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.
People Who Complain About the New Mac Pro Misunderstand It
- Thread starter Radiating
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
GermanyChris
macrumors 601
Right, so cost shifting is OK, How much do you think it cost Apple to add 8 DIMM slots to the old MP? never mind that fact that many DP machines have 16 DIMM slots.
Those that want fiber already have the card, I notice you left out SAS.
Except I don't believe your benchmark because I also hang out in a non-Apple world and have seen benchmarks that prove otherwise and it's still only windows. I've also yet to see a TB box w/ 6 inputs that would actually give me 24 real lanes
Sure it can as long as it's all external which is unacceptable. You don't seem to understand that that in its self is a deal breaker.
The new Mac Pro is the first high end workstation that has ever been made that you can take with you in carryon luggage. That's a big deal. Everything is a trade off, Apple decided to trade form factor for the upgrade cost of the RAM at the extreme high end (128GB), they weren't being too cheap to add extra RAM slots, they needed the space to acheive other design goals.
I'm sure the resale value would be pretty good on a fiber chanel card, regarding SAS, yes the price is $600 vs $300 with thunderbolt, but this is backwards thinking. Thunderbolt interfaces are NOT inherently expensive, they are simply marked up. This is like complaining about how USB devices are marked up too much and trying to stick with paralell ports at the turn of the millenium. A few years from now this argument will be beyond laughable. Apple said they built the Mac Pro with an eye to the future.
Every single benchmark of the dozens I have seen says the same thing. There is around a 5-15% performance hit. If you've seen benchmarks that show otherwise feel free to post them because they would be way out of line with everything else done by various reviewers and I'd be very interested in learning about them.
I will agree that thunderbolt development could improve, especially on the speed side, but I don't think anyone is questioning IF anybody will get around it it, just when and how expensive it will be, and how quickly it will come down in price.
If external bothers you that much, then I propose this solution:
This is such a stupid thing to say and its parroted all over these boards. People with big computational needs still have budgets. And even if you don't, why would you want to spend 4x as much on RAM, just because they give you 1/2 the slots.....?
Well, its is going to be using some 3 years newer tech. So, that's not really saying whole lot. The thing it really needs to compete with are other new computers. Ie, the HP z420/620/820.
As many people have outlined on these boards, much will come down to price, since all expansion/upgrade have now been made more expensive over traditional form factors. If the base is around $2000 or less, it will work very well for many people. If its $2500 or greater, I believe you're going to see some serious backlash, sluggish sales, and no 2015 version.
----------
I don't think many people want their workstation to be portable. And the idea of portability take a big hit once you realize you also have to lug around all those externals.
I'm sorry, the goal of making a workstation maybe an inch smaller in diameter (since this thing is cylindrical), when chance are you're going to move this thing only a handfull of times in its whole life? HUH?
Thunderbolt is not that new anymore. Until its more widely adopted (ie its on most windows machines), prices will still be high. So, don't hold your breath for prices coming down. It will probably be replaced before costs come down significantly.
While your drives and expansion chassis sit in your checked luggage below.
That joke wasn't funny the other 5 times you posted it.
Look, I'm not even against the new Mac Pro. I can assess the pros/cons and will make a decision once we see pricing and real world benchmarks. But the sycophantic attitude coming from a lot of the defenders gets tiresome, especially those trying to project their needs/wants onto others. This new machine will not work for some users. It will for others. Whether or not this pays off for Apple or customers in the long run won't be known for some time.
Seems like there's a lot of assumptions here that my bean counters probably won't buy?
Other peoples experiences with Thunderbolt doesn't seem to jive with yours. Are they (we) all technically incompetent? Things go on in those chips that they have tried to make totally "transparent" but alas, in real usage not all things worked as expected (though I admit they are getting better). I have yet to see anyone running to implement thunderbolt except in a few mobile applications (I'm not talking about software applications here). Moreover, most of the workstations I've been scoping out have v3 PCIe; so, that is the comparison that one needs to use for benchmarks. Also, what about that 1 CPU thing you mentioned in your original post. The PCIe implementations I'm considering work with 2 CPUs (I could use more than 2 as the software stands right now).
There are too many people questioning this design for it to a "misunderstanding". But the truth is we won't REALLY know until Apple actually releases it, and the market will determine if this truly is the future for computing.
I'd like to see "real life" data to support these "facts". I, like most people, won't buy something for a kiss and a promise; although, I have heard that there is a fool born every minute.
(Sorry it seems I answered this without reading the rest of the post and I duplicated some sentiments…)
Last edited:
GermanyChris
macrumors 601
I don't want to take it with me, If I did checked baggage is fine it's a computer.
I care very little about the resale value of Fiber Cards, and yes SAS gets even lower than $300.
I don't need to post benchmarks you do, in OSX of course.
TB development is basically dead what you have is really what you're going to get no matter how bad Intel/Apple want it to be.
I shall ask again what new does this MP bring to the table? TB???
maflynn
macrumors Broadwell
What??
The last time I checked, most professionals care more horse power, and expandability and not whether it will fit in the over-head bin of a plane.
Since it lacks severely in the internal expandability where and how will the professional carry the external storage with them on the plane when they take their new Mac Pro with them.
I'm not getting the logic you're using to defend your position. The machine looks interesting, its a unique design but it also looks extremely expensive (read flash storage) but hamstrung with the lack of expansion.
OP, tell your bosses at Apple you tried but nobody was interested in warmed over dog poo, even when you called it chocolate cake.
And please show us how you connected a Titan via TB in OSX, should be interesting since nobody else can.
And please show us how you connected a Titan via TB in OSX, should be interesting since nobody else can.
Video cards only work when booted in windows for now, however you've got to be crazy if you think that this is going to be a long lasting limitation.
If Apple wanted to sell horsepower they would sell horsepower, instead they are selling last year's performance with some slight updates in a new form factor this is the first high end workstation that has a small form factor which may not make sense to a lot of people but it means you can use it in many more settings than you could the old machine. One of those settings is traveling creative professionals. They make a flight case for the old Mac Pro, it weighs 75 lbs and are the size of a freezer and I know people that carried a full sized computer on planes with them because they had to. Lugging around a flight case to 3 desitinations in a week because you have to edit in a hotel room is quite difficult.
The Mac Pro isn't hamstrung by expansion though. It's hamstrung by lack of support from the aftermarket industry, and poorly implemented hardware.
The biggest thing that needs to happen is that cheap flawless 15" PCIe expansion boxes need to show up and thunderbolt driver support needs to be improved. If I were Apple I would pay companies to make thunderbolt drivers and release my own 15" PCIe 500 watt expansion box for $200.
Last edited:
GermanyChris
macrumors 601
They are selling Ivy-E which isn't even out yet..
The biggest thing that needs to happen is they need to put crap back into the box even a $150 expansion box is too much..
You're right,
Thunderbolt expansion cards will always be twice the cost of everything else, and spending a few hundred bucks more is the end of the world.
Video cards don't work in OSX and they never will, all driver development for future technology has stopped forever.
Thunderbolt development is dead and nobody will ever do anything worthwhile with all it's potential.
The Mac Pro doesn't bring anything new to the table. Flexibility is wrong and nobody should ever want to have a machine that is physically and performance wise bigger or smaller than exactly what the old Mac Pro gave you.
Good points all around.
Try selling the Kool Aid with less sarcasm.
So, does Apple pay you bi-weekly or every month?
Yes, we do have budgets. The complaints seem to be largely from single person shops or those that may have had an interest but don't for reasons they list. I doubt many here use an app that requires 128GB RAM. At that point the cost of the memory, licensing whatever app requires that much memory and training costs will far outpace the initial hardware costs. Training is going to be the biggest cost for any complex app. Even if it's a single person shop and you only pay in your time, it's still opportunity cost for your time.
That's not even taking into account the business case of if one is doing commercial work that requires that sort of power then what is charged for the work should well be able to sustain a budget that can support the costs of the using this equipment. There is nothing stopping people from not upgrading either. As stated in a previous post we just retired the last of the G5s earlier this year and I still see purpose built, single app G4 and G5s working in the business. If your current toolset works and there is no compelling reason to upgrade it's a moot point.
Because it's ridiculous. People who criticize the Mac Pro are short sighted to the point where it is mind blowing. It's beyond comprehention to me that people can sit in the middle of a technological revolution and literally make claims like:
"The technology will NEVER improve"
"Prices will NEVER come down"
"NOBODY on earth needs this added flexibility"
"Nobody will EVER make software to support this new technology"
These sorts of viewpoints seem incredible to me considering the exact opposite has happened in every technological revolution in history. The technology did improve. Prices dropped like a stone. Flexibility revolutionized the industry (remember the invention of the laptop or mini ITX tower anyone?). And driver support always follows hardware support.
So I care because I am shocked that some people could think in such a self centered backwards looking way.
I don't doubt there is a need somewhere for some that travel with workstations. I've known it to happen from time to time. However in my experience most production out in the field relies on laptops that are more than suitable for rough cuts or the other kind of work done on the road. The vast majority of high end creative work is not mobile, nor does it need to be. So this smaller size does help out a select group of users, though I'm sure if you took a poll of all workstation users you'd find that an extremely low percentage would look for mobility as a defining feature, especially if it comes at the expense of internal expansion.
GermanyChris
macrumors 601
This proves you misunderstand or are not reading anything we say.
TB is to slow to be the only expansion option, as a nice side benefit it's great.
Prices do come down with market share, the MP isn't much of Apple market share and apple market share just isn't that great. Welcome back to Power without the benefits.
The new MP reduces flexibility by removing optical drives, internal SATA ports, PCI slots, and likely LGA sockets (though this is unknown) this is the epitome of reduced flexibility.
There is no new tech in this tube just new implementation of older tech, TB had it's debut in '10.
=================
Again why couldn't Apple have introduced the new tech that no none was clamoring for along side the old tech that people still use. Calling PCI-E v3 old is disingenuous.
Again what other then TB (which could very well have been implemented in the old chassis does the new MP bring to the table.
If Apache made Linux must have what makes the MP 6,1 must have?
This Mari that everyone keeps brining up was on Linux first and the will likely continue. So why buy Apple vs a DP RHEL box? Make a compelling business case why Apple is better.
You seem to be an Apple employee, tell me why I shouldn't build a Linux box and run my Apple only applications in virtual box,crossover, or PlayonLinux, I run Windows only applications in crossover on my Mac and it's just fine. I have Windows as a VM to hook to my work network and it works just fine why would the opposite not be true?
I'm a user/modifier tech is great I LOVE change, I dislike change that removes functionality.
Did you figure out a way to run the second CPU over Thunderbolt as well?
Otherwise it will be less than half as fast as it's competition from a CPU standpoint.
The last Mac Pro was updated in 2010. A machine that is, at best, equal from a CPU standpoint to it's predecessor and, at best, half as fast as competition is a non starter.
Bringing a more or less complete post room remote is becoming more common for us though I've yet to see any finishing work, besides perhaps reality TV, ENG or sports done on site. The last couple of 3D shoots we've done had Mac Pros for content acquisition from the cameras and proofing with a feature we were on setting up a complete post facility in a warehouse to produce dailies. In all those instances the gear comes in cases or racked and isn't carried as hand luggage. I suppose one could bring one as carry on though when I was touring we were trying to carry on only personal items and not production gear. That's what trucking companies and freight forwarders are for. 😉
GermanyChris
macrumors 601
That would be the 17" MacBook Pro, I can hook it to any camera you might have. I can record from tape as well as HDD no matter the obstacle I've got you. Edits, yea I've got a 48GB scratch disk that fits all nice an pretty in my express card slot.
stitch
I'm not an über pro, I cut and stitch interviews from one camera with one audio track onto DVD's. I edit training videos that vary from 5 Min. to 3 hours not muti-cam very little BR. If I'm in the field I'll just drop the footage on my MBP.
I create in Ps and Ai for most of my work but once or twice a year I create a new coin or whatever in AutoCAD.
Things are what they are, I cannot recommend a MP to replace my current iMac and PC I have now.
I'm a jobber shop, apple has left me wanting….
But, but, but render farms? 🙄
That being the all encompassing answer to the question from those that don't seem to have much knowledge of the entire production pipeline and why render farms aren't the be all end all solution.
In that case dual CPUs may make little difference since that application relies heavily on GPGPUs, and the new Mac Pro comes configured with two, and performed better than previous boxes for Mari specifically.