Apple Surveying iMac Pro Buyers About Key Features

[dannys1]

I want upgradable RAM and CPUs, and PCIe slots.

Well you can upgrade the RAM and CPU (still don't get why people want to do this mind, I've never done it in my life, I can afford an iMac Pro why would I skimp on a CPU and then want to upgrade it 4 years later when everything else in the computer is dated)

PCIe isn't going to be in an iMac is it, but you can add them with Thunderbolt 3 so.
[doublepost=1536689236][/doublepost]

Yeah 3D games are very intensive workloads for any modern GPU, but really this is getting ridiculous.
Nvidia's Titan Xp and Titan V wipe the floor with Vega 64 in most professional tasks as well. Vega is competitive in only a few specific tasks or in GPU mining. AMD tried to play a trick with this when they launched the Vega Frontier Edition but after one driver update from Nvidia the scale was balanced.

Except it's massively better for Final Cut Pro - so all the actual "Pro's" would not be happy with a switch to Nvidea at all - and it's never going to happen, so stop going on about bloody Nvidea.

 

[ROGmaster]

Except it's massively better for Final Cut Pro - so all the actual "Pro's" would not be happy with a switch to Nvidea at all - and it's never going to happen, so stop going on about bloody Nvidea.

Final Cut is just an application.
And "massively better" is just a matter of optimization.

And it's Nvidia not Nvidea.

 

[lowejazz]

I'm concerned. Since Apple has very infrequently, if ever, so publicly sought customer input, could they be laying the groundwork for killing the iMac. With iPhones being their "business" now, Apple may have decided that they no longer need the iMac. If it's all about the profitability of their individual product lines, then they may be creating a scenario where their "Customers are telling us" that the iMac is no longer the essential machine for Apple. They could continue with all the popular MacBooks and iPad product lines and skip the energy and resources going into the iMac line. From a strictly shareholder financial perspective, this might make good sense.

I hope and pray that I'm wrong. The iMac is the fundamental, essential device I own and to have the iMac disappear would be a profound loss.

 

[SoyCapitanSoyCapitan]

Performance per watt? I highly doubt that's generally possible. But overall efficiency? maybe.

The iPad Pro’s GPU already beat many laptop GPUs 1-2 years ago. Benchmarks on Barefeats.

I wouldn’t be surprised if the T3 chip has an embedded Apple GPU. The only thing is by then Vega and Navi on the 7nm node could be ahead of the field.

There’s definitely no need for Nvidia though. Not including 10 bit color on GeForce drivers in 2018 is insane.
[doublepost=1536691509][/doublepost]

Drop the silly Xeons and EEC RAM, it's a fricking workstation, not an enterprise server. Make the normal iMac user upgradeable / modular and call it Pro. There you go.

True.

Threadripper would be better and more affordable in an iMac Pro. Thunderbolt would have to be added via another controller.
[doublepost=1536691735][/doublepost]

Yeah 3D games are very intensive workloads for any modern GPU, but really this is getting ridiculous.
Nvidia's Titan Xp and Titan V wipe the floor with Vega 64 in most professional tasks as well.
As a serious question.
Does AMD have an equivalent for the Titan V? Because I simply can't see it? Where is it?

The Radeon Pro range. They sometimes come in dual GPU configurations and Vega/Navi is rumored to continue this tradition and offer 20 teraflops of compute power and above.

If Nvidia won’t enable 10 bit color on their GeForce and Titan range then its pointless for professional use beyond acceleration. Pros need color control. HDR needs 10 bit. AMD gives 10 bit supoort even at the low end. Nobody wants to spend 3000 bucks on a Quadro just to get 10 bit color enabled.

 

[LillDrutten]

Apple has recently been sending out surveys to customers who purchased an iMac Pro, asking them about which features drew them to the pro-level machine and what they like or dislike about the iMac Pro.

Article Link: Apple Surveying iMac Pro Buyers About Key Features

The import ones to question is people that could be a buyer but did not buy a iMac. From the question shown they dont have a clue of what a PRO is supposed to be. We need a machine that is designed by engineers not marketing suits and bean counters.

 

[ROGmaster]

The iPad Pro’s GPU already beat many laptop GPUs 1-2 years ago. Benchmarks on Barefeats.

If you say so. It guess it's great to have a wild imagination.

The Radeon Pro range. They sometimes come in dual GPU configurations and Vega/Navi is rumored to continue this tradition and offer 20 teraflops of compute power and above.

If Nvidia won’t enable 10 bit color on their GeForce and Titan range then its pointless for professional use beyond acceleration. Pros need color control. HDR needs 10 bit. AMD gives 10 bit supoort even at the low end. Nobody wants to spend 3000 bucks on a Quadro just to get 10 bit color enabled.

No consumer (Radeon) GPUs support true 10 bit rendering over OpenGL.
I don't understand why you insist so much on this subject anyway. For example AMD GPUs lack double precision cores, does that make them pointless for professional use?

 

[JungleNYC]

Forget thinness. This isn't the same market that is looking at the new iPhone or iPad. It is a pro machine. Sure they'll buy those too, but this is for development or graphic design and the like where thinness is irrelevant.

From your mouth to Apple's ears?

 

[robbyx]

Internal or external, what's the difference? Both are upgrades.

Are you just trying to be obtuse or are you seriously asking that question?

 

[Polymorphic]

I'm concerned. Since Apple has very infrequently, if ever, so publicly sought customer input, could they be laying the groundwork for killing the iMac. With iPhones being their "business" now, Apple may have decided that they no longer need the iMac. If it's all about the profitability of their individual product lines, then they may be creating a scenario where their "Customers are telling us" that the iMac is no longer the essential machine for Apple. They could continue with all the popular MacBooks and iPad product lines and skip the energy and resources going into the iMac line. From a strictly shareholder financial perspective, this might make good sense.

I hope and pray that I'm wrong. The iMac is the fundamental, essential device I own and to have the iMac disappear would be a profound loss.

I doubt very much that Apple is looking to eliminate the iMac. A similar survey has been circulated to MacBook Pro owners.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

What a weird, uninformed statement to make. Just because you yourself are part of the "Mac Pro Audience" but don't want an iMac, Apple is blowing it by going this route?

Who do you think they should ask then? Should they ask the customers who bought an iPod Shuffle, or the ones who bought a $5k iMac?

Seems pretty clear to me that iMac Pro buyers absolutely ARE part of the audience that would purchase a Mac Pro.

This is the type of assumption I would NOT want them to make. It's certainly fair to say there's less correlation between iPod Shuffle and Mac Pro but I would bet there is far less than 100% correlation between iMac Pro and Mac Pro. Doesn't mean it's bad data to have collected but if those data have an outsize impact on Mac Pro design I would be greatly disappointed. One of those questions is literally the ability to state that the 5K screen on the iMac Pro was important to the buying decision. The last thing in the world I want is an all in one Mac Pro (taken to an extreme but there are plenty of other design compromises in an iMac Pro that a sizable population of Mac Pro consumers would hate).

There are many other ways to do market research rather than just, "let's poll our existing customer base for product X and apply that knowledge to product Y," so relative correlations between Mac Pro and other products don't eliminate the validity of my concern. Call me uninformed if you like but I feel it would be a mistake if Apple were to overestimate correlation between those two populations.

edit to add: if we're sticking with existing customer bases I would prefer to see a survey of existing Mac Pro owners asking what their top wants are for new systems. Of course all of this started with a very simple statement of mine hoping that they weren't applying apples (heh) to oranges and using this as a proxy for Mac Pro, they may very well just be getting market data about the iMac Pro itself and I'm reading way too much into it all.

 

[rellimie]

Anyone filling this in, please tell them we want Nvidia 1080 ti / 2080 GFX cards.

Screw Vega.

Really? I don't.

 

[CollinH]

In general a pro machine should be upgradable:
Lots of memory, upgradable.
Replaceable disks.
Replaceable video cards.
Current generation CPUs, video cards etc.
Thunderbolt 3.
DDR4 (parity is important).

Forget thinness. This isn't the same market that is looking at the new iPhone or iPad. It is a pro machine. Sure they'll buy those too, but this is for development or graphic design and the like where thinness is irrelevant.

This. 100x.

 

[technorganic]

You mean the crappy VESA mount Apple sells for it? https://www.macrumors.com/2018/05/28/snazzy-labs-imac-pro-vesa-adapter-broke/

For about $75 you can get an iMac Pro VESA adaptor and make it whatever height you want via an arm - There are also companies that make stands that adjust the height of the system.



I do that all the time, you just reach around the back - the USB ports are all on the right side close to the edge.



Why would I not when they'd do it for free?



Yes I agree the situation is different than for cars, but on the other hand it allowed for Apple to make a better sealed/compact/lighter system where it's more fiddly to open so only technical competent people should try, unlike cars where any idiot can open up a hood and probably (probably!!) not break anything. I don't feel the need to open it up so who cares? Eventually the warranty will expire and I may open it up for some kind of upgrade. You can so I don't really see the issue since if I want to, I can. I think there's room in the world for lots of pro users who do not want to be pro COMPUTER users, if you know what I mean. They just want a solid powerful system to work on and not mess with it.



Well I have my other screen vertical so it'd be different anyway. Many pro users have different screens anyway, since one screen for example might be specially calibrated while the main one is more for tools and things where calibration and luminance settings are not as important.

[doublepost=1536716071][/doublepost]macOS Server is essentially dead and will be further neutered this fall. https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208312

I am in audio, film and TV production and Apple has left us in the dust. This is because we need specialized components -- you can't just buy the computer ready-to-go from apple you also need to add stuff like a Blackmagic video card or Pro Tools HDX card (which doesn't have a thunderbolt version). This type of software used to be nearly mac-exclusive but the Pro Tools has seen a major shift to Windows in recent years because of the upgrade schedule/compatibility and lack of a modular machine.

In any specialized technical industry there is need to have specialized components and gigantic Sonnet Tech dongles for PCIe cards just don't cut it because they are added complexity. We grew up with tower computers, it can't be hard to just make a tower computer can it? There are thousands of companies that do it. I know 14 year-old people who can make a tower computer. It's nice if it looks good but that's so far down the list. A modern (and complete) set of ports is essential beyond Thunderbolt, PCIe, 5k Graphics. Aside from an SSD boot disk it needs room for 3.5" drive bays. It needs some kind of removable media, SD cards are looking good these days! Very widely used and getting better and better. It needs a combined analog/digital headphone jack AND combined digital/analog input jack for audio (many pro's use this!). It needs 2 10GB ethernet ports.

What I don't see mentioned much is that if a larger company (or higher-computer-need company, $$$ for apple) needs to buy apple servers they're also in the dust because there are none other than mac mini's. While a tower works ok for this, what's really appropriate is a rackmount server. This is a server that no-one ever sees -- it could be designed to look like poop and it will still sell because it is purchased for a specific need that winds up reinforcing the whole apple ecosystem.

Apple needs a Pro division with a lineup of chassis that they can keep upgrading without the design team involved that they can upgrade quickly to keep competitive with the rest of the world. Tower workstation/server chassis, rackmount workstation/chassis (maybe a 1u option and 3u option that can hold PCIe cards, eh?), 13" laptop, 15" laptop. Include Thunderbolt 3 yes but also SD card, ethernet and audio in/out on all (as just a slightly-overpriced option is great, even!)

The expensive computers wind up affecting the tablets and laptops on many different levels so neglecting them has left a big and long-lasting hole in the next phase of Apple because those server apps and audio/video production programs have migrated strongly away from Apple. These are the computer-deciders and content creators ... the mavens that are the word of mouth that worked so long in Apple's favor.

Design for the pro users could be so easy if you were to let go of trying to make flashy products for us and ones that JUST WORK. Let the consumers have the shiny stuff. Heck, the 'bulky' laptops could still have nice metal, the rackmount could look slick like a piece of audio gear. It won't tarnish the apple reputation in the slightest -- it will only strengthen it because the major holes would be filled.

One more thing ... the software upgrade codependency on OS has to stop! does iMessage really need the new OS to function? when it does, then don't leave the older customers out in the cold. Short term, shareholder wise sure it's what gets you a fat bonus but long-term health is a disrespect to Steve Jobs because the user experience suffers to profits.

 

[wizard]

I really don't understand why Apple can grasp some of this. I suspect that they want mass market numbers out of Mac Pro sales. That will never happen, rather they need to grasp what a professional needs machine wise. Of course that is never the same one professional to antoher so the obvious answer is configurability. The problem here is that Apple has some sort of mental blockage related to upgradable / configurable hardware. I'd be shocked if they got the new Mac Pro right and even more shocked if the finally introduce a mid range Mac desktop.

In general a pro machine should be upgradable:
Lots of memory, upgradable.
Replaceable disks.

The base machine should be all solid state. That being said we should have at least 4 slots for SSD's. Bulk storage should be handled in an external storage array.

Replaceable video cards.
Current generation CPUs, video cards etc.

I'd really like to see Apple offer a ARM based solution!!! Especially an ARM based solution that uses the mainframe vector extensions. This is currently called SVE by ARM and its partners. If apple could pull it off going right to the 2048 bit vector length would be ideal. Throw in hardware for machine learning acceleration independent of SVE and Apple would have a processor that few could beat at a reasonable price.

Thunderbolt 3.
DDR4 (parity is important).

Forget thinness. This isn't the same market that is looking at the new iPhone or iPad. It is a pro machine. Sure they'll buy those too, but this is for development or graphic design and the like where thinness is irrelevant.

I like the idea of a 1/3rd rack width unit that is 4 U high. That would fit a lot of use cases. Make it so three units "SNAP" together for a full rack width and bingo a professional platform for a wide variety of users.

 

[JodyBevan]

Apple has recently been sending out surveys to customers who purchased an iMac Pro, asking them about which features drew them to the pro-level machine and what they like or dislike about the iMac Pro.

Some of the survey questions were shared on Twitter, with customers asked to point out some of the most important iMac Pro features, like Thunderbolt 3 ports, Xeon W processors, T2 chip, external display support, and more.

​

Apple regularly sends out surveys of this nature to customers, but this line of questioning on the iMac Pro suggests Apple is perhaps trying to suss out key features that pro-level users want to see in future pro machines, such as the Mac Pro machine that's in the works.

The iMac Pro was a precursor to a new Mac Pro, which Apple first announced in April 2017. Apple is working on a high-end high-throughput modular Mac Pro that will facilitate regular upgrades to meet the needs of Apple's pro user base.

Apple has a dedicated team working on the Mac Pro, and Apple executives have said that Apple is committed to making the machine the highest-end desktop system able to handle VR and high-end cinema production. Apple has even put together a "Pro Workflow Team" to tailor the Mac Pro and other Apple products to professional users, and that team could potentially be behind the iMac Pro survey.

Phil Schiller and Craig Federighi admitted last year that with the 2013 Mac Pro, Apple designed itself into "a bit of a thermal corner" given the restrictive size of the trash can-shaped Mac Pro and its inability to handle the thermal capacity needed for larger single GPUs. Apple learned from that mistake and is this time aiming for a machine that will better accommodate future upgrades and high-end hardware.

Apple plans to release the new Mac Pro at some point in 2019, so a launch is a ways off, but it's possible Apple will be ready to share additional details about the machine this year when new Macs are unveiled either in September or October.

Article Link: Apple Surveying iMac Pro Buyers About Key Features

[doublepost=1536717270][/doublepost]I purchased my MacPro in 2017 after the MacBook Pro (latest version) came out. The limited port options, and Ram limit made me make this decision. Obviously though Apple does not care to get the opinion of MacPro purchasers. That is a whole sector of purchasers that are not buying into their latest releases for some reasons. One would think that they would want their opinions too. Of course Apple is very uninterested in customers compared to the 80s and 90s.

 

[thepixelpusher]

Prelude to killing the Mac Pro?

 

[dfs]

Apple has recently been sending out surveys to customers who purchased an iMac Pro, asking them about which features drew them to the pro-level machine and what they like or dislike about the iMac Pro.

Some of the survey questions were shared on Twitter, with customers asked to point out some of the most important iMac Pro features, like Thunderbolt 3 ports, Xeon W processors, T2 chip, external display support, and more.

​

Apple regularly sends out surveys of this nature to customers, but this line of questioning on the iMac Pro suggests Apple is perhaps trying to suss out key features that pro-level users want to see in future pro machines, such as the Mac Pro machine that's in the works.

The iMac Pro was a precursor to a new Mac Pro, which Apple first announced in April 2017. Apple is working on a high-end high-throughput modular Mac Pro that will facilitate regular upgrades to meet the needs of Apple's pro user base.

Apple has a dedicated team working on the Mac Pro, and Apple executives have said that Apple is committed to making the machine the highest-end desktop system able to handle VR and high-end cinema production. Apple has even put together a "Pro Workflow Team" to tailor the Mac Pro and other Apple products to professional users, and that team could potentially be behind the iMac Pro survey.

Phil Schiller and Craig Federighi admitted last year that with the 2013 Mac Pro, Apple designed itself into "a bit of a thermal corner" given the restrictive size of the trash can-shaped Mac Pro and its inability to handle the thermal capacity needed for larger single GPUs. Apple learned from that mistake and is this time aiming for a machine that will better accommodate future upgrades and high-end hardware.

Apple plans to release the new Mac Pro at some point in 2019, so a launch is a ways off, but it's possible Apple will be ready to share additional details about the machine this year when new Macs are unveiled either in September or October.

Article Link: Apple Surveying iMac Pro Buyers About Key Features

[doublepost=1536723369][/doublepost]I think it's positively thrilling that Apple is conducting some market research. Historically, that's not played an important role in its corporate culture. More typically, they give us what they persuade themselves we want rather than solicit any input about what we actually do want. Case in point: I wonder what kind of feedback they'd have gotten if they had asked us whether we wanted iPhones even larger than those they currently offer. I have a hunch the answer would lie somewhere between "meh" and "hell no!"

 

[crsh1976]

I'm not sure why everyone keeps saying Pros want upgradability, they don't. Most pro users buy a pro computer, use it for 3-4 years, then upgrade to the newest latest and greatest.

Isn’t it the case precisely because said purchased machine cannot be upgraded to begin with?

 

[pipis2010]

Yep

Thats whats disturbing about apple these days.
You state the obvious but they bring out that stupid round thing years ago after years of stagnation.
Apple has lost its way.
Very sad!

It’s funny how in another forum people were begging for apple to release a new computer design (like cube, lamp, etc) and when they actually do release the trash can (which is a nice design), people still keep bashing them, for not being innovative with their designs...

I dunno if it’s because it was a Pro machine, instead of releasing it as a normal-mainstream machine like the iMac though...

 

[Abazigal]

The import ones to question is people that could be a buyer but did not buy a iMac. From the question shown they dont have a clue of what a PRO is supposed to be. We need a machine that is designed by engineers not marketing suits and bean counters.

Then you are looking at the wrong company, because Apple products have always been designed by designers, not engineers.

 

[HiRez]

Where is the checkbox for "Fewer than 6 years between updates"?

 

[Tech198]

I'd be leaving these surveys for other uses...

 

[Jetfire]

Well you can upgrade the RAM and CPU (still don't get why people want to do this mind, I've never done it in my life, I can afford an iMac Pro why would I skimp on a CPU and then want to upgrade it 4 years later when everything else in the computer is dated)

PCIe isn't going to be in an iMac is it, but you can add them with Thunderbolt 3 so.
[doublepost=1536689236][/doublepost]

Except it's massively better for Final Cut Pro - so all the actual "Pro's" would not be happy with a switch to Nvidea at all - and it's never going to happen, so stop going on about bloody Nvidea.

Wait for Ram prices to come done. I did this with my MacBook Pro early 2011. Linus Tech Tips just did a video of upgrading a Stock iMac Pro to 18 Core and 128GB Ram for cheaper than Apple would change and he can sell the 8-Core and 32GB ram he takes out.

We like choices.

 

[dannys1]

We like choices.

You mean you like saving a few buck to invalidate a 3 year AppleCare warranty. Not worth IMO.

If you could put something in that wasn't available from Apple, that's worth it - like I ripped apart from 2011 iMac and took the CD-DVD out and put in 2x SSD's in Raid 0 - it performed unlike any other iMac in the world for two years or so. But these days there's no point, the performance is great, just buy what you need. I wouldn't go through all that hassle just to get the same spec I can buy but save a few quid. Time is money as well for me, it's not worth the two hours it'd take to do it - I could earn that money and more in that time!

RAM is literally about the only thing worth updating in the first couple of years - but again that's only a case of "I couldn't afford it at the time". After 3 years for me there are things fundamental to the Logic board that can't be updated without a new system. New design, new cooling, better monitor, Thunderbolt 4, improved power efficiency, new processors that need a new board or slot, which will come with support for hardware decoding/encoding of new codecs that just isn't possible by upgrading that current gen of CPU's to a faster one, faster ram not compatible with that board, the ability to go beyond 128gb ram not compatible with that board, possible T3 chip with more useful features.

After 3-4 years putting in a better CPU that will give you a barely noticeable performance increase and none of the things above. I'd rather just sell the system I bought, in tact, with a years warranty left on it and get a new one.

 

[dragje]

Drop the silly Xeons and EEC RAM, it's a fricking workstation, not an enterprise server. Make the normal iMac user upgradeable / modular and call it Pro. There you go.

I don't like a computer and screen in one device principle.