Metriacanthosaurus

EsquireCats said:

Apple design their products based on the use/experience they're trying to cater, each Mac has a clear purpose, the price is secondary and largely psychologically driven. The Mac Mini, iMac and MacPro are all desktop computers - yet each deliver the concept in a unique way.

Thus identifying a gap in the lineup isn't about looking at what comes after the dollar sign for each model's entry price. Instead it's about looking at what users aren't being satisfied.

That is simply not true when the gap is this big. The gap between my iMac 5K and the Mac Pro + XDR Display is outrageous.

The iMac 5K:
1. Is not expandable at all, beyond a modicum of RAM.
2. Has no external 5K display to mate with (3rd party doesn't count, nor interest me).
3. Is a substantial PITA to upgrade the whole machine, and completely limited to whatever/whenever Apple releases a new one.

Just in terms of experience, the gap is gaping. In terms of price, I bought a $4,000 iMac, but would need to invest a minimum of $11k to get into the experience of "expandability and standalone Apple display".

There are a hell of a lot of Pros who want to get into "expandability and standalone Apple displays" and can't go as high as 11k for an initial investment. Every $1000 increment is an entirely different market segment, and income level. You look at the range of prices between other Macs and they are all within the same ranges.

I love my iMac 5K, but it is not expandable at all, and extremely cumbersome to upgrade the whole machine.

Apple should be offering a base model of the Mac Pro for $2999 and a 27" 5K display for $999.

That is well within my budgetary range for a work Mac. And it would get me a lot more mileage than an of-the-shelf iMac will. I would be happy to put another $1000/year or so into the machine for upgrades for the next 5-10 years. So in 10 years, it would still be a beast with relatively modern components.

----

The actual product delivered from Apple is perfectly fine for some people. It is not overpriced for what it offers. Not even close. Unfortunately it offers too much for most Pros.

Sadly, I think this is the latest example of Apple's greedy pattern of pushing everyone toward spending more. They've had (some) success with delivering products that are way over what the market indicates they're willing to pay...and getting them to pay it anyway. Here they think they can convince (some) Pros to up their game, break their bank, and buy more than they need to get into expandability range.

lorin schultz said:

AppleExposed said:

Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?

It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.

Yeah, that aspect is disappointing. There are many, many levels of Pro and Apple is saying that any level below the $11k mark should be satisfied with another Mac.

Nothing would please me more than to buy this machine for $2-3k with much lower default specs (yet the same upgrade potential), and a 5k display (not 6k) for another $1500.

The best part about all of this is iOS device syncing moved to the Finder. It looks like it has been there all along, and in a few years we'll have forgotten that it was ever any other way. It makes so much sense it is almost silly that it wasn't this way sooner.

Great computer.

My only complaint is the high starting price. This is meant to be a modular and upgradeable system (and it is). But the baseline is too expensive. They should have tried for a $2999 entry level price so that more customers could get in on the ground floor, and upgrade it themselves over the next 10 years or so.

The pricing on this machine is absolutely fine for what it includes and the market it hits. I just wish they had sought to make the same machine just a little more accessible to another class of pros.