“Apple said Tuesday that the new iMac will be available on December 14,” Todd Haselton reports for CNBC. “The news was confirmed in an e-mail from Apple that was sent to customers.”
“Earlier, the company’s senior vice president of worldwide marketing Phil Schiller said in an interview that the company’s iMac Pro would launch in the next couple of days,” Haselton reports. “Apple announced the iMac Pro, its most powerful desktop computer to date, back in June.”
The all-new iMac Pro, with its 27-inch Retina 5K display, up to 18-core Xeon processors and up to 22 Teraflops of graphics computation, is the most powerful Mac Apple has ever made. Featuring a new space gray enclosure, iMac Pro packs serious performance for advanced graphics editing, virtual reality content creation and real-time 3D rendering. iMac Pro starts at $4,999.
Brief article in full here.
MacDailyNews Take: Less than two days away!
I can’t wait to see the reviews on it. I know it’s going to be compared to every custom gaming Windows PC that’s ever been built. The “how I built a much more powerful Windows/Hackintosh desktop at half the price of the iMac Pro” meme will be all over the internet. That nonsense should be ignored but that’s what anti-Apple critics want to boast about.
I don’t care about that comparison stuff. I just want the iMac Pro to be reliable and not thermal throttle if that’s not too much to ask. Paying $5K isn’t too much for a desktop computer that will last me five years running 24/7 with good service. I look at it for the long haul and it should serve me quite well.
I hear the unit doubles as a hand dryer.
Have you been listening to your nether regions again, DavGreg?
Seriously, it is very possible that the fans will have to work harder to keep the CPUs from overheating in the iMac Pro. But how would you know? From whom did you ‘hear’ this little jewel?
Have you owned a Xeon CPU computer?
My Mac Pro could double as a space heater when the CPU is being taxed.
The heat produced by the CPU and the new Graphics setup produce significantly higher heat than the i5 and i7 units that have been used in other iMacs. Then factor in the very narrow space front to back of an iMac. The only real advantages are the vertical aspect of the cabinet, which works with the natural tendency of heat to rise and the ability of glass and metal in the case to conduct and dissipate heat.
If this unit turns out to be a self baking computer it would not be the first time Apple has had that problem.
Can you say “gee!” 5 times…?
Like the $1000 cell phone, the $5000 iMac (Not Pro) d.b.a an iMac “Pro” is an IQ test by Apple. This is testing demand destruction by excessive price.
An already overpriced iMac + an upgraded GPU and CPU does not equal $5k just as an OLED screen and an infrared face detection camera does not equal $1k. BTW iPhone X users, the cost per unit is a little over $300- that is one hell of a markup.
And no mention of the mythical modular Mac Pro. Apple has money to buy Shazam, but designing a workstation seems beyond them.
Cost per unit in terms of component prices is just one piece of the total cost, DavGreg. Surely you are aware that there are other costs, such as R&D, assembly, shipping, engineering staff, retail staff, management, shipping, royalties, customer service, web site management, payment processing, leases, legal costs, taxes, etc.
Apple’s gross margins are typically around 38 to 39%. This data is included in Apple’s quarterly SEC filings. Please do not try to mess with us anymore. We see through your crap.
30-40% is the usual over many years but has been dropping and Apple sees the handwriting on the wall regarding future growth of the iPhone. They are mature in most markets able to afford iPhones in significant numbers and production is already located in relatively low cost China.
The only way to expand iPhone revenue for hardware sales is to increase the margin on each unit sold and I think the iPhone X pricing is a test of how high they can jack up the price without killing sales- demand destruction.
There is no crap here- it is commonly done in consumer items and Apple is trying to push margins higher so that they can grow revenue even if sales growth slows. After you are in China, India, North America and the EU there are not many large wealthy markets for high margin smart phones.
My comments are not trolling but they are also not blind by hype. Apple is looking to grow revenue on a mature product with few prospects for large growth in the future. This is exactly why Apple is rapidly moving into monetized services and accessories.
30-40% is for the company as a whole, with the iPhone at roughly 60 percent margins, and Macs at roughly 25-30 percent. The iPhone is the outlier here.
The iPhone X doesn’t have that much higher margin than the iPhone 8, the higher price is included in higher component costs (the FaceID notch didn’t fall from the sky) and R&D to capture the higher end of the market, while their older models capture the lower end of the market. If Apple doesn’t push the cutting edge, they lose the right to charge 60 percent margins.
With computers, they have always strived to hit at least 25 percent margins, and justified it with better build qualities and customer service, instead of the other companies that struggle to reach margins of 10 percent. But therein lies the rub. You can’t have great customer service and build quality, and replacement policies if you have margins of 10 percent. This is where the brand gets built. It’s why the Ritz-Carlton service is not a negative on the balance sheet, but part of the justification for the price you’re paying, and glad to pay.
The tear down of the iPhone X put manufacturing cost at a little over $300.
If we marked up like Apple in healthcare people would be lined up with torches and pitchforks
I think the markup of most of the healthcare in America is actually something to get angry over. If you want to compare the manufacturing cost of the stent that goes in your arteries, or the bags of saline used post-op, compared to what the patient is charged, those markups would make Apple’s margins look like rounding errors.
This is the most ridiculous thing I’ve read all week. Talk to me the next time you get a $25,000 hospital bill and they’ve charged you $12 for ONE SINGLE cotton swab.
“This is testing demand destruction by excessive price.”
Accurate statement.
It’s not that designing a workstation is beyond them. At this point, where the lion share of their profits is coming from any and all things NOT related to workstations, it’s beneath them. 😉
It’s almost as if they are making this as a favor to the people that want to spend money on Apple. 🙂 They’ve probably projected that they won’t sell too many, and even so, that still won’t hurt their bottom line because this line of computers is priced to subsidize its own creation.
There should be nothing “beneath them”.
Plenty of highly successful companies design products that generate little on the balance sheet for the company, but add greatly to the intangible public image, goodwill and reputation for customer service.Everything is not about the bottom line.
It matters not if the Mac Pro never makes a red cent if it takes care of Apple’s Creative, Scientific and power users. The halo and image that represents is invaluable- exactly why Car Companies do limited production Supercars. Do really think the ROI on a Corvette matches the ROI on a mass market car or Truck despite having very similar development costs? The answer is no, but the image of the Corvette is something no amount of advertising can ever achieve.
Similarly, the ROI of the hyper personalized customer service of Ritz-Carlton does not spec out well on the balance sheet, but it is their calling card. This company actually makes significant money training whole companies in customer service- I have been through the program.
There is a place in a for profit business for mass market cash cows, limited edition high margin cash cows and low margin but high prestige products. The Workstation Mac Pro takes care of a critical market but also gives the company part of it’s image.
Millions of Mac users first bought a Mac not of of frustration with Windows but because that was the computer of choice for Graphic Artists, Musicians, Film Editors, Architects and many others and that usually has meant the Power Mac and later the Mac Pro. It is part of Apple’s DNA, helps define it’s image and is an aspirational purchase for many who will someday buy one.
Do not fall into the trap of putting everything on the ledger and expecting a huge return in cash on investment. Plenty of the reputation of many companies is made by operations or products that are simply not that impressive on the accountant’s ledger but are priceless for image.
Trying to argue that Apple should sell their ‘Pro’ desktop with little concern for profit, but instead the invaluable “image” it would be creating is ludicrous.
I get it, this is the iMac you want, but not the price you want to pay for it. It sucks, but maybe it is not the right machine for you, at this point in time. For those real pro users, the architects, and designers, and scientists, who would use this machine professionally 40+ hours a week on processor-intensive projects, any performance improvements are saving them money, not costing them money. $5000 means nothing if it can save them thousands in run-time.
There are things we can criticize about Apple’s desktop lineup, and until we see what the MacPro update looks like, it is incomplete. But looking at iPads, there are various models from between $330 and $1,300, iPhones between $350 and $1200. Apple gives you a variety of quality products to fit your budget and needs. You don’t to buy their “cutting-edge” work for budget prices, and you don’t need to. That’s how aspirational purchases work.
Apple takes risks that few other companies do in building what it thinks a computer should be, and then charges a price that it thinks that computer is worth. It bet wrong on the last MacPro and the market corrected them. Whether this iMac Pro is priced wrong, the market will determine too. But Apple has been building computers for forty years, they have earned the right to make a profit, instead of working on image and goodwill.
I will add, I think Apple makes a ridiculous amount of money, and the space-grey iMac Pro is dope, and I would love one too, to match my space grey iPad and iPhone, but I don’t need the power. For most people, the current iMacs have enough computing power to handle most people’s needs. The top of the line iMac is $2300. The base iMac Pro is $5000. That is a steep jump, and it is not really a jump anyone would make unless they really need the power. Would DavGreg actually buy it if it was $4000 instead of $5000? Probably not.
Exactly what risks has Apple taken under Tim Cook?
His business model has been to imitate, iterate, acquire and follow. Almost every action he has taken since becoming CEO has followed the products or services of others
$1,000 Samsung not for you? Then don’t buy it.
Oh, I’m sorry, you meant Apple’s $1,000 phone. Same advice, don’t buy it. They sell less expensive models too.
As to the iPhone X, it appears to be selling quite well.
So are Chipboard houses with fake stucco. And your point is?
get a life… and stop trying to sound smart…
This is not a gaming machine. It is a workstation class machine targeted at the creative professional. I.e. video, 3d rendering, CAD, etc. It’s a Radeon Vega machine and the gaming world is still an nVidia playground for the most part.
I wonder if most people will wait to see what is up with the Mac Pro unicorn. My guess is we won’t hear anything until WWDC, and then it won’t ship until 1st quarter of 2019.
From the numbers Apple has inferred at prior events, very few people will be waiting on the Mac Pro. Think about it like this, if you can configure one of these for the highest possible configuration, what workflow will this computer not be able to handle?
Consider that currently pro Mac users fall into two camps, one that is happy with the current iMac, and those that truly need more power in certain specific areas. Apple’s going for a good number of people in this second group, but definitely not all. The “Happy with iMac” group is going to grow, they’ll see how many are left, then if there’s money in it, they will make a Mac Pro starting at… I don’t know, maybe $10,000?
And their new AI framework turicreate uses CUDA (nvidia) for GPU acceleration. Why do I have dual Fire pros in my trashcan?
And their new AI framework turicreate uses CUDA (nvidia) for GPU acceleration. Why do I have dual Fire pros in my trashcan?
Looks like the trashcan MacPro, deconstructed and reapplied to the back of the iMac.
Wonder how much the non-upgradable RAM will cost, Apple RAM always at premium.
I see by several responses that quite a few have commented without actually checking out the actual specifications for this iMac “Pro”. According to the specs – this machine should pretty much scorch anything available at any price near it. AND – if typical Apple build quality holds true – will be still working hard and kicking tail for years beyond a Windows-based machine of similar price.