Apple's Revamped Mac Pro to Launch in 2019

[TechZeke]

I'm sure there will be a dedicated group of people willing to buy it, but I also think the long wait has heightened expectations to a degree that many people will be very disappointed, i.e., reaction of "I waited 2 years for that???"

Honestly, this task is fairly simple.

If Apple screws it up, it's because they would be trying too hard to be "innovate" instead of giving us a no-BS machine. The Touch Bar on the MacBook Pro or even the trash-can Mac Pro is a prime example of this.

We don't know what it is, but I guarantee there is going to be some BS restriction or compromise in the expandability, functionality or performance for the sake of change and looking innovative.

 

[LordVic]

As many have said here: Apple, just put the most recent components into the cheese grater MP case and do that every time Intel / AMD / nVidia upgrade their components (or let users do that themselves).

Oh, and just call the trash can MP the new Mac mini (keeping Xeon CPU options and discrete GPU [more expensive version], and adding a consumer-CPU/integrated graphics option [cheap version]). That way the R&D resources that went into producing a silent, compact machine, will not be wasted.

Amen.

if the current Mac Pro was available with single i5 or i7 option, and single consumer GPU (at least relatively modern), and half the price, it would be a really good desktop computer for an average user who wants to Bring their own peripherals.

but the current version just isn't right for "pros" and lack of upgradability as mentioned keeps being a bottlneck for those who earn their living based on the performance of their machines.

consumers are generally fine with "throw away" machines. But not people who put serious investment into their hardware for return on investment.

 

[iMi]

There are many people who say we complain about a product most of us would not be able to afford to buy or would not need, but that's the not entirely true.

I opted for a high-end iMac for work. I don't do any graphical or video related work, aside from media rich documents and some personal photo editing. I like having a fast computer though for a number of other reasons. I would have purchase a modular Mac instead, even if it was a Mac Pro model, if Apple also sold a matching monitor that is apple branded and delivers the same quality display (or better) as the iMac.

I would pay more up front to be able to later update the monitor or internal components and keep the machine longer... I wish Apple would realize this and return the days when this exact setup was available.

 

[TheHurryKayne]

Yeah, well, that's made sense for over a decade at this point and Apple has avoided it like the plague for fear of cannibalizing the outdated all-in-one iMac concept, something that should have been put to rest ages ago. I don't see why they would have a sudden change of heart so I doubt it. I'd love to be wrong about that, BTW, but I wouldn't bet on it.

It would be too good to be true.Apple is not into this.One less thing.

 

[macduke]

While I'm incredibly happy with the revelation that they're taking professional users seriously by hiring them to do real-world projects and work directly with their engineers, it's a bit of a bummer that this device won't be launching this year. I guess we won't see a sneak preview at WWDC then? Was really thinking this would be the year—at least by autumn. Maybe it's because this will be the first Mac with Apple-designed CPUs? Hopefully the new display is at least 6K at 31.5" (rounded up to 32" for marketing?), which would give a PPI which is the same as the 27" 5K at 218PPI. Hopefully if they're working with professionals to engineer the thing, they'll bust out some of their patents on a display that senses when you grab it, disengages a latch mechanism and folds down at a shallow angle for drawing/touch while transforming the OS to be touch-friendly in one smooth motion. This would mean we could see a lot more professional crossover apps between Mac and iPad Pro—and they could use universal binaries running Apple chips.

Personally I can't be too upset about the delay. I'm currently in the process of finishing the unfinished section of my basement so that I can have an office/photo studio/man cave area. A newly redesigned, modular Mac Pro with, perhaps, a 32" 6K Thunderbolt Display would be the crown jewel of my new space, but would also cost a ton. 2019 gives me a break between paying for construction costs and a new Mac, lol. I'm too busy to be very creative at the moment outside of work anyway between this and landscaping.

Speaking of price, the current Mac Pro starts at $3000, which would seem really low next to the iMac Pro if Apple had kept up with updating it. It would be great if it started there, but I doubt it will start below $3499, and more likely $3999—without a display and quickly go up from there. If the display is indeed 6K, I could see that alone in the $1499-1999 price range. Would be great if it had a minimal bezel or maybe some OLED technology similar to the iPhone X which has great color reproduction, high dynamic range and excellent contrast ratios. I would definitely pay that much for such a display, but even $2000 may not be enough to get all of those things when you look at consumer TVs and the costs involved.

 

[xnu]

Whew, already purchased three new Windows PCs this year, I was worried something would come out in June.

 

[tkatz]

This sounds about right. There'll be proprietary "modules" you can buy. I'll be very surprised if they allow the Mac Pro to be a "free for all" in the way that PC towers are.

I agree. Though having a more traditional tower format did seem to work for them in the past... I'm sure hoping those days aren't over, but I fear they are long gone.

 

[Peperino]

At least they gave a heads up.

Pro workflow team. That’s a good idea. Kind of crucial actually. I’m surprised that hasn’t always existed.

I wish their pro workflow team studied my work flow as a digital artist who needs powerful desktop drawing applications on the go in a stand-alone device. Just wishful thinking.

One year ago, Schiller came out talking about how they care about their Pro customers...? Remember?

Now, it took them one year to assemble a workflow team?? That shows how much they care about their "Pro" customers...

And then, they say they want to be transparent... what a bunch of bull...

 

[LordVic]

Whew, already purchased three new Windows PCs this year, I was worried something would come out in June.

yeah, i was in the market for a new PC last year. wanted something with more cores and some power behidn it (coming from an i5-4570). held out as long as I could. Ended up just doing my own build with an AMD CPU. can't be bothered to wait on Apple to release another proprietary box.

as is, looking at laptops and their latest offerings just aren't there. We'll see what happens with the MacBook Air. it's ALMOST there, but needs an updated to a more recent CPU (at least 7 series by now) and a better display (i don't even care if it's retina. but nothing Apple prices should be < 1080p at this point)

 

[Peperino]

This is all very good news.
1. That they are being open and transparent about their plans and their timeframe. That's all I needed to know. I'm pretty certain I can milk my 5,1 and my MBP 15" along for another year.

2. That they seem serious about listening to professional users about what we want and how we use our machines.

3. That they actually went out of their way to let the media know.

Now, we just have to wait. Let people save their complaints until after they announce it. Anything until then is just hot air. Back to work.

Really?? they say the same thing a year ago. If you remember Schiller did an interview (which they rarely do), saying how much they care about the Pro users...

They care so much that you have to wait another year or more...

 

[Joe The Dragon]

If this new Mac Pro doesn't accept off-the-shelf components for upgrading the RAM, HDD, GPU, and CPU, then they might as well not bother. Thats what made the old cheese grater Mac Pro a great Pro machine.

And please, please let there be room for at least one 3.5" HDD. I know Apple wants to SSD everything, but mechanical drives are still massively superior for mass file storage.

and REAL m.2 slots (no forced raid 0) + sata for lower cost SSD as well.

 

[doctor-don]

So my Mac Pro will be 12 years old by then. Looks like I will have to buy a used Mac Pro6,1 that's already got electronics that are more than 4 years old.

My 23-inch Apple Cinema Display, bought at the same time I bought my Mac Pro, is functioning perfectly. I do NOT plan on buying an iMac Pro - or any other all-in-one.

So the choice is buy a USED Mac Pro (2010 for the tower model or 2013 for the cylinder) and a cable / connector that will allow me to connect my 23-inch ACD. Since what I read makes it appear that it will be another 18 months till the redesigned modular Mac Pro is on the market, I see little choice. I certainly don't plan on buying a PC with all the M$ mess.

 

[fathergll]

They're right, I did just that and didn't buy an iMac Pro because I want the modular Mac Pro. Had they updated us earlier I would have don't just that. I'm feeling a bit spiteful though (in a cut off my nose sense) and almost don't want to buy an iMac Pro at this point just because they now want me to.

Anyway, the big question is when in 2019 and if it's late 2019 what are the chances it delays to 2020.

I should probably just order the iMac Pro today.

I called this from day one when the iMac Pro was announced last year. The chances that Apple would release a iMac Pro Dec 2017 and another high end Mac 1 year later was extremely slim. It wouldn't make sense and the iMac Pro is the holdover product for users who need Xeons, ECC memory and high end graphics cards. Extremely good shot Mac Pro will be late 2019 when it ships.

They want you to buy the iMac Pro and they can sell you a monitor with it as well.

Either get the iMac Pro or you need to vote with your dollars and jump platforms if its a big enough problem.

 

[L-Viz]

Need help.

Seriously considering to buy the current Mac Pro in its very first very base configuration:
Quad Core 3,7 Ghz, 12GB Ram, 256 SSD.

Currently sells for 2000€

Why?

I need a Mac that fits my monitor and the current mac mini is out of question.

I understand, that I could easily upgrade Ram and even replace the SSD in the future.

Would it be a nice machine for the next 8-10 years? (no fancy graphics rendering or video editing, etc)

 

[canonical]

Well that should give Apple (with all of its thousands of employees) enough time to figure out how to make a monitor again.

 

[shaunp]

Makes sense. At least 18 month development from the time they announced they were redesigning it.

Although, if you think about it they should have been doing this refresh long before this. It's pretty sad for a company this large. Apple doesn't have a product person leading the company anymore. It's design by committee now and you can see they are not giving the mac the time of day. No clear vision of what the line should be. What happened to the four quadrants Jobs drew out when he returned to Apple.

I think 18 months is too long, but you are right about Apple no longer being led by product people.

Given Apple's resources I can't see why it would take longer than 6 months to create a very respectable workstation that competes in every single way with Dell Precision and HP Z, etc. Lets face it, business customers just want a fast, reliable machine and don't really care what it looks like as it's a business tool. So a 'box' design would be perfectly acceptable. This is one product where Apple don't need to reinvent the wheel, and to me they are just overthinking the problem.

 

[Macintoshrumors]

So no new Mac Mini this year either?

Obviously not. Mini is dead

 

[fathergll]

Need help.

Seriously considering to buy the current Mac Pro in its very first very base configuration:
Quad Core 3,7 Ghz, 12GB Ram, 256 SSD.

Currently sells for 2000€

Why?

I need a Mac that fits my monitor and the current mac mini is out of question.

I understand, that I could easily upgrade Ram and even replace the SSD in the future.

Would it be a nice machine for the next 8-10 years? (no fancy graphics rendering or video editing, etc)

No. Get a Macbook Pro and close the lid and use the external monitor.

 

[buckwheet]

It looks like Apple’s take on “modular” is not going to be anything like what the people here are expecting. Instead of replaceable parts, it sounds more like a retread of the Mac Pro where you add extra functionality via thunderbolt functionality.

Honestly, I think the whole point of the article is that we have no idea what "it looks like".

I have no idea what they'll do, but there are a few things we know: 1) they want to make something modular, 2) they're consulting with working professionals to find out where the pain points are, 3) they're planning to release something in 2019. Frustrating as it may be to know it's another year wait, it's better than what we knew before.

Also, I see a fundamental inconsistency in a lot of people's complaints here. First of all, people keep bringing out the old "Apple doesn't care about the Pro market, because it's too small" argument, but if that were the case why would they break with decades of customary silence and start telling us what they're up to? Why would they spend 2 years developing a new Mac Pro? And why would they make a point of assuring us of the fact that they are actually looking at professional workflows and identifying pain points? That's a lot of hand-holding for a market they don't care about. As to the hilariously paranoid suggestions that they're lying to us—well, again, why would they bother?

Secondly, we have to consider that the benefits of modularity and economy don't only benefit us. If Apple can make a machine that's easier for them to keep up-to-date, to repair, etc., then that helps their bottom-line as well. Since the rate of pro product updates has been a huge pain point, my guess is that they want to build a basis for a machine that enables them to plan a roadmap and stick to it. Could this just be a new basic tower? Sure. But it could also be something more friendly for Pro users, like myself, who will always do a good chunk of their work on a MacBook Pro. (As to anyone who suggests that "Pro" users don't work on laptops? Well, you're just wrong. Wake the **** up.) An external GPU, for example, might rid me of the irritation of having to disconnect/reconnect my display to/from my Ubuntu box. If the new Mac Pro system used an external GPU, I could probably just plug in a single TB3/4 connection and be ready to go. Or maybe they design some method for clustering, so that Mac Pro + MacBook Pro become a single, multi-core machine? A pipe-dream, maybe, but possible.

Thirdly, Apple has taken a ton of heat—particularly since releasing the latest MacBook Pro—for soldering in upgradable components like SSD and RAM. I would be very surprised if they took that route with the Mac Pro (after all, they didn't even do that with the trashcan). Considering the rate of industry development, upgradeable GPUs would be very smart, as well. Will they enable this? I really don't know. But it would make sense, particularly given that GPUs are regularly being used for more than just gaming these days (e.g., machine learning/high-performance computing).

One last thing, which was almost hidden in that article, is that it sounds like they're looking at bottlenecks right down to system level. I find this part very encouraging, because it suggests that they've realized that macOS design and performance is part of the equation, as well. Also, there's virtually no improvement they could make through such an understanding that wouldn't vicariously benefit consumer's in the process, making any improvements proposed a pro/consumer win/win—i.e., no excuse to avoid implementation.

 

[Glockworkorange]

I think we do know. ARM chips were designed for power saving so why would you expect them to perform any better than chips designed to favor performance over power savings? Kind of like building a racing car based on a diesel engine. It could be a fun experiment but you would never win any races so what's the point?

Porsches were designed to be race cars and sports cars, yet they make SUV’s as well.

There are uses for ARM chips other than battery saving. ARM powers the Secure Enclave on the iMac Pro. Not a real power drawing concern.

 

[shaunp]

Need help.

Seriously considering to buy the current Mac Pro in its very first very base configuration:
Quad Core 3,7 Ghz, 12GB Ram, 256 SSD.

Currently sells for 2000€

Why?

I need a Mac that fits my monitor and the current mac mini is out of question.

I understand, that I could easily upgrade Ram and even replace the SSD in the future.

Would it be a nice machine for the next 8-10 years? (no fancy graphics rendering or video editing, etc)

I honestly wouldn't bother. I had the 6-core one with D700's and 64GB RAM. It was a nice quiete machine, but I ended up with various bits of storage all over the place and needing a ton of plugs - it was a very messy setup compared to an older Mac Pro or a PC. If you need a Mac you'd be better off spending 2K on an iMac right now and selling it on later when you want to upgrade. If you really, really want a machine you can keep for 8-10 years then just get a PC and swap out the odd bit here and there as you need to. 2K will buy you a lot of PC.

 

[whitedragon101]

I think we do know. ARM chips were designed for power saving so why would you expect them to perform any better than chips designed to favor performance over power savings? Kind of like building a racing car based on a diesel engine. It could be a fun experiment but you would never win any races so what's the point?

It all depends how ARM chips scale up to higher power input and higher TDP designs. Even at the top end of super computing its the most power efficient chips that win out because once you hit the cooling systems thermal limit the chips melt. Its how much performance per watt you can get under that thermal threshold that counts.

I think the fact that the IPad Pro/ iPhone X outperforms mobile i7 chips shows that ARM chips could potentially scale to high performance designs.

(FYI I don't think apple are considering ARM chips for the primary CPU of the Mac Pro any time soon. Even if they are considering it I would think they will try it out on all the Macbook and Macbook Pros for a while to work out compatibility issues).

 

[canonical]

What was wrong with the 2010 Mac Pro tower?

It was noisy, incredibly heavy, a dust magnet inside, and for all that size and weight, no faster or better than something vastly smaller. I am actually increasingly impressed with the stability of the little R2D2 Mac Pro - it's a wonderful machine and design - and disappointed that Apple does not update it with new components, like faster RAM, 10g Ethernet, new graphics cards, etc ... all of which are in the iMac Pro, and would be relatively easy to update.

 

[oyabroch!]

Such wonderful, insightful "journalism" which shows possibly THE most hideous, unrealistic, idiotic "concept" ever thought up. Raise your standards a few thousand notches up, would you, thanks.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I'd like it see a new pro display with it's own, built-in GPU. You'd plug in via Thunderbolt 3 which would not only power/charge your MacBook, but also access the extra GPU resources just like an eGPU device.

Perfect for MacBooks, etc, that don't exactly have desktop class graphics.

I agree 100%...there were rumors of just such a beast within the past couple of years (LG and Apple joint project), but Apple opted to simply stop selling it's Thunderbolt Display and instead handed us the LG UltraFine 4K and 5K displays hoping that would placate us despite the fact that Apple has been making it's own displays since 1980. Well, it didn't, and it was simply a horrible mistake on Apple's part. Why Apple didn't release a branded 21.5" 4K and 27" 5K in June of 2017 to work with the MacBooks, MacBook Pros and new iMacs escapes me, but I digress.

My opinion is that Apple should make a 21'5" 4K, a 27" 5K and a either a 40" or 42" 8K display (depending on the resolution) with just the 8K display containing a built-in GPU (AMD Vega 56 or 64 with 8GB VRAM minimum). This would ensure that at least it's MacBook Pro, iMac, iMac Pro and Mac Pro customers that have Thunderbolt 3 ports a way to attach something this massive to a computer that otherwise wouldn't be able to handle it as the current Thunderbolt 3 controller (Intel JHL6540; Alpine Ridge) can't support an 8K display and allow you to plug directly into the computer.

I am 100% certain the next Mac Pro will use the new Intel JHL7540 (Titan Ridge), which can support 8K at 60Hz with 30-bit/px and HDR (DP 1.4), but I suspect that instead of swapping out a PCIe-based GPU, you will be swapping out an entire GPU "Module". Why? For the same reason we ended up with a cylindrical Mac Pro with no PCIe slots - How do you extend a Thunderbolt connection out through the PCIe bus to a third party OEM GPU card, so that the end-user can plug a Thunderbolt display into the GPU and also use the USB, Ethernet, Firewire 800 embedded in the display while also ensuring that basic Thunderbolt functions such as daisy-chaining of RAIDs, additional displays, expansion chassis and other devices work seamlessly. The answer, unfortunately, was - YOU DON'T. At least you don't with a commodity PCIe GPU. And so, I believe the fate of the tower Mac Pro was sealed the day Apple committed fully to Thunderbolt. (Side note: Apple did route USB 2.0 signals through the ADC connector connected to the GPU sitting in the AGP slot of a PowerMac G4, but this restricted you to Apple-engineered cards. In fact, I still own an NVIDIA GeForce 4 Ti card to this day.)

Sure, you have all manner of DisplayPort, HDMI and/or DVI connectors on modern graphics cards today, but the Mac Pro after-market for a custom card that also includes a Thunderbolt solution onboard is going to a pretty hard sale to someone the likes of Asus, Gigabyte, EVGA or even Sapphire. Hence, this is why everything Apple sells now is essentially an All-In-One. The Mac mini routes it's video through it's TB2 ports, ditto the 2013 Mac Pro, the MacBook via USB-C, and the MBP, iMac and iMac Pro now do it through TB3. The next Mac Pro will probably adopt the same approach, even though I think a a PCIe module will be available for those of us who need an SAS card, Red Rocket card, etc.

Last thought, the article directly states how Apple is using eGPUs extensively right now with their current MacBook Pros, perhaps a monitor with a built-in eGPU is in the cards as well. Reading the article, one could argue that Apple setting some expectations for 2019. Only time will tell, I guess.