Some might argue they've more or less done just that, with the iMac Pro.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Continues to Work on All-New Mac Pro With Upgradeable Design
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Some might argue they've more or less done just that, with the iMac Pro.
"Mac Pro design has a limited thermal capacity that doesn't always meet the needs of the most demanding workflows"
Whatever the constraints of the thermal capacity of the Mac Pro, it is LOT better thermal design than the all-in-one iMac Pro ... so this explanation makes no sense to me. Imagine what they could do with the Mac Pro design using the same GPUs in the iMac Pro, throw in 10G ethernet, the fast RAM etc .. if it can be done in the constrained space of the iMac Pro, it can all be done better in the R2D2 Mac Pro.
Whatever the constraints of the thermal capacity of the Mac Pro, it is LOT better thermal design than the all-in-one iMac Pro ... so this explanation makes no sense to me. Imagine what they could do with the Mac Pro design using the same GPUs in the iMac Pro, throw in 10G ethernet, the fast RAM etc .. if it can be done in the constrained space of the iMac Pro, it can all be done better in the R2D2 Mac Pro.
Is that really something you're not 100% certain about? Why would it ever not be possible for Apple to use an old, large chassis for something? The only thing I can think of are aluminium resources are so depleted that it's prohibitively expensive to use so much, but then they could use another material so even even that's not a hurdle. So what your comment really amounts to is that Apple should do something because 1) they can, and 2) you want them to—neither of which are valid reasons when making corporate decisions on products.
For the record, I like that chassis design. They could obviously reduce its size while still keeping the same look-and-feel while making it user-upgradable, but none of that matters. You need to ask yourself how bringing that design back (or something similar) benefits Apple. You could say, "I think that general casing architecture would be easy for Apple to engineer and would likely be a better financial gain for the company over the current Mac Pro."
Last edited:
My 2006 Mac Pro is the best computer I've ever owned. It still works and runs fast enough for most tasks. I like my 2013 Mac Pro as well, but it just doesn't run as smooth overall as my 2006 did.
Would love to see Apple go back to the old Mac Pro tower design, but I would bet good money on the fact that they won't for the next iteration of Mac Pro. I consider my G5 tower a work of art still today, even if it's effectively a paperweight at this point.
For anyone interested in a technical deep dive into the iMac Pro chips. I spent all day yesterday acquiring the info and forming it into a sane piece today.
Hope you peeps enjoy
https://discuss.macstadium.com/t/imac-pro-tech-breakdown/91
Hope you peeps enjoy
https://discuss.macstadium.com/t/imac-pro-tech-breakdown/91
I bought my first Mac, a PowerMac G4 for £1600 ish back in around ‘02.
Then a PowerMac G5, Mac Pro followed by another Mac Pro, (along with 2 MacBooks Pro, a MacBook Air, 3 Macs Mini and ‘loads’ more other Apple gear.
I’m a home user who dabbled with vid editing.
I will not be buying that large faced proprietary appliance that is the iMac.
Speak for yourself.
When I hear modular. My concern is that it will be something like. You want a faster GPU. You need to buy a Apple built self enclosed GPU module using all proprietary connectors. More storage, same deal. So, that the desktop is not actually a tower. But a series of self contained cubicle modules you plug together.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I suspect you are more likely to be right than wrong. Watching Apple evolve, I foresee efforts being made to proprietary this & that, and "modular" could very well be a scenario where only modules from Apple can work.
I think too many of us are imagining something very flexibly upgraded with third party-sourced (cheaper) hardware attached to industry standard jacks/cable connectors/etc. However, modern Apple seems locked into a mindset of proprietary over standards and going out of their way to drive "lock in" concepts (did we really need a proprietary connector in iMacs for hard drive upgrades?)
If they build the classic Mac Pro in a modern shell, how do they make money off of the upgrades people might want to use year after year? However, if they build something that makes Apple the only source of such upgrades, then a Mac Pro 2018 can keep up with the times while Apple keeps making it's profits on those upgrades.
I suspect the new Mac Pro is more likely to be in that direction than some kind of modernized version of the old tower. But hopefully, Apple will prove such suspicions wrong and roll out one that leans heavily on standards so that upgrades can come from many other sources.
I think too many of us are imagining something very flexibly upgraded with third party-sourced (cheaper) hardware attached to industry standard jacks/cable connectors/etc. However, modern Apple seems locked into a mindset of proprietary over standards and going out of their way to drive "lock in" concepts (did we really need a proprietary connector in iMacs for hard drive upgrades?)
If they build the classic Mac Pro in a modern shell, how do they make money off of the upgrades people might want to use year after year? However, if they build something that makes Apple the only source of such upgrades, then a Mac Pro 2018 can keep up with the times while Apple keeps making it's profits on those upgrades.
I suspect the new Mac Pro is more likely to be in that direction than some kind of modernized version of the old tower. But hopefully, Apple will prove such suspicions wrong and roll out one that leans heavily on standards so that upgrades can come from many other sources.
Last edited:
No one said you had to buy it (iMac Pro). But Apple said right after they teased the iMac Pro that they were working on a modular Mac Pro design for 2018. So why expect features from the product that isn't designed to be the product they told us we being designed to meet that need (expandability and upgradeability).
If it is not upgradable, it´s not "Pro". No matter how magnificent it´s now,
At what cost? $8,000? No thanks. Apple really needs to come down to earth. They are putting themselves in the absurd position of a boutique computer company. That path doesn’t lead to a good place.
Given all the recent (read post-2012) hardware releases, Apple WILL fork this up.
Us Mac enthusiasts WILL NOT get what we want.
Steve's gone, folks, and he took that Apple with it.
Tim's Apple is not my Apple, so I'm slowly starting to let go.
But like the married man headed towards divorce, the hold-out for hope remains while watching the wife move on without you.
Us Mac enthusiasts WILL NOT get what we want.
Steve's gone, folks, and he took that Apple with it.
Tim's Apple is not my Apple, so I'm slowly starting to let go.
But like the married man headed towards divorce, the hold-out for hope remains while watching the wife move on without you.
Unbelievable how people still complain after Apple made it absolutely clear they’re building what those people were clamoring for for years.
I wonder how many of them ever had a Mac Pro or the need for one. I started with the 7100 and I’m very happy about this development.
I wonder how many of them ever had a Mac Pro or the need for one. I started with the 7100 and I’m very happy about this development.
Making the $5000-$13000 iMac Pro un-upgradeable ( storage - no, RAM only by Apple? ) was 100% expected ( Sir Ive!! ), but OH SO WRONG !!!
Computers that can't be upgraded or repaired are essentially iPads. Temporary things that will eventually be thrown away ( because they can't be upgraded or repaired ). So again they prove that they make computers ( like iPads ) under protest only. And won't build them like computers. Everything soldered on is necessary for iPhones and iPads. It is completely misguided, UNnecessary and wrong for computers. Ive has NO CLUE what he is doing when it comes to computers. All his decisions are based on how thin something can be made.
So these are the same geniuses who will be working ( part time ) on the Mac Pro, frankly i'm worried. Clueless is as clueless does. And unless Forstall is coming back, they will continue to do head slappingly idiotic stuff.
IveCook don't seem to understand/care that alot of the high end video pros are already gone. There is some urgency here if they really want to keep and satisfy the base of customers that kept that company alive prior to the iPhone.
Just think of somebody going into a meeting and pitching Steve Jobs on a $13,000 computer that can't be upgraded. They would be fired before they finished the sentence.
They must announce Mac Pro by April at the latest, even though we know it won't hit the Apple store until Dec 20 2018. Just like the iMac Pro. Because a product release 5 days before Xmas really maximizes sales ( idiots!! )
Computers that can't be upgraded or repaired are essentially iPads. Temporary things that will eventually be thrown away ( because they can't be upgraded or repaired ). So again they prove that they make computers ( like iPads ) under protest only. And won't build them like computers. Everything soldered on is necessary for iPhones and iPads. It is completely misguided, UNnecessary and wrong for computers. Ive has NO CLUE what he is doing when it comes to computers. All his decisions are based on how thin something can be made.
So these are the same geniuses who will be working ( part time ) on the Mac Pro, frankly i'm worried. Clueless is as clueless does. And unless Forstall is coming back, they will continue to do head slappingly idiotic stuff.
IveCook don't seem to understand/care that alot of the high end video pros are already gone. There is some urgency here if they really want to keep and satisfy the base of customers that kept that company alive prior to the iPhone.
Just think of somebody going into a meeting and pitching Steve Jobs on a $13,000 computer that can't be upgraded. They would be fired before they finished the sentence.
They must announce Mac Pro by April at the latest, even though we know it won't hit the Apple store until Dec 20 2018. Just like the iMac Pro. Because a product release 5 days before Xmas really maximizes sales ( idiots!! )
You put WAY MORE thought into my thought than I did. I bet your a blast to have a casual conversation with!
For about 20 years, Apple did release Power/Pro towers that were easily upgradable at prices that were accessible to relatively normal home consumers. I bought three towers between 1999 and 2006 while I was a student.
I think the upgrade cycle for most people now stretches longer than it used to, and great monitors are much cheaper, so upgradability is less important than it used to be for consumers. Still, the Hackintosh community shows there is some market for a customizable Mac box, at a price that doesn't restrict purchases to studios editing Hollywood movies.
Cool. We'll put you in the "form-over-function" column.
I wouldn't mind seeing the Mac Pro "round recycling bin" tower re-used for a newer Mac mini. I'm just hoping it would be a bit shorter.
It would be neat if Apple designed their Macs motherboards as modular components, so that when designing a new motherboard it would fit the Mac mini, MacBook Pro and iMac. One motherboard, three computers. It would lower their R&D costs, their manufacturing costs, simplify inventory for both manufacturing and Apple stores (for repairs) and would always keep all three Macs up-to-date.
For an example, look at the 2015 MacBook Pro motherboard, it's a rectangle. Just put anything related to batteries on a separate motherboard which could then be shared by all Apple laptops and you've simplified a lot of other things. Make three types of motherboards: basic, good, better. You instantly get three Mac mini models, three iMacs models and three laptops models.
It would be neat if Apple designed their Macs motherboards as modular components, so that when designing a new motherboard it would fit the Mac mini, MacBook Pro and iMac. One motherboard, three computers. It would lower their R&D costs, their manufacturing costs, simplify inventory for both manufacturing and Apple stores (for repairs) and would always keep all three Macs up-to-date.
For an example, look at the 2015 MacBook Pro motherboard, it's a rectangle. Just put anything related to batteries on a separate motherboard which could then be shared by all Apple laptops and you've simplified a lot of other things. Make three types of motherboards: basic, good, better. You instantly get three Mac mini models, three iMacs models and three laptops models.
Last edited:
Agreed. The whole point of a pro machine is you pay a relatively small amount for a shell (circa $1500 like the old G5, Mac Pro etc) and THEN the sky is the limit with upgrades. $5000 is not a realistic starting point for any machine.
Says who (besides you)? Believe it or not, there is a huge market between the people that want something more than their iPad and movie makers and scientists. You're saying everybody else should be happy with the ONLY OTHER CHOICE, the iMac?
Point is, don’t assume u know who can afford or will buy it.
It is telling that Apple can only deliver overpriced underwhelms or extremely overpriced overkills.
I guess once you're used to those fat profit margins that's all you can dream of. Otherwise I would have had my $2199 MBP with 4C/8T 32Gb 512GB without the stupid touch bar. And for the desktop a decent quality upgradeable, configurable tower like HP, Dell and Lenovo are selling. That's all most people need.
I guess once you're used to those fat profit margins that's all you can dream of. Otherwise I would have had my $2199 MBP with 4C/8T 32Gb 512GB without the stupid touch bar. And for the desktop a decent quality upgradeable, configurable tower like HP, Dell and Lenovo are selling. That's all most people need.
Last edited: