Poll: How should the next Mac Pro be upgradeable/expandable?

[ActionableMango]

Phil Schiller:

We’ve asked the team to go and re-architect and design something great for the future that those Mac Pro customers who want more expandability, more upgradability in the future. It’ll meet more of those needs.​

I realize some of the options are not realistic. But this isn't about predictions, it's about what you personally would like to see them make for the next Mac Pro.

 

[Prince134]

5.1ish is all you want. Don't regret if you don't get this much high level of machenical design. Plus plenty of what you wish to have it upgraded in the future.

 

[Auggie]

I'm kinda torn about this. I had the first generation cheese grater in the form of a dually-G5 and I've been enamored with this design aesthetic and clean internal layout ever since, having moved to a 1,1, a 3,1 and now the 5,1.

But I'm curious if Apple can begin fresh with something completely new but retaining all the upgradeability, internal expansion, and accessibility. Let's be real here: the only "generic" internal interchangeability with "PC" parts is the SATA ports, RAM, CPU's, 5-1/4" optical bays, and PCIe slots. Maybe the fans could be swapped out for aftermarket ones. But everything else is proprietary Apple.

After 14 years, I just think it's time for something "different" (but not "different" like the nMP).

 

[William Payne]

I just think it's time for something "different" (but not "different" like the nMP).

It's funny you say this as I feel boredom is the biggest issue in the tech world today.

People want different because they are bored. When the new MacBook Pro came out it got trashed regarding its hardware specs. Yet people loved the surface studio which when you read the specs has very similar hardware.

But the surface studio had a fancy Wacom style movable touch screen with a pen, it was something new and something different where the MacBook Pro was just another laptop.

 

[Auggie]

There's essentially two types of "changes:" 1) changes made for the sake of "change," and 2) evolutionary or revolutionary change.

I should clarify I only support the latter. If Apple cannot improve upon the cMP, then fine. As all designers should aspire to expand the envelope, but they should be grounded in reality. There must always a be a counter-balance to keep the project in perspective. There apparently was no such counter-balance for the nMP project.

And the MacBook Pros as well. I personally am not a fan of the new MacBook Pros and their limited upgradeability (non-replacable RAM and drive? Really?), especially the elimination of USB-A ports and the MagSafe power cable.

When Stevie killed off the floppy, the industry was already moving towards CD's as content was exploding in size. The ADB port was all Apple but the industry was adopting USB, so it made sense for the switch since the only ADB devices were essentially keyboards, mice, and printers (which undergo periodic replacement anyways). Going Intel was inevitable as the G5 processors were unable to keep up, both clock-wise as well as thermal-wise.

Even though USB-C is certainly the wave of the future, there are just too many out there and a wide range of different types of perfectly functional USB-A/B/Micro devices that work just fine, including the ubiquitous portable flash drive that the vast majority of us use daily. Overnight, Apple essentially relegated all our existing USB-A devices, including Apple's own iPads and iPhones, no longer connectable to the new MacBooks without hideous adapters or brand new cables. My USB flash drives from almost 10 years ago are still working just fine and useful.

 

[William Payne]

There's essentially two types of "changes:" 1) changes made for the sake of "change," and 2) evolutionary or revolutionary change.

I should clarify I only support the latter. If Apple cannot improve upon the cMP, then fine. As all designers should aspire to expand the envelope, but they should be grounded in reality. There must always a be a counter-balance to keep the project in perspective. There apparently was no such counter-balance for the nMP project.

I personally am not a fan of the new MacBook Pros and their limited upgradeability (non-replacable RAM and drive? Really?), especially the elimination of USB A ports and the MagSafe power cable.

When Stevie killed off the floppy, the industry was already moving towards CD's as content was exploding in size. The ADB port was all Apple but the industry was adopting USB, so it made sense for the switch since the only ADB devices were essentially keyboards, mice, and printers (which undergo periodic replacement anyways). Going Intel was inevitable as the G5 processors were unable to keep up, both clock-wise as well as thermal-wise.

Even though USB-C is certainly the wave of the future, there are just too many and a wide range of different types of perfectly functional USB-A/B/Micro devices that work just fine, including the ubiquitous portable flash drive that the vast majority of us use daily. Overnight, Apple essentially relegated all our existing USB-A devices, including Apple's own iPads and iPhones, no longer connectable to the new MacBooks without hideous adapters. My USB flash drives from almost 10 years ago are still working just fine and useful.

I am sorry but I can't relate. I do now and then use a portable flash drive but I honestly can't remember when the last time was that I used one.

My opinion on USB-c is if it's a cable attached device then I'll just buy cables that plug into USB-c. If I have to buy an adapter then oh well it is not the end of the world.

In my word cables tend to become replaceable items after a while. I have to buy new iPhone charging cables every few months. Though I'm getting good mileage out of these new heavy duty belkin cables.

In case you didn't notice. I kill cables.

 

[kwikdeth]

i'd like a somewhat expandable machine, with both internal expansion (PCIe, M2 or U2 support) and also fast external peripherals, thunderbolt 3, USB3.1, etc. Said it before, saying it again: Thunderbolt complements PCIe, its not meant to be an either/or proposition.

 

[flat five]

for sake of discussion..

are you basically asking about the following components:
• RAM
• GPU
• CPU
• SSD
?

and if so, we're all pretty agreeable that they'll be using industry standard CPU and RAM, right?
the ssd might not be industry standard per se but i'd definitely imagine it will be apple standard (or- used in computers other than mMP)

but, we're basically only talking about GPU.. is that right?

-----
if so, that makes the question a little tricky to answer.. because for a lot of the parts, considering all of the various parts in a computer, i hope they'll be customized apple stuff.. (fans, W1 chip, maybe some version of T1 onboard display?, various boards and brackets and chassis etc.

idk, i guess i'll answer D) Custom since as a whole, i'd like to see a mostly customized computer.


----
that said, i realize this mostly misses the point of your question.
in which case, my vote is some 6,1 and some 5,1

 

[aaronhead14]

The second option. I want to be buying a Mac, not a PC. But I also want to be able to add my own industry-standard parts. It needs plenty of PCI-e slots and M.2, upgradeable RAM, upgradeable CPU, upgradeable GPU (via said PCI-e slots). It also needs a couple older standard connectors, such as USB-A and Thunderbolt 2. (Yes, I'm a forward-thinker and believe in USB-C/Thunderbolt 3; but I also don't want/need to upgrade some hardware that I already have, and I hate dongles because they make a mess of my desk). I figure with a Pro product, there's no reason to not make room for those ports. Also, full support for 3rd-party monitors WITH boot screen.

 

[flat five]

T The ADB port was all Apple but the industry was adopting USB, so it made sense for the switch since the only ADB devices were essentially keyboards, mice, and printers (which undergo periodic replacement anyways).

i think this went down slightly differently:

USB wiki:
Apple Inc.'s iMac was the first mainstream product with USB and the iMac's success popularized USB itself.[15] Following Apple's design decision to remove all legacy ports from the iMac, many PC manufacturers began building legacy-free PCs, which led to the broader PC market using USB as a standard.​

or, comparing to past actions, apple's decision to go USB-C only on the latest MBP is less radical than what they did with USB-A and the imac.
currently, there are at least some other companies already using USB-C... when the iMac ditched legacy ports for USB, there were no other companies using it.
(iiuc)

 

[Nermal]

when the iMac ditched legacy ports for USB, there were no other companies using it.
(iiuc)

USB had been available on Windows machines for about a year at that point, but it wasn't very popular. It'd be more accurate to say that few (rather than no) companies used it.

 

[FireArse]

The G5 and cMP were designed to be 'Workstations'. They had tremendous flexibility and this is shown by the fact that I'm writing this on a 2006 Mac Pro, which has been upgraded to run 10.11.6. The MP 4,1 should last even longer because it's I/O is managing with the tasks of today (you can put a 1080 in there..)

Next-Gen Mac Pro is required to support all the I/O that a 'Pro' requires in 2018 (and beyond), together with support for perhaps 2+ CPU and 3-4 GPU.

That HP z840 Workstation sure does look good - they look better in the flesh - in fact a colleague designs rail layouts on one.

 

[AidenShaw]

USB had been available on Windows machines for about a year at that point, but it wasn't very popular. It'd be more accurate to say that few (rather than no) companies used it.

It was fairly common on PCs, but it wasn't until Windows 98 that there was solid OS support for USB. Once the OS support arrived, usage took off rather quickly.

Note that Windows 98 and the space egg iMac arrived at about the same time.... Since the iMac had only USB, many translucent plastic devices were plugged into PCs.

 

[linuxcooldude]

It's funny you say this as I feel boredom is the biggest issue in the tech world today.

People want different because they are bored. When the new MacBook Pro came out it got trashed regarding its hardware specs. Yet people loved the surface studio which when you read the specs has very similar hardware.

But the surface studio had a fancy Wacom style movable touch screen with a pen, it was something new and something different where the MacBook Pro was just another laptop.

Seen exactly the same thing. They praised the Surface Studio but had trouble running even Lightroom.

The new MacBook Pro was underpowered yet many pros were using it for their everyday jobs editing 5K:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/thomas-grove-carter/one-professionals-look-at_b_12894856.html

 

[mattspace]

the box of slots workstation paradigm has evolved the way it has, because it suits the tasks a workstation has to do - a huge variety, each of them specialised, and each different enough, and with a small enough market, that dedicated machines aren't economical, and in which reconfigurability during the machine's service life is its primary feature.

People wanting to "redesign" or "redefine" the Workstation strike me as the sort of people who think they could design a better tiger, or white pointer shark, if only they could get people to think afresh about what an ambush predator is...

"sure, it's been the apex predator for millions of years, but see, we had this idea..."

 

[flat five]

The G5 and cMP were designed to be 'Workstations'

but that's back when 'workstations' was a less blurry term.
(though the fact that G5 and cMP were considered 'workstation computers' was already beginning to blur lines with regards to original workstations.. G5/cMP were, after all, personal computers)

idk, i'll be slightly surprised if apple uses the term workstation in mMP marketing.


---
(not meant as an argument or opposition to what you said.. i'm off on a tangent is all)
[doublepost=1496564084][/doublepost]

the box of slots workstation paradigm has evolved the way it has, because it suits the tasks a workstation has to do - a huge variety, each of them specialised, and each different enough, and with a small enough market, that dedicated machines aren't economical, and in which reconfigurability during the machine's service life is its primary feature.

People wanting to "redesign" or "redefine" the Workstation strike me as the sort of people who think they could design a better tiger, or white pointer shark, if only they could get people to think afresh about what an ambush predator is...

"sure, it's been the apex predator for millions of years, but see, we had this idea..."

for fun..
looking into the future, how long do you suppose box-with-slots will be around? if not forever, then what's going to replace it? will it be a complete&sudden paradigm shift in computing?
or an evolution of the computer?

and speaking of evolution:

"the box of slots workstation paradigm has evolved the way it has..."
​

i don't think it's evolved at all.. it's the same thing as the first one that was 'designed'.. which was very likely a box because that was easiest and cheapest and manufacturable on a large scale at that time.. the box wasn't picked because it was thoroughly tested and proven to be the optimal enclosure to house computer components.. like, it wasn't even thought of at all..
i don't think people are wanting to redesign the workstation.. they're simply wanting to design it since thats been pretty much neglected since forever.


-------
edit

presented another way: the first things are likely to be boxes.. once the initial technology is worked out, the boxes can then become the focus and very often, the box is abandoned because other forms are found to be more effective, efficient, and yes, even more stylish..
the computer will go through this same thing (well, it already is.. pretty far into the process actually.. but it will happen to 'workstations' too)

car? box on wheels:


tv? box with dials (floor mount )


radio? box with dials



phone? box with weird stuff on it.




etc

 

[mattspace]

for fun..
looking into the future, how long do you suppose box-with-slots will be around?

I suspect the companies who are invested in the slot-based paradigm represent a large enough part of the computing economy, that they have more ability to control the future of computing than Apple does. For most PC and workstation vendors, the slot paradigm has no downside.

"I just wish this computer was less flexible, cost more and had to be thrown out the moment the fastest evolving component becomes obsolete", said noone ever. It remains one of Apple's greatest weaknesses, that they attribute to their success, aspects of their products which people merely tolerate.

Personally, I think slots should be THE paradigm of workstations going forward. If a 4x pci slot is effectively "good enough" for all expansion via thunderbolt, then 16x pci2 are still good enough for, what, a decade or more (the 2009 is 2 years off).

build a 6 or 8 slot spine, and then put whatever you want on them, cpus, gpus, various types of io, whatever. point being that interconnect progress over the last 8 or so years has been so minimal, that upgrading components plugged into that interconnect pretty much shows that the interconnect improvements are at best the margin for error in any testing.

 

[William Payne]

looking into the future, how long do you suppose box-with-slots will be around? i

Based on what keeps getting released at nearly every tech show, a long time yet. Every show its bigger cases with more slots, more of everything.

For example at computex right now, custom prototypes like this

 

[mattspace]

i don't think people are wanting to redesign the workstation.. they're simply wanting to design it since thats been pretty much neglected since forever.

The height of hubris, is to think you can design a solution from scratch, that's better in use, in the real world, than something which a massive process has arrived at from trial, error and correction. Apple's biggest problems stem from decisions being made by people who are, basically, detached from reality as it's experienced by most of the rest of humanity.

Case in point - the Maps fiasco, which should be a central case study for any business school - Cupertino was well mapped in their system, and noone considered the possibility that it working well where they lived and worked was in any way atypical.

 

[flat five]

Based on what keeps getting released at nearly every tech show, a long time yet. Every show its bigger cases with more slots, more of everything.

For example at computex right now, custom prototypes like this

"..the utter scale of this freaking monstrosity. Look at it! This thing is one hundred and twwentty liters of volume.. of puure enthusiast grade PC goodness"

lol.. probably couldn't of said it better myself
[doublepost=1496569968][/doublepost]

I suspect the companies who are invested in the slot-based paradigm represent a large enough part of the computing economy, that they have more ability to control the future of computing than Apple does. For most PC and workstation vendors, the slot paradigm has no downside.

hmm..
not talking apple vs pc..
or apple
or PC

---
i'm pretty sure i won't be able to communicate my thoughts accurately if that's the level the discussion is on.




-----

----

-------

For example at computex right now, custom prototypes like this

i knew i recognized that guy from somewhere!
finally remembered:

 

[mattspace]

Just to point out since you mentioned cars, the Ford f150 is the biggest selling car in America. In Australia it's what is basically the equivalent, the Toyota Hilux. Still effectively boxes on wheels, whose primary design feature, is a blank cargo tray that can be user configured, adapted and reconfigured to have any combination of storage and tools put into it.

They're vehicles made for work, and the reason they're used for work is that individual users can configure and reconfigure them, not the car company.

 

[William Payne]

"..the utter scale of this freaking monstrosity. Look at it! This thing is one hundred and twwentty liters of volume.. of puure enthusiast grade PC goodness"

lol.. probably couldn't of said it better myself
[doublepost=1496569968][/doublepost]
hmm..
not talking apple vs pc..
or apple
or PC

---
i'm pretty sure i won't be able to communicate my thoughts accurately if that's the level the discussion is on.




-----

----

-------



i knew i recognized that guy from somewhere!
finally remembered:

View attachment 702047

Hahaha oh man that is funny. I have got to send that to them on twitter.

 

[m4v3r1ck]

The days of the 6,1 form factor are a long way behind us now. Let's hope for the "Apple will make the Mac Pro GREAT again!" quote at the upcoming WWDC!

 

[Simon R.]

The days of the 6,1 form factor are a long way behind us now. Let's hope for the "Apple will make the Mac Pro GREAT again!" quote at the upcoming WWDC!

Obviously, there won't be any talk about the new Mac Pro at this years WWDC. But perhaps you mean 2018 which is more likely.

 

[scoobs69]

I am sorry but I can't relate. I do now and then use a portable flash drive but I honestly can't remember when the last time was that I used one.

My opinion on USB-c is if it's a cable attached device then I'll just buy cables that plug into USB-c. If I have to buy an adapter then oh well it is not the end of the world.

In my word cables tend to become replaceable items after a while. I have to buy new iPhone charging cables every few months. Though I'm getting good mileage out of these new heavy duty belkin cables.

In case you didn't notice. I kill cables.

What the hell are you doing to your cables that warrant replacing every few months? Egads, I'm still using my original iPhone 5 cables with my iPhone 6s. LOL