My guess is they drop the headphone jack. May or may not provide a usbX to headphone adapter in box.
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.
Tim Cook Says Apple is 'Very Committed' to the Mac and to 'Stay Tuned'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well my 12c 2010 mac pro with its recently installed gtx 980 can transcode huge files and fly through hd+ editing. Most of that kind of work requires fast storage, which, regardless of whether one has a new machine or not, costs quite a lot. With the "older" mac pros, a sas/mini sas (12 G) raid controller and a multiple bay enclosure can be much faster that TB. Besides, these machines can be upgraded in many ways by adding pcie cards and faster processors.
My guess is you'll get 2-3 USB-C/TB3 ports per side, an SDXC card reader and a handful of dongles.
As per link in my sig, I have been saving and waiting for over a year for the new iMac, staying tuned the best I can Tim. Gosh, renew more frequently please, so I dont' lose hope!
This trite response just shows how "on their heels" Apple is regarding the Mac and macOS.
If Tim loves the mac to bad he couldn't have had at least one slide in this week's keynote announcing the Sierra release date. Instead they just quietly updated the website with a release date. Although that was much better than the faux leaked email containing the release date for El Crap.... which was just a slap in the face to all the Apple Software engineers who work on it.
If Tim loves the mac to bad he couldn't have had at least one slide in this week's keynote announcing the Sierra release date. Instead they just quietly updated the website with a release date. Although that was much better than the faux leaked email containing the release date for El Crap.... which was just a slap in the face to all the Apple Software engineers who work on it.
Last edited:
I'm not sure I'd call it whining, but I'm certainly going to try and complain loudly and hopefully as a collective, we can get someone at Apple to have 2nd thoughts about the state of things.
Momentum.
And, it was hard-won over a long time of Apple putting user-experience as top priority. Apple didn't get fanatically loyal customers quickly, nor by doing a bad job. It won't last either, the way Apple is currently going.
Priceless! That explains so much.
In terms of hardware, kinda. Apple could have certainly been bumping up specs regularly, even if they don't do major redesigns. (And, the way things are going, maybe we should hope they don't do any major redesigns of the Mac lineup!)
But, the 'perfect storm' doesn't explain the degradation of Apple across the board. No, I think their core values have changed. All of these things are symptoms.
It just wasn't that big of a deal in the past. Apple had products that were superior enough that they provided a competitive advantage worth taking the risk. But, yes, things are different now.
Yep. It's a prosumer machine, and quite a nice one. But it isn't aimed at the pros.
Yes, it's a market Apple had and traded for success in mobile. I'm not sure why they couldn't do both. Maybe they made the right choice? I suppose so in the short-term. But, long-term, they don't seem to realize the importance of the entire eco-system. You ditch the pros, the pros go elsewhere. The next 'Apple' comes along, and pretty soon the pros are influencing everyone down the chain towards the new 'Apple' and Apple becomes Microsoft.
Yikes! That's the whole point of the 'Pro'. And, that's also why everything but the Mac Pro just won't do for true pro work.
Um, no. He might have done a fantastic job at the supply chains and such which enabled the growth to continue. I'm thankful for that, and it's certainly a necessary talent for big and growing company. But, that IS NOT WHY they had the growth. Operations enables growth, it doesn't cause it. Without it, you could have the best products and services and things could still fall apart. But, customers don't buy your stuff because you have streamlined operations.
They had the growth because of the innovation and excellent products and service they produced. They had the growth because the UX (user experience) was so awesome, we Apple fans couldn't even think about buying anything else.
For sure! I've significantly shortened the life-span of a couple of MBPs, and that's my big complaint about them. They aren't really pro machines, in that you have to be careful what you run on them. Beautiful machines otherwise. I currently try to limit things on my iMac so I'm not pushing too many hours of maxed-out running in a row.
I've heard the quad-core minis are quite good... but they are starting to get old. The older Mac Pros were excellent too. Apple severely needs that kind of machine again.
If you're fortunate to use the right software, some folks have been successful at off-loading some of the processing to Amazon Cloud Computing or services like that. And, I'm hopeful for the future of eGPU boxes. But, we need a solid core to build off of.
And, the problem is that they are only giving it like 12% (or much less) in terms of attention. And, that number will keep shrinking if they don't do something about it. Also, IMO, it's a much bigger piece of the eco-system, in importance, than that percentage indicates. I'm not sure Cook and company quite have the smarts and vision to realize that.
Yea, BT pretty much sucks. Hopefully Apple will improve it. Sony's BT implementation for the PS4 is just rock-solid... I'm guessing they are doing custom stuff too. But, then there are the health concerns of constant RF shoved in the side of your head for extended periods of time. Aside from that, I'm all for wireless for *some* of the time. But, wireless just doesn't cut it in some situations, so if Apple's plan is all wireless, that's a problem.
True enough, but the problem with that thinking (and it's probably like Cook's thinking) is that the small percentage of pros have big influence and impact on the whole eco-system. A company like Apple can't just ditch the creatives and the 'think different' crowd and not be impacted.
As for durability, it's not so much that the computers are less durable, but that Apple has ramped up the obsolescence rate. Also, w/o a true pro machine, yes, breaking your computer is a factor to consider.
I think you're both right and wrong to an extent. Apple's hands are tied a bit on the rate they can increase single-core performance. But, that's a problem every computer maker faces. At the same time, a lot of apps (especially pro apps) can take advantage of multiple cores, and with more cores, you can run a number of different apps doing stuff in the background without impacting performance / stability of the app you are actively using. Bring on the cores!!! (Some of the apps I use can take as many core and as much RAM as I can give them.)
Couldn't it also indicate that *model* is being phased out and will be replaced with something new soon? It actually could be a good sign, in that case.
The CPU, but not the rest of the machine. Unfortunately, I have experience with what happens when you run some of these machines maxed out. Things break much sooner than they should.
That's good news (re: new think iMacs). I suppose with lower and lower power components, heat dissipation isn't as much of an issue... IF they don't also lower the cooling capability! The problem is that they often do. The best combination would be the latest CPU/GPUs in an enclosure that was designed for previous gen components with higher cooling capacity.
If I knew a new (or upcoming) MBP could handle being run 100% 24/7, I'd gladly buy one and look into adding an eGPU. Aside from many the RAM limit, that would work quite well for me. But, after significantly shortening the life of a couple MBPs, that's not a mistake I want to experience again.
Eh, it's just the RAM and disk that are upgradeable, right? Nobody upgrades CPUs or GPUs in laptops.
[doublepost=1473480987][/doublepost]
PCIe is a big one. You can easily update the GPU and put in PCIe-based SSDs that are incredibly fast. My Linux workhorse has two Samsung SM951s in a striped RAID set. It's running a database that is almost always CPU-bottlenecked because the disks are so fast!
Last edited:
They had more important things to cover, like the Watch looking for a use, Pokemon Go, and goofing around with celebrities.
What they covered should have taken like 30 minutes, and they'd have had 90 minutes to cover cool stuff. They just didn't have anything better to show, it seems.
I just love how people gloss over history to try to suggest the Jobs era was faultless and the Cook era hopeless.
The end of the G4 desktop era was a complete fiasco. The only thing Apple did was over lock the chips by increasing fan noise. They were not superior.
And the years of "where is the G5 PowerBook?" Now that was such a balls up that Apple fell so far behind the competition they had to switch to Intel and suck up years of "power PC is better than x86" marketing in the process.
Oh and the continual use of "pro" when describing computer use is really just buying in to marketing BS. I'm working in 2 professional architectural offices. One has 40 people doing buildings over $100m each and winning numerous awards. They are PROfessionals. 100% iMac based.
"Pro" work is work done by professionals. Plenty of that work is done on Apples.
Now if you said "pro gamer" that might be more accurate cause that's essentially 100% PC based.
No no...
You tell others that your girlfriend can do what your wife does and it is a post marriage world.
You know, kind of like how Tim mentions the post-PC world when talking about the iPad.
(Please don't really do that to your wife. I will not be responsible for the consequences)
After that awful product announcement this week, I wouldn't be surprised.
Macs don't have a 4.7 inch display, nor are they hurting for real estate, I'm not sure why you made this comment.
Adapters. But, clearly at this point, Apple doesn't really give a $*(% about what users need or do.
I'm not sure how you got the impression that's what I said...
Yes and no. First, that wasn't something that was exactly in control of anyone at Apple. Motorola and IBM kind of let Apple down. But, no, Intel wasn't better until Apple helped them move to the Core Duo architecture. That was the narrative in the press at the time, but it was baloney. I actually wrote an article at the time, comparing benchmarks of the top Mac G5 and the best Intel workstations w/ 3D rendering projects. The G5 blew away the Intel (and the Intel was even over-clocked, home-brew).
The problem was really the future, as Apple wasn't going to be able to stay ahead and get sufficient quantities from Moto/IBM, and absolutely, the high-power stuff was a big issue for laptops. Intel (w/ Apple's help and direction) headed down the power reduction, multi-cores path. That enabled Apple to kill several birds with one stone with the switch to Intel. But, it was a *massive* undertaking.
But, the previous Mac Pros and xServes and such were true pro machines. No, things were never perfect under Jobs, but night and day from the current Apple in terms of priorities, quality-control, software development, etc.
Well, it depends on whether we're talking 'pro' equipment, or 'pro' use. Cook is a 'pro' and he seems to get by with an iPad. I'm talking about 'pro' equipment. Yes, it's a bit of marketing, but also usually has some meaning within an industry.
When I'm talking about 'pro' in terms of computers, I mean things like it can run full-out 24/7 without damage. Or, often ECC RAM or things like that. Possibly expandability or extendability. Or, for example for people who do video production, 3D rendering, etc. maybe the ability to use specialized GPUs or cards/equipment to get their work done.
So, it might be marketing, but it's not *just* marketing.
I think that's called a Liberal.
(i.e.: make up terms and definitions to fit one's worldview)But, it should mean making things better, not worse.
Adapters. But, clearly at this point, Apple doesn't really give a $*(% about what users need or do.
I'm not sure how you got the impression that's what I said...
Yes and no. First, that wasn't something that was exactly in control of anyone at Apple. Motorola and IBM kind of let Apple down. But, no, Intel wasn't better until Apple helped them move to the Core Duo architecture. That was the narrative in the press at the time, but it was baloney. I actually wrote an article at the time, comparing benchmarks of the top Mac G5 and the best Intel workstations w/ 3D rendering projects. The G5 blew away the Intel (and the Intel was even over-clocked, home-brew).
The problem was really the future, as Apple wasn't going to be able to stay ahead and get sufficient quantities from Moto/IBM, and absolutely, the high-power stuff was a big issue for laptops. Intel (w/ Apple's help and direction) headed down the power reduction, multi-cores path. That enabled Apple to kill several birds with one stone with the switch to Intel. But, it was a *massive* undertaking.
But, the previous Mac Pros and xServes and such were true pro machines. No, things were never perfect under Jobs, but night and day from the current Apple in terms of priorities, quality-control, software development, etc.
Well, it depends on whether we're talking 'pro' equipment, or 'pro' use. Cook is a 'pro' and he seems to get by with an iPad. I'm talking about 'pro' equipment. Yes, it's a bit of marketing, but also usually has some meaning within an industry.
When I'm talking about 'pro' in terms of computers, I mean things like it can run full-out 24/7 without damage. Or, often ECC RAM or things like that. Possibly expandability or extendability. Or, for example for people who do video production, 3D rendering, etc. maybe the ability to use specialized GPUs or cards/equipment to get their work done.
So, it might be marketing, but it's not *just* marketing.
I think that's called a Liberal.
But, it should mean making things better, not worse.
What have they made worse?
Really?
Mac Pro, OS X, iOS, UX, UI, 'flat' design, remove 3.5mm jack... need I go on?
(Note: I should say, worse on the whole, as they've certainly also made some improvements.)
Well what you're stating is 100% relative. Good thing millions and millions disagree with you or else Apple would be in trouble...
They are in trouble... it's just going to take a few years to destroy one of the strongest brand reputations in history and $billions in the bank.
And, no it's not relative (I think you mean subjective). Apple spent much of their early history doing careful UX/UI studies, much of which they've thrown to the wind. And, while maybe a bunch of folks are completely satisfied with iPhones and dancing emojis, there are a lot of long-time Apple users who aren't happy with the current trends.
Eh, not really. It's your opinion, but what Apple has built is nearly impossible to destroy....
It wasn't long ago, that's what people said about Microsoft when I suggested they consider Apple.
Yep.
(I'm not sure how long you've been around Apple, but I've been following them for about 30 years now. I also predicted they'd do well back in the mid-90s when everyone else seem to think they were doomed. So, my track record re: Apple has been pretty good so far.)
I wouldn't say one good guess makes you have a great track record lol