Mac Pro and Pro Display XDR Launched Three Years Ago Today

[theluggage]

Sadly I agree, but it doesn’t change my statement. Apple made an apology about the trashcan, then touted “modular design” and “upgradability”.

...well, if you go back and read the transcript of the 2017 "apology" they were mainly apologising for the dead-end "thermal" design which prevented them from offering updated models with new CPU and GPU, were using "modular" to mean "anything without a built-in display" and I don't think they promised anything about user upgradeability - just their ability to produce updated models. Of course, history shows that we did get a fully modular/upgradeable PCIe based system but I got the impression that they hadn't decided at the time and were choosing their words carefully.

My guess is that the whole thing was triggered by pushback against the iMac Pro (which would have already been in development then) being the "new Mac pro".

Touting upgradability in a platform they knew they were going to trash five years later

When it comes down to internal politics, kicking the can a few years down the road is often the result.

Actually, it makes more sense to produce an upgradeable machine in those circumstances. The design is probably good for a few more years - they even updated the GPU options last year. They could even, possibly, use the MPX bus as a way to add Apple Silicon "compute modules".

I suspect that, if Apple announced that they were going to support the Intel Mac Pro for a few more years rather than discontinue it in favour of Apple Silicon, a lot of existing Mac Pro users would be quite happy.

Problem is that they haven't said anything (maybe a few big customers know something under NDA but we'll never know) so as far as anybody knows, the 2019 MP is going to be discontinued at short notice when the new shiny comes out.

 

[Velli]

...well, if you go back and read the transcript of the 2017 "apology" they were mainly apologising for the dead-end "thermal" design which prevented them from offering updated models with new CPU and GPU, were using "modular" to mean "anything without a built-in display" and I don't think they promised anything about user upgradeability - just their ability to produce updated models. Of course, history shows that we did get a fully modular/upgradeable PCIe based system but I got the impression that they hadn't decided at the time and were choosing their words carefully.

You think that a year before launch they hadn't decided on the form factor yet? Okay.

Whichever it is, I don't think customers of the current Mac Pro was expecting to buy into a form factor that Apple would then leave 4-5 years later. I understand that giving an upgrade path to a different CPU would be highly unusual, however changing CPU architecture altogether is also highly unusual. Replacing the CPU in the old cheesegrater was not out of the question. I don't think it is unreasonable to expect a CPU upgrade to be available for the current Mac Pro.

From the roundtable: "...certainly flexibility and our flexibility to keep it current and upgraded. We need an architecture that can deliver across a wide dynamic range of performance and that we can efficiently keep it up to date with the best technologies over years." No, it's not a promise that new mainboards will be available, but it does read like a promise not to shift to a completely different platform 4-5 years later.

 

[chucker23n1]

You think that a year before launch they hadn't decided on the form factor yet? Okay.

It launched December 2019 and was shown June 2019. April 2017 isn’t a year before either of those.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

So how does that translate to market share? The last 10 years must have seen a huge surge in semi-pro video creation for YouTube etc. (and even humorous cat videos now need to be in 4k HDR ) as well as a boom in TV production driven by streaming services, so I'd expect the whole video editing market to have boomed.

Market share is not really important for these “Pro” computers (I guess that could be said for almost everything Apple makes). They just need to sell enough to be profitable. If so, then they’ll keep making them. If not, they won’t.

So, Apple isn’t assuming those customers can turn on a dime, they’re assuming those may or may not be future customers, so their focus is going to be to make a system that future customers (that may not have owned any Apple product at all) will find desirable at a price they’re willing to pay. When considering that “Pro” machines sell in the lowest numbers for Apple (especially if they’re desktop systems), they’re the ones where Apple has the most leverage in defining what APPLE wants their future to be, contrary to what current customers may want.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I really don't see a future for Mac Pro like machines any more.

The pool of users who need uber high-end computers and who still use OSX has to be so small as to make the investment not worth it.

The Mac Studio doesn't have any problems for rendering 4K and 8K video or extensive audio production, so what's left?

As someone else has posted, there ARE some users that take advantage of PCIe expandability. However, the big question is, how many people NEED both PCIe expandability AND macOS? With the strides Apple’s been making and driving those folks off, if it’s seen that the remaining folks interested in macOS at that performance level really don’t have much of a need for slots, then the next Mac Pro will differentiate itself in ways other than that.

I personally think (based on nothing ) that there may be enough call for two PCI slots (specifically for audio/networking) and one slot in a special place like the current Mac Pro that’s just for I/O. But, I don’t expect that any future Apple system will have 8 slots.