iMac Pro's RAM Can Only Be Upgraded by Apple or Authorized Service Provider

[steve333]

Apple has pissed me off so much lately I was thinking about going to the PC.
My Mini's logic board had to be replaced and my experience at this one Apple Store near me was awful.
I bought a PC while it was getting fixed and just did not like the experience so I guess I'm stuck with Cook's Apple.
Just wish they could see what jerks they are becoming

 

[MH01]

Me. Because I need the fastest Mac available. And this is it.

Pretty simple really.

In which case, what are you running today ? I'm intrigued what you consider the fastest before iMac pro

 

[BaltimoreMediaBlog]

I'm amazed it took them this long to re-engineer a closed non-upgradeable box.

This could have been released better on the day it was announced from available iMac & Mac Pro spare parts!

 

[szw-mapple fan]

I don't get it; what's the reason behind this change? Surely they should make a Pro machine MORE upgradeable, not less.

Some profesionals just want a super fast computer that comes in a nice looking package. They don't really need to have the ability to upgrade any of the components. When a significantly better version drops, they can sell the old model and get a new one. Other professionals want to be able to tinker with the hardware inside and enjoy being able to add their own modifications. Neither is more pro than the other. Real pros get the best tools for their use cases to do their work.
[doublepost=1513320578][/doublepost]

The whole design of this thing is a show-off of why the current Apple is against the traditional Mac Pro concept. The current Apple wants to be in control of your choices and moves. The traditional Mac Pro put you in control, and Apple cannot permit that anymore. The only hope for the promised “modular Mac Pro” is that this weird thing fails like the cylinder. And still... what will the current Apple mean by “modular”?

Apple probably realized that there is a significant number of people who want modular machines but also a significant group that just want monster performance in an all in one. They are giving pros the choice between the iMac pro and Mac Pro. I think this is the best of both worlds.

 

[manu chao]

Would u also have "direct access" if its on the board vs in slots ?
Similar to how u move external tasks into the CPU that can handle both tasks faster ?

I am pretty sure the position of the memory relative to the main CPU is fixed by Intel's Xeon design, ie, place the CPU somewhere in your computer enclosure and the position of your RAM is also given.

 

[pratikindia]

I think, since it's an ECC RAM, it's expensive. There is about $600 difference for 96 GB RAM.

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Prod...d=1&N=100007952 600564445 601275452 601275449

 

[cube]

ThinkPad T's show Apple how to make computers (except when Lenovo solders one RAM bank).

 

[macs4nw]

Isn’t it funny how Apple is for the ‘consumer’ when it comes to net neutrality, but when it comes to benefitting the consumer by allowing cheaper third party upgrading...

"Isn’t it funny how Apple is for the ‘consumer’ when it comes to net neutrality, but when it comes to benefitting the consumer by allowing cheaper third party upgrading...", they are unflinchingly for the shareholders.

Finished that sentence for you

 

[dysamoria]

I opened up my previous generation (2012) iMac to replace a failed HDD. It wasn't hard at all. Probably took 10 minutes to get the display off and then 10 to clean the adhesive residue and replace the adhesive strips.

Only hard thing was making sure I had the adhesive on hand first. Other than that it was quite straightforward and not a hindrance in any way.

You didn't find it difficult to put the glass panel back on without dust sticking to the LCD? Hell, even dealing with the screws around those magnets is a PITA.
[doublepost=1513330488][/doublepost]

And the same people that are up in arms about net neutrality seem to be the ones that love locked-down, non-upgradeable/repairable Apple hardware, permanent iOS updates, etc...

Uh, not from where I've been watching... Those who want net neutrality, and know what the heck it is, are generally critical thinkers, who are also criticizing Apple's disposable products and bullying software update behavior.
[doublepost=1513330887][/doublepost]

I hope you're wrong too. Because if you're not that would mean they wasted that "come to Jeebus" insight they got earlier this year. That would mean they really didn't "hear" the concerns of their professional users. The one overarching complaint has been upgradeability or the lack thereof. They even sort of admitted they painted themselves into a corner regarding the inability to upgrade the trashcan. If they heard their users and saw the mistake they made with the MP, wouldn't it make sense they don't repeat those mistakes?

Even if the reality says not many people upgrade machines, wouldn't it be prudent to have that capability in a computer that is designed to be a workhorse pulling a plow instead of a showhorse with braids. The last MP was a showhorse with braids.

No, they admitted to painting themselves into a corner on THERMAL design, which meant they couldn't marketΩ upgraded versions of the same system year over year without completely redesigning the entire machine. They said nothing about upgradability.
[doublepost=1513330995][/doublepost]

Significant? Not sure about that with something being specifically marketed to professional users. I think you could safely say that individual buyers might be more likely than corporate buyers, but that's about it. Tinkering around with the machines to add new hardware is usually anathema to corporate use. Typically the main focus there is on software and when/if upgrades are made.

When i was in IT, we would sometimes go to people's machines to put more RAM into them. It's not anathema, it's just not a very frequently done thing.
[doublepost=1513331077][/doublepost]

Just bought one today. (Though perhaps "ordered" is the correct term) I'm pretty excited as I've been waiting for a pro-workstation class desktop from Apple for years. I've noticed two kids of commenters here: Those who complain "It's too expensive... waaaa" and those who are more objective and say "It seems fair for the components ... let the dollar votes count" - as a pro I can say that my dollar votes are trying to incentivize Apple to make as many pro-oriented choices as they can in the near future.

What do I do? I develop, perform cyber security research, and play games when I'm not banging my head against a difficult problem. My requirements for a computer are extensive, and this machine meets my expectations for my budget. According to my calculations, the machine will pay for itself in one year (break even at least, all profit after that or resale for the modular).

My specs: 18 Core, Vega 64, 128 GB ECC, 1 TB SSD (I don't need more space than that on the main drive).
Bring on the hate.

I hope the machine pleases you. Do let us know how it works out for games and heavy lifting work tasks, especially in terms of throttling when it gets hot.
[doublepost=1513332803][/doublepost]

Geez, lighten up.

This is an entirely new product designed for a specific niche of pro customers. It's not replacing the Mac Pro (2012 or 2013). It's not replacing the iMac.

Did you not hear anything Apple said when they announced this product in the first place? That the Mac Pro was being retooled and reintroduced for a 2018 release? That Apple all but admitted screwing up with the 2013 model? That machine certainly got bought by a lot of big shops...I've seen dozens of them in some places. But the small shops and indie crowd who always wanted a modular machine like the original silver chassis never warmed up to this machine. They are two different "Pro" customer bases. The iMac Pro is not for that crowd (though some will buy it). The 2018 Mac Pro will be for to borrow a phrase, "For the rest of us".

You really think that their initial announcement of the iMac Pro was just a regular announcement? It was damage control. This machine was already in the works when the people making the top-level decisions at Apple finally got it through their thick heads that the path they were on with their "pro" machines was terminally flawed. This machine was going to be the replacement for the Mac Pro, but only NOW Apple was making it out to be just another soon-to-come option for their pro users, and that the REAL Mac Pro replacement was coming some time later. They had only just started the process of making said Mac Pro replacement. The iMac Pro was going to be their only offering for the pro customer base. Any other take on this situation is naive.

 

[antonis]

Apple isn’t perfect and they admitted that the Mac Pro didn’t satisfy as many potential users as they thought it would. They basically misread the technology roadmap, believing that a dual GPU solution was the preferred path. But the architecture of the 2013 locked them into that configuration. From the April interview:

Craig Federighi: I think initially, certainly from a market reception point of view, the current Mac Pro design was well received. It wasn’t that sales fell off at all. But the architecture, over time, proved to be less flexible to take us where we wanted to go to address that audience. In hindsight, we would’ve done that differently. Now we are.​

Apple also said in that interview that they had been talking to a lot of different pros, and that they were basically going to re-architect a completely new solution. I hope they get it right!

Part of their research showed them that people were already moving to higher end iMacs for workloads that used to have to be done on Mac Pro. So the iMac Pro is a higher end solution for users who many times are already using an iMac (or MBP), and wish it were faster.

Those who need a modular server/desktop will be looking to the upcoming Mac Pro to better suit their needs.

That was exactly my point to the post I was replying; Apple isn't perfect (as the post implied) and they made serious mistakes in the past, regarding Pro machines, no matter how much research they did (or didn't) beforehand.
[doublepost=1513336665][/doublepost]

These people leaving for PC (including myself) are Apple fans, not Apple haters. Discontent was massive and widespread.

If only this could be pinned in the site's frontpage.

 

[gnipgnop]

I hesitated on a PC for years. Then when my 5,1 started to struggle with 4k, even with a GTX980 video card, I realised I had to jump ship. I custom ordered a Threadripper PC 16cores, 64GB ram, and GTX1080ti 11GB video card.

Okay, but that type of configuration is easily in the $5,000 range.

https://www.amazon.com/gp/offer-listing/B074V3RGF2/ref=dp_olp_new_mbc?ie=UTF8&condition=new

 

[bopajuice]

People (who aren't in the market for this machine) will still complain that "pros" can't open it up themselves to upgrade the internals. Because all "pros" are techie people who open up their machines.

I would think that it is reasonable to say Pros want choices and the ability to adapt and expand as needed. I understand your blanket statement was to prove a point, but the Pro moniker should mean something other than ability to have Apple ad $2400 RAM.

 

[hugodrax]

Just bought one today. (Though perhaps "ordered" is the correct term) I'm pretty excited as I've been waiting for a pro-workstation class desktop from Apple for years. I've noticed two kids of commenters here: Those who complain "It's too expensive... waaaa" and those who are more objective and say "It seems fair for the components ... let the dollar votes count" - as a pro I can say that my dollar votes are trying to incentivize Apple to make as many pro-oriented choices as they can in the near future.

What do I do? I develop, perform cyber security research, and play games when I'm not banging my head against a difficult problem. My requirements for a computer are extensive, and this machine meets my expectations for my budget. According to my calculations, the machine will pay for itself in one year (break even at least, all profit after that or resale for the modular).

My specs: 18 Core, Vega 64, 128 GB ECC, 1 TB SSD (I don't need more space than that on the main drive).
Bring on the hate.

Lol yeah okay. Cool story bro. Do you want a pat the back?

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

I don't get it; what's the reason behind this change? Surely they should make a Pro machine MORE upgradeable, not less.

Likely optimal thermal constraints. This thing will generate a *lot* of heat with up to 18 active cores runnnig for hours, so I assume they had to prioritize air flow as much as possible.

 

[Abazigal]

In the Mac Pro forum there were (and continue to be) hoards of people leaving for PC because of the 2013 Mac Pro. These people leaving for PC (including myself) are Apple fans, not Apple haters. Discontent was massive and widespread. Right from the announcement people were pointing out all of the very real problems with it.

I can't even count the number of times I was told the MR community didn't represent the Pro community. But you know what? We were right. Apple even had a mea culpa press conference about it. The 2013 Mac Pro was supposed to be the model forward for the next decade and instead it will never get an update.

I have no idea what's going to happen to the iMac Pro, but I do assure you that you are wrong about Apple's perfection. Their track record does have a recent black mark.

Apple isn’t perfect, but they aren’t run by idiots either. Personally, I am of the opinion that Apple isn’t being accorded enough credit for their accomplishments, but that’s another discussion for another day.

I myself am not what you would consider a “professional user”, so I guess I have been largely unaffected by Apple’s recent pivot in hardware strategy for the Mac. If anything, I actually like their renewed push into wearables and greater iPad productivity.

I can only guess at the frustration and disappointment the pro community here must feel, but let me tell you that it is also equally frustrating when these sentiments leak into practically every other thread here.

- Apple releases a new Apple Watch? Where’s my Mac Pro? Apple is doomed. Tim needs to go.

- Apple updates their iPad line. Where’s my Mac Pro? Apple is doomed. Tim needs to go.

- Apple announces new watch bands. Where’s my Mac Pro? Apple is doomed. Tim needs to go.

Rinse and repeat for basically every piece of Apple news. See the trend? Feels like it’s practically impossible to have a civil and reasoned discussion these days. Everyone is all acting like jilted lovers who are bent on torching their ex-lovers’ cars and houses on their way out. Apple gains and loses users all the time. If you want to go, just go. Quietly.

No need to sound like you have been living in the matrix all this while and have only just woken up.

 

[itguy06]

You didn't find it difficult to put the glass panel back on without dust sticking to the LCD? Hell, even dealing with the screws around those magnets is a PITA.

Apple changed the design somewhere around the 2010-2011 iMacs to do away with the magnetic glass. On My 2012 the display is a bonded unit like an iPhone and held in with 3M adhesive all around the display. It removes pretty much like a huge iPhone. Wedge a pick under a corner to slice the adhesive and move around the whole thing to cut it. Suction cup and lift it off gently, detatch the display cables and set aside. Viola you are inside.

 

[jmgregory1]

While I understand what you're getting at here, and agree on some points, stating that the "world is changing" and shrugging off the consequences as if they're the result of some sort of natural evolution mischaracterizes what's happening, IMO. The world is changing because manufactures, like Apple, and consumers, like most of us, have pursued and encouraged, with our purchases, the change.

Technology moves on, obviously, and with different pacing for different types of tech. Interconnect and storage tech are certainly two areas that have seen dramatic increases in performance. Apple, however, through its design decisions, has purposefully and, debatably, needlessly introduced products that are acutely susceptible to being left in the dustbin (see what I did there?) of technological progress.

For example, the move from the 2009/2010/2012 Mac Pro to the 2013 Mac Pro was not the result of some natural change necessitated by the advancement of technology. It was a change, with significant compromises, thoughtfully and purposefully implemented by Apple. There were no technological pressures forcing Apple to make a mostly non-upgradable workstation.

Your example of storage speeds is a perfect example of this. My 2009 cMP came with a spinning HD on a SATA 2 interface. Both are practically ancient by today's standards. SATA 2 progressed to SATA 3, storage moved to the PCIe bus, and from AHCI to NVME protocols. My computer, from 2009, can do all of these things (NVME starts straining things) because it was designed to be upgradable. The speed of the USB 2 connectors that came on my machine are laughable compared to the speed of today's USB 3.1 Gen 2 connectors. But, I can readily add USB 3.1 Gen 1 and, if a card was designed to do so, I could also add 3.1 Gen 2.

Apple stripped all of these possibilities out of the 2013 MP by deciding that the only user access to the PCIe bus was going to be by way of TB 2, which, at the time, was already a pale imitation of PCIe slots. This wasn't some organic, technology-driven or -necessitated choice. This was a design decision. Apple decided to take relatively immature technology (often prone to large generational leaps in performance) that made a lot of sense for a laptop and used it to replace in toto the very flexible, more mature tech on its former workstation. In doing so, Apple designed a product that was going to have a far shorter usability life than its predecssor.

One can react to this by saying the world is changing, but in the process of doing so let's try not to delude ourselves when it comes to the reasons why the world is changing.

I don’t disagree with your points, but in the broader scope of what is normally needed to move any technology ahead, that is the ability to discard the previous generation even if it is considered a “standard” in favor of a newer technology, if Apple was stuck designing their devices so that each component had to be upgradable by the consumer, we and they would be stuck with slower, larger, heavier devices, and you’d still have the majority of people using their device as it was sold, un-upgraded for its lifecycle.

Apple in particular is great about their ability to embrace some new tech (and not others), which in some cases has provided us consumers with ground breaking products. But they have also made some bad decisions, like the Mac Pro, that could have been so much better, but instead became a single generation product. As the owner of a G5 tower, what I would consider the pinnacle of beige box computer design, that was beautiful on the outside and inside with its easy to swap out components and fantastic thermal efficiency.

The shift from the PowerPC to Intel should not have caused Apple to ditch the form factor, but I think this is where Apple realized that they needed to become something more than just another PC maker, one using the same chips as most other manufacturers, so they pulled the plug on the tower design and have not looked back.

I personally think they are stuck in a position they don’t want to be in. That is they have committed to building a replacement for the Mac Pro, but to give people what they actually want and need may require them to go back to a design more like the old tower, which they clearly don’t want to do.

And to your point, Apple and most other manufacturers are simply following the money and making decisions that generate the greatest returns. There is a reason why Radio Shack is gone today, because people stopped building and fixing their own electronics, in part because many became unfixable, but also because most people simply don’t want the hassle.

 

[Delgibbons]

Standard 27-inch iMacs have a small hatch in the back that allows the RAM in the machine to be upgraded after purchase, but the iMac Pro does not have that feature.

There is no rear hatch because the RAM in the iMac Pro is not user upgradeable following purchase, but there's good news -- an Apple Store or an Apple Authorized Service Provider is able to open up the iMac Pro and swap out the RAM.

iMore's Rene Ritchie spoke to Apple and learned that any service center is able to upgrade the RAM on an iMac Pro following purchase.

​

At Apple Stores, iMac Pro users will likely only be able to upgrade to Apple-provided RAM, but third-party service providers will be able to offer non-Apple RAM and might even allow users to bring in their own RAM. Policy will undoubtedly vary by location, however.

The entry-level $4,999 iMac Pro ships with 32GB of 2666MHz ECC RAM, but up to 128GB RAM is supported. Apple charges $800 to upgrade to 64GB RAM and $2,400 to upgrade to 128GB RAM. Upgrading RAM after purchase in eligible machines is often more affordable than purchasing Apple's RAM upgrades at checkout.

There are no post-purchase options for upgrading the SSD, processor, or graphics card in the iMac Pro.

Apple began allowing customers to purchase the iMac Pro this morning. 8 and 10-core machines will begin shipping out this week, while 14 and 18-core options won't be available to ship out for 6 to 8 weeks. While the entry-level iMac Pro is priced at $4,999, there are a number of upgrades available. A maxed out 18-core machine with 4TB of storage and a Radeon Pro Vega 64 is priced at $13,199.

Article Link: iMac Pro's RAM Can Only Be Upgraded by Apple or Authorized Service Provider

Pro. Cough.

 

[zoozx]

Just Stupid Apple.
Have you forgotten what a mac user is or wants?
It isn't this!

 

[asdavis10]

I would think that it is reasonable to say Pros want choices and the ability to adapt and expand as needed. I understand your blanket statement was to prove a point, but the Pro moniker should mean something other than ability to have Apple ad $2400 RAM.

And they'll get choice with the modular Mac Pro. It's not like this will be the only option for "pro" users. They also have the MacBook Pro. And I know many "pros" that use them connected to larger screens as their daily work computer. I know "pros" who use the Mac mini.

Apple views a "pro" by their workflow. Not by the ability to make mods. And with external GPUs, that addresses the biggest expandability need for "pros". Internal storage isn't even a big need because external storage (direct/RAID or networked) is industry standard for "pro" users. I think Apple knows this by the analytics they receive about what systems are in use, how they've been modded, and what's connected to them.

 

[dysamoria]

Apple changed the design somewhere around the 2010-2011 iMacs to do away with the magnetic glass. On My 2012 the display is a bonded unit like an iPhone and held in with 3M adhesive all around the display. It removes pretty much like a huge iPhone. Wedge a pick under a corner to slice the adhesive and move around the whole thing to cut it. Suction cup and lift it off gently, detatch the display cables and set aside. Viola you are inside.

No separate glass and LCD? Wow. Too bad my iMac was too early for that change. It's a PITA to service.

 

[RumorSeeker]

Apple lets you "have" an ethernet port and a headphone jack for $5,000+ but claims being on the leading edge for doing away with them on everything else they make; and making their products un-user friendly is their company direction.

 

[PickUrPoison]

Apple lets you "have" an ethernet port and a headphone jack for $5,000+ but claims being on the leading edge for doing away with them on everything else they make; and making their products un-user friendly is their company direction.

Apple isn’t removing headphone jacks on anything except iPhone. iPhone is an iPod replacement, and AirPods are the most user friendly product to use. Wireless is the future, and the space used inside iPhone can be better used for battery than headphone jack.

Apple also includes an adapter if you still
want to use wired headphones. That is also very user friendly.

 

[AcesHigh87]

$2400 extra for 96 gb more of RAM? What are they? Nuts?

You looked at the prices of 128GB of RAM lately? It’s pushing $2000 for non-ECC. They are upcharging a bit for sure (it is Apple RAM after-all) but it’s not that extreme. You have to keep in mind that chances are they aren’t just adding extra sticks, they are replacing what’s there with the full 128GB so your pricing comparison needs to reflect that.
[doublepost=1513344319][/doublepost]

At that price range, I would rather build my own Hackintosh.

To get these specs I doubt you’ll save a ton of money. I’d rather pay the slight extra charge to know that a software update won’t brick my workstation.

Mind you not being able to upgrade anything later is a fair argument but that’s never been the case with iMacs.

 

[gnipgnop]

Mind you not being able to upgrade anything later is a fair argument but that’s never been the case with iMacs.

It's a limited argument. RAM can be upgraded, but unless you're a tear down enthusiast you need to take it to a shop. That doesn't = can't be upgraded. The boot drive is easily self-upgraded using Thunderbolt 3. The GPU is easily upgraded using High Sierra in combination with Thunderbolt 3 and an eGPU box. So really, the "can't upgrade" argument comes down to things like the CPU and motherboard.