Apple Silicon Mac Pro Said to Feature Same Design as 2019 Model, No User-Upgradable RAM

[Jethro!]

Not really Jobs era, though. The first upgradable machine to approach the upgradability of the Apple II was the Mac II, and that came after Jobs left. Jobs was generally against ideas about upgradability.

Definitely not the Cook era.

Not likely. For every person that wants an upgradable Mac, there are probably 5 that, within the last couple years, bought an MBA. If the day comes with the MAJORITY wants the ability to upgrade, maybe Apple will change. However, as long as the size of Apple’s echo chamber provides for the sale of 20-30 million non-upgradable Macs, they’ll continue to serve that market.

That's because people have been acclimated to the iToy culture. Fine for toy users, but unbelievable that actual pros put up with it.
"MAJORITY" is only because Apple hasn't provided a choice for upgradable machines. Fait accompli.

 

[Realityck]

Apple's philosophy (mostly Jobs era) was upgradability. Obsolescence could be delayed, sometimes for a very long time.

Soldered in RAM is hardly new. The original Apple MAC introduced in 1984 had soldered in RAM with no provision for upgrades. I am sure it wasn't the first.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Definitely not the Cook era.

The Cook era is not much different from the Jobs era. They both are different from the Scully or Amelio eras, though.

That's because people have been acclimated to the iToy culture. Fine for toy users, but unbelievable that actual pros put up with it.
"MAJORITY" is only because Apple hasn't provided a choice for upgradable machines. Fait accompli.

Well, most folks want mobile devices, over 80% of what Apple sells is mobile. And, for those wanting those mobile devices that Apple’s selling SO many of, mobility takes precedence over upgradability. The same is true for PC users looking for lightweight long lasting devices. The entire industry is more interested in “computing right here, right now” than “can I put in more RAM 6 years from now?”.

 

[Jethro!]

Soldered in RAM is hardly new. The original Apple MAC introduced in 1984 had soldered in RAM with no provision for upgrades. I am sure it wasn't the first.

Don't know if that's true. But if it were, the original Mac was more novelty for people with money than anything; more showcasing potential than practicality. People learned quickly that 128K wasn't enough, thus upgradability.

 

[Jethro!]

The Cook era is not much different from the Jobs era.

No! Totally different philosophies.
Jobs: We're here to enable you to do what you want to do how you want to do it.
Cooke: You're gonna do it OUR way, and you're gonna like it whether you like it or not.

Well, most folks want mobile devices, over 80% of what Apple sells is mobile. And, for those wanting those mobile devices that Apple’s selling SO many of, mobility takes precedence over upgradability. The same is true for PC users looking for lightweight long lasting devices. The entire industry is more interested in “computing right here, right now” than “can I put in more RAM 6 years from now?”.

Are you not aware this is a Mac Pro thread?
Tower users don't give a crap about mobility and lightweight devices.
And I don't give a dozen craps about what iToy users want. Apple only exists today because people like me stuck by them when they were barely hanging on by a thread in the 90's. And we are indeed interested in putting in more RAM 6 years from now.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Jobs: We're here to enable you to do what you want to do how you want to do it.
Cooke: You're gonna do it OUR way, and you're gonna like it whether you like it or not.

Jobs: And you’ll do it on a locked down Mac with 512k of RAM whether you like it or not. Yeah, REALLY different.

Are you not aware this is a Mac Pro thread?
Tower users don't give a crap about mobility and lightweight devices.
And I don't give a dozen craps about what iToy users want. Apple only exists today because people like me stuck by them when they were barely hanging on by a thread in the 90's. And we are indeed interested in putting in more RAM 6 years from now.

Yes, and the majority of folks buying PC’s today do not want what this thread is about. Just a bit of reality for folks that continue to wonder “Why doesn’t it appear that PC companies are interested in making their customers happy!?” They are, it’s just that their customers are buying mobile systems!

 

[Jethro!]

Jobs: And you’ll do it on a locked down Mac with 512k of RAM whether you like it or not. Yeah, REALLY different.

No. You can't compare the dawn of the Mac to what it became. That first Mac was more toy than tool.

Yes, and the majority of folks buying PC’s today do not want what this thread is about. Just a bit of reality for folks that continue to wonder “Why doesn’t it appear that PC companies are interested in making their customers happy!?” They are, it’s just that their customers are buying mobile systems!

I don't buy it for half a second that non-upgradable is what they want. Non-upgradable is what they're force-fed: "Mmm, disposable tastes soooo good, doesn't it? Don't gag. It yummy! Now throw it away and empty your wallet on us!"
What is WRONG with you folks?? Or, which navel-gazing wing of the Apple spaceship do you work in?

 

[jdb8167]

Don't know if that's true. But if it were, the original Mac was more novelty for people with money than anything; more showcasing potential than practicality. People learned quickly that 128K wasn't enough, thus upgradability.

Both the original 128K Mac and the later 512K and 512Ke Macs had either soldered or socketed RAM (I can't remember but I think it was soldered.) The next generation, the Mac Plus had DIMM sockets for up to 4 MB of RAM.

 

[haddy]

Both the original 128K Mac and the later 512K and 512Ke Macs had either soldered or socketed RAM (I can't remember but I think it was soldered.) The next generation, the Mac Plus had DIMM sockets for up to 4 MB of RAM.

Yep and changing the logic board on an SE to an SE30 was a pretty easy task

 

[JazzyGB1]

The original Hulk was grey and the original Superman couldn't fly.
However, if you presented the Hulk as any other colour than green or Superman as a hero who couldn't fly it'd be ridiculous as they've both been defined by those traits for decades.
The same goes for expandability with Apple.
Most Macs over the last 4 decades have been user expandable to some degree, so it's not unreasonable to expect that to continue - particularly on their professional tower.
Only a polemicist or troll would argue otherwise.

 

[HDFan]

Loving the aesthetics is irrelevant

Maybe to you. There are other posters for whom aesthetics are very relevant.

Same for a non-upgradable Mac "Pro". Hit the ceiling for your config? In the past you'd just upgrade it. Now... Awww, too bad so sad. Throw it away.

And that's just what my company did. The labor and parts cost to upgrade all of those machines would be astronomical. There are certainly some places where it is important to be able to upgrade. There are also lots of users who don't want to muck around with machine internals. The iMac Pro and Studio met my needs perfectly, but do understand that there is a subset of users who need to be able to upgrade.

 

[chucker23n1]

They can do their work on an M1 -- for now. But when new software or user needs inevitably surpasses the machine's capabilities you have but one option: throw it away.
Same for a non-upgradable Mac "Pro". Hit the ceiling for your config? In the past you'd just upgrade it. Now... Awww, too bad so sad. Throw it away.

Yeah, and so what? Donate that Mac Pro to a library or elementary school who can still get some use out of it, and treat yourself to something that is newer than a decade and a half ago.

Totally wrong. I've swapped out and replaced the CPU's on my 2009 MP that I write this on. That's why they're such great machines. You think you'll get 13-14 years out of a throw-away Mac "Pro"? Not on your life.

You can only upgrade to CPUs that fit the same socket. Given that Intel likes to change sockets a lot, that's not that useful. You're mostly stuck within a generation or two. On top of that, you're limited by all the other components: your RAM will still have the same speed as was typical back then. Your system bus will be slow. Your PCIe will be 2.0 (so even if you frankenstein something like USB-C in with a PCI card, it'll be needlessly slow that way). Your SSD will likely be slower (heck, a 2009 MP didn't even come with any SSD at all) than is typical today. And so forth. (Oh, and it only runs El Capitan. I'm sure you've patched it to run something newer, but that's frigging seven releases ago.)

It's cool that you've gotten so many years out of it, but all you've done is patched over a very old thing when you could've instead gotten a much newer thing, which is quieter, smaller, cheaper, and much, much faster. A $999 MacBook Air runs circles around your machine. It has way faster single-core perf, might even have more cores than you have now, and has so many amenities in hardware and software that you haven't been able to use because you're trying to eke out the last bit out of a very old machine.

Buying a Mac Pro is simply only a good choice if you have extremely specific use cases.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

No. You can't compare the dawn of the Mac to what it became. That first Mac was more toy than tool.

Ah, so Steve Jobs worked at Apple up until 85… all non-expandable Macs. 86, Mac II introduced. Steve Jobs RETURNS to Apple, 1997. The FIRST Mac introduced after his return in 1998?

The iMac.

But, sure, if we ignore the ways todays non-expandability and those days non-expandability were the same, then they were entirely different.

I don't buy it for half a second that non-upgradable is what they want. Non-upgradable is what they're force-fed: "Mmm, disposable tastes soooo good, doesn't it? Don't gag. It yummy! Now throw it away and empty your wallet on us!"
What is WRONG with you folks?? Or, which navel-gazing wing of the Apple spaceship do you work in?

So, your thinking is that people who care STRONGLY about a computer being upgradable, such that THAT is their primary requirement for a computer’s features… are buying non-upgradable computers? I don’t buy THAT for a second. I agree that folks that would like to buy an upgradable computer but have a HIGHER priority need for their computer to be light with a long lasting battery will likely shrug and buy that mobile computer where all their desires except for being upgradable are met.

But, these days, for folks that care VERY STRONGLY about a computer being upgradable, (which is a small number of folks) are buying computers that are upgradable, most likely a PC. Either that or upgradability is just what they SAY is important and “running macOS” is actually their primary need.

 

[JazzyGB1]

I've had my Mac Pro since 2010. Not out of choice, but simply because Apple haven't offered a viable replacement for it since.
When they introduced the Mac Pro in 2006 it cost £1699 (UK price).
By the time the last tower Mac Pro was introduced in 2012 it cost £2049. A £350 price increase (just over 20%) in 6 years (prices taken from Mac Tracker).
Then in 2013 they introduced the debacle that was the cylinder 'Mac Pro'. A Mac Pro in name only IMO.
As well as being totally unfit for purpose it cost £2499. That's 20% more than the model it replaced just the year before.
It would take another 6 years (2019) for Apple to reintroduce the Mac Pro tower (after they claimed in 2017 they'd listened) and that a 'New modular' Mac Pro was coming...when it eventually arrived at the end of 2019 it started at a whopping £5499.
That's £3000 more than the model it replaced (more than twice the price), a whopping 120% price increase.
It's an eye watering £3450 more than the last Mac Pro tower in 2012. That's represents a 175% increase.
So the 2019 model wasn't viable to many prior Mac Pro users - this time because of its cost.
It isn't reasonable to expect those who have owned Apple towers that had started at £1699 and seen just a 20% increase in cost between 2006 - 2012, to then be expected to pay a price that has increased by 175% in the following 6 years.
I honestly find it bizarre that people take their time to come on forums and argue otherwise.
Anyway, it appears from some of the comments on here that if Apple replace the current Intel Mac Pro with a more restricted model they may further alienate those who remain users of the model.
Time will tell I suppose.
Personally I don't think Apple even cares.
You know when you're in a relationship with someone and you want to end it, so you start treating them poorly hoping they'll leave you instead...that's basically how it feels Apple are being with its Mac Pro users.

 

[chucker23n1]

I don't buy it for half a second that non-upgradable is what they want.

If you ask a consumer, "would you prefer something more flexible", they will of course answer "yes".

But that's not the question. It's: "do you care a lot about internal expansion?", at which point you've lost 90%. And of those remaining, many aren't that interested in the Mac platform anyway. They want to tinker with their device, and/or they're high-end gamers. Rarely are they professionals, because ain't nobody got time for that.

 

[Jethro!]

The original Hulk was grey and the original Superman couldn't fly.
However, if you presented the Hulk as any other colour than green or Superman as a hero who couldn't fly it'd be ridiculous as they've both been defined by those traits for decades.
The same goes for expandability with Apple.
Most Macs over the last 4 decades have been user expandable to some degree, so it's not unreasonable to expect that to continue - particularly on their professional tower.

Hope you're right. But the title of this thread is..

No User-Upgradable RAM​

 

[Jethro!]

Ah, so Steve Jobs worked at Apple up until 85… all non-expandable Macs. 86, Mac II introduced. Steve Jobs RETURNS to Apple, 1997. The FIRST Mac introduced after his return in 1998?

The iMac.

But, sure, if we ignore the ways todays non-expandability and those days non-expandability were the same, then they were entirely different.

The original iMac had upgradable RAM.

So, your thinking is that people who care STRONGLY about a computer being upgradable, such that THAT is their primary requirement for a computer’s features… are buying non-upgradable computers? I don’t buy THAT for a second. I agree that folks that would like to buy an upgradable computer but have a HIGHER priority need for their computer to be light with a long lasting battery will likely shrug and buy that mobile computer where all their desires except for being upgradable are met.

But, these days, for folks that care VERY STRONGLY about a computer being upgradable, (which is a small number of folks) are buying computers that are upgradable, most likely a PC. Either that or upgradability is just what they SAY is important and “running macOS” is actually their primary need.

Apples (no pun) and oranges. Power users don't care about light, thinness or battery (also non-replaceable).
Amazing how Apple takes away features and people not only eat it up, but defend it as being yummy good.

 

[Jethro!]

I've had my Mac Pro since 2010. Not out of choice, but simply because Apple haven't offered a viable replacement for it since.
When they introduced the Mac Pro in 2006 it cost £1699 (UK price).
By the time the last tower Mac Pro was introduced in 2012 it cost £2049. A £350 price increase (just over 20%) in 6 years (prices taken from Mac Tracker).
Then in 2013 they introduced the debacle that was the cylinder 'Mac Pro'. A Mac Pro in name only IMO.
As well as being totally unfit for purpose it cost £2499. That's 20% more than the model it replaced just the year before.
It would take another 6 years (2019) for Apple to reintroduce the Mac Pro tower (after they claimed in 2017 they'd listened) and that a 'New modular' Mac Pro was coming...when it eventually arrived at the end of 2019 it started at a whopping £5499.
That's £3000 more than the model it replaced (more than twice the price), a whopping 120% price increase.
It's an eye watering £3450 more than the last Mac Pro tower in 2012. That's represents a 175% increase.
So the 2019 model wasn't viable to many prior Mac Pro users - this time because of its cost.
It isn't reasonable to expect those who have owned Apple towers that had started at £1699 and seen just a 20% increase in cost between 2006 - 2012, to then be expected to pay a price that has increased by 175% in the following 6 years.
I honestly find it bizarre that people take their time to come on forums and argue otherwise.
Anyway, it appears from some of the comments on here that if Apple replace the current Intel Mac Pro with a more restricted model they may further alienate those who remain users of the model.
Time will tell I suppose.
Personally I don't think Apple even cares.
You know when you're in a relationship with someone and you want to end it, so you start treating them poorly hoping they'll leave you instead...that's basically how it feels Apple are being with its Mac Pro users.

Right on. If Apple leaves behind its Mac Pro users, here's why it's a big, BIG mistake they'll pay for in the long run.
These are the loyal people who kept Apple afloat when they were barely hanging on in the 90's. The iToy users are not the least bit loyal. They'll chase the latest shiny thing, which will inevitably someday be something NOT Apple. When iThing is no longer cool and those customers are gone, AND the pros are gone, so are Apple's days.

 

[Jethro!]

And that's just what my company did. The labor and parts cost to upgrade all of those machines would be astronomical. There are certainly some places where it is important to be able to upgrade. There are also lots of users who don't want to muck around with machine internals. The iMac Pro and Studio met my needs perfectly, but do understand that there is a subset of users who need to be able to upgrade.

"Company" -- I'm not a company. Apple loyalists are not companies.
Not buying that upgrades cost more than all new machines.
I also have an iMac, but it's not what I use to get my real, paying work done. That's what the MP is for.

 

[Jethro!]

Yeah, and so what? Donate that Mac Pro to a library or elementary school who can still get some use out of it, and treat yourself to something that is newer than a decade and a half ago.

Are you paying for that "treat" or am I?

You can only upgrade to CPUs that fit the same socket. Given that Intel likes to change sockets a lot, that's not that useful.

Of course it's useful. I've upgraded the snot out of my 2009 MP, including the processors. Still works fantastic. Creating stuff that you've likely heard at the movies around the world. No one has ever said, "Gee, that sounds like an old, unuseful computer!" Ever.

It's cool that you've gotten so many years out of it, but all you've done is patched over a very old thing when you could've instead gotten a much newer thing, which is quieter, smaller, cheaper, and much, much faster. A $999 MacBook Air runs circles around your machine. It has way faster single-core perf, might even have more cores than you have now, and has so many amenities in hardware and software that you haven't been able to use because you're trying to eke out the last bit out of a very old machine.

Buying a Mac Pro is simply only a good choice if you have extremely specific use cases.

No, a MBA does not run circles around my machine. I rely heavily on PCI-exclusive expansion, multiple hard drives, lots of memory (which I have EXPANDED MYSELF), and multiple monitors, all of which fit neatly into the MP box. A MBA can't do that.

 

[Jethro!]

If you ask a consumer, "would you prefer something more flexible", they will of course answer "yes".

There you have it.

But that's not the question. It's: "do you care a lot about internal expansion?", at which point you've lost 90%. And of those remaining, many aren't that interested in the Mac platform anyway. They want to tinker with their device, and/or they're high-end gamers. Rarely are they professionals, because ain't nobody got time for that.

iToy users vs. actual computer users. Which are more loyal?

 

[JazzyGB1]

It's not a choice between satisfying the casual Mac user and satisfying the power user/pros - it can be both.
It used to be both.
It's not that fulfilling one segment prevents you from being able to still fulfil the other, so the arguments about laptops, iPads, MacBook Airs as mentioned by some in this thread are totally irrelevant.
Apple could easily have introduced a tower starting under £3k...easily.
They chose not to. It was a big F**k you to many existing Mac Pro users who had waited years for it and if there's any truth to this report and Apple choose to make the RAM unexpandable too, then this is likely to be another one.

 

[chucker23n1]

Are you paying for that "treat" or am I?

I for one am not. An MBP does the job just fine.

If you aren't either, I'm not sure why you're so invested in Macs. Apple hasn't focused on internal expansion in a long, long time. Steve was never a fan of it.

Of course it's useful. I've upgraded the snot out of my 2009 MP, including the processors. Still works fantastic. Creating stuff that you've likely heard at the movies around the world. No one has ever said, "Gee, that sounds like an old, unuseful computer!" Ever.

No, a MBA does not run circles around my machine.

Yeah it does.

Mac Pro (Early 2009) Benchmarks - Geekbench

MacBook Air (2022) Benchmarks - Geekbench

I rely heavily on PCI-exclusive expansion, multiple hard drives, lots of memory (which I have EXPANDED MYSELF), and multiple monitors, all of which fit neatly into the MP box. A MBA can't do that.

I mean… nobody is denying that the Mac Pro offers internal expansion and all other Macs don't. So, not sure what your point is here.

There you have it.

iToy users vs. actual computer users. Which are more loyal?

I have a VM, various Docker containers and other stuff running right now, but please, do keep defending your Klingon honor by telling others they're "iToy users".

 

[Jethro!]

I for one am not.

Then shut your pie hole telling others what to buy.

An MBP does the job just fine.

No it doesn't, not for me.

If you aren't either, I'm not sure why you're so invested in Macs.

I have "invested" in Macs for nearly 30 YEARS. I was programming on them probably before you were born, champ.

Apple hasn't focused on internal expansion in a long, long time. Steve was never a fan of it.

Except that's wrong. The current MP is highly expandable. Whether or not Steve was a fan is irrelevant that, except for the trash can MP, Macs have been expandable for decades.

Yeah it does.

Mac Pro (Early 2009) Benchmarks - Geekbench

MacBook Air (2022) Benchmarks - Geekbench

No. CPU benchmarks are not the full picture as to how a machine performs for a particular need.

I mean… nobody is denying that the Mac Pro offers internal expansion and all other Macs don't. So, not sure what your point is here.

My point has been made over and over here. Others have chimed in with the same. Maybe you're the slow one here.

I have a VM, various Docker containers and other stuff running right now, but please, do keep defending your Klingon honor by telling others they're "iToy users".

If you think disposable "pro" machines are "pro," you're an iToy user. Because that's where it comes from.

 

[Jethro!]

It's not a choice between satisfying the casual Mac user and satisfying the power user/pros - it can be both.
It used to be both.
It's not that fulfilling one segment prevents you from able to still fulfil the other, so the arguments about laptops, iPads, MacBook Airs as mentioned by some in this thread are totally irrelevant.
Apple could easily have introduced a tower starting under £3k...easily.
They chose not to. It was a big F**k you to many existing Mac Pro users who had waited years for it and if there's any truth to this report and Apple choose to make the RAM unexpandable too, then this is likely to be another one.

🎯 Nailed it, JazzyGB1.
This discussion shouldn't even exist. RAM expandability shouldn't even be an issue for a "pro" machine -- it's a given.
There's no reason Apple can't serve both the actual pros with expandability and the iToy disposable crowd. Except Apple Spaceship hubris.