I don't know the exact Mac Pro sales numbers, but the numbers have been well above the 60k a year mark before.
There is probably a floor under which a Mac Model is a no go. Over 60K/year in 2006-2009? Probably. Over 60K/year for most of 2012-2013? Probably not.
If someone at Apple is comparing the 2013 Mac Pro to the crippled 2011-2013 years then sure it is doing "better". But the machine was doing so badly 2010-2011 that Apple didn't do jack squat to update it.
I suspect they are following some shrink and grow over time strategy. They had already done most of the "shrink" when had gotten to the phase had t pull the Mac Pro from EU market because it was too old. It is definately pragmatically is a new product that is going after a different subset of users than the old one did.
If Apple discontinued the Mac Pro, I can't see FCPX continuing to last. You'd see a lot of the final FCPX users leave the platform, and yes, while an Retina iMac can run FCPX, I don't think there would be enough people left to justify development.
Depends upon where the iMacs are at when drop. Obviously Apple isn't going to drop the Mac Pro right now. Worst case they will milk this model for at least 2 (maybe 3 ) years like they did the last iteration. So it is really where iMacs and their CPU/GPUs will be at 2-3 years from now. If Apple does a E5 v3/v4 upgrade then it is where iMacs will be 4-6 years from now.
For 1080p work the iMac isn't a non starter.
The iMac is a great machine in everything except for GPU, and that's where the Mac Pro has a chance to shine.
Mac Pro has chance to shine when the bulk goes up substantially. The chase into 4-8K RAW is were it has FCPX traction. The notion 30K cameras and massive TB storage arrays are necessary to do "Pro" runs at odds with the major new content distribution mechanisms that are opening up. The most expensive content possible is really not what the vast majority of content consumers are asking for.
I think Apple's next move will really be based on if the nMP is selling better or worse than the oMP. If sales really plummeted, they may step back and rethink things. If sales stayed the same or improved, they'll carry on.
Reportedly there is a weekly Monday morning meeting at Apple where the Execs look at how all the products are doing. I don't think this is a big leap. It isn't just the nMP that is on that metric. Everything else at Apple is on the same treadmill.
Like the Xserve, you'd have a lot of collateral damage if the Mac Pro was discontinued. With the Xserve, it was Mac OS X Server that really died (although no one was sad.)
Not really. From Apple's XServe transition whitepaper...
"... Since its introduction in the fall of 2009, Mac mini with Snow Leopard Server has
become Apples most popular server system. ... "
http://www.apple.com/xserve/pdf/L422277A_Xserve_Guide.pdf
"... The new hardware is optimized for Mac OS X Snow Leopard Server, and comes bundled with the operating system software. Previously, users had to spend $500 for the retail box option. For comparison, prior to Snow Leopard, the unlimited user version of Mac OS X Server cost $999. Now, users can pay the same cost and get a Mac mini along with the software.... "
http://appleinsider.com/articles/10..._mini_server_surprise_with_strong_sales_start
The transition to "Server is just an app" has probably muddled things, but the whole notion that OS X Server would completely implode if not hooked into enterprise racks was flawed. OS X Server was never gong to squeeze Llnux or Windows Server out of the vast majority of managed machine rooms. OS X Server deployments went
up after the XServe models were decommissioned; not down. It just isn't the holy data center priests that are the primary buyers.
So asking if Apple is ready to give up on the Mac Pro is really asking if Apple is ready to give up on things like FCPX, deeper OpenCL support, a strong commitment to Thunderbolt, etc.
As outlined above. Apple "gives up" when folks stop buying. If the buyers stop they are already at the stage where FCPX isn't good enough ( hence the dubious move of having just
one app be justification for a hardware system versus having a more diverse and resilient app system to support it. ), don't believe in Apple's OpenCL stack, and/or aren't buying systems primarily on Thunderbolt capabilities.
The rest of the Mac line up needs OpenCL and Thunderbolt also; if not more. The mainstream Intel Core CPU package line up is increasing core count by adding GPU cores not x86 ones. If have tons of math ops to perform on data if can't employ those GPU cores then are settling in on a plateau. Similar, huge data rates without Thunderbolt are a pain via the alternatives that Apple uses.
The Mac Pro plays no super special role for those two ( the PCIe slots in the old version are/were a rough exchange for TB. ). FCPX needs more than just Mac Pro system sales to remain viable also. if FCPX only could run on the Mac Pro it would be in at least as much trouble if restricted to the others.
And, to be perfectly frank, if they want to keep trying to improve their standing in those markets, they have more than enough money to do so. Financial considerations are important, but Apple's will to be in those markets is the bigger driver here.
The vast majority of Apple's cash horde exists just purely to be there. It has really no influence on current product development other than a measure of "Apple won't go bankrupt any time soon". The will is more so coupled to return on investment. If there are other places to put the same dollars and get a higher return .... that will starve off the Mac Pro from getting new R&D money.
Watch event (surely there will be an event) to see if one gets introduced alongside the watch and/or the 12" Macbook Air. That's where I'd expect to see it introduced if one is going to be introduced before WWDC.
