I guess I win. My LC was in 1992.
Well, I'm glad you have come to this very mature conclusion.
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 Silicon Mac Pro Said to Feature Same Design as 2019 Model, No User-Upgradable RAM
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I guess I win. My LC was in 1992.
Well, I'm glad you have come to this very mature conclusion.
We did upgrade the RAM, but while you could put 12 Megs in there, the logic board could only actually handle 10 of those. I don't believe we did any other internal upgrades, though we did get a massive-by-the-time external hard disk.
And, sure. But that was an in era where Steve's influence was gone, and Apple wasn't very successful. When he returned, one of the convictions he brought was that the Mac should be more restricted. (He then went much further on that with the iPhone.)
I disagree with that.
There's a difference between being an 'all in one' and being unupgradable.
The original iMac had a user accessible slot for upgrading RAM and you could open it and replace the Hard Drive and optical drive too.
Same for the eMac & Mac mini.
By the time the slot loading iMac came along you could add a user installable Wi-Fi card too.
Of course along side the iMac you had the beige G3 desktop (fully expandable) and then the green tower G3 (fully expandable) as were the 4 iterations of G4 towers that followed, plus the G5 & Mac Pro's that followed them.
Steve Jobs oversaw all of those products.
At the time of his passing in 2011, there wasn't a Mac for sale that didn't allow the user to upgrade the RAM or replace the internal storage.
There's a difference between being an 'all in one' and being unupgradable.
The original iMac had a user accessible slot for upgrading RAM and you could open it and replace the Hard Drive and optical drive too.
Same for the eMac & Mac mini.
By the time the slot loading iMac came along you could add a user installable Wi-Fi card too.
Of course along side the iMac you had the beige G3 desktop (fully expandable) and then the green tower G3 (fully expandable) as were the 4 iterations of G4 towers that followed, plus the G5 & Mac Pro's that followed them.
Steve Jobs oversaw all of those products.
At the time of his passing in 2011, there wasn't a Mac for sale that didn't allow the user to upgrade the RAM or replace the internal storage.
Last edited:
The Twitterverse isn't buying it either.
"Certainly hope thats not true. Rather disappointing and will keep the 2019 Mac Pro around for pretty long while. The “Pro” is beginning to lose meaning. Why the hell would a whole ass desktop “Pro” machine, costing a leg and arm, not have upgradeable GPU and memory?"
"That’ll leave it dead in the water. A dud for all but a tiny tiny fraction of power users. Really, what would be the point of the massive expenditure, if the AS GPU will be so far behind nVidia’s best."
"defeated the point, bring back the trashcan design then."
"This just sounds like another Mac Studio but double the price!"
Apple doesn’t NEED loyalty. What they need is people buying goods and services.
I could be a die-hard Mac user that would never use anything else because I’m loyal. However, if I’m not buying Apple products, Apple can’t pay their employees with anyone’s loyalty. They can’t keep the lights on with anyone’s loyalty.The “Twitterverse” is just a small number of the few billion every year that will not buy any Apple products. For the few million that will buy a Mac, it doesn’t matter to Apple if they tweet or not. What’s critically important to Apple, is that a couple 10’s of millions actually buy Macs. That’ll likely happen, regardless of the “Twitterverse”.
Oh, yes they do. Without loyal customers in the 90's Apple wouldn't even be here today. I still remember when pondering in the mid-90's whether to go Mac or PC everyone was saying "PC". "Because Apple won't be around much longer." I still went Mac. So did enough others to keep them hanging on, if just barely.
"Apple doesn’t NEED loyalty" is the creed of fools.
So you know all these figures as a matter of fact? Really? Do tell us all about your robust statistical analytical methods, Unregistered 4U!! Or is it just... sez you?
Today and every year for awhile, half of the Macs sold go to folks with no loyalty to Apple. Because, it’s the first Mac the person has ever owned. “Loyalty” haven’t driven more than half of Apple’s Mac sales in a long time. I know there are SOME people that wish Apple Stores were still mainly empty with Apple only selling 12 million or so Macs a year, but Apple appreciates the purchases made by the non-loyal
Here’s something a lot of people don’t think about enough. A person can only be loyal for roughly 80 years. Any company that prides loyalty over bringing in new users (purchasers) will find themselves in a position like JCPenny, Kmart and Sears struggling to figure out how they can continue to make money as their “loyal customers” stop shopping there (due to being bereft of life).
Ok, so, to start with there are over 7 BILLION people in the world.
Analysts indicate Apple sold 28 MILLION computers in 2021.
2021 Mac shipments grew twice as fast as overall PC shipments - 9to5Mac
A new report shows that 2021 Mac shipments grew almost twice as fast as the PC market as a whole. Annual growth for Mac was 28.3% ...
9to5mac.com
Now, here’s where you’re going to have to use your grade school math, but, follow me here.
7 BILLION minus 28 MILLION is
6.972 BILLION
That’s 6.972 billion folks that didn’t buy a Mac in 2021.
Now, this Twitterverse, it’s indicated that it has roughly 353 MILLION users as of Jan 2023.
How Many Users Does X/Twitter Have?
X/Twitter is currently one of the biggest social media platforms worldwide. Learn more about X's user base in this article.
www.bankmycell.com
They’re not all on at the same time, no. BUT let’s just say they ALL got on at the SAME time AND they are all “not buying it”. It’s easy to work out the math here.
7 BILLION minus 353 MILLION is
6.647 BILLION
So, if even EVERY individual in the Twitterverse were solidly “not buying it” (which isn’t the case but… for the sake of knowing how important this “Twitterverse” would be at it’s most powerful) that still leaves 6.647 BILLION that would be potentially in the group of “buying it”… of which Apple ONLY has to sell, say, 20 million Macs to (of which a teeeny tiny portion would be Mac Pro’s of the types folks on the Twitterversere “not buying”).
As Apple could sell 20 million Macs to 6.647 BILLION people over 332 times (and they only NEED to do it once), having even EVERYONE in the Twitterverse “not buying it” would be barely an inconvenience.
And, in the end, the systems they’re “not buying” wouldn’t even need to sell anywhere near 20 million. Those systems would sell well under 1 million, well under 500,000… pick a random number under 500,000 and it’d be expected to sell even LESS than that.
So, the fact that a few in the “Twitterverse” “aren’t buying it” isn’t noteworthy or even an odd occurrence. I would expect (and the Twitterverse just confirms this) that almost ALL OUT OF 7 BILLION in the world “aren’t buying it”.
They're are called trendy/iToy buyers. Flavor of the moment. Shiny toy chasers. They'll be gone as quickly as they came when the next shiny thing comes out. Which Apple "loyalists" don't really care about, UNLESS Apple treats them also like iToy customers. According to the topic of this thread, that's what they'll planning. If they do that, they'll have alienated their base thus sealing their own demise when Apple is no longer "hip." What a stupid, boneheaded move that would be. But I wouldn't put it past them.Today and every year for awhile, half of the Macs sold go to folks with no loyalty to Apple. Because, it’s the first Mac the person has ever owned. “Loyalty” haven’t driven more than half of Apple’s Mac sales in a long time. I know there are SOME people that wish Apple Stores were still mainly empty with Apple only selling 12 million or so Macs a year, but Apple appreciates the purchases made by the non-loyal
p.s. Don't get me started on how clueless hip Apple Store employees are about their own products. "Uhhh. Imma look that up on my iPhone."
Irrelevant statistics. Nothing to do with the topic or the veracity of opinion where it matters. Good thing you don't do this for a living -- at least I hope you don't.Ok, so, to start with there are over 7 BILLION people in the world.
View attachment 2151236
Analysts indicate Apple sold 28 MILLION computers in 2021.
2021 Mac shipments grew twice as fast as overall PC shipments - 9to5Mac
A new report shows that 2021 Mac shipments grew almost twice as fast as the PC market as a whole. Annual growth for Mac was 28.3% ...
Now, here’s where you’re going to have to use your grade school math, but, follow me here.
7 BILLION minus 28 MILLION is
6.972 BILLION
That’s 6.972 billion folks that didn’t buy a Mac in 2021.
Now, this Twitterverse, it’s indicated that it has roughly 353 MILLION users as of Jan 2023.
* If you do, tell me where so we can avoid it.
Good thing for Apple, the fact that they aren’t loyal customers doesn’t meant that the money Apple gets from them spends any differently
Yeah, but… 10 “trendy” buyers buying Macs in year 1, 10 different ones buying in year two, 10 different ones buying in year three (all of whom may never buy another Mac) is worth MORE than 30 loyal customers on a fixed income that hasn’t bought anything in those three years.
They’ve alienated their “base” so many times over the years, it shouldn’t even be surprising when they do it anymore! The Apple II folks, the OS 9 folks, the PowerPC folks, the Intel folks, the Airport folks, the laserwriter folks, the iPod folks, the Final Cut folks, the 32-bit folks, any I’ve left out (oh, the SCSI and ADB folks in combination)? By this account Apple has “demised” at least 9 times and I would guess that trend of “boneheaded moves which, in some odd incomprehensible way, leads to further Apple success” is not likely to stop now.
Entirely relevant. So much so, that I realize there’s nothing to say ‘against’ it as it’s not in any way controversial, it’s just the numbers provided by what I like to call “reality”.
It’s merely a fairly clear recognition of the fact that, no matter what tiny sliver of the “Twitterverse” isn’t “buying” whatever the thing-of-the-day not to “buy” is, it won’t have any measurable impact on Apple’s (relative to the rest of their Macs) tiny expected sales of whatever future Mac Pro they release. In the big picture, this entire thread is a corner of a sliver of a slice of a small percentage of the entire Apple world.It spends VERY differently when Apple is no longer trendy and they have little to spend.Good thing for Apple, the fact that they aren’t loyal customers doesn’t meant that the money Apple gets from them spends any differently
Good for this year. What about next? What a foolish notion.
No, that's not alienating their base. iToying their ENTIRE line is.
Big difference.
No, it's entirely irrelevant. The people the MP is intended for don't like this plan. Same for the poll on this forum which shows the same distain. World stats are irrelevant. Pissing of your loyal base is idiocy, especially when it's unnecessary.Entirely relevant. So much so, that I realize there’s nothing to say ‘against’ it as it’s not in any way controversial, it’s just the numbers provided by what I like to call “reality”.
Speaking of irrelevant, your posts have gone from unhelpful to just plain annoying. Ignored. Later.
Unregisterd4u with another straw man argument.
The 7.88 billion figure is irrelevant.
It's almost impossible for those aged between 1 and 17 years for example to purchase a Mac, as most of this age group will not have the financial means to do so. It's extremely unlikely that many over 70 are buying Macs either, so you can discount most of them too.
In the poorest countries many won't have the financial means to purchase a Mac either. So South Sudan, Burundi, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Togo, Liberia, Yemen etc etc, they can all be largely be discounted from the equation too.
So let's limit it down to what it really is....
The developed world. And in that developed world you can largely omit those aged from 1 - 17 years and those aged over 70.
So the pool of new customers is much smaller than you claimed and the significance of loyalty MUCH more important too. It typically costs between 4 or 5 times as much to get a new customer as it does to keep an existing one, so of course loyalty matters.
The new Apple users you refer to are buying Apple products in many cases because they've encountered someone else who already uses one.
If Apple relied purely on new users to sell Macs to, then it would very quickly run out of customers.
Most people who buy Apple computers, will go on to buy another and another and then one for their children or parents etc etc - so brand loyalty isn't just important, it's VITAL.
The 7.88 billion figure is irrelevant.
It's almost impossible for those aged between 1 and 17 years for example to purchase a Mac, as most of this age group will not have the financial means to do so. It's extremely unlikely that many over 70 are buying Macs either, so you can discount most of them too.
In the poorest countries many won't have the financial means to purchase a Mac either. So South Sudan, Burundi, Haiti, Afghanistan, Sierra Leone, Togo, Liberia, Yemen etc etc, they can all be largely be discounted from the equation too.
So let's limit it down to what it really is....
The developed world. And in that developed world you can largely omit those aged from 1 - 17 years and those aged over 70.
So the pool of new customers is much smaller than you claimed and the significance of loyalty MUCH more important too. It typically costs between 4 or 5 times as much to get a new customer as it does to keep an existing one, so of course loyalty matters.
The new Apple users you refer to are buying Apple products in many cases because they've encountered someone else who already uses one.
If Apple relied purely on new users to sell Macs to, then it would very quickly run out of customers.
Most people who buy Apple computers, will go on to buy another and another and then one for their children or parents etc etc - so brand loyalty isn't just important, it's VITAL.
You misread that section. BUT, a more foolish notion will always be trying to ONLY sell Macs to folks that have owned Macs before.
Ok. Well, i mean, iToying their ENTIRE line IS apparently making them trendy enough to continue making Macs. And important thing to remember HERE, is that Macs make up less than 20% of Apple’s revenue. The Mac ending in no way equates to Apple ending. Like the Apple II they ended before it, they’ll survive after the last loyal person can’t buy a Mac anymore because the lack of “trendy” people buying it means it’s no profitable enough to continue as a product line!
And, folks will still be saying whatever it is that’s making them money, will lead to their downfall.
No, the people it’s NOT intended for don’t like this plan.
These are the same people that have NOT been invited to Apple’s campus to discuss their workflows and what they want from a future Mac. (Have you heard of anyone that has been invited to Apple’s campus to talk about their potential Mac Pro workflows saying they don’t like the plan?) The reason why Apple can invite a large number of the folks they think are in the market for a new Mac Pro is because there’s an infinitesimally small number of them compared to everything else Apple makes The way the MacBook Air is focused on a specific set of users such that Apple expects ONLY 15 million or so will buy them in a year? AND that billions are not interested in? The Mac Pro focus is even MORE extreme than that. They plan to sell, far, far fewer of those.
I’m sure it’s annoying. Instead of making emotional appeals which can be bounced against other emotional appeals, I’m just pointing out raw facts that a LOT of folks that really want the Mac Pro to mean something significant to Apple, don’t want to realize. It’s not controversial, I mean, the only thing anyone can say is, “Well, I don’t like that the world is that way.”
In 5 years from now, the reality will be that some noisy folks in the Twitterverse were (not surprisingly) unable to alter the course of a large multinational organization. Apple will have released “the thing” they intended to release. It will sell in small numbers that meet their expectations, the world will continue to spin.
So it looks "Pro" =D
Seriously though, depending on how many cores Apple stuffs into the Mac Pro, that computer might need better ventilation than the Mac Studio to avoid throttling. Here's hoping Apple DOES keep the old case and takes the CPU and GPU core counts to the limit for that particular case design. The M3, the likely processor for the first generation of Apple Silicon Mac Pros, is rumored to be substantially more heat-efficient per performance than the M1 and M2, so it's possible the new Mac Pro could be an absolute beast compared to the Mac Studio, especially if Apple makes use of the extra ventilation (versus the Mac Studio) possible in the preexisting Mac Pro case.
Maybe Apple will save some headroom in the Pro case for future M3 Mac Pro upgrades, i.e., maybe Apple will use the preexisting Mac Pro case and intentionally WON'T hit the limits of that case so it is easy for the company to release a faster Mac Pro in the future (without significant chip design upgrades) just by adding M3 cores. So rather than growing the size of the case as the processor hardware is upgraded, Apple can keep the same form for years.
It's also possible that Apple will include some sort of internal modularity in the Mac Pro design. It's likely, based on the rumors and knowledge of the unified memory architecture, that user-upgradable processors and RAM won't be a thing for the Mac Pro, but there's still the possibility that Apple will include support for user-upgradable, internal third-party cards, requiring extra space inside the case (and further justifying the use of a much larger case compared to the Mac Studio).
I guess we'll see this summer!
I think Apple is just gonna release an updated Mac Pro with Intel components.
they may have an CPU card with ram on it just to cut down on needing to build full an MB for each ram config.
storage build in is likely to be on blades
I wouldn't be against that at all. Been reading accounts in the pro audio world of no performance boost with "M" chip machines, and even worse performance for some.
And if true there's no user-upgradable RAM, that's a big no sale for me. Hoping common sense prevails over Apple hubris.