David Pogue: New iMacs and Mac Pro's Coming "Probably in 2013" [Update] [Archive] - Page 2

Rocketman

Jun 11, 2012, 10:22 PM

Just when I thought some people on Engadget deserved the king bonehead crown I see we have an heir to the throne. If Apple has maxed out the entire world's manufacturing capacity and technical limits it's a wonder ANYTHING gets manufactured.

"People simply don't understand that Apple has maxed out the entire world's manufacturing capacity and technical limits in their field."

You missed my edit "in your field" because of your and a couple of others' reflexive comments.

Apple spends tens of billions of dollars on factories and supply chains and labor in many countries far from the USA so they can make the product at all, much less at an economical price.

This is not irrational behavior.

And whether or not I wear a tin hat, am paranoid, or they really are out to get me, or if the tin hat retains the last few valuable electrons in my orbit, the above is still true.

We have seen smart phones and cell networks and social apps make astounding impact on country civil revolt, and even on things in advanced countries.

We have seen the Facebook offering crash and burn and Apple rise from the ashes once or twice.

At some point the fact Apple was there for it matters.

If I have to wear a tin hat while saying it, I am fine with that, but I will look phunnie.

I hope you had fun piling on.

2LMedia

Jun 11, 2012, 10:23 PM

What programs do you use? That will save time. I and a few others on these forums regularly use apps like Cinema 4d, which will eat twelve cores and ask for more in a heartbeat.

Pretty much. My crew is looking at HP Workstations given the lack of any attention given to the Mac Pro line. We can run Cinema4D and Adobe Apps on a Windows machine with few issues, so that seems to be the direction we're headed unless Apple can change our minds in the next 6 months. Unlikely.

bearcatrp

Jun 11, 2012, 10:26 PM

How do you keep an apple fan boy in suspense?
By promising a product that probably won't appear!
I got off the Mac pro wagon a couple years ago knowing the Mac pro wasn't going to stay around much longer. Loved my 2008 Mac pro. Couldn't afford the newer models so built myself. No issues on software running on win7. Just as stable as OS X. Would suggest folks see the writing and move on to another platform, or suck it up with the latest Mac pros available now. But the end is near, if not already here for the Mac pro.

DakotaGuy

Jun 11, 2012, 10:33 PM

Apple has became one of the most profitable corporations in the world and most of the profit is due to the consumer electronics iDevice products. I believe Apple is also planning on exiting the desktop space in the next few years except for possibly continuing to offer an iMac.

Are we at the point where notebook computers are powerful and robust enough to be used as a main computer by professionals? I'm not sure, but I think Apple thinks that is where the future is heading.

I don't see the actual computer companies like Dell and HP exiting this market, but they have no choice because they don't have a successful consumer electronics line like Apple does.

Like it or not the iPhone and iPad and the insane profits they can produce has changed Apple. Some would argue for the better and some for the worse, but it is what it is. A corporation exists for one reason and that is to increase wealth for shareholders. To make any decision that does not result in maximum profit is not a good corporate decision.

andrewzz

Jun 11, 2012, 10:33 PM

dbit

Jun 11, 2012, 10:39 PM

People need to understand that the processes of editing and compositing video consist of many compromises based on the capabilities of current hardware. This means that as soon as hardware becomes more powerful there is always a laundry list of better/faster/higher quality ways to accomplish a goal that become adopted, integrated into software, and expected by clients. This is why there is never 'enough' power, and why after 5 years of doing basically the same fundamental types of tasks, you will always find a machine/workstation becoming 'slow' compared to the current demands and expectations. Just resolution scaling alone will keep hardware forever playing catch up. Maybe one day this will slow, but we're not there yet.

This is wholly separate from the issue of Apple trying to pass this antiquated machine off as viable by today's workstation standards. People who think its only about the CPU spec don't know what they're talking about. The whole logic board/io/buss/ram situation is terrible compared to what's currently available everywhere else. If you think this machine looks bad now, it will look ridiculous in a year.

PeterQVenkman

Jun 11, 2012, 10:41 PM

Pretty much. My crew is looking at HP Workstations given the lack of any attention given to the Mac Pro line. We can run Cinema4D and Adobe Apps on a Windows machine with few issues, so that seems to be the direction we're headed unless Apple can change our minds in the next 6 months. Unlikely.

If you rely on C4d, Windows all the way. The open gl performance is WAY better. Get yourself a good single GPU gaming videocard (nothing that is basically two cards in one) and Cinema 4d runs a million times faster than my macs ever did.

You'll never have to ask someone about a mac version of a C4d plugin, that's for sure.

nickarmadillo

Jun 11, 2012, 10:51 PM

Man, I'm glad I got out of the Apple game a few years ago. I've still got tons of Macs lying around and I love to use them, but they just have not released any compelling desktop computers recently. There is only one explanation for letting the iMac and Mac Pro languish for this long. Apple is getting out of the desktop business, though I imagine that they will be killing off the Mac Pro first.

Apple could have brought me back into the fold with a nice Macbook Pro upgrade, but I already see the writing on the wall. Non-upgradable RAM and storage are the future for Apple and that is simply a deal-breaker for me. There's no way that I'm going to shell out that much cash for a laptop, pay the Apple Tax for any upgrades, and then be forced into another purchase down the road when a simple RAM and SSD upgrade would have sufficed. Sorry Apple. We had a great run, but I don't see any Mac purchases in my future.

G51989

Jun 11, 2012, 10:56 PM

A new Mac pro " Probably coming in 2013 "

Don't bother Apple. The Pro's know you don't give a damn. They'll all be gone by the time you bring that thing out.

Dionte

Jun 11, 2012, 10:57 PM

Did he really write that.

MacFanJeff

Jun 11, 2012, 10:57 PM

This is one BIG joke I am sure and us Pros are the butt end of it. How can is possibly take until "sometime" in 2013 for a real updated Mac Pro? All the parts are out now and will have been out for at least 1 1/2 years or more by then. Not to mention the fact even if they did update, those will be older parts by then and you could've been using them for some time already with a Windows workstation.

I for one don't believe this at all and have a hard time believing this report or Pogue about any of it. Apple has been loud and clear by remaining silent for so long. Had they intended on keeping the Mac Pro and their PRO users, they would have at least made a statement at the WWDC saying they had something really big in the works that won't be out for a while but they did NOT forget about us PRO users and know we are out there. What do we get instead, nothing, zero, no response at all about the PRO market.

Too little, too late, it's over and that's clear more than ever.

DakotaGuy

Jun 11, 2012, 10:57 PM

>> don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year

Agh. "For LATER NEXT year". Wow, was that supposed to be encouraging? I'm utterly disappointed in this WWDC. Looks like all attention is on iOS and that's that.

It's now a typical business -- deliver in markets that bring in most profit. Apple's PC vision is down-the-drain IMO. If Apple was committed to its Mac community, there would be a major update today at WWDC. They have Retina technology, they have Thunderbolt technology, putting these in other devices but not the Mac.

They are putting Thunderbolt and Retina technology in the Macs. The iMac has had Thunderbolt for a year and I would expect it to get a Retina display at some point, but for now I agree their focus is the iDevices and to a lesser extent the portable Macs. The desktops are a smaller and less significant market to Apple at this point.

I love my iMac and when I want to use a computer at home it is by far my first choice, but people like me who prefer doing their main computing on a larger desktop are becoming a dying breed.

One thing Apple has going for it is loyalty. They know that a simple promise of something new coming later next year will keep people around. Honestly even if new iMacs and Mac Pros don't come for another year how many of you will actually buy a Windows PC desktop or tower? Probably very very few. Apple knows they can focus on their main consumer products business and as long as they throw a cookie to their Mac customers now and then they will keep coming back. That is a wildly profitable concept. Being able to focus most of your energy on the most profitable parts of your business while still retaining customers with little investment on your least profitable business is a corporations dream come true.

Rocketman

Jun 11, 2012, 11:03 PM

Are we at the point where notebook computers are powerful and robust enough to be used as a main computer by professionals? When the Mac-Mini had a geekbench score better than a 3 year prior Mac Pro I was already convinced. After that it was all about product positioning and expandability.

Then Apple decommissioned the servers. And delayed the Pros, and now officially for another year after a minor update.

As I have posted for a few years now I think the world is reverting to client server. Like the 70's. Thin client, thick cloud. It may very well be your next MacPro is a server farm in NC or OR with processes initiated on your iPad or MacBookAir.

A MacPro of any merit costs $5000. Do you have any idea how many minutes you can rent on a 30 CPU server for that?

Rocketman

Woodcrest64

Jun 11, 2012, 11:03 PM

You are exactly right. You can use Sandy Bridge on the Ivy Bridge Z77 platform but NOT the Sandy Bridge-E processors which is what the next generation of Xeon processors are built on. They for socket 2011 not 1155. Also the Z77 chipset does not support dual sockets. All I am saying is Intel didn't deliver to Apple so its not really their fault in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, it sucks for us but I don't think there was anything Apple could of done.

Not to mention 40 on a single socket or EIGHTY (80) PCI-Express 3.0 lanes on a dual to play with under Sandy Bridge-E.

There is no lack of money, bandwidth, and lanes for all (8-12) USB 3.0 ports on a Mac Pro in addition to FireWire and Thunderbolt.

Thunderbolt is still a chipset, controller, and logic pathing issue and not a processor one. You can run a Sandy Bridge processor on that fancy new Z77 board and use Thunderbolt just fine.

You are using an additional controller for Thunderbolt under Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge. The Intel 7 Series introduced USB 3.0 onto the PCH and a new lower process manufacturing.

drorpheus

Jun 11, 2012, 11:07 PM

mozumder

Jun 11, 2012, 11:07 PM

duffman9000

Jun 11, 2012, 11:07 PM

"People simply don't understand that Apple has maxed out the entire world's manufacturing capacity and technical limits in their field."

You missed my edit "in your field" because of your and a couple of others' reflexive comments.

Apple spends tens of billions of dollars on factories and supply chains and labor in many countries far from the USA so they can make the product at all, much less at an economical price.

This is not irrational behavior.

And whether or not I wear a tin hat, am paranoid, or they really are out to get me, or if the tin hat retains the last few valuable electrons in my orbit, the above is still true.

We have seen smart phones and cell networks and social apps make astounding impact on country civil revolt, and even on things in advanced countries.

We have seen the Facebook offering crash and burn and Apple rise from the ashes once or twice.

At some point the fact Apple was there for it matters.

If I have to wear a tin hat while saying it, I am fine with that, but I will look phunnie.

I hope you had fun piling on.

Did you forget to take your meds today? I'm being serious. What does Facebook of all things, have to do with what Apple is doing with a MP? :confused:

Woodcrest64

Jun 11, 2012, 11:09 PM

This is nonsense.

Sandy Bridge doesn't have a T-Bolt controller on the chipset - you need a fairly large discrete controller.

Sandy Bridge doesn't have a USB 3.0 controller on the chipset - you need a fairly small discrete controller.

Intel SB motherboards have USB 3.0 - which blows your argument out of the water...

Sandy Bridge boards do have USB 3.0 but its not native to the z68 chipset. The usb 3.0 controllers are from other companies like NEC. As far as I know Apple doesn't do this with their logic boards. Everything is Intel based in terms of the I/O.

duffman9000

Jun 11, 2012, 11:12 PM

Yep.

Intel isn't ready for a major Mac Pro upgrade this year, and, besides, the current models are just fine.

No one is complaining about the current Mac Pro. It's still a fast machine.

Every major OEM has a Sandy Bridge-E server, except Apple. Unless Intel has some super secret technology that it will only give to Apple, Intel is already ready.

mozumder

Jun 11, 2012, 11:13 PM

I wanted to see a mac pro update more than anything, sadly I think what your seeing is Intel holding Apple back on the professional level. There upgrades have been weak for the most part, Intel doesn't have much new to offer. Intel works from the bottom up instead of top down, because they have no reason not to, they have no competition. It just so happens that the hurt falls on Apple's pro user base. Pretty lame on Apple's part considering that same base kept them a float through there toughest times. 3 yr wait for a hardware upgrade was the same reason Apple left IBM in 2006, now we're back at the same place with Intel, but this time its tolerable and acceptable. The Mac Pro should always be Apple's most advanced newest everything cutting edge machine, now they have the Dell approach, with minimal marginal line updates and even that cant be delivered. Apple should rename themselves to Apple Mobile Inc.

I think it's because Mac Pro buyers, who are pretty much video editors, have no real reason to upgrade their existing Mac Pro.

Apple doesn't cater to the server or scientific or financial markets, so that doesn't matter.

Video is still the same 1080P they've been using a decade ago. No one is recording with 4k yet. So, no real reason for Apple to upgrade their Mac Pros until people start recording 4k, or if they decide to serve up other markets.

Right now every other usage is covered by the MacBoo Pros.

tdtran1025

Jun 11, 2012, 11:13 PM

They are secretly building a MP line with ARM processors, considering what they having toying with OSX and iOS. Rack-mount for server will not be far off. As far as graphics performance is concerned, 8 to 16 of those imbedded chips from iPad 3 could out-perform gtx670.

nickarmadillo

Jun 11, 2012, 11:14 PM

Yep.

Intel isn't ready for a major Mac Pro upgrade this year, and, besides, the current models are just fine.

No one is complaining about the current Mac Pro. It's still a fast machine.

As compared to what? Yes, it may be relatively fast, but the components are practically ancient. The graphics card was a mid-range part when it came out 3 YEARS AGO. Combine that with a premium price and this update is dead in the water.

O and A

Jun 11, 2012, 11:14 PM

Eidorian

Jun 11, 2012, 11:16 PM

You are exactly right. You can use Sandy Bridge on the Ivy Bridge Z77 platform but NOT the Sandy Bridge-E processors which is what the next generation of Xeon processors are built on. They for socket 2011 not 1155. Also the Z77 chipset does not support dual sockets. All I am saying is Intel didn't deliver to Apple so its not really their fault in my opinion. Don't get me wrong, it sucks for us but I don't think there was anything Apple could of done.What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

Sandy Bridge boards do have USB 3.0 but its not native to the z68 chipset. The usb 3.0 controllers are from other companies like NEC. As far as I know Apple doesn't do this with their logic boards. Everything is Intel based in terms of the I/O.The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.

mozumder

Jun 11, 2012, 11:17 PM

Every major OEM has a Sandy Bridge-E server, except Apple. Unless Intel has some super secret technology that it will only give to Apple, Intel is already ready.

That super-secret technology is Thunderbolt. It's the only technical reason that the Mac Pros would need an upgrade.

Pro users don't upgrade machines based on a 15% speed improvement, that doesn't matter at all. You actually have to have a technical NEED for an upgrade, and right now, Intel isn't offering that.

----------

I'm annoyed as much as the next guy but i can see the logic here.

They dont' want to screw you over now. Because in Jan/feb they will announce a redesigned mac pro. Probably smaller form factor yet still allow PCI expansion. And they will announce updated thunderbolt retina cinema displays.

That is the only thing i can see as making this small update justifiable. With that said it still friggin sucks. If it doesn't pan out like this then everyone is right to be pissed at apple.

It's not going to be Jan/Feb... it's going to be WWDC.

duffman9000

Jun 11, 2012, 11:17 PM

As compared to what? Yes, it may be relatively fast, but the components are practically ancient. The graphics card was a mid-range part when it came out 3 YEARS AGO. Combine that with a premium price and this update is dead in the water.

+1

How about leveraging the GPU for work... oh wait... it's 3 years old...

nickarmadillo

Jun 11, 2012, 11:17 PM

Video is still the same 1080P they've been using a decade ago.

You have no idea how old you just made me feel. I get the same feeling when people tell me that they were born in the 90's and I think "surely they must be mistaken". Then I realize that was 20+ years ago.

mozumder

Jun 11, 2012, 11:18 PM

What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.

Apple doesn't use third party controllers.

Eidorian

Jun 11, 2012, 11:20 PM

Apple doesn't use third party controllers.Tell that to the Ethernet and FireWire controllers on my Macbook.

nickarmadillo

Jun 11, 2012, 11:20 PM

I'm annoyed as much as the next guy but i can see the logic here.

They dont' want to screw you over now. Because in Jan/feb they will announce a redesigned mac pro. Probably smaller form factor yet still allow PCI expansion. And they will announce updated thunderbolt retina cinema displays.

That is the only thing i can see as making this small update justifiable. With that said it still friggin sucks. If it doesn't pan out like this then everyone is right to be pissed at apple.

There's nothing justifiable about it. Updating the Mac Pro with current-gen components would have taken practically no effort at all. They're just trying to eek out one more upgrade to let the Pros down softly.

KevinAGI

Jun 11, 2012, 11:22 PM

Let me think you introduce a new OS that won't run on my current macpro, and then you don't give me a new one to replace it with. Instead you change the processor in a 2 year old machine and give us more ram.
I see a hackintosh under my desk!:confused:

duffman9000

Jun 11, 2012, 11:25 PM

Apple doesn't use third party controllers.

The flaky Broadcom WiFi in my MBP begs to differ.

MacForum55

Jun 11, 2012, 11:28 PM

I don't know if you guys are not refreshing your pages or what..but the current Xeon server class chips will blow the roof off of an iClass processor. Hense why you will not find an i7 in a server and also there is not an i based 6 core chip.

I'm not exactly sure what you are talking about at all. If you could clarify that would be helpful.

If you look (I haven't checked since a little after my first post) at the comparison from the Mac Pro site to the iMac, it lists incorrect stats for the iMac.

I never said iMac chips are better than Server class chips? I'm not sure where you're getting this. I simply said they list the iMac 27" standard config as 6gb RAM and a 2.8 gHz processor where it's really 2.7 gHz I think and 4gb RAM.

Some other minor things were off on the page like the graphics card they list I think remembering it was a very old one similar to the Mac Pro's so I thought maybe they just messed something up on the page and it wasn't hinting at new specs of an iMac.

duffman9000

Jun 11, 2012, 11:31 PM

That super-secret technology is Thunderbolt. It's the only technical reason that the Mac Pros would need an upgrade.

Pro users don't upgrade machines based on a 15% speed improvement, that doesn't matter at all. You actually have to have a technical NEED for an upgrade, and right now, Intel isn't offering that.

----------

It's not going to be Jan/Feb... it's going to be WWDC.

Ivy Bridge isn't a great leap in computing power from Sandy Bridge. Disregard the updated integrated GPU, and lower power consumption, why would users want to upgrade from a 3 year old MPB? Oh boy, I can't believe I'm having this discussion.

relimw

Jun 11, 2012, 11:32 PM

I think it's because Mac Pro buyers, who are pretty much video editors, have no real reason to upgrade their existing Mac Pro.

Apple doesn't cater to the server or scientific or financial markets, so that doesn't matter.

Video is still the same 1080P they've been using a decade ago. No one is recording with 4k yet. So, no real reason for Apple to upgrade their Mac Pros until people start recording 4k, or if they decide to serve up other markets.

Right now every other usage is covered by the MacBoo Pros.

What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:

mdriftmeyer

Jun 11, 2012, 11:39 PM

I haven't watched the Keynotes yet, but Tim would have been well advised to talk about a Mac Pro redesign that Apple is hard at work while also working with out parts suppliers to make it possible to have this upcoming Mac Pro a product even the most hardent Pro critic couldn't complain about.

Instead, they release a stop gap and then a blurb about ``hang in there, we're working on something much better for next year.''

You'd think they'd have learned from Steve's ability to future speak and keep the audience satisfied.

----------

What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:

Documentaries shot in 4K is one matter. Lord of the Rings shot in 4K being brought to the public is an entirely different matter.

I'm with you everywhere else.

Woodcrest64

Jun 11, 2012, 11:41 PM

I was fixated on the 1155 because you mentioned you can use Sandy Bridge on the Z77 platform and take advantage of the thunderbolt. You can do that just fine with that socket. But you can't put a Xeon processor from a Mac Pro in an iMac with thunderbolt. I think you know this judging by your knowledge. I think I was just misunderstanding your point in that Apple should just be able to have thunderbolt just fine on the Mac Pros.

The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end. I can't see Apple releasing a thunderbolt port that doesn't offer the ability to have a display run off it.

What does LGA 1155 have to do with the Mac Pro? You are rather fixated on the minimal bonus that the Intel 7 Series offers USB 3.0 support onboard.

The Mac Pro has plenty of board space for additional controllers and an insane number of lanes to switch.

Intel has third party I/O controllers on their own brand boards. Apple already uses third party controllers on their logic boards.

mdntcallr

Jun 11, 2012, 11:42 PM

Apple is seriously mistaking that their professional mac customers would wait till next year for a serious mac pro update.

All this proves is that Apple, the company which is awash in massive profits, no other company literally makes as much profit as apple, won't update a simple circuit board to include

Thunderbolt
USB 3
Bluetooth 4.0
SATA

Of course add in the proper CPU, Fast Memory... ASUS could update a proper board faster than apple is. Its pathetic to hold off Professionals from having a quality system.

It will have effectively been almost 3 years since the real last Mac Pro update.

Apple needs to spend the money for an interm solution NOW!!! build a new motherboard, fast solution. use same body. get something better than this sham of an update.

theBB

Jun 11, 2012, 11:47 PM

As I have posted for a few years now I think the world is reverting to client server. Like the 70's. Thin client, thick cloud. It may very well be your next MacPro is a server farm in NC or OR with processes initiated on your iPad or MacBookAir.

A MacPro of any merit costs $5000. Do you have any idea how many minutes you can rent on a 30 CPU server for that?

That makes sense for processing heavy, data light applications, but uploading a large video file to edit on an off-site server is not very practical. I doubt that is going to change in the near future.

Eidorian

Jun 11, 2012, 11:50 PM

I was fixated on the 1155 because you mentioned you can use Sandy Bridge on the Z77 platform and take advantage of the thunderbolt. You can do that just fine with that socket. But you can't put a Xeon processor from a Mac Pro in an iMac with thunderbolt. I think you know this judging by your knowledge. I think I was just misunderstanding your point in that Apple should just be able to have thunderbolt just fine on the Mac Pros.

The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end. I can't see Apple releasing a thunderbolt port that doesn't offer the ability to have a display run off it.Only the mainstream LGA 1155 based Xeons will have integrated graphics on select versions. It is disabled on the majority of them. Intel is not going to bring an IGP to the massive 6/8-core monsters they have for LGA 1356/2011.

On the Windows side LucidLogix Virtu is handling discrete GPU output from the motherboard's Mini-DisplayPort just fine without a nightmarish external Displayport passthrough. You just need the proper controllers, pathing, and configuration on the logic board.

Look ma', no hands!

Woodcrest64

Jun 11, 2012, 11:51 PM

Tell that to the Ethernet and FireWire controllers on my Macbook.

Okay, I'm wrong. :) I am also wrong regarding the IGP being a requirement to have the display run over the thunderbolt. Apparently you can have a PCI-E graphics card interact with the thunderbolt controller to have the display run over it at least according to Wikipedia. Eidorian, thanks for a good debate!

So the question still remains.. why the lack luster Mac Pro update?

mozumder

Jun 11, 2012, 11:52 PM

What freaking world are you living in?!?

As an example, http://timescapes.org/4k/about_the_movie.aspx is SHIPPING as a 4k to the consumer, shot on RED Epic at 5k. And this is an indie.

You also discredit the scientific uses of the Mac Pros, why do you think Apple went to the trouble to make OSX POSIX compliant?

If you have no idea what you are talking about, please don't say anything :rolleyes:

Like I said, NOBODY is using 4k and other markets don't matter either.

Are YOU shooting 4k?

Eidorian

Jun 11, 2012, 11:52 PM

Okay, I'm wrong. :) I am also wrong regarding the IGP being a requirement to have the display run over the thunderbolt. Apparently you can have a PCI-E graphics card interact with the thunderbolt controller to have the display run over it at least according to Wikipedia. Eidorian, thanks for a good debate!

So the question still remains.. why the lack luster Mac Pro update?"Phase-out model" as mentioned earlier?

Woodcrest64

Jun 11, 2012, 11:56 PM

"Phase-out model" as mentioned earlier?

Yeah its a very good point but why not just kill it off now?

damir00

Jun 11, 2012, 11:58 PM

The thunderbolt port requires an integrated graphics processor to have the display work over it which isn't available yet on Xeon processors as far I know. Intel is suppose to be releasing Xeons with integrated graphics to deal with this at year end.

Is that factually correct? It would certainly be a more rational explanation than the "Apple hates us" whine fest.

URFloorMatt

Jun 11, 2012, 11:59 PM

So, Retina Thunderbolt Display coming probably a year from now.

When they do it, I really hope they upgrade the FaceTime camera to 1080p.

GeMenRe

Jun 12, 2012, 12:02 AM

New iMac is the new TV that Apple is working on, can also be controlled by iPad and file sharing between the 2.

no need for that - you can do that already with your Apple TV and an iPad - I was holding my breath for a new iMac but now will stick to my old MBP and thinking about an investment into a refurbished iMac with some money left jingling in my pockets.

Apple should drop words like really great, exceptional, amazing and others when describing their products when it comes to the Mac Pro or the iMac - there really isn't anything outstanding right now apart from the, still impressive, retina screen on their mobile devices. I think that basically the mini and the Mac Pro are already "retina-ready". :p

mozumder

Jun 12, 2012, 12:03 AM

Yeah its a very good point but why not just kill it off now?

Because it's a useful product?

At this point, anyone that buys a Mac Pro knows exactly why they're buying it. (IO expansion, SDI interfaces, etc.)

And any rendering application that requires increased CPU speed is going to need a CLUSTER of them anyways, which they served up quite well today with the reduced price.

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 12:04 AM

Like I said, NOBODY is using 4k and other markets don't matter either.

Are YOU shooting 4k?

Nope, 5k.

Woodcrest64

Jun 12, 2012, 12:04 AM

So, Retina Thunderbolt Display coming probably a year from now.

When they do it, I really hope they upgrade the FaceTime camera to 1080p.

Wasn't Apple quoted to say that there will be one more Mac Pro update before WWDC2012? Essentially meaning this is it for the Mac Pro... ?

LarryC

Jun 12, 2012, 12:05 AM

I'll bet you $100,000 it doesn't happen... :)

Mitt Romney, is that you?

Woodcrest64

Jun 12, 2012, 12:13 AM

Is that factually correct? It would certainly be a more rational explanation than the "Apple hates us" whine fest.

No I was wrong Damir. I was corrected and I also found on Wikipedia regarding the thunderbolt port that you can use a PCI-E graphics card to have the display run over it.

Judging by what I learnt here tonight and by what Apple has done I am starting to really believe this is it for the Mac Pro.

----------

Because it's a useful product?

At this point, anyone that buys a Mac Pro knows exactly why they're buying it. (IO expansion, SDI interfaces, etc.)

And any rendering application that requires increased CPU speed is going to need a CLUSTER of them anyways, which they served up quite well today with the reduced price.

They should of updated the graphics card at least along with the processor spec bump. The 5770 is a little dated but so is the Mac Pro's processor... I don't think it would looked as bad had they also updated the GPU too.

qtx43

Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 AM

What could Apple do that would be a complete redesign of the Mac Pro? In my imagination, I could see them merging the mini and mac pro, so you just start with a base station similar to the mini. Expansion (other than RAM) comes with stackable modules made possible by thunderbolt. You don't even need a thunderbolt cable, because each module plugs in to the one below it when you stack them.

Okay, so that's pretty far out there, but it would be cool.

notabadname

Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 AM

Wouldn't be such a big deal if my mid 2010 MP were upgradable in the Graphics department. Like at least a 5970, or even better, a 6000 series. Certainly no reason to trade my 12 core, even after 2 years, for the stale improvements made to the Mac Pro line. Thhe lack of support for upgrades has really soured my take on this otherwise awesome machine. Crazy how it just languishes.

And later next year? We aren't yet half way thru this year. 3 years in "computer years" puts dog years to shame.

HelveticaRoman

Jun 12, 2012, 12:26 AM

Sales of a product that hasn't been updated for years are falling. This seems to prove to someone that there is no point to support the product, whereas to the huge market that has been waiting in vain to spend their not inconsiderable money it just proves the company will not, or cannot, support them. As gorgeous as tablets and phones are, there is a limit to what can be achieved on them, and retina displays don't really make anyone more productive or even more creative, just shinier. Apple is free to apply its marketing genius anywhere that gets it the most money, but it would be decent of them to just be up front about their intentions for, what is to many people, their work.

RalfTheDog

Jun 12, 2012, 12:30 AM

Hey guys I'm still fairly new here.

Can I curse on this forum? (Serious question).

:(

#^&%$ and %^U** are acceptable. If you say !@$% or @#%^^&, you will be banned.

I think the Mac Pro will get Thunderbolt as soon as a PCIe Thunderbolt card comes out for Windows PCs.

From what I understood, (I may be wrong), PCI Express 3.0 is borderline on having the bandwidth. It might work; It might be slow.

Steve Jobs found a way to take Apple with him.

Now THAT'S visionary genius.

:apple:

I hope not. I don't think Mr. Jobs went where Apple is currently going.

_______

Apple currently knows they stepped in it. They stepped in it big time and it stinks! The only way they can scrape it off of their footwear is to design a new MP MB that is up to standard. That will take time. If they can get a new graphics card into the current systems, it might help with the scraping.

damir00

Jun 12, 2012, 12:35 AM

No I was wrong Damir.

Damn, too bad. Then I really have no idea what Apple is on about.

bigjohnwoo

Jun 12, 2012, 12:36 AM

Like I said, NOBODY is using 4k and other markets don't matter either.

Are YOU shooting 4k?

This has to be a troll post. This cannot possibly be serious.

necromorph

Jun 12, 2012, 12:43 AM

Well why couldn't the idiots at Apple say that in the first place rather than making me wait 6+ months for a sodding iMac.

In 2013 they will probably say 2014. Why not lower the price of the existing ranges now as they are clearly not worth what you are expecting us to pay for them!

Hackintosh - "sticks two fingers up at apple"

:(

Battlefield Fan

Jun 12, 2012, 12:58 AM

Apple needs to get it together.

ezekielrage_99

Jun 12, 2012, 12:58 AM

This is insane, does it take that much to at-least just put in some new processor and ram in the iMac and update it.

Unless they are waiting for a FULL redesign and repositioning then the reasoning could be seen as sound via Apple's part (from a business strategy perspective, not so much tactic/operational). I suspect if they do a complete overhaul then you'll see a slimmer rackmountable design with a completely refocused design.

# The quantifier here being if Apple are still interested in the professional market, which is coming more and more likely they aren't as interested as they were 10 years ago.

Blue Sun

Jun 12, 2012, 01:03 AM

To all the people complaining about the lack of iMac updates, spare a thought for those who need a Mac Pro to make a living. At least the iMac saw an update last year.

Besides, I still think we'll see an iMac update sooner rather than later (wish I could say the same for the MP).

ezekielrage_99

Jun 12, 2012, 01:08 AM

What Apps are you using that can benefit from more than 4 hyperthreaded cores? And please DON'T SAY PHOTOSHOP.

I work in geospatial, more then 4 threads is a must... The last box I had for dev purposes was a SuperMicro running 2 X 4 core Xeons with 16GB of ECC RAM, I was looking forward to a Mac Pro redesign...

The system is end of life so the choice being wait till next you for a supposed Mac Pro bump or a 3DBoxx 8920 now (considering the Mac Pro GPU it looks like a Boxxtech system looks pretty likely). Again anyone using 3d and FX would want/need more than 4 threads for obvious usability of the software.

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 01:23 AM

For all those times you take your iMac to Starbucks to surf the internet. The glare from the windows can be really annoying.

Kidding.

Don't joke; I've actually seen people do that!

Just kidding. You can joke. I think those guys were hipsters or trolls.

----------

Because it's a useful product?

At this point, anyone that buys a Mac Pro knows exactly why they're buying it. (IO expansion, SDI interfaces, etc.)

And any rendering application that requires increased CPU speed is going to need a CLUSTER of them anyways, which they served up quite well today with the reduced price.

Well, not "anyone". I need a new computer (my old one is slowly burning to death), and I actually found that used Mac Pros deliver the best performance and cost less than used iMacs and MacBook Pros. I've never really dealt with expansion cards besides a couple of PC cards I used in my Windows 98 VAIO before I got my Mac.

spl456

Jun 12, 2012, 01:26 AM

...As gorgeous as tablets and phones are, there is a limit to what can be achieved on them, and retina displays don't really make anyone more productive or even more creative, just shinier. Apple is free to apply its marketing genius anywhere that gets it the most money, but it would be decent of them to just be up front about their intentions for, what is to many people, their work.

I agree.
Seems like Apple is focused on iOS/iPhone/iPads/MBA/MBP.

The Mac Pro update is a flop.

Swordylove

Jun 12, 2012, 01:36 AM

Oh no no no no no.... say it ain't so! :( I was already fairly disappointed that no new iMac was announced at the WWDC. I thought, "Okay, maybe they're holding it off a little bit so that they can give us a completely awesome new iMac" and it wouldn't be too bad for me to wait another 1 or 2 months.

But 6 months minimum!? Are you crazy!!? :mad:

I can't imagine how it feels for those who waited for a new Mac Pro. And I'm gonna go nuts if they release the new iPhone before iMac and Mac Pro!

Sgt. ButtKiss

Jun 12, 2012, 01:44 AM

I've waited a while, only good thing is I can save up some more money.

Right now I hope the predictions of a release with Mountain Lion comes true. I can live with the current design but would dearly love USB3 and a matt screen.

I'm in the same boat man. I would just hate to finally make the purchase only to see the update I've been waiting for to pop up one month later.

Redesign would be nice, and a ML combined release would be sweet. Maybe the new MBP is just a market introduction for machines with no ODD's.

I could see a market for those who want an iPad/iMac combo in lieu of a MacBook with eyes towards a portable unit as well as a large desktop screen with more processing power, but I'm no market analyst so I could be way off. It would definitely keep iMac in the running for continued innovation (and more frequent.)

----------

Oh no no no no no.... say it ain't so! :( I was already fairly disappointed that no new iMac was announced at the WWDC. I thought, "Okay, maybe they're holding it off a little bit so that they can give us a completely awesome new iMac" and it wouldn't be too bad for me to wait another 1 or 2 months.

But 6 months minimum!? Are you crazy!!? :mad:

I can't imagine how it feels for those who waited for a new Mac Pro. And I'm gonna go nuts if they release the new iPhone before iMac and Mac Pro!

My emotions exactly

NY Guitarist

Jun 12, 2012, 01:46 AM

Like I said, NOBODY is using 4k and other markets don't matter either.

Are YOU shooting 4k?

Give it a rest. Just stop.

You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

cliffjumper68

Jun 12, 2012, 01:53 AM

If hackintosh people with little budget can produce workstations with years newer technology with off the shelf parts, what is Apple's excuse while it has thousands of employees and billions of dollars on the shelf? The least Apple could do is sanction pro's building there own hardware rather than give them this crap update that uses hardware three years old. :apple: not!

Eric5h5

Jun 12, 2012, 01:54 AM

Wasn't Apple quoted to say that there will be one more Mac Pro update before WWDC2012? Essentially meaning this is it for the Mac Pro... ?

No.

--Eric

biallystock

Jun 12, 2012, 01:54 AM

Our pro customers are really important to us...

Appearances to the contrary.

Torrijos

Jun 12, 2012, 01:55 AM

To all the people complaining about the lack of iMac updates, spare a thought for those who need a Mac Pro to make a living. At least the iMac saw an update last year.

It would be pretty reckless of Apple to update its entire computer line in the same period putting a strain on supply, manufacturing, transport etc.
Furthermore Apple laptops, especially the Air, are what sales best in the computer range, followed by the iMac.

I choose to believe that the iMac will probably get an update in a couple of month, but I see a couple of issue with Apple's desktop range...

If the Mac Pro has a future it would need a better GPU supply from AMD & Nvidia, who sell only a handful of their range adapted for the Mac platform.
What would be the purpose of Apple financing Mac specific version of some GPUs (that would then only be available trough them) if the end user wouldn't get the upgrade options he payed for?

Then there is this Retina future that seems to be promised to us...
I think we might see the same kind of introduction for desktop computer, meaning that when the iMac range is upgraded we'll get a Retina iMac, or iMac Pro that would have components closer to the pro needs allowing it to recuperate part of that market.

Anyway for the Mac Pro range to remain, Apple needs to provide their own GPUs, and probably a Retina Thunderbolt display, so that market becomes more R&D expensive, not certain Apple thinks its worth the trouble.

cliffjumper68

Jun 12, 2012, 01:57 AM

miles01110

Jun 12, 2012, 01:59 AM

Why does anyone listen to David Pogue anymore?

Sgt. ButtKiss

Jun 12, 2012, 02:06 AM

I guess I'm not walking as far as I thought. Don't waste my time yeven.

Northgrove

Jun 12, 2012, 02:12 AM

You know what would instill faith? APPLE telling pro users that they will continue to support them. Its not like that information would benefit the competitors to any significant degree, and I'm positive it would put the minds of those who DEPEND on this tool for a living, at ease.

Getting this info exclusively from third parties borders on insulting.

You must be happy now, since this is exactly what they just did. :)

kaisdaddy

Jun 12, 2012, 02:14 AM

Because in 2008, the hype was 1080p with the 5D mkII. Now, it's stereoscopic 3D. We're starting to see 4K footage. After that, they will expect us to work with 4K stereoscopic 3D...

In 3D animation and VFX, it's common to have scenes that take hours of computing and rendering, per frame. Imagine when we will have to work in 4K!

As technology advances, more and more is expected, and many artists/technicians can't upgrade a 6000$ computer every year. We have to take our purchases decisions very seriously, and right now, those working with Apple-based workflows and pipelines are being left in the dust. A 1000€ pc is faster and much more expandible than a 2500€ Mac Pro. Which means, 3D animation studios using W7 will be able to afford three times more workstations, and cut their in-house render times by three, and so on...
We have to know whether to go back to Windows (which means buying new software and train to use it) or hold onto our existing workflow for a few more months. All the expectancy and hype is good for consumers, but for professionals, it's a dangerous game to play.

Agreed! Once again, Apple is behaving like the honey badger of the computer industry, when it comes to the pro market...

Northgrove

Jun 12, 2012, 02:14 AM

Apple is now a phone company.
Huh. As soon as Tim Cook steps on board, Mac Pro get its first update in a very long time, although small, and he has now also told they have something "great" in store here for next year. Apple also release a major update to the Macbook... Pro.

If anything, it seems like Cook is more pro-positive than Jobs, unless this is all in some "grand scheme" of things planned since years ago. But it doesn't take some "grand planning" to give the Mac Pro line a tiny bump like they just did, which indicates to me that Jobs was simply more reluctant to this, possibly part of Jobs' wish to focus on things, this time mobile.

Controversial because Jobs is so looked up to, yes, but nothing's wrong with having different philosophies. Minor changes in view is what I expected would come from this. As long as they don't affect the "Apple spirit", I'm fine.

Sgt. ButtKiss

Jun 12, 2012, 02:24 AM

It would be pretty reckless of Apple to update its entire computer line in the same period putting a strain on supply, manufacturing, transport etc.
Furthermore Apple laptops, especially the Air, are what sales best in the computer range, followed by the iMac.

I choose to believe that the iMac will probably get an update in a couple of month, but I see a couple of issue with Apple's desktop range...

If the Mac Pro has a future it would need a better GPU supply from AMD & Nvidia, who sell only a handful of their range adapted for the Mac platform.
What would be the purpose of Apple financing Mac specific version of some GPUs (that would then only be available trough them) if the end user wouldn't get the upgrade options he payed for?

Then there is this Retina future that seems to be promised to us...
I think we might see the same kind of introduction for desktop computer, meaning that when the iMac range is upgraded we'll get a Retina iMac, or iMac Pro that would have components closer to the pro needs allowing it to recuperate part of that market.

Anyway for the Mac Pro range to remain, Apple needs to provide their own GPUs, and probably a Retina Thunderbolt display, so that market becomes more R&D expensive, not certain Apple thinks its worth the trouble.

Nicely put, I agree with your rationales and speculations. It's nice to read something from a business-minded perspective, which may be painful to acknowledge but it makes the most business sense.

People just need to keep in mind Apple is a business.

Northgrove

Jun 12, 2012, 02:26 AM

If you go to the new MacPro on Apple Store and hit compare .. it compares the new MacPro to the iMac 27" but it if you look at that iMac specs .. it does not exists ... yet ....
Interesting find there! A minor CPU speed bump if this would be the "budget" iMac 27" model. +2 GB RAM to 6 GB, and what first dropped my hopes as I thought it looked like a sloppy update, but later realized was a graphics card identical to the Mac Pro ones in no "Mobile" version (!): ATI Radeon HD 5750 w/ 1 GB GDDR5. Should be much faster than the current despite being from a former ATI Radeon generation? Also curiously no price listed for this iMac. Wow. Very interesting indeed.

iEdd

Jun 12, 2012, 02:29 AM

Huh. As soon as Tim Cook steps on board, Mac Pro get its first update in a very long time, although small

Small is an understatement.

I saw pages back that someone asked what changed. Did that get an answer? All I see that's different is the word "new". :confused:

No Thunderbolt, no USB3, either same graphics or some other non-new ones, CPU seems about the same as I remember. Maybe BTO options got cheaper?

GeMenRe

Jun 12, 2012, 02:30 AM

Apple sure didn't invest that much resources into retina updated pro apps just for "just" a new MBP. They will bring more hardware that is using retina displays (cinema displays, iMacs and maybe some highly rumored Apple TV-sets)...

Marx55

Jun 12, 2012, 02:32 AM

Hopefully with matte display. At least as an option. Even if more expensive. Oherwise, no purchase. Sign the petition at
MacMatte (matte petition)
http://macmatte.wordpress.com

kendall69

Jun 12, 2012, 02:38 AM

The Mac Pro will be updated and Obama has created 4.2 million jobs.

Which statement will be true by the end of the year?

Porco

Jun 12, 2012, 02:39 AM

Apple could have done the 'silent upgrade' with just a little bit of noise and avoiding burning their bridges with lots of Pro users yesterday. I think many will have just decided it's PC / Hackintosh time now, and it might be a difficult mindset to shift with such half-hearted non-communication of vague future plans.

kevsun92

Jun 12, 2012, 02:49 AM

Does this mean iMac won't get updated until next year neither? This happens every time, the cycle is always the longest in the history when I decide to wait.

Mac2004

Jun 12, 2012, 03:00 AM

The new iMacs will be released this fall when IOS6 is released and will be pre-installed with the new operating system.

mozumder

Jun 12, 2012, 03:02 AM

Give it a rest. Just stop.

You clearly have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Yah i'm not the one bringing up an irrelevant documentary (really, a test shoot) as an example of people using 4k.

4K (and 3-D) is irrelevant this year, and B) the few people that ARE using 4k are doing fine with what they have already, and have no concern about adding more CPUs to their render farm.

NO ONE is complaining about the Mac Pros.

Hanhart

Jun 12, 2012, 03:07 AM

I think David Pogue needs to stop sucking up to Apple and be a little critical.

Train

Jun 12, 2012, 03:09 AM

Interesting find there! A minor CPU speed bump if this would be the "budget" iMac 27" model. +2 GB RAM to 6 GB, and what first dropped my hopes as I thought it looked like a sloppy update, but later realized was a graphics card identical to the Mac Pro ones in no "Mobile" version (!): ATI Radeon HD 5750 w/ 1 GB GDDR5. Should be much faster than the current despite being from a former ATI Radeon generation? Also curiously no price listed for this iMac. Wow. Very interesting indeed.

This is very strange. This iMac is supposed to have a better processor, more RAM, but only with 1066 Mhz (even the current one has 1333 Mhz, the new MacBooks have 1600 Mhz) and the same graphics card as the Mac Pro (not a mobile version). I think this iMac is complete nonsense when it comes to RAM and Graphics.

My girlfriend is waiting for new iMacs, she wants to replace her Late 2009 Unibody Macbook (white), seeme like she has to wait a bit longer. I really hope there will be new iMacs anytime soon.

Perhaps they are holding back the big redesign until they can release Retina-iMacs and Retina Cinema Display. My bet is that they will bring Retina to all of their Macs (at least BTO) at WWDC 2013 and that the current MacBook Pro and the Bext Generation MacBook Pro will become one by then.

Sorry for mistakes, I'm German. :rolleyes:

haravikk

Jun 12, 2012, 03:14 AM

Weird that they wouldn't at least include the E5 chips since they've now been out for a little while. Maybe they're waiting for the next E7's…

BlueBubba

Jun 12, 2012, 03:16 AM

If Apple was at all bothered about Mac Pro users in the slightest it would have added Thunderbolt to the Mac Pro at the very least. They know that Mac Pro users are especially spec savvy and that the updates they released yesterday would receive such a negative from the Mac Pro community, but obviously couldn't care less. No one who already owns a Mac Pro is going to upgrade to these, so who do they think are going to buy them?

Whether or not Apple intend to release an all new Mac Pro in 2013 doesn't matter because Pro users can't be left waiting 3 years for a computer that may or may not be updated to the spec they desire, I need to have confidence that my hardware provider will keep me 'ahead of the game' for years to come. All other workstation providers will include the latest processors, graphics cards etc.. in their machines as soon as they can = good business = customer satisfaction = hello Apple!

I know Apple couldn't care less, but I've been buying Macs for pro use since 1999 (I'm a dinosaur) and have paid 100+ times more than any isumer to Apple over the years, my current Mac Pro will come to the end of its Apple Care in September, I was really hoping for a significant update before this so I could sell it with the Apple Care included and upgrade, obviously this scenario isn't going to happen now, but I'm not going to keep a machine that may need expensive repairs and lose resale value after September, so will still be selling it and will have to buy another brand, to be honest it isn't such a bad thing I've had a look around and can get the latest processors, latest graphics cards, bumper RAM, etc... for a less than a Mac Pro.

I really think they are going to kill the Mac Pro and I'd rather they did it now than feed their professional customers a load of bull, I don't believe there will be a significant upgrade in 2013, rather that this is some ploy to keep current sales turning over, who would buy a machine now that may be obsolete next year?

akbarali.ch

Jun 12, 2012, 03:18 AM

Does this mean iMac won't get updated until next year neither? This happens every time, the cycle is always the longest in the history when I decide to wait.

Ha ha ha, same here.
I sold my tiny mac mini in Jan and used my bro's laptop and thought they would release some update in Feb (considering last 2 fixed interval of 380 days). but they didn't. Now i dont know what to do. it will be really bad for me to go n buy the same imac at the same price as it was available six month back..atleast in Jan it was 6 months old, now its 1yr old !!

Wild-Bill

Jun 12, 2012, 03:21 AM

xbjllb

Jun 12, 2012, 03:23 AM

Personally I believe Apple should dump the Mac.

Agreed. Because the sooner it does this the sooner it follows Jobs into the grave, killed by cheaper better iToy competition without Job's phobias and biases.

But getting that through thick heads is like telling millions of Lawrence Welk viewers in 1972 that Thomas Organ would be dead by 1995, killed by trying to chase Casio down the lowest common denominator plastic iToy heap.

Ditto any other US organ manufacturer that didn't gradually shift to entry-level product STARTING at five figures.

A wise man once said: "Quality; not quantity."

:apple:

Macist

Jun 12, 2012, 03:24 AM

There's nothing wrong with the MacPro case. Sure, it's old now. But the people who buy them seldom complain about the age of it or the heft.

Plus aren't the MacPro's motherboards basically made by Intel anyhow and aren't that different to other Xeon motherboards? So Apple simply needed to order a different motherboard, slap in the latest CPUs, and everyone would have been happy.

Even if they had been working on radically upgraded MacPro cases for 2013, surely with their cash mountain they could have afforded this 'stop gap'?

One day iPhone and iPads are going to tank when some 'next big thing' appears out of the blue and Apple will turn back to the pro content creators that have been in their corner from day one... and they'll have all buggered off.

macsmurf

Jun 12, 2012, 03:26 AM

So what if Apple releases the Jesus Pro 6 months from now? You'd be in the same situation a couple of years later.

There are companies out there that actually listen and respond (you know, officially) to their professional customers. They provide road maps and all that sort of thing. If your business rely on top of the line hardware, maybe you should rethink your tactics. In fact, you probably should have done that already but there's no time like the present :)

"Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

bazinga!!

Jun 12, 2012, 03:27 AM

Why buy a macpro? For 1500-2000 bucks you have the best possible processor, ram, SSD, etc... And a macpro costs more and does less.

emulator

Jun 12, 2012, 03:36 AM

Why buy a macpro? For 1500-2000 bucks you have the best possible processor, ram, SSD, etc... And a macpro costs more and does less.
Exactly. For $1500 you can build an awesome OSX machine. But for some people, it is more important how the desktop case looks than what's inside.

NY Guitarist

Jun 12, 2012, 03:38 AM

Yah i'm not the one bringing up an irrelevant documentary (really, a test shoot) as an example of people using 4k.

4K (and 3-D) is irrelevant this year, and B) the few people that ARE using 4k are doing fine with what they have already, and have no concern about adding more CPUs to their render farm.

NO ONE is complaining about the Mac Pros.

People shoot 4k (or better) quite a bit these days. Even if your deliverable is 2K or only some flavor of HD it is sensible to shoot in the highest possible resolution available.

With 4K here to stay it makes sense to have the most powerful computer available to handle the media. Because it is more accessible it's not just big budget production shooting 4K but many smaller production companies, freelance DP/camera owners, indy films, etc, who will be generating enormous amounts of footage, much of it in REDCode RAW (R3D) format and not have the budget to order up a render farm.

So... It's NOT just a few people using 4K, and is highly relevant.

A powerful computer is needed by anyone doing work with 4K, even if you are using proxy files. Editorial houses need as much REALTIME performance as possible. A render farm is for renders.

"NO ONE is complaining about the Mac Pros." Really? Are you sure about that?

barkmonster

Jun 12, 2012, 03:39 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong but could the delay be because they're finally getting round to using a new motherboard?

4 years worth of Mac Pro models and they're still using the standard 4 or 8 RAM slot design, same SATA 3Gb/s connections and only the CPUs, RAM speed and GPU options have improved along with the standard amount of RAM they ship with but that's more an indication of RAM cost as much as anything.

I imagine adding SATA 6Gb/s and Thunderbolt and maybe redesigning the internals for more expandibility could be taking some time. SSDs are here to stay and having 4 x 2.5" SATA 6Gb/s bays and 4 x 3.5" SATA 6Gb/s bays would make a lot of sense.

Check out "The Promax One", it's what the Mac Pro "could" be but minus Thunderbolt.

http://barefeats.com/sandy01.html

Tsuchiya

Jun 12, 2012, 03:51 AM

"Later next year" falls in line with Intels estimated Ivy Bridge-E release.

That's one hell of a wait though.

mdriftmeyer

Jun 12, 2012, 03:57 AM

The Mac Pro problem lies with Tim.

With all the years of dealing inside and out at Apple and NeXT prior, Steve was extremely adamant at making sure, even if he left it to a future date, to leave a teaser in public presentations to reassure segments of developers, producers and users that product A is getting a significant upgrade.

This does not destroy secrecy, nor reveal what's behind the curtain, but it does work to put a lot of consumers at ease.

Tim should not be this bad at delivering a Keynote. He's got enough experience to be able to see that a little sugar goes a long way.

To reportedly respond to people emailing him, in hindsight, to hint at a significant upgrade soon, after a Keynote is an utter failure.

That is a big no, no.

He cannot run the CEO position like he did as the former Chief Operating Officer. It's time he puts that Industrial Design Engineering degree to use, dust it off and have some vision when it comes to guiding the ship.

Otherwise, he's going to ignore that you have to take risks from time to time.

No one will replace Steve. steve often told Ivy he's full of it and his work is crap and Ivy would step back and go back to the team and work at meeting needs of how come Steve hates this or that. Often he'd come back and knock it out of the park. Often it was another round of what is wrong. Tim needs to start doing this or Ivy will just go off a cliff with winowing down systems to absurd levels.

Today's new Macbook Pro is an example of when you let Ivy just do what he wants and then you release a new video braging about how you have to break the mold and create a product for the most performance driven user, while actually not delivering on that claim but delivering on the ooh and ahh factor of HiRes DPI without a product capable of being more capable in power because you have this continued fetish of being the slimmest laptop provider in the world.

It's reached an end. The system weighs less than 4.5 lbs. Enough already.

Make it 100% recycleable, 100% Green and as energy efficient as Science and price points can warrant, while making it the highest performance driven solution you can provide. Those are admirable goals in Engineering. What's not impressive is making it any lighter just for the sake of being thinner and lighter. That ads nothing to the performance of a laptop.

The iPad weights 1.46 lbs. What's Ivy's goal? Does he want to widdle this down to the weight of the iPad?

Enough.

Frosticus

Jun 12, 2012, 04:01 AM

I seriously don't think that Apple intends to neglect pro users... I think they want to perhaps change the perception that the Mac Pro is the only way to go by developing and enhancing other tools like the MBP and to a certain extent the iMac.

However, I'm not stupid and I realise that in certain circumstances the Pro is the only suitable option, especially when you require expandability and serious processing power (although perhaps the advent of Thunderbolt addresses some of these concerns, allowing expandability of other Macs).

I guess it's (sadly) a wait and see game. But hopefully, it will be worth the wait in the end. :)

slater-k

Jun 12, 2012, 04:02 AM

daneoni

Jun 12, 2012, 04:09 AM

They probably just don't want to use Sandy Bridge chips and would rather wait until native Thunderbolt and USB 3 support (Ivy Bridge) is available and do the update alongside a redesign.

iBug2

Jun 12, 2012, 04:17 AM

Today's new Macbook Pro is an example of when you let Ivy just do what he wants and then you release a new video braging about how you have to break the mold and create a product for the most performance driven user, while actually not delivering on that claim but delivering on the ooh and ahh factor of HiRes DPI without a product capable of being more capable in power because you have this continued fetish of being the slimmest laptop provider in the world.

You honestly think that Steve didn't know about this laptop? It's been only 8 months, I bet this device was in the making for over 2 years.

boomish

Jun 12, 2012, 04:20 AM

I'm sure the current Mac Pro is going to be a significant upgrade to a 2011 17" Macbook pro. As an aside, two 8 core Sandy Bridge-EP will set you back $3800 just for the CPUs.

You gota be kidding me if you think I'm paying all that for a Mac Pro with a 2 year old video card in it..no USB 3, no thunderbolt, blimey I could build a PC for less than half that with all those features (not that is a fair comparison but you know what I mean)..why buy a botched old 2010 model with a new CPU..nothing else has changed !
Thanks apple for the insult of an upgrade..

champ01

Jun 12, 2012, 04:23 AM

Why buy a macpro? For 1500-2000 bucks you have the best possible processor, ram, SSD, etc... And a macpro costs more and does less.

The Mac Pro has no hassle with updates a hackintosh does. Thats why.

It's not about the money its about knowing you bought a problem free system.

Wild-Bill

Jun 12, 2012, 04:27 AM

The Mac Pro has no hassle with updates a hackintosh does. Thats why.

It's not about the money its about knowing you bought a problem free system.

Five minutes worth of research would show that isn't the case. The Hackint0sh community has come a LONG way.

Can't speak for everyone, but investing that kind of money in completely outdated technology is fiscally irresponsible.

subsonix

Jun 12, 2012, 04:30 AM

You gota be kidding me if you think I'm paying all that for a Mac Pro with a 2 year old video card in it..no USB 3, no thunderbolt..

I dunno, you mentioned that you had large amount of work comming, I just offered a pragmatic way of looking at it. So what are you going to do?

Mr Rogers

Jun 12, 2012, 04:33 AM

If Apple wish to abandon the desktop space, why don't they do us all a favour and break-up the business into its consumer-orientated toys - these being the mobile's and iOs toy - Let's call this APPLE - and a professional computer business that focuses on desktops and workstations all underpinned by OSX - for the sake of clarity, lets call this Macintosh Computer.

Other businesses have split in two and prospered, whilst others have withered on the vine - my impression would be that iOS toys will one day go the way of Nokia and many other businesses that are based on fads and what's in vogue.

Given the desktop segment, and indeed OSX are now little more than a small segment of Apple's overall business model - it would be best to dispense of the desktop segment and OSX and allow those who believe in this business segment to innovate with new superior products that are engineered to outperform DELL, Lenovo, HP and the other PC manufacturers.

Given Mountain Lion is a merger between OSX and iOS - it does not represent leading-edge computer coding, such a move would allow both engineers and software designers to concentrate on products they love - they may be niche products and not part of what's fashionable today, but they are required products that have a large following - basically Apple you can keep your feminine toys and allow the boys to actually have something muscular to play with!

Macist

Jun 12, 2012, 04:37 AM

It seems that they see no value in having someone say "i create using a mac".

Why don't they realise that the creative segment is important?

Why can't they see the need for a rounded hardware portfolio rather than thinking that all they need is the iOS stuff?

Sure, the Mac Pro might not sell that much, but the work that is produced on a mac pro is very important both to the creators and to other people's expectations of what is possible.

To be fair, a friend works at an independent Mac dealer that primarily serves the professional market and a massive percentage of the kinds of customers that used to buy G3, G4 and G5 towers are now all buying MacBook Pros and iMacs to do the same thing. Indeed, go to a graphic design house or magazine and designers are almost all on iMacs these days.

Two points, though: First, there is still strong demand for a headless iMac/bigger mini/MacPro Lite with fast desktop class chips as a general design and business machine. Second, YES, for the sake of completeness of the platform Apple should have an up to date workstation even if it only sells a relative handful of machines.

Enterprise servers, really not too important - in the corporate world most Macs are clients on Unix or Windows servers anyway. And for smaller Mac-only shops, the current Mini and Tower machines do the job.

theSeb

Jun 12, 2012, 04:50 AM

I am fairly convinced that what they're working on is an all-in-one that will swivel down to your desk and then you'll use the new vibrating pen for graphics etc whilst still using the traditional keyboard, mouse and voice input.

The rumour is a couple of weeks old, but it explains it well:

http://www.cultofmac.com/169875/what-apples-vibrating-pen-tells-us-about-the-future-of-everything/

This is why we don't have the updated iMacs yet.

----------

They probably just don't want to use Sandy Bridge chips and would rather wait until native Thunderbolt and USB 3 support (Ivy Bridge) is available and do the update alongside a redesign.

The problem with that is that currently Ivy Bridge Xeons do not bring native USB 3 or Thunderbolt. So you may as well keep waiting. Unless Intel announces a new chipset for the IB Xeons. The SB Xeon chipset will support IB Xeons and Intel have indicated that there will be an update. The workstation world moves a lot slower than the consumer one.

----------

You know what would instill faith? APPLE telling pro users that they will continue to support them. Its not like that information would benefit the competitors to any significant degree, and I'm positive it would put the minds of those who DEPEND on this tool for a living, at ease.

Getting this info exclusively from third parties borders on insulting.

Yes, the "update" yesterday was an insult and it would be nice for a proper, clear statement on what the company is going to do. They don't need to give us all of the details. Just say it clearly and straight:

"Yes, we're committed to the Mac Pro. We promise to stop using 3 year old graphic cards and 2 year old CPUs. Soon. Seriously."

student_trap

Jun 12, 2012, 04:55 AM

Eh, mine still works like a charm and its a 2010 model. Amazingly fast, just like day 1.

It is unfortunate for those waiting to buy but the new price drops will be helpful to some.

Mine also still works like a charm, and its an early 2008! Over four years old now and going strong.

I really hope the Mac Pro continues to exist and gets a decent update soon though, I remember waiting for the 2006 pro to get updated and that was painful, but this situation is just ridiculous.

juanm

Jun 12, 2012, 05:03 AM

If you're still at 4K then you're already playing catch-up. 5K stereoscopic at 48 fps is not an unreasonable request now (expect this to be 6K later in 2012) and yes, the Mac Pro in a DIT function that needs ingest, backup and show instant rushes really shows its age.

I know (I've got a shooting with the Epic in a few days) but the trend, as I've seen it, considering other manufacturers than RED, at the moment, is going towards 4K rather than 5K. Again, personal experience: I'm in Europe, maybe in the US you're more Epic-prone. We also shoot a lot with the Alexa.

bobright

Jun 12, 2012, 05:05 AM

Later next year? So this could mean from this point on actually well over a year till we see anything, just awful.

DudeDad

Jun 12, 2012, 05:34 AM

If the update to the current design of the MacPro included Thunderbolt, some on this forum would be happy...then, in 8 months or so, when a new design comes out, they would be as unhappy then as they are now with only a speed bump. The complaints about the MacPro's lack of Thunderbolt is form over substance. While Thunderbolt offers some great features, the reality is that unless you are using the Apple Thunderbolt display, the Thunderbolt hard drive offerings out there are still very limited, and still overly pricey. Those high-end, hard-core users relying on the benefits of a MacPro likely have better displays than the Apple display. So what, really, will Thunderbolt get you right now? Nothing more than hope for useful and reasonably priced peripherals that still have yet to materialize.

I agree that a MacPro design change is overdue, but I don't think Apple is planning on making it obsolete. Mine is from 2007 and, unfortunately, not eligible for Mountain Lion. However, it still hums along like it did when I purchased it (although my boot drive is now an SSD, which helps).

I'd rather wait 6-8 months for a newly designed MacPro, then get one now only because it has Thunderbolt.

I have a few friends who think the future is in an iMac with daisy-chained Thunderbolt drives. I disagree....the ability to add cards, change the video, have 4 internal drives, a separate monitor, etc. make the MacPro highly desirable in the long-run. Let's see what 2013 brings....

docmordin

Jun 12, 2012, 05:34 AM

They probably just don't want to use Sandy Bridge chips and would rather wait until native Thunderbolt and USB 3 support (Ivy Bridge) is available and do the update alongside a redesign.

Despite the fact that Intel's c600 series chipset datasheet

http://www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/c600-series-chipset-datasheet.pdf

only mentions support for USB 2.0, and the E5-2600/4600 datasets

http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e5-1600-2600-vol-1-datasheet.html
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/processors/xeon/xeon-e5-1600-2600-vol-2-datasheet.html

make no note of it, several companies, such as Supermicro, have been churning out DP (E5-2600 series) and MP (E5-4600 series) Xeon motherboards with the c602 chipset that offer USB 3.0 and multiple PCI-e 3.0 x16 connections:

http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/C600/X9DAi.cfm
http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/C600/X9DA7.cfm

http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/C600/X9QR7-TF_.cfm
http://www.supermicro.com/products/motherboard/Xeon/C600/X9QRi-F_.cfm

As such, there's no engineering reason, as far as I could tell, that would have prevented them from updating the Mac Pro with a recently-released AMD or NVIDIA GPU, e.g., a modified Radeon HD 7970 or GeForce GTX 680/690 with EFI support, and either dual E5-2600s, e.g., E5-2643, E5-2667, or E5-2680, or quad E5-4600s, e.g., E5-4603, E5-4617, or E5-4650.

Of course, as you mentioned, if they plan on pushing for native Thunderbolt support, I could see why they would hold off on doing a major overhaul: overall, it wouldn't necessarily be prudent to lock in the supplies for a comparatively low selling item like the Mac Pro if it's lifetime was only supposed to span a few months (or however long it is until the DP Ivy Bridge Xeons are released).

wizard

Jun 12, 2012, 05:45 AM

Rather this is a pretty classic new technology ramp up! By releasing on one machine they reduce exposure if anything goes wrong in the supply chain.

I think Apple are going to see the reaction to the new Retina MB Pro's BEFORE updating the rest of the range, why else has it launched only one machine with the screen, it could have easily implemented it into the 13" Pro and the Air's.

Actually I think not. Intels integrated GPU most likely isn't up to the task.

So I think next year, we will see totally redesigned iMacs with retina and flash storage and a totally redesigned Mac Pro with some tasty options and retina cinema display's. And imagine a Mac Pro with SSD's as standard?

Well yeah that is what was rumored to have been said.

Although I do feel sorry for the current Pro owners, it would have been good for Apple to launch options to 16 core machines? But maybe the new one is such a new design that's why they have done such a soft update?

It really doesn't matter what next years design is. The problem is with this years rev. Here it isn't the CPUs that bother me but everything surrounding them. No USB 3, no TB and a three year old GPU in a "Pro" machine is a joke.

HurryKayne

Jun 12, 2012, 05:52 AM

No need to find any good points with this choice...
Cook has wrong,badly!Neither Imac have an update..
now i understand what he talked about the double down...
both desktop line terminated!
Apple is an I-toy company sold to Forstall...and it reminds me very closely
Commodore..and we know all what has happened...they had the Amiga..they..ran the console game..forgettin their dna....and Commodore die.
Cook...very bery bad WWDC.. .
Its time to build an hackintosh with the prodigy phoenix case.

wizard

Jun 12, 2012, 05:59 AM

I often stop by the local library to soak up some WiFi, this with my old 2008 MBP that has seen better days. I'm often sitting there surrounded by "kids" with machines that far outclass my old MBP. These are high school students, so when I say $2500 for a computer isn't a problem that is pretty much the case.

Well a lot of those high-school kids look like pro video editors, photographers, and musicians to me... Very odd.

Sorry, more sarcasm. But if you really think the average US teen is ordering a Retina MacBook Pro today, I think you're vastly overestimating the economic status of most American families.

Nope I think you got that wrong, at least from what I'm seeing it is apparently no problem at all. I suspect many families see these machines as investments to get their kids through college. Maybe also they see them as status symbols. Whatever is going on the economic conditions are not part of the buying decision as I suspect compromises are made elsewhere to make sure the purchase of the laptop goes through.

That is a pro machine, no question.

There really isn't any such thing as a Pro machine. There are various levels of performance one can buy. Pros often gravitate to things like the AIRs because they are a better fit for their needs.

In the end it was probably a mistake for Apple to even use the word Pro in its naming conventions. People attach value to the word instead of the hardware. Of course maybe that was the intention.

Minocan

Jun 12, 2012, 06:09 AM

2.4 12 core has a nice price drop, 12 corers from 2010 need not buy these :p I'm tempted to upgrade it from my 2006 quad core. Hope they are compatible with Snow Leopard still.

nick_elt

Jun 12, 2012, 06:09 AM

Five minutes worth of research would show that isn't the case. The Hackint0sh community has come a LONG way.

Can't speak for everyone, but investing that kind of money in completely outdated technology is fiscally irresponsible.
In a professional corporation do you really think a hackintosh is a feasible option?

toke lahti

Jun 12, 2012, 06:14 AM

Actually, that is one thing I'm keeping my eye on. Now with OSX natively supporting USB 3.0 with the new Macbook models, I think it's just a matter of time till we see more Mac compatible USB 3.0 cards. If this happens, I see throwing one in my MP to get a little more life out of it.
Hmmm, usb3 support in laptops are inside intel's chipset, so the drivers don't work with 3rd party cards? Or does intel make discreet usb3 chips?
What are the performance of the current Mac Pro or old Mac Pro compare to competitors? Some mentioned that would move to HP Z820 (http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z820_features.html#.T9aTOo5ZVUQ).

I do understand that this update is not fair, but can anyone could tell me how the two compare in performance? I'm talking real numbers. I don't know, rendering or whatever else you find more comfortable to show. I just want to understand as I'm not into professional softwares.
How about: hp's usb ports are 20x faster than MP's?
Thunderbolt is a great thing, but the Mac Pro (while being a professional machine) is the one computer Apple makes that needs it the least. The majority of the peripherals on the market right now are (expensive) hubs that give laptops and iMacs the I/O options that the Mac Pro already has. Would it be nice? Sure. Is it worth an extra $1K-$2K? Nope.
If you think about professional use of tb, what comes in mind?
DAS for fast storage?
Video i/o like decklink or AJA?
If MP had tb, you could use same hardware in the field and at the workstation.
Now you need to buy separate stuff.
How do you edit video ingested to tb-DAS in the field with MP?
Copy it to another DAS through fw, esata or ethernet?
Is there any DAS that has tb AND fw or esata?
How state-of-the art is that speed?
"Later next year."
Later next year?
Later NEXT year??
Help me with my english. Does this mean later than today next year?
Meaning over 12 months for "the real update" since 2008?
Sandy Bridge doesn't have a T-Bolt controller on the chipset - you need a fairly large discrete controller.
"Fairly large" meaning Apple can fit it to Air but not in MP? ;D

wizard

Jun 12, 2012, 06:19 AM

Frankly I don't care how good the next machine is, this update is so bad that I can see many people just up and leaving Apple completely. It isn't just the Mac Pro fiasco that is the problem but rather the total lack of desktop updates that is just offensive. The Pro just stands out as a symbol of Apples disregard for the desktop user.

Let's ignore the Pro for a moment. The iMac was not updated this means a bunch of users will have to forego the new technologies Ivy Bridge would have brought such as USB 3. Maybe over all that isn't a big deal as the raw performance of Ivy Bridge isn't that much better than the current machines. The second machine is of course the Mini, a machine that really could have benefitted greatly from Ivy Bridge due to its cooler running and far better GPU.

The complete lack of mention of the Mini makes me wonder if the machine is completely dead and is about to be dropped. In the end it just looks like you are right on target, they are screwing with the desktop lineup so badly that sales will drop resulting in the justification to drop the lines.

Frankly this WWDC fiasco is exactly the opposite of what Apple should have been doing. They should have been demonstrating a capacity to innovate on the desktop as the whole line has been stagnet for years.

Let's ignore the Mac Pro, neglect it for a few years, fail to update it, which leads to professionals and businesses losing interest and faith in Apple's pro-line, then claim "desktops/workstations are dead" as sales fall due to Apple's neglect. Yeah, that makes sense. :rolleyes:

Apple FAIL

GeMenRe

Jun 12, 2012, 06:21 AM

The Mac Pro has no hassle with updates a hackintosh does. Thats why.

It's not about the money its about knowing you bought a problem free system.

You can run into problems with a Mac Pro too - they're great but not perfect.

Wild-Bill

Jun 12, 2012, 06:27 AM

In a professional corporation do you really think a hackintosh is a feasible option?

Maybe you should re-read my post you quoted a little more carefully.

Roller

Jun 12, 2012, 06:28 AM

...will take place in July and should be interesting. Apple will announce what will likely be a significant drop in desktop Mac sales compared to the same quarter last year, as well as explain their lack of competitive products in this market segment. A July iMac refresh with Ivy Bridge, USB 3, and maybe more SSD options would help, but you'd think we would have heard more about it by now.

iBug2

Jun 12, 2012, 06:34 AM

chrisdee

Jun 12, 2012, 06:34 AM

MacPro's may die from underexposure regardless of what Apple does.

+1.

With this release crApple have lost product diversity.
It's the iToys that applies now.:(:apple::(

Razeus

Jun 12, 2012, 06:43 AM

Wow. iMacs next year? NEXT YEAR? I guess I'll put my mid-2010 iMac up for sale. Good bye Apple.

linnarsson

Jun 12, 2012, 06:54 AM

NEVER ASK WHAT APPLE CAN DO FOR YOU! ONLY ASK WHAT YOU CAN DO FOR APPLE!!! :cool: ;)

And yes.. this upgrade was a slap in the face for pro customers!

76ShovelHead

Jun 12, 2012, 06:58 AM

Konrad

Jun 12, 2012, 07:00 AM

Wow. iMacs next year? NEXT YEAR? I guess I'll put my mid-2010 iMac up for sale. Good bye Apple.

..or you could trade it for a trendy new iPhone? Hahaha. I am sorry, this was really too mean, way below the waist...I am really sorry.

techguy20

Jun 12, 2012, 07:04 AM

I'd rather have the 27" iMac with the upgraded i7 rather than these new Mac Pros.

Fraaaa

Jun 12, 2012, 07:17 AM

What are the performance of the current Mac Pro or old Mac Pro compare to competitors? Some mentioned that would move to HP Z820 (http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/workstations/z820_features.html#.T9aTOo5ZVUQ).

I do understand that this update is not fair, but can anyone could tell me how the two compare in performance? I'm talking real numbers. I don't know, rendering or whatever else you find more comfortable to show. I just want to understand as I'm not into professional softwares.

How about: hp's usb ports are 20x faster than MP's?

Is that it? The only thing you can come up as reason to update from a two years old mac pro to a newer one is USB port? Is that worth a rant-thread this long? There are third party PCI Express that can fix that up.

Is anyone else can stop ranting and actually writing something more on how the current/previous Mac Pro fairs compare to competition?

Also on geekbench the Mac Pro 2010 12-cores scores around 40,000 and the HP Z820 16-cores scores the same on Windows.

Poketmouse

Jun 12, 2012, 07:21 AM

Has anyone thought about contacting the other companies Apple uses? I have no idea how one would go about it, but ask people at Intel to see if there is anything in the works, or speak to those at ATI/Nvidia to see if they're working on new compatible cards or something?

I know its a long shot but you never know, some companies might not be as closed mouthed as Apple is...

subsonix

Jun 12, 2012, 07:21 AM

Is anyone else can stop ranting and actually writing something more on how the current/previous Mac Pro fairs compare to competition?

They lowered the price so it compares well to similar configurations. http://shopping1.hp.com/is-bin/INTERSHOP.enfinity/WFS/WW-USSMBPublicStore-Site/en_US/-/USD/ViewProductDetail-Start?ProductUUID=71gQ7EN57N0AAAEtFjFVIOHn

toke lahti

Jun 12, 2012, 07:27 AM

If the Mac Pro has a future it would need a better GPU supply from AMD & Nvidia, who sell only a handful of their range adapted for the Mac platform.
What would be the purpose of Apple financing Mac specific version of some GPUs (that would then only be available trough them) if the end user wouldn't get the upgrade options he payed for?

Then there is this Retina future that seems to be promised to us...
I think we might see the same kind of introduction for desktop computer, meaning that when the iMac range is upgraded we'll get a Retina iMac, or iMac Pro that would have components closer to the pro needs allowing it to recuperate part of that market.

Anyway for the Mac Pro range to remain, Apple needs to provide their own GPUs, and probably a Retina Thunderbolt display, so that market becomes more R&D expensive, not certain Apple thinks its worth the trouble.
The problem with gpu is volume.
Same thing than with express card market for mbp's.
It died when only 17" had it.
Same thing for MP's gpu. Too little volume to make products. If Apple had oofered xMac for years, there would be great market for graphics cards for mac, but they make more profits without xMac. People can't upgrade their iMacs and those who would be fine with xMac, has to buy MP.
And no, even Apple isn't big enough to build own cpu's or gpu's.
Or they sure could, but it's much more economical to let others do it.
Is that it?
No, it was just shortest to write.
Second might be that it doesn't use 2 year old cpu's or 3 year old gpu's.
I'll let others continue.

Chupa Chupa

Jun 12, 2012, 07:34 AM

Let's ignore the Pro for a moment. The iMac was not updated this means a bunch of users will have to forego the new technologies Ivy Bridge would have brought such as USB 3.

Why the need to be such a reactionary? The iMac was not updated yesterday. That doesn't mean it won't be updated soon. If you have been following Apple for any decent amount of time then you know Apple spreads new hardware launches out. It seems perfectly reasonable to me that Apple is holding back the iMac upgrade until after ML ships for a host of obvious reasons.

But it was important to get the laptop updates out now b/c of the "back to school" season starting up next month. College kids will be starting to look at new hardware and they don't buy iMacs they buy laptops.

Keebler

Jun 12, 2012, 07:35 AM

Wow. iMacs next year? NEXT YEAR? I guess I'll put my mid-2010 iMac up for sale. Good bye Apple.

really? they had new ones last year. if your older one isn't up to snuff, buy a new one (may 2011) and be happy. Still fast, still great graphics.

Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's good on their part to not have new imacs later this year. I find that quite odd actually, but saying goodbye over an iMac seems a little too far?

I can understand the anger towards the Mac Pro 'bump'. I'm actually stunned at the pathetic update for others - I'm ok - just bought a 2010 12 core before Christmas, but I can see how other post production houses and photographers etc... were waiting for a new desktop.

Sure, it's nice for Pogue to report they're working on a new design blah blah, but some communication from Apple on their gameplan would be nice. I don't think it would be tipping their hands towards other vendors either.

I've never written an email to Apple brass, but I think I might at this point. I seriously think they are forgetting the halo effect of folks implementing Mac Pros for their profession - iPhones, iPads, software etc... It's the sole reason I'm all Apple. I bought my 1st Mac in 2002 for my business and since then, I've owned 8 other Macs (still have 7) and various iPhones, ipod touches and 3 iPads b/c they're all connected and work together.

I'm not sure I would have as many Apple products had I not started with this ecosystem.

Without a definitive upgrade to the Mac Pro, what incentive is there for a pp house to stay with Apple if their latest desktop doesn't have thunderbolt or USB 3 - new technologies which can help businesses get their work done faster.

If those are available on another platform, where is the incentive???

HurryKayne

Jun 12, 2012, 07:36 AM

You can run into problems with a Mac Pro too - they're great but not perfect.
If you need a Mac Pro you have the knowledge to operate with it...
you know how to fix problems,making backups..so no hassle to fix an hackintosh,you inform,ask,choose the right pieces...,
its a little different..than a noob pc...assembled somewhere somehow ...
and yes..this WWDC IS A TOTALLY UTTER OF CRAP!
Small bumps,a pricy retina which needs all the other appz to be redesigned to work as on the Ipad with Iphone appz and the 2x button,,.
ipad,retina,retina,macbook pro..my God...don't you understand?Forstall is ruining Apple...with tiny apps and tiny retiny ********s!
Imac left in the dust,,,usb 3 and thunderbolt on Air but not on Mac Pro..
********s!!!! and then...don't worry 2013 will bring that..just sit and wait..,
no Apple you stand up and wait..because when phone users will leave the old Iphone 6 gui for a samsung s3 or for a Win phone..while you dismissed us.with our passion for Macs...you'll see..Apple sinking in a Deep black Hole,with Forstall smiling sayng..its a new App the I-Fall..for Ios 11...,Sad.Cook,i thought you were smarter,you,re just not.

dador

Jun 12, 2012, 07:37 AM

One thing I noticed about the next gen Mac Book Pro is that Apple lists the Thunderbolt Display as an accessory. But the specs don't work. The next gen MB Pro has a 15.5" screen with 2880 x 1800 = 5.2 M pixels. The Thunderbolt display is 27" with 2560 x 1440 = 3.7 M pixels. So the desktop display has 312% the screen real estate, but 29% less resolution than the new laptop.

I can't imagine releasing a truly refreshed iMac or Mac Pro without a 27" retina display to go with it. And that may be what's delaying things until 2013.

In a more cynical vein, the sales volume and margins for Apple product are in the notebooks, iPads, iPhones, and now Apple TV and the software. iMacs have become less important to younger students because of iPads and base level Mac Book Pros and Air Macs. The power users are a much smaller install base (not that Steve Jobs would ever have take this core constituency for granted).

HurryKayne

Jun 12, 2012, 07:40 AM

And you delay a whole new line...for a display?
Thats silly!

Rocketman

Jun 12, 2012, 07:41 AM

That makes sense for processing heavy, data light applications, but uploading a large video file to edit on an off-site server is not very practical. I doubt that is going to change in the near future.The iCloud meme is to upload everything right away. I think FCP and iM already edits a thumbnail of a video as an option. So that could easily be done on an iPod touch over wifi and the edited and rendered video would then be available for iCloud to serve at various resolutions for various target devices and bandwidths.

Some of the stuff we used to do to make imagery possible on BBS systems over modems (pre-internet!) can now be done automagically and in real time on substantially larger files.

Rocketman

macandiPhone

Jun 12, 2012, 07:46 AM

1. Ping: Dead

2. 17'' inch MBP: Dead

3. Mac Pro: On expiry

Instead of enticing poor Mac Pro users, just say whether the future of Mac Pro is dead or not.:mad:

Minority_taxi

Jun 12, 2012, 07:46 AM

till213

Jun 12, 2012, 07:51 AM

"Our pro customers are really important to us...don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year."

Yay... looking forward for the next "iMac Pro"! FCP 7 -> iMovie Pro anyone? ::rolleyes:

Cheers

Appelflap

Jun 12, 2012, 07:55 AM

These past years they should have at least released some more graphics cards for existing Mac Pro's every now and then. Mac Pro deserves these upgrade possibilities. Does Apple hope this way I might just buy a new Mac earlier?

Train

Jun 12, 2012, 08:07 AM

There's still one hint pointing to an iMac refresh anytime soon. On May 13 appeared two Geekbench results on Macrumors ( => http://www.macrumors.com/2012/05/14/unreleased-2012-macbook-pro-and-imac-models-showing-up-in-benchmarks/ )

The MacBook Pro is now released and it's specs are the same as in those Geekbench results (the biggest 15" model).

So we should see the iMac 13,1 and 13,2 anytime soon now, at least I hope so.

doctor-don

Jun 12, 2012, 08:12 AM

I haven't kept up with the Mac Pros since buying mine in 2008, but the Apple site has a NEW tag next to the Mac Pros today!

Not much new except for the removal of the 8-core Mac Pro and higher prices, especially with the substitution of SSDs for HDDs.

––––––––––
Tim Cook says don't worry as we're working on something really great for later next year.

Next YEAR?

It is irresponsible of people to keep complaining about the length of time between Mac Pro updates. They are robust and reliable.

Konrad

Jun 12, 2012, 08:14 AM

I date back the IICi and the FX...so this current deal was like throwing a bare bone in the dirt, letting you know to GFY and beg elsewhere. Well Timmie, **** likewise. Enduring the stupid light bulb jokes, btw, what imbecile at apple came up with this idea? Now I am going to watch a George Carlin to make myself feel better.

cburton

Jun 12, 2012, 08:20 AM

overcast

Jun 12, 2012, 08:25 AM

Maybe sales are down for the Mac Pro, because YOU NEVER UPDATE THEM.

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 08:31 AM

Maybe sales are down for the Mac Pro, because YOU NEVER UPDATE THEM.

Bingo.

Or never slash the prices of stale, old hardware that's an embarrassing joke.

ChrashM

Jun 12, 2012, 08:32 AM

I recently upgraded to SSDs in my two year old MacBook Pro 15" and six-core Mac Pro and couldn't be happier with the bump in performance. I can't imaging replacing either computer for years to come, primarily because I have no immediate need for TB or USB3. Save some money and spruce up what you already own.

I do agree with others here that Apple has missed an opportunity to invigorate the Pro community. Vote with your wallets and leave the updated Mac Pros on the Apple Store shelves. Or better yet, get a refurb for less.

chirpie

Jun 12, 2012, 08:32 AM

henrikrox

Jun 12, 2012, 08:33 AM

JeffDM

Jun 12, 2012, 08:35 AM

I'm very disappointed with this alleged news. I'd like to buy a new machine with the latest chips, particularly to get USB 3. Faster and slightly cooler running chips would be a bonus.

I can imagine they're probably working on a Retina iMac. A 21" display at a bajillion pixels would be killer, but maybe still very hard to make, which is an interesting prospect, but I think I'll buy a refurbished iMac soon.

patsfan83

Jun 12, 2012, 08:42 AM

I think it's because Mac Pro buyers, who are pretty much video editors, have no real reason to upgrade their existing Mac Pro.

Apple doesn't cater to the server or scientific or financial markets, so that doesn't matter.

Video is still the same 1080P they've been using a decade ago. No one is recording with 4k yet. So, no real reason for Apple to upgrade their Mac Pros until people start recording 4k, or if they decide to serve up other markets.

Right now every other usage is covered by the MacBoo Pros.

You've obviously never heard of the RED camera. People are shooting 4K all the time, and either transcoding to ProRes or working with the RAW .r3d files.

cypress822

Jun 12, 2012, 08:43 AM

Im giving up on waiting anymore...went to apple yesterday--i just need to decide whether i should buy an i5 or and i7 iMac...having a hard time deciding.

It makes me ill to think I've waited 4 months for absolutely nothing.

arkmannj

Jun 12, 2012, 08:44 AM

You know what gets me isn't the lack of a huge CPU update, it's the combiniation of the "little things" that got missed. Not Thunderbolt, no combo USB3/2 ports (yes it would have to be a dsescrete controller, rather than integrated, but it should be easy enough), no GPU jump, etc.

I agree the current machines are fairly decent, but at the price point it would be nice to see a little Apple TLC on some of their newly accepted "latest and greatest" technologies.

chumpy34

Jun 12, 2012, 08:45 AM

This has been hit upon, but I do find it interesting that Apple hasn't been updating or coming out with newer designs of their products like they once were. A few years back, with each refresh, was a totally new look for the iPod, iPhone, iMac and laptops. Now days, Apple seems to have found a template for most of their products that they like visually and are instead focusing on the inner-workings of their products.

Tough to complain when they come out with some amazing products like the new Macbook Pro Retina, but I think they are also underestimating the fact that most people like to see, hold and experience something new. If the next iPhone is the best phone ever to be constructed but looks the same as the current iPhone 4, people are going to complain. Same goes with the Mac Pro, iMac, etc.

It's been awhile now since Apple truly awed us with a new product or new design where it instantly became water-cooler talk. And that's where I do think Steve Jobs and his legacy comes into play, will be interesting to see if Ive, Cook and the gang can come up with some new products or have the knowledge to realize that even a new design of the same product can do wonders for the hype-machine.

patsfan83

Jun 12, 2012, 08:45 AM

[QUOTE=Documentaries shot in 4K is one matter. Lord of the Rings shot in 4K being brought to the public is an entirely different matter.

I'm with you everywhere else.[/QUOTE]

The OP specifically mentioned RECORDING 4K, not delivering in 4K.

DudeDad

Jun 12, 2012, 08:48 AM

It's been awhile now since Apple truly awed us with a new product or new design where it instantly became water-cooler talk. And that's where I do think Steve Jobs and his legacy comes into play, will be interesting to see if Ive, Cook and the gang can come up with some new products or have the knowledge to realize that even a new design of the same product can do wonders for the hype-machine.

Steve's death had nothing to do with what was and what wasn't announced yesterday. These things take time to develop, so what came out has been in the pipeline for awhile, and long before Steve's untimely passing. This was documented in the bio.

patsfan83

Jun 12, 2012, 08:55 AM

I'd rather have the 27" iMac with the upgraded i7 rather than these new Mac Pros.

That's what I use. 12GB of RAM and it smokes the base MacPros

chumpy34

Jun 12, 2012, 08:55 AM

Steve's death had nothing to do with what was and what wasn't announced yesterday. These things take time to develop, so what came out has been in the pipeline for awhile, and long before Steve's untimely passing. This was documented in the bio.

Yes, agree. Seems like the last couple of years has been a bit stale in "new" designs and will be interesting to see what takes place in the next 2-5 years.

zzLZHzz

Jun 12, 2012, 08:56 AM

don't forget that behind the curtain, all the great apps are created with the use of MBP and MP

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 08:56 AM

People simply don't understand that Apple has maxed out the entire world's manufacturing capacity and technical limits in their field. They are under political attack in their home country on labor, regulations, taxation, and criminality, so must adjust.

You are lucky you are getting any computers at all, and the only thing saving Apple is the very social change they and their peers, and their app developers, are generating, out of thin air.

The world currently hates and wants to kill private innovation. Somebody has to blast back.

Rocketman

You took advantage of the tinfoil sale at Costco. Well played.

ktbos

Jun 12, 2012, 08:57 AM

So Apple believes in desktop Macs, which is good. But how about something that has the same horsepower as a top end iMac but in a package that allows for multiple optical drives, a card or two, built-in power supply, etc.? Basically something to compete horsepower and functionality-wise with the majority of Windows PCs at a price point much lower than a Mac Pro? Call it a Mac semi-Pro? I'd love to buy that new Mac but I'm not going to buy a new Mac Pro (assuming it continues to occupy the same price point in the market) and I'm not going to buy a new iMac or a Mac Mini because I need a chassis that has room for add-ons. I don't want to clutter up my desk with external drives and other things that should be inside the computer. Are there really so few of us with this kind of interest that Apple has no interest in filling this hole in their lineup?

powers74

Jun 12, 2012, 09:00 AM

Macist

Jun 12, 2012, 09:01 AM

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 09:02 AM

Well the pro got something.

Yeah, a jar of vaseline with every purchase.

AnonMac50

Jun 12, 2012, 09:07 AM

Tim's reply gives hope.

But, if Apple keeps delaying the Mac Pro, no one will want one, and then they can easily say that they will discontinue it because there was no demand.

Rocketman

Jun 12, 2012, 09:08 AM

Yeah, a jar of vaseline with every purchase.
Your comments are always so polite and helpful. /sarcasm

PracticalMac

Jun 12, 2012, 09:09 AM

Tim said something LATE NEXT YEAR?

iPad take over the entire eng staff?

HIRE MORE PEOPLE!

jamesryanbell

Jun 12, 2012, 09:15 AM

Tim said something LATE NEXT YEAR?

iPad take over the entire eng staff?

HIRE MORE PEOPLE!

Agreed. Late next year is way, way, WAY too long.

notabadname

Jun 12, 2012, 09:17 AM

I would be happy if Apple just allowed the OS to support GPUs newer then 2010 for the MP. That is one of the best arguments to invest in a Pro - easy upgrades to the individual hardware. New GPU's, a blu-ray ODD, SSD, more RAM. But a current GPU is a major part of that upgrade approach to giving a MP longevity.

Apple seems to be intentionally thrwarting GPU compatibility. What other PC option ONLY works with either AMD or Nvidia, and subsequently supports zero upgrade options with either (including the one they supposedly supported). Very frustrating indeed.

SJBMusic

Jun 12, 2012, 09:22 AM

Apple really dropped the ball here.

I'm not one of those "pros" waiting for this anymore - I built my own Windoze machine a few years ago. I was at one point in my life, though, and I still would like to think that Apple does make the best pro machines, but this doesn't look like it is the case any longer.

Already a 3 year old graphic card? Not a big deal to me - I'm a music guy, not a graphics guy. Not good, though, for those who would want it.

No thunderbolt on the pro machine, but it is on the new laptop? Unexcusable, and that easy connection and massive throughput is exactly what I would have wanted. And easy multiple monitors? I could get used to that, too. Not on my stinking laptop, though - on my desktop!

C'mon! This wasn't poorly thought out - it wasn't thought out at all. That is clear. I hate to say it, but I'm glad I started shifting platforms a few years ago.

davidgrimm

Jun 12, 2012, 09:32 AM

Apple, not everybody wants to work on a little screen and keyboard. Some of us users want some serious screen view and a full sized keyboard. And no, its not the same as getting a little laptop and then spending another $1k for an big monitor, keyboard, and mouse. At least update the iMac. Don't kick us desktop users to the curb (or worse, Windows).

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 09:32 AM

I'd really like to know who Apple is losing their Pro users to?

I read a lot of people's frustration about the Mac Pro. And I understand. But when they talk about Pro users jumping ship to the competition, I wonder who?

Is Windows 7 really that much better that Pro, OS X users are dropping their Macs for a better spec'd Windows machine, or is the hackintosh community gaining a lot more attention lately?

HP, Dell, BOXX and hundred of boutique builders.

W7 works fine. Doesn't have some neat features of OSX, though.

The Hackintosh community gets bigger and more mature every
year Apple neglects their meager desktop line and continues
to leave gaping holes in the model lineup.

MacsRgr8

Jun 12, 2012, 09:38 AM

Or they are waiting for Ivy Bridge Xeons due in 2013 to include native USB 3.0.

No excuse for still shipping that video card in this "update.". None.

Both QFT.

Yes, I'm sure Apple is waiting for Ivy Bridge IF that's what will get them USB 3.
But, why can't they have at least updated grfx cards..??? What was the problem with that? There were references of new drivers (http://netkas.org/?p=1045) already?

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 09:45 AM

Yeah, a jar of vaseline with every purchase.

Your comments are always so polite and helpful. /sarcasm

Humor isn't for everybody.

I left an opening there for you for a witty comeback.

You're welcome. :D

kalsta

Jun 12, 2012, 09:46 AM

On the new MacBook Pro's 'Performance' page (http://www.apple.com/au/macbook-pro/performance/), the heading reads:

http://images.apple.com/au/macbook-pro/performance/images/title.png

'With great power comes great capability.' From a misspent youth reading comics, I assume that's a play on the old Stan Lee line—often shortened to, 'With great power comes great responsibility.'

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-29ddznnVeOs/TwvDR31RMuI/AAAAAAAAF_g/CDZjEtzjghw/s400/greatpower.jpg

Interesting that Apple should trade out the word 'responsibility' for the word 'capability'… 'Capable' certainly describes Apple at the moment—they're not lacking for the resources to produce the fastest, most expandable, most incredible machines on the planet if they choose to. But what if they choose not to? What options do we have—those of us with OS X in our blood? Not all that many as it turns out! Apple has all the power, but as evidenced by this very disappointing upgrade to the Mac Pro desktop, they don't feel a lot of responsibility to the pro community.

I am lucky—the MacBook Pro caters to my needs very well. But I really do feel for you guys who could be significantly more productive in your work with a modern Pro desktop. I think you deserve better than a vague promise of something new in another year or more.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 09:46 AM

Did I read the "lack of thunderbolt" correctly in the specs!?

...and only USB 2?

And don't forget only SATA II. It's a $2499 machine and no way to connect one of the faster SSDs at full speed without spending more and eating up a PCI slot.

Umbongo

Jun 12, 2012, 09:48 AM

Both QFT.

Yes, I'm sure Apple is waiting for Ivy Bridge IF that's what will get them USB 3.
But, why can't they have at least updated grfx cards..??? What was the problem with that? There were references of new drivers (http://netkas.org/?p=1045) already?

They do not need Ivy Bridge for USB 3. They haven't updated the graphics card for the same reason they haven't updated any of it. They haven't put any money in to this update. These models don't cost them any more to produce and no R&D has been spent on them.

ThunderLounge

Jun 12, 2012, 09:48 AM

It's been 13 months since the last iMac refresh. I can't imagine it being another year for what has carried their desktop sales.

Granted, the current iMac is quite capable. It doesn't have the latest and greatest, which all tech-geeks want, but it's still a very capable machine.

What has me wondering in all of this iMac/Mac Pro update stuff is where the current technological limitations fit in. I mean really, computers just aren't getting faster and faster every 6 months like they were in the last decade. Not to mention that a Mac still out lasts its PC counterpart. Heck, I'm on an iMac from the Mid-2007 update (2.4 Core2 Duo, 4G RAM), and it's still running like a champ.

Does it bench like the most current model?

No.

Do I notice that it doesn't bench like the current model?

Nope.

So while there are new parts available, what does it really do to noticeable performance? I could see where saving an hour on a 12 hour video project would be nice, sure, but I'm guessing most people (outside of forums) really wouldn't notice or care.

I don't think this is an excuse for lagging behind, but I'm more curious if/how this could come into play as one potential "reason" for Apple to not be running themselves sick over every tiny potential update.

That being said, I was really, really hoping for the non-reflective glass to show up. Hopefully soon, since I could get a new iMac and a MBP for what I'd spend on just a Mac Pro. :D

Gloops

Jun 12, 2012, 09:53 AM

perjorgen

Jun 12, 2012, 09:55 AM

Is that it? The only thing you can come up as reason to update from a two years old mac pro to a newer one is USB port? Is that worth a rant-thread this long? There are third party PCI Express that can fix that up.

Is anyone else can stop ranting and actually writing something more on how the current/previous Mac Pro fairs compare to competition?

Also on geekbench the Mac Pro 2010 12-cores scores around 40,000 and the HP Z820 16-cores scores the same on Windows.

Are you sure? There is a lot of machines called MacPro5,1 on the top list, but if you go to the dedicated Mac Benchmarks page the top MacPro only recieves 24000 which is about the same as a single Intel Core i7-3960X on the processor benchmarks page

I agree that the feel on OSX is faster, but when it comes to number crunching that is a minor factor - the major factor is the compiler

nwstehle

Jun 12, 2012, 09:59 AM

When making the last Mac purchase it was an iMac. It had enough power for what was needed. MacPros no longer represented a value for my needs.

The portable market is growing and will be the foundation. It makes complete sense.

The MacPro users are the ones who should be the most upset and will cost Apple business. They buy more than just the machine too. The upgrade they put out there should not be. It's really no better than what is out there now. Why waste the resources on something that received minimal though?

The iMac has not seen an upgrade in over a year and with the arrival of the Ivy Bridge processors it made sense for Apple to wait until they came out.

Clearly a lot of resources went into the redesign of the MacBook series, and it shows. But Apple couldn't handle an upgrade to the MacPro and iMac? They touted their frequent upgrades during the keynote even! So why not energize the entire Apple community and do it right?

Yes, I realize a computer is obsolete as soon as you open the box. You can always wait for the next upgrade forever.

So late next year for the MacPro? Huh? What about the iMac?

My iMac is long in the tooth and I'm just not sure what to do. If it is going to be six months or more, maybe I just get the current model. Honestly I need to look at when mine was first released and relate that to purchase date. The new laptops are neat, but I've grown fond of the larger screen and these would be a step back for me.

:confused::mad:

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 10:02 AM

Let's ignore the Mac Pro, neglect it for a few years, fail to update it, which leads to professionals and businesses losing interest and faith in Apple's pro-line, then claim "desktops/workstations are dead" as sales fall due to Apple's neglect. Yeah, that makes sense.

Honestly, the only comparison that comes to mind is when Netflix hiked prices on DVD by mail and was going to split it off and rename it - the only logical explanation anyone could think of was that they planned to kill off that part of the business but needed to make it fail first so they had an excuse to shut it down.

Unless you're a high-level Apple exec (unlikely if you're posting here), you have absolutely no idea what will happen to the Mac Pro.

...

It seems more likely to me that they gave the Pro a little bump and price drop because it is rather outdated, keeping it around until the new design ships.

So let me get this straight...you whine about someone speculating about Apple's plans...then you speculate about apple's plans?

Pot, I've got a kettle I'd like you to meet...

ScottishDuck

Jun 12, 2012, 10:02 AM

Apple could solve themselves and their customers problems if they modularised the Mac Pro further, make it more upgradable.

Easy CPU and GPU swaps, maybe even motherboard upgrades, coupled with better drivers from AMD/nVidia to allow the latest hardware.

That would make it a truly excellent workstation.

theSeb

Jun 12, 2012, 10:04 AM

This news tells me that Apple does not want to sell any more desktops until 2013.

ShiftyPig

Jun 12, 2012, 10:07 AM

Your comments are always so polite and helpful. /sarcasm

Could be worse... he/she could sign every post in a self-aggrandizing fashion.

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 10:12 AM

could be worse... He/she could sign every post in a self-aggrandizing fashion.

:d

MacsRgr8

Jun 12, 2012, 10:13 AM

They do not need Ivy Bridge for USB 3. They haven't updated the graphics card for the same reason they haven't updated any of it. They haven't put any money in to this update. These models don't cost them any more to produce and no R&D has been spent on them.

They don't need Ivy Bridge for USB 3, but it's probably far cheaper to wait for the Ivy Bridge instead of changing the logic board to support it now.

IMHO, having a Radeon 7970 option would have been cheap too! No reason why any hardware had to be changed, and having this card in the store makes this "update" seem more reasonable.

jon9091

Jun 12, 2012, 10:13 AM

Clearly a lot of resources went into the redesign of the MacBook series, and it shows. But Apple couldn't handle an upgrade to the MacPro and iMac? They touted their frequent upgrades during the keynote even! So why not energize the entire Apple community and do it right?
:confused::mad:

I'm guessing it's because they wanted to focus the hardware portion of this keynote on their biggest selling platform...the laptop. And not take way from its spotlight, and not take time away from iOS, MAC OSX or any of the other stuff right now. Sorry, but desktop computers are low man on the totem pole. I think they'll get their time...eventually.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 10:20 AM

I don't understand this hype about upgrading computers. In 2008, pros used 2008 computers. Why do they suddenly need faster processors?

Because there's work to be done that requires the latest hardware. One piece of software I use, Mac is supported but the company is actually recommending that people run it on PC because none of the available macs can handle it. Specifically, the problem is Mac Pro only having SATA II which isn't fast enough for a decent SSD any more.

So yes, some of us are doing applications that are real-time and require more than the old generation can provide.

Pro tip: Buy used Mac Pros off eBay if you feel that they are being sold for more than they are worth. In some cases, they are, and you can get a much better deal.

Buying used MP makes sense if it's a good enough deal, particularly since it's essentially the same machine as they are selling now (and the CPU can be upgraded). But honestly at this point I'd say the smartest option for many power users is just build a hackintosh already.

iGrouch

Jun 12, 2012, 10:22 AM

This optics of all this look wrong.

My theory is that Apple has a tendency (because they are perfectionists) of painting themselves into a corner. It is possible that this is what happened here.

Firstly there is the whole advent of the iPhone/IOS phenomenon which draws a lot of the company's energy, just to keep in the game against the competition.

Where Apple may have blundered, regarding the Mac Pro, is with Thunderbolt (Lightpeak). Specifically what tripped them up may have been the Thunderbolt display. In eagerness to impress they released this display in a way that the graphics were dependent exclusively on Thunderbolt. This was fine for their laptops/iMac/MacMini but was problematic for the pro desktop which traditionally use graphics cards and expansion slots.

Apple didn't think through properly how the Thunderbolt display was going to connect to the one mac where it was the most important (for them), the Mac Pro, the one Mac Apple really likes us to purchase with their quality though expensive screens. If Apple thought that the vendors of graphics cards would release thunderbolt enabled cards we must then assume that Apple are naive.

Apple have themselves in a knot of a design quandary due to the way that they are so specific on the way a Mac is designed and looks. Don't get me wrong the Thunderbolt display is a great idea but Apple could have perhaps either implemented and released the screen at a later date or in a different guise.

The options could have been:

Release Thunderbolt Display as is, when top end Mac is released with new type of Thunderbolt enabled graphics card in 201x; whenever such a thing happened.

Release the Thunderbolt Display when they did but in a way that the Mac Pro would connect using conventional display port. How this would be implemented I am not sure. Some kind of adaptor? Extra cable: thunderbolt on Mac Pro to thunderbolt-in on display? Who knows, but again, because of the way that Apple is specific about perfect design they have given themselves little room to manoeuvre.

What is sad about all this is that Apple does not have Thunderbolt in its top of the range Mac, the one place where you would expect it. A technology that will mostly only be used by pros initially. But also as a consequence of this design bottle neck the top of the range Mac does not have USB 3 and is using cpus that are two years old. What a faux pas!

I think we can all agree that if Apple had road mapped their design approach, whereby the Mac Pro continued in its current form factor (albeit with the latest Xeons, USB 3, Thunderbolt and whatever are the best in current graphic cards), and then, lets say next year, replaced it with something more radical, they would have held on to some kudos amongst the pros.

Then again maybe I am completely wrong. Maybe Apple doesn't care or are at a point where they feel that they cannot compete in this area. Whatever the reason they are alienating professionals who want to work on Mac and in the long run this can't be good.

bassfingers

Jun 12, 2012, 10:28 AM

Well a lot of those high-school kids look like pro video editors, photographers, and musicians to me... Very odd.

Sorry, more sarcasm. But if you really think the average US teen is ordering a Retina MacBook Pro today, I think you're vastly overestimating the economic status of most American families. That is a pro machine, no question.

Kids have no idea what they need. I bet the ratio of spoiled college freshmen to pro users is close to 1:1

Eidorian

Jun 12, 2012, 10:30 AM

Kids have no idea what they need. I bet the ratio of spoiled college freshmen to pro users is close to 1:1Back when I graduated, the freshman were all sporting 15" MacBook Pros while the upperclassmen were on iBooks/Macbooks...

HurtinMinorKey

Jun 12, 2012, 10:33 AM

This optics of all this look wrong.

My theory is that Apple has a tendency (because they are perfectionists) of painting themselves into a corner. It is possible that this is what happened here.

Firstly their is the whole advent of the iPhone/IOS phenomenon which draws a lot of the company's energy, just to keep in the game against the competition.

Where Apple may have blundered, regarding the Mac Pro, is with Thunderbolt (Lightpeak). Specifically what tripped them up may have been the Thunderbolt display. In eagerness to impress they released this display in a way that the graphics were dependent exclusively on Thunderbolt. This was fine for their laptops/iMac/MacMini but was problematic for the pro desktop which traditionally use graphics cards and expansion slots.

Apple didn't think through properly how the Thunderbolt display was going to connect to the one mac where it was the most important (for them), the Mac Pro, the one Mac Apple really likes us to purchase with their quality though expensive screen. If Apple thought that the vendors of graphics cards would release thunderbolt enabled cards we must then we must assume that Apple are naive.

Apple have themselves in a knot of a design quandary due to the way that they are so specific on the way a Mac is designed and looks. Don't get me wrong the Thunderbolt display is a great idea but Apple could have perhaps either implemented and released the screen at a later date or in a different guise.

The options could have been:

Release Thunderbolt Display as is, when top end Mac is released with new type of Thunderbolt enabled graphics card in 201x, whenever such a thing happened.

Release the Thunderbolt Display when they did but in a way that the Mac Pro would connect using conventional display port. How this would be implemented I am not sure. Some kind of adaptor? Extra cable: thunderbolt on Mac Pro to thunderbolt in on display? Who knows, but again, because of the way that Apple is specific about perfect design they have given themselves little room to manoeuvre.

What is sad about all this is that Apple does not have Thunderbolt in its top of the range Mac, the one place where you would expect it. A technology that will mostly only be used by pros initially. But also as a consequence of this design bottle neck the top of the range Mac does not have USB 3 and is using cpus that are two years old. What a faux pas!

I think we can all agree that if Apple had road mapped their design approach, whereby the Mac Pro continued in its current form factor (albeit with the latest Xeons, USB 3, Thunderbolt and whatever are the best in current graphic cards), and then, lets say next year, replaced it with something more radical, they would have held on to some kudos amongst the pros.

Then again maybe I am completely wrong. Maybe Apple doesn't care or are at a point where they feel that they cannot compete in this area. Whatever the reason they are alienating professionals who want to work on Mac and in the long run this can't be good.

Amen.

Eidorian

Jun 12, 2012, 10:33 AM

They don't need Ivy Bridge for USB 3, but it's probably far cheaper to wait for the Ivy Bridge instead of changing the logic board to support it now.

IMHO, having a Radeon 7970 option would have been cheap too! No reason why any hardware had to be changed, and having this card in the store makes this "update" seem more reasonable.USB 3.0 controllers have been down in the $4-6 range for many months now. They probably wanted to support Thunderbolt and lacked the few square mm on the PCB. Yet they found a way to include a Thunderbolt controller instead.

iHEARTcartoons

Jun 12, 2012, 10:38 AM

Apple likes spoon feeding us with new oohs and ahhs, one at a time. It wouldn't be surprising at all if next year was for desktops.

iGrouch

Jun 12, 2012, 10:39 AM

The problem with gpu is volume.
Same thing than with express card market for mbp's.
It died when only 17" had it.
Same thing for MP's gpu. Too little volume to make products. If Apple had oofered xMac for years, there would be great market for graphics cards for mac, but they make more profits without xMac. People can't upgrade their iMacs and those who would be fine with xMac, has to buy MP.
And no, even Apple isn't big enough to build own cpu's or gpu's.
Or they sure could, but it's much more economical to let others do it.

Exactly. This is the problem that Apple have specifically when it comes to graphics cards and doubly so where requirements to add Thunderbolt to the mix.

As some suggest perhaps Steve Jobs was persuasive at getting vendors to produce such specialised components for Mac. We do not know if Tim Cook has the same clout.

What is also odd is the way Apple suddenly intros HDMI on the new Retina MacBook Pro after ignoring it for years (except MacMini).

xgman

Jun 12, 2012, 10:40 AM

This optics of all this look wrong.

My theory is that Apple has a tendency (because they are perfectionists) of painting themselves into a corner. It is possible that this is what happened here.

Firstly their is the whole advent of the iPhone/IOS phenomenon which draws a lot of the company's energy, just to keep in the game against the competition.

Where Apple may have blundered, regarding the Mac Pro, is with Thunderbolt (Lightpeak). Specifically what tripped them up may have been the Thunderbolt display. In eagerness to impress they released this display in a way that the graphics were dependent exclusively on Thunderbolt. This was fine for their laptops/iMac/MacMini but was problematic for the pro desktop which traditionally use graphics cards and expansion slots.

Apple didn't think through properly how the Thunderbolt display was going to connect to the one mac where it was the most important (for them), the Mac Pro, the one Mac Apple really likes us to purchase with their quality though expensive screen. If Apple thought that the vendors of graphics cards would release thunderbolt enabled cards we must then we must assume that Apple are naive.

Apple have themselves in a knot of a design quandary due to the way that they are so specific on the way a Mac is designed and looks. Don't get me wrong the Thunderbolt display is a great idea but Apple could have perhaps either implemented and released the screen at a later date or in a different guise.

The options could have been:

Release Thunderbolt Display as is, when top end Mac is released with new type of Thunderbolt enabled graphics card in 201x, whenever such a thing happened.

Release the Thunderbolt Display when they did but in a way that the Mac Pro would connect using conventional display port. How this would be implemented I am not sure. Some kind of adaptor? Extra cable: thunderbolt on Mac Pro to thunderbolt in on display? Who knows, but again, because of the way that Apple is specific about perfect design they have given themselves little room to manoeuvre.

What is sad about all this is that Apple does not have Thunderbolt in its top of the range Mac, the one place where you would expect it. A technology that will mostly only be used by pros initially. But also as a consequence of this design bottle neck the top of the range Mac does not have USB 3 and is using cpus that are two years old. What a faux pas!

I think we can all agree that if Apple had road mapped their design approach, whereby the Mac Pro continued in its current form factor (albeit with the latest Xeons, USB 3, Thunderbolt and whatever are the best in current graphic cards), and then, lets say next year, replaced it with something more radical, they would have held on to some kudos amongst the pros.

Then again maybe I am completely wrong. Maybe Apple doesn't care or are at a point where they feel that they cannot compete in this area. Whatever the reason they are alienating professionals who want to work on Mac and in the long run this can't be good.

OMG you are over-thinking this. Maybe it's just that Apple has other priorities and couldn't be bothered to make any decisions on either in a timely manner, mainly because they don't care and/or don't need to in their financial eyes.

theSeb

Jun 12, 2012, 10:42 AM

I don't understand this hype about upgrading computers. In 2008, pros used 2008 computers. Why do they suddenly need faster processors?

But still, paying the "new" price for old stuff sucks. Get used ones from eBay, and they're way cheaper. I'm getting an 8-core Mac Pro for under $1000 that is old but is still crazy fast.

I am not sure what you don't understand. In 2012 people need to use 2012 computers. 2008 computers were fine in 2008. Did you notice that technology moves forward? A 2008 Mac Pro is not crazy fast.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 10:42 AM

What Apps are you using that can benefit from more than 4 hyperthreaded cores? And please DON'T SAY PHOTOSHOP.

Logic. Currently limited to 16 threads (the MP 12 core would be able to handle 24), and all those cores and threads make a huge difference in performance.

Mac Pro is a great machine to run Logic...except for SATA II which bottlenecks SSD drives.

rmwebs

Jun 12, 2012, 10:48 AM

Am I the only one who finds the article a tad...pointless.

Anyone could spit out a statement saying they will PROBABLY be updated in 2013.

Here's my statement: We'll probably see a retina iMac in 2013, or maybe 2014. Want to put that on the front page?

blackant

Jun 12, 2012, 10:51 AM

This is so disappointing. I was looking for a new iMac but now I've to wait another year?

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 10:52 AM

That super-secret technology is Thunderbolt. It's the only technical reason that the Mac Pros would need an upgrade.

Seriously, you're completely ignorant of the fact that MP only has SATA II? That there's no way to connect a high end SSD at full speed without adding PCI cards?

Yeah its a very good point but why not just kill it off now?

Because they could do this "update" without spending a penny on R&D - they can still kill it off, but have an excuse to slap "NEW!" on it and get a few more sales before finally killing it off.

Fraaaa

Jun 12, 2012, 10:57 AM

Are you sure? There is a lot of machines called MacPro5,1 on the top list, but if you go to the dedicated Mac Benchmarks page the top MacPro only recieves 24000 which is about the same as a single Intel Core i7-3960X on the processor benchmarks page

I agree that the feel on OSX is faster, but when it comes to number crunching that is a minor factor - the major factor is the compiler

Well, that is what I want to find out. The problem is that most people here are only able to rant, but don't care of going further in the argument.

What about the compiler?

Seriously, you're completely ignorant of the fact that MP only has SATA II? That there's no way to connect a high end SSD at full speed without adding PCI cards?

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?

Eidorian

Jun 12, 2012, 11:02 AM

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?You are still dumping a lot of money for a logic board based on 2008 hardware. Everyone else gets USB 3.0, PCI-Express 3.0, and SATA III out of the box before you even touch the expansion slots just from the processor and PCH.

Why not leave the expansion slots open for some real I/O instead of something like USB 3.0?

Simon R.

Jun 12, 2012, 11:08 AM

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?

Not really. SATA3 is standard on motherboards on all newer PC's (1-2 years old). My PCIe slots (the Mac Pro only has 3 after the gfx card) are already occupied by a soundcard, a DSP-card and a video HDMI monitor card. So there you have it, I am using my MP for Logic too, and I can't waste a PCIe slot for adding SATA drives. Also, the current MP has PCI Express 2.0 standard, as far as I know, and that is just about pushing the limits of the SATA 3 standard + your gfx card and what more you have running on the PCI bus.

There is NO excuse for Apple not coming out with a Thunderbolt + USB3 + SATA3 Mac Pro NOW (or sooner) - I think we just have to face the truth that the Mac Pro is being phased out. I don't but the "later next year" thing.

kps

Jun 12, 2012, 11:10 AM

This news tells me that Apple does not want to sell any more desktops until 2013.

Fixed that for you.

theSeb

Jun 12, 2012, 11:10 AM

At least people's thoughts on the matter are getting some attention.

Andy Hertzfeld: The only thing that’s still high-end about [Mac Pro] is the bloated price

We can’t say we were too shocked when Apple quietly updated its Mac Pro lineup following its WWDC keynote yesterday. We had previously revealed the spec bumped Mac Pros, but many were skeptical Apple would release such a minor refresh for the product that otherwise hadn’t received an update in two years.

Not surprisingly, many are calling out Apple for its decision to not release a major refresh to the Mac Pros. Perhaps most notably is former Apple engineer and current Google employee Andy Hertzfeld. In a Google+ post, Hertzfeld congratulates Apple on its new Retina MacBook, while expressing disappointment in the new Mac Pros:

The next generation MacBook Pro announced today at WWDC looks fantastic. I ordered one immediately and can’t wait to start using it. Unfortunately, the euphoria was negated by my deep disappointment with the meagre, lame update that was silently bequeathed to the Mac Pro today… The specs for the “new” Mac Pro had hardly changed, except for a tiny, inconsequential processor clock bump. Still no Thunderbolt, still no USB 3.0, no SATA III or RAM speed improvements - it seems like it’s stuck in time in 2010. The only thing that’s still high-end about it is the bloated price… Even though I’m well aware that Apple’s future lies increasingly with mobile iOS-based devices, it still makes no sense to drop the ball on your high end desktop Mac so thoroughly, and to utterly disappoint your most loyal customers like yours truly.

http://9to5mac.com/2012/06/12/andy-hertzfeld-the-only-thing-thats-still-high-end-about-mac-pro-is-the-bloated-price/

Russell L

Jun 12, 2012, 11:13 AM

Guess I'll be hanging on to my Mac Pro 1,1 for a little while longer. Still going strong after nearly 6 years (knock on wood)....

bretm

Jun 12, 2012, 11:14 AM

Logic. Currently limited to 16 threads (the MP 12 core would be able to handle 24), and all those cores and threads make a huge difference in performance.

Mac Pro is a great machine to run Logic...except for SATA II which bottlenecks SSD drives.

After Effects. FCP X. Smoke. Premiere CS6. Compressor. Motion. I could go on.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 11:19 AM

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?

You mean wasting PCI slots on things that are included standard on pretty much every other mac and PC shipping today?

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 11:27 AM

kenaustus

Jun 12, 2012, 11:30 AM

When the component's are ready I believe that the iMac will be released.

Biggest component factor for Apple these days is SSD. Apple is sucking these up as fast as they can and I can see a "period of adjustment" before moving to the iMac.

Improvements to the display might also be on the cards and that might be a factor in any delays.

My money is waiting and I'll keep waiting until Apple is ready to ship.

Umbongo

Jun 12, 2012, 11:30 AM

Again, another reason to just let all graphics cards work in either a PC or a Mac unmodified, and be done with it vs having a "Mac specific" card. Then we can throw as many CUDA cards in as we need for that extra cycle boost.

Someone has to write OS X drivers and get income from that. Mac specific cards solve that issue as they can be priced to cover the development and support costs.

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 11:31 AM

Buying used MP makes sense if it's a good enough deal, particularly since it's essentially the same machine as they are selling now (and the CPU can be upgraded). But honestly at this point I'd say the smartest option for many power users is just build a hackintosh already.

But that's illegal. Also, how hard is it to do that?

Bubba Satori

Jun 12, 2012, 11:34 AM

But that's illegal.

Sigh...

http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/175/315/PicardDoubleFacepalm-1.jpg?1316330080

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 11:36 AM

I'm surprised the professionals haven't all gone on strike yet. That'll teach the consumers...

----------

Sigh...

Image (http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/175/315/PicardDoubleFacepalm-1.jpg?1316330080)

I'm sorry, Captain Picard, but I'm not breaking the law.

taylord22

Jun 12, 2012, 11:38 AM

First, sorry MacPro crowd —

Second, to those of us that have waited for an iMac update —

For me, the iMac is the most attractive of Apple's line due to my above average needs, and home entertainment extendability (leveraging it as a TV/Gaming monitor). I question whether it will still be the best bang for the average users buck once the retina screen is implmented. The retina should easily push the base model over the $2000 price point; therefore, does the new MBP take the iMac's place as the value buster?

Of course, a $2000 iMac that's re-design is based around the rumored Apple TV is a different story. Why wouldn't Apple re-fresh (and position) the iMac along with its TV line? But then again, would Apple really split the spotlight up?

I think the aforementioned is likely, but I'd expect the refresh to be pretty major. If I had to guess, I would say that 1. it would be much, much thinner 2. it would have a mounting option 3. Apple TV functionality built-in 4. Multiple HDMI inputs (largely for compatibility with receivers) 5. More microphones 6. "potentially", motion controls (for gaming) 7. Biggest of all I'd expect the screen sizes to change

With the potential for Apple TV integration, I think you see the max screen size shoot up from 27 to 32...which further positions the iMac as a multi-duty device. That screen size gives you a nice desktop built within a good sized office/spare room tv. There's nothing wrong with the 27" monitor, but 32" & 33" are two of the most popular television sizes amongst consumers — I doubt Apple ignores that.

This is all just guessing from an un-educated/un-informed mind, but I really thing we're going to see a line blurred between TV and iMac, with the desktop separation occuring with MacMini and MacPro. And once the "blurring" happens, I worry how far the price tag of the iMac is going to get pushed.

RBR2

Jun 12, 2012, 11:44 AM

"Later next year."

That is an ambiguous and troubling expression. Is it supposed to mean "later" as in next year or later in the next year as in late next year?

That does not show me much either in terms of the timing or the commitment to keeping hardware current, most especially the Mac Pro. This is especially true in that Apple are using a only slightly worked over Intel reference platform logic board. Just how hard would it have been to have updated the CPU, if nothing else. And what about the odd number of RAM slots (6). With dual channel RAM the logical progression is from 4 to 8, not 6. There are tests out there that have shown that RAM in all 6 slots actually slows some operations compared to 4.

I am left to draw only a few possible conclusions. Number one is that Apple simply are not capable of keeping its entire hardware lineup up-to-date in a timely fashion. Number two is related to number one in that the company consequently places a very low priority on projects that are not their best sellers. While prioritizing the allocation of resources to projects which generate the greatest revenue/profits for a company is logical, one must ask just why it is that over a number of years the company have chosen not to bring on enough personnel to handle the situation. Given just these two hypotheses, it seems unnecessary to immediately consider others as these two alone virtually dictate the stagnation of the Mac Pro, resultant declining sales, and, eventually, its demise. If one must consider another possibility, remember Apple's continuing position that it is a consumer company and Mac Pros are, well, for Pros (supposedly).

I am also taken by the very strange manner in which Tim would choose to make a statement affirming the company's intention to continue development of the Mac Pro in particular. I just can not take it at face value. It does not "add up" to me. I would not take the Mac Pro off the proverbial "death watch". Many people who depend upon productivity have already left the platform and more are sure to follow. At some point it becomes a self reinforcing phenomena...a death spiral.

It certainly seems logical that the company will continue development of the iMac. After all, sales are still good and it is little more than an outgrowth of the laptop platform. It is still very, very odd that the company will not have an meaningful update of the iMac this year.

All in all, I thought the Keynote speech showed more weakness than strength.

----------

I'm sorry Mr. Picard, but I'm not breaking the law.

That's Captain Picard to you. :rolleyes:

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 11:53 AM

Looking at things (disgreard the disappointment factor of what COULD have been) ... wife has 1,1. Does the 12 core now look like a really good deal for someone that needs, desparately, to upgrade? Or am I crazy and the price was similar before?

Price was reduced, and is certainly a viable option. I suppose it really depends on what she does with her 1,1 and what she hopes to do with a new system.

My 1,1 at home I had intended to replace with the non-existent Ivy Bridge Mac Pro that wasn't released this week :mad: and convert it into a full on server to replace an even older machine :cool:

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 11:56 AM

First, sorry MacPro crowd —

Second, to those of us that have waited for an iMac update —

For me, the iMac is the most attractive of Apple's line due to my above average needs, and home entertainment extendability (leveraging it as a TV/Gaming monitor).

Lucky. My iMac can't act just as a monitor, which is very stupid if you ask me. Is there some way to get VGA video input into an iMac screen (in a broken iMac)?

----------

That's Captain Picard to you. :rolleyes:

Fixed.

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 12:00 PM

The OP specifically mentioned RECORDING 4K, not delivering in 4K.

Actually he is delivering in 4k, but that wasn't the point. The point was that an indie was shooting 5k on a RED. An the troll was saying nobody shoots that high of a res. If an indie is shooting 5k, all out pros sure as heck are shooting at 5k (or better).

TimeScapes was shot in 5K resolution on Red Epic and Canon DLSR cameras, edited in 4K in Adobe Premiere and After Effects, and graded at 16-bit 4K

taylord22

Jun 12, 2012, 12:02 PM

Lucky. My iMac can't act just as a monitor, which is very stupid if you ask me. Is there some way to get VGA video input into an iMac screen (in a broken iMac)?

----------

Fixed.

http://www.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Product_Id=515815

The latency is pretty terrible, so I generally stear away from playing hockey or FPS, but otherwise, it works 'ok'. Not sure what part of your iMac is broken, though?

I don't think Apple fully realized the potential, and obsession people would have, of leveraging their iMacs for monitors/tvs. The commercialization of hacking hardware, however, didn't really come about until after the last iMac re-fresh. I hope/believe they'll take this new culture into consideration, and make it much easier to leverage your iMac in this fashion. In addition, this seems like another strong piece of evidence as to why Apple may be waiting on their TV product line to solidify. I fear the iMac is going to enter a new market space vs. refresh.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 12:03 PM

Also, how hard is it to do that?

Shockingly easy.

I'm sorry, Captain Picard, but I'm not breaking the law.

And neither are any of the people making hackintoshes.

jjhny

Jun 12, 2012, 12:05 PM

The move to let the pros die is flat out dumb. The creative pros kept the company alive - there wouldn't have been "Apple, Inc." if it weren't for the pros in the trenches all those years.

That said. Sony has both a consumer and a pro division. The pro division keeps them cutting edge. Apple should have an actual "pro division" in case the interest in the toys dies down. The other thing is that tech keeps getting better - who can say if an innovator down the road makes a better mousetrap (device). Having a strong computer division might be a life saver down that road. Even if the pro division only breaks even it is worth it as a "just in case" strategy.

Steve is gone, and he drove the innovation. I fear the corporate types who will rise to the top - and those types are usually mediocrities at best. I have looked at IOS 6 - you have maps and facebook integration. That is hardly compelling new tech! Without Steve to kick a** you may see many useless features and no innovation - just standard corporate "new and improved" which will be neither new, or improved.

paulvee

Jun 12, 2012, 12:10 PM

If your current machine is not working for you, get a new one.

If it IS working for you, keep working and there's a good chance a new one will come along.

If it DOESN'T come along, you can switch platforms and keep working, albeit at great psychic and physical and spiritual cost.

If you don't like the new ones, or the fact that Apple kept the platform alive for now, then by all means keep complaining.

I have work to do.

SeeLos

Jun 12, 2012, 12:11 PM

Mac Pro users have indeed been abused the last few years but I'd be shocked if we don't see a major hardware upgrade next year. 20 pages of wining on the macrumors, and yet ya'll will forget you were ever ignored the second tim cook announces the newly designed mac pro packed full of a bunch of apple-designed parts with that **** eating grin of his. Look how long the last mac pro design has lasted them, they are holding off until technology dictates their design in such a way that it is clear they'll be on target with their design for another 10 years- and they will be right. there's nothing in the market to necessitate a major over hall quite yet...or until 2013 at least. Top priority has been to get their professional macbooks up to speed, now shut up and buy the new macbook pro pro, or whatever you want to call it (that there is no such thing as a macbook and yet there are two differently designed macbook pros is **** 'n stupid if you ask me.

TL;DR: bicker all you want, the second apple releases a completely redesigned mac you guys will be lapping that **** up like you were poisoned and clicking "add to cart" is the antidote. personally, i want it to be all black.

manu chao

Jun 12, 2012, 12:13 PM

Seriously, you're completely ignorant of the fact that MP only has SATA II? That there's no way to connect a high end SSD at full speed without adding PCI cards?

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?

Sure, that is why it has PCI slots, to create possibilities. But not being able to use any of the six SATA ports for high speed data storage is somewhat limiting, not least because of space considerations (how to route from the PCI card slot to one of drive bays for a standard 2.5" SSD).

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 12:14 PM

Isn't that what Mac Pro is for?

Um, you do realize those few slots Apple decided to give us, fill up rather quickly right?

bilbo--baggins

Jun 12, 2012, 12:16 PM

I'm waiting for a worthwhile Mac Pro upgrade (yesterdays updates are too similar to my current 2008 8-core Mac Pro for me to bother upgrading) - but given Apple's track record over the last 3 years it doesn't surprise me.

What really would be shocking is if Apple didn't update the iMac's this year to include Ivy Bridge and USB 3 at the very least.

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 PM

And neither are any of the people making hackintoshes.

It says right there in the end-user agreement that you can only install it on Apple hardware.

Carouser

Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 PM

The move to let the pros die is flat out dumb. The creative pros kept the company alive - there wouldn't have been "Apple, Inc." if it weren't for the pros in the trenches all those years.

1) They aren't keeping the company alive now
2) They don't owe you anything, just like you don't owe them anything
3) You're not as important as you wish you were ("in the trenches" - lol)

relimw

Jun 12, 2012, 12:17 PM

Guess I'll be hanging on to my Mac Pro 1,1 for a little while longer. Still going strong after nearly 6 years (knock on wood)....

Best advice, max it out on everything you can :D

faroZ06

Jun 12, 2012, 12:25 PM

http://www.belkin.com/IWCatProductPage.process?Product_Id=515815

The latency is pretty terrible, so I generally stear away from playing hockey or FPS, but otherwise, it works 'ok'. Not sure what part of your iMac is broken, though?

I don't think Apple fully realized the potential, and obsession people would have, of leveraging their iMacs for monitors/tvs. The commercialization of hacking hardware, however, didn't really come about until after the last iMac re-fresh. I hope/believe they'll take this new culture into consideration, and make it much easier to leverage your iMac in this fashion. In addition, this seems like another strong piece of evidence as to why Apple may be waiting on their TV product line to solidify. I fear the iMac is going to enter a new market space vs. refresh.

My current iMac has a faulty GPU card (thanks to NVIDIA). I also have a G5 with a broken motherboard (thanks to Apple for making those pieces of trash). I can still use my iMac, but I have to run the fans higher, and it still freezes every day at least once (as opposed to every few seconds).

But that product you sent would not work for what I'm trying to do. I need something that can let me connect VGA or something into the wires on the iMac screen itself (taken from a disassembled iMac). Mine is a 2006 machine.

----------

Best advice, max it out on everything you can :D

When I get my 2008 Mac Pro, I'm going to stick every part I have in there. Firstly, my iMac's 2TB hard drive.

prowlmedia

Jun 12, 2012, 12:25 PM

I suspect this is quick fix stop gap... Bump the specs with minimal engineering.

They are lingering with this and it's going to cause them problems - people will definitely switch. I am not buying this - 2 year old tech (1 year old CPU ) 3 year old graphics card and no upgrades

Ivy Bridge Xeon 54xx are pegged for later this year. With upto 16 cores.

So my punt is the the next pro will be modular like the RED cameras all linked via Thunderbolt. Buy as little or as much as you want.
CPU unit. This could be like a the mac mini+
SDD Boot Drive
On board graphics / sound etc - and with the basic interfaces.
Storage units. Choose your size. 4 - 8 - 12 drives.
interface unit - hold the PCI cards. Cho
Additional memory units
Will all be very clean designs though and slot together to create a whole machine.

The future is 1980s Stereo systems.

Of course I am half joking - it's against the Apple ethos to produce modular stuff. But I suspect that's the way the apple television will have to work. A great screen with an upgradeable plug in brain unit in the side - kinda like the latest samsungs

Oh and a retina iMac / 27" monitor with the same antiglare bonded tech - though the res is going to have to be massive ( but less exponentially as the viewing distance is more than a laptop ) - probably about 3840x2160

johngordon

Jun 12, 2012, 12:30 PM

You know how they just announced that incredible new MacBook Pro? How about when the next update to the iMac comes around, there's a new, flagship model that packs in the power of a MP? An iMac Pro for want of a better name. May in one way explain the lack of both iMac and MP updates yesterday. And if a top end iMac had no HD or optical drive, that's a lot of space freed up that doesn't need to be filled by batteries. Just a thought.

milo

Jun 12, 2012, 12:31 PM

It says right there in the end-user agreement that you can only install it on Apple hardware.

Yeah. And what makes you think that violating a user agreement is the same as breaking the law?

manu chao

Jun 12, 2012, 12:34 PM

Where Apple may have blundered, regarding the Mac Pro, is with Thunderbolt (Lightpeak). Specifically what tripped them up may have been the Thunderbolt display. In eagerness to impress they released this display in a way that the graphics were dependent exclusively on Thunderbolt. This was fine for their laptops/iMac/MacMini but was problematic for the pro desktop which traditionally use graphics cards and expansion slots.

Apple didn't think through properly how the Thunderbolt display was going to connect to the one mac where it was the most important (for them), the Mac Pro, the one Mac Apple really likes us to purchase with their quality though expensive screens. If Apple thought that the vendors of graphics cards would release thunderbolt enabled cards we must then assume that Apple are naive.

Agreed, though Intel at least went along with this blunder (though, sure Apple was in a strong negotiating position).

Release the Thunderbolt Display when they did but in a way that the Mac Pro would connect using conventional display port. How this would be implemented I am not sure. Some kind of adaptor? Extra cable: thunderbolt on Mac Pro to thunderbolt-in on display? Who knows, but again, because of the way that Apple is specific about perfect design they have given themselves little room to manoeuvre.

Yes, none of the options are appealing:
- add TB-less (m)DP ports (ie, what the graphic cards already have) to the Mac Pro & (m)DP-less TB ports, requires at least an external adaptor to feed these two into one combined TB port for the TB display to connect to, or a new 'TB' display which has both a (m)DP and a TB cable (and both DP and TB feed-throughs)
- convince the graphic card manufacturers to change the physical size of their cards so Apple can place a DP+TB combiner between the graphic card DP output and the physical end of the card which is normally flush with the back of the machine
- convince the graphic card manufacturers to design a TB input for their cards so DP and TB can be combined within the existing card dimensions

The last option would be the most appealing but I am not sure the low-volume Mac Pro would offer enough incentive for the graphic card manufacturers to do this (unless this solution would become common on PCs as well).