Which you can, if skilled.
Source of that definition...?
Uhm... did you read the article? Please don’t twist words to fit your narrative.
“it’s not clear if an upgrade is actually feasible”
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.
iMac Pro Teardown Highlights Modular RAM, CPU and SSD Along With Redesigned Internals
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Which you can, if skilled.
Source of that definition...?
Uhm... did you read the article? Please don’t twist words to fit your narrative.
“it’s not clear if an upgrade is actually feasible”
iFixit has clarified that this is not an A10 Fusion coprocessor because the package size is too small. Not clear what it is, but I've nixed that paragraph from the post.
https://twitter.com/iFixit/status/948355117262176257
Hilarious. What do I have to do to see Apple as being evil, planning for devices to fail at specific times, while providing underpowered machines? Because that isn’t the reality we live in...
What's funny is I've got an 09 iMac at work that FLIES now that I stuck an SSD in it. iMacs have remarkable lifespans (barring ****** graphics cards overheating) compared to most machines on the market.
For clarification, end of life meant 5 years of use and the new budget for refreshes had been approved by the board.
At a previous job (Mac Technician) I had a project to take the 200 end of life iMacs around the campus and put a new hard drive in them so they could be donated for reuse in a nearby school system. Out of those two hundred, TWO were dead. The other 198 all worked fine with their new drives and moved on to a new second life. I'm not sure you could do that with any other OEM's AIO devices, especially Dell's. FIVE YEARS and still chugging along, I was thoroughly impressed by the extremely low failure rate.
Of course one can service them (the HD temperature sensor is a problem, though). That still doesn't change the fact that Apple expects you to bring them in if you don't want to service them yourself. And within manufacturer warranty periods there should be no reason to swap out broken hardware yourself anyway.
The last sentence wasn't addressed at said video editors, but more of a general remark. I know several architects who literally ask for Photoshop specifically to fill line drawings.
Video editing must be easier than audio production then, because for some years and OS X versions cutting-edge audio performance on Macs became harder and harder to pull off, because of various OS bug, undocumented changes and various uncontrollable power-saving mechanisms. Curious thing, because in the past you told people to either buy a dedicated Audio PC from one of the few specialized brands or just get a Mac.
Of course that was a rather simplistic advice even then, because starting from the very first Macbook Pro I ever bought in 2009 there were lots of caveats (no experience from times before that).
Anyway, Apple just demonstrated that they are still insisting on the "bring it in" kind of service, which is unfortunate. Nice for me that I can practically walk to the next Apple store, as long as I am not carrying a 27" computer that is.
The music production room (there's one guy that's the head of it) runs off a Mac Pro and a CRAZY table rig. We definitely had an issue when upgrading from Yosemite (turned out to be an issue from the manufacture of that table rig, not sure what the term for it is, mixing table?) but that wasn't apple's fault.
Other than that almost all the audio aspects of ESPN stuff is done on a Mac.
Go ahead and point out where it was EVER advertised as modular then....
to do what?
that doesn't make much sense.. srry.
are you sure that's what these architects are requesting Photoshop for?
..and what CAD software are they using?
We need to remember that the iMac Pro (or any computer) is just a tool.
Presumably a person (or company) who is buying it will make money using this tool that will far exceed the purchase price of this tool. And any increase in speed can increase their bottom line by allowing them to complete more work in the same (or less) time.
In the video world... $5,000 isn't really a lot of money when you consider the other tools they use.
You can spend $9,000 to get into the RED Camera system... and that's just the body. You still need another $5,000 for required accessories.
You can spend $2,000 on a set of LED light panels... plus batteries, battery chargers, hard-shell carrying cases, etc.
You can spend $2,000 on a professional audio mixer/recorder.
You can spend $2,000 on a shotgun microphone.
And so on...
The difference between a computer and all these other tools is that the computer could have a shorter reasonable lifespan. Computers are always getting faster... thus increasing your desire to upgrade/replace for more speed... while things like LED lights and microphones will continue to perform as expected for many, many years.
Still though... while a $5,000 computer sounds expensive... if this new machine allows you to do more work (or be more efficient) it's really a small price to pay. That's all the justification you need.
Last edited:
If Apple is going for planned obsolescence, they're doing a terrible job at it. Their computers, even without upgrades, often last longer than comparable Windows PCs. They continue to provide security and feature updates to 7 year old computers and 4 year old phones, neither of which encourages people to buy shiny new products. Think about it- why bother throttling iPhone processors to allow the phones to function? Far more people would have been driven to buy replacement phones if their current phones simply stopped functioning instead of just slowing down. (For the record, Apple absolutely should have been clear about the throttling from the day iOS 10.2.1 came out, including notifying users that battery replacement would restore phone performance).
I have an iPad Air 2 that still runs almost as smoothly as it did when I got it over three years ago, and a 2012 MBP that runs just as well as it did when I bought it over five years ago- both devices are on the latest version of their respective operating system.
All that said, I have no doubt that Apple wants to make more money by making the iMac Pro difficult to upgrade post-purchase. Apple wants to profit off your initial purchase because they have confidence that it will be many years before you upgrade- because they design their machines to last for many years. Yes, some Apple products in the past have suffered from premature failures. But by and large, their products last for a long time. You get what you pay for, with Apple products you pay for the expectation of long-term reliability and post-purchase retail support.
What's the result of all this? You shouldn't buy Apple products (except possibly the future Mac Pro) if you value the capability to upgrade and expand your machines. It's why I'm happy to buy their phones, laptops, and tablets, but never their desktops- because that's where I value the ability to upgrade components.
[doublepost=1514944550][/doublepost]I also wish that Apple had used an Nvidia chipset in this model
It's still freakin ridiculous that you have to unglue a screen to get to the insides of a computer.
Now, If Apple weren't hell bent on the form over function philosophy, the rear of the unit would NOT be an idiotic curved design, but it'd be flatter, with moderately thicker sides (who cares that the sides of the damn thing are 5mm?), and could have a properly removable rear cover, with all the components accessible, and everything could be spread apart for better cooling and extra component space.
There's no need to skimp on the thickness at the edges, there's no space to be gained by it.
Anyone remember the 1st/2nd Gen iMac G5? That's exactly how it was, with modular components that could be replaced independently, AND by the end user with instructions from Apple.
Now, If Apple weren't hell bent on the form over function philosophy, the rear of the unit would NOT be an idiotic curved design, but it'd be flatter, with moderately thicker sides (who cares that the sides of the damn thing are 5mm?), and could have a properly removable rear cover, with all the components accessible, and everything could be spread apart for better cooling and extra component space.
There's no need to skimp on the thickness at the edges, there's no space to be gained by it.
Anyone remember the 1st/2nd Gen iMac G5? That's exactly how it was, with modular components that could be replaced independently, AND by the end user with instructions from Apple.
And, I believe it’s a safe bet that the Mac Pro will START at $13,000 or higher. Because, if the iMac Pro doesn’t have enough power, it stands to reason that the Mac Pro’s reason to exist will be to provide that power. Anyone looking for a “$1000 computer I can configure myself” is going to be sorely disappointed.
What Apple needs to make and sell is a "Hackintosh". Apple could buy the "Z8" type workstations from HP and put their own Apple sticker over the logo then load MacOS and people would buy these by the truckload. It is what every Mac Pro user wants. The Z8 has ECC RAM a 10-core xeon and nVidia GPU and sells for just under $2500
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/..._us/en/psg/hp_desktop_workstations/z8-mdplink
These HP machines have a high top tend. Foe example you can order two of the top end Xeon CPUs and end up with something like 72 virtual CPU cores and the ECC RAM maxes out at 784GB (yes that is 784 GB RAM, not the SSD)
In any case why spend the money on engineering, just buy the Z8, paint it silver and load Mac OS. This is EXACTLY what everyone has been asking for. Apple could have these on the market in a week
I actually bought an earlier version of this when it went off-lease. The specs were right, the thing really does weight in at 49 pounds. They are built like tanks and my 3 year old "Z" workstation is still the fastest computer I've ever owned. I use it for machine learning experiments and robotics.
http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/..._us/en/psg/hp_desktop_workstations/z8-mdplink
These HP machines have a high top tend. Foe example you can order two of the top end Xeon CPUs and end up with something like 72 virtual CPU cores and the ECC RAM maxes out at 784GB (yes that is 784 GB RAM, not the SSD)
In any case why spend the money on engineering, just buy the Z8, paint it silver and load Mac OS. This is EXACTLY what everyone has been asking for. Apple could have these on the market in a week
I actually bought an earlier version of this when it went off-lease. The specs were right, the thing really does weight in at 49 pounds. They are built like tanks and my 3 year old "Z" workstation is still the fastest computer I've ever owned. I use it for machine learning experiments and robotics.
Last edited:
If you have links to tests, that really test longer rendering, it would be interesting.
Eg. Barefeats have made lots of tests, that all are measured in seconds, not even minutes.
AI concludes: "With that said, it is a bit disappointing to see Apple prioritize noise over performance and thermals on a high-end pro machine."
It can also be, that cpu/gpu thermal envelope is now really limited and it will get more powerful with os updates to come.
Or Apple just might have chosen longer, colder lifespan for chips not easily to replace.
In AI's tests, the chips were nowhere near 100%.
Interesting also: http://appleinsider.com/articles/17...d-with-the-imac-pro-with-more-in-the-pipeline
:"Preliminary AppleInsider testing with a Vega 64 PCI-E card in our faithful Mantiz eGPU enclosure is delivering about 10 percent more performance than the down-clocked Vega 64 chipset standard to the 10-core iMac Pro, and is far faster than the Vega 56 in the $4999 configuration."
It might very well be that iMP is a "corporate pro" in that way that rendering is supposed to be done in machine room, not inside iMP.
Apple did gave us heads up that "mMP is coming" (time is of course relative), but it would be fair for "personal pro" that Apple would promise solid support for eGPUs. In addition of assurance of epgu being stable from update to another, using real pci cards would give ability to go around that ancient dp1.2 that TB is cursed with before TB4 comes.
(EDIT: Oops, there it is: https://www.apple.com/macos/high-sierra/#footnote-3 :"Planned for spring 2018." Well, planned... what does that mean in Apple language...?)
Last edited:
Ah, it looks to be highly integrated with that arrangement they made with IBM a few years back. I had no idea that was a thing!
Definitely looks that way. IBM’s site is the first result for “enterprise AppleCare”
https://www.ibm.com/us-en/marketplace/applecare-for-enterprise
Why change what works?
The display design works well, which is likely why they've kept it around for so long.
I’ll take that bet with a cherry on top. No way the new starting price Will be over four times more than the starting price of the current model. The truth will lie between that absurd base price and the cost of an iPhone X.
First time I've seen desktop RAM in an iMac since the G4 :O