When the iMac offers an external hard drive throughput that matches that of an internal hard drive then yes, the Mac Pro becomes truly and irretrievably dead.

Er… hands up how many FCP editors reliant on fibre link and Xsan are buying iMacs for their edit suite?

I’ve heard a rumor that the Mac Pro will one day get a faster processor.

Yes, I’m being a smart you-know-what, but the fact that the iMac is faster at some tasks than the Mac Pro doesn’t mean the latter is dead. It, too, will be upgraded, and be wicked fast. 12-core dual i9 sound good, anyone?

There is a business case for Mac Pro power even if one doesn’t require internal expansion or monitor flexibility. Even though the iMac *can* exceed the clock speed of the Mac Pro, it most definitely can’t offer up 16 virtual cores to process video in After Effects, Final Cut Pro, Compressor, or other similar applications, or filters in Photoshop, Aperture, and the like.

During a render, After Effects can (at least version CS4 can) spawn multiple child processes that can each work on part of the render job and each eat up 200% - 300% or more CPU power. The 8-core Mac Pro offers up 1600% total CPU power for these processes to share. The best 4-core iMac will hit 400%, meaning that a well-coded application will take 4 times as long to do the same work on the iMac.

Those same After Effects child processes work in their own (up to 2GB) memory space. The Mac Pro can hold up to twice the RAM the best iMac can. This means up to twice as many of these child processes can be spawned by After Effects. Or if the application in question is 64-bit capable, it can access more RAM with a single process. It is also common for pro graphics and video people to have open multiple RAM-hogging applications at the same time. Being able to do this without hitting virtual memory is a significant time-saver.

Additionally, the 4 internal SATA drive bays allow for much faster storage than FireWire 800 can offer. The pressing need for faster storage has led our company to start deploying SSDs in these internal bays. An external SSD on a FW800 cable is like putting a Ferrari engine in a minivan.

Even though the Mac Pro is a diminishing part of the total number of computers Apple sells, they are certainly extremely profitable, as are the Pro apps Apple has done very will with over the last 10 years. If Apple were to decide that the Mac Pro was truly dead (i.e. dropped from the product line) it would also risk ceding a significant chunk of the pro video and graphics market to other computer companies that *can* supply that kind of power. And of course every edit system that moves to a Windows-based workstation will also be one less license of Final Cut Studio sold.

I readily concur that there is absolutely no reason for 95%, or maybe even 99.9% of Apple’s customers to consider these systems, but they are indispensable for many people, and very profitable for Apple. The Mac Pro is definitely not dead.

As someone who uses AE, FCP, C4D and other processor intensive programs, I hope this prediction does not come true. I just expect to pay a premium to have lots of drives, crushing performance with the ability to add advanced IO cards. There are so many out there that do not need this kind of machine, but for the people who do, they’ll always be willing to pay. Perhaps the real solution is to make laptops that can add processors/graphic preformance when docked at a desk. I’m totally on board once you can start chaining on multiple CPU’s for added performance.

Ted,

The Mac Pro has it’s place, and it’s not in a consumer’s home.

The iMac has it’s place too, and it’s not in a busniess’s office.

As long as the Mac Pro is able to demand it’s current profit margins, it will remain.  I don’t think that Apple is sentimental about it, nor does it provide an engineering showcase that will keep it alive.  Only profitability will do it.

Same here. For the work that I do and the software that I do it with, I need a real work station, not a regular PC. And I need OS X.

True, I can’t fathom why a regular home user would ever need to consider a Mac Pro, but for me there isn’t really anything better suited. A niche market perhaps, but we are out there. I’d be really miffed if I was forced into using an iMac instead.

Oh! And I use my iPhone for mobile computing, for me, it suits those needs just fine.

The Pro will never die, because the highest end users will always need more than a consumer-aimed model will deliver. How many times have we seen pictures of a high end station using 3 displays?  The Pro can handle up to 8 (though I cannot for the life of me image a need for 8 displays!) The Pro user does not have to settle for whatever video card Apple places in the iMac either.  Multiple internal HDs has already been mentioned. Add to that greater RAM expansion.

And let’s not forget that the processors being lauded in the newest iMacs had not been released when Apple last updated the Pro line. Try putting the 3.2 GHz i7-960 processors in the 8-core Pro and then compare THAT to the iMac.

Either Apple will abandon those remaining users…or the technology will advance to a point that a much smaller computer will satisfy them.

I do not see either happening. To make that assumption you’d have to predict that user demands would remain fixed, or advance more slowly than new technology.  This, historically, has not been the case. User demands - at least at the high end professional level - more often stay ahead of what the technology can deliver, not lag behind.  10 year ago the thought of being able to do high resolution real time video editing on a (relatively) affordable desktop station was but a dream.  Now it is a fact.

But the technology of the field(s) that use Mac Pros as a necessity is also advancing, which in turn will require ever better computers to handle the jobs. How long will it be before polarized 3D video editing becomes the standard instead of the high end exception? The people who work in those fields don’t crunch pennies when it comes to buying computers. (NO professional crunches pennies when buying the tools their trade depends on.) As such the profitability of the professional line of Macs will remain as long as high end professionals need high end computers to work with.

The Mac Pro is dead. May it rest in peace.

Does it come true if you say it often enough? And does it then happen to all of Apple’s pro apps, too? And does Apple then cease codevelopment of Mac-compatible higher-end graphics cards that lead the way for lesser components that end up in iMacs?

I can see this part of the product line reducing production as its core customers become more specialized, but eliminated altogether? I’d need more than anecdotes to agree.

If Apple continues to market to these Pro users…I believe the machines will become so different from the iMac-type models—as to not really be the same species anymore.

That depends on what you mean by “not the same species”. From one standpoint, they will always be the same species. IE: and Apple computer running Mac OS-whatever operating system and other Apple software.

From another, they are already different species: different models specifically designed for different markets. The iMac is an all-in-one consumer model and the other being a “headless” professional model, each designed to fit a particular user niche.

Don’t let the fact that updating the consumer model a half-year or so after the pro model confuse you.  Had Apple updated the iMac model before the 3.06 and 3.2 GHz Core i7 processors were out, the Pros would still be king of the hill in speed and power. Like I said, wait until the Pro line gets the latest and greatest - like the upcoming 3.33 GHz Core i7-620M - and then compare.  Sometimes 8 months can make a BIG difference in computer technology. I applaud Apple going ahead and putting front line processors in their consumer line shortly after their release. But the time of the iMac overpowering the Pro line is, I am certain, a very temporary situation.

You should add easy DIY repairs to your list of Mac Pro pros.

The Mac Pro and its PowerMac G5 predecessor are a dream to work on. The iMac, Mini, and laptops - no so much.

There are a number of interesting reasons for Mac Pro.

One of the interesting ones is that it supports ECC memory (correct a single-bit error, detect a double-bit error).

It turns out that memory errors are MUCH more common than people thought (recent research done at Google).

So I *AM* pleased that I found out about it and could get it replaced (thanks OWC)

I don’t think this argument could even be made if the delays to the Pro upgrade trajectory weren’t sacrificed for readying for the holidays with the latest portables and iMacs. I don’t see Apple letting loose of the “fastest personal computer” label any time soon… just the opposite in fact.

eSATA RAID and 32GB of RAM expansion are the two main reasons I chose the macpro over an iMac.

I can’t see those features being added to the imac line anytime soon.