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.
The 'Trashcan' Mac Pro: Remembering One of Apple's Most Controversial Designs Nine Years Later
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I stumbled upon the "half-brick" form factor ASB75US12 and never looked back. Originally I was going to use a laptop charger + DC buck converter in the bottom of the Mac Pro's housing but I'm really happy I didn't go that route.
I also know from experience that this $11 power supply on Amazon also works, though there's something to be said about powering a ~$900 board with an $11 PSU. 😅
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, MacRumors earns a commission from qualifying purchases made through links in this post.
I was one of those for whom the product was perfect.
From my PowerMac 7200 to my current nMP, I've never added a card. Once I changed out the graphics card on a PowerMac G5.
My nMP is still going - 32GB and dual FirePro D700s...
I always liked the design. It reminded me of space age design from Silicon Graphics.
I was lucky enough, that on one of my previous work locations, my boss gave me the one I used as a good bye present when I resigned.
I have upgraded the ram on that one to 128gb. I use it as a Docker server and it works great!
I was lucky enough, that on one of my previous work locations, my boss gave me the one I used as a good bye present when I resigned.
I have upgraded the ram on that one to 128gb. I use it as a Docker server and it works great!
In other words: The best Pro device Apple had to offer at that time had the same ability as any run-of-the-mill desktop PC? Even worse, unless you have that adapter you can't switch out the SSD (I still have that original Sintech adapter but it isn't readily and cheaply available anymore) and the whooping SIX ports were always limited in terms of what the graphics cards from 2013 could do (in a desktop PC at least I can throw in any regular or low profile card and get 4k 120Hz easily) and barely any peripherals were ever released for TB2.
Only with the same processors that Apple sold. They were standard Intel CPUs. So you can buy the 12 core E5-2697 v2 on Ebay and it will work just fine, but you can never upgrade beyond that old Ivy Bridge generation.
They could have offered at least a single graphics card upgrade module in one of the years after to enable use of all standard 4k screens at 60Hz (or better 120Hz at least), and even a slightly reduced clockspeed gpu from 2015, 2016 or 2017 would have outperformed the old chips easily. It's not just about the raw speeds, you can make use of more VRAM without impact to thermals, instead of those measily 3GiB per card a WX 5100 would have offered 8GiB on a single card, and it would probably have been possible to take a higher end model with even more VRAM and adapt the clocks to suit the Mac.
The iMac Pro had those horrible and very hot running Vegas, and the Vega 64 came with 16GiB of RAM in 2017. So it is perfectly doable to have such power hungry cards in smaller form factors.
Apple must have certainly given the trashPro some headroom for upgrade modules (which I really think is the case since the fan stays quiet most of the time even under more intense loads, so it's not like the fan was already running at max speed all the time). They just chose not to bother. Just buy the new Pro.
No. Apple never bothered with any upgrades.
And how are you supposed to use them in the Pro from 2013? That is entirely incompatible.
I still appreciate the design but Apple did fail to consider how the design would impact customers who needed the expansion the 'cheese-grater' Mac Pro offered.
The Apple ecosystem was broken. I was working at a place that literally moved away from Apple products for this reason and replaced aging Mac Pros with HP Zseries workstations. Once that happened, as phones and tablets came due for replacement they were replaced with non-Apple products.
The Apple ecosystem was broken. I was working at a place that literally moved away from Apple products for this reason and replaced aging Mac Pros with HP Zseries workstations. Once that happened, as phones and tablets came due for replacement they were replaced with non-Apple products.
Last edited:
Pop an M-series chip in this seriously cool enclosure, replace old Thunderbolt ports with USB-C Thunderbolt ports, and I would buy one of these today.
Agreed. Imagine if Apple released the Mac Studio form factor as the new Mac Pro 7,1 in 2019, people would be proclaiming “Trashcan, Again!” (or if they put a ridge around the top of the Mac Studio it could have been nicknamed the “Dumpster” for when you have more **** to get done than a trashcan can handle). But it was not positioned as a Mac Pro and it had a logical place in the product lineup. Imagine if back in 2013 a Mac Pro 5,2 upgrade with slots was launch next to the 6,1 with the 6,1 target at specific workloads or as a “Beyond Beige: The Fine Art of Creativity” etc marketed as a unique entry level workstation it may have been received much more positively. Of course, that wouldn’t solve the “thermal corner” Apple painted itself into with the 6,1 but then again, Apple would probably have been able to offer more modest upgrades for the 6,1 during its lifetime without the fear of huge blowback from the workstation community if it wasn’t the only “workstation” from Apple. Just as Porsche didn’t introduce the Boxer as the spiritual and literal successor to the 911, I feel marketing as much (or more) as product dev let Apple and the 6,1 down.
With all that said, long live the Trashcan!
At the time, I was in the market for one, but the thought that their solution was to sell us a chip with spectacularly expensive memory and drive space so overpriced it was practically interstellar, and then leave us to buy more storage that should have been in the machine and connect it all with a tangle of cables all over our desks, just seemed like Ive had lost his damn mind and turned on the “sleek and beautiful“ aesthetic Apple had been building all along. The iMac Pro seemed like a step in the right direction after this, but then they even dropped the ball upgrading that, and the next spec bump of the plain jane iMac spanked both of these things. Still, if you needed a modular headless system, these are pretty slick. Sort of like a Mac Mini Pro. They were popular enough to open a second production line here in the US, so that’s something.
I absolutely loved this design. I wasn't much impacted by what others saw as limitations. It was a high performance appliance with an aesthetic that deserved to be on top of the desk.
I daily drive a top spec 2013 Mac Pro. It's one of the least problematic Macs I've ever owned and has been upgraded about as far as I can push it. Come to think of it - its the ONLY Mac I've had since the PPC era that hasn't been problematic with random monitors. Ever monitor I've ever tried on it has aways just worked and done so consistently.
Worst would be the 2006 iMac or 2017 Macbook Pro 15".
Worst would be the 2006 iMac or 2017 Macbook Pro 15".
I'm not sure I'd call either a valid comparison.
Yes they are all Macs but the iMac and laptop have completely different hardware structures. Is it really right to compare a computer with no screen against one that has the possibility of a failure of the screen and associated components?
Interestingly, what upgrades did you manage to do?
The thermal's design of the trash can R2D2 Mac Pro is clearly superior to the Mac Studio: the Mac Studio has no natural vertical venting, with all air flow forced by fan out the side. This is in stark contrast to the Mac Pro with its brilliant vertical air displacement. It makes a mockery of Apple's claims that they discontinued the model due to thermal limitations, because the thermal limitations of the Mac Studio are worse. The Mac Pro would be a natural fit for an M2 processor.
CPU and storage are upgraded beyond what was avalible through Apple. Arrived already configured with the D700 and maxed out RAM - not my choice on the RAM, it's all they had ready to go at the time.
Ahem the Boxster originally was planned as the 911’s replacement as was the 928, saner minds at Prache did prevail.
Apple’s seemingly had a fairly recent history of releasing machines that are both expensive and far out in terms of design.
It all started with:
The T.A.M. Twentieth Anniversary Mac (Ive)
- first desktop PC to have LCD screen,
- first to have a CD Player (I think?),
- first to have a trackpad vs a mouse and it extended,
- first to include hI-End speakers and subwoofer from the PC manufacturer (Apple learned a whole lot here from Bose).
Extremely expensive and those that bought it had it delivered by limousine and personal tech install and setup in the USA. Nice premium customer touch.
Power Mac G4 Cube
- square design much loved but terrible choice of material in using Poly-Carbonate for the putter case had production issues of cracks so pulled from production in just 1 year.
Mac Pro 2013
Cylindrical design and heat limitations. This oddly enough seems to have a better welcome in the later years of its lifespan?
This could’ve been the hammer that dropped pushing Apple to their own silicon. Makes you wonder if Schiller’s famous quote was intended 8yrs into the future. But he was still right Apple can, does, and still innovates!!
iMac Pro.
Well received due to giving it proper hardware engineering room to be done right! Function led design not the other way around.
I think the real blame is Apple and ATI/AMD for soldering the video card to the motherboard. If I’m correct this sealed the cans fait.
I’m on the fence buying a used model with D300, 6-core Xeon 256GB storage, and 32GB ram for $500 CAN or wait for another month n get an M1 or hold out for a base Studio + 1TB storage or a MBP M1Pro 14”.
Judos, I bought one, (which I sent back almost immediately), but would have gone the same route had I kept it. Have a 2010 5,1 still in my portfolio and I think it's the best value Mac I've had.
