When do you think Apple will release a new Mac Pro?

[brentsg]

No, people do not "forget" the difference between Xeons/i7s and ECC/non ECC. It's that the price differences are not that big. We just bought 24 gigs of Mac Pro ram for under 200 dollars. The Mac Pro comes with ...3? The entry level CPU is about 300 dollars.

The base level Mac Pro is a complete rip off. It's a sub 1000 dollar machine priced at 2499. It's nothing less than shameful.

It was stated pretty well above. The entry level model is priced higher so as not to cannibalize the iMac line. The higher level Mac Pros compete quite well with other manufacturer's workstations. Not to mention that the iMac line has benefitted from Intel CPU refreshes in contrast to the current MP.

And regarding "sub $1000", people underestimate the value of the case, power supply, and tray-based motherboard that they use. These things are all value adds, and while they don't contribute to the performance they certainly contribute to the machine's price. They also contribute to its value in the target market. There are no sub $1000 PCs that are built this well.

 

[JesterJJZ]

What a load of codswallop. You obviously don't know how to keep your machine safe.

Needing Norton installed on your system as a mandatory safety net is not a solution.

 

[sigmadog]

Personally, I find all these "Will there be a new Mac Pro?" threads wildly entertaining, which is of course a sad, sad commentary on the state of my life right now.

 

[ixodes]

dozens of threads on this, plus the Buyer's Guide,

True, and all the more reason I am glad the OP put up another thread.

Anyone who thinks that Apple doesn't monitor MacRumors, one of the most influential and valuable Apple sites on the web, is missing the point.

Apple needs as many reminders as it takes to let them know...

We want a new Mac Pro!

 

[Photovore]

... And regarding "sub $1000", people underestimate the value of the case, power supply, and tray-based motherboard that they use. ... There are no sub $1000 PCs that are built this well.

I got my 2009 used for $1500.00, and it still feels like the best buy I've ever made. Every time I have to open up the case I get excited....

I've built PCs, I've built hardware interfaces from chips, I've written software on PCs and Macs since the ][e and industry-specific hardware end users never see. The Mac Pro is just a beautiful machine to work with in many ways.

 

[24Frames]

It was stated pretty well above. The entry level model is priced higher so as not to cannibalize the iMac line.

I don't buy this cannibalisation argument. Apple don't care what you buy provided that you buy Apple and not HP / Dell /...

In any case if there is any cannibalisation going on it is the iMac that is cannibalising Mac Pro sales, not the other way round.

 

[jadot]

Man, people have always criticised the Mac Pro line, even when it's been new. Are the current Mac Pro's not superb and capable machines? Bar a couple of connections such as TB, perhaps USB 3, I can't see why the current expandable Mac Pros aren't awesome computers.
If you're a pro Film/Photography/Music you can probably afford to spec out your Mac Pro, even incrementally.
If you don't need that much power you don't have to have it.
If you simply *want* it, and at a better price, you'll likely never be happy.

 

[akis-k]

Man, people have always criticised the Mac Pro line, even when it's been new. Are the current Mac Pro's not superb and capable machines? Bar a couple of connections such as TB, perhaps USB 3, I can't see why the current expandable Mac Pros aren't awesome computers.
If you're a pro Film/Photography/Music you can probably afford to spec out your Mac Pro, even incrementally.
If you don't need that much power you don't have to have it.
If you simply *want* it, and at a better price, you'll likely never be happy.

I agree that Mac Pro is a powerful machine as it stands, but is it wise to buy a nearly 2 year old hardware, at the same price as when was introduced? When at the same time your competitors have moved forward (though not yet shipping their products, to be honest) to the next generation chips?

 

[-hh]

Man, people have always criticised the Mac Pro line, even when it's been new. Are the current Mac Pro's not superb and capable machines? Bar a couple of connections such as TB, perhaps USB 3, I can't see why the current expandable Mac Pros aren't awesome computers.
If you're a pro Film/Photography/Music you can probably afford to spec out your Mac Pro, even incrementally.
If you don't need that much power you don't have to have it.
If you simply *want* it, and at a better price, you'll likely never be happy.

I agree that Mac Pro is a powerful machine as it stands, but is it wise to buy a nearly 2 year old hardware, at the same price as when was introduced? When at the same time your competitors have moved forward (though not yet shipping their products, to be honest) to the next generation chips?

These are both reasonable points IMO ... personally, my home Mac Desktop is overdue for replacement, and a few hundred difference on the cost isn't a game-stopper in the context of the cost of the camera gear whose images it will be supporting: one can look at the Mac Pro as an accessory, both from a workflow standpoint as well a from a cost/price perspective.

However, one doesn't relish the prospects of buying any tool that's become a poor value in context. For example, my Canon 20D dSLR was worth ~$1500 to me when I bought it back in 2005, but I'd not pay that amount today for one, since it has been superceded by the 30D, 40D, 50D and 60D (all at similar initial price points). But if anyone wants to offer me anything close to the full price I paid for my Canon 20D dSLR, I'll take it!

Insofar as the Mac Pro and paradigms and perception of 'value', I can see good arguments for expecting better from Apple. Historically, part of the problem is that Apple has been a laggard when it comes to adopting new technologies into the Mac Pro. TB and USB3 are merely recent examples of where there's been customer disappointments. Graphics cards have been another. Personally, I'd also list SSDs as a third, since tossing an SSD into a 3.5" HDD bay is a pretty weak/lame technical approach. Personally, I can see adding onto the MP's motherboard the SSD card slots developed for the MBA as a straightforward way to improve performance while preventing the loss of an entire 3.5" HDD bay from a much-smaller component...and in sharing from the parts bin with the MBA, it wouldn't be cost-prohibitive at all.


-hh

 

[AppleDroid]

Man, people have always criticised the Mac Pro line, even when it's been new. Are the current Mac Pro's not superb and capable machines? Bar a couple of connections such as TB, perhaps USB 3, I can't see why the current expandable Mac Pros aren't awesome computers.
If you're a pro Film/Photography/Music you can probably afford to spec out your Mac Pro, even incrementally.
If you don't need that much power you don't have to have it.
If you simply *want* it, and at a better price, you'll likely never be happy.

But buying 2yr old machines at full retail price is currently a horrible investment. I think many of the anxious posters have older machines they want to replace and they are rightfully upset that the only offerings are about 300% overpriced. (I'm exaggerating for effect)

 

[vohdoun]

Needing Norton installed on your system as a mandatory safety net is not a solution.

There's better things than Norton.

 

[derbothaus]

There's better things than Norton. Image

Pretty much everything is better actually.

 

[chilly7]

True, and all the more reason I am glad the OP put up another thread.

Anyone who thinks that Apple doesn't monitor MacRumors, one of the most influential and valuable Apple sites on the web, is missing the point.

Apple needs as many reminders as it takes to let them know...

We want a new Mac Pro!

what about to arrange a meating with Apple CEO?

 

[AppleDroid]

what about to arrange a meating with Apple CEO?

That is the best unintentional double entendre ever.

 

[NMF]

That is the best unintentional double entendre ever.

 

[brentsg]

I agree that Mac Pro is a powerful machine as it stands, but is it wise to buy a nearly 2 year old hardware, at the same price as when was introduced? When at the same time your competitors have moved forward (though not yet shipping their products, to be honest) to the next generation chips?

Whatever might become available soon is likely to be evolutionary in most respects. They will probably add Thunderbolt, which may or may not matter to buyers. There will be the inevitable CPU upgrade, of course. The GPU will get better, which is what I'm most interested in. But people doing many workstation tasks won't care.

The bottom line is that most people will go ahead and buy if they truly need it. As a tool, it could have paid for itself while everyone else was waiting.

I'm using a 2010 Hex core model right now and it's anything but slow and obsolete.

 

[Neodym]

The bottom line is that most people will go ahead and buy if they truly need it. As a tool, it could have paid for itself while everyone else was waiting.

For the people earning money with the machine you are right. However, for the so-called "prosumers" who prefer some of the unique features of the MP (higher core count, thermal design, expandability etc.) over the iMac or mini it isn't as simple as that, as they are not necessarily paying their bills with the MP and thus it'll never "pay for itself" (except in the fun/hobby department - but that's hard to evaluate).

 

[NMF]

I basically only want a Mac Pro so I have the ability to swap in a new GPU in a few years rather than have to buy an entirely new system. And also to have my choice of SSD. I don't mind paying a premium but the $450 SSD's in the current gen iMacs are garbage.

So yeah, bottom-tier $2499 model for me if they keep the MP line alive...

 

[Umbongo]

For the people earning money with the machine you are right. However, for the so-called "prosumers" who prefer some of the unique features of the MP (higher core count, thermal design, expandability etc.) over the iMac or mini it isn't as simple as that, as they are not necessarily paying their bills with the MP and thus it'll never "pay for itself" (except in the fun/hobby department - but that's hard to evaluate).

That's part of the problem here on Macrumours in that there are several types of users who want this type of machine (and are best suited by it), but Apple really have no regard for some of them. So discussions are always going to have conflict.

 

[relbbircs]

The bottom line, really, is that Apple has not reciprocated the loyalty of early (and fervent) Apple adopters. And that hurts!

 

[xgman]

Apparently Intel is fraught with supply problems with even the new Ivy's according to digitimes so maybe the quantity of the sandy Xeons was slow to ramp up to levels acceptable to Apple for the go. Everywhere you look these days you here about component supply constraints delaying releases.

"Apple is now ensuring to have secured enough CPU before announcing and launching its new models in order to be able to face demands. As Tim Cook has been in charge of aligning and optimizing Apple supply chains with the switch to Intel CPU, we can be certain that there will be not announcement before Apple is ready to go."

 

[Ice Dragon]

Apparently Intel is fraught with supply problems with even the new Ivy's according to digitimes so maybe the quantity of the sandy Xeons was slow to ramp up to levels acceptable to Apple for the go. Everywhere you look these days you here about component supply constraints delaying releases.

: P Although you never know, it could be true.

 

[xgman]

Here's my current guess. If we don't see something next week, then I'm thinking they will wait till June around the other Mac stuff. If not in June, then I think it's done for good. Worst case scenario is they use the imac/macbook announcements to quietly lay the Mac Pro to rest.