Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple should have made it 6.5" x 6.5"; the OG Mac mini dims...! ;^p
Obtained from confidential Apple source:
1672001613092.png
 
I think the Intel Mac Pro will be around for a while. Why would anyone go for a Mac Pro that is limited to 192GB RAM and an Ultra chip they can already get in a more affordable Mac Studio? I think the current Mac Pro supports 1.5TB of RAM. None of this makes any sense.
Correct, folks' new Mac Pro assumptions do not make sense. We need to wait and see what the new MP turns out to be. Making dumb assumptions that define what is not yet defined is absurd.
 
Last edited:
I think the Intel Mac Pro will be around for a while. Why would anyone go for a Mac Pro that is limited to 192GB RAM and an Ultra chip they can already get in a more affordable Mac Studio? I think the current Mac Pro supports 1.5TB of RAM. None of this makes any sense.

Maybe some folks need PCIe slots, maybe these folks do not want to have said slots hanging off Thunderbolt ports and would prefer internal PCIe slots on the motherboard...?

As for the RAM, the Xeon is what allowed that massive amount of RAM...

But if Apple switches to LPDDR5X SDRAM they could ramp up to 1TB of RAM on an Extreme SoC, don't know how they will handle the ECC issue though...?

Correct, folks' new Mac Pro assumptions do not make sense. We need to wait and see what the new MP turns out to be. Making dumb assumptions that define what is not yet defined is absurd.

It's a rumors forum. so we all discuss rumors and make assumptions...

Some assumptions make sense, some make no sense, but everything is an assumption until we get solid proof...
 
It's a rumors forum. so we all discuss rumors and make assumptions...

Some assumptions make sense, some make no sense, but everything is an assumption until we get solid proof...
Of course it is a rumors forum. But even so, making assumptions like assuming a RAM limit then dissing the new MP because of that assumed RAM limitation is poor logic. With its next Mac Pro Apple may (folks like me hope Apple will) take some new approach(es) to solving the contradictions between the old hot Intel solution and the new efficient Apple M1 SoC solution.
 
It's self-evident. The burden of proof is on you to explain how that's not the case.
Apple by far has the highest margins of any computer hardware company
Eg:
Apple 42%
Dell 21%
HP 19%
That leaves a big lot of room to lower prices and still have the highest margins in the business . The difference is of course in mobiles.
 
Apple by far has the highest margins of any computer hardware company
Eg:
Apple 42%
Dell 21%
HP 19%
That leaves a big lot of room to lower prices and still have the highest margins in the business . The difference is of course in mobiles.
High margins are not some per se bad thing. Maintaining high margins against the likes of Dell, HP, et al. can be indicative that a high-competence product strategy is being successfully followed.

High margins are what allow Apple's great products to exist. Folks who want Dell crap can buy Dell crap.
 
High margins are not some per se bad thing. Maintaining high margins against the likes of Dell, HP, et al. can be indicative that a high-competence product strategy is being successfully followed.

High margins are what allow Apple's great products to exist. Folks who want Dell crap can buy Dell crap.

Spot-on assessment.
 
Poor writing on the part of MacRumors, as the highlighted section reads as if 192GB of RAM is the minimum ("at least"), when the truth of it is that 192GB of RAM should be the maximum for a M2 Ultra SoC...?

If 192GB of RAM was the minimum, the base ASi Mac Pro would be well above the current (2019 Intel Mac Pro) US$5999 starting cost, which would be problematic for many..?
Maybe, maybe not. The studio exists for those that want less. If the mac pro will have user upgradeable RAM, that implies a whole different modular design approach. It will be interesting what that may be.
 
Rather than truly putting power in the hands of the people, as was Apple's stated ideal in the first decades of its existence - whether that was ever truly the case is another debate - this ideal has taken a backseat to shareholder profits for a decade now. It's absolutely shameful.
It's time for some woodshedding. The CEO, CIO, CFO, and whatever other CxOs there might be, all have an explicit duty to the shareholder.

To do less would be shameful. And COULD even invite criminal indictments or lawsuits.

So there may be a gap in the product line. I'm sorry that you're furious about that. (you said "shameful" multiple times, so to me that means you're furious)

But you need to get over this. It may help if you understand just who those "shareholders" are. They are regular people like you and me.

Those fat-cat shareholders are garbage collectors, teachers, college professors, the farmers that grew that turkey or ham on your Christmas dinner table, the people who assembled the cars, trucks, trains, or planes that brought your loved ones to you (or vice versa) this holiday season.

They are firemen, police officers, accountants, doctors, insurance claim inspectors, plumbers, electricians, loading dock workers, the people working at your local grocery store, at your pharmacy, or the firm that designed and built your home and the homes of half of your immediate neighbors. They are the people who STILL get up and go to work at the hospitals at 5 am, car repair shops on Christmas Eve, and fast food places that you like to visit on New Year's Day.

Apple is between 7% and 12% of any given S&P or NASDAQ index fund, and is the single biggest holding in many of them and others.

I get it that you think there's a gap in the SKUs for Apple. That's probably a point that gets argued weekly in Cupertino, and all your bellyaching isn't going to change that. But you've developed a little bit of an "I'm holier than the scumbag investors" attitude, which can hold you back if you're not careful.

Open your mind and you just might improve your prospects in many different areas of your life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AppleEnthusiast1995
High margins are not some per se bad thing. Maintaining high margins against the likes of Dell, HP, et al. can be indicative that a high-competence product strategy is being successfully followed.

High margins are what allow Apple's great products to exist. Folks who want Dell crap can buy Dell crap.
Amen, brother.

And I say this as an owner of some of that Dell crap. 😉
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.