OK, OK. Yes, my comments had some ignorance in them. Thank you for not being too hard on me. After working in the aerospace (space) industry for 35+ years I do understand the nuances of cheap vs. robust/hi-rel electronic design. However, I think to be fair, there are user levels of "Pro" out there that need something more than the iMac, and certainly less than the full blown capability of what either a tricked out MacPro or XEON workstation provides. For me, it is music creation using Logic Studio and it is a hobby since I am retired. What I do know is that I have gone through three iMacs failing after only three or four years. They simply do not last. They essentially burn themselves out. And, they cannot be configured in any way save for some added minimal amount of RAM. The iMac sound capability is weak and has to be augmented by external USB devices. The plug-in music applications each require a dongle, some of which cannot be connected to external USB hubs. The keyboards (piano) should be connected directly to the computer, not through a hub. Etc. The iMacs four USB ports are inadequate. I think that that was why I saw a Pavillion as "viable" (with its eight USB ports), though I can certainly understand why it would be a poor choice for much of what others need in a MacPro (ergo, the car analogy). Further, I reiterate that providing a real update at the end of next year does not make sense. Save for the motherboard (and the system, the case, and the thermal design), pretty much all of the other components are commodities. Presuming that the motherboard is the most complex part of the computer and that boards can be designed and fabricated into a "proof of design" sample in six or eight weeks (my experience), I don't see the reason for 18 months for introduction to the market unless they have done nothing so far and don't intend to start for another six months. If, on the other hand, they intend to re-invent the concept of a pro machine, I should cut them some slack, assuming that their need for re-invention matches the prosumers need for updated equipment. The angst of the many recent comments leaves that philosophy in some doubt. At least we can agree that Apple took the low compliance path towards customer satisfaction on this update.
Why do you insist on ranting about some computer in the BMW M forum?
Oh, no, wait... Nevermind.
<Gazing into crystal ball> the reason it takes 18 months is because Apple can't be bothered to support USB3 and Thunderbolt on their own, they are waiting for Intel to release new Xeons.
I believe that Mac Pro Eternal/Timeless/End of Time (2009, 2010, 2012, it's so perfect, we haven't bothered changing anything 'cept adding the Westmere chips), is the end of the dinosaurs.
I am 100% sure that whatever arrives as the new "pro" machine, will have a different case, and probably make quite a few people even more psychotic about everything they threw out. The "xMac" that's been ranted about for half a decade+ will quite likely arrive and replace the Mac Pro.
Of course, if Apple is waiting on Intel, based upon Intel's delivery of the last two Xeon updates, 2013 is gonna become 2014 before it drops.
Basically ... it takes 18 months because Apple can't be bothered to dedicate resources money/manpower/time, to solving Mac Pro problems, because it's down somewhere around #501 on the Top 500 Most Important Issues for Apple hot-list.
tl;dr: why does it take 18 months to update?
Because Apple doesn't really care much and can't be bothered.
On the bright side, name a single time in computer history since the Apple ][ days, when you could purchase the Most Awesome Super-Powerful Computer Apple Ever Made, and it still is... 5 years later. Also, that 2009 is gonna continue running OS/X an awfully long time, because it's Exactly the Same Thing, as the Brand New 2012 if you run the firmware updater and drop in some Westmere chips.
MacPro5,1 End of Time/Eternal
