Like it or not, Apple needs Mac Pro.

[dmccloud]

He effectively says that by claiming receiving review samples will not affect his reviews. That's tantmount to claming no bias is introduced, even if he doesn't use the word. I thought that was clear from my post.

That's just the nature of being human. Even if you don't think it introduces bias, it does, even if the reviewer has the best of intentions. That's been shown to be an issue for medical studies, and those are done by trained scientists.

Correlation does not equal causation, despite your claims to the contrary. There are multiple reviewers who will receive samples from manufacturers and review them in an objective manner, as free from bias as possible. You seem to think that objectivity is out the windows in those scenarios. It is possible to receive samples for testing and still provide an honest, objective assessment. Many reviewers who will accept samples will only do so in scenarios where they are free to review the product on their own terms rather than stick to corporate talking points.

Can't have been that critical, since tech journalists who have been strongly critical, even if that criticism is reasonable, have been blacklisted by Apple. So Apple allows a certain level of crticism, but only up to some limit. And this has been going on for quite a while. Here's a 2012 article from ZDNet:

Apple PR's dirty little secret

Apple PR maintains a blacklist of journalists that it refuses to talk to. This includes any media outlet that posts anything even remotely negative or heaven help you, a rumor.

www.zdnet.com

And this is not a fringe view. Jason Snell, former editor-in-chief of Macworld magazine, has stated that Apple (like other big consumer-product companies) has a blacklist of journalists and publications to whom they won't provide product or invitations to their events.

Nvidia, AMD, Intel, Microsoft, Valve, Sony, Universal, FOX, Tesla/SpaceX also have blacklists, and have had them for decades at this stage. However, the reasons aren't simply for a journalist being "strongly critical" as you implied. It is usually when either incomplete/selective information is presented in order to push an predetermined angle or non-public information is obtained and then disclosed publicly.

 

[OptimusGrime]

This sounds like a great point to discuss some shortcomings of the technology as implemented. And probably the most significant one is that it’s barely usable at scale. And I’m not even talking about lack of professional cabling or routing, but basic hardware/software management. These are still independent computers communicating over the network, so you need to make sure that they are properly configured and that the software is running. As a hobbyist or a small-time user you can reasonably manage a few studios using a kvm switch or remote desktop, but I don’t see how it’s feasible in a larger environment.

Not that it changes much for people outside Apple, but it’s interesting to know that as well as Thunderbolt support, RDMA is also supported on MLX5, which is some kind of Mellanox Ethernet solution I think. I assume for whatever Apple uses for PCC. This is according to Longhorn on twitter.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1999644566408843607

 

[OptimusGrime]

Right, but you'd also want an ILO management interface, at least at scale.

Many recent desktop macs have basic lights out management. It’s not as sophisticated as some but covers the basics.

Lights Out Management device management payload settings for Apple devices

You can configure Lights Out Management settings to remotely start, shut down and restart specific Mac computers that enrol in a device management service.

support.apple.com

 

[8483011]

https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/mac-pro-reportedly-on-back-burner-and-largely-written-off-at-apple.2471279/

Despite that Mac Pro is being on the back burner, Apple will need to develop high-end and/or workstation grade Apple Silicon chips for their own future. I would skip the performance and specs of Macs cause it's gonna be a long conversation despite the fact that Mac's max performance is poor but the most important fact is, they need workstation grade chips to make their own servers for AI.

Take a look at Gemini 3.0. Google trained their own AI with their own chips, TPU. Which means, Apple can also do it as long as they can make their own powerful chips. M3 Ultra? It's extremely slow compared to others especially Nvidia. Furthermore, since Apple Silicon is SoC based, it's too expensive to mass produce especially with ultra-fusion due to the die size. Dont forget that Apple does NOT make chips to sell so they'll need to use chips from Mac, not custom chips just for servers.

Tho Apple is planning to make new chips with a whole new design thanks to TSMC's SoIC, they will need Mac Pro grade Apple Silicon chips one way or another cause in order to compete and improve their Apple Intelligence.

So what Apple is doing with Mac Pro is totally unacceptable.

Are you able to provide some data that shows another computer that is in the same price range coming close to a Mac on performance? Not too sure there is much of said data available, but interested to see your source. Also wasn't it already established that Apple was creating custom silicon for their servers with Broadcom? In any event, there is literally nothing that says an Apple model needs to be trained on Apple hardware, that's not how LLMs work.

 

[maflynn]

Are you able to provide some data that shows another computer that is in the same price range coming close to a Mac on performance?

At this point in 2025 with memory prices going through the roof, Macs, particularly the Mac Studio imo, have no peers when considering price to performance. I don't know what 2026 will bring for mac prices, but its clear that as of right now, Macs offer an even better deal then ever before imo

 

[8483011]

At this point in 2025 with memory prices going through the roof, Macs, particularly the Mac Studio imo, have no peers when considering price to performance. I don't know what 2026 will bring for mac prices, but its clear that as of right now, Macs offer an even better deal then ever before imo

I think you could slide RAM prices back a couple of years, and it would still be hard to find comparable performance for the money, even before the current world order where getting a RAM upgrade from Apple is somehow and miraculously cheaper then a RAM upgrade from Dell lol.

 

[maflynn]

Apple is somehow and miraculously cheaper then a RAM upgrade from Dell lol.

I fear that may not be the case in 2026, when apple rolls out the M5 Max and Ultra, but only time will tell. Maybe with a bit of luck the AI bubble will burst and ram availability will return to normal

 

[mr_roboto]

No he doesn't.
It's a standard disclaimer given by every responsible reviewer who receives free/loan review samples (and, I believe, required by YouTube codes of practice anyway). He's just telling you that he's not being paid and that Apple aren't censoring the result. You're twisting that into some sort of evidence of unconscious bias - without providing one shred of argument as to what was "biassed" about the review.

I don't think you're getting the point of what @theorist9 was saying.

You don't need specific evidence to assume that unconscious biases are present, because the sum total of scientific research into the phenomenon of bias says that nobody is ever free of it under any circumstance. It's just the human condition. Our brains are not good at being objective, even when we're trying real hard. This is one of the central challenges in doing quality scientific research - trying to come up with ways to prevent bias from influencing results, or their interpretation.

Did you know that if you put two wine glasses with price tags in front of someone and ask them to identify which wine they prefer, most people prefer the more expensive option, especially as the price gap widens? But the really interesting thing is that this holds true even when you've lied to them by giving them the exact same wine twice. The mere presence of a label identifying one as an expensive wine makes it taste better.

That's just the tip of the iceberg. Human beings are all biased, all the time. Geerling can put in a disclaimer saying he's not being paid, and that's fine. But he's still biased, and that's worth thinking about since he gives many subjective evaluations.

 

[dgdosen]

How soon before Apple starts shipping MacBook Pros with fiber optic ports enabling a few hundred GbE?

 

[bigglow]

Can't resist a comment on this:

"Apple doesn't have any say about what I'm saying in this video and if they did I wouldn't be making it."

Nope, if reviewers rely upon getting loaner review samples from companies, rather than purchasing the product themselves, that introduces bias. They know if they speak very negatively about a product they'll be cut off, which will affect their income stream if their business relies on continuing to get those loaners for product review.

That's why reviewers that truly are independent, like Consumer Reports, purchase all their review samples at retail using anonymous buyers.

A reviewer that doesn't recognize the bias introduced by relying on receiving review samples is fooling themselves. Only by recognizing the potential for bias can they minimize it.

Does his YouTube channel generate >$38k to cover 4x $9.5k Mac Studio M3 Ultra 512GB 1TB?

If not then who are doing this Mac cluster on their own dime to your exacting standards?

Are there enough clicks and views out there to cover that $38k bill for a paying audience for that raw performance?

I see reviewers for niche use cases like these to introduce the product within their own vocabulary and realm of interest.

It ends up the end users who actually buys into this $38k setup to look for shortcomings.

I appreciate his take on it. Many Mac Studios hate the concept of using the M3 Ultra for AI use because many see it as a crime against labor when all these tech are a product of labor saving tech.

 

[theluggage]

I don't think you're getting the point of what @theorist9 was saying.

...and you're straw-manning a simple transparency disclaimer about not being paid by or censored by Apple as "I am a perfect being immune to any form of unconscious bias". There's no claim that the video is anything other than opinion plus some (presumably reproducible) benchmark data.

You don't need specific evidence to assume that unconscious biases are present, because the sum total of scientific research into the phenomenon of bias says that nobody is ever free of it under any circumstance.

Sorry, but if you're going to accuse a specific person of a specific bias then you do need to substantiate that. Yes, every human being is capable of unconscious bias - but you can't use that as a trump card to selectively discredit any opinion you disagree with without providing some sort of counterargument.

...and yes, this was an attempt to cast doubt on a specific video without giving any valid reason. Unless someone just decided to post a Public Service Announcement about unconscious bias in response to a particular video that gave an unfashionably positive opinion on using the Mac Studio for AI.

Did you know that if you put two wine glasses with price tags in front of someone and ask them to identify which wine they prefer, most people prefer the more expensive option, especially as the price gap widens? But the really interesting thing is that this holds true even when you've lied to them by giving them the exact same wine twice.

Well, as you describe it - there may have been more to it but you don't give a source - that experiment is not just biassed but completely rigged.

So, for the first part, you give them two different priced wines and they prefer the more expensive one? I mean, as a beer drinker I'm rather consciously biassed against expensive wine but you are rather assuming that the expensive one isn't better.

For the second part, you lie to people and tell them that two identical wines are in fact different - so of course they will tend to find an imaginary difference based on the only information they are given - the price. Especially something totally subjective like the taste of wine.

...and it's not about disbelieving the claim (which is deeply unsurprising) it's about whether that particular experiment was capable of disproving the claim.

As I said, maybe there was more to the experiment. You'd need a proper, double-blind A/B test (so neither the subject or the interviewer knew which was which) to find whether people could perceive any difference between the two wines, then another group where the subjects had been handed a sealed envelope that randomly gave either true or reversed information about the price of A vs. B. then do a lot of stats on the results to see if they were significant. (And I'm shooting from the hip here so I've probably made a mistake).

Oh, and, yes, you'd also have to tear up the research ethics manual and drag randomly selected candidates off the street at gunpoint, because all this asking for volunteers and getting informed consent malarkey makes it impossible to actually get an unbiassed sample of the population. "Hi, we're looking for volunteers to drink wine" - yeah, that's not going to skew the sample much. (I'm joking about the ignoring ethics and gunpoint part of course - but this is an elephant in the room with social science research...)

 

[bigglow]

What I'd want to see is sales # of Mac Pro before/after Mac Studio was released.

As a whole did having both Mac Pro + Mac Studio increase in units shipped?

 

[dmccloud]

I don't think you're getting the point of what @theorist9 was saying.

You don't need specific evidence to assume that unconscious biases are present, because the sum total of scientific research into the phenomenon of bias says that nobody is ever free of it under any circumstance. It's just the human condition. Our brains are not good at being objective, even when we're trying real hard. This is one of the central challenges in doing quality scientific research - trying to come up with ways to prevent bias from influencing results, or their interpretation.

You make a major logical leap by stating that since unconscious biases exist, any reviewer that receives sample products is by default biased in favor of the product being reviewed/assessed/rated. Just yesterday, Jayz2Cents posted a video in which he received some manufacturing samples from a company based in Australia. Jay's preliminary review of the computer case was definitely not biased in favor of the product, offering several areas of constructive criticism alongside recommendations for improvement with respect to some of the design aspects of the case. Jay is not the type of person to blow smoke just to please a sponsor or friend of the channel, and will call out brands on their stupidity (i.e. EK not paying employees, Asus and MSI customer service issues, Nvidia 12v power connectors melting, etc.).

Did you know that if you put two wine glasses with price tags in front of someone and ask them to identify which wine they prefer, most people prefer the more expensive option, especially as the price gap widens? But the really interesting thing is that this holds true even when you've lied to them by giving them the exact same wine twice. The mere presence of a label identifying one as an expensive wine makes it taste better.

And that experiment is flawed because it's designed to elicit those responses using the perceived prices as the motivating factor. It's also completely irrelevant to reviewers receiving product to review/test from manufacturers.

 

[mr_roboto]

...and you're straw-manning a simple transparency disclaimer about not being paid by or censored by Apple as "I am a perfect being immune to any form of unconscious bias".

... What? I think you could stand to stop interpreting everything others say in the most hostile, over-the-top way possible.

Sorry, but if you're going to accuse a specific person of a specific bias then you do need to substantiate that.

So where did I accuse Geerling of a specific bias?

Yes, every human being is capable of unconscious bias - but you can't use that as a trump card to selectively discredit any opinion you disagree with without providing some sort of counterargument.

See above re: hostile interpretation. I didn't do that! The point is simply that of course there's biases of some sort in Geerling's video. And that the non-sponsored disclaimer is a bit offputting since direct payment is not the only form of compensation in this space.

For the record, since it seems I have to make this as clear as I can: despite having some criticisms, I for one don't hate the video overall, nor do I think Geerling is a bad awful poopyhead who puts out nothing but corporate propaganda. Please, I beg, stop making assumptions.

Well, as you describe it - there may have been more to it but you don't give a source - that experiment is not just biassed but completely rigged.

I'm not giving a specific source because I don't have one off the top of my head. What I described was not a rigorous scientific experiment either, instead it's a demo done to teach people about unconscious wine tasting biases they didn't know they had.

But honestly, "rigged"? Nah. That's just you (once again) assuming malice, for some reason. It's quite possible to do a version of this (including the "same wine but different pricetags" aspect) with full scientific rigor.

 

[theluggage]

So where did I accuse Geerling of a specific bias?

You didn't - but you posted in support of someone who clearly insinuated Geerling was biassed by virtue of receiving loan equipment from Apple. Clue: if someone suddenly gives you a personal lecture on the dangers of (contentious habit), they're passive-aggressively accusing you of having that contentious habit, even if they're following "Interventions 101" and not using "you-statements". If I come along and chime in "well, there's certainly evidence that (contentious habit) is dangerous" when I'm aware of the context then I'm effectively supporting that accusation.

And that the non-sponsored disclaimer is a bit offputting since direct payment is not the only form of compensation in this space.

That type of disclaimer is common on many youtube channels, and is a response to widely reported cases of YouTube influencers presenting straight up paid advertisements as "reviews" or "here's what I use every day". It may even be mandated by the YouTube monetisation T&Cs (but don't quote me on that) and it's certainly good transparency practice.

I for one don't hate the video overall, nor do I think Geerling is a bad awful poopyhead who puts out nothing but corporate propaganda. Please, I beg, stop making assumptions.

Now who's being "over-the-top"? You posted in support of someone implying that Geerling was biassed by receiving loan equipment from Apple. This was never an abstract debate about unconscious bias.

But honestly, "rigged"? Nah. That's just you (once again) assuming malice, for some reason. It's quite possible to do a version of this (including the "same wine but different pricetags" aspect) with full scientific rigor.

Yes (although "quite possible" => expensive, time-consuming and hard to get right) but the actual "demo" as you described proves nothing because it breaks all of the rules on avoiding unconscious bias (and not just the particular bias it was trying to demonstrate). All of the subjects have the issue of the prices deliberately put in to their head, and the questioner knows which the "right" response (i.e. the one that proves their conjecture) is and can easily pass that on by body language - especially when the subject is being asked to find a non-existent difference. So, unless you're unlucky and find a bunch of subjects who have a chip on their shoulder about expensive wine being a con, that "experiment" is only going to have one outcome so, yes "rigged" is a fair comment.

The relevance of this is that you - or at least theorist9 - were holding Geerling to absurd standards of impartiality but then both of you happily relied on cases (your 'demo', theorist9's article from a blacklisted journalist) with huge potential for bias...

 

[maflynn]

What I'd want to see is sales # of Mac Pro before/after Mac Studio was released.

I posted this article in another thread
MacBooks account for 86% of total Mac sales; Mac desktops just 14%

In stark contrast, Mac desktops constitute just 14% of total Mac sales, per CIRP’s analysis, signaling a significant decline in demand for Apple’s stationary systems. Among these, the iMac holds the largest portion at 10% of overall Mac sales, making it the most popular desktop option, albeit still a minor player compared to laptops. The Mac Pro, Mac mini, and Mac Studio trail far behind, with shares of 3%, 1%, and a mere 0.5%, respectively, suggesting that these models cater to increasingly niche audiences, such as high-end professionals or specific creative workflows. This disparity reflects a broader consumer move away from desktop setups, as modern laptops like the MacBook Pro offer comparable performance in a more convenient form factor.

 

[maflynn]

You didn't - but you posted in support of someone who clearly insinuated Geerling was biassed

Why are you arguing over the credibility of the youtube instead of discussing the topic? Seems silly that you need to attack a video instead of discussing the worth, or quality of the topic.

 

[theluggage]

Why are you arguing over the credibility of the youtube instead of discussing the topic?

Ooops. If my posts have suggested that "credibility" and "youtube" belong in the same sentence then I'll shut up immediately 🙂

 

[MRMSFC]

As someone who loves his 5,1, and loves the Mac Pro as a product, I don’t think Apple specifically needs the Mac Pro.

Looking at the way computers have evolved in the prosumer space where Apple exists, I really can’t see much benefit to the Mac Pro as it currently exists.

In the PC space expansion slots are almost always used exclusively for a GPU, which the current M series architecture doesn’t support in the first place, and other functions have been shifted to either USB devices or on the SoC/CPU itself.

As an example, the M series already excels at video editing and graphics programs that have been Apple’s primary market for decades now. And really the only race they’re losing is gaming, which is its own problem altogether. As for as hobbyist AI stuff that’s emerging, Apple still has a leg up on most of the affordable GPU offerings.

If I may use my anecdotal experience, prices for consumer PC parts have skyrocketed to the point that even people who build their own desktops upgrade so infrequently that by the time they’re ready to upgrade one part, they just take on a whole new build.

And without those two things the advantages of the Mac Pro are just gone. If a new GPU that costs $400 at the entry level and may only offer a 10% increase in performance over the past gen is the only available upgrade option for five years running then it eventually becomes more economical to spend $3,000 after five years and get any other performance improvements along with it.

So that puts the Mac Pro as a niche within a niche within a niche of a market segment. Not really even as a “halo” product either when their flagship SoC is in the Mac Studio for $500 less.

 

[maflynn]

So that puts the Mac Pro as a niche within a niche within a niche of a market segment. Not really even as a “halo” product either when their flagship SoC is in the Mac Studio for $500 less.

We're at a point in the computer life cycle that there will never or could neveer be a mac halo product. Apple understood this when they renamed the company from Apple Computer inc to Apple.

I'm not knocking the Mac, just facing facts, its a tiny percentage of the actual revenue that apple makes

 

[deconstruct60]

Can't resist a comment on this:

"Apple doesn't have any say about what I'm saying in this video and if they did I wouldn't be making it."

Nope, if reviewers rely upon getting loaner review samples from companies, rather than purchasing the product themselves, that introduces bias. They know if they speak very negatively about a product they'll be cut off, which will affect their income stream if their business relies on continuing to get those loaners for product review.

Does he care if he gets cut off? The vast majority of the rest of his videos have little to do with Apple products. Apple is trying to leverage him for legitimacy far more than the other way around. If they drop him for telling the truth that would only reinforce him as being legitimate in the audiences he is going after.

Apple delivered as set up with tons of bugs. It likely is as much a beta test program as a marketing promotion activity.

Consumer Reports doesn’t beta test products. That is a different context.

 

[maflynn]

What I'd want to see is sales # of Mac Pro before/after Mac Studio was released.

As a whole did having both Mac Pro + Mac Studio increase in units shipped?

Yeah, I'd like to see that information. What data we can glean though, is apple moving forward with the Studio and putting the Mac Pro on the back burner for the time being.

 

[Fishrrman]

I've never owned a Mac Pro -- no need for one.
(I did once have a g4 MDD -- it's still up in the attic)

I'm thinking the main reason for having an Mac Pro (in Intel days) was "the slots".
And then it follows, what's the main reason for slots?
Would that not be for graphics cards?

I may have this wrong, but are PCI video cards NOT supported on m-series Macs?
And... is this a limitation of the entire design?

If true -- if one can't install 3rd-party video cards in an m-series Mac Pro -- doesn't that severely limit their usability...? And their intended market?

 

[Basic75]

I've never owned a Mac Pro -- no need for one.
(I did once have a g4 MDD -- it's still up in the attic)

So you did have a Mac Pro, just by a different name. Call it Power Mac, Mac Pro, or even Big Mac, it's one product line. The 2013 Mac Pro was less of a Mac Pro than your Power Mac G4.

If true -- if one can't install 3rd-party video cards in an m-series Mac Pro -- doesn't that severely limit their usability...? And their intended market?

I mean, that's exactly what's being discussed here for pages and pages with no end in sight, whether a Mac Pro makes sense as a product when you can't install a GPU (or add RAM).

 

[maflynn]

I'm thinking the main reason for having an Mac Pro (in Intel days) was "the slots".
And then it follows, what's the main reason for slots?
Would that not be for graphics cards?

Pre-trash can mac pros had a number of reasons why a desktop Mac made a ton of sense. The pre-trash can mac pro had multiple drive bays for storage upgrades and flexibility. Those Macs could upgrade ram, upgrade/replace the GPU, add expansion cards for video production, faster networking, RAID interfaces, capture cards, expansion cards for audio production.