Apple to Release Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR on December 10

[gugy]

One consistent comment I see in this thread is that the new Mac Pro is for professional Hollywood filmmakers. Well, for colourists, compositing, audio for sure. However for picture editing, which is probably what most non-industry people think of, it really isn't the solution, at least for film and television editing. We actually work with proxy (low data rate, high compression) files when doing our offline edits. Given that the camera source media can be in the 10s if not 100s of TB of data and data rates starting at >400Mb/s it is easier to transcode everything to a smaller file for the edit and then conform to the camera source or other high quality format for finishing. A decade or more ago you still needed a pretty powerful machine to do this work but now, well, not so much. For offline editing (when all of the picture decisions are being made) an iMac with a second monitor and I/O device (if going to television) is often a better solution than the old (or new) tower. On the television series I worked on for 9 years we replaced the 2006-2009 Mac Pros with iMacs when it became time and the editors fought over who got to use the new iMacs because they were so much more capable (poor assistant editors got the trickle-down machines and in season 13 were still using the remaining 2009 MacPros). For what it's worth when the series first started shooting they shot super16 film, edited from DVCam SD 29.97 transfers and needed to run everything through Cinema Tools (originally cut in legacy FCP, still my favourite NLE overall). I do not miss those cadence tracking, pulldown days one bit.

Curiously, it is the corporate video makers who are often working in the latest formats with the camera source files who would actually benefit most from these machines as far as day-to-day editing goes. They often need the horsepower to push far greater files than anything I do in proxy. With ProRes RAW finally gaining some traction as a standard the Afterburner addition will probably prove very valuable to some users. However, I do not see ProRes RAW becoming a proxy standard in film or television any time soon, it is still too big for 100+ hours of footage.

The biggest hurdle to quick adoption of the new Mac Pros into the film industry at large is Catalina. It simply is not supported by AVID Media Composer or Pro Tools, the standards in North America still (for now, which I have been saying for 20 years). Past experience has shown we might still be 6 months away from Catalina support though, who knows, maybe AVID will surprise us and announce support tomorrow with the release of the Mac Pros. I wouldn't take a bet on it, though.

So, though I can imagine a great many use cases in the broader sense of filmmaking for these new Mac Pros which will allow some pretty amazing work to happen I know I won't be seeing one in an edit bay any time soon. Which is okay, the Mac tools currently available are more than sufficient for the work I do.

Oh, and one final comment on all the PC switching, DIY fans out there. In 20+ years I have been editing I have been asked to work on a PC once. It was a Franken-computer assembled by a gamer as having all of the bells-and-whistles necessary for editing 4K: 12-core Intel; 128GB RAM; 2x Nvidia 1080 Ti video cards; they dropped almost $12K Cdn on the build with monitors (2 years ago). Alas, there were driver issues, architecture issues, and my 2016 MBP was a faster option for editing 4K, even in Premiere Pro (only time in my career I have been asked to use PP as well). Curiously it was a Mac facility that was convinced they need to build the PC to work in 4K. Nobody wanted to use the machine, though, because of all of the problems, which is why I, as a contractor, got stuck with it. Now, your experience may vary but for all of those claiming that the Pros have abandoned the Mac that simply has not been my experience and for good reason.

I am in the motion graphics industry, mostly LA based. I totally agreed with your points.

 

[alexandr]

I am generally quite happy with my Dell displays but I wouldn't say they resemble "Apple design" (apart from black bezel + silver stand, I guess?). But, I also tend to spend my time looking at the stuff on the screen itself, rather than the bezel and the stand. They don't really ever change so they're kinda just like the desk - something that holds the thing I'm interested in up off the floor.
[automerge]1575919064[/automerge]

what's on the screen is always more important, but i'm very passionate about the aesthetics too.. and i'm really speaking of pre-black bezel design, like their 30" displays from way back when)
the new display is quite attractive!

 

[FlyingDutch]

Ten years ago the 2009 (which was ten years ago) 4,1 Mac Pro started at $2,499. A 2009 MBP was $2,299.

$2499 in 2009 dollars is just over $2997 in 2019 dollars.

So, no...$2499 is nothing like $6000 expensive and wasn't "ridiculous expensive".

The 2010 Mac Pro was available for $2499, $3499 or top end model for $4999.

In 2009 my MBP 15” was $1600... you are making up numbers.

 

[mdriftmeyer]

One consistent comment I see in this thread is that the new Mac Pro is for professional Hollywood filmmakers. Well, for colourists, compositing, audio for sure. However for picture editing, which is probably what most non-industry people think of, it really isn't the solution, at least for film and television editing. We actually work with proxy (low data rate, high compression) files when doing our offline edits. Given that the camera source media can be in the 10s if not 100s of TB of data and data rates starting at >400Mb/s it is easier to transcode everything to a smaller file for the edit and then conform to the camera source or other high quality format for finishing. A decade or more ago you still needed a pretty powerful machine to do this work but now, well, not so much. For offline editing (when all of the picture decisions are being made) an iMac with a second monitor and I/O device (if going to television) is often a better solution than the old (or new) tower. On the television series I worked on for 9 years we replaced the 2006-2009 Mac Pros with iMacs when it became time and the editors fought over who got to use the new iMacs because they were so much more capable (poor assistant editors got the trickle-down machines and in season 13 were still using the remaining 2009 MacPros). For what it's worth when the series first started shooting they shot super16 film, edited from DVCam SD 29.97 transfers and needed to run everything through Cinema Tools (originally cut in legacy FCP, still my favourite NLE overall). I do not miss those cadence tracking, pulldown days one bit.

Curiously, it is the corporate video makers who are often working in the latest formats with the camera source files who would actually benefit most from these machines as far as day-to-day editing goes. They often need the horsepower to push far greater files than anything I do in proxy. With ProRes RAW finally gaining some traction as a standard the Afterburner addition will probably prove very valuable to some users. However, I do not see ProRes RAW becoming a proxy standard in film or television any time soon, it is still too big for 100+ hours of footage.

The biggest hurdle to quick adoption of the new Mac Pros into the film industry at large is Catalina. It simply is not supported by AVID Media Composer or Pro Tools, the standards in North America still (for now, which I have been saying for 20 years). Past experience has shown we might still be 6 months away from Catalina support though, who knows, maybe AVID will surprise us and announce support tomorrow with the release of the Mac Pros. I wouldn't take a bet on it, though.

So, though I can imagine a great many use cases in the broader sense of filmmaking for these new Mac Pros which will allow some pretty amazing work to happen I know I won't be seeing one in an edit bay any time soon. Which is okay, the Mac tools currently available are more than sufficient for the work I do.

Oh, and one final comment on all the PC switching, DIY fans out there. In 20+ years I have been editing I have been asked to work on a PC once. It was a Franken-computer assembled by a gamer as having all of the bells-and-whistles necessary for editing 4K: 12-core Intel; 128GB RAM; 2x Nvidia 1080 Ti video cards; they dropped almost $12K Cdn on the build with monitors (2 years ago). Alas, there were driver issues, architecture issues, and my 2016 MBP was a faster option for editing 4K, even in Premiere Pro (only time in my career I have been asked to use PP as well). Curiously it was a Mac facility that was convinced they need to build the PC to work in 4K. Nobody wanted to use the machine, though, because of all of the problems, which is why I, as a contractor, got stuck with it. Now, your experience may vary but for all of those claiming that the Pros have abandoned the Mac that simply has not been my experience and for good reason.

There's a reason TB 3 is tied with the GPGPUs and if you slave a NAS or SAN off one of these systems with Afterburner it'll chew it up.

 

[Brandhouse]

Unfortunately, Mac products are getting exorbitant in their pricing. Great products, but Apple are putting themselves out of reach.

 

[SSDGUY]

For me, the wait continues. As a one-person small-shop professional who managed to afford a fairly high-end Mac tower and the 30" ACD (eons ago … before Apple's immensely long pro-market hiatus), the relatively huge leap in entry point for these new pro hardware releases keep them too distant for my budget, and likely anyone else in the small-shop-pro demographic. (Bracing for the barrage of "This wasn't made for you, get over it. Be happy with your all-in-one iMac." comments.)

 

[Unregistered 4U]

if it makes a significant sales number, they might consider giving more attention to more powerful hardware and the MacOS instead of emojis

Looking at the market, there are FAR more people using emoji’s and non-macOS systems... so emoji’s and non-MacOS systems will continue to rule the day for the foreseeable future.

rules out a lot of professional users who used to buy Mac Pros.

And most of those users that USED to buy Mac Pro’s now buy the iMac... yes the same arguments over and over again
[automerge]1575932287[/automerge]

For me, the wait continues. As a one-person small-shop professional who managed to afford a fairly high-end Mac tower and the 30" ACD (eons ago … before Apple's immensely long pro-market hiatus), the relatively huge leap in entry point for these new pro hardware releases keep them too distant for my budget, and likely anyone else in the small-shop-pro demographic. (Bracing for the barrage of "This wasn't made for you, get over it. Be happy with your all-in-one iMac." comments.)

If your fairly high-end Mac tower and 30” ACD are meeting your needs, then are you really in the market for a Mac Pro? I mean, I knew someone that did work with a Dual G5 for a VERY long time. Sure, they WANTED to upgrade, but, financially, couldn’t justify it as they were making good money with the box they had. There’s nothing a new computer would offer than other than a bill to be paid.

 

[Marinna]

Yeah! I'm still on a mid 2010 mac pro 5,1. I've been waiting a long, LONG time for this. So, it's Merry Christmas!

I am still on Mac Pro 4,1. It has been almost 11 years and that Xeon still runs quite strong except Adobe stops supporting old Mac OS. I plan to add an old Nvidia GPU (maybe GTX980 Ti) and install Linux on it to repurpose it as home workstation. The Mac Pro tower build is really solid, you don't see much these days even from these expensive enterprise level Dell workstation.

 

[Timothy Leo Crowley]

To this day I don't understand how they didn't see beforehand how positioning it as they did in the keynote was stupid. "It's $6K or $5.2K with a VESA mount" would have been much, much better messaging. Don't put the stand up there in a slide for the people who don't need the product anyhow to chortle over.

\
[automerge]1575934173[/automerge]

To this day I don't understand how they didn't see beforehand how positioning it as they did in the keynote was stupid. "It's $6K or $5.2K with a VESA mount" would have been much, much better messaging. Don't put the stand up there in a slide for the people who don't need the product anyhow to chortle over.

They got millions in free advertising with that one line. And people who buy those types of displays don't flinch at the cost. It was a brilliant move.

 

[Glockworkorange]

How the heck is a Mac mini a prosumer device? It has a mobile CPU with thermal issues.

Up to what, 6 cores, 64 GB RAM and four TB 3 ports so you can hook at eGPU and 6K monitors?

You can make it more powerful than the 2018 15 inch MB Pro if you add your own GPU.

Are you telling me that's not enough for "prosumers" and YouTube makers?

Sure it is.

 

[OkiRun]

well technically it's not 30k in tax savings, it takes 30k out of your income, which means you have less taxable income. Advisors generally suggest sticking that money into a 401k or some other retirement account, but if you're already maxed out on those then the 179 is great.

It's how large and small companies can show no profit on specific projects or, even for the entire year.

 

[Abazigal]

To this day I don't understand how they didn't see beforehand how positioning it as they did in the keynote was stupid. "It's $6K or $5.2K with a VESA mount" would have been much, much better messaging. Don't put the stand up there in a slide for the people who don't need the product anyhow to chortle over.

I will say that this says a lot more about the people kicking up a hissy fit over this issue (what’s that saying about knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing?), than it does about Apple.

 

[Rodney Dangerfield]

I was excited to see an update but at 5k starting price point, which more than average Joe, can afford this except for the very wealthy and professionals who would buy this equipment though their businesses. It is sad but never the less a great product they can be proud of at Apple.

Agree...Average Joes need not apply!

 

[OkiRun]

There's a reason TB 3 is tied with the GPGPUs and if you slave a NAS or SAN off one of these systems with Afterburner it'll chew it up.

I think when PP users start working with FCPX on the 7.1 with the afterburner card (ProRes) and the Vega II Duos, some will be converted. Not to have to go through a proxy workflow and to be able to process though 6K and 8K video with no speed degradation is something I am personally looking forward to...

 

[Billrey]

By $12,000, you mean a system with an XDR display? You are comparing that to a system without one? If that is the case, you do not need an XDR display and it would be dumb to buy one. If you need one, your alternatives are all substantially more.

However, if your alternative is a Linux system, you are probably not a great candidate for a Mac Pro. If you are a Linux user, you probably get no value from the ecosystem, so you see no value from its added cost.

No, by $12,000 I am referring to the price of a properly configured Mac Pro: at least 64 gigs of RAM, 28 core CPU, a few TBs of storage and one or two MPX GPU modules.

The base model of the Mac Pro is almost pointless - you are much better of buying an iMac then. The only reason one would get the M.P. is because it can be configured to be much more powerful.

These are specs you would need for higher end 3d animation and rendering. I am not even entertaining the idea of the XDR Display here.

The base model of the Mac Pro is almost pointless - you are much better of buying an iMac then. The only reason one would get the M.P. is because it can be configured to be much more powerful.

Later today when the configurator is up, we’ll see what the price of a decent config will be. But I fully expect it will be a *lot* higher than the $6,000 entry price.

 

[chucker23n1]

I will say that this says a lot more about the people kicking up a hissy fit over this issue (what’s that saying about knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing?), than it does about Apple.

Regardless, it gave people entirely the wrong thing to talk about.

 

[OkiRun]

Unfortunately, Mac products are getting exorbitant in their pricing. Great products, but Apple are putting themselves out of reach.

There's an economic re-recession coming and the tarrif wars are not going to abate and China is flexing their control over all corporate data located in the country. Grasshopper vs Ants. Apple is definitely the Ants.

 

[wilhoitm]

The important question will be: how much are the wheels?

I have got to have the wheels and they better not be $1000! 😲
[automerge]1575942307[/automerge]
Does anyone know when the Apple store will start taking orders? I am worried the Mac Pro is going to sell out! 😲

The Mac Pro e-mail from Apple had a calendar invite for 12 Noon EST on 12/10. Can anyone confirm that time or are orders going to be active at midnight tonight?

 

[mannyvel]

It's how large and small companies can show no profit on specific projects or, even for the entire year.

Larger companies have better ways of saving money on taxes, like R&D tax credits etc. Us little guys don't have as many options to evade minimize taxes.

 

[lilkwarrior]

Cuda is dead! Long live AMD's RDNA GPUOpen!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPUOpen

No disrespect, but that's an extremely laughable. I do agree Nvidia, Intel, & AMD needs to sit down and figure out a successor to CUDA that actually meets CUDA's stellar mGPU & GPU compute performance.

OpenCL ain't it, and at the very least needs a major version revision to catch up to CUDA.
[automerge]1575942498[/automerge]

I want to make sure I future proof mine. Will the base 32GB of RAM last me or should I opt for the 1.5TB of RAM. I'm torn...

It's upgradable. Get the smallest one you can grab to update with better RAM after purchase.
[automerge]1575942817[/automerge]

No, by $12,000 I am referring to the price of a properly configured Mac Pro: at least 64 gigs of RAM, 28 core CPU, a few TBs of storage and one or two MPX GPU modules.

The base model of the Mac Pro is almost pointless - you are much better of buying an iMac then. The only reason one would get the M.P. is because it can be configured to be much more powerful.

These are specs you would need for higher end 3d animation and rendering. I am not even entertaining the idea of the XDR Display here.

The base model of the Mac Pro is almost pointless - you are much better of buying an iMac then. The only reason one would get the M.P. is because it can be configured to be much more powerful.

Later today when the configurator is up, we’ll see what the price of a decent config will be. But I fully expect it will be a *lot* higher than the $6,000 entry price.

I agree most serious professionals will get the 12-28 core version. The base one is not it for most pros.

Some won't get the AMD Pro Duo right away as Fabric & OpenCL is ????? + ??? release of Ray-tracing Navi next year compared to CUDA, RTX Nvidia GPUs, & NVLINK. Nvidia & Apple GOT to get back to good terms as a significant amount of pros want this computer really, really bad but can't without CUDA + Tensor & Ray-tracing cores.

A couple pros will hold off on the Pro Display XDR because of the Asus PA32UCG

 

[tillsbury]

They got millions in free advertising with that one line. And people who buy those types of displays don't flinch at the cost. It was a brilliant move.

Absolutely. Now any self-respecting boss just *has* to have an XDR and that stand on their desk, whether or not they use it

 

[Timothy Leo Crowley]

Well, this was a very entertaining thread to read.

It's certainly the only thread I've read where someone used the phrase "only 192 gig of ram.

My thought is the thing will sell very well to the people and businesses it's intended for. I have no need for it, but I wish Apple every success.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

Regardless, it gave people entirely the wrong thing to talk about.

People would STILL be talking about it. The ONLY difference with YOUR way is that people would ALSO be talking about how Apple tried to hide it. The $1000 stand joke will live on forever along with the “Apple only makes Emoji’s” joke

I am worried the Mac Pro is going to sell out!

I don’t think they’re going to sell out. But, just to be safe, I’d say keep an eye on their site until Midnight Pacific US Time. I don’t know if they’re going to do the “Store is Offline” thing ahead of the release, but it wouldn’t be TOO surprising. Also, from prior consumer launches, the Apple Store app seems to usually be available before the website.

 

[chucker23n1]

People would STILL be talking about it. The ONLY difference with YOUR way is that people would ALSO be talking about how Apple tried to hide it. The $1000 stand joke will live on forever along with the “Apple only makes Emoji’s” joke

It’s not a big deal. It’s also unnecessary. There was no point in having that slide at all (it’s not like they had a slide announcing the price of the Mac Pro wheels), and they should’ve simply said pricing starts at $5,199.

If the stand joke lives for a while, that’s in part on Apple. It’s also not important. We’ve had decades of “haha Apple mice have one button”, “Apple is doomed”, etc.

It’s valid to criticize a company for making a mistake at a presentation when that company’s reputation is they’re the benchmark of how to present products.

 

[Abazigal]

I don’t think they’re going to sell out. But, just to be safe, I’d say keep an eye on their site until Midnight Pacific US Time. I don’t know if they’re going to do the “Store is Offline” thing ahead of the release, but it wouldn’t be TOO surprising. Also, from prior consumer launches, the Apple Store app seems to usually be available before the website.

The Mac Pro does appear to be a fairly low volume product, and I think most of the orders are going to be custom builds. I won’t be surprised if this pushes the delivery date to early next year.