Absolutely. They used to specify 5k monitors with dual cables, now these can be done with a single TB3. There's no reason they can't suggest single-cable 5k monitors or dual-cable 8k monitors with the Mac Pro. If the monitor is only usable with the MP, what's the problem?
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.
MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
Well it is indeed a problem with a solution, the question is if this solution is suitable for the scenario. This goes back to the MP itself, how it should handle its display output, if it should limit itself to TB3 when full sized PCI GPU cards are present. Even without Apple offering a 1st party display that demands higher than single cable TB3 DP specs, other manufacturers' monitors will, and certainly some spectrum of MP potential users will want to have that option.
That said, I still think 8k for deskop usage is rather silly, considering the typical ~2 feet viewing distance and 120 degree human vision viewing angle that is. I would much rather see a 27" 5K with scalable refresh rate max at 120Hz, ala ProMotion on iPad Pro.
That said, I still think 8k for deskop usage is rather silly, considering the typical ~2 feet viewing distance and 120 degree human vision viewing angle that is. I would much rather see a 27" 5K with scalable refresh rate max at 120Hz, ala ProMotion on iPad Pro.
Last edited:
For the Mac Pro user? Nothing. But Apple isn't going to make a display that the vast majority of its pro users (aka the people on MBPs) can't use.
Who knows. They currently make a "Mac Pro" that the vast majority of pro users can't use so...
TB3 supports dual-DisplayPort 1.2 over a single cable so it can drive a 5K display at 60Hz over a single cable as seen in the LG series of displays (27/32/34).
Dell's 8K Displays requires dual-DisplayPort 1.3 to drive it and I assume this will be the case for all 8K panels. So I expect the Mac Pro and the Apple 8K display to use HDMI 2.1 as that can support 60Hz 8K. This will also allow iMac / iMac Pros and MacBook Pros to connect to it via an eGPU card with HDMI 2.1. I could also see Apple having dual-DisplayPort 1.3 on the 8K display for eGPU cards that have that instead of HDMI 2.1.
Will be interesting to see what the future of HDMI is on Apple's products for sure.
Apart from the 4 year old trash can/Tim cook Mac Pro does any current apple product have hdmi? Adapters sure but built in.
It certainly wins points for being a novel rethinking, although I can make pretty mockups with no consideration for how I'd actually fit components inside too
DisplayPort 1.4 can handle 8K at 60Hz over a single cable and uses the USB-C plug so worst case, Apple could drop Thunderbolt and go to pure USB-C/DP1.4.
I'm not sure what Intel's plans for Thunderbolt are going forward, but we could see a TB4 that supports DP1.4 using USB-C connectors.
EDIT - Intel announced at CES 2018 that the Titan Ridge TB3 controller will support DisplayPort 1.4 so I expect Apple will adopt this on all 2018 Mac models.
And I do not known if you can have separate USB-C and TB3/USB-C ports (so a dedicated USB-C controller with DP1.4 driving one or two ports and then a TB3 controller driving two or more ports) but that could be an option, as well - say two USB-C/DP1.4 ports on the iMac Pro and one each on the iMac and MBP with the other ports being USB-C/TB3. The Mac Pro could have a few of each type.
Last edited:
I would think given that all of apples devices which are pretty much all battery anyway they could easily do a Mac mini in that form factor, the boards are just strips these days. Granted it probably wouldn’t do a spinner drive.It certainly wins points for being a novel rethinking, although I can make pretty mockups with no consideration for how I'd actually fit components inside too
I know this is the year of female empowerment, and outing sexism and systemic misogyny etc. And I'm all for it, you go girl, fearless, strong, build the future unchained and confident !
But a macmini that resembles a vibrator is a bit too much for me. And even though some dudes are into that sorta thing, I'll pass.
Overall, I suspect that most of what we saw was Apple manipulating customer expectations - - when you don't have a hard delivery date target to hit, you can delay until inventories are healthy, then open the doors with relatively conservative delivery dates ... watch the demand, and then adjust. All that the drop in BTO times really means is that they did a good job anticipating what customers are going to order and had adequate reserves already fabbed to ship.
One can hope that Apple will grok customers who don't buy sealed machines .. but I'm not being optimistic.
In any event, Apple did quite poorly with the iMac Pro launch. Digital Lloyd has already ripped Apple for the iMac Pro, for two very basic reasons:
1. "Form OVER Function" (again), as illustrated by de-rated chips because of thermal.
2. Lack of Basic Business Sense (& professional courtesy): they withheld the details a business needs in order to make a buy decision, which compounded with their nearly-end-of-tax-year rollout (and ship dates) which made it impractical to buy & deploy by 12/31 in order to use the {USA} 179 tax deduction.
And FYI, I believe I read that the 179 just got killed for computers for small businesses in the tax bill ...?
And these are some of the factors which Apple will use to rationalize to themselves which are other than customer-based hardware modularity...
...particularly since I think that Zarniwoop hit it on the head when he showed how Apple's language on modularity is that it really is about what Apple wants for turning around faster updates to sell to customers - - which is not modularity that can be DIY'ed by customers because then Apple doesn't get their 30% profit/cut on that component.
iMac Pro Teardown
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMa...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
TL;DR;
https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/iMa...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
TL;DR;
- Even Less MODULARITY than the iMac 5K.
- SSD discrete but proprietary (I bet $1Million we will see it soon again on another Mac).
- standard 288-pin DDR4 ECC RAM, DIY Ram Upgrade Are Possible, CPU too (if you find one).
- Cheap AQUANTIA 10Gb Eth. (disappointing, I expected an X540), likely we will see it again in the "modular" Mac Pro
- Despite plenty PCIe lines, Apple sill needed a PCIe Switch
Last edited:
Other people have noted this, but there was a language shift recently where Apple started describing the next Mac Pro as "upgradable" instead of "modular".
I wouldn't be surprised as they've starting locking down aspects of the Mac Pro if they've decided that they're going to have upgradability as a feature. I think that they used the word "modular" early last year because they didn't want to commit to it yet. But they are seemingly starting to head down that path.
(Please note upgradable doesn't necessarily mean PCIe GPUs.)
Last edited:
Pretty sure that isn't going to be the new mini, and if it is, it won't be sitting on my desktop.
Pretty sure that isn't going to be the new mini, and if it is, it won't be sitting on my desktop.
Of course this is not going to be the new mini, if there is a new one it will be like a brick, a completely sealed monolith, non upgradable, non serviceable... this is why is taking them too long to develop a new one, similar method to MP, to make us forget how the older models used to be.
Last edited:
you can put sub-10W cpus into this, along DDR4, flash storage, just look at the MacBook 12 logic board, barely the same size, also the PSU can be integrated into this tiny space, its technically feasible the concept, of course its unlikly Apple to put the TouchBar on nowhere else than the keyboard itself, else they need to re-design every mac to put the touch bar, while on the keyboard its available along all the desktops.
I'm intrigued about the Mac mini future, will be more mini? not so -mini? will be discontinued -right now its obsolete technically- ?
This is the case... we 'll wait and see. Mini is very nice solution for many needs.
Last edited:
Partially it depends on what form the Mac Pro takes, I imagine. The Intel minis straddled the 'cheapest entry point to the Mac ecosystem' role up to 'kinda sorta an xMac if you squint', as well as stuff like 'mini server alternative' and the like. Apple doesn't have any NUC-like object in their lineup and it's conceivable they could turn the mini into that, but then they're cutting out its midrange flexibility, which if the Mac Pro is going to be a $3K and up machine I'd argue is a net loss for the Mac line.
Well I wonder how well today's latest highlight on the poopfest on intel is going down at apple's secret macpro development basement/closet/shed. If I were one of those three people allocated by allowed budget, I'd probably call in sick today and wait for some panicky manager type to start drafting a memo with AMD in the subject line....
We all know that won't happen. But it begs the question : what _would_ need to happen to facilitate the switch ? If hardware assisted virtual kernel memory hemorrhaging isn't it ... hard to imagine what would.
We all know that won't happen. But it begs the question : what _would_ need to happen to facilitate the switch ? If hardware assisted virtual kernel memory hemorrhaging isn't it ... hard to imagine what would.
Last edited:
