This has been going on for over a decade. It's not going to happen. It's not even clear Apple will stick with this new machine any more than they did with the previous MP (no updates for 6 years).
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 Says New Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR Are Coming in September [Updated]
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
This has been going on for over a decade. It's not going to happen. It's not even clear Apple will stick with this new machine any more than they did with the previous MP (no updates for 6 years).
I am going with this LG thunderbolt 3 display for the new Mac Pro. No one says you have to buy a $5000 monitor to work with the new Mac Pro.
Apple screwed up here. They should have just announced it as a $6K monitor and let people find out on the website they can get it cheaper if they don’t need a stand.
Not really. Just like the Trashcan before it, this one leaves too many unknowns. Upgradeability for one: if Apple didn't upgrade the GPUS on the upgradeable Trashcan proprietary GPUs for six years, why should they be trusted again with their again proprietary GPU system?
https://frankglencairn.wordpress.com/2019/06/04/the-new-macpro-we-need-to-talk/
However we have in this very thread a surgeon who will buy it for the aesthetics. Maybe that's what you guys mean by "real pros".
I still think the trash can Mac Pro looks much nicer. Black chrome (or whatever it's referred to as) is so pretty.
[QUOTE="TallManNY, post: 27448587, member: 137178"who the heck is going to buy one when the monitor has a vesa mount built in.[/QUOTE]
Eh, no it doesn't. You have to buy that too. $199.
You have to buy one or the other or you're leaning it up against a rock.
Eh, no it doesn't. You have to buy that too. $199.
You have to buy one or the other or you're leaning it up against a rock.
My 2¢ is that Apple has made one hell of a machine; and yes it is priced high. But...you can always start at the base model and get the CPU cores you need (minimum RAM and HD), my guess is the 12 core is going to be the best bargain for overall performance. Once you have the base, then you can later buy MPX modules and the Custom ASIC card if your workflow demands it.
And nobody knows how fast these Radeon Pro Vega 2 are going to be. And the fact that you can stick 8 of them in there using the dual cards (unless I am reading into it wrong); **** that is a lot of GPU power.
And nobody knows how fast these Radeon Pro Vega 2 are going to be. And the fact that you can stick 8 of them in there using the dual cards (unless I am reading into it wrong); **** that is a lot of GPU power.
This new Mac Pro is not made for us "normal" customers that uses it for 10 years (like I did with my former iMac). A high-end workstation is replaced after about 2-3 years and I doubt that Apple will deliver a new Mac Pro or a least a new motherboard for a new CPU and PCI generation in that time. That is where modularity ends...
I also think there is a market for a modular Mac above the Mini but with a way cheaper price point than this Mac Pro. If Apple wants to establish a macOS based market for high-end workstations they also need a more basic offering to be taken seriously...
Absolutely.
If you don't need an HDR reference panel then it's a total waste of money unless you really must have that cool matching enclosure. If you do need that kind of monitor, it's totally cheap.
Isn’t that what the iMac Pro and new Mac mini are for? My guess is both those machines meet what most of these people need to get their work done. Seems like most of the complaints are coming from enthusiasts/hobbyists who want to tinker. I don’t think Apple much cares about that market.
As much as I dig that pro display and its miracle stand, I'm not going to buy an office full of them. But after how many years, is it really inconceivable for Apple to produce a decent display for the rest of their users at this point? ...something proportional to go with their best selling laptops? They already do produce perfectly suitable displays for the iMac line. Even those would be something for the throngs of students on their little MBP's. ...they could even cheap out & just use the normal imac stand and matching enclosure, so they'd actually match sitting on a desktop connected to an iMac this time. They were on a logical track with the old Thunderbolt display, but in trying to get out ahead of rapidly changing display tech, ended up abandoning it entirely. ...a decent TB3 display shouldn't be so impossible to put out.
...unless they really feel that a basic monitor that simply completes their exiting product line is beneath them at this point. Differentiation is great, but there's a lot of room to innovate a decent Apple display for the unwashed masses.
...unless they really feel that a basic monitor that simply completes their exiting product line is beneath them at this point. Differentiation is great, but there's a lot of room to innovate a decent Apple display for the unwashed masses.
Last edited:
There's still a product gap between the Mini and the Pro for a headless yet serviceable Mac Desktop. iMac's don't really fit that because of the all-in-one nature coming with a display you can't replace and components that aren't easily accessible. Something LIKE a Mac Mini in consumer grade parts, but big enough to fit at least a moderate sized GPU in, with swappable storage and RAM would be what a lot of nay-sayers are looking for.
Something Apple used to provide with the original Mac Pro cheese grater, which price point was "high" but at least somewhat comparable to other PC's of similar function of the time ($2,500ish start price)
the New Mac Pro isn't a bad machine, but starting at $6k for performance that can be had in a computer costing 1/2 of that, it seems to miss that entire product segment. So the old Mac Pro users who would be fine with a $3000 "mac" just don't really have an option in that price range for that computer.
Like I said, the people whom the monitor is for will know that $6k is a reasonable price to pay for it.
The ones laughing at it are not the target market, however Apple chooses to price the display and the stand.
It makes no difference to Apple in the end.
I have about that much money in camera gear, and I work(ed) with RED and Alexa, and I'm telling you this Mac Pro is too expensive. Also, since you talk about photographers, Apple abandoned and now killed its own photo management software.
Since you need some context, for video/cinema cameras are 30K. Lenses can be 10K each (or more). Most video equipment is rental these days, as cameras depreciate so fast (and lately lenses tend to be locked in a system too, so they are a bad investment too right now).
However, very few people actually need the specs that Apple touted during their keynote, and those who do, usually would need whole render farms anyway (although the FPGA afterburner could be great). It's a great product, but too expensive, and too niche.
Last edited:
Yeah, but this is not 2006-2012. Smartphones (among other things) also were cheaper and powerful (for their time) and did cost less than half of what they cost now. But really, none of that matters anyway. People who need this machine aren't the one who focuses on the price of a stand (or other silly similar stuff) but rather on how good this machine will be for what they need it for. The ones who whine about it are in most cases the ones who have zero intention to buy it, in the first place.
I am hoping that Apple releases another machine that is basically half what the current one is. Take it down to 1 MPX slot (2 double wide x16), maybe 2 more x16 slots, and the other slots; and use non ECC RAM and use the consumer i7/i9 for the CPU. GPU options can stay the same. Although nVidia support would be nice for either one.
I wonder if Mac Rumors could do some investigation and find out if the Mac Pro is being build in the United States or is this just another China get rich machine. I don't mind it being a bit more expensive if it is being build or even assembled here.
This is the first apple product that I have ZERO interest.The monitor stand is ridiculous. Oh well..
- The same Steve Jobs who pitched a $6500 computer to students and educational institutions alike whose sole storage medium and highlight feature was a dog ass slow magneto-optical drive that contained the OS and all their files that they would carry around in their backpack from lab to dorm room...that Steve Jobs?
- The same Steve Jobs who gave us the Power Mac G4 Cube?
- The same Steve Jobs who introduced a very mediocre, but incredibly thin and light 13" MacBook Air in 2008 that had an 80GB drive, or a 64GB SSD (+$999) and a 1.6GHz CPU (or a 1.8GHz for +$300), 2GB of DRAM, a single USB-A port and a mini-DVI port. At a starting cost of $1799, "modest premium" are words that were never applied to the cost of the first gen MacBook Air.
- You mean the short term profits that Tim Cook has sustained since taking over Apple in August of 2011...i.e. eight (8) years ago? Is eight (8) years short term to you?
- The same Apple that has the highest customer satisfaction score? - https://www.macrumors.com/2018/09/2...atisfaction-score-among-pc-and-tablet-makers/
You asked for a Prosumer machine, which are labels that can be applied to the Mac mini or the 27" iMac. What Apple gave us is what many have asked for from them for a LONG time and that is a PRO machine, uncompromising and higher end.
I half agree with you. But while its easy to spout that ‘price doesnt matter at all’ like you and so many others are doing, is not entirely true.
For many smaller production houses the price is certainly a consideration, though agreeably not as much as it would be to an individual buyer who used to be able to afford the mac pro.
Price matters to almost everyone. But exactly how much it matters varies.
