS X equivalents). So some may have to chose to jump ship due to cost or even usability issues (cost reasons are more likely IMO, but the usability factor can't be totally discounted either).

The MSRP on Apple's pro-line has been perfectly stable. The only fluctuation was when the prices dropped during the Intel switch.

To be perfectly honest, the only reason the 2006/2008 Mac Pros were so cheap compared to the G5's was probably because Apple had a back room deal with Intel. That's a special situation, not some market force. Prices are back in line with what they should be.

Apple honestly doesn't have huge margins on most the Mac Pros, and it doesn't look like they've been increasing their margins at all. Not sure where you're getting that from. Again, I think the only reason the prices jumped up on the 2009's was because they had a sweat heart deal with Intel. The 2006/2008 Mac Pro prices were so low, as to be abnormal. They were cheaper than custom building.

(Another thing to keep in mind, while a small number, all the XServe buyers will be moving to Mac Pros. If anything the cancelation of the XServe more solidly entrenches the Mac Pro.)

 

[nanofrog]

I don't really think this matters... Apple's R&D costs on the Mac Pro are basically zero. The sales could drop by 3/4 and it wouldn't matter. The XServe is an entire different bag (of hurt?). If they were only selling 10k a year, they were probably losing money just keep a production line around. Meantime, the Mac Pro is probably easily selling a few hundred thousand units a year, if not more.

It's not zero. They pay Foxconn to do it these days (Yes, they can follow/modify Intel's reference design, but there's still engineering design to be done), there's manufacture and assembly as well, not just R&D. Economy of scale has relevance here.

BTW, where are you getting the idea that there's hundreds of thousands of systems sold each year?

This stuff happens across ALL Apple products. It's not at all a Pro specific thing. Apparently you missed the complaining when Apple screwed up the SATA on the Macbook Pros. Or when they put defective power supplies in the iMac G5s. Or when they broke dial up networking in 10.1. Or the Apple phone that won't make phone calls. This is more of an Apple in general thing.

And it's pissed a lot of people off.

But I'm talking about enterprise gear, which is supposed to be free of this sort of crap (or worst case, fixed fast if it's there). Down time is unacceptable for such systems, as is hours and hours of diagnostics. Enterprise users need their equipment to work, and keep working for 5 years (typical MTBR).

These sorts of little-big annoying issues exist on all their lines.

My point is, that this sort of stuff isn't acceptable in the enterprise market. Mistakes like this have cost vendors dearly when users switched to other vendors as a result. Some are no longer exist...

Which was very unique and never happened back in the G5/G4/G3 days.

And was one of the reasons touted for moving to Intel based parts. Now they want to keep the difference, rather than pass on any of it to the users.

Prices adjusted back to where they used to be in the G3/G4/G5 days.

For proper perspective, you'd need to tell me the margins generated at that time (current margins are 41%, and has climbed since earlier Intel based systems). Even a year ago or so, the margin was 39%. Assuming an increase of 2%per year, it won't take that long for the MSRP's to get completely out of hand (this is margin, not increase from MSRP year to year).

If anything, the 2006 and 2008 Mac Pros were a very unique switch for Apple to low priced workstations. The current Mac Pro prices are inline with what the prices were on the G5's, and in line with other PC workstations, actually. There is absolutely nothing abnormal about the Mac Pro pricing.

I need margins and production costs to get a true perspective, as it's possible that the PPC systems cost more to produce, but had a lower margin to generate the MSRP.

They're (PPC MSRP's v. Intel based MSRP's) not much good to me otherwise.

Huh? Workstations will be the last to go because they will be the only kind of machines that can't be replaced. If anything, this gives Apple more of a reason to keep selling Mac Pro hardware.

I'm not saying the workstation will go away. But it will increase in price (no matter the vendor).

Now consider the margin's Apple applies, and it will get out of hand in short order unless they make a dramatic change (namely reduce the margin on the MP). Otherwise, it will be priced out of range at some point (i.e. independents first, SMB second, then large corporations).

To be perfectly honest, the only reason the 2006/2008 Mac Pros were so cheap compared to the G5's was probably because Apple had a back room deal with Intel. That's a special situation, not some market force. Prices are back in line with what they should be.

This may be part of it, but the biggest thing you have to look at is the margin applied. The margin has been increasing, and the parts are actually cheaper in most cases.

Apple honestly doesn't have huge margins on most the Mac Pros, and it doesn't look like they've been increasing their margins at all. Not sure where you're getting that from. Again, I think the only reason the prices jumped up on the 2009's was because they had a sweat heart deal with Intel. The 2006/2008 Mac Pro prices were so low, as to be abnormal. They were cheaper than custom building.

Front page news.

And when I applied the margins posted, the math worked out extremely well (shown in past posts in older threads - look around the time when the 2010's came out).

(Another thing to keep in mind, while a small number, all the XServe buyers will be moving to Mac Pros. If anything the cancellation of the XServe more solidly entrenches the Mac Pro.)

Assuming the physical format (pedestal case/tower) is acceptable/usable, only until OS X Server is canceled (yesterday's front page). Not even that if they use racks.