New Mac Pro Nearing Release as Apple Advises Technicians How to Place Computer in DFU Mode

[Abazigal]

Your fixation on the tower form factor is not uncommon amongst users who are clinging desperately to the past, but your entire argument is based on a world that simply doesn’t exist anymore. It takes time to adjust, it isn’t easy, but the paradigm has shifted and the target has changed.

The inertia that exists within corporate America is the last bastion where the mini-tower resides and it needs transformation. That there are uses in the Professional market for creatives, gamers, hobbyists, scientists and others is not in dispute, but the tower is not the dominant form factor as it used to be, nor should it be.

In the corporate world, you would think that most companies should have transitioned to laptops by now, which I feel to be way more versatile. You can bring them around with you for meetings, and hook them up to monitors if you desire more screen estate.

I agree that the case for a dedicated desktop form factor just keeps getting lesser and lesser by the day.

 

[Parzival]

Correct, this isn't for 99% of the people on this website. This is for companies that need major firepower for editing etc. Of course there will still be those regular users who claim they really have to have it. So they'll toss cash at it which is also what Apple banks on.

This computer also isn't for people who care about price/performance ratios. The base model shouldn't even exist.

 

[OkiRun]

This computer also isn't for people who care about price/performance ratios. The base model shouldn't even exist.

That ratio improves as you build up the machine to your personal specs on your own from the base model ~ Thereby saving money on a forward basis. Can you imagine if the entry level was a $25k setup?!?

 

[Parzival]

That ratio improves as you build up the machine to your personal specs on your own from the base model ~ Thereby saving money on a forward basis. Can you imagine if the entry level was a $25k setup?!?

Well, the original cheese grater also was upgradable, without it being insanely expensive

 

[Abazigal]

Well, the original cheese grater also was upgradable, without it being insanely expensive

Times have changed since then. Standard configurations of off-the-shelf computers have become more than adequate for the bulk of computer work, even for heavy users.

I can’t help but notice that the main gripe the self-styled “pro users” here have isn’t that the existing Mac models which Apple offers aren’t powerful enough, but that they are sealed, untinkerable boxes.

I have said it before, and I am willing to bet that for much of the stuff that the “pro” users here do, a souped-up iMac, an iMac Pro, or even a MBP with a 5k display will more than suffice. The inability to upgrade them on your own doesn’t stop you from getting the specs you want at the time of purchase; it just means that you need to spend more to do so.

In summary, I think a lot of the perceived demand for a “Pro Mac” is really a desire for the ability to tinker with computers and to be able to access and upgrade the internals whenever they do desire.

Which also means that these self-styled “pro” users aren’t really “pro” in the conventional sense. They are actually Mac enthusiasts, and there is a difference.

The Mac Pro will have an audience. They just aren’t here at Macrumours. It’s ironic really. By making a Mac Pro which meets every one of the demands of the community here, Apple has made a computer that is also 100% not for them.

 

[OkiRun]

Well, the original cheese grater also was upgradable, without it being insanely expensive

Adjust for inflation and you're approaching the current Mac Pro and the hardware and software are lightyears ahead. Go to a primary source - anyone who bought a decked out original model.

 

[Parzival]

Times have changed since then. Standard configurations of off-the-shelf computers have become more than adequate for the bulk of computer work, even for heavy users.

I can’t help but notice that the main gripe the self-styled “pro users” here have isn’t that the existing Mac models which Apple offers aren’t powerful enough, but that they are sealed, untinkerable boxes.

I have said it before, and I am willing to bet that for much of the stuff that the “pro” users here do, a souped-up iMac, an iMac Pro, or even a MBP with a 5k display will more than suffice. The inability to upgrade them on your own doesn’t stop you from getting the specs you want at the time of purchase; it just means that you need to spend more to do so.

In summary, I think a lot of the perceived demand for a “Pro Mac” is really a desire for the ability to tinker with computers and to be able to access and upgrade the internals whenever they do desire.

Which also means that these self-styled “pro” users aren’t really “pro” in the conventional sense. They are actually Mac enthusiasts, and there is a difference.

The Mac Pro will have an audience. They just aren’t here at Macrumours. It’s ironic really. By making a Mac Pro which meets every one of the demands of the community here, Apple has made a computer that is also 100% not for them.

I think you're mostly right, however, speaking from my own perspective, I want something that is not thermally constrained, easily upgradable, and super reliable. I also do not want a screen or hardware that is glued together. I do however want MacOS. So what are my options, except for shelling out an awfully high amount of money for a terrible base config?

 

[Abazigal]

I think you're mostly right, however, speaking from my own perspective, I want something that is not thermally constrained, easily upgradable, and super reliable. I also do not want a screen or hardware that is glued together. I do however want MacOS. So what are my options, except for shelling out an awfully high amount of money for a terrible base config?

Either go hackintosh, or accept that Apple currently has no intention of catering to your demographic whatsoever.

Or to put it another way, you are sadly out of luck.

 

[Parzival]

Either go hackintosh, or accept that Apple currently has no intention of catering to your demographic whatsoever.

Or to put it another way, you are sadly out of luck.

I was afraid you were going to say that
I'm wondering what the price of the Mac Pro will be in Europe, could be even higher than in the States.

 

[Abazigal]

I was afraid you were going to say that
I'm wondering what the price of the Mac Pro will be in Europe, could be even higher than in the States.

I honestly don’t think you will need a Mac Pro, and throwing a huge wad of cash to get one just on principle alone feels like a colossal waste of money.

What do you even see yourself doing on it?

 

[Parzival]

I honestly don’t think you will need a Mac Pro, and throwing a huge wad of cash to get one just on principle alone feels like a colossal waste of money.

What do you even see yourself doing on it?

I would be using it primarily for music composition.
Reliability is of paramount concern to me, as are decent thermals.
So, other than the price, the Mac Pro seems a good fit for that.

But I'm open to any suggestions you guys might have.

 

[theluggage]

You are conflating the Mac Pro with the entire Mac division which is not what I said, but nice try.

No - its true of the whole Mac range - its dwarfed by the iPhone and will get even smaller if wearables and services continue to grow. Yet its actually one of the 4 biggest global PC businesses, so why are people making excuses for Apple as if they were still a 2-man startup running out of Steve's garage?

Know what most of those other top-5 vendors manage to do? Offer a complete range of laptops/2-in-ones/towers/mini-towers/all-in-ones/rackmount servers/displays and, yea, serious-callers-only 5 digit workstations.

Your fixation on the tower form factor is not uncommon amongst users who are clinging desperately to the past, but your entire argument is based on a world that simply doesn’t exist anymore.

Or maybe you're living in a trendy echo-chamber where everybody happens to have jobs that can be done in Starbucks on tablets and ultrabooks. If it works for you - fine. Yes, once upon a time, the typical home/small office/work cubicle computer was a sub-$1000 PC tower, and you're quite right, that is gone, and you're also right that most of those ended up on landfill having never seen a user's screwdriver. That's not what the pre-2013 Mac Pro was ever for (and, remember, the post-2013 'nobody needs a tower any more' cylinder was a failure, or we wouldn't be discussing a new Apple tower today).

I use/have used laptops. phones, tablets, small-form-factor systems where they make sense, and for some things they're great. But, if you have to edit any amount of text/code, phones and tablets are useless. If you need to connect a lot of peripherals to do your work, laptops are irrelevant and a tower can be customised with the exact interface you want. If you need a half-decent GPU - even a moderately powerful 'prosumer' one that hasn't been gimped to fit a mobile/SFF thermal envelope - by far the most cost-effective way is to plug a PCIe card directly into a tower. (Or, you could spend hundreds of dollars on an eGPU enclosure, a separate power supply and cable, check the long list of software compatibility issues and hope that the fanbois are right when they say that a GPU really doesn't need more than 4 lanes of PCIe...)

Actually, I find it now makes more sense to have a desktop - after some years where laptops were the best solution - my large-screen phone or tablet gives me email/web on the road, any product is, more often than not, I can access my files etc. via the internet in the vast majority of places. So there's less reason to compromise for the sake of being able to physically take everything I need on the road. Good job, given the current MBP range...

 

[theluggage]

That ratio improves as you build up the machine to your personal specs on your own from the base model ~ Thereby saving money on a forward basis.

We don't know what Apple is going to charge for the upgrades yet - but going on past performance that's likely to be at least 2x the list price of comparable parts for things like CPU and SSD upgrades. (e.g. for the iMac Pro they want $800 for an 8 to 10 core upgrade - if you go to ark.intel.com, the difference in 'suggested customer price' is $327). Not something you can do yourself if you want to keep your Applecare (and a certified Apple engineer is gonna charge $800 + labour).

That goes for the proprietary SSD upgrades, MPX GPUs, afterburner cards etc. that distinguish the Mac Pro from a generic PC tower - until we know otherwise, there's no reason to expect those to be any more reasonable than the $6000 entry system or the $999 display stand.

Will it be possible to add generic GPUs without boot-screen/re-flashing issues? Last I heard NVIDIA wasn't supported under recent versions of MacOS. I guess you can add extra generic SSD on PCIe cards, or even SATA (if someone sells a mounting cage other than the expensive official one from Sonnet). RAM should be straight forward.

...but that gets us on to this "True Pros who Work For Real Money And Will Pay What It Takes To get The Job Done Faster" cherry-picking fallacy. Such users are certainly not going to void their service plan/lease agreement on day one by doing a DIY CPU upgrade, use some unsupported hack to run NVIDIA cards or add unofficial RAM and SSD (even if it doesn't violate their service plan, it might not be covered).

Can you imagine if the entry level was a $25k setup?!?

If it was only $25k for the 28-core 1.5TB, quad-GPU beast that was shown at WWDC then we'd be treating it a bit more kindly - while still criticising Apple for failing to offer something suitable for those of us who just want a headless Mac that can take a half-decent GPU and extra internal storage.

...but if that system was going to be such a bargain, why didn't they announce the price?

 

[Macpro2019]

Proper desktops have brand agnostic user replaceable parts. It may be a desktop, but it is in no way proper.

Desktop can be anything that is on the desk.

 

[OkiRun]

We don't know what Apple is going to charge for the upgrades yet - but going on past performance that's likely to be at least 2x the list price of comparable parts for things like CPU and SSD upgrades. (e.g. for the iMac Pro they want $800 for an 8 to 10 core upgrade - if you go to ark.intel.com, the difference in 'suggested customer price' is $327). Not something you can do yourself if you want to keep your Applecare (and a certified Apple engineer is gonna charge $800 + labour).

That goes for the proprietary SSD upgrades, MPX GPUs, afterburner cards etc. that distinguish the Mac Pro from a generic PC tower - until we know otherwise, there's no reason to expect those to be any more reasonable than the $6000 entry system or the $999 display stand.

Will it be possible to add generic GPUs without boot-screen/re-flashing issues? Last I heard NVIDIA wasn't supported under recent versions of MacOS. I guess you can add extra generic SSD on PCIe cards, or even SATA (if someone sells a mounting cage other than the expensive official one from Sonnet). RAM should be straight forward.

...but that gets us on to this "True Pros who Work For Real Money And Will Pay What It Takes To get The Job Done Faster" cherry-picking fallacy. Such users are certainly not going to void their service plan/lease agreement on day one by doing a DIY CPU upgrade, use some unsupported hack to run NVIDIA cards or add unofficial RAM and SSD (even if it doesn't violate their service plan, it might not be covered).



If it was only $25k for the 28-core 1.5TB, quad-GPU beast that was shown at WWDC then we'd be treating it a bit more kindly - while still criticising Apple for failing to offer something suitable for those of us who just want a headless Mac that can take a half-decent GPU and extra internal storage.

...but if that system was going to be such a bargain, why didn't they announce the price?

I think we are talking past each other...
3.5GHz Intel Xeon W - Upgrade later by yourself.
32GB - Easy to upgrade later by yourself.
AMD Radeon Pro 580X - Upgrade later by yourself.
256 SSD - Upgrade later by yourself.

All of these options are things you can upgrade by yourself. It's a modular Mac.
All of your upgrades will most definitely be cheaper than the Apple Tax products.
By the time you reach a mid level machine - you have saved money over what you would pay Apple for that same mid level machine. That's why they are placing a premium on the base model.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I think we are talking past each other...
3.5GHz Intel Xeon W - Upgrade later by yourself.
32GB - Easy to upgrade later by yourself.
AMD Radeon Pro 580X - Upgrade later by yourself.
256 SSD - Upgrade later by yourself.

All of these options are things you can upgrade by yourself. It's a modular Mac.
All of your upgrades will most definitely be cheaper than the Apple Tax products.
By the time you reach a mid level machine - you have saved money over what you would pay Apple for that same mid level machine. That's why they are placing a premium on the base model.

I’m just ready for Apple to release the thing and let’s see how much it costs. I have no intention of buying one. My i9/Vega 48 iMac is working like a dream, but I am curious to see the premiums, if any, placed on the BTO upgrades. Either way, the people with the most negative reactions aren’t going to change their tunes all of a sudden, so enough teasing by the analysts and MacRumors. Lets get the party started Apple.

Frankly, I’m more interested to see the 16” MacBook Pro and a Xeon W-22xx update to the iMacPro, other than maybe some real-world benchmarks of the Afterburner card or the Vega Duo.

 

[teejaysplace24]

Frankly, you can build your own PC with Ryzen and buy a great Samsung monitor at Best Buy for $1000 altogether and it should be good enough for editing movies and scientific research. I cannot imagine any “professional” who’d need this machine.

Plus, this thing can’t play Resident Evil 2 or Red Dead Redemption 2. Not a pro machine. Fact.

Professional workflows are not a bring-your-own-lunch situation. Many, many craftspeople work on entertainment projects and it's preferable to have full cross-compatibility. It's not quite as problematic as it used to be, as there is more cross-platform and cloud-based software in use today; but if something goes wrong — a wonky software update, for example — it's easier to navigate if everyone's on the same page. If your custom built PC blows up in the middle of the day, good luck finding someone else in the department ready to help you deal with it. Outside of the spreadsheet people, rare is the PC user in any facet of entertainment production.

We're also not talking about engineers or hobbyists here — the film industry is comprised of artists and designers, many of whom began their careers in an analog medium and have only adopted digital means because they were forced to. These are not the type of folks who have the inclination to build their own boxes, which is why Apple has found a substantial market in them over the years. They are willing to spend to have the best turn-key solution available for their needs. That may change if Apple gives up on the Mac, but it's an investment that most folks are not presently keen to let go.

(Finally, if you are a true professional, your absolute last thought when purchasing a new workstation is whether or not it can play games. That's not what it's for.)

 

[Abazigal]

Professional workflows are not a bring-your-own-lunch situation. Many, many craftspeople work on entertainment projects and it's preferable to have full cross-compatibility. It's not quite as problematic as it used to be, as there is more cross-platform and cloud-based software in use today; but if something goes wrong — a wonky software update, for example — it's easier to navigate if everyone's on the same page. If your custom built PC blows up in the middle of the day, good luck finding someone else in the department ready to help you deal with it. Outside of the spreadsheet people, rare is the PC user in any facet of entertainment production.

We're also not talking about engineers or hobbyists here — the film industry is comprised of artists and designers, many of whom began their careers in an analog medium and have only adopted digital means because they were forced to. These are not the type of folks who have the inclination to build their own boxes, which is why Apple has found a substantial market in them over the years. They are willing to spend to have the best turn-key solution available for their needs. That may change if Apple gives up on the Mac, but it's an investment that most folks are not presently keen to let go.

(Finally, if you are a true professional, your absolute last thought when purchasing a new workstation is whether or not it can play games. That's not what it's for.)

Not only that, but the people who claim they can build an equivalent PC for less often hit this price point by putting an absolute garbage CPU in it that would take 5x longer to render video or compile code. Considering how the price of the Xeon chip alone is more than that already.

In fact, I am starting to wonder whether a lot of the ‘demand’ for a new Mac Pro is actually coming from PC trolls who knew Apple’s solution would cost a small fortune just so they could step in and criticise.

Curiouser and curiouser.

 

[Parzival]

Not only that, but the people who claim they can build an equivalent PC for less often hit this price point by putting an absolute garbage CPU in it that would take 5x longer to render video or compile code. Considering how the price of the Xeon chip alone is more than that already.

In fact, I am starting to wonder whether a lot of the ‘demand’ for a new Mac Pro is actually coming from PC trolls who knew Apple’s solution would cost a small fortune just so they could step in and criticise.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Hey Abigail, do you happen to know if those Xeons have any advantage or disadvantage when it comes to all things audio?

 

[Abazigal]

Hey Abigail, do you happen to know if those Xeons have any advantage or disadvantage when it comes to all things audio?

This is completely outside my area of expertise, but I wager that if you have to ask, an i7 might probably suffice for you.

 

[theluggage]

All of these options are things you can upgrade by yourself. It's a modular Mac.

...and that will be great in 2023 when you pick up a cheap base Mac Pro on eBay - but I raised a series of issues as to why that isn't an attractive option for the sort of users the Mac Pro is supposedly aimed at, who are going to want stability and support.

Here's a question - if you put non-MPX cards in there that need extra power (like most CPUs) where's it going to come from? I see one power connector up by the SATA ports - a Xeon tower would either have a bunch of unused power cables, or a modular PSU with multiple power connectors (not as neat as MPX, but potentially neater than fitting a non-MPX card in a Mac Pro). Maybe someone will make an adapter that plugs into the proprietary MPX slot, but that's going to block one of your double-width slots.

Same thing with feeding video back to the thunderbolt controllers - but I'm not sure thats a problem anybody has unless they're also getting a $5k HDX display that only supports Thunderbolt.

 

[Zdigital2015]

...and that will be great in 2023 when you pick up a cheap base Mac Pro on eBay - but I raised a series of issues as to why that isn't an attractive option for the sort of users the Mac Pro is supposedly aimed at, who are going to want stability and support.

Here's a question - if you put non-MPX cards in there that need extra power (like most CPUs) where's it going to come from? I see one power connector up by the SATA ports - a Xeon tower would either have a bunch of unused power cables, or a modular PSU with multiple power connectors (not as neat as MPX, but potentially neater than fitting a non-MPX card in a Mac Pro). Maybe someone will make an adapter that plugs into the proprietary MPX slot, but that's going to block one of your double-width slots.

Same thing with feeding video back to the thunderbolt controllers - but I'm not sure thats a problem anybody has unless they're also getting a $5k HDX display that only supports Thunderbolt.

There are connectors on the left side of the logic board that you can see on the Apple website (not the MPX connectors). The connector does not look like a standard 6- or 8-pin connector, so it will require an XXX-connector to 8-pin connector in order to get those third party GPUs in there. However, this is nothing new. Apple has always kept the GPU stable small and very few vendors ever went to the effort of creating Mac EFI compatible GPUs for the Pro. EVGA and Sapphire spring to mind, but EVGA is almost exclusively NVIDIA now, so that would leave just Sapphire at this time.

I am sure that most independent Pros who choose to buy this Mac Pro will decide which CPU they need and upgrade to that right off the bat. Most of the systems sold are going to be the 12-core with the 16-core coming in second, the 8-core third, then the 24 core will sell the least unless the leap to the 28-core is $$$ more than the 24-core. The Pro 580X will see more than its fair share of users, who either want to pull over their existing cards that are more powerful (Vega 56/64/VII), but I see the Pro Vega II being the most popular upgrade out of the gate and the 48GB DRAM upgrade being the next most popular and then the 1TB SSD upgrade...really wish there was a 512GB SSD (2x256GB SSD), but that's not looking like a possibility. So basically, the following:

- 12-core Xeon W (+$1200)
- 48GB DDR 2933MHz DRAM (+$200)
- 1TB SSD (+$400)
- Pro Vega II (+$600)
- AppleCare+ ($249)

Total - $8,648.00USD + applicable taxes

Cheap? Not to me (I don't have a need for this beast yet), but not outside the realm of a Pro user's grasp, depending on workflow.

 

[theluggage]

Not only that, but the people who claim they can build an equivalent PC for less often hit this price point by putting an absolute garbage CPU in it that would take 5x longer to render video or compile code. Considering how the price of the Xeon chip alone is more than that already.

You can't build an "equivalent" PC for less if "equivalent" has to mean 7 high-bandwidth PCIe slots (the 8th is a 4x, half-width slot pre-fitted with an I/O card containing things like USB ports that most PCs include on the main board), capacity for 1.5TB of RAM, hot-and-cold-running Thunderbolt etc. oh, and available today. Which the Mac Pro isn't and we still have no idea of the price of MP system that can out-perform an i9 or Ryzen.

I've already pointed out that currently available Xeon PCs need dual processor configs (...which, incidentally, can support twice as many cores and/or more GPUs as the Mac Pro) and linked to at least one new motherboard that can support the new Xeon-W and hence offers 7 slots + 1.5TB RAM. Maybe that hasn't shown up on the HP system configurator yet - but the technology isn't an Apple exclusive but if it hasn't shown up in six months time that would probably mean that nobody needs a general-purpose single-CPU machine with that level of expandability.

If the prime requirement is to render/compile at speed, here is a system that will out-perform the entry level Mac Pro. (Spoiler: its the iMac Pro) - since it comes with a $1200-value display you can probably afford a 12- or 14-core CPU if the entry level (in case a better GPU and more SSD than the MP doesn't quite hit the mark). Of course, the reason that we all don't just shut up and buy iMac Pros is that wanting a "modular" system isn't just about getting the fastest possible CPU, and that some PCIe slots and RAM expansion would be good, but more isn't necessarily better.

What you can do - even with currently available hardware - is build a system (or, if you are Too Pro For DIY, go to an OEM who will build it to spec and sell you a support plan) that better meets your needs than the MP (or iMP) - which may mean cheaper (outside the Mac bubble, AMD processors are seriously competing with the low-end Xeon and high-end i9 for multi-core workflows, and are certainly not 'garbage'), or may mean better (maybe you want true rack mount with all the redundant PSU/lights out trimmings, maybe you want a scalable Xeon system, 10 GPUs, or a silent water-cooled system...)

In fact, I am starting to wonder whether a lot of the ‘demand’ for a new Mac Pro is actually coming from PC trolls who knew Apple’s solution would cost a small fortune just so they could step in and criticise.

Thanks for drawing a line under any attempt at rational argument by invoking the MacRumors equivalent of Godwin's law. "Troll" does not mean "anybody who disagrees with you".

 

[theluggage]

There are connectors on the left side of the logic board that you can see on the Apple website (not the MPX connectors). The connector does not look like a standard 6- or 8-pin connector, so it will require an XXX-connector to 8-pin connector in order to get those third party GPUs in there.

You may be right - I'd taken those to be the SSD slots, but looking closely, I now see that those may plug in to the other side of the board (with the fans and RAM).

However, this is nothing new. Apple has always kept the GPU stable small and very few vendors ever went to the effort of creating Mac EFI compatible GPUs for the Pro.

Fine - but you're pre-supposing that the only relevant comparison with the Mac Pro is the Mac Pros of yesterday (just like Apple's benchmarks - if this is better than anything the PC world has to offer then show us - there are plenty of cross-platform Pro apps to compare). If you can't contemplate Windows or Linux as an alternative then maybe the Mac Pro is for you - but only by virtue of being the only choice.

 

[Zdigital2015]

You may be right - I'd taken those to be the SSD slots, but looking closely, I now see that those may plug in to the other side of the board (with the fans and RAM).



Fine - but you're pre-supposing that the only relevant comparison with the Mac Pro is the Mac Pros of yesterday (just like Apple's benchmarks - if this is better than anything the PC world has to offer then show us - there are plenty of cross-platform Pro apps to compare). If you can't contemplate Windows or Linux as an alternative then maybe the Mac Pro is for you - but only by virtue of being the only choice.

DaVinci Resolve and Windows 10 is my only other consideration for video...Premiere CC and Windows is not. Audio for me is Logic Pro X. Audacity is popular, but I hate it, same with Reaper, incredibly powerful, but the UI is a mess. Yes, I know there are a crap ton of other Audio packages on Windows, but I just don't have the time or patience right now.

Linux is just not a consideration in any form or fashion. I have zero desire to spend time configuring basic functionality in Linux to capture audio. It's not cool, its not neat, it's a complete and absolute waste of my billable time and I while I applaud Linux on the back end, it's never going on my desktop. 20 years ago I had that sort of time and desire to fiddle with config files and watch crap magically spring to life...now, not so much.

If I outstrip my Core i9 iMac, I won't hesitate to buy a Mac Pro, although I have other strategies that may work better for me from a scale up incrementally instead a taking a big leap...who knows what the future will hold.

Bottom line, if I have a choice, I'm using iOS first for the day to day tasks, and scaling up my usage as iPadOS gets better, and relegating macOS to those heavy lifting tasks. I know Windows and Linux are better than they used to be, but I just don't want to waste my time with them. It's not a matter of being ignorant of the alternatives, it's a matter of having worked with all three and knowing which one I have the best synergy with on a day in/day out basis. Windows and Premiere ain't it. Linux, any flavor ain't it.Yes, I know that severely limits my flexibility, but for me macOS simply gets the way I work and I get how it works. There is a limit to how much I will pay Apple to stay on their platform, but they absolutely know the limits and add about 15%. One day, they may regret it, or not. Time will tell.

Cost is huge factor in my decisions, but larger than that is my time and my sanity. Windows and Linux offer nothing and want everything, so I stay away and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.