Because like those other companies, you have absolutely no "vision".
Why oh why would Apple choose to try to compete with a form-factor that has already been perfected and cost-reduced to within an inch of its life by those Other Companies?
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's Revamped Mac Pro to Launch in 2019
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Why oh why would Apple choose to try to compete with a form-factor that has already been perfected and cost-reduced to within an inch of its life by those Other Companies?
Yes, really. Modularity doesn't have to be plugging a bunch of stuff in with USB-C wires and having bits here and there all over the desk. Towers are extremely modular, and designed to have nearly all the modularity hidden away on the inside. I think the cheese grater Mac Pros up to 5,1 are some of the most beautiful machines I've ever seen. I don't think anyone looks at the 5,1 Mac Pros and thinks "yuck, towers are ugly". Those Mac Pros were massively modular, had fantastic thermals and looked amazing.
What you said makes no sense at all.
All-in-ones are the exact opposite of workstations.
Workstations are bought by people who need expandability, upgradeability, cooling, and modularity. AIO's have none of those things, while also being not portable. They are literally the worst of all worlds.
Keeping an overpriced 5-year-old product on your website as a "placeholder" is not a sentence that makes sense.
Imagine if you could buy a Dodge Neon on Chrysler's website for full price....people would think they were being predatory. Which they are.
Apple has not shipped a workstation since 2012. Let that sink in. Do you have any idea how long six years is in the computer industry?
They literally chose to stop servicing the workstation market and then have the nerve to call gimmicky ultrabooks with bad keyboards and 16GB of soldered RAM "pro".
...or lots of Research, Prototyping, More Research, More Prototyping, until it is RIGHT.
All of these years, all of the people's comments over those years. Admitting that they've blown it with the Mac. And now the "thing" is not going to be ready until sometime in 2019 because they are still deciding on what to do. What a disappointment. Apple grows and grows but delivers less and less. The pro side and the mini side continues to get not Apple's best. I can't think of an Apple product that I want to buy right now. I looked at the speaker, no stereo, no buy. The iMac, while an improvement, still doesn't give us what we need and if it wasn't for Final Cut Pro, we would be gone. Apple is finding more and more ways for us to save money.
Nah, they have a huge market in music production, video editing and such.. It is possible to be in both markets- and advertise for both markets. Again, people also spelled doom for apple, when Steve introduced the iPod.
I almost only use the iPad in the couch, bed, and on the go - but when I produce music or develop, I use the Mac.
Ssoooo your complaining about the competition having perfected and, utterly destroying Apple, with their perfected pro machines? Your arguing why should Apple do the same? Not sure if your being serious here?
Yeah, go hire an industrial designer from HP or Dell. That would be SOOOOO much better...
You’re glad they’ve got the balls to not upgrade a computer for six years? That’s not courageous. That’s bad management.
I don't think you are getting what I'm saying it all. Of course Apple is technically capable of doing all of this, just as they have been since before the trashcan MP and chose not to. They've had people waiting and waiting...
When they finally do launch it, after all that wait, its not enough for it to launch late into TB3/PCIe3 as the type of users who would want an MP would likely just delay their purchases with a "well, TB4 is right around the corner, I'll just hold out on my 4,1 or 5,1 until then". I'm not condoning any of the long ass time its taken for them to focus on Pros in the way that they should -- I'm just estimating what path Apple will take to position the MP at the top of the power/performance spectrum of Macs and what kind of value proposition they will pitch it with.
They won't want to launch it after all this time as an equivalent to the iMac Pro -- they will want to position it above that, and TB4 & PCIe 4 are logical options for part of how they can do that
It would be more spectacularly impressive. But the Mac Pro 2013 was spectacular. Apple (and the vast majority of users don't need a stunt or impressive) need a tool that has a sustainable business model. Period.
Too high power and the niche is so small it isn't sustainable. Many folks are sitting on these systems longer so the number of folks coming up for upgrades is shrinking. Increasing that shrink by jumping even higher is just as likely to put the product on a death spiral as anything else. ( less people so charge more so less people so charge more .... death spiral )
It isn't about bragging rights on CPU. The CPU on the Mac Pro and the iMac can be the same because they systems as a whole offer substantively different things. There are very few users who are just solely focus solely on CPUs.
Those who need their own screen(s), add-in cards, a GPU vendor different from the one Apple picked for the default GPU , etc. can buy the Mac Pro even though the same CPU could be in an iMac Pro.
If the CPU is the only factor and want to just pull the machine out of the box, plug it in and use it then the iMac Pro is better. If already have screen and replacing a tower/module box and that is it then the Mac Pro would be better. Different people have different needs even if have a single primary criteria there area always secondary ones to do the product discrimination on.
There are more dimension to these systems that just CPU. The same is true for GPUs. Solely wrapping the systems around a specific GPU is myopic also.
The iMac Pro has other rather significant limitations.
1. It has a singular storage drive. Just one.
Folks who like to put 8-10TB of storage inside the computer the iMac is a non option.
Even with just 1-3 HDD SATA drives the Mac Pro would pull away from the iMac Pro.
Even if Apple stuck to their path of "SATA is dead long live PCI-e SSDs" 1-2 M.2 SSD empty slots would be a substantive improvement over the iMac Pro's limitation of just one proprietary SSD.
2. a Thunderbolt v3 eGPU PCI-e card enclosure can't solve some problems.
8K RAW video capture. Nope ( does most pros need it, no? but some do)
lowest possible latency audo capture. Nope. (does most pros need it, no? but some do )
.....
also if folks have a PCI-e card that hooks them to some > $10K system they get kind of twisted about sunk costs. If that is more than what they paying for the Mac Pro (or iMac Pro ) then have a tail wagging the dog effect. They want a slot in the system to put the card into to turn the whole thing back on. That's mostly it.
Just giving folks a single x16 slot to stick a card into would be a major separator from the iMac Pro.
3. some folks want to put the Mac into a rack because there is a set of equipment that provides the solution. (e.g. mobile video capture system that take to locations bolted to a rack with wheels. ). The iMac Pro llkely isn't going to work. If new Mac Pro was standard rack friendly it would be easy to bolt in. The CPU and GPUs differences between the to may not matter much in that context.
This whole mindset that the Mac Pro needs to be some tech spec porn dominator over every other possible Mac is alot of the junk that got to the Mac Pro 2013 designed into a corner. It doesn't.
Primarily it needs to solve a substantively different set of problems for a different set of users who are happy with the iMac Pro. That's it. Do that and the iMac Pro and Mac Pro can share components to offset the too low volume to be viable for Apple market constraints. Mac Pro doesn't need to beat up on the iMac Pro ... it just have to be different enough so there is limited fratricide sales between the products. Two fraternal twins that are different. Same parents but look different.
Dual Xeons is a dubious "look different" metric when there are so many others.
That last MacPro was released spring 2014, it's a little over 4 years old - stop that lying with over 6 years.
They get it right with hardware that is a few gens old by the time they’ve finished ‘perfecting’ it..
Meanwhile the competition has had several gens of machinists nes using newer faster more capable hardware.
You are defending Apple very hard on this topic, got to admire your persistence here as you certainly are the only person doing so... that should be telling you something..
My long held belief is that Apple created the late 2013 Mac Pro for two reasons - 1) To cut down on the cost of the raw aluminum that was necessary to build such a large tower and increase their overall profit margins and 2) To increase the number of Mac Pros that could be packed into a FedEx plane to cut down on shipping costs...oh and 3) To shift the support of certain configurations to third party vendors like Promise, Sonnet Technology and Other World Computing when it came to storage and PCIe expansion, but I digress.
Personally, I do want Apple to do a bit more than figure out how to put a motherboard in a box and sell it. I don't think the mental gymnastics are unwarranted, but the proof will be in the pudding when the Mac Pro finally ships. Is it simply a proprietary $h*tst0rm with modules plugging into modules that make what should be a fully decked out system for $4999 end up costing 2x-3x as much with no discernible advantage other than to lock me into Apple's view of a Pro computer AGAIN, or does this approach truly give me a way to mix and match the modules I need now (fast CPU with 8-12 cores, lots or RAM, not so much GPU and no PCIe slots) and expand later (dual CPU and more storage)? If Apple can create something like that and it has some longevity, I am there and I think it will be compelling. If this is something that is half-baked and ends up about as modular as an Apple Watch, then Pros are going to have a field day. Either way, it taking six years to get to this point is exhausting for most of us and justifiably so. Apple can do better.
They talk about timelines and being wrong because they don't have any products to talk about and iPhone sales have maxed out. They should have been supporting Pro users since the beginning, as Pro users sales don't max out. But they got in bed with only teenagers and now teenager's toys are all Apple has.
It figures that would be your "takeaway" from that comment.
What I mean is that Apple needs to do what Apple does, and everyone else follows: INNOVATE.
Check your facts please, here's one laptop Intel based with 32 gb: https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...re=laptop_32gb_ram-_-9SIA7AB6UR8166-_-Product
What do you call switching to all SSD and USB-C/TB3 and building All-In-Ones with 5K displays, but "Adopting new technologies"?
And then, they get excoriated for it.
It may come as a surprise to someone as visionless as you; but "Adopting new technologies" does NOT mean "Putting the next iteration of the same old Intel CPU into a new plastic enclosure and calling it "New".
""completely rethinking" the Mac Pro"
completely overthinking like the MP 2013, trying to work out how thin it should be.
I'm sure it'll be great but will be paying for lots of things that aren't necessary
completely overthinking like the MP 2013, trying to work out how thin it should be.
I'm sure it'll be great but will be paying for lots of things that aren't necessary
If someone put away a few bucks a month away for every month there hasn't been a new Mac Pro, they could afford a loaded one by the time one comes out.
You don’t know what’s already out there. Apple is the laggard here and the competition is setting the standards in markets once belonged to Apple. Yes their iMacs are okay. I recently bought the 5K i7 iMac myself. I could have better hardware for far less from HP or Dell though.
Nope. That's non-spastic Management.
They took a flyer on a radical new design back in 2010 or 2011, when the Mac Pro redesign probably started internally at Apple. Didn't think some things through quite far enough (like the Thermal Budget), and some predictions, such as them OBVIOUSLY predicting that TB would become "The Next Big Thing" (mostly Intel's fault for being too greedy/controlling) simply didn't pan out.
Because of the OBVIOUSLY huge R&D investment in the 2013 Mac Pro, and because it was projected to not be a "fly off the shelves" consumer-grade product, they gave it some time to see if it would "grow" on people. For some, it did; but for others (too many others!), not so much.
The rest of the time was just convincing Upper Management to spend ANOTHER multimillions-of-dollars to specifically-design a high-end (and thus expensive) Product to address a Market that, quite frankly, is actually pretty small.
What update, lol
[doublepost=1522963157][/doublepost]
At least we would get state of the art tech for reasonable prices. Oh wait... Tim Cook will do the pricingYeah, go hire an industrial designer from HP or Dell. That would be SOOOOO much better...
Thanks for the "props"; and genuinely sorry to read your sig-line about "Jasper" (whoever that was); but I am not at ALL the only person "Defending Apple" on this. And even if I am, that's only because MR seems to be infested by more Apple HATERS than ANYTHING.
Wonder why? Since most of those "people" (I use the term loosely!) wouldn't buy an Apple product if it only cost a Penny...
You may not like them but the nMP are really nice machines. I'm quite happy with mine.