Thank you for the kind reply, I didn’t think of those requirements, still it seems a little excessive, but it would be rather fun to see a render farm or server farm full of them I have to say! Although I suspect the target market is video and photo editing suits or music production, it would fit in well with other audio equipment in a rack.I agree, or at the very least send it back to Apple for a discount, or when you buy it at a retail store (if they even have it in stock) allow them to recycle it for a discount.
When I worked at an Apple retail store we had to fight customers who wanted custom configurations of the PowerMac and MacPro but were charged for BOTH the standard hardware and upgrades.
We kept telling them to order it online but a lot of them didn't understand why we didn't just take the component out and keep it.
Reminds me of the PowerMac G5 mailboxes.
Not too many, but there are some who will get this and try their best to us the Mac OS X "Server" plugin/firmware addon that Apple sells.
I'm just glad that the 9 year wait for a tru rack mountable Mac Pro is over.
The case has been changed a great deal from the picture alone. I'm sure there's more internally that's been adjusted. If we think of the current Mac Pro turned on it's side we can imagine the top Thunderbolt ports being removed or moved. The handle to open the case is gone. The fans need to be adjusted (heat rises) and a technician won't be able to access the "under side" of the case while it's in a rack.
Same here, and I was going to disagree with him at first but after reading your post both of you are correct.
Although, price wise it's still very inline with mid to high end server offerings from Boxx and Dell and HP.
You can, but there's no reason to buy the rack version and not put it in a rack.
It will be closed, but Apple is showing how the internals have been adjusted to have it make sense inside of a rack.
Did I miss something? It’s a $500 delta, not $1,000. One could still ask why, but it’s a smaller volume config aimed at a less price sensitive buyer. It’s typical with rack mount options.Forgive me please, but I’m struggling to see why Apple are charging a thousand dollars extra for a different case? Can anyone enlighten me as to the reason?
You mean $500 more? I would guess because they expect to sell fewer machines in this configuration, so recovering the design cost will cover part of the price difference and the inclusion of rails, covers the rest.Forgive me please, but I’m struggling to see why Apple are charging a thousand dollars extra for a different case? Can anyone enlighten me as to the reason?
...but (as you say yourself) "Unix" software runs pretty much identically on Linux - where Linux/Unix software falls down is on graphical/interactive apps, esp. "big name" ones. The real advantage of Mac is the combination of Unix with MacOS' UI and range of graphical desktop applications (MS, ProTools, FCPX, Logic, Adobe CS etc.) - which is why MacBooks are so good for "full stack" web development. If you're only going to use it as a headless server running "backend" software, the MacOS advantage goes away and you might as well get any old generic PC server to lock away in your machine room.The true power of a Mac is not in the user interface, but at the command line, same as Linux. A whole world of software is available for installation easily via package managers, just like in the Linux world. Homebrew (brew.sh) and MacPorts (www.macports.org) are the two most popular sources of such software.
Did I miss something? It’s a $500 delta, not $1,000. One could still ask why, but it’s a smaller volume config aimed at a less price sensitive buyer. It’s typical with rack mount options.
Yes, for some reason I thought the Mac Pro started at 5499, that helps to explain the difference then.You mean $500 more? I would guess because they expect to sell fewer machines in this configuration, so recovering the design cost will cover part of the price difference and the inclusion of rails, covers the rest.
Exactly. This is definitely not “the next Xserve” because... well, it’s a Mac Pro:It is still a workstation, not a server. I think this is more about mounting it alongside video/audio studio equipment than turning it into a server/high-density computing device.
Pardon my stupidity but how would that work? Don’t you need to output video SOMEHOW if only to set things up at first to be headless/etc.
For system management purposes , you can use an USB video adapter output or USB SideCar . No GPU required . Or just connect this Mac to a network connection , as expected .Xeon chips have no iGPU - last i knew. So it would to have some graphics card.
A lot of modern PC server and workstation logic boards have VGA output for system management purposes ( ie access BIOS screens ) . The last time an Apple workstation had VGA was the PMG4 ( year 2002 ) .That isn't a stupid question. A lot (maybe most) server motherboards have on-board graphics. On-board graphics is generally CPU dependent. I don't think the Xeon W supports it. Might be wrong, as I haven't used them personally, but a quick review of intel's spec page suggests I am correct.
Screen sharing requires both server and client to have a something of a video chip. The video is generated on the server before being sent over the network to the client. You could use remote access without video (over CLI or sth) to configure these Mac Pros, however (but I guess Apple does not want to support this as it makes diagnostics / troubleshooting a little tricky).
I question the form factor. A lot of rack space is wasted if machine's layout not optimized for the rack. This looks like 6U or so. Understand investment in redesign and volume may not warrant such a step, but is cooling still effective by turning machine sideways? Mare labels read top to bottom v. left to right?
Apple today released the rack mount version of the Mac Pro, offering a design that is suited to a rack configuration. Priced starting at $6,499, the rack mount Mac Pro features all of the same configuration options as the standard Mac Pro.
Rather than feet or wheels, the rack mount version of the Mac Pro uses stainless steel slide rails that allow it to be slotted into a rack. The machine features the same 3D lattice design for maximizing airflow and top handles for accessing the internals.
The base model of the rack mount Mac Pro is the same as the base model standard Mac Pro featuring a 3.5GHz 8-core Intel Xeon W processor, 32GB RAM, and 256GB of storage.
Article Link: Rack Mount Mac Pro Now Available for Purchase Starting at $6,499
If you buy the same thing in a PC workstation, they simply give you the desktop case and rails. Unlike Apple, they designed their deskside cases to be under 19 inches tall. Those generally end up 6-8 U.I agree. I dug around in the various pages and it is indeed 5U. A bit on the thick side.
Because no one would pay for a Mac to run Linux. The benefit of these machines is the ecosystem. If one is not interested in that, then these are not the right machines.
Single OS, nope.. but multi boot a Mac and ... they would.Because no one would pay for a Mac to run Linux.
I have priced them, and I said they were similar priced plus the Apple tax. But the Mac Pro is not a Dell, I’m assuming it has extremely high build quality, exceptional cooling that keeps it quiet, the T2 chip for security and MacOS.Have you actually priced one out yourself, or just reiterating what you read somewhere because a Dell Precision 7920 Rack @ $6400 gets you this:
Seems like you get WAY MORE for the same money @ Dell. Granted, the 7920 may or may not be able to handle $50K worth of additional graphics and memory, but as a base model, the 7920 outperforms the Mac Pro handily. The SATA drive in the Dell sucks, but $300 gets you a PCI-e adapter and a 2TB NVMe SSD.
- Intel Xeon Gold 6230 2.1GHz, 3.9GHz Turbo, 20C, 10.4GT/s 3UPI, 27.5MB Cache, HT
- Windows® 10 Pro for Workstation (4 Cores Plus) Multi - English
- Nvidia Quadro RTX 4000, 8GB, 3DP, VirtualLink (7920R)
- 48GB 6x8GB DDR4 2666MHz RDIMM ECC Memory
- 2.5" 512GB SATA Class 20 Solid State Drive