Will we finally see New Mac Pro's 24th of April?

[CaptainChunk]

I'm afraid it's over guys. With both Dell, and HP models ready to go, and still not one word from this tight mouth arrogant company in nearly two years, not to mention zip in rumors, logically one can only deduce EOL from these facts. Face it, some of us will be using Windows soon. Crap!

Dell and HP also had Westmere workstations shipping a least a month before Apple did back in 2010.

And for the record, Windows has come a really LONG way since XP. Windows 7 is actually a very good operating system. Is it Mac OS? No, but it's not terrible.

I want a Sandy Bridge Mac Pro too, but I'm not losing sleep over it. My 2008 still pays the bills.

 

[xgman]

Dell and HP also had Westmere workstations shipping a least a month before Apple did back in 2010.

Shocker! (not)

 

[thekev]

"Not as much" is still more than "not at all". Also - with Apple refusing to offer anything in between iMac and MP, the MP as the only really expandable machine in the lineup will always have to compete to some degree with what is considered "consumer towers" from the competitors.

The last time I can recall Apple doing any kind of mid cycle price adjustments on any machine was during the G5 era. This isn't limited to the mac pro. They've had other machines go slightly longer than expected without a refresh. This was an extreme example, but even if they did something, Sandy Bridge E wouldn't have been part of it. The concern on here seems to be an issue of Apple's continued interest in the line, and it's fed by the constant tech blog troll articles regarding product discontinuation.

Not talking about extreme bumps. But the 6850/70 would have been an improvement already. If only to show that they at least _try_ to care for value.

That's possible, but anandtech and others didn't show any significant improvement there relative to the 5870. I know you can find 5870s way cheaper now. http://www.anandtech.com/show/3987/...enewing-competition-in-the-midrange-market/21

Anandtech wasn't impressed with performance. They were only impressed with value, which is still something. As far as I can tell, workstation firmware cards Windows side which you'd find in a comparable machine build essentially skipped that round of hardware.

No need to redesign it - after all there are PCIe slots only waiting to become filled. Thunderbolt, USB3, Raid-5... it's not as if there wouldn't have been opportunities. And with components falling in price, they could even have done some kind of facelift (like e.g. putting in a faster CPU into standard config) w/o sacrificing their holy margin!

I kind of expected them to do that at one point. I thought they might reduce the price of the 6 core and change the upgraded quad cpu to the baseline model to at least keep cpu performance on par with the cheaper imac. It is possible that they didn't expect delays to go this long. I'm not saying the line isn't ignored. I am suggesting that it wouldn't have changed up that much without a complete set of hardware. There are other things that annoy me. Apple's clock on EOL product support doesn't always start when they discontinue a product. I have to wonder once new machines do come out, how long until these can no longer run the current OS? I realize they've been out for a while, and the logic board is essentially a 2009 design, but if you buy one today, you're still paying a new machine price.

Thunderbolt is basically a chip that's added. So far they've routed it through graphics. I don't know the logistics of how it would be added on the mac pro or if it's supported under nehalem. I never suggested the availability of PCI lanes was a problem, but I don't fully understand it. I haven't found any good white papers or anything that really explain in detail how it's set up, so it's hard to speculate on how they'd add it to the older board design.

It's as easy to add hard drives and graphic cards. With that reasoning they could as well offer a bare bones MP (w/o Ram, graphic card, hard drive) for a lower price and let the customers either order that parts optionally or install those things by themselves, choosing appropriate technology like SSD, decent graphic card and a proper amount of memory in the first place instead of having to throw away a good chunk of what is factory installed and (over)paid for!

I know what you're saying here, but it's quite common to handle ram on your own. Apple always charges a fortune on ram especially if you max it out as I do (I deal with a lot of big files). Other oems are all over the place, but ram upgrades are often pretty expensive.

Marketing 101: Sitting on ones laurels, leaning back and pointing at the competition when you're far from being dominant in a market segment is a good way to pi... errr scare off even the most loyal customers.

I'm aware of this. I'm not saying it's their focus at all. I am saying that people rely too much on the speculation driven by analysts and tech blogs.

 

[goMac]

I want a Sandy Bridge Mac Pro too, but I'm not losing sleep over it. My 2008 still pays the bills.

No. Not acceptable. I want a new Mac Pro to come out within 24 hours of HP's or else I'M SWITCHING.

Who doesn't run their business down the exact hour you plan to order something? Totally unacceptable.

 

[24Frames]

I doubt that Apple every intended such a long gap between updates, it is much more likely that they expected Intel to delivery last September, there were a few rumours suggesting that, with an update around that time. That being the case the update would have been after 15 months, about what you might expect.

The point is that you can usually buy one from Apple the day of the announcement and have it on your desk next day. Not the case with Dell or HP.

Anyway if you don't want to wait you can place an order with HP or Dell... Only to find that Apple launch next Tuesday before your delivery arrives!

 

[xgman]

So if Apple announces the new Macbook line and then the new imac line and maybe even an updated mini line and still nothing said about a Mac Pro, then can we give up all hope then?

 

[The-Pro]

Well there isn't much of the day left doubt they will update it in the next hours.

 

[goMac]

So if Apple announces the new Macbook line and then the new imac line and maybe even an updated mini line and still nothing said about a Mac Pro, then can we give up all hope then?

No. Not until a sunset notice.

 

[CaptainChunk]

No. Not acceptable. I want a new Mac Pro to come out within 24 hours of HP's or else I'M SWITCHING.

Who doesn't run their business down the exact hour you plan to order something? Totally unacceptable.

I know, right?

 

[theSeb]

Consumer desktop Ivy Bridge on the Mac Pro is something Apple likely wouldn't do. Cheaper non-Xeon Mac Pros would eat into higher-end iMac

I've heard this "cannibalisation" theory before and from a company's point of view it simply does not make sense. It's like saying BMW should not make the x3 because it eats away from x5 and 3 series sales. That's just not how things work.

 

[The-Pro]

Guess they didn't release them. What a bummer.

 

[Umbongo]

I've heard this "cannibalisation" theory before and from a company's point of view it simply does not make sense. It's like saying BMW should not make the x3 because it eats away from x5 and 3 series sales. That's just not how things work.

Apple don't like their products overlapping in that way. Analysts and pundits have relayed this mentality for years. Lots of what Apple do doesn't make sense to most people.

 

[-hh]

I've heard this "cannibalisation" theory before and from a company's point of view it simply does not make sense. It's like saying BMW should not make the x3 because it eats away from x5 and 3 series sales. That's just not how things work.

Within reason, sure, but by the same token, the x series are resulting in the EOL'ing of the BMW 3 wagon in the US marketplace in the 2013 Model Year...

Overall, we do have to also recognize that the fragmenting a product line into smaller subsets does hinder manufacturing economies of scale, because even if variable costs don't increase, the fixed costs (which need to get amortized) will figuratively double, thereby making both products more expensive to the consumer. This isn't canibalization per se, but it is related: the splitting of a product line has to attract more buyers - - while not canabalizing itself - - in order to get back to what its margins were beforehand; basically, its a "Grow, Or Die" paradigm.

Apple's lines for the past decade have been pretty sparse...but that's IMO still a survival-based reaction to the '90s and the gazillion permutations of Performas and PowerMacs that caused customer confusion and higher manufacturing costs ... a clear lose-lose strategy.

The good news in this area is that total Mac sales YoY continue to grow, so this makes additional product variations less expensive and thus moderately more likely.

But the bad news is that we (the public) don't have very good data on if this is a "Rising Tide Lifts All Boats" that has also improved Mac Pro sales too, or if the growth in Mac sales has been primarily limited to just a few specific models.

For example, my personal recollections of yesterday's call mentioned ... MBA's and iMac's ..?.. as worth mentioning for doing well. We simply don't know how/if Mac Pro sales are doing relative to the whole, although since laptops are reportedly 70+%, we do know that the desktops aren't a big piece of the pie, even on just the Mac-only side of the business.


-hh

 

[Neodym]

Within reason, sure, but by the same token, the x series are resulting in the EOL'ing of the BMW 3 wagon in the US marketplace in the 2013 Model Year...

That's most probably a market-specific decision, as in the home market (Germany) BMW is far from EOL'ing any of the 3 series variants (except for the 6-cylinder motors, which may be removed from the lineup in general).

Overall, we do have to also recognize that the fragmenting a product line into smaller subsets does hinder manufacturing economies of scale, because even if variable costs don't increase, the fixed costs (which need to get amortized) will figuratively double, thereby making both products more expensive to the consumer.

This paradigm has lost some of its importance, as especially the car industry has pioneered flexible production and improved upon it for decades now. In reality you rarely have two identical cars coming off the assembly lines nowadays.

Apple's lines for the past decade have been pretty sparse...but that's IMO still a survival-based reaction to the '90s and the gazillion permutations of Performas and PowerMacs that caused customer confusion and higher manufacturing costs ... a clear lose-lose strategy.

Only that we are not in the '90s anymore. The world has turned and markets have changed drastically (including Apple's market position and financial situation). What might have been the best choice back then does not necessarily continue to be the best choice today. After all it's not about "gazillion permutations" again, but about a gaping hole in Apple's lineup they could close easily if only they wanted to. They don't even have to introduce another variation, but instead design the existing products in a way to cater to both existing and new customer groups. That'd be possible even with the iMac (just think of the G5 iMac Rev.A, where you could simply take off the back to replace the hard drive - that way they didn't even have any distracting seams or holes in the "nice" body...).

 

[Apple Corps]

No. Not acceptable. I want a new Mac Pro to come out within 24 hours of HP's or else I'M SWITCHING.

Who doesn't run their business down the exact hour you plan to order something? Totally unacceptable.

Well, looks like you have a few hours left OR you will switch. Probability of a new MP announcement in the next few hours = 0.

Enjoy your DELL or HP or whatever & Windows - bye bye....

 

[DeepCobalt]

Unfortunately, the Mac Pro is no longer a real part of Apple's corporate strategy. It will go the way of the Xserve, and hence may not get an upgrade at all, or if it does in the near term, it will likely be its last. Hate to say that, but...

 

[goMac]

Well, looks like you have a few hours left OR you will switch. Probability of a new MP announcement in the next few hours = 0.

Enjoy your DELL or HP or whatever & Windows - bye bye....

Apparently my sarcasm was not communicated strongly enough.

 

[-hh]

(BMW analogy)

That's most probably a market-specific decision, as in the home market (Germany) BMW is far from EOL'ing any of the 3 series variants (except for the 6-cylinder motors, which may be removed from the lineup in general).

Except that it isn't like the US market is negligible in size: this merely indicates a reduction in permutations because of the expenses of maintaining support for (N+1) products.

This paradigm has lost some of its importance, as especially the car industry has pioneered flexible production and improved upon it for decades now. In reality you rarely have two identical cars coming off the assembly lines nowadays.

Actually, much of it is influenced on regulations (eg, expenses of crash tests based on what the DOT says are 'different' designs) but again also on the cost-to-support. For example, I found that my wife's car was available with options in UK not offered at all in the USA (eg, electric folding+heated mirrors).

(Back to Apple)

Only that we are not in the '90s anymore. The world has turned and markets have changed drastically (including Apple's market position and financial situation). What might have been the best choice back then does not necessarily continue to be the best choice today. After all it's not about "gazillion permutations" again, but about a gaping hole in Apple's lineup they could close easily if only they wanted to.

Actually, that plethora of Performa permutations was a significant factor that was contributing to the near-death of Apple. So while it sounds tempting to say "we only need one more model to plug a gap", the problem is that that's a slippery slope that's hard to gage when to stop (so much of Apple's perspective has been: "so don't even start!").

They don't even have to introduce another variation, but instead design the existing products in a way to cater to both existing and new customer groups. That'd be possible even with the iMac (just think of the G5 iMac Rev.A, where you could simply take off the back to replace the hard drive - that way they didn't even have any distracting seams or holes in the "nice" body...).

That's true, but producers seek to hit certain magical price points too, for example, and there's plenty of enhancements that appear to be "easy", but which rack up expenses to implment. Much of Cook's strength has been in managing & streamlining supply chains, so this gets into a "Less is More" feedback loop (not always for the better).

In any case, since Apple today has transended PCs, they no longer need to be particularly concerned about a 'gaping' product line hole for the Mac desktops, because the grand sum of all of the Mac desktops are only ~3% of all of Apple's revenues (all OS X is 13% of current revenue and laptops were previously reportedly as being over 70% of units sold).

So as much as I'd like to see "a gaping hole plugged" too (if its the plug I want, of course), I do also have to recognize that Apple is as pragmatic as we ourselves are, and with the product subsegment being single-digit, it isn't likely a particularly high priority "problem" for them to resource to solve.


-hh

 

[goMac]

Performas were also totally awful machines, as where any Power Mac based on them.

The 7X00 Power Mac Line and higher was solid stuff though.

 

[-hh]

Performas were also totally awful machines, as where any Power Mac based on them.

True, although my point was that some of the Performas (mostly the 68K ones) were literally rebadges of other models. Overall, there were a couple dozen Performa models offered by Apple in only ~5 years.

The 7X00 Power Mac Line and higher was solid stuff though.

Within certain constraints/limitations. For example, the x100 series had legacy NuBus slots where the rest were the first to get PCI.

Probably the most beloved - - by customers - - were the x500 series (and higher), since these featured teh CPUs on daughtercards, which made it easy to upgrade the machine to faster hardware and extend its useful life ... particularly during a period that CPU speeds were still advancing pretty significantly every ~6 months.

Of course, the ability to upgrade through buying 3rd Party upgrades may be good for the consumer, but from Apple's perspective, it means they're not buying a new machine as often, which equals "not so good" for Apple.

About the only time we've seen this since has been with Xeon CPU transplants for Mac Pros as mentioned in this very forum...which again is to extend the consumer's useful life on a discrete investment purchased from Apple. And that's probably one of the reasons why it is next to impossible to cheaply source Apple's dual CPU riser card, to facilitate a DIY upgun of a Mac Pro from a single CPU to a dual CPU configuration: there's no real money in it for Apple.


-hh

 

[chilly7]

(BMW analogy)


Nehalem
In any case, since Apple today has transended PCs, they no longer need to be particularly concerned about a 'gaping' product line hole for the Mac desktops, because the grand sum of all of the Mac desktops are only ~3% of all of Apple's revenues (all OS X is 13% of current revenue and laptops were previously reportedly as being over 70% of units sold).



-hh

If they will improve their Mac there will be more selles, if they will continue to decline end Mac users requsts the selles will continue to drop more .
is that sample?

 

[MacVidCards]

If they will improve their Mac there will be more selles, if they will continue to decline end Mac users requsts the selles will continue to drop more .
is that sample?

Somewhere there is an English teacher who should lose their license, that is simple.

The angst is the one common theme in these threads. Hopefully Apple has an "Angst Meter" and will respond next Tuesday.

We have seen the signs, the lowered inventory, the word "New" finally removed from the Mac Pro sales pages, the Tea Leaves in the shape of Steve Jobs....what have we done wrong, oh ye gods at Apple?

 

[theSeb]

Within reason, sure, but by the same token, the x series are resulting in the EOL'ing of the BMW 3 wagon in the US marketplace in the 2013 Model Year...

Overall, we do have to also recognize that the fragmenting a product line into smaller subsets does hinder manufacturing economies of scale, because even if variable costs don't increase, the fixed costs (which need to get amortized) will figuratively double, thereby making both products more expensive to the consumer. This isn't canibalization per se, but it is related: the splitting of a product line has to attract more buyers - - while not canabalizing itself - - in order to get back to what its margins were beforehand; basically, its a "Grow, Or Die" paradigm.

Apple's lines for the past decade have been pretty sparse...but that's IMO still a survival-based reaction to the '90s and the gazillion permutations of Performas and PowerMacs that caused customer confusion and higher manufacturing costs ... a clear lose-lose strategy.

The good news in this area is that total Mac sales YoY continue to grow, so this makes additional product variations less expensive and thus moderately more likely.

But the bad news is that we (the public) don't have very good data on if this is a "Rising Tide Lifts All Boats" that has also improved Mac Pro sales too, or if the growth in Mac sales has been primarily limited to just a few specific models.

For example, my personal recollections of yesterday's call mentioned ... MBA's and iMac's ..?.. as worth mentioning for doing well. We simply don't know how/if Mac Pro sales are doing relative to the whole, although since laptops are reportedly 70+%, we do know that the desktops aren't a big piece of the pie, even on just the Mac-only side of the business.


-hh

Yes, Apple does like to keep a sparse and lean product line and they still make bucket loads of money so it's working for them. A sparse product line makes the whole logistics and supply demand chains much simpler.

The point that I was making is that not producing a "Mini Mac Pro" has nothing to do with Apple worrying about "eating into iMac sales". It's simply not within their strategy to create such a product. This is probably because they don't see a market for it.

Unfortunately we cannot be sure what the demand for such a product is because the 15 guys that want it on Macrumors do not make a statistically significant sample set to make assumptions from.

 

[-hh]

Yes, Apple does like to keep a sparse and lean product line and they still make bucket loads of money so it's working for them. A sparse product line makes the whole logistics and supply demand chains much simpler.

Yes, and simpler = cheaper.

The point that I was making is that not producing a "Mini Mac Pro" has nothing to do with Apple worrying about "eating into iMac sales". It's simply not within their strategy to create such a product. This is probably because they don't see a market for it.

I'd refine that modestly by saying that they don't see an opportunity for a significantly growing market for it.

Unfortunately we cannot be sure what the demand for such a product is because the 15 guys that want it on Macrumors do not make a statistically significant sample set to make assumptions from.

Very much so, although if the proverbial xMac were to come about, you might be able to plus that counter to 16 guys who want it. However, the pragmatic reality for me is that I'd just like to have a refreshed Mac Pro, since the current one is presently a poor value, particularly since its refresh vs the 2009 configuration was weak.


-hh

 

[theSeb]

Yes, and simpler = cheaper.

I'd refine that modestly by saying that they don't see an opportunity for a significantly growing market for it.

Fair enough and I cannot disagree.

Very much so, although if the proverbial xMac were to come about, you might be able to plus that counter to 16 guys who want it. However, the pragmatic reality for me is that I'd just like to have a refreshed Mac Pro, since the current one is presently a poor value, particularly since its refresh vs the 2009 configuration was weak.
-hh

Yes, I am actually one of the people that would love such a product - something bigger than the mini and smaller than the Mac Pro with perhaps 2 x 2.5" bays, 2 x 3.5" bays, desktop CPU, desktop GPU and one or two empty PCIe slots. I would be ordering two today.