Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

MP 7,1 Will Apple cave on the 7,1 release?

Blair Paulsen said:
...

When the right components are available, and the initial sales rush for the 7,1 has cooled off, I fully expect a refreshed MacMini to fill some of the "hole" in their lineup, perhaps Q2 2020...
Click to expand...

The Mac Mini refresh is probably relatively highly decoupled from the Mac Pro release. If Mini refresh takes until Q2 2020 then ....

"..I asked an Apple source last fall why it took so long for Apple to release the new MacBook Air. Their one-word answer: “Intel.” ..."
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2019/05/01/cook-maestri-intel

The Mini is either waiting on an 8-10 core 'Comet Lake' solution or a 6-8 core Ice lake solution. Doubtful that it will get a major volume increase and a discrete GPU. The Mac that the Mini more likely would move in an orchestrated pattern with is the iMac. If Apple bumps up the graphics with Gen 11 iGPU ('Ice Lake' ) then they'll move the discrete GPUs of the iMac 21.5" more to keep the gap.


In theory, they could re-introduce the cylinder 6,1 with parts appropriate to the thermal envelope and sell it in the $2-4K range - but that seems extremely unlikely. IMO the 6,1 design was a fail because it was supposed to serve as the centerpiece of a Thunderbolt extensible workstation. As an upgrade to the MacMini, it might have been a winner - small, quiet fan, much better cooling architecture than the Mini and lots of ports. Yes, I realize that the cost of developing the cylinder design would have been hard to justify for a lower ASP product - but now that those costs are long ago amortized...
Click to expand...

the Mini probably isn't going to become a "headless iMac". Apple has already thrown the Mini into the > $2K 'hole'. ( BTO top CPU , 32GB , 1TB SSD , 10GbE is $2,399 even sliding back to 512GB SSD is still over $2K ). mid $2K Mini plus a eGPU is in $3-4K range. There is already overlap with the iMac. Apple won't do yet another desktop overlapping in the same space.


The Mini and iMac have been firmly pulled into the $2-3K space. The iMac Pro is frimly in the $4-6K space. They arent' slot boxes but they are 'hole' fillers.
 
fuchsdh said:
The argument that enthusiasts have the most money that Apple should be targeting versus professionals is an assertion I don't see a lot of evidence for. It's just that enthusiasts want to believe they're the center of the world, just like pros do.
Click to expand...

There is no reason that Apple can't build products to satisfy both markets, if you don't believe enthusiast have deep pockets, you haven't been around the internet very long.

Enthusiasts tend to want to build their own systems, Apple could build a logic board, slap an Apple firmware on it and certify it for the macOS. I've seen plenty of higher end logic boards around the $399-$499 range that include thunderbolt 3 and PCIE slots, and the companies that sell them make a profit. Slap an Apple firmware on a high end custom logic board, price it from $799-$899 and rake in the cash.

I know this is outside Apple's normal business model, that Apple has never really offered a product like this, a DYiMac, but desktop sales are not laptop and iPhone markets. Apple has done well with these systems selling them as a lifestyle brand, but desktops very rarely leave the house, people are not swayed by product envy when no one ever sees the brand logo.

Traditional ways of making money, don't lead to product innovation or high profits from more units sold and a larger install base. I doubt they'll ever make as much off desktops as they even do laptops, it's just a lot smaller market, but that's no reason to leave billions on the table. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, listen to what people that build high end desktops are saying, and don't use the copout that these people install and run Windows, because that is just to admit that Apple isn't competing with the macOS, dark mode gimmicks rather than real innovation.
 
DearthnVader said:
There is no reason that Apple can't build products to satisfy both markets, if you don't believe enthusiast have deep pockets, you haven't been around the internet very long.

Enthusiasts tend to want to build their own systems, Apple could build a logic board, slap an Apple firmware on it and certify it for the macOS. I've seen plenty of higher end logic boards around the $399-$499 range that include thunderbolt 3 and PCIE slots, and the companies that sell them make a profit. Slap an Apple firmware on a high end custom logic board, price it from $799-$899 and rake in the cash.

I know this is outside Apple's normal business model, that Apple has never really offered a product like this, a DYiMac, but desktop sales are not laptop and iPhone markets. Apple has done well with these systems selling them as a lifestyle brand, but desktops very rarely leave the house, people are not swayed by product envy when no one ever sees the brand logo.

Traditional ways of making money, don't lead to product innovation or high profits from more units sold and a larger install base. I doubt they'll ever make as much off desktops as they even do laptops, it's just a lot smaller market, but that's no reason to leave billions on the table. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, listen to what people that build high end desktops are saying, and don't use the copout that these people install and run Windows, because that is just to admit that Apple isn't competing with the macOS, dark mode gimmicks rather than real innovation.
Click to expand...

If it were really a matter of billions of dollars, they would be doing it already. I'm going to hazard a guess that Apple isn't just leaving money on the table for fun.

But it's not a copout to say that some people running Win10 will never want a Mac. That's part of the whole thing about Mac gaming—even if Apple actually had someone there who knew and loved gaming and made Macs better gaming machines, they're never going to be able to compete with PC gaming because it's a completely different audience that doesn't mesh well with Apple's audience.
 
fuchsdh said:
If it were really a matter of billions of dollars, they would be doing it already. I'm going to hazard a guess that Apple isn't just leaving money on the table for fun.

But it's not a copout to say that some people running Win10 will never want a Mac. That's part of the whole thing about Mac gaming—even if Apple actually had someone there who knew and loved gaming and made Macs better gaming machines, they're never going to be able to compete with PC gaming because it's a completely different audience that doesn't mesh well with Apple's audience.
Click to expand...

Never is a long time my friend.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ssgbryan
handheldgames said:
In Tim Cook's mind, who needed a mac pro when there is an imac pro. Although an iMac is not a Mac Pro, some pencil pushers just don't get it.

At the high end the MacPro can have a high end configuration and ungodly price. At the entry level, it's a fricking tower without a monitor and keyboard. The base product with the case, power supply and motherboard and video card should not come in at a higher cost. Placing the price of the base configuration at such an unrealistic level will greatly limit sales, making the platform super low volume, niche vanity product.
Click to expand...

Amen.
 
DearthnVader said:
Never is a long time my friend.
Click to expand...

Apple has multiple 10's of billions of dollars. Let's take a relatively small subset ( $8B) that Apple is willing to spend because doesn't want to primary chase mainstream, somewhat price sensitive , desktop buyers . If they spent $100 a day avoiding them, then it would be 80,000,000 days until they had to 'give up' on that. That's about 219K years. Approximately, that is pragmatically close to never.

Apple has enough resources that they don't "have to" pursue gamers if they don't want to. There are other, profitable markets to be in. Apple's gaming cash cow is iOS. Second behind that is iPadOs and probably working (putting money on) toward AppleTV. Whatever happens to drift over to macOS they aren't going be upset over. If Apple Arcade doesn't work on iOs , iPadOS , and AppleTv it will be a giant bust.

The icing on top that will be macOS play. That probably won't make that much of a different for completely shift the gears of their Mac hardware development. "hand me down" A-series chips into low end Mac laptops would probably basically be tracking what the iPadOS was at. Apple would be looking for incrementally GPUs on the rest of the line up that are useful in multiple contexts. ( but not neon "pimp my ride" ones.)
 
lowkey said:
They know their target market for this product. It’s not you.
Click to expand...
Brilliant ad placement...

ad.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jinnyman and Nugget
7.1 Mac pro is already outdated in price scheme. Their price levels is something from 2016 where AMD was meritless.
For one CPU workstation, AMD has changed the whole game.

We are yet to see the BTO price of 7.1, but I really hope they reflect 2019 cpu market situation.
 
There are no “billions on the table” selling a Mac motherboard :lol:
Releasing a Mac mother board for enthusiasts is hardly innovative.

DearthnVader said:
There is no reason that Apple can't build products to satisfy both markets, if you don't believe enthusiast have deep pockets, you haven't been around the internet very long.

Enthusiasts tend to want to build their own systems, Apple could build a logic board, slap an Apple firmware on it and certify it for the macOS. I've seen plenty of higher end logic boards around the $399-$499 range that include thunderbolt 3 and PCIE slots, and the companies that sell them make a profit. Slap an Apple firmware on a high end custom logic board, price it from $799-$899 and rake in the cash.

I know this is outside Apple's normal business model, that Apple has never really offered a product like this, a DYiMac, but desktop sales are not laptop and iPhone markets. Apple has done well with these systems selling them as a lifestyle brand, but desktops very rarely leave the house, people are not swayed by product envy when no one ever sees the brand logo.

Traditional ways of making money, don't lead to product innovation or high profits from more units sold and a larger install base. I doubt they'll ever make as much off desktops as they even do laptops, it's just a lot smaller market, but that's no reason to leave billions on the table. There is no need to reinvent the wheel, listen to what people that build high end desktops are saying, and don't use the copout that these people install and run Windows, because that is just to admit that Apple isn't competing with the macOS, dark mode gimmicks rather than real innovation.
Click to expand...
 
There will be no cave on the price. Even though people don't "like" it, Apples Mac product line right now is actually pretty sensible.

1). offer the Mac mini, now up to date. This is your entry device and it is good enough for most users that are not professional workers. the enthusiast can experiment with external graphics now if they choose if the GPU is a holdup.

2). iMac for the all in one consumer in 2 sizes. This also is a consumer device and has served as a staple in the product line for years.

3). iMac Pro the prosumer version of the iMac. it is a serious workstation with a reasonably high grade monitor integrated. It can satisfy almost any users needs

4). the new Mac Pro. This is for the user that cannot be satisfied by one of the other 3 systems. it is not for the "average Joe". this is for someone that needs audio / video equipment, processing and storage that just cannot be fulfilled by one of the other systems. That is why it is 6K+ Its like buying the Ford F350 when a F150 will do, the extra power is nice.... but do you really NEED it for what you are doing.

That 4 way chart that Jobs had for consumer / professional and mobile and desktop. Well it looks like that mentality is still in Apple. There is a lower "consumer" version and a "professional" version of everything. Mini and Mac Pro, iMac and iMac Pro, iPad and iPad Pro, MacBook Air and MacBook Pro, iPhone XR and iPhone XS. that "professional" designation is high cost, premium tax as it represents the best that they have to offer in design, engineering, and equipment. Those features eventually fall down to the consumer line but it takes time. (except the thunderbolt 3 mess...)
 
Apples Mac sales is in the order of $25B per year.

Gigabyte one of the major motherboard companies is less than $2B...that includes all its products. Their retail motherboard sales with be only a portion of that.

Every motherboard Apple sold would potentially reduce the sale of full computers. If it made economic sense they’d already be doing it.

DearthnVader said:
You don't know that, the build your our PC market is a multi billion dollar industry.
Click to expand...
 
lowkey said:
They know their target market for this product. It’s not you.
Click to expand...

The underlying problem is that they have changed their target market without telling us in advance. In fact, they never told us officially, except for that ridiculous price.

I haven't read anybody talking about the real cause of all the frustration: the price of the base model. Up until today, the base Mac Pro was interesting for (at least) two target markets:
1) pros in the $$$ sense of the word that needed expandability but not incredible power (they usually don't much care about the price increase);
2) people, like me, who wanted a headless iMac with some upgradability (we DO care about the price increase!).

What many people (and Apple, it seems) don't understand is that the base model Mac Pro used to be the next best thing to an xMac / headless iMac. Now it's not because it's potentiel buyers have been priced out.

Now. If you or other people want to tell me that Mac Pros have always been expensive, let's start with some data. Here are the prices of the base model of every Mac pro since 2006, adjusted in today's dollars:

2006: $2,800
2008: $2,750
2009: $3,000
2010: $2,950
2012: $2,800

Do you see any trend? There is none.

2013: $3,300, a 500$ bump. Not too bad.

2019: $6,000, a $2,700 price jump. WTF??? (Or, more precisely, a $3,200 jump from the last real base Mac Pro. ;-) )

The base 2019 Mac Pro is roughly the price of two base model Mac Pros of previous generations.

The root cause of the frustration about the new Mac Pro is about that xMac-sized hole in Apple's line-up. Up until today, we could manage to find a decent solution to that problem. Now, we can't.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacUser2525, ssgbryan, MisterAndrew and 3 others
Loa said:
What many people (and Apple, it seems) don't understand is that the base model Mac Pro used to be the next best thing to an xMac / headless iMac. Now it's not because it's potentiel buyers have been priced out.
Click to expand...

I think most, if not all, understand this issue. Some of us are more frustrated with the price hike than others, but most certainly understand that pro freelancers etc will have a tough time eating that price increase over the prior Mac Pro line.
 
Loa said:
The underlying problem is that they have changed their target market without telling us in advance. In fact, they never told us officially, except for that ridiculous price.
Click to expand...
I’m sorry but you couldn’t be more wrong.

Apple told us exactly that the target customer is the film and animation industry in the two TechCrunch articles. It was made quite clear that this machine was being designed to run bleeding edge AV apps (form follows function) and not the other way around. The Logic Pro X update that can run 1,000 VIs with plugins on each track was released a few days before the Keynote. Still not sure if FCPx is going to get a similar upgrade or if Apple will announce something new at the launch in September.

The articles don’t mention that these customers are already spending $8k—$150k on Win10 rendering stations that have been on the market for nearly 4 years but they are. Even if you think the price is ridiculous, they don’t and the 7.1 is going to prove be a bargain. OK, not the base model which (on paper) can be beaten by the iMac Pro but once you get into the BTO options, will prove to be all Apple says it is.

Will the market respond? I think it will. Me? sticking with my 14 core iMP for now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aaronhead14 and AlphaCentauri
Like i said. They aren’t targeting people like you who would want a headless iMac with a bit of expandability.

They are targeting those who need the most power available. The PSU, case and motherboard are designed for serious power. That’s why the base model is expensive.

What do you do that can’t be done with a Mac Mini and external GPU?

Loa said:
The underlying problem is that they have changed their target market without telling us in advance. In fact, they never told us officially, except for that ridiculous price.

I haven't read anybody talking about the real cause of all the frustration: the price of the base model. Up until today, the base Mac Pro was interesting for (at least) two target markets:
1) pros in the $$$ sense of the word that needed expandability but not incredible power (they usually don't much care about the price increase);
2) people, like me, who wanted a headless iMac with some upgradability (we DO care about the price increase!).

What many people (and Apple, it seems) don't understand is that the base model Mac Pro used to be the next best thing to an xMac / headless iMac. Now it's not because it's potentiel buyers have been priced out.

Now. If you or other people want to tell me that Mac Pros have always been expensive, let's start with some data. Here are the prices of the base model of every Mac pro since 2006, adjusted in today's dollars:

2006: $2,800
2008: $2,750
2009: $3,000
2010: $2,950
2012: $2,800

Do you see any trend? There is none.

2013: $3,300, a 500$ bump. Not too bad.

2019: $6,000, a $2,700 price jump. WTF??? (Or, more precisely, a $3,200 jump from the last real base Mac Pro. ;-) )

The base 2019 Mac Pro is roughly the price of two base model Mac Pros of previous generations.

The root cause of the frustration about the new Mac Pro is about that xMac-sized hole in Apple's line-up. Up until today, we could manage to find a decent solution to that problem. Now, we can't.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: greenmeanie
rafark said:
Wow, + taxes it is over $8'000!
Click to expand...

That’s not how it works. It’s not a 25% tax on the retail value of the whole machine.

It’s 25% on the value of parts or labour inside the machine that are effected by the tariff. So if 25% of the value of parts are Chinese you’re looking at a few hundred bucks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mikehalloran
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back