New Mac Pro finally nears release date

All-new, completely redesigned Mac Pro delivers maximum performance, expansion and configurability.
All-new, completely redesigned Mac Pro delivers maximum performance, expansion and configurability.

Joe Rossignol for MacRumors:

Apple today updated its Mac Configuration Utility for authorized technicians with instructions on how to place the new Mac Pro in DFU mode, according to a reliable source.

Our source was informed that this move likely means the new Mac Pro will be released imminently. Apple previewed the new Mac Pro at WWDC 2019 in June and said the computer will be available to order at some point this fall, but it has yet to specify a release date.

With the chances of an October event becoming increasingly slim, Apple could announce Mac Pro availability via press release.

MacDailyNews Take: Imminent! When the beast is finally unleashed, let’s hope Apple has learned some very valuable lessons about customer satisfaction, employee autonomy, design, configurability, the importance of having cutting edge products at the top of all lines, communication, perception, branding… We could go on, but we cannot wait to put this sad, half-a-decade-plus (!) chapter to bed once and for all.

Here’s to the very bright future of the Mac Pro and Mac pros everywhere!

36 Comments

  1. Let’s hope there are still enough pros left for sales who haven’t already abandoned ship to PC’s and justify a new Mac Pro. It will be interesting just how many they will sell and initial demand.

    1. They just need to sell a few. Even one or two. Then the rest of the technology can trickle down to the rest of the Mac line for us mere mortals. The Mac Pro is not just a machine for those wealthy corporations that need it and can afford it, but is also a showcase to show the world what Apple is capable of if it were a cost no object machine. Frankly, even if it were released today, I would still be a bit underwhelmed as I think Apple is still capable of better. But this is a good start given what Apple has come of with the last almost decade.

      1. They need to sell one hell of a lot more than a few. A hundred thousand over the next year or so would likely be enough, but if they sell less significantly than 100,000 over the next year or more the bean counters at Apple will likely force Tim to kill the entire Mac Pro line. Even with the anticipated extremely high prices of the upcoming Mac Pro and the new monitor, Apple will not recoup all its R&D costs if Apple sells significantly fewer than 100,000 of the upcoming Mac Pros.

        The bean counters and the marketing guys are running Apple today. It’s not the visionaries. It’s not the people who want to make products that change the world for the better even before customers know they need the new things. The bean counters do not care if the upcoming Mac Pro is a flagship unit that may create a limited halo effect that may sell other, higher unit count, devices.

    2. I doubt they even sell two million of these in it’s lifetime. I think they’re in direct contact with the 17 or so companies that will buy the first few so they don’t need to announce “It’s available” in a big event to the millions who will shrug and buy another iPad.

      The Mac Pro is just not important enough to Apple.

      1. You may have underestimated the market. When IBM introduced the minicomputer, which took up one room in an office environment instead of an entire basement, they announced that there was probably a market demand for about 10,000 of them. That fell severely short of the mark. As mainframe begat minicomputer, minicomputer begat microcomputer, and microcomputer (now just called computer) took over the world.

        1. Apple customers buy more portable devices than anything else, that’s about 80% of all they sell. And, it’s easy to see why. You can travel to different work locations and always be ready to work at a moments notice. Beyond that, For those that need power over mobility, they sell a large number of iMac and iMac Pro’s. There ARE those that NEED and mean REALLY NEED more power than that, but those Individuals don’t number in the millions. Those that DO need more power already have it in the form of a NON MacOS solution for a much better cost… so the ONLY folks that NEED that kind of power and NEED MacOS to do it would be those with very specific high powered requirements for FCPX or Logic Pro… again, the number of people we’re talking about at this point likely isn’t even in the hundreds of thousands.

          These are not folks that buy a new system every year, they buy the most powerful thing they can afford and run it until it can’t keep up with their needs anymore. Taking all this into account, Apple’s Mac Pro won’t hit a million in sales by the end of this year and MAYBE not even next year…

          Unless there are WAY more enthusiasts out there that just want it because it looks cool than I’m taking into account 🙂

          1. “Apple customers buy more portable devices than anything else, that’s about 80% of all they sell.”

            No sh*t Sherlock! Breaking News from @Wrong Again, pay close attention good citizens, the majority of Apple customers are not Mac Pros! WOW! Who would have known? Thank you for such astute enlightenment! 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

            “Those that DO need more power already have it in the form of a NON MacOS solution for a much better cost…”

            So, @Wrong Again has surveyed and polled all current and former Mac Pros and can speak with authority for millions of users since the 1980s. What a pompous arse.

            “so the ONLY folks that NEED that kind of power and NEED MacOS to do it would be those with very specific high powered requirements for FCPX or Logic Pro… “

            So the pompous one, Wrong Again — speaking opinions regarding millions of people telling them what they need or don’t need. You don’t know or have a clue regarding the evolving Mac Pro market for decades and the latest product impact will change the equation once the best beast is unleashed, used and reviewed.

            “again, the number of people we’re talking about at this point likely isn’t even in the hundreds of thousands.”

            WRONG again, again and again. For six years we are reading the same old, same old broken record crystal ball predictions crap. We get it already, again, again and again.

            “Apple’s Mac Pro won’t hit a million in sales by the end of this year and MAYBE not even next year…”

            Big iCal entry in two years, we shall see. If your guess is correct, SO WHAT and what is your point? Perhaps that every Pro market in every profession is small. Is this breaking news to you? 😱

            Your personal OBSESSION with Mac Pro sales numbers is bordering on psychotic and documented for years. Believe many here would agree, put it to rest already is long OVERDUE.

            Finally, yes MDN we can put to bed the Apple Pro neglect for the next two years at the very least. Fingers crossed the Apple beancounters are hands off. In the unlikely event the sales disappoint the bank account, agree with others if Apple loses money on this product, so be it. Apple has more than enough money. More important to keep the flagship product alive and allow the “halo effect” to grow…

            1. “You don’t know or have a clue regarding the evolving Mac Pro market for decades”
              If by “evolving” you mean “declining” then, yes, pretty much EVERYONE knows AND has a clue save for the bean counters in Apple.

              And Apple’s NOT losing money on it. It’s priced to make a profit, which is why it’s not what many consider as “affordable”. And, that’s why the sales won’t disappoint. Each one pays for itself with that cost, so even if they sell 59 in a year, it’s no skin off their back to just leave it in the store for purchase.

              LOL Old people and their fanciful “Halo Effect”! Yeah, I hear people say everyday, “Wow! That trash can Mac Pro is so powerful, I’m going to buy my phone from the same company that makes THAT due to the halo effect!!”

              “I was GOING to buy a Microsoft Surface, but HAVE YOU SEEN THAT MAC PRO??? No, I’m not buying the Mac Pro, I’m going to buy a MacBook… ummm… because I want to buy a laptop that has the same logo as the Mac Pro? I think? I’m pretty sure there’s a halo effect or some junk”

        1. I am not fond of Wrong Again, either. But his post on this topic is fairly reasonable, especially for him.

          Demand for a high power, high cost Mac workstation will be small compared to the consumer Mac market. It will be interesting to see the initial demand and the roll off to steady state demand over the long term. I am hoping that Apple gives the Mac Pro a fair shake and commits to maintaining cutting edge pro performance over time, even if the Mac Pro results in losses rather than profits. From a Mac ecosystem and Apple leadership standpoint, the Mac Pro is extremely important even if the Mac Pro, itself, does not generate profits.

  2. well, we wont be replacing our dozen studio systems with these overpriced doorstops. we’re looking elsewhere for something more future proof and more powerful at a much more realistic price point. unless they quickly add PCIe 4+ and invite NVidia to the party its DOA.

  3. I love Apple and as a shareholder, it’s been good to me, which is why I hate to agree with the naysayers on this board. However, Who’s to say that they release this Mac pro, only to let it languish for 5 or 6 years like the current one?

    In a previous life, I managed a companies technical roadmap and so I was privey to our primary vendors lifecycle for their computers (at the time, HP), I knew which models and features were due out, and when they were due for release. Why? So we could test them in our environment and have them ready to go when the final production models were released.

    Apple does not do that, so it makes it difficult to plan your enterprise computers lifecycle plans.

  4. Bill Clinton had trouble defining the word “is.” Just imagine his verbal acrobatics trying to spell out “nears” or “imminent.”

    With the history of this product, estimating release date is only suitable for Houdini.

    1. Clinton was trying in vain to separate oral from intercourse. It did not matter, Starr and his handlers were on a mission to conflate a consensual infidelity into a moral and constitutional sin against every pure red blooded American.

      Fast forward a couple decades and the Cult now worships a self declared poosy grabber, liar, constant victim, emoluments taker, serial wife importer, and constitution-ignoring whiner who couldn’t balance a checkbook let alone manage an honest business. The committee investigations are piling up the proof of impeachable offenses, but the rabid right doesn’t want a thorough investigation à la Starr. What are you afraid of?

      Apple meanwhile would be stupid to leave the huuuuuge gap between the Mini and the Pro unfulfilled. Millions who make due with iMacs would strongly prefer an affordable Mac tower.

      1. “Starr and his handlers were on a mission to conflate a consensual infidelity into a moral and constitutional sin against every pure red blooded American.”

        Obviously you are painfully unaware of the facts. Your naive depiction of the whole process is easy to see.

        FACT: Philandering Bill had sex with an intern, both of them on the job at work, in the White House. In typical twisted fashion of the dictionary denied it was sex. Because it was not rape, of course it was consensual, DUH!

        FACT: Philandering Bill on national television waging his finger while red faced and eyes bulging LIED to the entire world, his wife, his daughter, his consensual play thing and his supporters. How presidential.

        FACT: Philandering Bill lied under oath and was impeached by the U.S. House of Representatives.

        FACT: Philandering Bill paid a court fine of over 800 thousand dollars.

        FACT: Philandering Bill lost his law license and was disbarred for lying under oath. Fingers crossed some of the same happens to his lying wife.

        Get your facts straight about one president before you dump on another that had nothing to do with @Ronner post. Sheesh…

        1. GoeB, you should get YOUR facts straight.

          Disclaimer: I have NEVER supported what Bill Clinton did with regard to his multiple infidelities (yes, multiple). But the FACTS are not all what GoeB claims they are.

          REAL FACT: During the Whitewater investigation the investigators were given extremely broad authority to investigate ANYTHING that might be negative with regard to Bill Clinton or his administration — not just things related directly or indirectly to Whitewater. No investigation of a sitting president has been that broad, before or since. If the Nixon investigators or the Trump (Muller) investigation had anywhere near that broad authority, all hell would have broken loose.

          REAL FACT: Bill Clinton’s LAWYERS wanted to extremely narrowly define ALL terms used in the investigation. They pushed the investigators to define everything so narrowly and explicitly that things took on meanings the average American would never dream of using. The infamous, “depends on what ‘is’ ‘is'” was part of that processes.

          REAL FACT: “Sexual Relations” was so narrowly and explicitly defined for the investigation that when, under oath, Bill Clinton responded that he had not had “Sexual Relations” with the intern he was telling the truth. Bill Clinton, under the definitions and rules that had been agreed to by both sides, did not lie under oath.

          Think of it this way. If I get a local district attorney to define in a court case about me killing someone that murder is beheading someone with a Scottish Claymore (sword) and the presiding judge agrees to that definition, then if I killed someone by intentionally shooting them 12 times with a 9mm hand gun, I cannot, in that court case, be charged with murder. I didn’t murder that person per the definition!

          We all know that me intentionally shooting someone 12 times is some form of murder. That’s just common sense. But in legal cases it all comes down to the explicit denotation. It does not matter what the connotation is.

          REAL FACT: This is why while the House did impeach Bill Clinton, the Senate did not remove him from office. While Bill Clinton grossly and willfully embarrassed the Office of the U.S. President, he had committed no crimes or other actions that the Senate could use to remove him from office.

          REAL FACT: As far as the American public is concerned, based upon the common connotations, Bill Clinton had “Sexual Relations” with the intern multiple times. In the view of the American public Bill Clinton outright lied to the American people about that.

          REAL FACT: The issues between Bill Clinton and the Bar Associations and such were over ethics. They viewed what Bill Clinton’s lawyers did and what Bill Clinton did as unethical and beyond what the Bar and others could let slide. However, the bottom line of the actions of those groups has had virtually zero effect on Bill Clinton or his legal team.

          1. “But the FACTS are not all what GoeB claims they are.”

            I stand by my post over 90% as “REAL” FACTUAL.

            You make an interesting argument as to the definition of “sexual relations.” Lawyerly semantic word games and legally you have a point. That said, I remember my mother and girlfriend laughing out loud at the tortured process and mockingly saying sexual organs in mouths and stained dresses are not sex? 🤣

            Overwhelming, the majority of people worldwide know Clinton and Monica were engaged in sexual relations for as long as the relationship lasted before Matt Drudge broke the story. But OK, as much as I abhor word games when lawyers are involved — I’ll concede the point.

            Your so called “REAL FACT” the Senate did not have the evidence to convict is not exactly accurate. According to the Special Counsel to this very day in the past week on a cable news show said “Clinton committed 11 felonies.” The sham Senate trial boiled down to party politics with close to 10 Democrat senators describing the process as a public “lynching” including Joe Biden, who apologized Wednesday. The Party line stance of each team held their own and enough votes to convict were simply not there and the resulting truth be damned.

            As to the rest of your “REAL FACT”(s) you have provided more information and backstory detail I purposefully avoided. Certainly capable, but prefer a synoptic laundry list without lengthy descriptions diving into the tedious weeds.

            “They viewed what Bill Clinton’s lawyers did and what Bill Clinton did as unethical and beyond what the Bar and others could let slide.”

            Agreed the Bar could not let the Houdini sleight of hand dishonest legal tactics stand and tarnish lawyer ethics. Hence, Clinton was disbarred and justice is served.

            “However, the bottom line of the actions of those groups has had virtually zero effect on Bill Clinton or his legal team.”

            Huh? Your opinion is difficult to interpret specifically. Bottom line: Bill Clinton and his legal team did not artfully dodge the Paula Jones lawsuit. Clinton and his lawyers fearing defeat both sides agreed to an $850,000 settlement.

            So, both our posts are over 90% “REAL FACT”…

  5. Buy a Threadripper AMD based machine, 24, 36, maybe 64 core machine for a lot less.
    Listen the case is not worth 3000 dollars. Good grief!

    intel is cutting the prices of its processors, is apple lowing the price of this system, hm?

  6. Apple could claw its way back into desktop sales with a 3K version of this, for all those who are enthusiast and in particular already have monitors (so have no need of a newer iMac), and who have been limping along with upgraded 2010-2012 Mac Pros waiting for a suitable upgrade. Unfortunately, it looks like they’ve decided against that, because the base model at 6K is so hobbled that there isn’t any lower to go to get the better price point, and upgrades will quickly run into the 10K range and up – so only people making big money off one will be able to afford it.

    Plenty of people bought the old cheese-graters who didn’t need them, spending 3K to 5K. But 6K at the low end cut a lot of people out of that market in this day and age.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.