[Ronald Lindeboom] "It had been years since Apple built a new one. They had killed XServe. They had swept away things like XSan, Shake, FCP, Color and other pro initiatives."
It had been years since Intel updated their dual CPU Xeon line. There wasn't anything to build a new Mac Pro around since 2010. The new E5 Xeons only came out yesterday.
Also, Xsan is not gone. It is included in every copy of Lion. For free.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "It was not hard to envision an Apple in which they would not want to lose their highest end customers, while simultaneously finding themselves becoming ever increasingly unwilling to directly supply them.
Why? For the very same reasons that had killed all the products mentioned two paragraphs back."
If Apple kills off the Mac Pro, there will simply not be a workstation-class Mac anymore. Period. Apple will never license OS X. It doesn't make any sense for them to license it. What's in it for Apple? They don't make any significant money on OS X, it is just the thing that sells Macs. Also, why would they want to help a competitor? HP is also in the consumer PC space (for now).
I love OS X. I'll be very sad if there is no more Mac Pro. But I've already gone through the much worse (for me) loss of the Xserve. I had this crazy hope before it came out that Apple might allow in the EULA for Lion Server installation on non-Apple hardware, even if only as a VM. Or maybe they'd have Oracle build OS X Servers... No. And looking back, of course they wouldn't. Because there isn't anything in it for Apple. OS X exists to sell Macs. That's it.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "We believe that it would be a win-win to both camps. Apple users averse to running Windows directly would stay with their OS of choice, while Apple works with a single source whose commitment to building servers is unparalleled -- and whose corporate ethos of quality is akin to Apple's own."
It would be a huge win for HP, that's for sure. But it wouldn't do anything for Apple besides dilute their brand and create a massive distraction for the OS X development teams. It ain't gonna happen.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "A bonus is that for a change, Mac users would get rid of the goofy OpenGL they've endured for years. The double-and-more cost of high-end video cards would end for Mac users."
I'm not sure what you mean. OpenGL is a technology used in OS X, it isn't hardware. The video card gap is caused by the different firmware platforms used by Apple (EFI) and the rest of the PC industry (BIOS). Intel's Sandy Bridge controllers ship standard with EFI, so the GPU OEMs may need to start shipping cards that are EFI-aware, and thus Mac Pro friendly.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "Unfortunately, for many users, running Windows is not something they want to do. But even the most dedicated Apple user needing real workstation power would have trouble saying no to a Z-Series HP Workstation running Mac OS."
Unfortunately, this will never happen.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "Now if only the team in Cupertino, California would get on the phone with the people in Fort Collins, Colorado."
Ain't. Gonna. Happen.
[Ronald Lindeboom] "Apple is having to look at the proliferation of sites dedicated to the Hacintosh. So, a real joint venture looks to me to be well-timed and one that would be fortuitous to all involved."
Fortuitous for everyone but Apple.
There is a big shift happening in the wake of the iPad. It is the future of general purpose computing. Microsoft is betting big on tablets, so big that Windows 8 is shoehorning a touch UI onto the desktop. Everyone assumes Apple is going to abandon OS X because they make such a large percentage of their money from iOS. But Apple just doubled down on OS X with Mountain Lion, saying they would be aiming for an
annual release cycle for OS X, just like the one they have been keeping with iOS.
Whether or not there is another Mac Pro coming, right now, today, Apple looks like the commercial OS vendor that will be sticking with a desktop UI for conventional PCs while Microsoft thinks it can merge it all into one thing. I've tried Windows 8 Consumer Preview. Metro looks like it would be a great tablet UI, but it doesn't make sense on the desktop.
What the workstation market needs to come to grips with is that the age of hardware overlap may be ending, and soon. For a few decades now, desktop PCs have been the mass market computers
and the workstations. With relatively minor differences, the tower under an accountant's desk has been largely the same tech as the tower in an edit suite. That might not be at all the case in a few years.
Best,
Andy
