Well, if the baseline for the Pro market was made up of people who could afford the last version, then one can make the argument that Apple is the one that has redefined "Pro".
>> It seems evident that Apple views the "pro" market as movie studios, large corporations, and media entities that need serious computing power.
If Apple is going to price out people who had purchased Mac Pros in the past (the lowest point of entry for the new model is -double- the price of the lowest late 2013 model), I don't really have a problem with that group complaining about the price.
For that particular group, this new Mac Pro wasn't worth the long wait at all.
You can make an argument about performance multiplier, but I would bet that there are people who owned the trash can Mac Pros who want access to the new -form factor- at the $3-4K price point.
I'm sure the number crunchers at Apple (and you) are OK with losing those people, but it's a slippery slope, IMO.
According to their own marketing the new 18-core model is between 2.2 and 3.7 times faster than the the 2013 12-core model. They don't compare the entry level ones, but I highly doubt it is even two times faster.
The criticism isn't just the price. it's that the hardware does not match the price at all. A similarly specced PC would cost half the price, and would probably be able to use stuff like Nvidia cards with CUDA that has become pretty important for some of the groups you mention.
If it was a beefy workstation with specs to match the price I don't think people would complain (or at least as much).
