Apple's Mac Pro retail inventories suggest refresh on the horizon

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 132
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post




    If you want a Mac that gets uodated frequently you should be asking for an XMac. That is a Mac built around the more common hardware available instead of server grade hardware. Instead of knocking a niche product like the Mac Pro knock the missing product in Apples lineup.





    Dave



    Dave, you always know how to 'kiss it better.'



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 82 of 132
    Ps. the Mac 'pro' is a niche product? How did that happen? When? Golly, would it have anything to do with charging 2k for a 2.66 quad core with a p*ss poor gpu...and offering premium components like 4 gigs or ram and a 5oo gig HD?



    Other than that...I have no idea...



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 83 of 132
    Quote:

    It still doesn't look all that odd to me.

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by ascii

    Actually it is out of the ordinary. If you look at MacRumors Buyer's Guide it is the longest time without update since their records started, in 2002.

    http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#Mac_Pro

    Again it really doesn't look that bad. Im not sure what your problem is. The Mac Pro doesn't suport the volume to justify updates like are seen in the consummer lineup. It isn't even marketed to people with the need for the latest and greatest. Rather it is a stable platform for serious work thus the "Pro" name.







    Dave



    What?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 84 of 132
    *Hands Dave some spectacles.



    Now look again...



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 85 of 132
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SSquirrel View Post


    Yes Lemon, we know. It's been 4 days, you couldn't contain your Mac Pro rage The processors in the Mac Pro were definitely top end upon release, the only thing that was poor was the video card options. Currently it is certainly behind the times, no one is arguing that with you. I think you can let go of the anger tho buddy, it's being updated very soon if these reports are right. We'll see exactly how up to date it becomes.



    Heh, heh, heh...



    'Behind the times?' The gpu was behind the times at launch. So poor. Terrible pain.



    I'll wager the next iPad revision out performs the current graphics on the 'pro'...in fact, I'll wager the next iPad bump comes out before the 'pro...'



    4 days? That long. I'm slipping.



    Still, has it really been since 2002 since the mac 'pro' was updated?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 86 of 132
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by a Martin View Post


    I fully agree with Lemon here.



    At work we have been waiting fot quite some time to buy new Mac Pro's.

    I don't want to buy the current ones because of the reasons stated above (same price as when introduced over a year ago, now old graphics card etc.) and in this case there is no discussion that one feels a bit ?locked? having just Apple as the hardware vendor. Or I guess that would be fine if the updates was more frequent and more in pace with the rest of the industry. I'd also be happy to see a little more hardware options, (not that it should be overwhelming like with Dell and such).



    Cheers, Marv'.



    One Marv' to rule them all. Spoken like a true king.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 87 of 132
    ...and if the 'pro' is locked for 14 months. What's the point of the 'tower' format.



    It's not like you can add gpus to it in that 14 month cycle. Or an Apple branded monitor. They no longer sell them. (unless you count that apology of a display range updated 6-8 years ago?)



    Better to just create a 30 inch 'iMac Pro' and be done with it. You'd get a dual core in there? Plenty of space and some hot rod gills out the back.



    Let's not pretend Apple has a tower range. It's been updated about 5 times in the last ten years?



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 88 of 132
    Quote:

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69

    ... I suspect that the new Pro will be a big advance over the old one. I could be wrong here but it would not make sense for Apple to introduce a marginally better machine for 3 months if they know a major revision is just a short time away.



    If Apple delivers a new Pro with nothing more than a processor bump then they deserve some of the anger seen here. If it is instead a significantly newer platform then we have a different story. ...



    Re-hee-hee-heally? Ya think? What gave ya that idea?



    'Wu-ell...I dohwn kno' T.C...' Benny.



    How could it NOT be? *(Looks at the flies around the pungent, dead carcass of the 'pro' range specs...)



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 89 of 132
    Ok. I'll stop now. That was wayyyy too easy. You guys are slipping...



    Still, if Apple could deliver an entry Mac 'pro' with a decent gpu as standard and 27 inch LED for £1,995 I would look longingly at it.



    I don't see it happening. They're too greedy.



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 90 of 132
    pmzpmz Posts: 3,433member
    So does anyone have any idea of what might really be in store for this refresh? USB 3 and Firewire aside.



    What kind of processor offerings are we likely to see?

    Most likely those graphics cards that have already shown up as compatible with Snow Leopard?

    And what about output? Will the MacPro get HDMI? as well as Display Port? I can't see HDMI mattering much, some new huge IPS display will likely be the target output monitor. Or two or three of them.
  • Reply 91 of 132
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 15,354moderator
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    I think you might be forgetting the 30" ACD. Once you have one of those it's hard to go back to anything else and the majority of the Mac Pro market is still in love with the 30" ACD.



    I think at some point they have to have a modern replacement for this product and the 27" just doesn't do it.



    The Cinema display is bigger certainly but the main thing with the iMac is that it's 16:9 now, which makes it smaller but it's good for movies:



    http://eljackimages.com/temp/imac&acd-3043.jpg



    If they made a 42" then I'd say it's worth it but sitting in front of a 27" iMac feels like the screen is big enough. FCP panels fit in place very easily.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon


    £1,495 for a six core 'mini' pro with a decent gpu (AS STANDARD for gawd's sakes...) would get Apple back on the map re: value and reason again. Who knows, they might even sell more.



    I think they'd definitely sell more and that volume should make it worthwhile hitting that price point. I'd really like to know how many people actually buy the souped up $5900 model.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon


    Cheers, Marv'.



    One Marv' to rule them all. Spoken like a true king.



    Thanks for the sentiment but you quoted Martin there.



    I actually read his posts sometimes and think 'hang on, I don't remember writing that'.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz


    So does anyone have any idea of what might really be in store for this refresh? USB 3 and Firewire aside.



    What kind of processor offerings are we likely to see?



    If they go the boring route then it will be the 3600/5600 Xeons. So pretty much the same configs as now, just a tad faster.



    In fact, I don't think they'd use the 3600 Xeon as it's too expensive so it would be 3500/5600 but a faster 3500 on the entry point. Right now, the entry level uses a W3520 2.66, which is $284. The 3680 6-core is $999. So if they used it, the entry price would jump up over $700.



    If they use the 6-core 3.2GHz AMD 1090T however, it costs $295 but outperforms most of Intel's lower-end single chips:



    http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html



    You can see from the prices on the right how much cheaper it is vs performance. It's near level pegging with a $1200 Xeon 5600 series chip.



    Quite frankly, if Apple want to have an affordable entry Mac Pro, Intel has left them without an option with this generation of Xeons. They could go with the Core i7 but why bother when it's slower/more expensive than AMD's offering?



    In the higher-end, I'd like to see them make a 4P machine, just for the hell of it. Because AMD scrapped the 4P tax, Apple can build a 48-core AMD machine for the same price as a 12-core Intel machine.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz


    Most likely those graphics cards that have already shown up as compatible with Snow Leopard?



    Yeah, the high-end compute cards - the Geforce 480 and the Radeon 5870. As nice as it would be for them to drop them in the low-end, they'll probably continue the tradition of dropping a low-end GPU in the base model so that people can opt to save that money. I reckon they'll go with cards that have 6 x mini-displayport outputs on them.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz


    And what about output? Will the MacPro get HDMI? as well as Display Port? I can't see HDMI mattering much, some new huge IPS display will likely be the target output monitor. Or two or three of them.



    HDMI does support higher resolutions that 1080p so it's possible but they can still fit more ports on one card using Mini-displayport.
  • Reply 92 of 132
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Well I'm going to purchase a current 8-core and a current matte 30" in the next few days.



    If Apple release an updated glassy/glossy display then I'll be laughing.



    If they release an updated matte display I'll be able to return the matte 30"er.



    I can't risk being left in the position where a glossy display is the only show in town...
  • Reply 93 of 132
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by pmz View Post


    So does anyone have any idea of what might really be in store for this refresh? USB 3 and Firewire aside.



    I'm guessing it will be 'really slim'.
  • Reply 94 of 132
    sequitursequitur Posts: 1,910member
    I realize that this is third or fourth hand gossip but I'll pass it on anyway for what it's worth.



    Over a year or more ago, several Apple reps came to MDC, where I teach, to show some aspects of Snow Leopard. The show was interesting and I even won a keychain flashlight for answering a question about snow leopard. I can't recall exactly when this took place; however, I posted it on AI at the time.



    At that time, our campus Apple liaison claims, no, swears that he overheard them talking about a new Mac Pro.



    The Apple reps are supposed to have said that Apple was trying to get rid of towers and could be planning on fielding an iMac-like Mac Pro. Our liaison didn't overhear anything on how this beast was supposed to be upgraded and he wasn't willing to speculate when I asked him.



    Though I took this with a grain of salt, it might explain why there is no X Mac.



    Okay, let the flames begin. This may be good for several pages of posts screaming about how this can't be.
  • Reply 95 of 132
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by solipsism View Post


    Are you referring to me and my reply to a comment that specified Macs as a whole, not the single model type you specified in your comment? If so, note that I’ve already made a sarcastic remark about the long delay between Mac Pro releases in this thread and have made many mentions over the years to the weakening focus on non-consumer based Apple products, but that doesn’t change the fact that Apple is focused on Macs do to the money they are making and money they can make from them for the foreseeable future.



    Solipsism, it's one thing for Apple to continue to make money from Macs, and entirely another for them to routinely neglect pro users (and buyers). It's like a sad joke at this point that Jonathan Ives goes all out for other products (though he screwed everyone with the pitiful C2D chips in iMacs), and then does literally the very least he possibly can do with regard to the Mac Pro line. This IS his fault right? The finger must be pointed at him, correct? Or is there someone else designing the Mac Pro's whom we need to directly insult for the continued underperformance and excessive costs of the Mac Pro? It's not like Steve actually does anything with them. This has to be Jonathan's failure.



    Just once in my life, I'd like to see Apple lead in the pro market rather than follow years behind in tech. I'm 36 now, perhaps I'll see it sometime in my life. There must be SOMEONE at Apple (it obviously isn't Steve) that actually wants a high end machine that actually competes at the very high end (considering that they are charging us very high end prices). NVIDIA must enjoy dusting off all of their old stock, in order to sell it to us at a significant markup. I'm not sure who supplies the RAM, or HD's, but they have to be laughing at us all as well. The last update was 3 March, 2009. They expect us to believe they care about Mac Pro's with delays like that? Steve doesn't care about them, or those of us who use them, at all. Actions speak far louder than any words Apple could say at this point. And there haven't been an actions on their behalf in well over a YEAR.



    Just so it's clear, Solipsism, I'm not directing this anger and frustration at you, I'm just responding to your comment that, "Apple is focused on Macs". I'm furious at Apple and the lack of motivation they have demonstrated regarding the Mac Pro, which it has most decidedly NOT been focused on.
  • Reply 96 of 132
    messiahmessiah Posts: 1,689member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by sequitur View Post


    I realize that this is third or fourth hand gossip but I'll pass it on anyway for what it's worth.



    Over a year or more ago, several Apple reps came to MDC, where I teach, to show some aspects of Snow Leopard. The show was interesting and I even won a keychain flashlight for answering a question about snow leopard. I can't recall exactly when this took place; however, I posted it on AI at the time.



    At that time, our campus Apple liaison claims, no, swears that he overheard them talking about a new Mac Pro.



    The Apple reps are supposed to have said that Apple was trying to get rid of towers and could be planning on fielding an iMac-like Mac Pro. Our liaison didn't overhear anything on how this beast was supposed to be upgraded and he wasn't willing to speculate when I asked him.



    Though I took this with a grain of salt, it might explain why there is no X Mac.



    Okay, let the flames begin. This may be good for several pages of posts screaming about how this can't be.



    Well I think that if Apple produced a matte version of the 27" iMac, it would do very well (at the expense of Mac Pro sales). The i5 27"er is a very capable machine (especially when you connect two of them together), and the only reason that the studios aren't buying them en mass is because of the glassy-glossy display.
  • Reply 97 of 132
    solipsismsolipsism Posts: 25,726member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Brian Green View Post


    Solipsism, it's one thing for Apple to continue to make money from Macs, and entirely another for them to routinely neglect pro users (and buyers). It's like a sad joke at this point that Jonathan Ives goes all out for other products (though he screwed everyone with the pitiful C2D chips in iMacs), and then does literally the very least he possibly can do with regard to the Mac Pro line. This IS his fault right? The finger must be pointed at him, correct? Or is there someone else designing the Mac Pro's whom we need to directly insult for the continued underperformance and excessive costs of the Mac Pro? It's not like Steve actually does anything with them. This has to be Jonathan's failure.



    [...]



    Just so it's clear, Solipsism, I'm not directing this anger and frustration at you, I'm just responding to your comment that, "Apple is focused on Macs". I'm furious at Apple and the lack of motivation they have demonstrated regarding the Mac Pro, which it has most decidedly NOT been focused on.



    That's fine and it certainly does sucks when the product category you care most about is the least considered by manufactures. My point was that Apple does care about the Mac line, since the comment I originally commented on was about Macs, plural.



    I don't agree with you on te C2D in the iMac. There are space constraints and it wasn't until cooler Core-i and the larger 27" iMac that we saw this change so I have to think their were engineering reasons for it. One can argue that Apple didn't have to keep making the iMac thinner (and they didn't have to) but they choose to because they felt this was more important to the people that buy the most iMacs.



    But regardless of their business reasons, it's still the company's choice to make what they wish, and then our right to buy from them, a competitor, or make our own product if we feel their is a market for it.



    As for Ives, I have no idea jar his duties involve but I have to think he is one of many, many people responsible for the direction Apple is going and the lack of attention to their "Pro" market. Heck, for all we know Ives is the only one who wanted to focus on the Pros or maybe he really isnt that talented a designer but was chosen by Jobs as 'a' face and voice of Apple for his rugged good looks and cool way of saying "aluminum". [US] American think British accents mean you know what you're talking about.





    PS: I'm a decade plus notebook user who bought a 3rd-party SSD for my last MBP because Apple's offerings aren't great and I've technically voided my warranty by removing my optical drive to install a HDD for a total of two drives. You can technically get 2TB of storage in a unibody Mac notebook as they do take 12.5mm drives.



    My point being, Apple doesn't focus on my needs directly, either. I have to wonder how many people would go for regular notebook without an optical drive — the MBA's 1.8" drive won't cut it — if they offered it. I have to think this is the next major step for Mac notebooks... and people will complain!
  • Reply 98 of 132
    Solipsism, sure, it's their right to present us with Mac Pro's that aren't cutting edge. They've been succeeding at that for years. At least they have the common courtesy to dust off all the parts before assembling them. I simply don't have the heart to believe that the coming Mac Pro update will impress us at all. I've been let down too many times. I'll end up buying one someday, not because it inspires me, but because I'm a Mac user and I'll not use PC's again.



    It's obvious Steve Jobs doesn't care about the Mac Pro (because when he does care, things happen with haste) and it's obvious that Jonathan Ives hasn't gone above and beyond with his work involving Mac Pro's. Sure, they can go out of their way to make the inside look good, but the complete lack of quality, forward-thinking, updates, is utterly disappointing. A Mac Pro update with USB3, faster FireWire, and marginally faster CPU's, will be underwhelming in every way. I'll stick with what I've already "settled" for. Everyone on the Mac Pro team (if there even is a team) ought to be ashamed of the little they've accomplished.



    3 March, 2009 since their last update. Boy, their work on the Mac Pro must have taken a lot out of them.
  • Reply 99 of 132
    Quote:

    Solipsism, sure, it's their right to present us with Mac Pro's that aren't cutting edge. They've been succeeding at that for years. At least they have the common courtesy to dust off all the parts before assembling them. I simply don't have the heart to believe that the coming Mac Pro update will impress us at all. I've been let down too many times. I'll end up buying one someday, not because it inspires me, but because I'm a Mac user and I'll not use PC's again.



    It's obvious Steve Jobs doesn't care about the Mac Pro (because when he does care, things happen with haste) and it's obvious that Jonathan Ives hasn't gone above and beyond with his work involving Mac Pro's. Sure, they can go out of their way to make the inside look good, but the complete lack of quality, forward-thinking, updates, is utterly disappointing. A Mac Pro update with USB3, faster FireWire, and marginally faster CPU's, will be underwhelming in every way. I'll stick with what I've already "settled" for. Everyone on the Mac Pro team (if there even is a team) ought to be ashamed of the little they've accomplished.



    3 March, 2009 since their last update. Boy, their work on the Mac Pro must have taken a lot out of them.



    Get in there my son! *Joins in, puts boot into mac 'pro' team...*(and keeps kicking...and kicking...)



    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 100 of 132
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Brian Green View Post


    Solipsism, it's one thing for Apple to continue to make money from Macs, and entirely another for them to routinely neglect pro users (and buyers). It's like a sad joke at this point that Jonathan Ives goes all out for other products (though he screwed everyone with the pitiful C2D chips in iMacs), and then does literally the very least he possibly can do with regard to the Mac Pro line. This IS his fault right? The finger must be pointed at him, correct? Or is there someone else designing the Mac Pro's whom we need to directly insult for the continued underperformance and excessive costs of the Mac Pro? It's not like Steve actually does anything with them. This has to be Jonathan's failure.



    Just once in my life, I'd like to see Apple lead in the pro market rather than follow years behind in tech. I'm 36 now, perhaps I'll see it sometime in my life. There must be SOMEONE at Apple (it obviously isn't Steve) that actually wants a high end machine that actually competes at the very high end (considering that they are charging us very high end prices). NVIDIA must enjoy dusting off all of their old stock, in order to sell it to us at a significant markup. I'm not sure who supplies the RAM, or HD's, but they have to be laughing at us all as well. The last update was 3 March, 2009. They expect us to believe they care about Mac Pro's with delays like that? Steve doesn't care about them, or those of us who use them, at all. Actions speak far louder than any words Apple could say at this point. And there haven't been an actions on their behalf in well over a YEAR.



    Just so it's clear, Solipsism, I'm not directing this anger and frustration at you, I'm just responding to your comment that, "Apple is focused on Macs". I'm furious at Apple and the lack of motivation they have demonstrated regarding the Mac Pro, which it has most decidedly NOT been focused on.



    Absolutely 100% nailed down. Apple? Focused on Macs? In general? Bahhhhhh. Baaaaaaaah. Meehheheheheheheheheh. Brays*. The Mac desktop line has been coasting for years.



    The mini recently got a makeover with stagnant specs. Why bother. Drop it and buy a laptop. The iMac design and redesign with glass edging is the only thing to have happened to Apple's desktop line in years. Monitors? About nothing. Mini. Years. Nothing. Pro? years. Nothing. The desktop line has been overpriced and underspecced for years.



    It's clear Apple are pushing the tower design out the picture through their pricing structure. Which as gone from a single G5 tower option for £995 to an eye-watering £1964 for a crap entry spec. That's a thousand more. Drop the 'niche' monster...the lame ass dinosaur that it is. And just do an iMac Pro. Because it would make way more sense with what Apple are doing.



    Apple care about the profits from Macs. But take away the design and OS, would they be good value spec wise?



    Bullsh*t would they be. They're screwing the pooch on out of date components. The C2D is how many years old cpu? Not like they couldn't have used a quad core in the low end iMac or Mac Mini. Heat? Well design the f*ckers a different way then. It's not like we need desktops to be freakin' laptops. We got them already.



    Do away with towers? Go ahead. It's not like the 'pro' is a tower anyhow. It doesn't offer value. It doesn't offer gpu choice. It doesn't update with new specs regularly. It doesn't offer cpu choice. It's a complete oxymoron of what a tower is. So drop it. It's iMac obsolescence in a poor value, our of date spec box...that is far too overblown for the components inside.



    The fully loaded iMac p*sses on the 'pro' entry model in every way. Better cpu, better gpu, great monitor...more ram...better design.



    Other than the dual option, the 'pro' aint offering much else. Remember when the iMac had 2-3 models under £1000? What the hell happened?



    Rage. Anger. Rahahahhhh!. RAARRGGHHGH!. *Rails at angry red sky. I call upon the G3 towers of the past...avenge us...AVENGE US!



    Lemon Bon Bon.
Sign In or Register to comment.