Apple exec suggests new iMacs may not come till 2013 - Page 3

 

What are you talking about? The iMac has not been updated for 406 days. This has not precedent in iMac's history. Apple could easily find anything they need to give it a routine refresh if they wanted to.

 

 

 

The Titanium Powerbook G4 was updated for the last time in November 2002, and then in February 2003 Apple introduced the all new Aluminum Powerbook G4. Besides the update cycle for the Macs in the past was more or less twice a year, or three times each two years. They could easily have updated the iMac around this WWDC and then introduce a redesigned model in 6-9 months from now, or even after one year if it is going to be radically different. They just did not want to. A reasonable explanation would be that they put much resources on iOS and the satellite-around-it-hardware.

Just say no to Hackentosh Macs.

For my desktop needs immseriously thinking of going back to Linux. Yeah hardware support sucks but frankly it isn't as bad as on Apples systems. My experiences with USB to RS232 adapters taught me that lesson.

Frankly I've never been an iMac customer and likely never will be. However I had high hopes that the Mini would morph into something more acceptable. Ivy Bridge or Trinity certainly could have vastly improved the Mini. Now I will have to reconsider the Mini as a potential solution and instead look to the Windows hardware world.

Well the one thing we have to remember is this thread is based on an unofficial conversation with an excutives of unknown placement. He simply may not have the details down right. I have to balance that with what appears to be fairly clear statements regarding 2013. All in all I'm not hopeful at all. Even if the hardware comes early in 2013 it is very likely to not reflect user needs. I mean really if they can't support users with hardware that meets their needs after 400 days then they are grossly out of touch with user needs.

By the way I'm talking about USB 3 here which is extremely important if you are buying new hardware. Modern GPUs in an iMac are always welcomed too. I have to agree though making users wait +6 months is asinine. It will be very interesting to see what happens to desktop sales this year if nothing rolls out with Mountain Lion. .

I'm not sure what is up with he six months thing. However I totally disagree with respect to the need for an iMac overhaul. The current iMac is a terrible design and I will not buy one as it is now. But then again you would have to be really hard up for an iMac right now to buy the current model as it is nothing but legacy hardware.

In any event the problem today isn't with anyone model it is that Apple turned its back on the entire desktop user community. Effectively nothing was revved in a manner that users need. Not only did they walk away from the desktop user, they debuted the "new" Mac Pro which amounted to throwing those users the finger. It is really terrible behavior for such a large company. If Apple doesn't want desktop customers they should just say so.

Here is the thing.  Apple has suppliers building new mfg plants to make new displays, assembly, this or that.  What happens if the panel supplier for a new BIG panel isn't finished building their new mfg plant in time to announce the iMac in time for WWDC?   I mean seriously, they have custom fans, speakers on the new MBP and guess what?  They can't put it out right now because of whatever reason(s) and just because YOU or I or someone else wants something now, doesn't mean that we can get it now.  They put resources on iOS because they want to have a new iOS every year. But they put the resources where they can and they do their job in whatever time frame they can and they release stuff when they can and if they have to delay something for WHATEVER reason, then that's what it is.  Yeah, I would love to see a new iMac, but if the reason is not known to me, then I or anyone else can't just make up some invalid reason because we honestly don't the REAL reason unless Apple tells us, which they might or might not be able to, want to, or need to.  All we know is that the new iMac wasn't released yesterday and if the new one takes another 6 or 7 months, then it will take another 6 or 7 months.  If you can't wait, you basically have a few options.  Get an iMac that they have now, get a MBP now or buy a PC and suffer from having to use Windows.  Personally, I was planning on getting an iMac too, but I may decide to buy a MBP instead because that retina model KICKS any other product out there and it does the same thing and i can get a big flat panel screen if I need a bigger monitor to look at.  EIther way, the world isn't going to end just because Apple couldn't get their iMac out and HOPEFULLY, we'll get some more info from Apple IF they decide to go public about it.  

I am sure there is a logical reason that Apple hasn't mentioned because there might be something that they just simply have to wait for and they may not want to tell us because IT'S A SURPRISE. 

 

Do you know that in the Audiophile world that products are refreshed sometimes 3 to 5 years between models?  Sometimes even longer. You just can't FORCE things to happen.  If you need a new product get what they currently have that does the job OR wait.  I mean, their products have a lifespan of at least 3 years because that's the AppleCare Warranty period when you buy one, so if a product hasn't been replaced in 3 years, THEN I would start worrying.

 

That's far too lenient.

This isn't just an affront to creative professionals it is a slap in the face to every desktop user. That is if the rumor about no iMacs this year are true. The problem for Mac Pro users is the take this crap and shut up approach that Apple has taken to this update.

Mind you I'm not so much up in arms over the non E5 update as I'm am over the glaring slap in the face that the old GPU card is. What the hell is that all about?
The reality is you don't have to buy their products. Thinking like that is why Apple might be able to get away with this abomination of an update.
Up until yesterday I was suggesting that people should be patient as Apple must have been working on a significant update to the Mac Pro. Obviously that did not come through. Sometimes that happens but you expect companies like Apple to have viable contingency plans. This rev of the Mac Pro could have been such a contingency plan if they had taken the time to actually update it to reflect today's needs. That would have meant including a significantly upgraded GPU card, USB 3 ports (even if on a PCI card) and whatever else needed a refresh. Instead we get CPU upgrades only, which I don't knock but they are hardly enough.

I still kinda want to believe that Apple is overhauling their desktop line up to make it a rational play for the next few years but my faith is greatly diminished. They have had far to long of a time to modernize the desktop. I'm speaking of the entire lineup here. So my suggestion is to explore the alternatives.

 

http://www.helpguide.org/mental/stress_relief_meditation_yoga_relaxation.htm

 

-kpluck

I'm limping on an ancient CoreDuo iMac that is a first generation Intel with Snow Leopard that i would love to replace, but guess what?  I either have to wait for a new iMac because I prefer to have the latest processors OR I buy a MBP and a large panel monitor and do it that way. So if you have something newer than a first generation iMac running Snow Leopard, then you don't have anything to complain about.  OK.  Seriously.

 

So sit back get what they have now, or get nice tall cool glass of STFU and don't be an idiot about it.

Edited by drblank - 6/12/12 at 7:43am

The problems of the kind you mention are often known. There have been numerous times in the past when some delays were explained by such issues. For the case of the iMac we have total darkness and silence.

 

I think they went public about it in a way not exactly open but quite explicit by turning their back to the desktop users. This is all they could come up with after 685 days for the Mac Pro and 406 days for the iMac? Give me break here.

I would not be surprised if Apple quietly updated the iMac and Mac Mini later in the year and then axed the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro next year.

 

Then next year an all new iMac with a smaller/cheaper entry level model to replace the Mac Mini and a high end pro model to replace the Mac Pro.

Edited by Shaun, UK - 6/12/12 at 8:14am

For you maybe, but the majority opinion seems to be that the case design is just fine. I have no problem with mine. Don't mistake the outer shell for the internals. Apple has made major changes there several times.

This isn't a consumer device. If you think that the case has to look different just so that it looks different, you aren't buying pro level machines, because we don't care what the outside looks like, as long as it does what it's supposed to do, and that it does.

Do I want a new Mac Pro? You bet! But the outer shell is of no importance. I'm not trying to show people by the case, that I just bought the newest. If that's what bothers you, then your mind is on the wrong thing.

Maybe - just maybe - the Pro hasn't been updated because sales for the product are still strong - "strong" meaning they meet whatever internal target that Apple has for them. Or just maybe - they haven't hit a sales figured required to trigger the next evolution. 

 

Just speculating here - and yes an upgrade that sparks a rush of sales can't be left out of the equation. But in my opinion - it is beyond a waste of time to make claims that no one at Apple cares about the Pro line simply because there has been no update in x months (or years). 

 

As for design - I don't think the Pro tower is dated - though it has been a long time since I have felt a need for the power and expandability the tower offers. I did buy a Mac Mini Server with 12TB external RAID array recently - for data intensive purposes with little CPU load. 

 

Also, as a Mac user since the Mac SE - I have seen this sort of discussion throughout Apple's history - wild speculation regarding someone's particular favorite machine and why Apple hasn't updated it in so long - as well as denigrating whatever new product comes out as why would ANYONE want THAT since it doesn't fit MY expectations or requirements. 

 

My dad's theory of how to ensure that a manufacturer would produce a newer better product is to go buy the current product since it always seems like the next best thing comes along right AFTER you spent your money on the previous one. 

 

My last three notebook purchases have been 17" Mac notebooks - a PowerBook G4, a Core2 Duo, and a Core i7 - with the apparent demise of the 17" form factor (for now) I don't know what I my next notebook will be - although since I don't expect it to be for at least a year or possibly two - I will deal with that decision when the time comes - will there be a 17" Mac option then? or will I find one of the 15" options acceptable? That remains to be seen - it is far more likely that I would buy a 15" MacBook than anything in the Windows world. In the mean time I will not lament Apple's decision to make business decisions that keep the company profitably in business. 

So you're saying for Apple to be daring and bold, they should give you the same design but with new components?

I'd say for Apple to be daring and bold, they would do what they did with FCPX. Turn round to the customers who invested hundreds of thousands of dollars and say 'we're going this way now because it leads to a better place, come along for the ride or take the well worn path without us'.

Everyone has a benchmark for their computer. The individual workstation owner who laughs at the iMac and laptop owner would be laughed at by the render wrangler.

There is no job in 2012 you can do on a Mac Pro that you cannot do on a Macbook Pro. Some final passes on jobs will take longer but not many and there is still a Mac Pro available to do the grunt work.

I don't expect this rumour to be true at all. Pogue didn't even say Apple executive, he just said executive. It could have been the executive toilet attendent at the Moscone centre. There's no reason Apple would launch OS X 10.8 and not have a new set of consumer desktops.

Apple rarely launches all products at once. The laptops are the biggest sellers and they always come first, then it's the iMac and Mini. They will be updated in July or August at the latest.

I don't see it that way. Apples laptops are excellent examples of hardware, they currently don't have a bad laptop deign. So from that standpoint they are still about hardware. It is the desktop that has been ignored for too long. Some throw up their arms when I call the desktop lineup stagnet but I suspect hearts are changing here.

As to software one of the reasons I moved from Linux to a MBP was software. Specifically Apples software. You can't dismiss the importance of software, it becomes glaringly obvious once you walk up to a Windows machine. People often forget that underneath Mac OS/X lies UNIX which is a huge advantage for the platform. Really this is no place to whine about Apple. One of the reasons that I own an iPhone is that infrastructure, without which the iPhone would be useless. Please get a grip. You really need to look into why you need to feel special.
I came to Apple from an array of Linux machines, many of which I still have and use. The MBP is my primary "computer" now though and I don't see that changing. Why? Because it works well even if a little old. Notably though most of my Mail and web access is now handled on an iPad, because it simply is a better tool for that.

Since I'm still using Linux I can reflect a bit on that. It is a great tool in its own right, however you simply don't have the quality software to choose from that you have on the Mac. Let me be more specific, you don't have the quality user apps that the Mac is known for on Linux. You do have very high quality apps available for Linux but these are not normally mainstream user apps. Even then the quality apps on Linux for the most part have crap UIs.

With respect to hardware Linux is an incredible mixed bag. It is often harder to get Linux to run on new hardware where as Apples Mac OS often doesn't rise on older hardware. Desktop hardware is generally not a problem, laptops however still are. Thankfully both AMD and Intel are supporting their hardware well these days with both closed and open source support. Sometime that support is farther ahead than Apples. In the end though Linux requires constant updating and user intervention to keep the hardware running well. Worst is the constant need to update a "distro" (about every six months) because you need to get the latest updates to support your hardware. If you don't do a complete distro update your system slowly becomes a mess if you try to retro (back port support) update.

Linux works best on hardware that has been around awhile and if you can remain on one distro release for as long as possible. Otherwise the need to constantly update your distro becomes a pain and is no where near as pain free as a Mac OS update.

In any event I'd think long and hard about switching to Linux, it really doesnt work that great as a desktop system running user productivity software. It is just to much monkeying around. It is a different story though if you have more focused uses in mind.

 

I think you've hit the nail on the head.

 

Apple has different priorities than the rest of the computer and consumer electronics industries and while Apple is the one being copied a lot these days, most companies still don't do everything Apple's way.  First, I'm not surprised that we saw Macs that didn't get upgraded right now.  I can't remember a time that Apple turned over the entire Mac product line at once.  The fact that they turned over the entire Macbook line at once is pretty extraordinary.

 

Second, I'm sure the "unnamed Apple exec" who spoke to David Pogue is probably "unnamed Apple exec Phil Schiller".  I'm certain they knew there would be some blowback from people expecting to see Ivy bridge across the board all at once and a new Mac Pro (instead of the speed bump) and the message was to be patient.  It's not surprising to se the Macbooks get the new toys first.  They outsell the desktop Macs 3 to 1 easy.  And if you look at the comments above, the iMac isn't as beholden to the "seasonal buying trends" meaning "back to school" as it was a decade ago.  Most students carry Macbooks of some sort now or even iPads or both.  Oh sure, the iMac is still needed to classrooms and people who want a desktop Mac, either at home or at a business.  But school systems buy more iPads now anyway than Macs and those buyers care more about price than the latest Ivy Bridge hotness.

 

Somehow I still don't think we'll have to wait for 2013 for new iMacs or Mac Minis...they will just get updated press release style in a few months.

 

As for the Mac Pro, given the fact that Apple made a behind the scenes comment to Pogue at all means they are sensitive to these buyers.  Mac Pro buyers are not the rest of us.  Back in the old days, a lot of die hard geeks such as myself made sure to get whatever Mac tower Apple made at the time.  Now the Mac Pro is owned almost exclusively by the "time is money" crowd, and some collegiate academic and scientific circles.  If I need to processa lot of uncompressed video for a TV show or movie, I'm sorry but a Macbook Pro Retina is not going to cut it.  There used to be an old saying with car engines "there is no substitute for cubic inches".  For people who need the horsepower, only a multi-cored Xeon will get you to a deadline.

 

Which brings us to Apple's problem.  Since the "time is money" crowd buys machines when they need them, not necessarily due to "seasonal consumer trends", this machine ends up having a longer life cycle and we've seen that during the entire life of the Mac Pro since 2006 (and before that going back to the PowerMac days).  Right now I'm sure that Apple debated whether or not to go to Sandy Bridge-E for the Mac Pro right now.  On one hand, they need PCI 3.0 (which SB-E has) but they also need USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt (which SB-E does not have).  Suitable Ivy Bridge Xeon architecture won't be available until 2013 and this is where I think Apple decided to go with the extended product cycle strategy.  If they replace the Mac Pro with a new one, they are looking to have this guy around for 2-3 years with minimal changes.  They really don't want to shoehorn some added technology over and above what SB-E offers only to have it all on the chip level in six months anyway.  Better to wait and then do it all at once (which is more economical too).

There is a difference between slowing down and giving up. Look at old people, those that slow down enjoy their old years, those that give up die. USB 3 is a consummer trend and an important one, so how is ignoring it on the desktop smart. OK so where is Ivy Bridge in a Mini? At this point the Mac Pro is a piece of crap. If you can't recognize that how do you expect people to consider what you are writing here? The Mac Pro is now a heaping pile of crap. Computers these days without USB 3 are crap. It looks like Apples entire desktop line is a smoldering pile of crap. That concept has truly gotten old especially when it seems to be justification for ignoring significant portions of the market. So you are saying that Apple keeps the same Mac Pro case around so that people can recognize crap easier?
Actually I've been asking for years that question, why oesnt Apple make a good keyboard.

Please don't let Apples marketing BS blind you to the current situation.

Please don't make excuses for Apples behavior here.

You know what?  I think you should buy a Dell or an HP, or better yet, go buy an Acer leave Appleinsider because it sounds like you aren't the type of person that Apple needs or even wants as a customer.   If I was Apple and I found out who you were, I walk over to your business with a BRAND new Dell hunk of junk, take your Apple away from you and give you a restraining order to buy anything from Apple ever again.  Yes, component prices go down, but guess what shipping costs have gone up, labor costs have gone up and other things have gone up, the dollar has been devalued.  They aren't making a TON of money on desktops in the first place.  Do you think Aluminum prices have gone down?  Seriously, these things are not high mark up like software and they aren't ripping you off for software updates like Microsoft is, are they? NO. $30 or now $20 for a major OS release rather than what MS charges.  You really need to understand the cost of doing business before you open your mouth.  OR better yet, make your own PC and Operating System and see how far you get.  GO to Fry's or some component Build it Yourself computer parts store and make your own computer.

 

When Apple buys components they typically do YEARLY purchases or some kind of BIG contract.  If a particular component price drops significantly below what they bought it under their contract, they don't always get automatic price protection.  OK?  So, when they made their contract for 1333DDR memory, it was done at the time when they initiated the contract. IF the price of memory dropped because memory companies are dumping memory, Apple, just most other computer mfg don't always get price protection.  Now, if you don't want to understand this, then no one can help you.  If you feel the product is too expensive, then buy something else.  Computer hardware is not, nor will it ever be high margin products.  

Edited by drblank - 6/12/12 at 8:37am

Screw the Xeon. If Intel can't get their act together and make a Xeon compatible with thunderbolt or USB3, then Apple should release a brand new computer just like they did yesterday with the retina Macbook. I have the perfect name for it. Mac simply call it a Mac. It would  include a high end quad or maybe hex core i7, a modern GPU, thunderbolt, USB3, two drive bays at a minimum, one open PCIx slot. Once Intel get their act together with a Xeon, you can continue the Mac Pro line, but keep the Mac Pro as only a dual CPU system. You could choose between 4, 6, or 8 cores per CPU.  No more single CPU option for the Mac Pro since the new Mac would fill that need. There really is no advantage to a single CPU Mac using a Xeon over a Core i7. 

 

The core i7 Mac would satisfy a lot of people yearning for a new and up to date workhorse Mac. This new extreme edition would be perfect. Yeah it is pricey at about $999 but so are the Xeons. Apple could also offer two less expensive options. But a mac with a high end i7 would satisfy a lot of people disappointed that there was no Mac Pro update. The iMac can never use the fastest CPU or GPU because of thermal issues.  

 

http://ark.intel.com/products/64887/Intel-Core-i7-3920XM-Processor-Extreme-Edition-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz)

Edited by gwmac - 6/12/12 at 8:51am

I personally think the Mac Pro is finished. I think there will be another iMac, they are just waiting a month or two, so as to let people focus on the new hotness.

 

Long term, maybe they want us to use laptops with external monitors, or just AirPlay to our HDTV if we want a big screen.

Awesome!  Where do I plug this in?  http://www.blackmagic-design.com/products/decklinkhdextreme/

The current iMac really is an incredibly powerful machine. I don't think consumers are crying out for faster processors in them. It's all about that gorgeous display that just dominates the product.

Resources? Are you nuts, they have over $100 billion in the bank, hey could afford an iMac, Mini and Pro refresh. Oh it is not an over reaction to say that the Pro refresh is a joke. More precisely it is an insult to the Mac Pro community. Oh come on, we all know Ivy Bridge is out. While it certainly offers little in the way of performance gains the support for USB 3 is important to iMac users. So explain the video card! More so is it that difficult for Apple to write a driver for a third party USB 3 chip? Mind you it has been over two years now. Well that is in part garbage because some of Apples IP is in the laptops. However if your primary supplier is failing, isn't it about time to look for a third party. Actually I suspect Apple will have a huge backlog. I'm objective enough to see the retina MBP as a very compelling machine. However it is not a desktop machine nor can it effectively compete with one. You do realize that the Mini uses the same laptop chips that you claim are improving so damn fast!!! The fact is Ivy Bridge is exactly what the Mini needs to make it a more vible platform. Do you really think anybody would be buying the Mac Pro as it is now unless they had no choice? What today's non releases tells us is that Apple doesn't give a damn about the desktop. If the rumors about no iMacs until 2013 are true it also indicates a disdain for their customers.
So you think it is wise and proper for Apple to continue to sell grossly outdated iMacs to their customers when the hardware solutions exist to modernize the machines? Is it good for customer relations to say you can't have a desktop with USB 3 because we are to damn lazy to build one? Frankly I don't care if the product would only be on the market for six months until the current iMacs replacement cones. For me it is a question of ethics. If Apple advertised the iMac as their antique computer that would be one thing but they don't do that. Instead it is offered up as a modern computer which it isn't anymore.

2012: Quiet iMac speed bump.

2013: 26" iMac Retina.

 

Certainly a Retina iMac will be "the pro desktop workstation" for 2013. This way Apple streamlines the Mac line. They have "legacy" stuff like Mac Pro, Mac Mini, old iMac and old Macbook Pro, which is replaced by MacBook Air, Retina MBP and within the next 1.5 years Retina iMac. 

 

In Apple's case the momentum is all iPhone and iPad. Macs and OS X won't be going anywhere, it's a key part but I imagine Apple wants to streamline it to "the computer you're going to buy if you're not buying a phone or tablet". Hence Retina MBP and Retina iMac.

 

Interestingly before the keyonte last night I used my Apple Bluetooth Keyboard with my Retina iPad for the first time. It hit me how killer it was. An actual full-fledged computer with a Retina display? Indescribable. 

 

And you can bet your bottom dollar in China and Asia anyone who's anyone (aka everybody trying to gain status aka almost everyone) will be gunning purely for the MBA, Retina MBP or in 2013 Retina iMac.

I really hope so but it doesn't look promising.

I was actually hoping for a bit more of a performance gain. I also dislike the marketing of the machine as a server. Make a quad core mainstream.

Beyond that though I want to see other updates to the Mini. First would be the use of a Blade SSD for boot and apps without loosing the space for conventional drives. The other thing is support fort more RAM. It is a given that the other Ivy Bridge features like USB 3 would be supported.

As to the quad core machine I'd like to see the ability to support higher wattage processors so that we can sustain higher clock rates. Actually I'd like to see quad core move into the lower end model.

 

Not really motion seconded.

 

Into a Thunderbolt port as soon as Blackmagic gets their head out of their.....

 

Wizard, so the MacPro isn't where people want it to be, but I am sure in good time, they'll announce a new version to satisfy those that want USB 3, Thunderbolt, E5 chips, etc.  Show me ONE SINGLE Windows laptop that has Thunderbolt (which, BTW, is way better than USB 3), has a 5K display in a case that is aluminum, that is less than .75 inches thick, that weight less than 4.5 lbs?  I'll wait for your answer.  Until then, Apple will release products when they can and you decide to buy it or not.  Right now, they can't release any major releases for whatever reason and the thing is, these hardware companies can't redesign their top end systems every 6 months.  They'll lose money if they do that.

 

If you have a MacPro and NEED USB 3, here's a link for you.  http://eshop.macsales.com/item/CalDigit/U3HOSTADPTR/?utm_source=google&utm_medium=shoppingengine&utm_campaign=googlebase&gclid=CM_RgamKybACFccBRQodnh_AZA

 

IF you need other upgrades for the MacPro, go to OtherWorldComputing because they might have some interim solution for you. 

Out of curiosity, how many people here wanting a new mac Pro were considering the single CPU option? And if so, would you be happy with a slightly smaller Mac Pro that included thunderbolt, USB3, a modern GPU and something like this as the CPU. http://ark.intel.com/products/64887/Intel-Core-i7-3920XM-Processor-Extreme-Edition-(8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz)

 

When Apple chose to go exclusively with Xeons in the Mac Pro it made sense. Not so much anymore if they are going to be 2 years or more behind the core line for supporting key technologies like USB3 and thunderbolt. If even AMD can offer support for thunderbolt which was invented by Intel, why can't Intel do the same for Xeon? It just doesn't make any sense. Maybe Apple should partner with AMD and their 12 core opterons to build a new Mac Pro in the same way they switch between nvidia and AMD for GPU's. It is not like Apple is getting any advantage from being the only maker exclusive to Intel. All those Windows ultrabook commercials Intel pays for proves that Intel shows no loyalty to Apple. 

No new iMacs was a very sad disappointment.  No acknowledgment of the Mac Pro upgrade, and half baked upgrade at that, was equally as bad.  It could have been a major presentation coup had they upgraded their entire line up at once, and in my opinion, spurred sales from great headlines.  Quite the big splash opportunity for Tim Cook.  For what ever reason, the lack of announcements are sorely disappointing to us mac fans.  The Mac Pro non announcement and weak upgrade, as stated above, delivers a very poor message to consumers.  To me it says, "we don't care about this product line. We have spent 2 years doing virtually nothing to it.  We are not even going to bother to give it thunderbolt, something available on even our cheapest computers".  So as a Mac Pro owner this comes as a complete slap in the face by apple.  A pro machine, used by many graphics people who move huge files from major external drives and no thunderbolt, no usb3?  Yet both these ports are on a 999$ mac book air??!!!  Wow apple, you really really don't care about your high end users willing to spend $4K on one of your machines!  A very sad showing for a great company!  

Get rid of this glossy piece of iMac dung already.
Jonny can you hear me?

I have heard a lot of talk about the E5 series, but the E3 is an Ivy Bridge Xeon that is now shipping. Why was the E3 never an option for a Mac Pro?

 

http://ark.intel.com/products/series/53495

Yeah right. Black Magic makes some of the best gear out there and it is mostly platform independent Windows, Mac & Linux. Accusing them of head up ass is about as far off the mark as you could possibly be.

I think he didn't realize that you need PCI slots.  Can you do with a 12 core system that they have now?  What is it that you need that the current MacPro can't do? I am just curious.

Microsoft doesn't care what you do with the software after you buy it. You can put it on any computer. Apple calls you a criminal if you put the software you purchased on any computer other than an Apple. If you exchange money for something and you can't do what you want to do with it then you don't own it. You are renting it.

If you put any software on your iDevices other than approved software from the Apple Store, Apple voids your warranty. How is that fair? What about all the people who updated their iPhones and iPod Touches and lost functionality and data? Apple didn't do much to help those people.

When companies act that way they loose business and their reputation suffers. I think Apple is peaking right now.

Making a custom computer is challenging. The good thing about it is everything you want in it will be in it. It might cost more but it would be perfect for you.

If Microsoft keeps making crappy software and Apple continues to disregard their power users, more people will continue switching to alternatives. Installing an alternative OS was daunting for me in 2010. With help from people on the Ubuntu forums I got through it. Now my HP runs fast without problems and I love it.

Ubuntu Linux is getting really easy to install and get working. It comes with many hardware drivers already installed. It's time for me to switch from Ubuntu 10.04 to the latest version. I'm getting a variant called Bodhi when the newest version comes out in July. It will be filled with only the software I want and nothing more. It will be totally customized by me for me. It won't have any of the excess programs that come with Windows or OS X.

If Microsoft and Apple continue angering people nothing really bad will happen to them for a while. They're gigantic. Over time more people will stop buying their stuff. Eventually another player will come along and they'll be in trouble. Ubuntu is already so easy to install now that I think Microsoft will begin suffering in a couple of years. Apple won't be too far behind when people can buy a less expensive HP and put the FREE Ubuntu Linux software on it. Linux doesn't suck anymore.

So get a MBP retina and a decent large screen monitor and have a nice day.  That's what I might end up doing.  That way you have a laptop/desktop in one slick unit that EVERYONE with another brand laptop will be drooling over. Yeah, I wish they announced a new iMac too, but i guess we'll have to wait for it or get a MBP solution.

It is not that it is incapable of any task it is just a poor investment spec-wise since it is two year old kit at full retail price.

 

It really isn't entirely Apple's fault though because Intel is behind schedule. Although the Sandy Bridge Xeons are out, I don't think they support USB 3 or Thunderbolt which would clearly be part of a major refresh. Why would Apple put out a major case and component redesign and leave those two highly desirable Pro features out. The sort of 'new' Mac Pro is adequate if you really need another one in the shop right now, but as a solo freelancer trying to make a decision to buy their first Mac Pro this doesn't look like a great time to buy one from an investment stand point. For me it would have been nice to upgrade to an all new Mac Pro that would last another 5 years, but my current Mac Pro is running just fine so I'll wait. Now that I understand that I wouldn't get TB and USB 3 anyway I can see why they did what they did.