Originally Posted by nht
The reality is that there is no $2000 xMac after all these years. Putting your hope on the Mac Pro strikes me as a forlorn one given it's a Xeon based workstation.
The Mac Pro has potential here, it is up to Apples marketing to hit the price point. The reality is that it isn't expensive to put a base line XEON into this design. Obviously it depends upon exactly what Apple uses to implement the low end solution but I don't see $2000 as being a problem if they want to do it.
Nothing on the economic end has changed for Apple. A $2000 xMacs makes no more or less sense today than last year or the year before or the decade before.
It makes all the sense in the world if you have a failing product line in the marketplace. The Mac Pro was very much in failure mode and part of that failure was due to the entry level model being an extremely bad value. Now Apple could try to make a machine at the $2500 level that was worth it but that still won't drive sales.
I have, somewhere around here, a Quicksilver PowerMac that's pretty much the last time Apple made an sub $2K xMac.
There are a good number of folks that simply need CPU horsepower and as many cores as they can get. Given that some folks have been holding off on Mac Pro purchases for a while waiting for the refresh means there's significant pent up demand.
I have no doubt that the entire line up will sell well for a couple of months, as you note pent up demand is real. The problem is what comes after that mad rush to the new Pro? Apple could easily end up in the same boat of slow sales as the majority of the workstation market is not high end machines. Frankly it never has been.
I didn't say it was a problem. I said it would benefit Apple to prioritize the higher priced models.
I'm saying something different here, Apple needs to cover the entire workstation market here. Their apparent in ability to do that with the old Mac Pro was a significant problem.
Apple has a i7 + Single GPU solution in their current lineup.
It is unlikely they will be grossly over charging for any model of the new Mac Pro but that doesn't mean that they will offer a cheap model.
Frankly I'm thinking that one of the goals for this new Mac Pro was to address the entry level cost issue. In this day and age I don't consider a $2000 computer to be cheap, especially in a design like this Mac Pro focused only on compute.
I mean a quad core i7 + single GPU iMac will run about as fast as a quad core i7 + single GPU Mac Pro.
Which is fine if you can live with the rest of the iMac. I can't so I don't have an iMac. Apple could easily refactor the iMac into something I'd buy but they seem hell bent on making it less of a desktop machine every year.
Not over priced. Just expensive because it's higher end. Apple will make profit on a $2000 machine. Just less than a $4000 machine at the same margins. This has always been the problem of the xMac...it would lower ASPs.
ASP is a silly discussion as the iPad, the Mini, the MBA and many other things Apple sells lowers the ASP also. None of these lowers the price as much as hardware nobody wants to buy.
Cost is certainly not the point of any Mac much less the Mac Pro. Unless you mean high cost for high performance.
I disagree entirely here, the huge success of MBA is directly due to cost. It is actually a very good buy.
Yes, the iMac offers plenty of performance these days.
…for many users. iMac isn't the solution for everybody.
To hear you guys defend the Mac Pro it's the second coming of Steve Jobs. The rest of us are evidently luddites that abhor the advancement of technology and wish to hang on to our obsolete tech like floppy drives.
Err no, I've not said the new Mac Pro is perfect, but rather have addressed arguments that I see as asinine. There is a difference. As to being Luddites there is very much an element in some of the posts seen on various forums with the casual form of: "the Mac Pro is all new so it must be bad".
It isn't that we are defending Apple here but rather this noise about the new Mac Pro is like a skipping record that says the same thing over and over again. Seriously some of this stuff we hear is almost identical to what was heard back in the day when S100 systems where being replaced with mass production alternatives (yes I've been around that long). So yeah at times it feels like we are dealing with Luddites in general; I'm not sure you fit into that category but clearly you are more focused on the past.
The E3 is a nice little workstation chip. It'd be wonderful in a mini. That's not going to happen either.
Hey I'm patiently waiting for the next Mini, that might not be the machine I want now, but a couple of years from now who knows. I'm actually bummed out that Apple has yet to bring OpenCL support to intel GPUs.
Again, the argument in this and other threads here is that all those pro cards are a non issue and pros don't need slots or drive bays or CUDA support. If that's really the case then the new Mac Pro IS simply a drop in replacement for all those empty Mac Pro chassis that exist out there.
It isn't a drop in for an empty chassis as you would need adapters for the monitors or new monitors to leverage the TB ports.