Why is the MP so expensive?

[Hellhammer]

Just because you can buy a PC system which includes the monitor, don't think you getting the monitor for free. You can bet its price is added in total cost of the system. Often that monitor is cheaply made to lower the price of the complete package.

I didn't say PCs include a monitor. Avro said that Mac Pro gives you a better display than what other OEMs offer, which is false, since Mac Pro does not include a monitor. There is also the fact that you can use the ACD with PCs as well, or any other display with the Mac Pro.

 

[minifridge1138]

Because people are willing to pay that much?

 

[thermodynamic]

Loa,

Only Steve and his principals can give you the real response to your question. Generally, most owners of Apple products tend to believe that their products are superior. Regardless whether that is true or not, Apple owners have bought the hype. It is not just the MBPs. Presently Apple products set the standard to which other products are compared. Apple owners are very satisfied with their iPods, Computers, iPhones and iPads. Clearly, Apple's customer service stands shoulders over the competition. Additionally, Apple's marketing plan is aimed at higher income consumers and not at the general public. Accordingly, you pay the premium price or what you deem as the MP Tax. Take a look at the Apple Stores. New consumers are lined up around the block to place their orders for a new iPad2. And that order may still have a two week wait.

Not just "higher income" people...

Another way to look at it is to compare Apple to HP, Dell, etc. HP, Dell, etc, use big contracts with Microsoft to get lower volume prices for Windows. They also shove in a lot of trialware, shareware, and other forms of licensed crapware to subsidize the cost. Get rid of those aspects and their prices would go up as well.

Looking inside a Mac Pro chassis and a $1400 DIY desktop PC that has the same types of internal components (Xeon, et al), the Mac Pro is much better designed - virtually no cables, great cooling... it's wonderful from a technical standpoint and I came from a PC environment, both boxed and DIY setups... even the Dell Precision line - cables aplenty and a poor interior design layout in general. Yuck.

I've yet to look at a new HP all-in-one device, but I suspect its screen will be a TN panel. Definitely not an H-IPS that Apple routinely uses for the iMacs.

Not to mention, fewer Mac owners means they have to pay any difference on top of the rest.

There is no real "Apple tax" as far as I'm concerned. There are, however, subsidies, crapware, Windows OS and its problems (the registry, fragmenting file systems, no native support, etc), et cetera. Windows might be faster at gaming, but that's only as long as the games are DirectX-optimized and the ports made to OpenGL, etc, just remain "good enough".

Juggling a score of factors, I'd still go with Apple.

 

[nanofrog]

Another way to look at it is to compare Apple to HP, Dell, etc. HP, Dell, etc, use big contracts with Microsoft to get lower volume prices for Windows. They also shove in a lot of trialware, shareware, and other forms of licensed crapware to subsidize the cost. Get rid of those aspects and their prices would go up as well.

As far as all the crapware, it's definitely true the consumer systems get loaded up with it (particularly the budget boxes).

But if you order a business machine, it's not there. They know businesses don't want it, nor want to spend the time removing it. So vendors cater to this market ("extras" in terms of hardware may be missing as well, such as SD card readers for example, as businesses tend to see that as a potential security risk). So the profit margin works out.

As per Apple's pricing though, most of it is due to their love of high margins from what I've seen (i.e. Gross Margin of ~41% last I saw). Any discounts on software don't translate to a PC so much in terms of the user, as is applied to the vendor's margins (Dell, HP, ...).

Looking inside a Mac Pro chassis and a $1400 DIY desktop PC that has the same types of internal components (Xeon, et al), the Mac Pro is much better designed - virtually no cables, great cooling... it's wonderful from a technical standpoint and I came from a PC environment, both boxed and DIY setups... even the Dell Precision line - cables aplenty and a poor interior design layout in general. Yuck.

In terms of workstations and servers on the PC side, I've seen both extremes (rats nest to extremely clean and well laid out, even for the same model). So I've always wondered if the sloppy units (not a result of bad design) were the result of the system being assembled on either a Monday or Friday (spaced out/not interested in what they're doing due to weekend activities - daydreaming if you will, and possibly hung over on Monday ).

When I think of vendors such as Silicon Graphics, DEC, and Sun of systems' past, I don't ever recall seeing a rats nest that wasn't the result of an IT person. Those would blow the MP away in terms of how well they were laid out, cooled, and ease of replacing components in a hurry. I really miss systems like these....

I've yet to look at a new HP all-in-one device, but I suspect its screen will be a TN panel. Definitely not an H-IPS that Apple routinely uses for the iMacs.

Not sure if this would be the case unilaterally (you've not indicated a model or series), but for the low cost versions, TN would be the way they'd have to go to meet the manufacturing budget. Upper scale versions however, may use the same panel (i.e. Dell uses the same H-IPS panel in the iMac in one of their monitors, so it's not impossible that HP could use it in a product or two either).

Not to mention, fewer Mac owners means they have to pay any difference on top of the rest.

There is truth to this (lower economy of scale), but in the case of an MP, they follow Intel's reference designs for the most part (added FW controller is one exception).

There is no real "Apple tax" as far as I'm concerned. There are, however, subsidies, crapware, Windows OS and its problems (the registry, fragmenting file systems, no native support, etc), et cetera. Windows might be faster at gaming, but that's only as long as the games are DirectX-optimized and the ports made to OpenGL, etc, just remain "good enough".

There's problems with OS X and firmware as well on the Mac side, so nothing is perfect. Macs can even get infected with malware if the user isn't careful, so they're not even immune to this.

I say let the user figure out which platform is best fit for them (system + software + any training that would be involved), and get on with doing whatever they need to do.

 

[Avro]

I was talking about the electronics it's made of are the same. There's no "special sauce" or Apple magic involved.

The case may be pretty, but it's not as important as the rest of the system. I don't know if you've ever been inside other workstations, but they tend to be rather nice internally (drastic difference between these and cheap budget boxes).

Internals not in the same class as the Mac at all.


And it's not that the case is pretty. My Mac Pro has been half way around the world with me and no problems. Your "Plastic Pete" Dell or HP might not do as well.

Keyboard and mouse: They're not ergonomic (keyboard in particular). Pretty, Yes. But they actually hurt me, and I have to use 3rd party gear, no matter the system. Fortunately, such 3rd party equipment exists, or I'd have been in surgery (CTS).

I was speaking of Macs in general, but with the Mac Pro I have replaced the mouse with a Logitech Trackball and the keyboard with a Matias Tactile Pro 2.0. Suits me better.

As per the limited amount of hardware (aka closed system), in theory it produces fewer bugs. Unfortunately, this hasn't proven true in the recent past (particularly with the 2009 MP's). MR's full of threads on such issues (there are repeats), but there have been significant issues, such as the overheating issue by the audio drivers in the 2009 MP's amongst others.

But this isn't my point. You need to compare them with a Windows workstation which will give you far more trouble. There was a great deal of rejoicing when we dumped our Dell workstations in favour of Mac Pros and iMacs in our Reprographics department.

I didn't say Apple doesn't write software, but overall, it's not professional related (more general use and entertainment related).

Most of your heavy lifting professional software comes from 3rd party vendors, whether it's run under OS X or Windows.

Actually you didn't say pro software, but Apple does have Filemaker, Final Cut Pro and Aperture

I ask, as when I think of professional software, I usually see vendors providing multi-platform support. Adobe, Autodesk, and even National Instruments does (one of their products even runs under OS X). There's others as well, but they go for Windows due to the fact that it's used by the majority of users. Thus there's a higher potential for profit, which makes sense.

Pixel Corps dropped their Windows line due to the high support costs and even Adobe states that their split in software is 50/50 Mac/Windows.

All the pro software I use is Mac only so Windows is a non-starter for me.

For consumer grade software, they may concentrate on one OS, which is usually good for the consumer's who buy those products, as it's a natively written application rather than one that's been ported (such applications tend to suck).

Agreed.

It all comes down to usage. What works for you may not work for someone else.

My usage OTOH, has to do with hardware design, so applications I use come from companies like National Instruments and Synopsys. Synopsys doesn't make OS X versions, and National Instruments only offers an OS X version for a single product. VM didn't work (had to pass hardware data from instruments), and rebooting between Windows and OS X is a PITA, so the best solution is to run Windows.

I won't disagree with you. Your work will determine your OS in many instances.

So when I take the above 3 reasons into consideration, using a PC running Windows was the best solution in my case.

OK

To me it seem's your truly an Apple fan, and that's fine. But you don't provide sufficient proof, or in some cases none at all, to the arguments you've made. That's why I've posted; counterpoint with fact, rather than just preference spun into superiority.

Picking and choosing facts though can result in a slant in a particular direction. For instance a big feature with me is how easy it is to work on and customise a Mac Pro. It is very nicely put together with easy access, Windows PCs tend not to be like this. Windows certainly does require more maintenance and the variety of Windows hardware can be a big problem in relation to stability. The biggest complaint I have against Windows its tendency to mysterious behaviour just at the wrong time. In addition security problems abound with Windows and let's face it the OEMs are pants when it comes to service and support.

I'm actually platform agnostic, which means I don't care if the solution is Apple, Windows, or Linux. It's all a combination of odds and ends that should result in the fewest number of compromises = best solution for the particular need.

I don't disagree with you there, but the assertion that a Windows box will always be a more cost effective or better is false.

Can it be justified as that much better than any other premium box? No.

For me it can be. Windows just has far too much maintenance and downtime and Apple service and support is fantastic.

 

[Transporteur]

Internals not in the same class as the Mac at all.

You didn't get his point. Although the internals of the Pro are customised, they are standard workstation hardware, there is absolutely NOTHING special about them. On the contrary. Foxconn (who manufacturers the logic boards) isn't really known for high end quality.
And besides that, the hardware you find in HP or most Dell workstations is customised as well. Just take a look at the HP Z800 series. That is how you make a workstation. The Pro sucks big time in contrast to that machine, internal design wise.

Picking and choosing facts though can result in a slant in a particular direction. For instance a big feature with me is how easy it is to work on and customise a Mac Pro. It is very nicely put together with easy access, Windows PCs tend not to be like this.

Easily accessible parts, yes, no doubt the Pro does that nicely for the parts it lets you swap, such as HDs, expansion cards and optical drives. That's it. Other workstation grade computers provide far more than this.
For example, the aforementioned Z800 workstation can be fully taken apart (which includes the mainboard!) in less than 10 minutes without tools!
That is customisable. The Mac Pro internals are very, very limited to upgrades. Other workstations do much better.

You really have to get away from your "Windows PCs" point of view, cause it is just wrong. Don't generalise all other computers. You can't compare a $1000 cheapo computer with a workstation class Mac Pro.

For me it can be. Windows just has far too much maintenance and downtime and Apple service and support is fantastic.

Although I question your statement about Apple's support being fantastic (it might be in your case and in fact has ever been in my case as well, it really depends on the service provider you chose though. They are by far not all the same), I tend to agree with you saying that Windows requires more maintenance than OS X. But that is the software side, which I think has nothing to do with this thread as we're comparing hardware here.

 

[Avro]

You didn't get his point. Although the internals of the Pro are customised, they are standard workstation hardware, there is absolutely NOTHING special about them.

That is a different point than he was making, if he means that your Sony DVD drive in your Mac Pro is as likely to fail as your Dell, then you would be right.

Easily accessible parts, yes, no doubt the Pro does that nicely for the parts it lets you swap, such as HDs, expansion cards and optical drives. That's it. Other workstation grade computers provide far more than this.
For example, the aforementioned Z800 workstation can be fully taken apart (which includes the mainboard!) in less than 10 minutes without tools!
That is customisable. The Mac Pro internals are very, very limited to upgrades. Other workstations do much better.

Limitless upgrades with limitless problems. Sorry don't want any of that.

Is the Z800 cheaper than the Mac Pro?

You really have to get away from your "Windows PCs" point of view, cause it is just wrong. Don't generalise all other computers. You can't compare a $1000 cheapo computer with a workstation class Mac Pro.

I wasn't, I was comparing them with our Dell and HP workstations we used to have at the office. Difference of night and day.

Although I question your statement about Apple's support being fantastic (it might be in your case and in fact has ever been in my case as well, it really depends on the service provider you chose though. They are by far not all the same), I tend to agree with you saying that Windows requires more maintenance than OS X. But that is the software side, which I think has nothing to do with this thread as we're comparing hardware here.

In every survey in Which? (Consumers Association in the UK) and Consumer Reports and just about everywhere else, Apple has been tops for support. The OEMs rate very poorly here. If you are talking about an Enterprise picking a particular service provider that is another matter entirely.

As to maintenance I am afraid Windows has everything to do with it as that is what the alternative to a Mac Pro will be running - unless it is running Linux.

 

[Hellhammer]

Is the Z800 cheaper than the Mac Pro?

Z800 isn't since it is a DP configuration but Z400 is cheaper than the SP Mac Pro. Again, SP Mac Pro is still expensive but the DP Mac Pro is and has been more reasonably priced all the time.

In every survey in Which? (Consumers Association in the UK) and Consumer Reports and just about everywhere else, Apple has been tops for support. The OEMs rate very poorly here. If you are talking about an Enterprise picking a particular service provider that is another matter entirely.

Consumer reports don't really matter because we are talking about enterprise level stuff here. Consumers don't buy workstations with Xeons. They buy those cheap plastic boxes and consumer computers is a whole new topic of discussion.

Apple does not even offer enterprise level service. On-site service? Nope, we don't offer that. +3 years of coverage? Nope, we don't offer that either. What does Apple offer then? One-year warranty as standard and if you have an issue, you can lug your Mac Pro into an Apple Store and let the "Genius" have a look at it.

From what I have heard, enterprise services use a lot different service providers since most repairs are done onsite. That means the service can and will vary so it does make comparing harder. However, on paper, Apple's service is far behind its competitors'.

As to maintenance I am afraid Windows has everything to do with it as that is what the alternative to a Mac Pro will be running - unless it is running Linux.

Your software point is still moot. ALL your software must be available for OS X as well. Otherwise you are forced to run Windows in some way (Boot Camp or VM). If you look around here, there are lots of people who run Windows in their Mac Pros and Macs in general. While there is nothing wrong with that, it can again be hard to justify the ~1000$ premium in the SP Mac Pro.

FYI, I use solely Macs (iMac+MBA) so I'm not one of those PC trolls. That doesn't mean that I have to wear  glasses when looking at these things though.

In the end, it's your money and none of us cares how you spend it. From pure hardware side, PCs are a lot cheaper than SP MPs but software can mix the decision quite a lot. Software makes this hard, thus we have only looked at the hardware side (software is not truly comparable since preferences exist etc). Every case is unique due to software so there is no general answer to which is better or has better "overall value".

 

[Transporteur]

Apple does not even offer enterprise level service. On-site service? Nope, we don't offer that. +3 years of coverage? Nope, we don't offer that either. What does Apple offer then? One-year warranty as standard and if you have an issue, you can lug your Mac Pro into an Apple Store and let the "Genius" have a look at it.

Actually, Apple does offer on-site service for their desktops. But wait, here comes the catch; p) ONLY if you're within a 80 mile range from an AASP or Apple Store. Pathetic, isn't it? I mean it's fine for people in the cities, but what are people (or companies) doing that are located on the countryside?
That being said, I never had any experience with the on-site customer service (I'm one of the lucky bastards with a really, really good AASP only 20 miles away), so I don't know how well they operate and if they have all replacement parts with them.

FYI, I use solely Macs (iMac+MBA) so I'm not one of those PC trolls. That doesn't mean that I have to wear  glasses when looking at these things though.

Exactly!

 

[Hellhammer]

Actually, Apple does offer on-site service for their desktops. But wait, here comes the catch; p) ONLY if you're within a 80 mile range from an AASP or Apple Store. Pathetic, isn't it? I mean it's fine for people in the cities, but what are people (or companies) doing that are located on the countryside?
That being said, I never had any experience with the on-site customer service (I'm one of the lucky bastards with a really, really good AASP only 20 miles away), so I don't know how well they operate and if they have all replacement parts with them.

Have you ever heard of it in action? I was aware of it but I've been here for 2.5 years and I have never heard of anyone saying "A Genius came to my house and replaced my Mac Pro's RAM". That has made me to think that it's one of those things that exist on paper but since most people don't read the terms, they have no idea that such service even exists. Of course for Apple, it's cheaper to ask the user to bring the computer to a store.

 

[Transporteur]

Have you ever heard of it in action? I was aware of it but I've been here for 2.5 years and I have never heard of anyone saying "A Genius came to my house and replaced my Mac Pro's RAM". That has made me to think that it's one of those things that exist on paper but since most people don't read the terms, they have no idea that such service even exists. Of course for Apple, it's cheaper to ask the user to bring the computer to a store.

Nope, haven't heard any real life stories either. Although I would have had the chance to use that service, I rather bring the machines to the stores myself. Don't wanna wait hours at home waiting for some bloke to show up only to say "Sorry mate, I don't have that part with me." Maybe everyone else thinks the same.

But the pure fact that they don't advertise the on-site service anywhere should tell us how they handle that. I also doubt that all AASPs or Apple Stores actually offer the on-site service. I reckon only very view ones in selected cities have that service in place.

 

[Avro]

Consumer reports don't really matter because we are talking about enterprise level stuff here. Consumers don't buy workstations with Xeons. They buy those cheap plastic boxes and consumer computers is a whole new topic of discussion.

Actually it does. I have a Mac Pro and use my 3 year warranty. Had some watermarks appear on the ACM and it was replaced within one working day with a new one.

Your software point is still moot. ALL your software must be available for OS X as well. Otherwise you are forced to run Windows in some way (Boot Camp or VM). If you look around here, there are lots of people who run Windows in their Mac Pros and Macs in general. While there is nothing wrong with that, it can again be hard to justify the ~1000$ premium in the SP Mac Pro.

In my case the software isn't even available for Windows.

FYI, I use solely Macs (iMac+MBA) so I'm not one of those PC trolls. That doesn't mean that I have to wear  glasses when looking at these things though.

In the end, it's your money and none of us cares how you spend it. From pure hardware side, PCs are a lot cheaper than SP MPs but software can mix the decision quite a lot. Software makes this hard, thus we have only looked at the hardware side (software is not truly comparable since preferences exist etc). Every case is unique due to software so there is no general answer to which is better or has better "overall value".[/QUOTE]

Yes the SP doesn't seem to be very good VFM compared with the DP models.

Agreed. But "cheaper" doesn't mean better.

 

[goodcow]

Have you ever heard of it in action? I was aware of it but I've been here for 2.5 years and I have never heard of anyone saying "A Genius came to my house and replaced my Mac Pro's RAM". That has made me to think that it's one of those things that exist on paper but since most people don't read the terms, they have no idea that such service even exists. Of course for Apple, it's cheaper to ask the user to bring the computer to a store.

I work at a college, but we've had Apple techs (they just outsource it to a local Apple Authorized Service Provider) come on campus and repair iMacs and MacPro's numerous times. Also, a co-worker of mine had them come to his house to replace the power supply and logic board on his iMac, no problem.

If my MacPro ever has a problem there's no way I'm lugging that thing on the bus/subway to the Fifth Ave store, I'm having them visit my apartment.

 

[goodcow]

Don't wanna wait hours at home waiting for some bloke to show up only to say "Sorry mate, I don't have that part with me." Maybe everyone else thinks the same.

When you're setting up for the on-site, Apple asks for the various symptoms going on. Then, based on that, they overnight whatever related parts it may be to the AASP to bring with them for the visit.

 

[Legion93]

Why is my house tax so expensive?

 

[Transporteur]

When you're setting up for the on-site, Apple asks for the various symptoms going on. Then, based on that, they overnight whatever related parts it may be to the AASP to bring with them for the visit.

That is good to hear! Do you have first hand experience with them?

 

[Hellhammer]

I work at a college, but we've had Apple techs (they just outsource it to a local Apple Authorized Service Provider) come on campus and repair iMacs and MacPro's numerous times. Also, a co-worker of mine had them come to his house to replace the power supply and logic board on his iMac, no problem.

If my MacPro ever has a problem there's no way I'm lugging that thing on the bus/subway to the Fifth Ave store, I'm having them visit my apartment.

When you're setting up for the on-site, Apple asks for the various symptoms going on. Then, based on that, they overnight whatever related parts it may be to the AASP to bring with them for the visit.

Good to know, thanks. I had never heard of Apple's onsite service in action before so I was a bit skeptical. Doesn't seem to be that popular though (Apple doesn't exactly push it). There is still the 80-mile limitation that can be a problem but at least we now know that Apple's onsite service does exist somewhere else than on paper too

Looks like they offer this in Finland too. Now I know what to demand if my iMac breaks

 

[Apple OC]

Macs are no different than any premium product ... you pay more for premium

 

[derbothaus]

Apple offers Enterprise support in the way of their "Alliance" contracts. I have 2 or 3 in place at my jobs. They are in the many thousands of dollars. Having an Apple store around play's no part. They do whatever is needed. They concentrate on server, workstation, Xsan.

 

[Hellhammer]

Apple offers Enterprise support in the way of their "Alliance" contracts. I have 2 or 3 in place at my jobs. They are in the many thousands of dollars. Having an Apple store around play's no part. They do whatever is needed. They concentrate on server, workstation, Xsan.

Yeah, it's $50k

http://store.apple.com/us/product/D5691?mco=MTgzMTUyMzQ

There seems to be a premium AppleCare for XServe which is closer to what other OEMs provide (could be even better than the basic plan offered by Dell, HP etc since it has 4-hour onsite service).

 

[Transporteur]

Apple offers Enterprise support in the way of their "Alliance" contracts. I have 2 or 3 in place at my jobs. They are in the many thousands of dollars. Having an Apple store around play's no part. They do whatever is needed. They concentrate on server, workstation, Xsan.

Which is at least $6000 per year and does not include hardware support. You still have to buy AC to cover your hardware.

http://www.apple.com/support/products/enterprise/server.html#xserve

 

[derbothaus]

But it does exist and it is very helpful. You DID say enterprise so cost is not really an issue. Pretty sure we have the HW thing too

 

[Transporteur]

But it does exist and it is very helpful. You DID say enterprise so cost is not really an issue. Pretty sure we have the HW thing too

Well the $6000 per year probably won't be much of an issue in an SME, but the higher end contracts (20k, 50k per year!) certainly are not suitable options for some companies.

Just compare those prices with what other vendors offer. Dells or HPs extended on-site warranties are considerably cheaper (a couple of hundreds). They are hardware only, though.

 

[derbothaus]

Apple is always more expensive. There are hundreds of posts with people arguing one way or the other. Apple considers itself a premium brand. They cost more for the same with few exceptions. Dual socket workstations being one of them. If you value their product you pay. If you are more interested in price cutting, you find alternatives.

 

[linuxcooldude]

If we get back to the original point, yes, the SP Mac Pro is still overpriced compared to its competitors.

I don't think it would be a good comparison about the Mac Pro just being a single processor alone. As many people here are recommending the 6 core 3.33 MP over the 8 core MP.