Apple's Revamped Mac Pro to Launch in 2019

[laurim]

WHAT A JOKE !

so apple will do it again. like in 2013 they will suprise us with an abomination of a computer, that will not follow any industry standard, will be expensive, outdated after 1 yr, not be upgradeable on your own and forgotten by apple 1 week after its release.

what we need is a simple tower with single/dual xeon configs, supporting standard components (memory, drives and gpus). we do not need a special consulting pro-team @ apple. we just need a damn standard computer with a nice case, as we had it perfectly in 2012 where a mac pro was upgradeable with standard non-apple-memory at market price, you could insert a standard nvida gpu and about 6 standard drives. its not rocket science. every technology is there, they just have to build a box. also eGPU is standard by now, and nothing has to be invented. all this stuff works if you buy a modern windows pc and we just want the same with macos running on it. it is as simple as that. but no, apple thinks we want something else.

i'm really to old to go on with that b$, they produce in that bagel in california.
sorry apple, big time fail in strategy. you just dont get it what pros need.

im off to windows for my next CG computer.

Good, go. I don’t want you attempting to speak for me anymore. Speak for yourself because that’s all you really know
[doublepost=1523030102][/doublepost]

Just bring back the old Mac Pro Tower in a nice space grey to match the iMac Pro and make it super easy to switch internals. That's all we want.
[doublepost=1523009423][/doublepost]

See your problem there is that you're not a millennial asking for watch straps and TV shows.

Pros like me who aren’t chained to a desk also want desktop abilities in a portable form factor. I can’t haul a cheese grater -style MacPro around everywhere I go for work.
[doublepost=1523030442][/doublepost]

I've owned Mac Pros before; iirc the first one, my Powermac G3 was in the $2000's range. I actually still have that one in my basement somewhere; I've been meaning to mod the case to take an ATX board. I loved the cheese grater style.

In 2015 I put together a $3000 windows workstation, and I would have happily gone as high as $5000 for a mac pro with comparable capabilities. In the $5000 price range, I may well still consider a Mac Pro in 2019 -- does that mean I get to complain?

More seriously though, it's way too early to say much because we don't know anything about what Apple means by "modular". If they mean one big box where you can install industry standard modules (for example video cards, ram, HDDs and SDDs) and it has plenty of modern ports it's something I'd be interested in buying (obviously I'm not going to promise how I'll feel before I see price and specs though.)

On the other hand, if "modular" means a desktop strewn with Apple proprietary modules like $600+card video card boxes, external drives, etc and a CPU "module" like a mac mini on steroids, then no, all I'll do is criticize Apple and Timmy for ruining a product I've enjoyed for 20+ years.

The reality though is we don't know anything about what Apple plans for the Pro, it's too early to speculate. But that in itself is a huge problem with Apple. For a major purchase like a $5000 or more computer, I should be planning my budget now; not a month before release day. I'm considering buying a GTX1080 at the moment for my 2015 machine; knowing what Apple has in store with the pro could help with that decision.

Also, at this point if Apple releases my dream mac pro and still leaves us in limbo wondering about these arm rumours, I'd still be very reluctant to drop $5k or more in what may or may not be a deal product line (imo). And since I'm currently running my "windows pro" machine, a move back to mac will be a harder sell for me than it would have been in 2015 when I would have spent the $5,000 without a second thought.

So funny that your “nightmare” design is actually my ideal design. I’m picturing basically a stackable set of modules so when I take my MacPro on the road I can separate the modules and pack them in a case flatter.

 

[thisisnotmyname]

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.

I'm sure I'll end up buying an iMac Pro for a year but I'm salty enough that I'm going to stew about it for a short bit first.

 

[theluggage]

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?

...because there's nothing fundamental about the ARM instruction set/architecture that says "low performance" - that's just been the available market niche, and now they have an unshakable bridgehead in the mobile market, ARM and others are already working on server-grade, 64 bit chips, and even supercomputer applications. Also because they are low power - and comparatively simple c.f. x86 - you can stick more cores on a chip, alongside GPUs, floating point units and vector processors - and ARM's mix'n'match licensing strategy means that a serious player like Apple can do this for themselves.

The sticking point - and why is more likely that any ARM Macs will start at the 12" MacBook end of the market - is legacy software compatibility.

What Apple could do is produce a truly different Mac Pro with - I don't know - with 32 ARM cores on a chip alongside a shedload of specialist processors for graphics etc. coupled with optimised versions of FCPx etc. that blew the competition out of the water. That would justify the time that its taking, and fit with the flowery rhetoric in this press... conference? leak?

Of course, that also sounds like a re-run of the Mac Pro Trashcan debacle, which was a brilliant and revolutionary FCPx appliance that perfectly met the needs of Leslie/Erin/Jordyn (or whatever name they gave the fictitious 'target user' that their focus groups came up with) and was as much use as a chocolate teapot to anybody else who just wanted a powerful, flexible and adaptable workstation to replace their ageing cheesegraters.

This is where we find out what Apple thinks they learned from the nMP: was it (a) "just don't make another machine with a unified, triangular thermal core" or (b) "when people are desperately asking for an upgraded pickup truck, don't design a Tesla X SUV". Going from this article, I'd say the (a)s have it.

Thing is, I could always see the point of the nMP and I could see the point of some amazing new innovative multicore marvel - but they're high-risk ventures that you produce after you've made something newer than 6 years old for people who just want to replace their out-of-warranty cMPs and/or choose their own GPU and display. Same goes for the new Macbook Pros - if they're exactly what you need (Hi Leslie/Erin/Jordyn!) than they're fine, but they lack flexibility and broad appeal.

What do "Pro" users actually want? Well, something that actually exists, is available to buy and doesn't force you to buy a glossy prosumer 27" display would be a really, really good start.

 

[fokmik]

Since they talked like that, its clear the future mac pro will be as it should be...because if they now say these such things about this and in 2019 nobody will like/buy the mac pro because its a BS product...the TURST in Apple brand will fall significantly and the stocks will start to drop big time...

 

[theluggage]

Pros like me who aren’t chained to a desk also want desktop abilities in a portable form factor. I can’t haul a cheese grater -style MacPro around everywhere I go for work.

...then what you want is surely called a "MacBook Pro". Or, more accurately, a 2018 technology version of the good old 17" MacBook Pro rather than the current thin'n'crispy MBP offerings.

Alternatively, by the time you've unplugged the excitingly contoured future modular Mac Pro CPU, the eGPU, the external storage array, etc. and carefully rolled up all the $50-a-shot Thunderbolt cables and packed them all into protective flight cases, you might as well have grabbed a cheesegrater with all of those gubbins already inside and slung it in the trunk of your car (unless you were planning to take a 27" display on a plane?)

 

[Peperino]

As long as Apple get the Mac Pro right, I'll be happy to wait longer. Heck, we all have been waiting for so long anyway.

I just hope whatever the solution is we will be abe to upgrade RAM, storage and video cards without having it all soldered inside the machine. I also hope that we can buy these components from third part companies and not stuck with "only Apple" parts that for sure will cost way more. We'll see.

Finally is Apple is really listening to professionals, there is hope the future displays might come with a matte screen. I hate the glare the current displays have on bright environments.

Finally, Apple is listening??? They have waited over 5 years to start developing an upgrade?

Furthermore, last year, Schiller did an interview talking about how much they care about their Pro customers.

That was a year ago and still nothing...

I think it is just plain more excuses from Apple. Whoever is planning this should be fired.

 

[69650]

Let’s hope it’s sufficiently configurable to replace both the Mac Pro & Mini with a wide range of price options.

 

[Peperino]

Typical Apple PR blowing smoke all over the place "transparency", "communicate openly with our pro community", "we care", bla bla, 2013 to 2019 for a pro desktop computer, they even had time to throw in a "pro" iMac no one asked for in-between and keep their atrocious pricing on the current trash can/Mac Mini, and people go like "makes sense" lol, no wonder these PR/keynotes sound like kids fairy tale.

Total Apple PR smoke... if you remember last year Schiller and Federighi, did an interview talking how much they care about the "Pro" community... One year later, still nothing...

They do not care at all. A lot of friends that were waiting for Mac Pros, are in Hackintosh, iMacs or actually switched to PC.

The "we are assembling a workflow team"... really?? why did you wait 6 years to assemble a team?

APPLE DOES NOT CARE ABOUT THEIR PRO COMMUNITY ANYMORE!
LOOK AT ALL THE RECENT PRO PRODUCTS... THEY SPEAK FOR THEMSELVES.
- THE MAC PRO TRASHCAN WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE.
- THE MACBOOK PRO WITH A TOUCHBAR ANOTHER JOKE.
- THE RELEASE OF AN iMAC PRO THAT NO ONE WAS ASKING FOR AT PRICES THAT ARE IMPOSSIBLE TO BUY.

THe only fiscal reason they are delaying the Mac Pro is because they do not want to cannibalize the iMac Pro.
[doublepost=1523034516][/doublepost]

This is pathetic...

If you are a electrical engineer and you can't design a motherboard in less than a year, you are in the wrong business. If you are a computer manufacturer and you can't hire the right people to get the job done in less than a year, you are in the wrong business. If you are a CEO and you can't get your act together with a product line you claim publicly is still important, you are in the wrong business and should resign.

And if you no longer care about this line of business, ADMIT IT and let your customers move on to companies who actually try harder than you do to serve their customers

Exactly....

Apple sadly turned into a consumer-iPhone company.
[doublepost=1523034889][/doublepost]

So it took them 7 years from the last Tower in 2006 to the trashcan in 2013. And now another 6 until the next one. "Our pro customers are very important to us". Yeah right.

Exactly. Yeah right...!!

 

[imac2017mm]

Finally, Apple is listening??? They have waited over 5 years to start developing an upgrade?

Furthermore, last year, Schiller did an interview talking about how much they care about their Pro customers.

That was a year ago and still nothing...

I think it is just plain more excuses from Apple. Whoever is planning this should be fired.

isn't the iMac Pro an example of caring for customers?
I know iMac are popular amongst music producers... so I think that was a good idea to do a pro version

 

[DevNull0]

So funny that your “nightmare” design is actually my ideal design. I’m picturing basically a stackable set of modules so when I take my MacPro on the road I can separate the modules and pack them in a case flatter.

Really, if you want desktop power that you need to carry along often and a laptop isn't going to cut it for you, that is a very small fringe use case. I would absolutely hate having to disconnect and reassemble a case of modules on a regular basis. It makes zero sense to compromise a powerful desktop design to make it fit in a bag more easily.

You can get pretty close to your dream scenario now anyway. A Macbook Pro with external video cards and SSD storage boxes is one way. All you lose is some CPU performance.

And what do you think of a powerful monolithic computer as I described on your desktop and a simple MBP to take with. iCloud is actually quite good at synching your working files at this point. Given what Apple lately charges for accessories and those external video card boxes, it's probably cheap to have the mac tower and MBP than a collection of proprietary modules.

 

[timber]

If they need all this time there can be only two reasons:

1 - Don't care
2 - Are designing some weirdo, this is the future, you know you want it design (trash can I'm looking at you).

Neither of the reasons is enticing..

 

[DevNull0]

isn't the iMac Pro an example of caring for customers?
I know iMac are popular amongst music producers... so I think that was a good idea to do a pro version

The iMac Pro is a huge middle finger to anyone who wants a high end desktop machine. AIWs are great for grandmothers who don't care about hardware and will just use the ancient machine 10 years in.

A good display will easily last 10-15 years and not be all that much worse than the latest model. My first IPS monitor I bought 7 years ago is still available for sale brand new, with the only change being mine is a CCFT backlight and the current version is LED.

Even with the currently slow progress from intel, a new CPU is nearly double the speed of a 5 year-old version of the CPU. And a 5 year old GPU is completely garbage today that is only burning electricity for less performance than a good integrated GPU. Why would any pro want to throw out a perfectly good and very expensive almost brand new 5K display after 5 years just because it's permanently attached to ancient and crappy 5 year old computer bits?

The AIW form factor does not fit in well with a multi-monitor setup, it doesn't allow me to add my own multiple video cards, it doesn't let my pile in tons of SSDs and HDDs, it doesn't lend itself to a good cooling system.

You give a case where an AIW is a good thing. But it is nothing but drawbacks for a power user.

 

[saulinpa]

Why would any pro want to throw out a perfectly good and very expensive almost brand new 5K display after 5 years just because it's permanently attached to ancient and crappy 5 year old computer bits?

1. You need to get with the iPhone bandwagon that everything is disposable and should go to the landfill after a few years.
   
2. Apple thinks pros only do 3 year leases. Computers are purchased for the depreciation/tax write-off, not for actual use.

 

[wigby]

...because there's nothing fundamental about the ARM instruction set/architecture that says "low performance" - that's just been the available market niche, and now they have an unshakable bridgehead in the mobile market, ARM and others are already working on server-grade, 64 bit chips, and even supercomputer applications. Also because they are low power - and comparatively simple c.f. x86 - you can stick more cores on a chip, alongside GPUs, floating point units and vector processors - and ARM's mix'n'match licensing strategy means that a serious player like Apple can do this for themselves.

The sticking point - and why is more likely that any ARM Macs will start at the 12" MacBook end of the market - is legacy software compatibility.

What Apple could do is produce a truly different Mac Pro with - I don't know - with 32 ARM cores on a chip alongside a shedload of specialist processors for graphics etc. coupled with optimised versions of FCPx etc. that blew the competition out of the water. That would justify the time that its taking, and fit with the flowery rhetoric in this press... conference? leak?

Of course, that also sounds like a re-run of the Mac Pro Trashcan debacle, which was a brilliant and revolutionary FCPx appliance that perfectly met the needs of Leslie/Erin/Jordyn (or whatever name they gave the fictitious 'target user' that their focus groups came up with) and was as much use as a chocolate teapot to anybody else who just wanted a powerful, flexible and adaptable workstation to replace their ageing cheesegraters.

This is where we find out what Apple thinks they learned from the nMP: was it (a) "just don't make another machine with a unified, triangular thermal core" or (b) "when people are desperately asking for an upgraded pickup truck, don't design a Tesla X SUV". Going from this article, I'd say the (a)s have it.

Thing is, I could always see the point of the nMP and I could see the point of some amazing new innovative multicore marvel - but they're high-risk ventures that you produce after you've made something newer than 6 years old for people who just want to replace their out-of-warranty cMPs and/or choose their own GPU and display. Same goes for the new Macbook Pros - if they're exactly what you need (Hi Leslie/Erin/Jordyn!) than they're fine, but they lack flexibility and broad appeal.

What do "Pro" users actually want? Well, something that actually exists, is available to buy and doesn't force you to buy a glossy prosumer 27" display would be a really, really good start.

I think the best point you make is that pro users simply want something that exists. The same goes for developers. that means no developer wants to rewrite software to support 32 core architecture and no pro user wants to wait for that software. Pro users only care about big, inefficient towers that have lots of horsepower and compatibility. I don't see why Apple would make ARM for that application when they can easily make ARM work for laptops and consumer grade desktops.

 

[5105973]

What's interesting are some of the clues about what modularity might actually mean in reality. eGPUs and iPad Pros as input devices are two of the cited examples. This probably isn't the kind of modularity some Mac Pro enthusiasts have in mind, but it does make sense and Apple is already on this path.

iPad pro as an input device would be...wow. I do love to draw on my iPad Pro but feel stymied by the apps and their danged IAP feature structure and the choppy workflow the apps force me into when I want features from a different app than the one I started my project in. Perhaps I just need better tutelage in the existing app feature sets but I've always been pretty smart about figuring these things out and I still think the experience could be better for hobbyist artists like me.

I missed working on my desktop with a mouse and all the power and features I had with a desktop program. To have that marriage of Apple Pencil and tablet interface with a fully functional desktop computer app and the ability to seamlessly switch to other desktop apps would be most welcome. I hope you are right about this. And I hope it all happens before my vision or manual dexterity go entirely. I am not getting any younger!

 

[DevNull0]

1) That’s not what made the cheese grater Mac Pro great. The OS combined with high end components made a superior workflow. I don’t know anyone who was grateful they could stick garbage RAM from a no-name company in an expensive machine.

2) Mechanical HDDs will be around for a little while, but I personally hope they die soon. Too many downsides. The few upsides are now mitigated.

1) Apple putting their sticker on cheap RAM does not make it great and Apple does use cheap RAM. I'm much happier with Crucial RAM in my Mac than apple's Hynix or whatever is cheaper today RAM. Apple also generally gives you RAM a few steps away from the fastest more towards the cheaper than performance part of the curve. It's nice to have the ability to choose the fastest ram the chipset can handle.

2) What exactly do you mean by the few upsides are now mitigated? Cheap but decent quality slow SSD is about $300/TB right now. Up to about $500/TB for fast high quality SSD. 8TB...that's EIGHT TERABYTE spinning drives are currently $200; $25/TB and 12TB drives are on the market.

Why do you hope they die, just because you don't need much storage, why do you want to prevent anyone else from having it? How do you think SSDs mitigate the price of $25/TB for mass storage?

My 4K video files (at 100Mbps) take around 40 gig per hour. It is very easy to pass 10TB of stored files and I certainly don't need fast SSD access to my storage archive.

I can put 16TB of storage in my machine for $400. Your way I'm looking at at least 16*$300 = $4800 to get the same space and since it's just to archive video footage, there is absolutely zero benefit to SSD. And in fact, I store everything 2 places for backup, so we'e talking $800 vs $9600. Why do you want to force me to waste $10,000 for absolutely no benefit. And 16TB is not a large archive. I know someone who shoots wedding videos in 4k and sends multiple shooters to each event, his archive is over 100TB of spinning drives. How do you do that without spinning drives?

Hey, even your iCloud data is stored on spinning drives. Can you imaging what Apple would charge if they had to use SSD for everything. 12 times as much as they do now ($25/TB replaced with $300/TB).

 

[wigby]

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).

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.

The analogy is not about the car maker but about the engine of the car. Porsche doesn't use the same engine throughout their entire product line for a reason. Of course they could engineer it so that all cars use the same engine but why would they? The reason why ARM chips outperform mobile i7 is because the mobile i7 chips cannot run at full speed because of heat and power inefficiencies. Those inefficiencies are not nearly as acute in desktop platforms as they are in any mobile platforms.

 

[nvmls]

isn't the iMac Pro an example of caring for customers?
I know iMac are popular amongst music producers... so I think that was a good idea to do a pro version

So you consider a form-factor with an outdated GPU which can't even handle thermals properly a "pro" device. Ok.

 

[deconstruct60]

Total Apple PR smoke... if you remember last year Schiller and Federighi, did an interview talking how much they care about the "Pro" community... One year later, still nothing...

They do not care at all. A lot of friends that were waiting for Mac Pros, are in Hackintosh, iMacs or actually switched to PC.

It isn't so much PR smoke as folks folks not listening to what Apple has to say. In last years meeting with the reporters Apple very explicilty and clearly outlined that their pro users used MacBook Pro , iMacs , and Mac Pro to get work down. The largest selling Pro system they sold was the MBP. iMac was next. And the smallest unit segement was the Mac Pro.

"...
. Notebooks are by far and away our most popular systems used by pros.

Second on the list is iMacs — used by pros, again by the people who use professional software day in, day out, not just casually.

Third on the list is Mac Pro. Now, Mac Pro is actually a small percentage of our CPUs — just a single digit percent. However, we don’t look at it that way. .."
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/t...-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/

If you don't want to listen to what they are saying that one thing but it isn't smoke. They clearly defined their terms and what they meant. In that collection of systems they delivered the iMac Pro.

" ... ext up: we have plans on iMac, to move that line ahead, and do great things on iMac. It’s core to our Mac business and our customers, including making configurations of iMac specifically with the pro customer in mind and acknowledging that our most popular desktop with pros is an iMac. We want to do things with the iMac in the future to help address those pro needs, and make it… not only continue, but more of a capable machine for pro customers. .."

Same transcript. What they continued on with after that was they intended to do a Mac Pro after that. There are a couple of comments in the transcript that are suggestive that they were "going to start" working on a Mac Pro. Not they started.

Yes Apple as a whole is large company, but there is very little to indicate that the Mac product has more than several product teams working on overlapping pipeline product roll outs for every system in the line up. The results over the last several years is that are a couple of teams that are change their focus between products to get 1-2 new products out a year and perhaps speed bump 1-2 more.


Apple doesn't slap together other Mac products together in a couple of months and push them out the door so it is rather odd expectation management to think they'd do it for the Mac Pro ( an unusually expensive Mac with higher typical user expectations ). iPhones don't have a 12 month development cycle. The development is pipelined and concurrent so that can get a 12 month arrival rate out the back end of the pipeline but it isn't 12 months. Macs are similar with really no concurrency.

the PR smoke that has pushed the expectation that the Mac Pro was going to appear rapidly has mainly been the rumors boards and the tech porn press. Not Apple.

 

[redheeler]

Cue the complaints from people that won't be putting down the money to buy a Mac Pro regardless.

I'm upset about the Ferrari that's far outside of my price range.

It might surprise you to know that Macs are sold used for less later on, and though it may be out of their price range now, that won't be the case forever. I myself didn't get a 5,1 Mac Pro until a couple years ago, and bought it used for a good price.

Upgradability is important when you're buying used. Thanks to the upgrades I made to my 5,1, it has become far more useful than it was with the stock graphics card and CPUs.

 

[jwdsail]

Bring back the Quadra replace the internals with the latest components. Done!

Pretty sure that you're joking, but my first Mac was a Quadra, (Centris 650/Quadra 650, I lusted for the Quadra towers that were just slightly out of my budget at the time) and it was the best computer I've ever owned. Bulletproof, PDQ for anything I threw at it (CAD, Photoshop, QTVR, HTML - 24MB ram helped), and was still working the day I gave it away to the cute neighbor who needed a computer, any computer, for some word-processing/resume writing. I still wish I'd given her the PowerBook G3 instead, I miss the 650 more.

 

[Glockworkorange]

The analogy is not about the car maker but about the engine of the car. Porsche doesn't use the same engine throughout their entire product line for a reason. Of course they could engineer it so that all cars use the same engine but why would they? The reason why ARM chips outperform mobile i7 is because the mobile i7 chips cannot run at full speed because of heat and power inefficiencies. Those inefficiencies are not nearly as acute in desktop platforms as they are in any mobile platforms.

Not true. Many of the Porsche's share the same V-6 with tweaks. The same 300 HP Jaguar Super Charged V-6 powers it's F-Pace SUV and its F-Type (sports car). That same V-6 also powers its XF (four door sedan). They all are of varying performance.

The bottom line is the same engine can run different types of cars made for different purposes. Same with computer chips.
[doublepost=1523041192][/doublepost]

Pretty sure that you're joking, but my first Mac was a Quadra, (Centris 650/Quadra 650, I lusted for the Quadra towers that were just slightly out of my budget at the time) and it was the best computer I've ever owned. Bulletproof, PDQ for anything I threw at it (CAD, Photoshop, QTVR, HTML - 24MB ram helped), and was still working the day I gave it away to the cute neighbor who needed a computer, any computer, for some word-processing/resume writing. I still wish I'd given her the PowerBook G3 instead, I miss the 650 more.

I hope you got to hook up with her

 

[Googlyhead]

I hope all the bays are 3.5" .

I hope there's something vaguely describable as a 'bay'.

 

[Dozer_Zaibatsu]

Cue the complaints from people that won't be putting down the money to buy a Mac Pro regardless.

I'm upset about the Ferrari that's far outside of my price range.

This is a weird comment. The machine is a "pro," and priced accordingly.

I worked in advertising, and I also worked as freelance page designer. I worked with a lot of Mac Pros, (and PowerMacs, and even Quadras…). These are specialty items, not ubiquitous consumer items like an iPad. I've never bought a MacPro, personally. Nor have I purchased a Dell Precision or an HP Z series. But I have configured them for users.

More to the point, for the past decade, I've worked exclusively in IT. I've been in lots of discussions about the price of Macs and how they will be supported (or not).

I'm curious as all get out for what this is going to be. Apple really wants to be a player in creative content, so this is a big deal. Will it fit a big, honkin' Nvidia card? How much swapping of components will Apple allow? Can we put up a bunch of SSDs in and configure a RAID? Will it have multiple PCI lanes for components? Separate ARM controller or ROM chips?

This has a chance to be a great machine. I won't hold my breath. But I hope to be impressed.

 

[jroman]

I am so glad for this update... I have been holding off. Still won't buy a Mac Pro though. If only they would update the Mac mini this year..