or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple improves Mac Pro ship times to 3-5 weeks
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple improves Mac Pro ship times to 3-5 weeks

post #1 of 34
Thread Starter 
In a change to the Online Apple Store on Thursday, Apple is now quoting Mac Pro shipping availability at three to five weeks for all configurations, suggesting supply of the flagship Mac is finally catching up to demand.

Mac Pro


Since launching the redesigned Mac Pro in December, Apple has struggled to keep up with demand and as recently as February was quoting nearly two-month delays in estimated ship times on new orders.

The situation appears to be improving, however, as current Online Apple Store estimates show new orders will be shipped out in three to five weeks for all configurations. When shipments were at their worst, Apple was quoting month ranges instead of weeks.

Ship-by dates have been slowly improving over April, with checks earlier in the month showing estimates pegged at 5-6 weeks, which moved up to 4-6 weeks on Apr. 11 and finally 4-5 weeks on Apr. 18.

Customers interested in the most powerful Mac ever will still need to place orders through Apple's online storefront, however, as in-store supplies are non-existent.

While Apple is still building up inventory, authorized resellers like MacMall and Adorama have limited supply of certain configurations as seen in AppleInsider's live Price Guides.
post #2 of 34
[sarcasm] Sigh, demand is already dwindling so they're able to catch up? Just so worried about their innovation, the thing needed a bigger screen... [/sarcasm].
post #3 of 34

Que the ever argued memes. Is this the result of lower demand or increased availability? For the glass-half-empty crowd it’s always lower demand of course, just like the hand wringing over Q2’s iPad numbers. Life’s a bitch and then you die for some people (Constable Odo.)

 

My personal uninformed opinion is that power users have figured out this machine is a real beast and appealingly priced for the monster it is. Apple has increased production to meet growing demand.

post #4 of 34

My uninformed personal observation:

 

Apple hadn't seriously updated this machine in a loooong time, and then they dropped this snarling sexy uber powerful beast of a computer.

 

There is huge pent-up demand.

 

I'd even risk adding a "duh" after that.  I'd bet $1000 it's in high demand.

post #5 of 34
Did I miss something, was the Mac Pro even mentioned during the earning call?
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #6 of 34

By Geekbench standards (which closely approximate the relative performance in my usage), the top-end Late 2013 Mac Pro is 21% faster than the top-end Mac Pro of 4 years ago.

Am I impressed? Nope.

post #7 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post

By Geekbench standards (which closely approximate the relative performance in my usage), the top-end Late 2013 Mac Pro is 21% faster than the top-end Mac Pro of 4 years ago.
Am I impressed? Nope.

There is so much more to performance than some Geekbench results. AnandTech has an excellent review of the new Mac Pro.

But even if the performance gain for all tasks you require for your professional business is only 21% would that $3,000 (minus the resale value of your 2009 Mac Pro) pay for itself by being able process 21% more work in the same time frame as before. I know some people who work with video that would say that the Mac Pro would easily pay for itself within a couple weeks.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #8 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post
 
Mac Pro

 

 

Wow, Apple's photo budget is getting trimmed. 

 

"Chuck, just shoot the promo material photo in your office on your iPhone. Marketing needs it yesterday! No need to Photoshop yourself out, takes too long!" 

post #9 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

Que the ever argued memes. Is this the result of lower demand or increased availability? For the glass-half-empty crowd it’s always lower demand of course, just like the hand wringing over Q2’s iPad numbers. Life’s a bitch and then you die for some people (Constable Odo.)

My personal uninformed opinion is that power users have figured out this machine is a real beast and appealingly priced for the monster it is. Apple has increased production to meet growing demand.

Manufacturing capacity is always designed to meet ongoing demand rather than an initial surge in demand. If a company has the luxury to build ahead before introducing a product then it can minimize delays during the initial surge, but that comes at the expense of delaying introduction when the product could have been introduced earlier. I think Apple likely does a good job at balancing it's build-ahead inventory against delaying availability in order to create that initial inventory. And this tells me that Apple is able to smooth out the delays introduced by the initial surge. Trouble is, once the product gets out, new Demand is created faster than the initial surge can be satisfied. That's because people gain experience with the product and brag about it and that brings others into the market for the product. I think this happens with all Apple products and it means that demand is not so much waning but finally leveling out to a steady state.
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
I don't care about what the ignorant masses perceive as truth. I'm concerned with the facts on the ground.
Reply
post #10 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by jfc1138 View Post

 Just so worried about their innovation, the thing needed a bigger screen.

Totally agree. I'm waiting for the matching Apple 4K monitor.

 

I have read the reviews of the Sharp unit and they are not great, although better than the similarly priced Asus and Samsung 4K models which are worse. 4K is not quite ready for primetime apparently. Probably with Displayport 1.3 things start to shape up. I think 60 Hz is really the minimum. I would rather have 75+.


Edited by mstone - 4/24/14 at 3:47pm

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #11 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Did I miss something, was the Mac Pro even mentioned during the earning call?
I was just about to ask the same Q. I think... No.

Too bad. It would have been nice to get a feel for how well they are selling.
post #12 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


There is so much more to performance than some Geekbench results. AnandTech has an excellent review of the new Mac Pro.
But even if the performance gain for all tasks you require for your professional business is only 21% would that $3,000 (minus the resale value of your 2009 Mac Pro) pay for itself by being able process 21% more work in the same time frame as before. I know some people who work with video that would say that the Mac Pro would easily pay for itself within a couple weeks.

As I wrote, Geekbench is a good, relative indicator of performance for my computational needs and I believe my needs are rather common. My bread and butter isn't video, though, which is the area Apple has tailored the 2013 Mac Pro for.

 

I'm much better off buying a dual-Xeon Linux system (for less money) that's 2-3X faster than the new Mac Pro and with more memory expansion capability. I believe Apple has turned away from general purpose computing because they can't compete with Linux. Tying Mac Pro hardware to their video apps is a way to maintain a high profit margin. I would have much preferred Apple continue to provide dual-processor systems, though, because every PowerMac and Mac Pro I've ever purchased has been a solid workhorse.

post #13 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Did I miss something, was the Mac Pro even mentioned during the earning call?
I was just about to ask the same Q. I think... No.

Too bad. It would have been nice to get a feel for how well they are selling.

Do they ever break out the Macs by individual models in these reports?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #14 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Do they ever break out the Macs by individual models in these reports?

I seem to recall them mentioning how specific models are doing from time to time.

edit: From AppleInsider's Notes of Interest articles:
  • Q2-2014 — Apple cited strong performances from the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air.
  • Q1-2014 — iMac and MacBook Air saw particularly strong growth during the quarter.
  • Q1-2013 — Apple was "significantly constrained" of inventory of the new iMacs. Oppenheimer said the company believes Mac sales would have been "much higher" if not for those constraints.

Edited by SolipsismX - 4/24/14 at 4:05pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #15 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cpsro View Post
 
I'm much better off buying a dual-Xeon Linux system (for less money) that's 2-3X faster than the new Mac Pro and with more memory expansion capability. 

What application are you going run on the Linux box, if you don't mind me asking?

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #16 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Do they ever break out the Macs by individual models in these reports?

I seem to recall them mentioning how specific models are doing from time to time.

I can't recall ever hearing hard numbers for any specific Mac, iPhone or iPad model. They generally only talk about segments. They do mention numbers of Apple TV but it is the only model in the segment.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #17 of 34

Ordered mine on March 17 and it arrived on April 23. 

 

If you are a pro and work in Aperture, it is more than well worth it. It is flat out amazing.

Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #18 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

I can't recall ever hearing hard numbers for any specific Mac or iPhone model. They generally only talk about segments. They do mention numbers of Apple TV but it is the only model in the segment.

Ah, you meant break out hard numbers. I thought you meant just mention them at all instead of just referring to the Mac line in its entirety. .

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #19 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Ah, you meant break out hard numbers. I thought you meant just mention them at all instead of just referring to the Mac line in its entirety. .

Ah, well they could have easily said Mac Pro showed considerable increase in sales. ;-) They may not have sold any in the previous quarter.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #20 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eriamjh View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Did I miss something, was the Mac Pro even mentioned during the earning call?
I was just about to ask the same Q. I think... No.

Too bad. It would have been nice to get a feel for how well they are selling.

 

Glad they skipped over it for now.

I'd rather wait till this thing is shipping to every science lab, university, and creative studio, in huge palleted orders. Then let them report the numbers. At this point it's still in the "ramp-up" phase.

post #21 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

Ordered mine on March 17 and it arrived on April 23. 

If you are a pro and work in Aperture, it is more than well worth it. It is flat out amazing.

Hey I love my new Mac Pro and FCPro X screams but Aperture? For me it is no faster than it was on my MBP i7 which I fitted with an SSD. Where are you seeing a speed increase and what are you comparing it to? I am really hoping many more apps are upgraded to take advantage of the new dual GPUs but so far Aperture, which I use every day with RAW and HD video, certainly isn't one of them ... unless you know something I don't.
Edited by digitalclips - 4/24/14 at 7:11pm
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #22 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Hey I love my new Mac Pro and FCPro X screams but Aperture? For me it is no faster than it was on my MBP i7 which I fitted with an SSD. Where are you seeing a speed increase and what are you comparing it to? I am really hoping many more apps are upgraded to take advantage of the new dual GPUs but so far Aperture, which I use every day with RAW and HD video, certainly isn't one of them so far ... unless you know something I don't.

I guess it depends on what you moved from. A mac mini that was cursed with problems (crucial SSD and 16 GB ram) but had to reinstall Mavericks every two restarts. Before that it was a 2010 27" iMac with spinning HDD.

 

My plugins are (NIK, Noiseware, etc.) are much improved and batch processing is awesome. Best feature is editing in Pixelmator for those special photos. 

Hard-Core.
Reply
Hard-Core.
Reply
post #23 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by aplnub View Post

I guess it depends on what you moved from. A mac mini that was cursed with problems (crucial SSD and 16 GB ram) but had to reinstall Mavericks every two restarts. Before that it was a 2010 27" iMac with spinning HDD.

My plugins are (NIK, Noiseware, etc.) are much improved and batch processing is awesome. Best feature is editing in Pixelmator for those special photos. 

I have to think Apple have a new Aperture X coming soon to really utilize the power we have now.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #24 of 34

Just days after me any wizard were discussing why the heck Mac Pro ship times are still in weeks.

 

And to me this isn't really an improvement in shipping time at all. They have merely shifted the top and low end of numbers of weeks a little. By all means you still have to wait a month before you get one.

 

P.S - By the way is that photo really from Apple Press, surely it cant be right?

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply

There are only two kind of people in this world.

Those who dont understand Apple and those who misunderstood Apple.

Reply
post #25 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Do they ever break out the Macs by individual models in these reports?

No, they don't normally break out sales by model, I wish they did.
post #26 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

I seem to recall them mentioning how specific models are doing from time to time.

edit: From AppleInsider's Notes of Interest articles:
  • Q2-2014 — Apple cited strong performances from the MacBook Pro and MacBook Air.
  • Q1-2014 — iMac and MacBook Air saw particularly strong growth during the quarter.
  • Q1-2013 — Apple was "significantly constrained" of inventory of the new iMacs. Oppenheimer said the company believes Mac sales would have been "much higher" if not for those constraints.

He was asking for more detailed sales numbers which they rarely do for Macs. They might say something, but it's not detailed enough.

An example of a detailed number would be

Mac Pro sold x number of units
Mad mini sold x number of units
MacBook Air sold x number of units
Etc.

Generally speaking they don't consistently go through each model, they sometimes discuss it, but usually they don't.

I wish they released sales numbers in units by category and ave selling price since one can configure a Mac Pro, Mac mini, etc. any number of ways, but an average selling price and unit numbers would be really interesting to track, but they that internal.
post #27 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


There is so much more to performance than some Geekbench results. AnandTech has an excellent review of the new Mac Pro.
But even if the performance gain for all tasks you require for your professional business is only 21% would that $3,000 (minus the resale value of your 2009 Mac Pro) pay for itself by being able process 21% more work in the same time frame as before. I know some people who work with video that would say that the Mac Pro would easily pay for itself within a couple weeks.

Final Cut Pro X at least for me was really the best way to benchmark the Mac Pro. Some are only seeing modest gains because the software is not taking advantage of the dual GPU configuration. As many know here this system is setup for heavy lifting and GPU's for years now have been configured to take much of the load off the CPU. 

 

Having been a gamer for years I use to dual and in a few cases triple SLI Nvidia GPU's to get the performance I needed. Trying to keep it cool and keep the noise down was impossible without water cooling. Sounds funny to even say that these days.

 

I never owned the previous model so I had to try and look up solid benchmarks, while doing a 4K export test in Final Cut the speed is excellent. The software needs to be written to take advantage of the CPU cores and the dual GPU configuration. When that is achieved the performance increase is well over 125%. 

 

The other concern I had was heat. Did a simple terminal prompt to stress all cores and the highest temp didn't exceed 113F- 45C. It would be a stretch to call that warm. 

 

I'm a fairly new Final Cut Pro user, I doubt there is anything I can do to ever max out this system on the OSX side, hopefully for those that use more "pro" software they will truly take advantage of the dual GPU config, that is why they are there to take the load off the CPU.  

 

It's nice to have a system like this that can also dual boot into Windows 8 and still have Crossfire enabled. The CPU only performance on this system isn't great compared to the pervious generation, a dual socket cpu option would have been nice for those that need it. I would also add OpenGL results need to be address. An Nvidia options would have been nice at least for some of my needs while using Windows. 

 

Overall great system.

post #28 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by ksec View Post

By the way is that photo really from Apple Press, surely it cant be right?

Not from Apple, no. It was taken by AI staff, possibly Mikey Campbell himself as they received their order at the beginning of this year:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/01/09/review-apples-redesigned-late-2013-mac-pro

They also reviewed that 32" Sharp 4k display, which displays that cloud picture on their dekstop:
http://appleinsider.com/articles/14/03/23/review-sharps-32-4k-display-proves-is-all-performance
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

I have to think Apple have a new Aperture X coming soon to really utilize the power we have now.

A new version of Aperture is welcome indeed. I liked the free upgrades we have gotten over the past four years but there is so much more a photo management and editing software tool can do.
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #29 of 34

Mac Pro sales doing poorly.

post #30 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

A new version of Aperture is welcome indeed. I liked the free upgrades we have gotten over the past four years but there is so much more a photo management and editing software tool can do.

Have there been any rumors regarding a new Aperture? I don't remember seeing anything so far. I agree there is so much more they could do with Aperture as well as harnessing the dual GPU speed. Do you have a wish list? I'd like built in HDR tone mapping for multiple RAW images, there is a great company Apple could absorb that makes the plug in, and I'd like to see lens distortion and chromatic aberration controls. Also their iCloud sharing could do with more options. It's very useful for showing proofs to clients or personal portfolios but severely limited in how it can be set up, far more so than it used to be pre iCloud. I wouldn't mind if this was a paid service, if reasonable, as I realize it's a bit much to expect that part of the free storage system. Full support of embedding (as done so well by Google's YouTube) of any such published work would be fabulous. Apple has never really supported embedding iCloud served pages yet they were far ahead of the game the other way around when they added the HTML widget in iWeb to support that very feature what seems like decade(s) ago.
Edited by digitalclips - 4/25/14 at 5:56am
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
post #31 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post

Have there been any rumors regarding a new Aperture? I don't remember seeing anything so far.

Me neither.
Quote:
Do you have a wish list?

Personally I'd like for them to (amongst other stuff, but I don't have the time now):

  1. finer control over storage location as I'm keeping all my photos in a managed lib and on SSD, but my videos go to HDD making it necessary for me to use a referenced lib for that. Well, it's all in 1 single library
  2. way better integration with iCloud. There is a ton of work to be done here. If I have the time I'll make a list for just that

In the meantime, read what others would like:
https://www.apertureexpert.com/forum/aperture-wish-list/13329#.U1pcS14WcfY
Quote:
your other excellent wishes

Agreed wholeheartedly.
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #32 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post
 

 

Wow, Apple's photo budget is getting trimmed. 

 

"Chuck, just shoot the promo material photo in your office on your iPhone. Marketing needs it yesterday! No need to Photoshop yourself out, takes too long!" 

 

Do you not see the "appleinsider" watermark on the photo?  It's not an Apple photo--Apple generally makes the MacPro look midnight black, not steel grey as AI correctly did.  Apparently it's difficult to get the color right, pity that Apple can't seem to do so.

post #33 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post

Do they ever break out the Macs by individual models in these reports?

Their SEC filings tend to have more details. They used to split desktops and laptops but eventually it reached over 75% laptops and they stopped doing that:

"The year-over-year growth in Mac net sales and unit sales for the second quarter and first six months of 2014 was driven by increased sales of MacBook Pro and MacBook Air . Mac ASPs decreased during the second quarter of 2014 and first six months of 2014 compared to the same periods in 2013 primarily due to price reductions on certain Mac models and the shift in mix towards Mac portable systems."

Their Mac unit volume was 4.1m units so at least 3.1m is laptops. The iMac makes up the majority of desktop units. The Mac Pro and mini make up a small portion. It could be 700k iMac, 150k mini and Pro. Given the minimum $3k price, 150k Mac Pros would account for over $450m revenue. I expected the Mac revenue would be $6b if the MP hit 200k units but it's hard to tell when the other products are in different parts of their upgrade cycles. Given the low revenue growth from last year, it looks as though the Mac Pro shipped under 150k units but it's unclear how much lower.

Whatever variation in the 50k-200k unit volume the MP reached, there's no way it would impact their revenue enough to be mentioned. Back in 2012, the laptops made $17b vs $6b desktops for the year and that has shifted more towards laptops over time so laptops will always be the revenue driver on the Mac side.

They built the Mac Pro as a favor to the Mac community, not as a means to drive revenues but it does maintain good margins so it's a good return on their investment. They'd have to sell 3 laptops to match the revenue they get from 1 Mac Pro and possibly more profit-wise.
post #34 of 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

Their SEC filings tend to have more details. They used to split desktops and laptops but eventually it reached over 75% laptops and they stopped doing that:

"The year-over-year growth in Mac net sales and unit sales for the second quarter and first six months of 2014 was driven by increased sales of MacBook Pro and MacBook Air . Mac ASPs decreased during the second quarter of 2014 and first six months of 2014 compared to the same periods in 2013 primarily due to price reductions on certain Mac models and the shift in mix towards Mac portable systems."

Their Mac unit volume was 4.1m units so at least 3.1m is laptops. The iMac makes up the majority of desktop units. The Mac Pro and mini make up a small portion. It could be 700k iMac, 150k mini and Pro. Given the minimum $3k price, 150k Mac Pros would account for over $450m revenue. I expected the Mac revenue would be $6b if the MP hit 200k units but it's hard to tell when the other products are in different parts of their upgrade cycles. Given the low revenue growth from last year, it looks as though the Mac Pro shipped under 150k units but it's unclear how much lower.

Whatever variation in the 50k-200k unit volume the MP reached, there's no way it would impact their revenue enough to be mentioned. Back in 2012, the laptops made $17b vs $6b desktops for the year and that has shifted more towards laptops over time so laptops will always be the revenue driver on the Mac side.

They built the Mac Pro as a favor to the Mac community, not as a means to drive revenues but it does maintain good margins so it's a good return on their investment. They'd have to sell 3 laptops to match the revenue they get from 1 Mac Pro and possibly more profit-wise.

Thanks for that info.
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
From Apple ][ - to new Mac Pro I've used them all.
Long on AAPL so biased
"Google doesn't sell you anything, they just sell you!"
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Mac Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Current Mac Hardware › Apple improves Mac Pro ship times to 3-5 weeks