Apple to cease Mac Pro shipments to Europe
geek.com
geek.com
If Apple had a new version of the Mac Pro around the corner, then they probably wouldn't bother release an update/redesign of the existing version in order to meet new EU laws.
Which is fairly likely, a Cook-sent email stated pretty much that last year: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1383915
> Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year. We also updated the current model today.
(emphasis mine)
Sure, I may be reading too much into 'really great', but I can't stop reading this stuff in Jobs voice.
That makes no sense whatsoever.
> I bet there's a new Mac Pro around the corner.
Not exactly a big bet, Tim Cook officially stated exactly that last June.
The Mac Pro's demise is fast becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. IT departments shouldn't have to plan their purchasing based on some vague statement from Tim Cook.
However, since i really enjoy having a 17" display (+27" via mini-Displayport) i can't quite see myself "downgrading" to a 15" machine once the current MBP is going to be replaced :(
using awesome wm for a triple head setup, which i guess is a lot lighter than unity or whatever.
I ran the same thing but in reverse before, windows 7 with a couple of linux VMs, for making web stuff to run on linux servers it was painful.
oh, and is it's vaguely relevant i bought the bits for a grand total of £700 excluding screens/keyboard/mouse/optical drive.
And sure there are lighter ways to test different browsers, but I don't trust them, been caught out before by silly differences like font rendering, testing eflyers outlook express/outlook etc, in the multi-ie-in-one-app things before, now i have a one-keystroke switch between an environment i can trust 100% to be authentic, and is easy to move around too.
basically using vm's in this way is one of the things that let me sleep at night.
If the Mac Pro is really done, I'm moving on. I'm not bitter about this, because I had a good time as an Apple/Mac user for more than a decade. Coming from Linux, where multi-screening is still not at the level of Windows 2000, OS X provided a lot of the Unix comfort for me in a safer and much, much saner environment. It is, however, clear where Apple is going. Over the years, OS X users have been steadily disempowered. At some point in the future there will be a merge with iOS. Even though I still consider it my digital home, it feels to me like a declining platform.
The real question is indeed one of alternatives. I dread going back to Linux where I'll wrestle with configuration and braindead-by-design features once again. Nothing else has stepped up in the meantime, but maybe there will be something new one day. One can only hope.
Of course, we hope that there's a new Mac Pro around the corner, but the chances are slim. Also, the advantages are getting smaller, except for the most specific uses.
I really want Apple to come up with a worthy Mac Pro substitute, something that has power. I sorely miss the G5 PowerMac, it seemed the epitome of what Mac could do. (even though the specs look silly today)
In 2004, the "sunflower" iMac G4 was actually discontinued for months before the iMac G5 shipped. Today it seems pretty incredible that less than 10 years ago there was a period of several months when Apple simply wasn't shipping any iMacs.
She was considering a Mac Pro but I guess that's out the door now. For those of you in a similar situation, what do you do? Does an iMac cut it, or have you moved over to Windows?
On the subject of the Mac Pros themselves, speculation here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/17mzf5/apple_to_disco...
is that it's because they draw too much power when switched off but still plugged in. As for those worrying Apple's discontinuing Mac Pros they're on record as saying there are new ones coming, so this just means they're probably coming sooner rather than later:
http://www.macrumors.com/2012/06/12/apple-spokesperson-confi...
IMO not good enough for professional image work. The LED backlighting gives the panel more consistent, longer life, but also means a pretty dramatic reduction in color gamut.
Even the Dell UltraSharp series will soundly beat out the 27" iMac display in every color accuracy measure, and those are on the lowest end of the professional scale - Eizo, NEC, and others have even more exacting panels.
The issue isn't performance - I agree a top-line iMac will trounce practically any image you throw at it (short of, say, the 100MP images coming out of a Phase One back), but the monitor is a big problem. Professionals frequently invest multiple thousands in a monitor that will last a long time - they aren't interested in throwing it out every time they need to upgrade the CPU.
Definitely agreed with that -- the iMac screen certainly isn't suitable for a lot of pros, but it ultimately depends on what you're doing and what your budget is. The iMac screens are still much better than a lot of what's out there, and price-wise is actually a good deal when you consider how much just the monitor would cost separately. I actually thought they used the same panels as the Dell UltraSharps? but I must be mistaken about that.
Edit: from The Verge's review
"...on the 27-inch behemoth, you get a 2560 x 1440 panel that's matched only by the Dell XPS 27."
"The IPS panels are the same as in last year’s iMacs, but they’re better integrated now — Apple says that by laminating the display to the glass it reduced reflections up to 70 percent, and indeed the glare problems that beset so many displays are much less present here, though there's still some reflection and glare. The improved manufacturing also makes whatever’s on the screen feel closer to you, almost like things are jumping out of the panel. The display's glossy bezel, which houses its HD FaceTime camera, is actually the most reflective part of the whole machine now.
I have to say, I was really surprised to see how much better the screen could be without a single change to the actual technology — but hey, I guess plastic surgery can work wonders. Both screens have fantastic color reproduction, are remarkably (like, blindingly) bright, and have near-180-degree viewing angles."
http://www.theverge.com/2012/11/30/3709120/apple-imac-mac-mi...
The Pro line will very likely (finally) be revamped this year, Cook pretty much stated so last year: http://appleinsider.com/articles/12/06/12/tim_cook_confirms_...
Apple will probably just jam the channels with a four month inventory so there's no issues.
Bear in mind also that mine is the i7 + maxed out RAM, which helps also.
> Although we didn't have a chance to talk about a new Mac Pro at today's event, don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year. We also updated the current model today.
From June 2012, confirmed by Apple as having been sent by Tim Cook.
I think this is a HUGE error on the part of Apple and makes me wonder if Steve Jobs wasn't just really good but absolutely horrid at picking CEOs. Or maybe they are updating the line like they mentioned in 2013 and these are the older ones.
I actually thought Apple would be smart and use their advantage to own desktop as well (which is a big market for them and not attractive to others). Most of the people I know that got Apple desktops/laptops get into their devices and vice versa. At a time when Windows loyalty is weak I think this is an error. Maybe I am skewed by the industry I am in but I need a big machine that runs OSX! I do tons of work on my iMacs and Mac Pro but wouldn't rely on just iMacs yet.
If iMacs are their biggest machines I suspect many game developers going Hackintosh and that is a HUGE missed opportunity. Sometimes you just need a tower that can expand big time.
Yeah those lost $0.5mm worth of sales are really going to kill Apple off.
On a more meaningful comment to yours, its not the millions they lose not selling it to those game developers, its the millions that they lose because games are being developed for their system, which is very much a big deal. Having developers on your platform is very important, and in order to have that, you have to give them the right tools, and if you are a hardware company like Apple, that includes the right hardware.
Think of the impact, for example, if MS said Valve could no longer have/use MS software[1]. The effect would be much more than the paltry amount Valve spends on MS licenses.
1. Yes, the two cases aren't even in the same ballpark (hence the "overstated above"). I'm just illustrating the point.
Many of the best developers on their platform use the Mac Pro. They also heavily influenced others adopting Apple devices. I think it seems small but the influence and impact of this decision is more than the revenue. iMacs will take the place of many of these customers like designers maybe but developers still want a beast with up to 64GB of RAM and 12 cores. You can easily run OSX and Windows dev at same time on it.
Might even be an immense error. I for one am disappointed if they don't hold true to the 2013 update. Once you go Hackintosh, why buy iMacs either if you have all that setup? Why walk away from die hard customers? They haven't even tried to grow it. So it could be much bigger and the desktop market for Apple is still untapped for the most part.
They stop selling the current Mac Pro where it's now out-of-regs, because they're expecting to release a redesign this year (or so Cook stated last year: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1383915). There is little sense in possibly significant alterations to the current one for a minority of the world (at best, resellers still have inventory after all) when a new model is on the way.
B) This is just a regulatory issue with the current model and will be fixed in the next revision.
C) For many tasks, the i7 iMac with 32GB of RAM and a Thunderbolt drive array is nearly as good as the Mac Pro (4-core). Obviously it can't compete with the 12-core but not many of those are sold.
D) Tim Cook was instrumental in making Apple what it is today. He's doing a fine job. You have no idea what you're talking about.
On D) I agree, I was overreacting to my tool of over 5 years going away. As long as the update comes through like Cook said. If not I feel Apple is making a mistake and this reflects on the CEO and direction, believing too much in 'post-pc'.
However, I do know what I am talking about regarding gamedev needs. Windows is part of that in parallels or bootcamp and a portion of your drives - including enough processor and memory to run both, if there is no 2013 refresh changes will take place in gamedev'ing for Apple. That will be a clear signal the biggest machine is the iMac.
Apple is a hardware company, they should always have something like the Mac Pro that is a market need/demand even if it is not directly as profitable. 4-5 years for an update and only a hint of an update does not leave one satisfied. Cook has been in charge at least half that time.
If they don't have a beast to buy that I can swap out the video card on or add a drive easily on occasion that means a windows tower will be back in my office. I got rid of the last one a year ago for parallels and bootcamp but only run that on Mac Pro now. It isn't like they play in the low end commodity desktop market, this is high end, higher margins than most. Passing on good customers if they bail.
I'd hate to see this occur, and I don't think it will anytime soon, but it seems possible to me.
The good news is for managing these you can Remote Desktop into them for most things like setup and build monitoring.
I love the Mac Pro, it's a great platform, but don't think it's going away just yet. This regulatory snag is really unusual and only happened because Apple's investing a ton of effort in the 2013 model of the Pro.
It's possible that a screw, even one like that, qualifies as some kind of mechanical barrier to entry. Apple's tab apparently doesn't even though, ironically, it can be locked to prevent access to the components within.
You'd think if they just slapped a zip-tie on the outside of the case they'd be able to get approval.
Which is a choice, and I've read many defenses of that choice, but let's not pretend: for most people, the Mac Pro is a terrible value. Right now, it's a terrible value in absolute terms. If Apple made a $1,000 tower, I'd probably use that in lieu of an iMac, and there must be others in my situation.
Of course not, since that's already been happening independently of the directive.
And high end mac users have been worried that apple is throwing them under the buss for the consumer market for years now.
If I where MS id set up a workstation division just for this market and produced built to the hilt machines for the high end users
I am a long time apple user, but will not buy a Mac Pro even if it's available, it is a ripoff at this price.