Apple officially pulls iMac Pro from its online storefront

Posted:
in Current Mac Hardware
Apple has pulled the iMac Pro from its website, officially discontinuing the model and making it unavailable for purchase.

Credit: Apple
Credit: Apple


The company announced plans to discontinue the model in early March. The iMac Pro was still available from Apple's website, though only "while supplies last."

After remaining models dried up on Friday, Apple pulled the iMac Pro page entirely. The model doesn't appear in the Apple Store app or in search results, and there is no longer an option to purchase the device from Apple's online storefront in the U.S. or elsewhere. Apple also changed references to iMac Pro models from "2017 and later" to "2017," indicating no new models will be produced.

Although Apple's official online store no longer lists the iMac Pro, there are still some models available in Apple's refurbished shop.

First introduced in 2017, the iMac Pro was Apple's most powerful computer at the time of its release. The high-end device sported Intel Xeon processors but retained the same general design as Apple's other all-in-one devices.

Aside from minor configuration option updates, the iMac Pro hasn't been refreshed since its release. That caused Apple's other iMac models, like the 27-inch iMac, to encroach on its place in the lineup.

In addition to discontinuing the iMac Pro, Apple has also stopped producing certain configurations of the 21.5-inch iMac.

Apple is reportedly working on a redesigned iMac series with Apple Silicon chips and a design reminiscent of the Pro Display XDR.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 26
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,468member
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    mwhitewilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 2 of 26
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,734member
    The only thing I miss is the space grey color.  I so wish I could have bought that color for my new 2020 iMac. :/
    roundaboutnowmacapfelwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 3 of 26
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,268member
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Well, we know Apple’s coming out with an ASi iMac sometime, and since the M1 already matches the iMac Pro’s performance there wasn’t much point in keeping it around. The big question is when the ASi iMac is released. I’m betting April.  
    Scot1danoxwilliamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 4 of 26
    mcdavemcdave Posts: 1,756member
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Event announcement next week?

    Hopefully something which takes advantage of a higher TDP.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 5 of 26
    aegeanaegean Posts: 155member
    Ah, my lovely iMac Pro. I still take care of it like it just came out, and I just bought it.  Let's see how long it will last :smile: 
    williamlondoncamcwatto_cobra
  • Reply 6 of 26
    MplsP said:
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Well, we know Apple’s coming out with an ASi iMac sometime, and since the M1 already matches the iMac Pro’s performance there wasn’t much point in keeping it around. The big question is when the ASi iMac is released. I’m betting April.  
    Not it's multi-core or GPU scores, just single core. The romped M1x will double the cores putting it on par with the 16-core Xeon but even with double the GPU it will fall short unless it can be clocked up or has even more GPU cores. Whatever it is it should not match but destroy the current iMac Pro. I hope they do away with 3rd party GPUs in all but the MacPro.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 7 of 26
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,734member
    MplsP said:
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Well, we know Apple’s coming out with an ASi iMac sometime, and since the M1 already matches the iMac Pro’s performance there wasn’t much point in keeping it around. The big question is when the ASi iMac is released. I’m betting April.  
    Not it's multi-core or GPU scores, just single core. The romped M1x will double the cores putting it on par with the 16-core Xeon but even with double the GPU it will fall short unless it can be clocked up or has even more GPU cores. Whatever it is it should not match but destroy the current iMac Pro. I hope they do away with 3rd party GPUs in all but the MacPro.
    I would think (and hope) that an ASi iMac will have CPU's/GPU's running at much higher clock speeds and more robust cooling systems that will essentially make the current M1 offerings "slow" by comparison.
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 8 of 26
    normmnormm Posts: 637member
    Love my iMac Pro.  Extremely reliable.  Unless their new machines have ECC RAM, I doubt they will be able to run on multi day or week computations as reliably.
    lkruppcpsrojdb8167watto_cobra
  • Reply 9 of 26
    danoxdanox Posts: 599member
    Everything is done, just release the hounds.....
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 26
    hagarhagar Posts: 119member
    My 2015 iMac has become unusable since upgrading to Big Sur. Turns out their flagship OS is incompatible with Fusion Drives causing huge performance issues. I’m very disappointed they don’t even care. 
    edited March 20 williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 26
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 2,438member
    sflocal said:
    MplsP said:
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Well, we know Apple’s coming out with an ASi iMac sometime, and since the M1 already matches the iMac Pro’s performance there wasn’t much point in keeping it around. The big question is when the ASi iMac is released. I’m betting April.  
    Not it's multi-core or GPU scores, just single core. The romped M1x will double the cores putting it on par with the 16-core Xeon but even with double the GPU it will fall short unless it can be clocked up or has even more GPU cores. Whatever it is it should not match but destroy the current iMac Pro. I hope they do away with 3rd party GPUs in all but the MacPro.
    I would think (and hope) that an ASi iMac will have CPU's/GPU's running at much higher clock speeds and more robust cooling systems that will essentially make the current M1 offerings "slow" by comparison.
    Single thread performance is already stellar, and increasing clock speed increases power consumption more than linearly.  So I’d rather see more cores, not more Hz. 

    Edit — here’s what I mean:
    https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/k3iobs/psa_performance_doesnt_scale_linearly_with/

    the M1 uses between 3 and 5 watts per core depending on the task. 
    This guy shows the nonlinear relationship between watts and clock using a Ryzen. About a 30% increase in clock speed more than doubles watts. Apple has to use the same laws of physics so going from 3 to 4 GHz would likely more than double watts per core. 

    At least for my work, more cores is clearly better than more clock at this point.
    edited March 20 watto_cobra
  • Reply 12 of 26
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,321member
    It’s a shame they never bothered to properly update it, it’s inexcusable that they let it run on the original specs for 4 years.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 26
    MplsPMplsP Posts: 3,268member
    MplsP said:
    lkrupp said:
    Something is on the way, I can smell it.
    Well, we know Apple’s coming out with an ASi iMac sometime, and since the M1 already matches the iMac Pro’s performance there wasn’t much point in keeping it around. The big question is when the ASi iMac is released. I’m betting April.  
    Not it's multi-core or GPU scores, just single core. The romped M1x will double the cores putting it on par with the 16-core Xeon but even with double the GPU it will fall short unless it can be clocked up or has even more GPU cores. Whatever it is it should not match but destroy the current iMac Pro. I hope they do away with 3rd party GPUs in all but the MacPro.
    yes, but even the multicore performance of the M1 wasn't far off with the base 8 core version of the iMac Pro. I haven't seen much in the way of direct graphics comparisons but the reviews I've read comparing actual application performance showed the m1 to be no slouch. 

    Like many, I'm assuming Apple will be releasing either an updated ASi chip with even better specs or a mulitchip architecture that further increases the performance, +/- the ability to use an external graphics card. If this assumption is correct, the new system should easily eclipse the current iMac Pros. As Saarek stated, the iMac Pro was also 4 years old and due for an update.

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 14 of 26
    camccamc Posts: 45member
    aegean said:
    Ah, my lovely iMac Pro. I still take care of it like it just came out, and I just bought it.  Let's see how long it will last :smile: 
    Same here.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 26
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 5,734member
    hagar said:
    My 2015 iMac has become unusable since upgrading to Big Sur. Turns out their flagship OS is incompatible with Fusion Drives causing huge performance issues. I’m very disappointed they don’t even care. 
    Please explain.  We have a 2015 iMac with a Fusion drive running Big Sur with zero problems.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 26
    saareksaarek Posts: 1,321member
    sflocal said:
    hagar said:
    My 2015 iMac has become unusable since upgrading to Big Sur. Turns out their flagship OS is incompatible with Fusion Drives causing huge performance issues. I’m very disappointed they don’t even care. 
    Please explain.  We have a 2015 iMac with a Fusion drive running Big Sur with zero problems.
    It’s quite a well acknowledged issue for many people. Although not listed officially the fusion drive is cited as the reason that the 2013 iMac did not get official Big Sur support despite being far more capable than the 2013 MacBook Air/Pro.

    Google it.
  • Reply 17 of 26
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,609member
    saarek said:
    It’s a shame they never bothered to properly update it, it’s inexcusable that they let it run on the original specs for 4 years.
    Clearly the iMac Pro was a stopgap measure to provide an upgrade option to the dead-end trash can Mac Pro. It was never meant to be a permanent fixture in Apple's Mac product line.

    Intel's infamous process node fumblings made the iMac Pro stale.

    Remember that this is a low-volume product. Over 80% of Macs sold are notebook models; it's been like that for well over a decade. The top desktop Mac is the entry-level iMac. Letting the premium-priced iMac Pro fester for years affected a miniscule portion of their customers.

    It is also a pretty good argument that super-expensive all-in-ones aren't a very good value proposition. Better off separating the display and the CPU. I ran a 24" Dell 2405 1080p monitor for thirteen years.

    From a total cost-of-ownership standpoint, the iMac isn't really a good deal.

    Apple has plenty of expertise letting old designs fester for years and years. Look at the cMP and the Mac mini 2014. Apple's inaction with the iMac Pro should come as a surprise to no one.
    edited March 20
  • Reply 18 of 26
    hagar said:
    My 2015 iMac has become unusable since upgrading to Big Sur. Turns out their flagship OS is incompatible with Fusion Drives causing huge performance issues. I’m very disappointed they don’t even care. 
    So for less than $200 you can replace the fusion drive with a 1TB SSD ... end of problems. (or a HDD for $50)

    I'm not sure you really want them to hamstring the latest OS just so it will work with hardware they made 6 years ago. :smiley: 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 19 of 26
    The M1X or whatever the name is going to be, in my opinion doesn’t need a lot of cores or megahertz. 
    If that’s a modest upgrade from the M1 that’s just fine by me, because computations like video encoding are accelerated through hardware anyways.

    Where I’d like to see the vast majority of innovation go to instead is GPU performance. To get to the mid-end and high-end performance levels, 2-4x speed improvements are needed (from 2.6 TFLOPS to above 7.5) when comparing to AMD’s or NVIDIA’s discreet GPU’s for example. 
    I’d love to see GPU support for hardware acceleration of things like raytracing as well over raw performance, so perhaps if only a 2X improvement is reached “raw”, the net performance could still be much higher if dedicated silicon is used for operations like ray-tracing.

    Also, it’ll be important to support more than one external monitor.

    Lastly, the iMac should be able to run as a monitor without the computer active, for a more ‘green’ product. This way the monitor can serve a purpose long after the computer dies. 
    edited March 21 cgWerkswatto_cobra
  • Reply 20 of 26
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,720member
    Kind of sad to see it go, as I know for people who have them, they generally love them. It isn't for me if it doesn't have video-in... let's hope Apple wakes up on that with their next revision (iMac... but also in general, for example the HomePod. They just don't seem to understand how people use thing in the real world, and how much more flexible what should be a fairly inexpensive addition would make their stuff).

    commentzilla said:
    I hope they do away with 3rd party GPUs in all but the MacPro.
    Is that what you meant to say? They need to add 3rd party GPU support, not get rid of it. I have serious doubts Apple is going to best AMD/Nvidia. It's possible, I suppose, but is that their speciality? And, without comparable or better GPU support, the rest doesn't matter all that much for a bunch of uses/industries.

    I'm *really* hoping lack of GPU support and eGPUs is just a 1st generation thing and not a direction they are headed. The eGPU / TB was one of the best things they added in a long time, and I'd hate to see that possibility dumped. It might not be for everyone, but created a LOT of flexibility. For example, you can turn a tiny laptop or Mac mini into a reasonable workstation.

    kingofsomewherehot said:
    So for less than $200 you can replace the fusion drive with a 1TB SSD ... end of problems. (or a HDD for $50)
    I'm not sure you really want them to hamstring the latest OS just so it will work with hardware they made 6 years ago. :smiley: 
    Even if it weren't for problems, I'd not have a computer anymore that isn't SSD based. The user experience is just THAT much better. However, for an iMac owner, it isn't like you can just easily swap one in. Still probably worth it, but it's going to cost more than $200.

    I suppose you could hang one external, and just make it the boot drive (and duct-tape the drive to it really, really good so it can't be accidentally disconnected!).

    CheeseFreeze said:
    ... Where I’d like to see the vast majority of innovation go to instead is GPU performance. To get to the mid-end and high-end performance levels, 2-4x speed improvements are needed (from 2.6 TFLOPS to above 7.5) when comparing to AMD’s or NVIDIA’s discreet GPU’s for example. 
    I’d love to see GPU support for hardware acceleration of things like raytracing as well over raw performance, so perhaps if only a 2X improvement is reached “raw”, the net performance could still be much higher if dedicated silicon is used for operations like ray-tracing.
    ...
    Lastly, the iMac should be able to run as a monitor without the computer active, for a more ‘green’ product. This way the monitor can serve a purpose long after the computer dies. 
    Yeah, Apple has to do something about GPUs, and that's really across the board (except the Mac Pro). They are getting a reputation of sucky-GPU performance they need to break.

    I've been a [email protected] user (millions of points submitted) for a long time, and recently spent hours attempting to find a way to try some crypto-mining. You just can't do that on a Mac anymore (short of Boot Camp), and it mostly seems to be the case that the development community has just given up on Mac. It's great to see a few big name 3D players engaging M-series/Metal, but Apple has a long way to go in terms of courting the rest of the the world. It doesn't seem like it would take a heck of a lot of effort for them to break this stereotype/problem either... just need to recognize it and fix it.

    Amen on your last statement. That's what makes the iMac a no-go for me. If it had video-in, I'd buy one soon. Maybe we can sell it to them on the 'Green' front? They don't seem to give a rip about the actual utility of it, unfortunately. And, it isn't just about after the computer dies.... they don't have a reasonably priced display for 'the rest of us' which this would fix. They also don't have a way of using an iMac with other components in a desk setup (ie. PC, Playstation, etc.). Fixed! It couldn't cost that much to implement either.
Sign In or Register to comment.