“2016 ended with a spreading school of thought that Apple was about to abandon the Mac Pro and Mac mini because sales for each are anemic,” Dave Farrington writes for NoodleMac. “Apple does not break out Mac sales units, but upwards of 75-percent of all Macs sold– according to Apple– are notebooks. That leaves the three desktop models– including the iMacs– as the smaller percentage of Apple’s overall Mac sales.”
“Strangely enough, the Mac Pro remains the most customizable Mac, and the most personal of Apple’s personal computers,” Farrington writes. “The most personal? How is that possible? Three words: Build. To. Order.”
“How much faster and upgradeable will Mac Pro 2017 be than Mac Pro 2016? I say nominally, and maybe that’s why Apple hasn’t moved the bar forward because there’s not much to move,” Farrington writes. “Recent versions of Intel’s Xeon CPUs are not leaps and bounds faster than previous versions. USB-C doesn’t raise the speed bar, though the seldom used Thunderbolt 3 may help with peripherals. How much faster in real world usage is whatever new crop of GPUs Apple could use? Geez, the Mac Pro can drive three Retina 5k displays now. How many do you need?”
Farrington writes, “I don’t think we’ve seen the last of the Mac Pro and Apple wouldn’t need to do much to make it a better seller than to upgrade the CPUs, the GPUs, the storage, increase and upgrade the ports, and get competitive with the price tag.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Even at over three years old, the Mac Pro is still a beast, yet Apple needs to lead the way, not follow. We’re optimistic that the Mac Pro conundrum gets solved this year.
I largely buy into the idea that Apple can’t make any significant upgrades as parts are not available that would make it a worthwhile change, given the costs.
But in the case of the Pro, where people do seem to feel they need whatever is available, how much work is it to incorporate what there is ?
It seems to me the design of this machine is such that the latest CPU or GPU would be relatively simple for Apple to slot in? Rather than MacBook Pro’s, where the power, space and cooling require new designs and engineering.
Doesn’t this Pro allow Apple to cost effectively make the incremental updates people are asking for while they work towards the next killer upgrade when the stars align in its favour?
Usually CPU and GPU changes require software changes. These changes can reverberate thru the OS.
Yes, gpu’s in particular.
Even if it costs a bit, Apple should spend the resources to keep the Mac Pro reasonably up-to-date while it works on a new design (which should have been released already).
I have always been proud of the professionals who have used Macs for scientific, engineering, and creative applications. I was also proud when the Mac was the performance leader in the mid-90s (early PPC) and again in the 2000s with the G5 CPUs. Once Apple shifted over to Intel processors, there was less opportunity to differentiate Macs from PCs in terms of basic performance (not including the impacts of the OS, of course). Still, MBPs were the fastest *Windows* laptops for years.
I am confident that Apple will get its act together and release some great new desktop Macs soon. Better late than never…
A $2000 base model MacPro in a mini tower format would be ideal. Plenty of slots for ram and cards. Ultimate flexibility so that power users can upgrade to the hilt. It won’t hurt iMac sales since this will be low volume but will address the need for a power machine. Make it attractive on the outside and easy to build on the inside.
DogGoneToo you have struck a chord I too have imagined.
Let people buy a mini-tower (whatever that is), then …
Let people buy an NAS/BOD module for the film editor & other modules which stack on the bottom or top of the “mini-tower.”
Your imagination can run wild on the modules you might see from both Apple and other licensed suppliers approved for the mini-tower.
Hmmm. OK it sounds great. BUT: Picture a car with all slots/ parts easy to install.
A huge engine
A tiny transmission
Big tires on the right side
little tires on the left side
Blinkers and Hazard lights that all work differently
engines that do not talk well with the engine control module
Hey. Lets make lots of different changes. Cause all those parts will work well together, RIGHT????
Apple wants your user experience to be great, especially if you do not know how to mix and match.
Engine RPM and torque has to be matched to transmission gear ratios and to wheel size to make the optimum power to the wheels. The engine control module has to know which engine is attached so it can provide optimum gas to air mixture and spark timing.
The same goes for an electronic device.
Just saying.
> Apple wants your user experience to be great, especially if you do not know how to mix and match.
If you are buying a Mac Pro then you know how to mix and match.
Just saying.
You seem to forget that we once had what people are begging for in the previous Mac Pro. Apple already solved this once, and walked away from it.
Precisely! 👍🏻
Rather strange and meandering analogy not based in reality.
Apple should and could do it better NOW MORE THAN EVER. With the cash pile and NEW spaceship digs this should be a no brainer.
From what I understand, the new Mac Pro requires custom GPUs because of the unique design of the board and enclosure. Suppliers haven’t much incentive to design and produce them for a product selling in low volume, so there aren’t any. In my opinion, that was a Procrustian design decision by Apple, which is to say, stupid. The other point of condemnation was the overall design forcing peripherals to the outside, like colostomy bags. Also stupid. The designers overplayed their perfume-scented hand. As I’ve explained to you, I obtained their system and made it work for me personally, but it clearly doesn’t lend itself to the wide field of crunching and rendering in the trenches and has become something of a blot on Apple’s reputation.
Apple would need to pay a steep premium for the custom design of timely GPU upgrades for this product. I believe that they did the math and were unwilling to suffer the resulting sharp decline in profit margin. This idea infuriates me. If I had pull there I would demand that they treat the Mac Pro as a loss leader, not just another device in their lineup. However, sigh, they think different. Or maybe they have come to think the same as all the rest, now that Steve Jobs is gone.
“From what I understand, the new Mac Pro requires custom GPUs because of the unique design of the board and enclosure. Suppliers haven’t much incentive to design and produce them for a product selling in low volume, so there aren’t any.”
Agreed, very stupid. These days I’m caring less about Apple fashion and vanity needs winning industrial design awards. Form should never CRIPPLE function. The core problem with ALL Apple design mistakes now and in years past. 🎨
“The other point of condemnation was the overall design forcing peripherals to the outside, like colostomy bags. Also stupid.”
And costly. Well word-crafted analogy. 👏🏻
“As I’ve explained to you, I obtained their system and made it work for me personally, but it clearly doesn’t lend itself to the wide field of crunching and rendering in the trenches and has become something of a blot on Apple’s reputation.”
Yes, I recall you mentioning your Spartan solution, or is it minimalist, essentially minimizing the impact of forced reality while making your space comfy workable as possible. And yes indeed, it is a most terrible blot! 🙈🙉🙊
“Apple would need to pay a steep premium for the custom design of timely GPU upgrades for this product. I believe that they did the math and were unwilling to suffer the resulting sharp decline in profit margin. This idea infuriates me.”
Me too. As we all know, Apple pulled this off beautifully for decades by offering PROS an upgrade path that did not force vendors to leave the upgrade platform altogether. Light bulb sockets, electricity plugs, vehicle gasoline tanks, et al SHARE universal connectivity. No need to reinvent the wheel and find a common solution to lock vendors in. Exactly what and where they need to go now. Turn the clock back, reincorporate what works, and then move forward to solve the problem. And Jony, please close the coffee table book and give your design ego a break for a New Year’s change of heart. 🍾💓🎉
“If I had pull there I would demand that they treat the Mac Pro as a loss leader, not just another device in their lineup.”
As many pro fans have posted, I too don’t understand how it could be a huge loss leader. As I have stated many times, you have the money Apple, the spaceship digs, the business scale and the best tech designers. How can you not figure out to make the Mac Pro line the baddest AGAIN in speed, upgradability, and price is beyond me. I spend tens of thousands upgrading or buying new pro Macs when moving forward technology lands, and sometimes forces hands. As you know, pros do the bestest high end cutting edge work in sheer volume, in so many industries, and that early ambitious drive way back when launched Apple through that unassuming Cali-forn-ya garage roof. 💥🚀
“However, sigh, they think different. Or maybe they have come to think the same as all the rest, now that Steve Jobs is gone.”
Sorry to say, I wonder if they are thinking at all BEYOND the salesmen, the bean counters, Wall Street and the balance sheet? 🤑🤑🤑 The tipoff was removing ports, selling extra connectors at high prices, making products lighter and thinner (less material to purchase), killing off pro software, and abandoning the router and monitor markets to name a few. If they go the way of the profit only rest, one day, they may no longer be the best. 😥
Apple owner since my Lisa … 😎
Ah yes, the argument sales are “anemic” so let’s go ahead and kill off the product line. I believe (my opinion only) that sales of the Mac Mini and Mac Pro are “anemic” because of the choices Apple made, not because people don’t want them. Apple did not listen the their customers with the new Mac Pro. That is why sales are “anemic”. Apple destroyed the upgradability of the Mac Mini and made it less powerful than it’s predecessor. That is why sales are “anemic”. I was ready and willing to replace my 2007 iMac with the 2014 Mac Mini until I saw the specs. I still want a Mac Mini as my home computer. It is all I need. However, I am not going to pay a premium price in 2017 for 2014 hardware that is less powerful than the 2012 model.
I realize mobile is the future and notebooks outsell desktops handily, but a company with over $200 billion in the bank can afford to put a group of engineers in a small corner office to let the work on nothing but the Mac.
Spot on. It isn’t that people don’t want to buy Minis and Pros; it is that Apple isn’t making the Minis and Pros people want to buy.
not to mention they do not even advertise them… they don’t just inadequately advertise them, they don’t advertise them at all !
not to mention they are getting increasingly out of date.
and they wonder why sales are anemic?
At this point the people who want a Mac mini-iMac-Pro know what is available and are likely using a Mac already.
Myself and other heavy users are waiting for true advancement before we commit what is likely far above $5-7k for a fully capable video or CAD or similar workstation.
What the average consumer doesn’t realize is that it is NOT the hardware cost!
By the time I pay for all the CAD and other software to put on a Mac Pro the software ALONE will total over $20,000.
So it is not about the hardware money, it is all performance. I want to see my productivity go up if I am going to put out another $30,000 for a CAD workstation.
Anyone arguing the difference between $4k and $7k for the workstation cost is an amateur, as a pro wants to know “HOW MUCH TIME CAN I SAVE?”
Spot on. I’ve made that same argument several times, also the upgrade cycle is far longer with Mac Pro’s than with other machines. We still have 2008’s that have been demoted to server duty, 2012’s that have upgraded as far as they can go, and 14 2013’s That out perform all of them. It’s 2017, which for us is right in line with upgrade time (4 years or so) , but a lot of our competitors are on even longer cycles (6+ years) so it makes sense that the cycle is longer for the product.
Right on Bo! I have been waiting, patiently, for a new Mac Pro for … wow, a year and a half now. I have the money set aside NOW for a fully loaded Mac Pro and new RAID. The cost is not the issue. The fact that I am still using a 2010 iMac for 1080+ video editing is. The machine is slow. Time is money. I need this machine to be a competitive editor. I do not want a PC or Linux or a Hackintosh.
I WANT A NEW MAC PRO! If nothing else, Tim, if you are reading this, let us know you are killing the line. Stop stringing us along. You have to know how badly people want this machine. Time to shit or get off the pot!
That makes three here and counting!
Well said and many more like minded out there, as well. Just chomping on the bit waiting for the biggest, baddest, screaming Pro (upgradeable) Mac ever made!
Two recent Apple changes that have Pros and others fuming.
1) locked down computers with no internal expansion.
2) too thin, too light, two may ports removed.
Fingers crossed Apple takes our suggestions to heart. 🌊
I’m in the same boat as you. I have an aging Mac Mini (2009) that I wanted to replace with a new model. When the new machines were released a year ago, the base model was not going to cut it (slow processor, low ram and small SSD). The next model up was a bit better but I would have needed to upgrade the SSD.
Instead I bought a SSD drive which made a huge difference in the performance of my aging machine. Apple lost $800 bucks from me.
My new touch bar MBP is being delivered today so I will be replacing the mini with my current MBP (1st gen rMBP). This machine is still going strong (but will need to replace the battery). What this gives me is a faster home media server with built-in battery backup that will last at least another 2 years.
I agree with the sentiment that Apple needs to continue to support the niche products and spend a bit more time on them so that they can upgrade the specs every year. And please give back the ability to upgrade ram at least.
Your reasons for anemic Mac sales is right on the money!
PROS KNOW. And they know enough to stay away from over-priced stale tech with no limited to zero upgrade options.
My cheese grater will suffice until Apple gets its act together.
Fingers crossed … 🙏🏻
On that we definitely agree. And yes not every upgrade needs to be a new paradigm shift, just simple updating would be nice and more price competitiveness. And a tower or mini-tower option for Mac Pro.
👏🏻👍🏻✌️
Apple stopped breaking down Mac unit sales in 2012 so we don’t really know how much revenue laptops bring in compared to desktops. One might think that large enterprise or education markets would buy Mac minis by the truckload, but since the hardware is stale and the price too high, perhaps Apple is walking away from those users too. Conventional wisdom says that when Apple goes silent on a product, its death is near. So many superb products dying on the vine only because Apple loses interest. Tons of pent up demand waiting for modern upgradeable Mac hardware….
Apple could also consider making a true gaming machine.
Yeah, I know, I know, a lot of competition in an already crowded space, addressable market is pretty small, yada yada, but if they made something with upgradeable processors and graphic cards, I might actually consider buying one because I don’t want to deal with building a Windoze box for my teens and having the security hell associated with it on my LAN. And I would still have it to use as regular Mac when they weren’t using it (LOL, teenagers not using a gaming machine 24/7, I crack myself up).
I would think that would produce a Mac Pro that pros would want and use, for the prestige of having photographers, videographers, typesetters, graphic illustrators, animators, developers, in general, creative professionals, using products to produce their work. “They did it on a Mac.” “They use Macs to do that.”
At one time pc magazines were ironically typeset on Macs. How much longer will the pros presently using Macs continue to do so? Some are already considering switching to pcs for the ability to upgrade when needed, and not having to wait on .
If I were in charge of Mac Pro design, I would give pros the Mac they need (upgradable cheese grater Mac Pro) and not worry about profit margins. After all the market is small, right? 🖖😀⌚️
“Some are already considering switching to pcs for the ability to upgrade when needed, and not having to wait on .”
Actually, the migration has already begun.
The 2009 Mac Pros cannot run the newest OS without an EFI flash to fake 2010 machines — something a lot of shops are not willing to do. The shops I’ve talked to are slowly replacing their old Mac Pros (pre 2010s and even some 2010s and 2011s) with Windows based boxes.
It’s not a stampede yet, but it would not surprise me if Apple does not come out with a new, true Pro desktop by the end of 2017, the stampede will be full blown in 2018.
Same here – I have 5 Mac users, currently using iMacs.
The 3 year AppleCare runs out next year, so I have the budget approved and waiting to spend on replacement Macs.
I’ve used Macs my entire career, and if Apple don’t have a significant upgrade to these iMacs, we’ll be switching to Windows.
Hello Apple? Make something darn quick so you don’t lose out on another £15k investment, which we spend with you every 3 years. Hello?
Oh you can’t here me because you want to sell watches, skinny, underpowered laptops, and tablets to the Starbucks generation.
The switch over to Windows is made easier not just because of greater hardware choices on the PC side but because the OS X UI and file management system hasn’t fundamentally changed in two decades. And guess what? Windows has caught up with and in some cases surpassed OS X in user experience. Shocking isn’t it…
Spotlight is broken. Smart folders aren’t that smart. HFS+ is ancient. Metadata is severely underutilized. And give me back primary file management control through a keyboard. I’m tired of having to move my hand back and forth from keyboard to mouse/trackpad. If I’m doing creative art or CAD work then absolutely I need a mouse/trackpad/pen. But otherwise I want to be 100% on the keyboard. It’s so much faster for most tasks. And stop it with the swoopy graphics. It doesn’t impress any more. It’s annoying and stupid. I want speed on the screen.
Apple’s leadership team is so focused on maintaining and expanding the dominance of the iPhone that they forgot that the Macintosh needs an internal advocate as well. If Apple totally cedes the personal computer market and lets the Macintosh die they guarantee loss of the power user market and some of the strongest advocates for their products. I don’t think that’s were they want to be.
a agree with you here.
This author truly does not know computer technology. Just one point shows this: “USB-C doesn’t raise the speed bar…” USB Type-C is a CONNECTOR. It allows a vast array of communications protocols with even more coming in 2017. To say that the communications capabilities with USB Type-C connectors does not raise the bar much is pure lunacy — or extreme naiveté.
Sure, the current (and even the soon to be announced) CPUs useful in a Mac Pro are not much more than 30% faster (on average) than the ones that have shipped in the 2013 Mac Pro. Sure, RAM isn’t THAT much faster. However, GPUs are noticeably faster if Apple were to switch to Nvidia’s newest lineup. Apple could blow everyone away by offering BTO options with Nvidia’s P100. The current leading edge interconnects are more than twice as fast. PCIe 4.0 (due in 2017) is almost 4x as fast as the 2013 Mac Pro’s PCIe 2.0. The 2017 Mac Pro could easily support 10 Gbps Ethernet, a factor of 10x faster than the 2013 Mac Pro. There are 8 TB SSDs today that are significantly faster and tolerate more write cycles than the 1 TB SSDs of the 2013 Mac Pro.
Hell, the 2017 Mac Pro could even support Intel’s XPoint technology which is overall 4x – 10x times better (though not the 1,000x that Intel claims).
It’s really the whole package. Upgrade everything from a factor of 1.3x to a factor of 10x and the whole world changes. The 2017 Mac Pro could be a real beast.
I’m still holding out hope that Apple actually builds one. In both my work arena and home office, I’d buy several. If only.
I run a recording studio, and bought a MacPro when they first came out. I’d like to buy another one, but not until they update it to something better/faster, whatever that is. But I’m pretty sure that will never happen. Apple has moved away from content creation to content consumption. The Digital Creative Community that Apple help produce is hanging on by a thin thread in Cupertino. If a device isn’t used to consume content, Apple won’t be very interested.
like I posted on the author’s site:
“your (the article author’s ) lack of tech knowledge is so glaring it’s hard to know where to start to criticize.
“How much faster in real world usage is whatever new crop of GPUs Apple could use? Geez, the Mac Pro can drive three Retina 5k displays now. How many do you need?”
?????
Barefeats.com tests from LAST year January 2016
running a GPU intensive game Diablo 3
the highest end D700 Cylinder gives 73 fps
a 2010 Cheese Grater Mac Pro with upgraded 980 Ti card gives 181 fps
games I understand has a limit for need for fps for playability, the test is just to show GPU strength. You need powerful GPU for all kinds of things for example 3D etc. Shootouts have shown for example you can rotate a high polygon 3D model SMOOTHLY with a powerful GPU while it STAGGERS slowly on a D700. There are way more powerful video cards now available for PCs. Note also the 2010 Mac Pro has slower subsystem with slower processors, modern PCs would show even greater differences in the Diablo test.
The D700 Cylinder btw starts at $4600 with 16 GB of RAM and a puny 256 GB drive , the 980 Ti is around $600 and like i said there are more powerful cards out now.
the really bad thing is that you can’t upgrade the cards in the cylinder from the ‘D’ series Apple provides. “
Gwad,
a WHOLE BUNCH OF IDIOT REPLIES TO MY POST in the original website and the ‘moderator ‘ refuses to post my replies to them.
like one guy Ben says the the cylinder is 3,099 but I quoted a D700 which starts at $4600 etc and another doesn’t understand that 2010 Cheese Grater MP IS a Mac Pro… (they’ve NEVER SEEN A CHEESE GRATER MP but they pick fights! ).
sheesh, maybe Tim Cook is right Apple’s new customers are all idiot Tweeter bots….
Dear lord almighty I got this from Dave Farrignton the author of the piece in reply to my FACTUAL post of the bare feats test above:
Dave Farrington to Davewrite:
“you could not be more wrong on every point above. I wrote the article so I know exactly what is meant. There is nothing to refute. ”
for people who didn’t read his entire post:
here’s more insightful nuggets:
“How much faster and upgradeable will Mac Pro 2017 be than Mac Pro 2016? I say nominally, and maybe that’s why Apple hasn’t moved the bar forward because there’s not much to move”
“Nominally”? “Not much to move” ?
181 fps vs 73 fps? (from a test one year ago. PC cards today would trash it worse).
——
I’m typing this from a Cheese Grater Mac Pro so I’m a MP user. Also have MBP and a12.9 iPad Pro.
Dave, you’re a sad soul. I feel for you. Please, go on a diet, get out of your mom’s basement, find a full time job where you can learn about how other people behave. Retail would be good.
Stop roaming around websites insulting every writer and commenter. Nobody cares about your little fights with bloggers and if you got moderated it’s probably because you didn’t add anything of value to the conversation.
Goodbye, Davewrong. We hardly knew ye.
Are you a Farrington flunky or Farry himself?
” Nobody cares” ? Considering I usually get a bunch of five stars like here (shoot I even got you to respond )
My posts are usually full of facts. My orinigal post –see above — ( echoed by many knowledgeable MP users here) was the gap in tech of the cylinder is hardly ‘nominal’ asFarrington contends. my original post quoted a Barefeats test, factual, yet I was called a ‘troll’. Farrington also deleted all my other ‘factual’ missives WHILE ALLOWING others to post their error filled criticisms of me, so locked out I have to post here — where actually more pro users — who can actually understand things like GPU — hang out)
Enjoy your day jungle j, don’t slip off that banana tree….
You guys are going to probably wait until hell freezes over before Cook and company release anything worthwhile. And by then, it will already be BEHIND THE CURVE. Good luck.
Give me a Mac Mini with an i7 Quad Core CPU, a decent GPU, a return to upgradeable memory and a good collection of ports in the back and you can have your trashcan. That action lone would meet the needs of many.
The trashcan needs to go away like the Cube. A slightly smaller version of the Cheese-grater Mac Pro tower capable of taking standard cards and memory would be nice as well.
Once they downgraded the mini processor and soldered in the memory, put my pocket full of cash back in the bank and kept the mini I have,,,,, so better than the new one,,, Apple cripled the mac mini
The Mini thing is weird.
They reduced the quad to two and made the RAM non upgradable to get the box SMALLER, THINNER ( Would an inch or so make a difference for a DESKTOP? This is fashionista gone too far )
“the Mac Pro can drive three Retina 5k displays now. How many do you need?”
Yep, pretty much sums it up for me.