Apple Allowed Developers to Test a Prerelease Mac Pro Hidden Inside a Metal Box

[SeaFox]

With the new Mac Pro, Apple is betting on a workstation future that looks different. More reliance on SANs and cloud storage. GPUs powerful enough on day one that they're probably good enough to last the useful life of the machine.

They're betting on a workstation only Apple can repair, and on a new business of "expansion accessiories" to allow use of hardware that used to plug right up on the inside of the machine before.

I don't see the new Mac Pro leading to a mess of cords and external expansion any more than we already are seeing with current Mac Pros.

You need to get your eyes checked then. Just use my previous post. I add two new hard drives and a PCI TV tuner card:

New Mac Pro: We now have two external drives with their data cables and a PCI expansion card chassis connected with Thunderbolt. And new power lines needed.

Old Mac Pro: Nothing new. The Mac Pro tower has room for up to four 3.5" drives inside and expansion slots on the motherboard. Power is supplied from the tower's supply on internal connections.

But SSDs don't fail as often as HDDs anyway.

Okay. I hear the opposite. Flash drives work for most people because by the time you're hitting the limit on read/write cycles you're likely looking to upgrade anyway.

I have spinning platter drives sitting around here I don't know what to do with. Not because they don't work. No, they're 10+ years old and still work fine. The issue is they're IDE interface and most of the machines are SATA now, and it's a waste of a 3.5" bay to use them because I have USB flash sticks with higher capacity now.

 

[Tech198]

Hehe..

Didn't Apple know it was encased in glass at WWDC? Why hide it now? . We've already seen it. It would make it more appealing now, since that's what they came to see.

 

[milo]

I add two new hard drives and a PCI TV tuner card:

New Mac Pro: We now have two external drives with their data cables and a PCI expansion card chassis connected with Thunderbolt.

Getting an expansion chassis would be an odd choice considering they make USB tuners. There are people who have spent thousands on PCI cards that would need an expansion chassis, but TV tuner is not the best example. External drives are nothing new, but either the USB3 or TB is faster than the old internal SATA. Not that it matters much if those hard drives are slower than any of the busses anyway. They also make enclosures that hold multiple drives, still cheap for the USB3 versions.

Why hide it now?

This article isn't talking about now, it's talking about developers using it weeks ago before anyone saw the hardware.

 

[Lancer]

I have zero need for one, but I want one!

Will it be any good for gaming?

I agree, got a top line 27" 2012 iMac with all the spec upgrades but the new Mac Pro with Big RAID server and a couple of 30" LEDs would be fantastic!

 

[SeaFox]

Getting an expansion chassis would be an odd choice considering they make USB tuners. There are people who have spent thousands on PCI cards that would need an expansion chassis, but TV tuner is not the best example. External drives are nothing new, but either the USB3 or TB is faster than the old internal SATA. Not that it matters much if those hard drives are slower than any of the busses anyway. They also make enclosures that hold multiple drives, still cheap for the USB3 versions.

Yeah, I was just pulling from my previous post for devices. Besides, if you use a USB TV tuner you're now adding a dongle device, which was my point. A USB TV tuner is just a PCI tuner card's hardware stuffed into a package that's more marketable to consumers.

If the drive you're adding is slower than the Thunderbolt bus, you're now paying extra for the "privilege" of using it outside the case. Same issue with the expansion chassis. Yeah, if you have a dozen cards and might relocate them to another machine occasionally it's a good idea. But for the more modest user you could look at the new Mac Pro as Apple selling you half the computer at what will likely be 100% of the price, then expecting you to buy extra hardware to do the rest.

So even ignoring the cord business the new Mac Pro will be overall more expensive.

 

[WMD]

One of the most significant changes with the new Mac Pro is a move away from silver to black. Apple tends to have the same basic colour scheme across all it's computers, so I'm wondering if this finally heralds a move away from silver Macs to black Macs after so many years of silver machines. I'm really hoping that it does. An all black iMac or MBP would be fantastic.

The new Mac Pro isn't really black; that's just the lighting/angles in the marketing photos. The shots from the display model look more aluminum.

 

[davidec]

Only the lower end MPs.



While we'd all love to hear about Logic, no reason to expect that at a developer conference.

Well it's a given that it will be released before the new MacPro.

I personally am delighted appears to be taking the pro consumer segment seriously again.

Looking forward to the next few months.

 

[heisetax]

I don't want to hear anymore "Mac Mini Pro" nonsense.

I thought that Mac Pro Mini is the better one to use. Because it it to be a Mac Pro & like the Mac Mini all expansion is external.

Also in keeping with what Apple referred to it as the Modern G4 Cube. That explains things better. Other things like Xeon Trash Can would be more descriptive of what it looks like but would be not liked by many more people. So in my opinion Mac Pro Mini is more descriptive than just saying Mac Pro. Also remember that Apple used a different name for the G4 Cube & the current Tower.

This means that I will henceforth call my old Mac Pros Mac Pro Towers. I will henceforth call the new Mac Pro the Mac Pro Mini. I;m sure that the name of Mac Mini Pro or Mac Pro Mini will stick by many as that is what I & many more think of when we see it. So unless Apple changes their mind & changes the new Mac Pro to a tower the name will stick. By now you should know that Apple wants their products to look different than everybody else's. Also the current design idea that seems to rule at Apple is small & pretty over every thing else. Compared to the current larger than normal Mac Pro Tower the new Mac Pro Mini is small & pretty.

 

[Mike Valmike]

Some people want a powerful machine but the freedom to choose not to buy an Apple monitor.

You... DO realize you don't have to buy an ATD, correct? Thunderbolt ports can accept a DisplayPort-to-HDMI connector. I'm using one on my Mac Mini at work, so that I can have two monitors. I can't imagine they're going to arbitrarily disable this on the Mac Pro.

 

[cmanderson]

The Macintosh II was $4000 without the monitor.

I'd like to encourage everyone to quote the price at the time of product release, as well as the price adjusted for inflation ("in today's dollars".) It puts everything in much better perspective, and can serve to prove your point even more so.

Introductory price of the Macintosh II in 1987 was $5500 (according to Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II

Adjusted for inflation, that would be $11,258.00 according to the CPI Inflation Calculator, http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=5500&year1=1987&year2=2013

I recognize the cost of technology goes down as time marches forward, but for a company like Apple, they're looking to keep their margins high (they're going to "get theirs") and their products are typically more expensive than most other "equivalent" products, not counting the "Apple value add."

 

[3282868]

I am tired of Apple missing a market segment to build a "high-performing" consumer level desktop WITHOUT an integrated display. A lot of people think they are "pro" but they are deluded by Apple's marketing and the lack of a upper-middle tier desktop option. Apple just wants to funnel developers into an expensive desktop product.

Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.

Make a grey version of this using desktop Haswell CPU's, and the option to have one or two GPU's.

^This. PowerMac's were great systems at a reasonable price (~$1499-$1999), were sold alongside iMac's and didn't cannibalize other desktop sales. Before the Intel switch (iOS not included) Mac users generally used towers and still do for the same reasons many stated (pricing, expandability, BTO options, etc). I'm surprised some are excusing the use of external devices; Jobs pitched the iMac's for their lack of cables, and contrary to what some claim not many with Mac Pro's or other workstations have tons of external devices. A few external drives for photo-shoots/film/portability, but most use all 6 internal SATA bays and ports on their displays.

Baby steps, Apple went all the way by not implementing at least 2 3.5" SATA III bays; it wouldn't take much more room while splitting HDD's between internal and external bays w/ a boot PCIe SSD (my 12-Core has a boot 256GB SSD in the 6th SATA II optical bay below my internal Blu-Ray burner w/ 4 2TB SATA II HDD's). We'd require less external Thunderbolt chassises as current prices are $1000+, especially w/ a smaller PCIe SSD drive ~512GB-1TB. Certain Apple SSD pricing will be bank. In essence, cut enough internal components and leave enough for mixed storage use.

Otherwise, I'm very excited Apple is showing interest and innovation in the pro-market again. I love the device even with the few issues I take and I truly should not be complaining, as this is better than nothing!

 

[SeaFox]

You... DO realize you don't have to buy an ATD, correct? Thunderbolt ports can accept a DisplayPort-to-HDMI connector. I'm using one on my Mac Mini at work, so that I can have two monitors. I can't imagine they're going to arbitrarily disable this on the Mac Pro.

That was a reply to the people who say there is no need for an xMac with the performance of the iMac being what it is.

 

[cmanderson]

This crying about the mac pro is just ridiculous.

If you are a "pro" in sense you are an professional programmer, any of the macs can do the job just fine. Which iphone developer need a mac pro? none.

And when its going to expandability. The new Mac Pro does you a favor.

Dropping PCI cards shifts everything to Thunderbolt. And like we all know Thunderbolt support right now isnt the best. Now the Hardware manufacturers have to deal with Thunderbolt, because no OSX user can now use their PCI cards.

This helps everyone, especially everyone who doesnt need a mac pro. Just take Pro Tools. For big system you always needed the the cards. Now you take your cards in some 3rd party case or Avid is going to make more Thunderbolt devices which can be used with a Mac Pro, a Mac Mini Macbook.. you call it. Isnt that what everyone wanted with Thunderbolt?

I agree with most everything except this - when someone buys a Mac Pro with the express intent to expand both internally (via SATA drives) and externally via add-in adapters, it's definitely no "favor". They're paying for the right to do so in that box. Having said that, no one is forcing anyone to run out and buy the new Mac Pro when it drops. If it doesn't suit your needs (anyone's particular needs), don't buy it.

 

[SeaFox]

Having said that, no one is forcing anyone to run out and buy the new Mac Pro when it drops. If it doesn't suit your needs (anyone's particular needs), don't buy it.

Yes, I'll just buy that other Macintosh that hasn't been discontinued and still has internal expandability

... oh wait, there isn't one.

Okay, then if Apple can't fulfill my needs, I'll by a Mac from another manufacturer who does.

... oh wait, Apple ended the clone program. There are no other Mac makers besides Apple.

A Hackintosh is starting to look more and more like the only alternative.

 

[tevion5]

This is a great design, which will be accompanied with a great price tag.

But the average consumer does not need Xeon's and dual workstation class GPU's. Way too many "developers" are going to buy this but people making iOS apps do not need a 12 core Xeon CPU to do the trick.

I am tired of Apple missing a market segment to build a "high-performing" consumer level desktop WITHOUT an integrated display. A lot of people think they are "pro" but they are deluded by Apple's marketing and the lack of a upper-middle tier desktop option. Apple just wants to funnel developers into an expensive desktop product.

Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.

Make a grey version of this using desktop Haswell CPU's, and the option to have one or two GPU's.

Fine, it will steal market away from the "pro" consumers, but it will INCREASE market presence overall. Now that services like Steam are no longer bound to PC gaming Apple is just ignoring the importance of not offering a desktop in this class without the Mini or "i" monikers.

Why not? It just makes sense. Do it now!

The first thing Jobs did when he returned to apple was cut out all the various types of Mac's Apple sold and set 4.

1 Laptop for consumers, 1 Desktop for consumers.

1 Laptop for Professionals, 1 Desktop for Professionals.

Apple has made much money with this line-up and so have little reason to change.

(I know they make a mac Mini now, but that sells the most poorly per target market of all the Mac's available)

 

[69650]

The new Mac Pro isn't really black; that's just the lighting/angles in the marketing photos. The shots from the display model look more aluminum.

Having looked at the photos on Engadget I see what you mean. I guess the Apple marketing people thought it would look better in black. Oh well one lives in hope.

 

[3282868]

The first thing Jobs did when he returned to apple was cut out all the various types of Mac's Apple sold and set 4.

1 Laptop for consumers, 1 Desktop for consumers.

1 Laptop for Professionals, 1 Desktop for Professionals.

Apple has made much money with this line-up and so have little reason to change.

(I know they make a mac Mini now, but that sells the most poorly per target market of all the Mac's available)

Except this was in 1997, and PowerMac's were priced reasonably, ~$1499-$1999, depending and didn't cannibalize iMac sales. It's not merely the hardware but the pricing associated with the hardware. Why use a bulldozer when a shovel can do the same job? Many want to use non-Apple displays and top line iMac's aren't powerful for some and lack the expandability and ports, graphics power, etc. in a tower system. The "Pro" desktop at that time is about what those would want from a BTO Mac mini-tower today. The Intel switch drove a large gap w/in their Mac desktops.

 

[69650]

The first thing Jobs did when he returned to apple was cut out all the various types of Mac's Apple sold and set 4.

1 Laptop for consumers, 1 Desktop for consumers.

1 Laptop for Professionals, 1 Desktop for Professionals.

Apple has made much money with this line-up and so have little reason to change.

(I know they make a mac Mini now, but that sells the most poorly per target market of all the Mac's available)

They changed that policy some time ago by introducing a third tier with a sub $1000 desktop (the Mac Mini) and a sub $1000 laptop (the iPad).

Steve himself referred to the iPad as Apple's answer to the emerging netbook computers in the iPad launch.

 

[shaunp]

Fail!

Huh? The MacMini is the Mac you are looking for.
The Mac Mini is the Mac.

NO. IT. IS. NOT!!!

There is a huge gap between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro, and the iMac is not the answer for many of us who don't want an all in one. Especially an all in one with a glossy screen!

All these calls for a 'core i7 Mac Pro' are because the mini doesn't have discrete graphics and starting point for the Pro is too high - not all of us need Xeon, ISV certification and the high price tag associated with proper workstations. So the answer is either a core i7 Pro or a Mini with better graphics. I'd be happy with either, but as things stand Apple don't make a desktop that I would buy.

So all of you "Pro's" ranting on about "This should stop all the Core i7 Pro calls", or "I wish people would stop talking about a Mac Mini Pro", I'll stop bitching about the desktop line up when Apple produce a small desktop that has decent graphics capabilities (enough for gaming basically), that doesn't have a starting price of around £3k.

 

[aaronvan]

In Love!

I love the garbage can.

 

[shaunp]

I don't want to hear anymore "Mac Mini Pro" nonsense.

How is it nonsense? There's a massive gap between the mini and the pro and for many the iMac is not the answer - I don't want an all-in-one, especially one with a glossy screen. A mini with decent graphics and a couple more thunderbolt ports would solve the problem for me, or a product similar to the Pro but with a Core i7. And before you say 'I don't get it', actually I do, I need more flexibility than the mini currently has but I don't want to spent a big pile of cash on a machine that is overkill either.

 

[heisetax]

I agree, got a top line 27" 2012 iMac with all the spec upgrades but the new Mac Pro with Big RAID server and a couple of 30" LEDs would be fantastic!

We can now follow Apple's orders & make these displays 3rd party. This seems to mean that Apple plans to stay with their glossy 27" 16:9 screen. For my purposes the new Dell 30" work work very well. It has a display Port connector so all one needs to connect to the new Mac Pro Mini is a $5 adapter cable.

 

[shaunp]

This is a great design, which will be accompanied with a great price tag.

But the average consumer does not need Xeon's and dual workstation class GPU's. Way too many "developers" are going to buy this but people making iOS apps do not need a 12 core Xeon CPU to do the trick.

I am tired of Apple missing a market segment to build a "high-performing" consumer level desktop WITHOUT an integrated display. A lot of people think they are "pro" but they are deluded by Apple's marketing and the lack of a upper-middle tier desktop option. Apple just wants to funnel developers into an expensive desktop product.

Apple needs to come out with the "Mac", period. Not iMac, not Mac Mini, not Mac Pro, but a consumer level "high-end" desktop. And I don't want a laptop with "near" desktop performance.

Make a grey version of this using desktop Haswell CPU's, and the option to have one or two GPU's.

Fine, it will steal market away from the "pro" consumers, but it will INCREASE market presence overall. Now that services like Steam are no longer bound to PC gaming Apple is just ignoring the importance of not offering a desktop in this class without the Mini or "i" monikers.

Why not? It just makes sense. Do it now!

Makes perfect sense to me. I'd buy it today if it were available.

 

[tevion5]

They changed that policy some time ago by introducing a third tier with a sub $1000 desktop (the Mac Mini) and a sub $1000 laptop (the iPad).

Steve himself referred to the iPad as Apple's answer to the emerging netbook computers in the iPad launch.

Netbook market entrance, Apple never made a netbook. A tablet does not replace any type of latop, MacBook Air included.

 

[shaunp]

Didn't the high end iMac outperform the Mac Pro before the update? Those iMac's can take most things thrown at them.

Maybe, but who wants an iMac? Not me. I detest glossy screens and don't want an all in one that has 'useful' design features like the SD card at the back of the machine where you can't reach it.