Apple to fire up Penryn-based Mac Pros - Page 4

PowerMac G5 Quad was announced late October 2005.

Yep, that's when I bought my G5. Except for then, all recent pro machines have come mid-year, so who knows what will happen. If Apple isn't selling many Mac Pros, they may not be in any hurry to upgrade them, much like the mini.

If Apple is not selling many Mac Pros, then conversely that means not many people are buying them. Wouldn't that scenario lead Apple to update the Mac Pros sooner so they would have more people buying them?

Yes, that's what I would have thought about the mini, too.

I would think most folks that are professionals and companies rather utilize the tax deduction for 2007 than actually a tax refund to buy their computers.
As an independent contractor I rather utilize the deduction, since it has been years that I have seem a refund.

Obviously there is more than one way to look at it. but the holiday season isn't when I go computer shopping. And I do use my refund for computers.

But WWDC is the usual venue for it, over the past 3 years, although I don't think they are going to wait that long.

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/aug/07macpro.html

Yes there is.

I want one.

Lemon Bon Bon.

Agreed.

I can't wait for the new MacPro and displays, hopefully sooner than later.

The mac pro is still profitable and there is a demand for them, especially because some pro applications require a mac pro. Its a key part of their strategy.

While it is true that the 64-bit ABI is improved, the impact of these things isn't really going to kill or otherwise negatively impact 32-bit application programming any time soon. Apple simply took advantage of an opportunity: they were creating the 64-bit ABI for Obj-C 2.0, and thus didn't have any legacy to contend with. I doubt any developers will look at these 3 things and say "oh, let's not bother with a 32-bit version because the 64-bit ABI has these 3 things". Instead they'll build for both 32-bit and 64-bit, and you may find that Cocoa 64-bit apps run at the same performance as Cocoa 32-bit apps... i.e. these new features (and on x64 vs x86, the improved instruction & register sets) will balance out the negative impact of larger pointers.

those 2 models make up the bottom and top end of their line up

if they are not balanced and pitched correctly then its surely a major problem?

i think the current mac pro is fine, but very overpriced. The mini on the other hand is next to useless for anything other than light home use and again is overpriced.

i'd like to see a price drop instead of upgrades and then maybe i'd buy either model depending on my needs.

When the MacPro came out its quad cores (or rather tandem dual cores) were a good deal compared to similar PCs from Dell and the like. Good value hardware and the option to run both OS X and XP, fantastic



Now you can buy a Del XPS 420 at close to 1/3 of the price of the powermacs if you settle for a slightly slower CPU and a much better GPU and RAM that is half the price of the type Apple has to use for their woodcrests.

To become competetive Apple has to either scrap the quad cores and move to octacore upwards. Or they can split the pro line into two. A prosumer at half the price of the current ones using the cheaper Intel CPUs and nonbufferd DIMMs, and a workstation with starting with dual quadcores

The macpros are what currently gives by far least bang for the bucks.

Yeah it's terrible, they are going to have to update pretty soon.

Penryn is out tomorrow so maybe new Mac Pros next week or the week after.

It would be great to see a single quad Penryn on the low end and going up to dual quad core.

So I'm guessing that the general AI consensus from this thread is that new Mac Pro's will be announced on tuesday? I just want to make sure you guy's are all in agreement.

LOL, I am not in agreement. While I wish they would announce them then... Apple loves to poke and prod my hopes. Loves to knock them down and break them into a million pieces. Since I'm hoping for asap... It'll probably be MWSF

Tuesday or Wednesday next week would be nice. So, I am hoping that will be the day. But you never know with Apple. The only thing that makes me confident is coming now is the talk Apple reserve a bunch of chips ahead of time, so that would make me believe they will release it very soon, rather than wait almost 2 months for MWSF.

I actually though that 3000+ $ would make me a decent machine in march 2008, so I would spent another 1000$ on display and will have my upgrade complete. 4000 is too much, I mean while computing power grows the price should go down, this is what the progress is meant to be.

Gosh, by your logic Apple should announce that they are discontinuing the Mac Pro altogether.

I fervently hope that there will be a new Mac Pro this coming week. But I have to admit that I have begun preparing myself for disappointment.

I just went to the Dell and Apple online stores and built as near to identical baseline 2.66 GHz quad core machines as I could. The MacPro came out almost $500 less than the Dell workstation. I have one of those Dell machines at work, and while its a nice machine it isn't of the same build quality and design calibre as the MacPro. And the Dell's video card had half the VRAM of the Mac's, even though it was arguably a bit higher performance -- but I wasn't pushing the GPU on purpose because, argue all you want, even the "lowly" 7300GT is just fine for many (if not most) users. Dell still sells lots of these workstations, by the way, so there must be good reasons to choose them over the XPS 420 and its ilk (I know what the reasons are, so don't bother telling me).


So what's really the issue here? It is that Apple simply does not have a plain-vanilla Mac that targets the market that PCs have dominated for the past 20+ years. Apple has the iMac because it can do that style of machine better than pretty much anyone else (note the use of the word "style"). Apple has the iMac mini because it too has a market segment that isn't flooded with competitors. And Apple has the MacPro for the high-end workstation market because they like the margins and having the mindshare of the pros who use their high-end software to do work that is substantial enough to justify spending a few grand more on a machine. Sorry if you're not part of those target markets.

Should Apple step back into the low-end of the generic PC market? They've been there before, so they know what its like. They aren't there now most likely because the margins suck and the competition is stiff. Apple isn't setup to compete in the "we're all the same, selling for cutthroat prices" market, and personally I don't want them to be. They are much more interesting the way they are. When they tried to be in that part of the market they were lost and wandering aimlessly, and nearly folded up shop.

On the other hand, there is something to be said for a single-chip built-to-order machine with lots of options. I think the MacPro design is great, but it is more robust than I need at home. I also don't need the high-end Xeon processors and FB RAM. I would like a choice of video cards, and the option to put in a couple of desktop-class hard drives and maybe 2 optical drives. Intel has a vast selection of chips and chipsets that fill this market (hence the XPS 420 and all its multitude of competitors) so it is easier than ever before for Apple to build such a machine. If they did that though, it would erode the fringes of the iMac, iMac mini, and MacPro markets where their margins are better. And the cost of doing business in the market we're talking about is not inconsiderable... they'd be expected to keep pace with the absolute latest processors, memory, drives, gpus, etc. I'm tempted to think that they should offer such a machine only via their online BTO store, and outsource construction of it to another company (Intel directly? [actually after I wrote this I realized that pretty much everybody already outsources things to Taiwan and China so this would mostly just amount to an expanded arrangement with an existing supplier]). Keep the Apple label on it, but keep it out of the Apple Stores (and other retail) and stay with the Dell business model for that particular class of machine. It would make a particular market segment happier, and would minimize the disruption to their other lines.

No. You are fundamentally wrong here. Technology is always stratified. $4000 today buys you "x" amount of speed/storage/feature that same $4000 system will be available in a couple of years but it'll simply have "more speed" "more storage" "more features". As technology progresses you get more at a "given" price point but generally those pricepoints still exist. You are correct though from the PoV of "computing power grows the price should go down" it "does" go down. The Macbook of today at $1099 is faster than the first Macbook Pro that was $2500.

That's such bullshit. #1 Apple was almost dead before the return of Steve Jobs. The PC was killing them because the Mac had nothing to offer, and no hope for the future. Things are quite different now. You talking times before the Think Different Campaign. That changed everything. Steve Jobs has changed everything. People will actually buy Macs now, and not wonder if there will be new software versions available for them next year. Your brain is wandering aimlessly programmer if you think no one was going to catch that line of crap.

I don't think what he's saying is crap at all.

Before Steve Jobs Apple's answer to low cost computers were Performas which did anything "but" perform. Apple also tried clones and that was a horrible idea as well.

Truth is Apple's best talent had left the company and the ideas coming from the remaining talent were plebeian at best. What the NeXT acquisition did was infuse the platform not only with a solid and proven OS core but more importantly a sense of direction and leadership.

A Mac mini is as low as you're going to get from Apple. They have no desire to deliver sub $500 general computers.

I don't think we're talking about sub $500 computers here. I think we're talking about desktops that perform at the POST $500 area. While I like the mac mini and believe it has it's place... I think there is also a place for a 1k-1.5k machine. This is what I was used to buying before Apple moved to G5. This is what PC users are used to buying.

Anyways, It would be wise for apple to release these mac pro's sooner than later. Especially if they are hoarding the chips... I'm sure intel wants them to be available asap, and wouldn't give most of the supply to apple if they weren't going to use them for another 2 months. So I do feel there is a slight possibility we will see something sooner than later.

Meh, you might think its bull but I still hear it all the time. "Why should I get a Mac when Windows is just as good, cheaper, and has all the software (particularly games)". The people that will line up to buy the $500-$1500 low margin desktops are the same ones who spew that line.

And you're 100% right, I'm sure onlooker will agree with it. It's time Apple delivers to this crowd. They would grow very quickly. And NOOOO the iMac does NOT fit this crowd.

That was my point. I thought it was obvious.

I know, why don't people get this? Over and over again people say no this isn't Apple's market and they can't compete with Dell etc. If that was the case then Apple should just give up altogether as their models all have competing models in the PC world - you can buy a quad core PC at 1/3rd of the price of Apple's cheapest quad.

The problem is that Apple don't make the model that is the most popular model in the PC world and that's one of a few reasons why their market share is low.

Yes a Mac Mini is ok but the graphics suck. Is that ok for most people? No because all the families I know who own cheap PCs need the machine capable of playing games for their kids. What about the iMac, that's ok but the families I know wouldn't buy an iMac simply because they wouldn't buy a product like that and let kids use it.

What they would buy is a small headless machine at £800-900 with a cheap screen that can be replaced for £50. I know this because that's what they own (though some have £500 machines) and they explain to me why they bought the computer.

The Mac Pro is overpriced compared to what the market is offering consumers. The iMac is the right price but is the wrong design for a lot of people. I keep wanting to get an upgrade to my Mini at home so I can do what I do at work and I just cannot bring myself to like the iMac at all - I'm basically paying double the price of my Mini for the benefit of a decent but not great graphics card. Hopefully Apple will see sense and build a single quad Penryn Mac Pro with 2GB Ram for close to £1000. Obviously I'd prefer a smaller form factor but if they refuse to build it, I have no choice but to get a workstation for home use, which is a little strange.

I might get another laptop actually, I had a couple of power cuts recently and it's pretty annoying. A second generation MBP refurb for £899 would be fine and it has faster graphics than the current iMac. Some people might question why I'd get a laptop and not an iMac and the answer simply is that I'd be paying for an actual laptop with the benefits of a laptop like being able to run it off the battery and I would expect laptop performance and no glossy screen. If I buy a desktop, I don't expect laptop performance.

Sorry, Programmer,

but we need a Mid-Tower.

Your arguments do have some resonance. But Many non-Major vendors are offering much better graphics cards than the Mac Pro for much cheaper prices.

A quad 2.4 gig is 150 quid, a GT 8800 is 150 quid. Don't tell me Apple can't build the mid-tower.

Apple will never compete in 'blah, blah, blah.'

Intel, Mac Mini, X-Serves and Dual Booting later...

Those 'don't need more than 15 inch iMac' arguments don't work anymore.

Along with the Macs should or can't do games.

2.3 million in sales there is space for the Mid-Tower.

1500 plus for a Tower with a crap gpu is poor.

Lemon Bon Bon.

If that was the case, how come their Mac Pros are cheaper?

A load of crock. Ok, so they won't ship junk. But starting a tower line at 1600 instead of 995 is poor.

Lemon Bon Bon.

In the days of PPC one could understand.

But with the dirt cheap Conroe line? No excuse.

And another thing. Why is Apple skimming off the 'Ram' off the 512 meg Radeon Pro in the iMac? It's a 60 quid gpu. And they're skimming off ram?

WHY?!?!? Why do they do that? Blank look? Ram has never been cheaper...or GPUs for that matter...

Yeesh. At least give me the option to buy the 8800GT for another 90 pounds. I'd take that. Even under clocked.

Yeesh.

Lemon BOn Bon.

You're so right.

Lemon Bon Bon.

LOL, I think you've got me all wrong. I'm telling you why Apple doesn't have a machine in this space, not whether I think they should. Like I said above, if they do dive into this portion of the market there is a lot of competition and therefore a lot of expectation and the lowest margins to be found. If the margins are four times lower then you've got to sell four times as many machines to make the same money.

Surely it is clear why they don't compete there (yet)? With margins like that they can't differentiate, and then they can't maintain the notion that their products are better. And if they deliver a machine that appears to be considerably better bang for the buck, then they will sell less of the high margin machines because a large fraction of customers will shop based on the feature list and the price. That will erode the status of the brand and weaken their overall position.

I'm quite sure Apple is trying to figure out how to sell a machine to this market, but (despite what you all seem to think) its not a simple matter. They are pursuing the blue ocean market model, just like Nintendo is with the Wii. And guess what? They are being successful.

LOL, you're just not going to get it, are you LBB? There's more to this market than you seem to understand.

Is there no thread in FH that is safe from the discussion of a mid-level Mac tower?

Take it elsewhere, this is a Mac Pro thread.
Seriously, the mods should start banning people at the first mention of a Mid-Tower.

Nope, nowhere's safe, and it is getting pretty distracting when the same people are fighting the same battle over and over. This is not a comment on the battle, it's a comment on where the battle is being fought: everywhere they can get a word in. I'm not sure banning is correct (I learn a lot from many of the main combatants, who are quite knowledgeable in many other areas), but a little bit of courtesy, or just keep it to the "headless Mac/xMac threads would be appreciated.

I wouldn't call it a battle. It's an obvious need for many people or it wouldn't come up so much.

The margins aren't any lower than the iMac. If they are a similar price with cheaper parts and no screen, there's no problem.


Actually it is quite relevant here as the Mac Pro update should be Penryn-based, which may finally encourage Apple to build the product a lot of us want. This is all speculation on what the Mac Pro update will include. Similar to how a tablet/ultra-portable discussion would arise in a Macbook update thread. They are the same class of machine.

The xMac thread had a Penryn-based Mac Pro price list so I think it's appropriate. The specifics of the discussion maybe not but it wasn't xMac proponents who started on the specifics.


The big problem really is that so many subjects link back to it. It's not hard to see why when it's the most popular computer model ever made in the world. Not mentioning it would be like telling people to not mention ipods in the Zune forum. If almost everybody else has one then it's hard to avoid bringing it up in conversation and talk about the advantages and disadvantages of each.

I'm sure the subject will die down as one of three things happen. Either people just end up migrating to PCs or in 2008, the components in Apple's consumer or laptop lineup are fast enough that form factor becomes largely irrelevant or Apple actually builds a proper consumer desktop. It might not be until February when we see quad core mobile components that the subject may become irrelevant.

I can understand the frustration with covering the same material though so it's probably best to start speculation on the possible upcoming Mac Pro spec. GPUs are clearly a big problem the current Mac Pro is having so what GPUs would likely make it to the Mac Pro? Also, will they go all octo-core or keep a single quad, what design problems might that bring up. Also, case redesign. I can't say I like the cheese grater design but it certainly keeps the machines quiet.

However, this design came from the G5 design and the iMac had an overhaul so maybe we will see a similar technical design but better aesthetically. What other limitations does the current Mac Pro have that could be addressed? Maybe more ports front and back, better audio output. An eject button would be nice - why don't they just make it so that you tap the front of the tray to get it to pop out if they want to hide the buttons?

Maybe they could try and make it lighter too.

I absolutely think the case will get a redesign, and that is why I think it's a MWSF update for sure.

new Xeons now available

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/...1_marqsub_45nm

http://www.intel.com/pressroom/kits/...ec&pricing.pdf

Mac Pro updated tomorrow?

either Tuesday or Wednesday. At least let's hope so.