What would you do if apple discontinued the Mac Pro?

[nanofrog]

The competition is stuff like Dell's Precision 7500 line, and they've remained perfectly competitive. You keep saying the "competition", but the competition for the Mac Pro is not the i7. It's the high end Xeon workstations, with which it remains completely competitive.

All the information I've posted is on comparing proper equipment. Never did I use the i7 series as a comparison. It's relevance has to do with how it and the SP Xeons are related (and happen to be priced the same per Intel's published quantity price list). That's it.

The Dell Precision T3500 is a compatible system with the SP MP, and the Dell Precision T7500 with the DP models (comparing this with an SP system is inaccurate). I've not used consumer systems as a price comparison. Go back and search the numerous threads, and you'll see that I compared it to Dell, HP, and Sun systems (all Xeon based workstations, not consumer grade i7 based systems, as the details in the PSU, ... matter, particularly the duty cycle they're intended to be used for).

For high end workstations, the Mac Pro is honestly the best machine on the market right now, and lots of people are buying it, even to just run Windows.

This is opinion, not fact.

The usage pattern matters, so for some, other systems will be a better choice.

Have you ever used a Precision 7500? Horrid, buggy machines with awful cases that are a PITA to open. The 7600 is supposed to be an improvement though.

I've been in one, Yes. HP's, Sun's, and a few others too.

It uses cables, so it won't be as clean as the MP. But you don't have to worry about burning up the traces on the main board due to exceeding the current limits if you want to connect up another graphics card either, as there's additional PSIG connectors which are attached directly to the PSU.

It all comes down to what approach the designers took; practicality/functionality first vs. placing industrial design (appearance) above function (aka Form follows Function design). Apple places more importance on Industrial design to the point it hampers functionality.

I upgrade when possible in order to extend the usable lifespan of my equipment. So the ability to upgrade easily is critical to me (not need to jump the moon to get it to work, or worse, can't do something that's possible on a multitude of other systems). This may not be that important to everyone, but it's a hallmark of the workstation market (and the details matter greatly as evidenced by the various questions of what can be added to the MP).

The SP versions are kind of a gimme, and aren't really at all in the target market. Workstation users would never buy a single processor machine, except in limited circumstances.

There's numerous reasons to get an SP machine. Usually based on the fact that the software used, and I mean professional applications, can't do n core multi-threading. It's a mixed bag right now, and there's plenty of information here in MR that the more popular application suites are limited as to their multi-threading capabilities (i.e. fixed core count if it's supported at all).

The DP systems have their place, but they're not the only thing people need. Not due to the fact they don't care or wouldn't love to have one, but it's useless given their software usage. Hopefully this will change sooner than later, but it's not going to happen unilaterally before the enterprise grade Haswell parts show up.

Again, compare to a line like the Dell Precision T7500. That's the target market. If you spec one out, the Mac Pro is extremely competitive.

Only for the DP systems, and if you really want an accurate price for Dell, HP, ..., call. You get better pricing over the phone.

You keep saying the Mac Pro is not competitive, but I'm not sure the Mac Pro is competing against what you think it's competing against.

SP compares with the Dell Precision T3500, and the DP systems the Precision T7500. HP has their lines, as do others. I actually like the Sun Ultra systems based on Xeons the best BTW (i.e. Sun Ultra 27 is the comparative model to the SP based MP's).

 

[goMac]

The Dell Precision T3500 is a compatible system with the SP MP, and the Dell Precision T7500 with the DP models (comparing this with an SP system is inaccurate). I've not used consumer systems as a price comparison. Go back and search the numerous threads, and you'll see that I compared it to Dell, HP, and Sun systems (all Xeon based workstations, not consumer grade i7 based systems, as the details in the PSU, ... matter, particularly the duty cycle they're intended to be used for).

I just speced out a T7500, more expensive than a DP Mac Pro. Barely, but more expensive.

I used to work at a place that had a "connection" at Dell. Our Dell workstations were always more expensive than our Mac Pros, even with the special prices.

It uses cables, so it won't be as clean as the MP. But you don't have to worry about burning up the traces on the main board due to exceeding the current limits if you want to connect up another graphics card either, as there's additional PSIG connectors which are attached directly to the PSU.

The T7500 actually doesn't have the extra GPU power leads. I know, because I've installed high end GPU's into them

It all comes down to what approach the designers took; practicality/functionality first vs. placing industrial design (appearance) above function (aka Form follows Function design). Apple places more importance on Industrial design to the point it hampers functionality.

I'm not talking industrial design... Have you ever opened a T7500? PITA to open, difficult not to cut yourself on the innards, PITA to yank an HD, and PITA to close again.

Not to mention the T7500's and T7400's I've worked on love to lose their audio, and constantly drop ethernet connections.

I'm not talking about the Mac Pro being pretty. I'm talking about it not being a PITA to open and work on.

There's numerous reasons to get an SP machine. Usually based on the fact that the software used, and I mean professional applications, can't do n core multi-threading. It's a mixed bag right now, and there's plenty of information here in MR that the more popular application suites are limited as to their multi-threading capabilities (i.e. fixed core count if it's supported at all).

If you're working on the sort of software where you're only going to be working on 4 cores at once, you probably aren't Apple's target market.

My coding software can use 12 cores (actually unlimited cores), and most professional software can soak up your cores, especially if you're using multiple apps at once. The Adobe suite is one I can think of that, at least in the 2D graphics side, is more limited. But if you're running multiple apps at once, you can soak up those cores.

Video apps love cores, so do rendering apps. If I'm a professional, I'll pay the extra to cut my rendering times in half.

The DP systems have their place, but they're not the only thing people need. Not due to the fact they don't care or wouldn't love to have one, but it's useless given their software usage. Hopefully this will change sooner than later, but it's not going to happen unilaterally before the enterprise grade Haswell parts show up.

Again, people who need lower end hardware are not Apple's market. Apple builds workstations, not consumer level towers, and not prosumer level towers.

The 4 core model is really a "because it's not too much more effort to make" system. It's not really the target market system at all.

Only for the DP systems, and if you really want an accurate price for Dell, HP, ..., call. You get better pricing over the phone.

If we want to start talking deals, I could call up my Apple business rep, look at an education discount, use my corporate discount, etc. We could spend all day at this. I'm using the quoted prices on each's websites (which according to Dell, is already discounted.)

(And if Apple still gave developer discounts I could make it really messy.)

 

[nanofrog]

I just spec'd out a T7500, more expensive than a DP Mac Pro. Barely, but more expensive.

I have no idea what you actually spec'd out, as it's impossible to get absolute parity. As you increase the clock frequency, the price gaps diminish rapidly, and can go over the MP, according to the web pricing.

I mentioned over the phone, as it's not using discounts per se, particularly those that only some would be eligible for (i.e. education).

The T7500 actually doesn't have the extra GPU power leads. I know, because I've installed high end GPU's into them

It's designed for 2x graphics cards (16x lanes) and has the necessary power cables (designed for 225W max per).


The T5500 can handle 2x cards as well, but have a lower TDP of 150W per card.

I'm not talking industrial design... Have you ever opened a T7500? PITA to open, difficult not to cut yourself on the innards, PITA to yank an HD, and PITA to close again.

You can cut yourself in the internals of any system, including the MP (done it). Nor do I find them nearly as difficult as the basic business machines either (consumer CPU's, as Xeon's aren't needed, but don't have the crapware or extra toys that come with the typical consumer oriented systems).

As per internal layouts, they vary from model to model (don't see the T7500 as too bad; T5500 OTOH, is more difficult due to the smaller space). I've seen some really good cable routing in some of Dell's systems, horrid mess in others (seriously if it was the difference between a "hung over Monday" vs. mid week "Wednesday Sober build"). The latter HP's were actually fairly clean inside.

The Sun's are impressive IMO. Because of their attention to detail, I've always preferred Sun and Silicon Graphics in years past. DEC too, but they were swallowed up by Compaq, and Compaq by HP.

Not to mention the T7500's and T7400's I've worked on love to lose their audio, and constantly drop Ethernet connections.

Not heard of complaints on this before (Ethernet controller = Broadcom 5761, Audio = Analog Devices IIRC).

If you're working on the sort of software where you're only going to be working on 4 cores at once, you probably aren't Apple's target market.

Yet Photoshop can only use 2x. Other applications have limits too (listed in other threads here on MR), such as some H.264 encoding done on one core.

My coding software can use 12 cores (actually unlimited cores), and most professional software can soak up your cores, especially if you're using multiple apps at once. The Adobe suite is one I can think of that, at least in the 2D graphics side, is more limited. But if you're running multiple apps at once, you can soak up those cores.

Some software can do true n core multi-threading. But not all software out there now can even do multi-threading of any kind, and what can, has a tendency to be a fixed core implementation.

The 4 core model is really a "because it's not too much more effort to make" system. It's not really the target market system at all.

It's perfect for students, or pros that run Photoshop all day. To claim it's there to fill a hole is foolish, as they won't produce what won't sell.

If you take a closer look at recent system purchase information, quite a few members here are indicating they went with Quad core or SP Hex core systems (several stated they would have gone with more had their software supported multi-threading on the max number of cores in the system).

It seems to me that you're discounting the software lag. Core counts are out pacing the software development rate.

 

[zodqyv]

nanofrog, goMac, I hope this never ends.

 

[nerdo]

They should start a website, they are the new Siskel and Ebert of geekdom.

nanofrog, goMac, I hope this never ends.

 

[highdefw]

nanofrog, goMac, I hope this never ends.

I agree. I'm not saying much, but very interesting to follow...

Mac Pros won't go away. Apple HAS to have at least one machine where you have expandability plus more cpu power.

Hopefully the next Final Cut update will be a good step in the right direction.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Apple HAS to have at least one machine where you have expandability plus more cpu power.

Why?

 

[Transporteur]

Why?

"Developers, Developers, Developers".

 

[chrismacguy]

"Developers, Developers, Developers".

*Demands we have the video!*

 

[Transporteur]

*Demands we have the video!*

I'd love to fullfil that request. Unfortunately, I still don't know how to embed youtube videos in a thread. I know, shame on me. (especially considering that I am myself a "Developer", or at least was for the past years)

 

[Bubba Satori]

"Developers, Developers, Developers".

Xserves, Xserves, Xserves.

 

[chrismacguy]

Xserves, Xserves, Xserves.

I wasnt aware hed done that

 

[Bubba Satori]

I wasnt aware hed done that

Windows developers are still around.
Xserves, not so much.
I suspect the Mac Pro will be gone within two years, max.

 

[chrismacguy]

Windows developers are still around.
Xserves, not so much.
I suspect the Mac Pro will be gone within two years, max.

I doubt that, Apple had PowerMacs and before that Quadras for decades before the XServe came into being, and theyll continue to have them for decades. Apple is still hiring for its Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro teams, and you cant run that, at least not for professional editors/musicians, on a iMac or anything that isnt expandable.

 

[nanofrog]

Mac Pros won't go away. Apple HAS to have at least one machine where you have expandability plus more cpu power.

Apple is still hiring for its Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro teams, and you cant run that, at least not for professional editors/musicians, on a iMac or anything that isn't expandable.

But you're both forgetting that the Haswell's will have 8x cores per CPU (enthusiast desktop/SP Xeons up to the Multi Processor Xeon parts), and LightPeak can be used as an expansion interface. Particularly for storage (video later when it gets a speed bump, as the initial implementation of 10Gb/s is a bit too slow). That could coincide with 2014 (LP's first speed bump), and end the Mac Pro as we know it.

I don't like the idea of an AIO system with LP as a workstation substitute, but the business side seriously could for financial reasons. Apple's done some strange things before, and I really don't see this as an impossibility.

 

[Icaras]

Apple is still hiring for its Final Cut Pro and Logic Pro teams, and you cant run that, at least not for professional editors/musicians, on a iMac or anything that isnt expandable.

What are you talking about? You can't run these programs on anything other than an "expandable system"? Only for "professional editors/musicians"? Please define that.

You gotta be kidding me

 

[avro707]

If they discontinued MacPro, I'd try to keep the one I have going for as long as possible. I don't like the PC alternatives - or the consumer Apple computer products (iMac 27" and similar).

 

[mdgm]

If the Mac Pro was discontinued I'd probably get another Mac Mini once they're updated. Seeing I find the performance of the Mac Mini limiting already, I doubt even an updated Mac Mini would be an ideal solution. I like using Mac Minis for HTPCs but they're not a good machine to use as a workstation.

 

[snouter]

Nothing.

I've already quit the Mac Pro and the only really compelling reason to get one, Final Cut Pro.

I do want one, sometimes. I'm about to get a 6 core Mac Pro at work (not my money, go for it!), but when it comes time for me to get a powerful machine for myself I usually end up building my own PC.

I do have affinity for Mac laptops though.

I don't irrationally hate Windows, I own full Adobe CS5 suites on both platforms and Cinmea 4d works well on both platforms and I can render using my PC via the network rendering, so I'm lucky to have such options.

 

[chrismacguy]

What are you talking about? You can't run these programs on anything other than an "expandable system"? Only for "professional editors/musicians"? Please define that.

You gotta be kidding me

If your a professional editor, your likely to have several expansion cards to connect to things, storage, video monitors, 100s of other random perhiperals that lie about your edit suite (Seriously Apple, Less than 10 USBs isnt enough). And if your a Musician, in a Studio, youll have a capture card, and if you use ProTools, several internal cards being connected out for a full setup. I cant see LightPeak ever being able to catch-up to the simplicity of having it all in 1 box. I didnt say they were the only people who needed it, I was just saying people who do Home Movies arent likely to have the same amount of gear, same for the Band in a Garage - unlikely theyll have a full ProTools setup, so if thats where your coming from you wouldnt necessarily see the need for the Pro. - Apple wont can it for 1 other reason - no Editor likes being told what Display they "have" to use. So either Apple produces a 24-core Mini (Likely to be impossible in 2014), or they keep going with the Pro (Likely) - There are enough people who will buy them for the prices the Pro goes for that really Apple may as well keep it, as its making them money. My point was if your a professional, your not going to want to run your programs on something without internal expansion, it doesnt matter how powerful the iMac gets, we still need expansion cards for stuff.

 

[sim667]

Id start building my own units and selling them

 

[cosmos]

If your a professional editor, your likely to have several expansion cards to connect to things, storage, video monitors, 100s of other random perhiperals that lie about your edit suite (Seriously Apple, Less than 10 USBs isnt enough). And if your a Musician, in a Studio, youll have a capture card, and if you use ProTools, several internal cards being connected out for a full setup. I cant see LightPeak ever being able to catch-up to the simplicity of having it all in 1 box. I didnt say they were the only people who needed it, I was just saying people who do Home Movies arent likely to have the same amount of gear, same for the Band in a Garage - unlikely theyll have a full ProTools setup, so if thats where your coming from you wouldnt necessarily see the need for the Pro. - Apple wont can it for 1 other reason - no Editor likes being told what Display they "have" to use. So either Apple produces a 24-core Mini (Likely to be impossible in 2014), or they keep going with the Pro (Likely) - There are enough people who will buy them for the prices the Pro goes for that really Apple may as well keep it, as its making them money. My point was if your a professional, your not going to want to run your programs on something without internal expansion, it doesnt matter how powerful the iMac gets, we still need expansion cards for stuff.

My sincere hope is that Apple continues to improve the Mac Pro, but my fear is that they will decide to offer something along the lines of a "Pro Mini" that is much smaller and offers much less options for expansion and upgrades.

I could be wrong, but I see the bean counters say why can't we make a "good enough" box with external ports using Light Peak or USB3 for external storage in a much smaller package? This would be a mistake IMHO, but it could happen. They won't consider those that need RAID cards, Video or other expansion options when adding up the production costs.

Hopefully someone will have enough sense to keep the Mac Pro going for those that require its unique fit to those that require it.

 

[chrismacguy]

My sincere hope is that Apple continues to improve the Mac Pro, but my fear is that they will decide to offer something along the lines of a "Pro Mini" that is much smaller and offers much less options for expansion and upgrades.

I could be wrong, but I see the bean counters say why can't we make a "good enough" box with external ports using Light Peak or USB3 for external storage in a much smaller package? This would be a mistake IMHO, but it could happen. They won't consider those that need RAID cards, Video or other expansion options when adding up the production costs.

Hopefully someone will have enough sense to keep the Mac Pro going for those that require its unique fit to those that require it.

Look at it from a business perspective: You can either sell a stripped down system that costs say $300 to make for $1000 and generates no Halo sales as everyones moaning about the Mac Pros demise, or to the exact same group of customers you can sell a $3000 that costs $2000 to make, and get $2000 in Halo sales from them raving about how awesome their new Mac is and they must thus buy the Latest Final Cut and Logic Release - Apple will keep making the Pro as they make $$$ on it, way more than theyd make on a stripped down model - especially as judging by this thread wed all buy the very last generation, and keep going with them until it really really became unfeasible.

 

[seisend]

I wouldn't know what to do if Apple would drop the Mac Pro. Probably build a Hackintosh.

Sooner or later the Mac Pro might be gone anyway. We are at a point that only Hardcore users for video/hires pictures and some science freaks actually do need this processing power...For audio production you only really need PCI-E slots. The CPU and Ram is totally overpowered for MOST ! An iMac has enough power for most.

I just try to say that in the future the only special thing about the mac pro is the PCI-E slots because people don't need the CPU/GPU power anymore because the iMac or Mac mini will give you more than enough. Also storage won't be a problem because of the SSD's which you can plant on the mainboard and save tons of space. So there will be a mini version of the mac pro like a Mac Mini PCI-E.

I say the Mac Pro will be here at least for another 3 years. That's for sure.
That's just my point of view.

 

[Garamond]

If Apple discontinue the Mac Pro in like two or three years from now, I'd get the top of the line model and stick to that as long as possible. If they stopped it now, I would just use my current rig until it kneels.