Apple Says All-New Modular Mac Pro With Apple-Branded High-End Pro Display Coming After 2017

[SteveW928]

I personally can't understand why the 'New' Mac Pro wouldn't look like the 'old' IIcx/IIci, or even the 'old' IIfx.

Because.... 'innovation' I guess.

The iMac Pro is such an odd duck, I just don't get why Apple wanted to give us something we didn't ask for. People love their iMac's they are a really cool computer, but for Pro work, it just seems like absolute overkill.

The argument I keep hearing, is that we're just not the target market for Apple any longer. I guess we'll see what the Mac Pro is like, but it sure seems this is true. The new MBP, iMac Pro, etc. seem designed for a different kind of pro user than in the past.

I've said this before.... but Pro used to be a quality about the machine. It was professional grade hardware. More fault tolerant, better cooling, better components, faster, etc. Now, it seems to have to do more with an upper-class categorization of user. You know, it's the model for the entrepreneur or lawyer instead of the student or home user. In other words, someone with more money, likely to buy an up-sell.

Or, marketing driven vs purpose driven.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

The iMac Pro will be pretty horrible for Pro Audio as well as Pro video. Not being able to house the computer in a quite room or headless in a machine room doesn't make much sense in the pro world. Can you imagine trying to mix Audio with Fans blowing the whole time? The iMac Pro is such an odd duck, I just don't get why Apple wanted to give us something we didn't ask for. People love their iMac's they are a really cool computer, but for Pro work, it just seems like absolute overkill. I can Facebook and Instagram faster than any other computer...

Why? It was a 'cheap fix'. They just popped a different socket on the board, and maybe rerouted a few things, and probably (hopefully) put in some larger heat sinks and fans, and TA-DAH! A 'new iMac Pro Machine' that all pros everywhere should be salivating over and beating down the doors to get.

It's obviously a bandaid and it's not a very well fitting one at that. And the price? 5k for a black iMac with a souped up processor? Either they think people are that gullible, or they think that this 'hybrid' is going to knock down a lot of sales of people unhappy with the 'trash can' (ironic?) Mac Pro.

Like the G4 Cube, this appears to be another machine that came out of the design shop with little outside input to rate functionality, usability, cost of ownership, with practicality. It 'looks' nice. It's just not been maintained, and built with more usability inside. Oh, and expensive, even for Apple.

So, throw a CLOSED trash can at people. Fail to update it. Declare it dead. Come up with another CLOSED box, even more CLOSED than the trash can. Who doesn't have much hope the 'new new Mac Pro' will be anything other than yet another CLOSED box. Maybe another 'pretty' CLOSED box?

I like my behemoth 2009 Mac Pro. It's still got a lot of life left in it (I hope). Give the users something EXPANDABLE, UPGRADABLE, USABLE...

This morning, I was going through the Wikipedia articles on the Mac II line, and the stories of Apple missteps and self inflicted wounds are cringe worthy. One model was only 'available' for less than 4 months. They had slower models selling for more than faster models. They had machines spec'ed with faster processors than when they were finally shipped, and the prices didn't change. That happened largely under Sculley. Yikes...

 

[NT1440]

Why? It was a 'cheap fix'. They just popped a different socket on the board, and maybe rerouted a few things, and probably (hopefully) put in some larger heat sinks and fans, and TA-DAH! A 'new iMac Pro Machine' that all pros everywhere should be salivating over and beating down the doors to get.

It's obviously a bandaid and it's not a very well fitting one at that. And the price? 5k for a black iMac with a souped up processor? Either they think people are that gullible, or they think that this 'hybrid' is going to knock down a lot of sales of people unhappy with the 'trash can' (ironic?) Mac Pro.

Like the G4 Cube, this appears to be another machine that came out of the design shop with little outside input to rate functionality, usability, cost of ownership, with practicality. It 'looks' nice. It's just not been maintained, and built with more usability inside. Oh, and expensive, even for Apple.

So, throw a CLOSED trash can at people. Fail to update it. Declare it dead. Come up with another CLOSED box, even more CLOSED than the trash can. Who doesn't have much hope the 'new new Mac Pro' will be anything other than yet another CLOSED box. Maybe another 'pretty' CLOSED box?

I like my behemoth 2009 Mac Pro. It's still got a lot of life left in it (I hope). Give the users something EXPANDABLE, UPGRADABLE, USABLE...

This morning, I was going through the Wikipedia articles on the Mac II line, and the stories of Apple missteps and self inflicted wounds are cringe worthy. One model was only 'available' for less than 4 months. They had slower models selling for more than faster models. They had machines spec'ed with faster processors than when they were finally shipped, and the prices didn't change. That happened largely under Sculley. Yikes...

I don't understand the venom towards the iMac Pro when Apple has made it very clear that a new MAC PRO is coming soon. For video editing the iMac Pro is going to be a dream, the folks at ESPN (my previous employer) LOVED the 5K display iMacs and used them every day. Now they get that PLUS more power than any Mac ever has.....what's there to bitch about? If the iMac Pro isn't for you, it's very likely given Apple's hugely public mea culpa, that the Mac Pro will be.

 

[SteveW928]

...or they think that this 'hybrid' is going to knock down a lot of sales of people unhappy with the 'trash can' (ironic?) Mac Pro.

At least the 'trash can' was great in many pro dimensions, that I wonder if this will be. It just wasn't what part of the pro market was asking for or needed. But, in it's own category, a great machine. I wonder about the iMac Pro though.

So, throw a CLOSED trash can at people. Fail to update it. Declare it dead. Come up with another CLOSED box, even more CLOSED than the trash can. Who doesn't have much hope the 'new new Mac Pro' will be anything other than yet another CLOSED box. Maybe another 'pretty' CLOSED box?

I like my behemoth 2009 Mac Pro. It's still got a lot of life left in it (I hope). Give the users something EXPANDABLE, UPGRADABLE, USABLE...

I really think - now - that TB3 is finally fast enough to put something serious external (at least one or two things... not a bunch of expansion yet) that the 'trash can' design is viable. I'd actually keep that design and update it. They could get away with less GPU internally, and add some externally. I'd also bring out something more akin to the 2009 (which I think they just declared obsolete), as there is a segment of pros who'd much rather just have something like that again.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I don't understand the venom towards the iMac Pro when Apple has made it very clear that a new MAC PRO is coming soon. For video editing the iMac Pro is going to be a dream, the folks at ESPN (my previous employer) LOVED the 5K display iMacs and used them every day. Now they get that PLUS more power than any Mac ever has.....what's there to bitch about? If the iMac Pro isn't for you, it's very likely given Apple's hugely public mea culpa, that the Mac Pro will be.

Yes, but...

Apple made the announcement that the New Mac Pro was going to be the 'best computer for professionals'. 'Powerful', yadda yadda yadda... IF it only lived up to the lofty claims of the obviously star blinded Apple PR team.

Was it amazing? Yes. Was it innovative? Yes. Was it powerful? At first. Was it for professional users? Some. It was expensive, and relied, for true 'professional' users, the addition of lots of expensive attachments. It placed this 'trash can' out of reach for the majority of pro, and semipro, users that have the old Mac Pro, and thought they could get into the New Mac Pro.

But whatever... I hope Apple did 'get religion', and comes up with a machine that can satisfy the people they burned with the 'New Mac Pro', and then abandoned. Perhaps the iMac Pro is aimed at the 'semi-pro' users, but the possibility if it being noisy and hot could make it another missed attempt at keeping another vital class of users in the Apple family. I know that my iMac makes a hell of a racket when its fans are running. If the iMac Pro has loud fans, it's going to be a non-starter for a number of prospective users. Those that can afford the entry price.

But, why the venom?

Because it appears that the iMac Pro is a band-aid. A rushed job to try to stem the rush of some of their users to other platforms after being burned by the heavily inaccurate statements of the New Mac Pro, and Apple all but abandoning it under all those users.

 

[Abazigal]

Yes, but...

Apple made the announcement that the New Mac Pro was going to be the 'best computer for professionals'. 'Powerful', yadda yadda yadda... IF it only lived up to the lofty claims of the obviously star blinded Apple PR team.

Was it amazing? Yes. Was it innovative? Yes. Was it powerful? At first. Was it for professional users? Some. It was expensive, and relied, for true 'professional' users, the addition of lots of expensive attachments. It placed this 'trash can' out of reach for the majority of pro, and semipro, users that have the old Mac Pro, and thought they could get into the New Mac Pro.

But whatever... I hope Apple did 'get religion', and comes up with a machine that can satisfy the people they burned with the 'New Mac Pro', and then abandoned. Perhaps the iMac Pro is aimed at the 'semi-pro' users, but the possibility if it being noisy and hot could make it another missed attempt at keeping another vital class of users in the Apple family. I know that my iMac makes a hell of a racket when its fans are running. If the iMac Pro has loud fans, it's going to be a non-starter for a number of prospective users. Those that can afford the entry price.

But, why the venom?

Because it appears that the iMac Pro is a band-aid. A rushed job to try to stem the rush of some of their users to other platforms after being burned by the heavily inaccurate statements of the New Mac Pro, and Apple all but abandoning it under all those users.

You think the IMac Pro was cobbled together in a week? It was clearly meant to be Apple's replacement for the Mac Pro all along. The backlash clearly got them to trot back on this plan somewhat, so it looks like users will be getting both.

 

[SteveW928]

You think the IMac Pro was cobbled together in a week? It was clearly meant to be Apple's replacement for the Mac Pro all along. The backlash clearly got them to trot back on this plan somewhat, so it looks like users will be getting both.

If the iMac Pro was meant to replace the Mac Pro... then Apple was incredibly off-base and out of touch. I'm not sure how anyone could see it as a successor to the Mac Pro.

But, anyway, what I don't get is why Apple feels the need to 'innovate' once again, especially when they are so far behind. If they took the 'cheese grater' and 'cylinder' Mac Pros and simply upgraded the guts to the latest and greatest... while they might not win any new design awards, I'll bet pros would be thrilled. I know I would.

And, that should take them all of a few weeks!

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

You think the IMac Pro was cobbled together in a week? It was clearly meant to be Apple's replacement for the Mac Pro all along. The backlash clearly got them to trot back on this plan somewhat, so it looks like users will be getting both.

It would not be that hard to take a CAD design for a motherboard and add a different socket, some different power bits, add different heat sinks and fans, and say it's 'new'. Really... The iMac Pro was the result of 'flop sweat' over having to admit they crapped on 'pro users', and don't have a thing to offer those that want to bolt. AND at that, they preannounced it too soon.

 

[Aldaris]

It would not be that hard to take a CAD design for a motherboard and add a different socket, some different power bits, add different heat sinks and fans, and say it's 'new'. Really... The iMac Pro was the result of 'flop sweat' over having to admit they crapped on 'pro users', and don't have a thing to offer those that want to bolt. AND at that, they preannounced it too soon.

But it comes in space gray... so it’s a Pro right?

Crapped on the pro users they did. They’re more interested in getting content deals done than the tools that help create and speed up content and push the limits of content creation...

 

[albebaubles]

You think the IMac Pro was cobbled together in a week? It was clearly meant to be Apple's replacement for the Mac Pro all along.

Not clear at all, actually. Or better put, only clear to you.

 

[Abazigal]

Not clear at all, actually. Or better put, only clear to you.

I saw this picture floating around on twitter some time back and it suddenly made perfect sense.

 

[vailr]

Here's an idea: offer a "Mac Pro Bitcoin Miner" with 8 or 10 PCIe slots, and durable enough to run 24/7/365 as a video production machine in the daytime, and as a Bitcoin miner after work hours.
One could install 4x GTX Titan X video cards, for live streaming 8k video content, or fill up all 8 or 10 PCIe slots for Bitcoin mining.
User's choice.

 

[SteveW928]

Here's an idea: offer a "Mac Pro Bitcoin Miner" with 8 or 10 PCIe slots, and durable enough to run 24/7/365 as a video production machine in the daytime, and as a Bitcoin miner after work hours.
One could install 4x GTX Titan X video cards, for live streaming 8k video content, or fill up all 8 or 10 PCIe slots for Bitcoin mining.
User's choice.

Heh. Though I don't think there's any money in mining Bitcoin any longer for most of us.

 

[vailr]

Heh. Though I don't think there's any money in mining Bitcoin any longer for most of us.

Well, I'm trying out a single GTX 1060 + Intel H81 system running Windows, which currently appears to be "mining" at a rate of ~$40/month in one of the alternative crypto-currencies. Whether that can re-pay the electricity cost of running it: don't know.
Note: the best nVidia video card option appears to be the GTX 1070Ti, which actually performs better than the GTX 1080 or 1080Ti, for some obscure reason. I imagine that a machine with 8x GTX 1070Ti's installed could produce enough net income to pay for at least one GTX 1070Ti card per month, or better. From what I've read (or seen on youtube), the maximum number of multiple video cards supported by the nVidia Windows driver appears to be: 8x.
The latest AMD Vega GPU video cards also appear to have very good crypto-currency production rates.
Of course, the convertibility to "real world" currency also fluctuates quite a bit.

 

[snipper]

Well, I'm trying out a single GTX 1060 + Intel H81 system running Windows, which currently appears to be "mining" at a rate of ~$40/month in one of the alternative crypto-currencies. Whether that can re-pay the electricity cost of running it: don't know.
Note: the best nVidia video card option appears to be the GTX 1070Ti, which actually performs better than the GTX 1080 or 1080Ti, for some obscure reason. I imagine that a machine with 8x GTX 1070Ti's installed could produce enough net income to pay for at least one GTX 1070Ti card per month, or better. From what I've read (or seen on youtube), the maximum number of multiple video cards supported by the nVidia Windows driver appears to be: 8x.
The latest AMD Vega GPU video cards also appear to have very good crypto-currency production rates.
Of course, the convertibility to "real world" currency also fluctuates quite a bit.

I suggest you read up on mining crypto currencies before you throw away money. A complete industry has been developed around it. You can't possibly beat the large scale mining farms in countries where the electricity is dirt cheap.

 

[vailr]

I suggest you read up on mining crypto currencies before you throw away money. A complete industry has been developed around it. You can't possibly beat the large scale mining farms in countries where the electricity is dirt cheap.

No, I didn't say that there'd be very much profitability through mining cryptocurrency using only a single GTX 1060 video card. Any kind of hardware expense would tend to force down profitability. There are also dedicated cryptomining hardware devices with multiple hundreds of specialized (cell phone type) ARM CPU's inside of them: "Antminer" is one brand. Completely solar powered cryptomining would be one method of getting more or less "free" electricity.
But: we're also getting off topic here.

 

[Daniel Reed]

It would not be that hard to take a CAD design for a motherboard and add a different socket, some different power bits, add different heat sinks and fans, and say it's 'new'. Really... The iMac Pro was the result of 'flop sweat' over having to admit they crapped on 'pro users', and don't have a thing to offer those that want to bolt. AND at that, they preannounced it too soon.

Not really, (i)Mac Pro engineering work started well beyond 2 years ago as a replacement/upgrade for the Mac Pro

The issue was:
The Apple executive team felt uncomfortable positioning the (i)Mac Pro as the new-er Mac Pro due to Creative/Scientific Pro backlash over expandability. Even w/ TB3, the intended new-er Mac Pro only works well w/ two professional level external devices. In some ways four TB3 ports is a downgrade from six TB2 ports, the complete opposite direction of Pro demands. Hence a high level decision was made early this year to not release it as a "Mac Pro" and instead start from scratch on a different Mac Pro design to allow for the ability to accept AND fully utilize more expensive add-in cards AND displays that those same Pros demanded.

 

[SteveW928]

Not really, (i)Mac Pro engineering work started well beyond 2 years ago as a replacement/upgrade for the Mac Pro

The issue was:
The Apple executive team felt uncomfortable positioning the (i)Mac Pro as the new-er Mac Pro due to Creative/Scientific Pro backlash over expandability. Even w/ TB3, the intended new-er Mac Pro only works well w/ two professional level external devices. In some ways four TB3 ports is a downgrade from six TB2 ports, the complete opposite direction of Pro demands. Hence a high level decision was made early this year to not release it as a "Mac Pro" and instead start from scratch on a different Mac Pro design to allow for the ability to accept AND fully utilize more expensive add-in cards AND displays that those same Pros demanded.

So, you're basically saying that the plan was to replace the cylinder Mac Pro with the iMac Pro? While I suppose that makes sense in the narrative of Apple phasing out the Mac, it doesn't seem to fit with the narrative Apple provided that they made a thermal mistake (painted into a corner) with the cylinder Mac Pro. It would seem an iMac Pro would just further paint them in.

If accurate, I guess for true high-end pros, this is good news (ie: card-slot Mac Pro). I'm hoping Apple also has something in mind for fill the huge middle gap. Like, a high-end Mini option, or something more like what has been dubbed the 'xMac' where it would be closer to a higher end regular iMac sans screen (ie: i7, reasonable GPU). If they would do something like that... heck, they could use the cylinder Mac Pro work already done to keep it nice and cool... they'd have a true hit product for many Mac users, and a killer solution for switchers.

 

[vailr]

If accurate, I guess for true high-end pros, this is good news (ie: card-slot Mac Pro). I'm hoping Apple also has something in mind for fill the huge middle gap. Like, a high-end Mini option, or something more like what has been dubbed the 'xMac' where it would be closer to a higher end regular iMac sans screen (ie: i7, reasonable GPU). If they would do something like that... heck, they could use the cylinder Mac Pro work already done to keep it nice and cool... they'd have a true hit product for many Mac users, and a killer solution for switchers.

You mean like this?:

 

[SteveW928]

You mean like this?:

View attachment 741779

Yes, except if possible, fanless or super-quiet.
(I know the cylinder Mac Pro has a fan, but it's very quiet, unlike most GPU fans)

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Not really, (i)Mac Pro engineering work started well beyond 2 years ago as a replacement/upgrade for the Mac Pro

The issue was:
The Apple executive team felt uncomfortable positioning the (i)Mac Pro as the new-er Mac Pro due to Creative/Scientific Pro backlash over expandability (sic). Even w/ TB3, the intended new-er Mac Pro only works well w/ two professional level external devices. In some ways four TB3 ports is a downgrade from six TB2 ports, the complete opposite direction of Pro demands. Hence a high level decision was made early this year to not release it as a "Mac Pro" and instead start from scratch on a different Mac Pro design to allow for the ability to accept AND fully utilize more expensive add-in cards AND displays that those same Pros demanded.

So their future is theirs to lose.

They really need to come up with a KILLER high end Mac, or they will be relegated to 'consumer grade' and maybe that's not all bad, but I wouldn't think that they would want to fade out and cede the high end to anyone else.

But the Mac Server, dead. Mac Pro, dead. MacOS server, dead? Rather than fix the issues stumbles and unforced errors in the high end market, they seem to want to cut and run. The American (?) company with the thickest wallet wants to give up and go home on the high end? What a sad and disappointing end to a company that suggested people 'Think different', and did...

And, no, the iMac Pro doesn't even come CLOSE, not even within a parsec of being an answer to anything except desperation on the part of Apple to try to phone in a device that might get people excited enough to not notice they are giving up.

 

[HHarm]

Certainly hope that they finally make a properly upgradeable MP. My MP 4.1 from 2009 is nearing the 10 year mark.

So far I've upgraded the CPU and RAM twice, SSD's and GPU's three times, moved from 2,5k to 5k etc.

If the (at time circa 3000€) computer wouldn't have been upgradeable I would be at 2.66 GHz quadcore, 8 or 12 GB's of RAM, a slow mechanical HDD and Radeon HD 4870.

Instead I have 6 cores at 3.49 GHz, 24 GB of RAM, PCIe SSD's, and a 980 Ti. Needless to say the non-upgradeable MP 4.1 would have been obsolete many years ago. With the upgrades it's still quite usable. Usable computer after almost 10 years.... how about that?

I can do with less innovation but upgradeability is a must.