Apple Sends Mac Pro Posters to Journalists: 'The Computer We Were Insane to Build'

[MacDav]

The real "Pro" community is used to spending thousands of dollars on misc. stuff for their workstations.

Yes, the successful ones that can afford it. Some startups have limited budgets. I'm only saying that most of the current ThunderBolt hardware is priced quite high. Also, you don't necessarily need this MacPro for anything other than Pro Video or scientific work, maybe audio. An iMac will work for most other "Pro" needs. So if you are saying the only "Pro" community that is "Real" are the successful ones with unlimited budgets, then I guess you have a point. I think the pro market includes a lot more than that.

 

[twoodcc]

posters look pretty cool. i bet this new machine will be a solid machine though, once we accept no more internal storage. at least for large data sets. maybe cheaper externals will be made for thunderbolt eventually

 

[yakovlev]

You have 6 TB 2.0 ports to do that with.

And using Mavericks’ IP over Thunderbolt feature, you can have 20 Gbps networking in your office for the cost of cables (Apple’s 2 m is $40, StarTech’s 3 m is $90, Corning’s 10 m is $330). For example, you can use 2 Thunderbolt ports to connect two displays, some storage and audio/video I/O, and the remaining 4 Thunderbolt ports to connect to four other computers (some of which could be Mac Pros that connect to even more computers). All of this works automatically, and the real speed should be around 12.4 Gbps (Thomas Kaiser measured Thunderbolt 1 at 6.2 Gbps vs. 10GbE at 5.7 Gbps, see https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/1657957/).

 

[supercoolmanchu]

That's the thing. I love the new Mac Pro. I think it's innovative and awesome. And I'm sure it will use a standard processor as it would be expensive to try to solder that thing in. And ironically I am going to buy it. I'm just hoping that 1TB SSD will be enough space for at least a year as it will be such a waste to take such beauty and ruin it with a bunch of external devices and wires. One more mini PCIex slot.. come on.. THAT is all my complaints summarized into one sentence. It's beautiful, I don't want to have external devices with it.

This is not a "pro" concern. I understand that this might be any important computer feature for your shopping, but it just doesn't apply to the professional market. Any serious professional in audio, video, graphics, programming that I know already has external networked storage and/or hot swappable enclosures. The low end people or hobbyist guys might keep all their projects on one drive, which is totally fine. However there's no professional wishing to replace separate client drives with that type of scheme.

Further, there are no professional creative or scientific industries without an abundance of necessary external devices. It's about time somebody lead the charge in better standardizing of peripheral i/o. It's the new Mac Pro, not the new Mac Play Video Games.

 

[MacVidCards]

It hasn't gained traction because CUDA got a strong foothold and as long as Nvidia cards are available everyone will take the path of least resistance.

That's why we will not be seeing Nvidia GPUs on the Mac Pro. Apple is betting that the workstation will be so compelling that users will switch to OpenCL based tools just to use it, forcing other providers to ditch the proprietary framework.

It's a gamble, but it's the only shot for OpenCL at this point, and really the only shot at a massively parallel future for all computer users, not just pros.

So, can we sum this up?

"It is CRUCIAL that we not use a single vendor proprietary solution for GPGPU as that is a bad thing and would give one vendor an unacceptable stranglehold over the industry, even though it is currently the better system. However, if you wish to connect anything to this free and open graphics system you need to use a single vendor, proprietary system that must be licensed and OK'd by Intel because if we force everyone to use it, it will become the better system"

Does that cover it?

 

[kalsta]

3000 for a quad core. I'm trying hard to keep a straight face.

You all wanted 'Made in America' and now you got it!

 

[Iconoclysm]

3000 for a quad core. I'm trying hard to keep a straight face.

And that would be because you mistakenly believe you can build a PC like this for the same price or less.

 

[yakovlev]

Heck if you want it done proper, you can situate the external devices some 10m away if I remember the spec of thunderbolt 2 correctly.

Up to 3 m for copper cables and up to 100 m for optical cables. Corning has just introduced Intel-certified 10 m optical cable for $330, and plans to launch 30 m, 50 m and 100 m cables in 2014.

 

[Iconoclysm]

Do you think it will cost more to build a pc with the same specs?

I absolutely know for a fact that it will.

 

[alphaod]

I hope they include this posters with the new Mac Pro

 

[Four oF NINE]

yeah, okay.. So Why aren't they calling this the Mac Mini Pro? It really seems fitting and apropos.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

With an unlimited budget, I'd absolutely want workstation-class hardware rather than desktop hardware, but you could pay a lot less than $3000 for equivalent or better performance than the base spec Mac Pro.

Buy a Windows machine at 1/3 the price for the same or better performance if you're using it for games.

[/url]

Your points are all good, but I would say that if you want a headless Mac (say you're invested in your current monitor setup and don't want an all-in-one) with good discrete graphics, this is your only choice. We haven't seen what's in store for the updated mini yet, but with top specs it isn't exactly cheap.

It's more expensive than a fairly loaded MacBook Pro, but not much more (for some definitions of much).

Obviously don't get this just as a gaming rig - that would be foolish. But if you want a high end Mac, the fact that it's a competent gaming rig is icing on the cake.

Plus it just looks cool.

 

[kockgunner]

Not trying to be cynical, but besides form factor, what's revolutionary about this Mac "Pro"? They've done it before with iCube, the iMac on the stick (with a dome base, in face of predominantly square computers back then and even today). But otherwise, what's revolutionary here, I just don't see it?

With quicksilver PowerMac G4 - it was revolutionary, because unlike PC (and I've always build my own PCs), it could be opened in one motion with all expansion slots very easily accessible. To a bit lesser degree same was with Mac Pro G5. But G5 had innovation that on top of easily expandability, it had smart cooling and almost no visible internal wires.

What's innovative about new Mac Pro? They designed cylindrical from factor with a turbine inspired cooling, venting through the top... OK. Custom design proprietary motherboard to fit into small space (ala dome base iMac) - OK. But that's nice for a light consumer computer, where looks are super important. Heck for Apple pro-user, looks are really important. But what does it bring to the usability that pro users need? How does it improve my workflow when I cannot add graphics card, expansion cards, more hard drives - while retaining the elegant minimalistic looks?

It seems to me Apple thinks Mac pro users really don't need pro features, they THINK they need. Time will tell. But given that, there is no technological barriers this thing broke. Anyone with enough budget can design custom electronics to fit into a specific shape, especially if there is no requirement for extensive expandability.

Marketing talk, that what it is.

I assume you haven't worked with product design before? Anything can sound trivial if you want it to. A refrigerator is a cold box. A smartphone is a screen on a rectangle.

The fact that they fit all that power in such a small design with one quiet fan is an engineering feat. Nevermind all the ports are aligned nicely on one side of the device. It's little things like these that take the most designing.

Take the iPhone 5's front camera for example. It's centred. Look at any Android phones and even the older iPhone's. It's not centred. With experience working with product design, you'll see that achieving an obvious, human-centred design usually means blood, sweat, and tears on the engineering side.

By the way, I like the language of the poster. It feels more like "Steve-Apple" in the garage days when they were the underdogs and could do anything without being scrutinized and just made badass products.

 

[WestonHarvey1]

So, can we sum this up?

"It is CRUCIAL that we not use a single vendor proprietary solution for GPGPU as that is a bad thing and would give one vendor an unacceptable stranglehold over the industry, even though it is currently the better system. However, if you wish to connect anything to this free and open graphics system you need to use a single vendor, proprietary system that must be licensed and OK'd by Intel because if we force everyone to use it, it will become the better system"

Does that cover it?

Are there any other options for PCIe over a wire besides Thunderbolt?

You can always hold your nose and attach an enclosure and your Intel lock-in is limited to a single cable.

Also, Thunderbolt does nothing to stifle a technology that Apple is boosting. In fact, it enables the direction they want to take their PCs. CUDA, on the other hand, is stepping on the throat of one of their core technologies.

 

[spaz8]

You have 6 TB 2.0 ports to do that with.

Except a 2nd internal SSD would have 4x or 8x the thru-put of the one hooked up via a TB2 (best case - USB3 is much more affordable and slower still) cable.

I'd love to find out you can put a 2nd SSD inside, isn't there space for it but no connector?
1 TB seems way too little. I have 8TB in my drobo and thats FW800, and about 6TB internally..

I'm gonna spend a small fortune on cables to hook up my dual-link DVI monitors, drobo, need to get an external blu-ray drive etc. Thats the killer, all the external stuff the "pros" have already is not in TB or USB3 form..

 

[aloshka]

This is not a "pro" concern. I understand that this might be any important computer feature for your shopping, but it just doesn't apply to the professional market. Any serious professional in audio, video, graphics, programming that I know already has external networked storage and/or hot swappable enclosures. The low end people or hobbyist guys might keep all their projects on one drive, which is totally fine. However there's no professional wishing to replace separate client drives with that type of scheme.

Further, there are no professional creative or scientific industries without an abundance of necessary external devices. It's about time somebody lead the charge in better standardizing of peripheral i/o. It's the new Mac Pro, not the new Mac Play Video Games.

Why do you assume that if someone doesn't have a rack of external storage that all they do is play games? That's a pretty bad stereotype and I can only assume that you think OSX / Mac Pro's are for the guys that have a camera and think they are creative professionals. Every time I read these forums it sounds like everyone here works for Pixar, when I am pretty positive a lot of people here just do youtube videos and think they need something so powerful.

My needs for a Mac Pro are a bit different. I have 5-6 clients that I do massive enterprise reporting and programming for. Just so happens, I like OSX and that's why I use a Mac Pro and temporarily using a PC as most enterprise-level PCIex SSD's do not work with the current Mac Pro. The current external thunderbolt enclosures do not quite hit the performance of even the consumer level cards like RevoDrive's (the expensive ones, not the x2's). And for the amount that I charge for clients, speed is essential to me and them and waiting an hour for SAP to run a quarter-end closing report is not acceptable. So yes, I am interested in a Mac Pro having multiple PCIex SSDs and look good and stay quiet in my office since that is what apple offers... small, quiet and powerful.

So no, I don't work for Pixar, and I sure don't have racks of storage for youtube videos or consider myself a "creative professional". But since I can afford it, I do want the fastest IO/CPU and potential upgradability as needs arise so I have every right to rant that Mac Pro does not meet my needs and wish it had a little more expansion just like every other person here has been complaining about CUDA.

I really am going to stop posting to these forums as everyone here is a "real pro" vs the normal pros or apparently everyone else who just plays games. sigh... Yes, you are very special and more "pro" than everyone else. The rest of us just make money playing games, apparently.

 

[brdeveloper]

We can't wait to see what you can write using a $3000 computer and a word processor.

It's maybe the only computer in the world capable of launching OpenOffice in less than a second.

----------

Don't forget the free PCIe storage. Or the free memory. Or the free ports.

Or the fact that it's made in America.

I want a cheaper MacPro Made In China in a plastic case, available in colors... That will be called Mac Pro C.

From $1699, quad-core, single gpu, 128GB SSD and 2GB RAM.

 

[HurtinMinorKey]

But that's the thing, it's not really a cost savings... and the video is much less capable even with this decked out system. If the graphics card weren't a mobile one...

Real question is, will the drivers in the new MacPro be written in a way where a Photoshop/Lightroom/gamer will be able to make use full use of them?

Sure, gamers can always use more power, but the even the 780M is overkill for Photoshop and Lightroom, and he was talking about editing stills. And when you factor in the screen, and the cheaper ram (you don't need ECC for photshop) you definitely are saving money.

----------

Except a 2nd internal SSD would have 4x or 8x the thru-put of the one hooked up via a TB2 (best case - USB3 is much more affordable and slower still) cable.

How is that possible? I thought PCie 3.0 would give you more or less the same speed as TB2.

 

[Piggie]

Without any question whatsoever, this is, by any standard, totally form over function.

This is supposed to me a professional machine not an iMachine make for it's looks.

It's supposed to me the Landrover that gets you across the dessert or thru the jungle, not the BMW with big wheels that looks like it's the same but gets stuck on a lumpy field.

 

[Renzatic]

How is that possible? I thought PCie 3.0 would give you more or less the same speed as TB2.

Not quite yet. I believe Thunderbolt 2 is roughly equivalent to a PCIe 4x slot. If you're running a single SSD off an internal slot vs. a TB cable, you wouldn't notice a difference, but some SSD Raid that wouldn't have a problem on a higher lane PCIe slot would can oversaturate TB connection.

 

[Slow Programmer]

So the new Mac Pro is targeted at journalists? Most journalists work with words. So the Pro is for word processing? "Can't wait to see what they create with it."

 

[NT1440]

So the new Mac Pro is targeted at journalists? Most journalists work with words. So the Pro is for word processing? "Can't wait to see what they create with it."

So...clearly no understanding of how PR works, or just being facetious?


Who knows?

 

[tdiaz]

Great. More posters for people to argue about "fakes" in about 15 years.

 

[percival504]

there is [sic - are] no technological barriers this thing broke. Anyone with enough budget can design custom electronics to fit into a specific shape, especially if there is no requirement for extensive expandability

If anyone can build a tiny cylindrical case, with the same mac materials and quality - and made in america - that holds this kind of technology, please respond to this post with a price. Insofar as expandability is concerned, I find it pretty critical given the need to share data. I, for one, will be in line.

 

[Antgb84]

"the computer you'd be insane to buy"

lol.