MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

[vailr]

@Dr. Stealth: you seem to be ignoring the fact that Dell, HP, Lenovo, etc. have all found it monetarily advantageous to employ U.S. citizens located in various U.S. locations to do final assembly work for desktop machines. Not for laptops, not for all-in-one iMacs, but for desktop machines.
HP for example, still has (AFAIK) final assembly factories located in Plainfield, IN and in Ontario, CA.
These are desktop models, which can be seen on the retail shelves at Best Buy, for example. The key factor to look at is the corporate tax advantages of locating these final assembly factories on U.S. soil.
Probably ~30% of these HP factory employees are actually Foxconn employees.
This same Foxconn company has agreed to build a new factory in the state of Wisconsin, eventually employing ~10,000 people.
As far as comparing U.S. workmanship vs. China workmanship: there are clearly differences when talking about circuit board manufacturing, where China has certain machinery and trained operators that aren't found very much in the U.S., for long standing economic reasons. But final assembly of desktop machines is another category, where U.S. workmanship would not be that much different from China workmanship. Either for the worker's wage structure, or for the required skill set.
The current "trash can" MacPro is still produced in an Austin, TX factory, and would seem to be a likely location for also producing the 2018 Mac Pro.

 

[CWallace]

With Apple's newly repatriated $350 billion from their overseas earnings stockpile, I would think they could now afford to offer a new 2018 Mac Pro that's actually price competitive with similar specced Dell, Lenovo, HP, etc. machines.

Considering the iMac Pro is priced better than their competitors*, I hope this is not the case.


* An HP Z4 with an 18-core Xeon, 128GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD and a nVidia P2000 video card is $12000. For $1000 more, the equivalent iMac Pro gives one a 27" 5K display, 3TB more SSD storage and a better GPU.

If you are hoping for it to be assembled in the USA you have to expect much higher prices. That's exactly why it WON'T BE assembled in the USA. And really why would you want it to be assembled in the US? To do that Apple has to consider the price of assembly. Over-seas they get very qualified employees to assemble their products for around 8 dollars an hour.

In addition to the Mac Pro, a fair number of iMacs are now assembled in the US and have been for years. Ireland has also been producing Macs for the EU for decades.

 

[mattspace]

You get an un-trained Goober who is working for $12.00 an hour and NO benefits to build your Mac. I would much rather have someone in China build my Mac. Very disciplined. Better build, better QA and lower prices.

I hear America has a large idle prison population, who can gain high level manufacturing skills, as a part of their rehabilitation process, to prepare them to re-enter society as productive law-abiding citizens.

And you can put them in the hole if they screw up the thermal paste.

 

[fuchsdh]

Considering the iMac Pro is priced better than their competitors*, I hope this is not the case.


* An HP Z4 with an 18-core Xeon, 128GB of RAM, a 1TB SSD and a nVidia P2000 video card is $12000. For $1000 more, the equivalent iMac Pro gives one a 27" 5K display, 3TB more SSD storage and a better GPU.




In addition to the Mac Pro, a fair number of iMacs are now assembled in the US and have been for years. Ireland has also been producing Macs for the EU for decades.

I don’t imagine being built in the US will have much of an effect either way. The Mac Pro was price-competitive at launch despite being assembled domestically.

 

[CWallace]

I don’t imagine being built in the US will have much of an effect either way. The Mac Pro was price-competitive at launch despite being assembled domestically.

Agreed.

It's not like it takes tens of hours to assemble and package one of these so even with US / EU labor costs at many multiples of Chinese, the actual price delta will be measured in the scores of dollars on a product priced in the thousands or even tens of thousands (if the Mac Pro really does play with the top-level PC OEM workstations) so it will effectively have no effect on the profit margins.

 

[Derived]

And it seems high-end users are confusing themselves for customers Apple has ever catered to. Again, you could never buy a high-end Mac Pro even in its cheesegrater form. There's no real evidence they've decided that's a market they're actually interested in pursuing.

The idea that "everyone who has lower system requirements than me is a filthy casual" is dumb, insulting, and makes you look like a tool of the highest order.

Wow, incredible, I don't remember typing that but I must be mis-remembering....

That's not at all my point, and if you've read my posts in the last few pages you'd know that instead of making up a thing I *didn't* say and then expect me to defend it.

The cMP was reasonably high-end for it's time...certainly higher-end than the iMac Pro is now. They sold quite a few of them, after all. They fit the usage case for many professionals, and they were broadly comparable to what the PC manufacturers were offering. To pretend otherwise is to simply deny facts.

You're saying they shouldn't even strive for mid/high-end? Remember when Xserve was a thing? I do. Now, I'm not saying that this what they will or even should go back to, but I think it's pretty nonsensical to say that "Apple *doesn't* make a product that competes with the higher-end desktop workstations from HP, Dell, etc and because of that they sell zero of this nonexistent product, and because of that they should go on doing this" - do you see where that line of reasoning seems, at best, silly, and at worst, unhinged? How can you argue against a product they don't even make but that many, many people right here in this thread have asked for and that many tens of thousands more across the business world would love to buy simply because they *don't currently make it* ? I don't see how you can. They've taken a huge hit in the professional market precisely because they haven't made something like they used to, and while that may indeed be a small percentage of their sales compared to iPhones & iPads, I sure don't think they'd like to give up on the entire creative industry (as well as the scientific, academic & other various industries) wholesale & without a fight...I don't see that happening.

The problem, I think, is that many *still* seem to think the nMP was an intentionally failed product...this simply isn't true...it took years & I'm sure tens of millions of dollars of engineering & design work (plus an entirely new factory) to bring into the world. It simply didn't pan out. You think they honestly are happy with how that turned out? I sure don't. They guessed wrong, that's all. And now they have to go back to the drawing board. And I think they should do so properly, and I have a feeling they will. As I've said several times before, I think it's quite strange that so many here seem to think Apple has nothing better to do (and possibly isn't capable of doing any better) than trolling Mac Rumors Mac Pro forum section commenters with intentionally sub-optimal products. I really don't think that's what's going on, do you?

My broader point is that there should be a Mac Pro that fits a BROAD RANGE OF USER'S NEEDS...I hope that's clear enough to read. That's it. There's no harm done to anyone here if they offer a configuration you can't afford or don't need. That may sound like a tool thing to say, but it's simply true. And I don't see how anyone could disagree. My point isn't to be an a** on the internet, but simply to convey my strongly held opinion that they *shouldn't eff it up this time* - do you disagree? And for the record, I am one of those filthy casuals, I couldn't possibly justify purchase of the new Mac Pro when it comes out, I don't need it. I may want it, but at this particular stage, I don't have the skills yet to build some of the projects that might take advantage of what it might have to offer. I use a 5,1 because I want to, and I probably will get something newer once this one finally becomes unusable. So I'm not saying this as some sort of elitist industry snob* that looks down on everyone that can't afford a $50k workstation for their home office...I'm saying this earnestly & sincerely as someone who doesn't want to see the greatest technology company in history fade into irrelevance in the areas they once dominated in. I don't have any ill intent towards anyone.

*no offense to elitist industry snobs, I've learned a lot from you in my life. And you create demand for cool stuff.

 

[iPadified]

Wow, incredible, I don't remember typing that but I must be mis-remembering....

That's not at all my point, and if you've read my posts in the last few pages you'd know that instead of making up a thing I *didn't* say and then expect me to defend it.

The cMP was reasonably high-end for it's time...certainly higher-end than the iMac Pro is now. They sold quite a few of them, after all. They fit the usage case for many professionals, and they were broadly comparable to what the PC manufacturers were offering. To pretend otherwise is to simply deny facts.

You're saying they shouldn't even strive for mid/high-end? Remember when Xserve was a thing? I do. Now, I'm not saying that this what they will or even should go back to, but I think it's pretty nonsensical to say that "Apple *doesn't* make a product that competes with the higher-end desktop workstations from HP, Dell, etc and because of that they sell zero of this nonexistent product, and because of that they should go on doing this" - do you see where that line of reasoning seems, at best, silly, and at worst, unhinged? How can you argue against a product they don't even make but that many, many people right here in this thread have asked for and that many tens of thousands more across the business world would love to buy simply because they *don't currently make it* ? I don't see how you can. They've taken a huge hit in the professional market precisely because they haven't made something like they used to, and while that may indeed be a small percentage of their sales compared to iPhones & iPads, I sure don't think they'd like to give up on the entire creative industry (as well as the scientific, academic & other various industries) wholesale & without a fight...I don't see that happening.

The problem, I think, is that many *still* seem to think the nMP was an intentionally failed product...this simply isn't true...it took years & I'm sure tens of millions of dollars of engineering & design work (plus an entirely new factory) to bring into the world. It simply didn't pan out. You think they honestly are happy with how that turned out? I sure don't. They guessed wrong, that's all. And now they have to go back to the drawing board. And I think they should do so properly, and I have a feeling they will. As I've said several times before, I think it's quite strange that so many here seem to think Apple has nothing better to do (and possibly isn't capable of doing any better) than trolling Mac Rumors Mac Pro forum section commenters with intentionally sub-optimal products. I really don't think that's what's going on, do you?

My broader point is that there should be a Mac Pro that fits a BROAD RANGE OF USER'S NEEDS...I hope that's clear enough to read. That's it. There's no harm done to anyone here if they offer a configuration you can't afford or don't need. That may sound like a tool thing to say, but it's simply true. And I don't see how anyone could disagree. My point isn't to be an a** on the internet, but simply to convey my strongly held opinion that they *shouldn't eff it up this time* - do you disagree? And for the record, I am one of those filthy casuals, I couldn't possibly justify purchase of the new Mac Pro when it comes out, I don't need it. I may want it, but at this particular stage, I don't have the skills yet to build some of the projects that might take advantage of what it might have to offer. I use a 5,1 because I want to, and I probably will get something newer once this one finally becomes unusable. So I'm not saying this as some sort of elitist industry snob* that looks down on everyone that can't afford a $50k workstation for their home office...I'm saying this earnestly & sincerely as someone who doesn't want to see the greatest technology company in history fade into irrelevance in the areas they once dominated in. I don't have any ill intent towards anyone.

*no offense to elitist industry snobs, I've learned a lot from you in my life. And you create demand for cool stuff.

Good post.

However, another unspoken reason for Apple missing the WS market is the lack of software. I know 3D modeling, rendering, engieering and science field. Many softwares which can utilise WS grade hardware are windows exclusive. Building a “dream” WS, whatever that is, will not be sufficient to claim a larger market share unless they have commitment from the software industry.

 

[Biped]

Good post.

However, another unspoken reason for Apple missing the WS market is the lack of software. I know 3D modeling, rendering, engieering and science field. Many softwares which can utilise WS grade hardware are windows exclusive. Building a “dream” WS, whatever that is, will not be sufficient to claim a larger market share unless they have commitment from the software industry.

Development of which, I'd argue, is dependant on Apple showing a consistent presence and effort in the space. Which it hasn't.

 

[barmann]

How time flies ; it seems like the trashcan was only released yesterday ...

Since it has actually been around for years, how urgent might it be for a new MP to be released, or at least be announced ?

When do you think there will be news ?
Considering the introduction of the inexplicable iMacPro line, does Apple even have anything proper cooking right now ( no pun ...) ?

When, that is the question; at some point it might not matter if they return to the workstation game .
Or has this point already passed - could it be argued that Apple has abandoned offering a full line of computers ?
Have too many bulk buyers already moved elsewhere ?

Questions, questions ...

My very subjective opinion is that Apple need to make a move now ; innovate their pale behinds back to the future of usable computers and an OS that puts compatibility over everything else .
Personally, my best upgrade path right now is a cMP newer than my MP 3.1 and keep running Mavericks ...

End of March for an announcement, product on the shelves in early autumn .
Needless to say, it has to be the most expandable Mac Pro ever, and competitively priced .

 

[Chancha]

Development of which, I'd argue, is dependant on Apple showing a consistent presence and effort in the space. Which it hasn't.

This is why it gave a strong hint to given industries that Apple has been backing off from the "pro" segments. FCP7 to X, Shake, Aperture, X-Serve/RAID, standalone OS X server version, a Mac with a single PCI card slot... I am still convinced that Apple did decide to fully back out of these markets, but whatever happened that changed their minds.

I personally think the mMP will have to be Cheese Greater 2.0, perhaps with even more freedom and flexibility in expansion to even begin reclaiming foothold in those spaces. It is only then the hardware wouldn't be the bottleneck for at least a considerable number of professional scenarios, since as you said, their pro-software base as of now is non-existent.

 

[Zarniwoop]

March has been usually a time for new Apple products. They've already promised official eGPU support for spring 2018, so it could be that Apple will release something related to it.

In the past March releases have been models of Macbook air, Macbook Pro, iPad, iPad Pro, iPhone SE and some accessories..

 

[iPadified]

Development of which, I'd argue, is dependant on Apple showing a consistent presence and effort in the space. Which it hasn't.

I agree it is a hen and an egg problem but it started much earlier than at present. Already during the cheesegrater era, much software was developed exclusively for windows. It has propably only got worse since than. Perhaps that has killed Apples interest for heavy WS except in a few well defined areas? What I am meaning is that make a spectacularly good WS is not enough - the software must follow and I fear for the latter part.

 

[singhs.apps]

Since the move to Intel and boot camp options, cMPs were well positioned to support professional applications either via OS X or windows. Everything you could expect from workstations was a possibility.

Apple didn’t help itself by discontinuing their own professional applications nor by releasing a closed system that took away a lot of flexibility from the workstation market.

And if that didn’t make matters complicated, they failed to keep the tcMP updated( for whatever reason that Apple and some users here cite or. ). What is more, the rest of the computing world continued to evolve in hardware and newer platforms ( AR/VR, AI ) emerged that raised the basic requirements for development on and for those platforms.

It is a self created problem by Apple. And they were too slow to adapt.

The U turn came around the time when apple realised whatever they were making for MacOS ( including the iMac Pro ) just wasn’t enough. And that, for whatever metric they applied for Proffesional workflows ( end to end ) on their hardware, jettisoning the Mac pros wouldn’t be a strategic move, that by continuing to go down the path they were on, they just might not be in the reckoning for these new technologies. That the gaping hole in their lineup, one that didn’t exist when things were stagnant, or existing hardware was adequate for all of their target consumers, is serious enough that they need to take a hard look again at their macOS hardware lineup and perhaps their earlier strategy of fading out of the higher tier of workstation market wasn’t good for their long term goals.

The software makers aren’t going to bother about closed systems. macOS is not in the same position of strength vs windows (the way iOS is vs Android) In sheer install base and variety and power...windows + PC dwarfs the macOS+hardware

The only one responsible for this situation is Apple.

 

[goMac]

March has been usually a time for new Apple products. They've already promised official eGPU support for spring 2018, so it could be that Apple will release something related to it.

In the past March releases have been models of Macbook air, Macbook Pro, iPad, iPad Pro, iPhone SE and some accessories..

I don't think there will be any Mac Pro news until WWDC, release in December.

 

[CWallace]

When do you think there will be news?

WWDC would be my guess.

Considering the introduction of the inexplicable iMacPro line, does Apple even have anything proper cooking right now ( no pun ...) ?

The iMac Pro was almost certainly planned to be the replacement for the Mac Pro, with that model being discontinued once stocks of the 2013 model were exhausted. However for whatever reason(s), Apple reversed themselves and last April publicly admitted they would be developing and releasing a new Mac Pro, but I expect that it might not be ready by 2018, though I expect a WWDC announcement about it.

 

[mattspace]

They guessed wrong, that's all.

The great sin of the nMP isn't that Apple guessed wrong about the future of computing, it's that the fundamental design relied on their guess being right, to the extent that it was unrecoverable when it turned out that they were about as wrong as it was possible to be.

 

[-hh]

If you are hoping for it to be assembled in the USA you have to expect much higher prices. That's exactly why it WON'T BE assembled in the USA.

A while before Steve Jobs passed away President Obama called him to the White House and implored him to bring Apple manufacturing back to the US. Steve Job's reply to the President was "IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN".

For certain things, Steve Jobs was correct: it is much harder in the US market to quickly bring up a new iPhone that can go from zero volume to a couple of million units / month because it takes thousands of talented staff working on a tight deadline - but making a million units in a ~week simply not the sort of manufacturing scaling that is applicable to the likes of the Mac Pro.

So the "NOT" doesn't logically apply.

And really why would you want it to be assembled in the US? To do that Apple has to consider the price of assembly. Over-seas they get very qualified employees to assemble their products for around 8 dollars an hour. To find anything near that they have to contract companies in the south (Like Texas or Georgia) to assemble the Mac Pro 6,1 which is why the price dissuades many potential customers.

A fair enough point, but still comes back to how much touch labor is involved in the total product: if one has a $2000 product that only has 60 minutes of touch labor, a labor rate of even $28 vs. $8 only adds $20 ... +1% ... to the price of the product.

And awhile back, I happened to have this very conversation while at the funeral of a friend's mother. Turns out that one of his cousins works for Dell. His comment was that he didn't believe that they really saved all that much money when they moved their primary assembly to China. What surprised me was that he did offer an actual number ... and the number he volunteered was "we saved maybe a $20 savings per unit".

 

[Flint Ironstag]

The great sin of the nMP isn't that Apple guessed wrong about the future of computing, it's that the fundamental design relied on their guess being right, to the extent that it was unrecoverable when it turned out that they were about as wrong as it was possible to be.

Being stuck with AMD right now feels like being stuck with Motorola back in the days when Intel was really eating their lunch. I bet there would have been a lot less complaining had Apple provided a mid 2016 nMP bump with underclocked 1070s & 1060s - Then went on to actually support eGPU in a timely fashion.

Maybe they couldn't make Nvidia cards shine in the FCP performance charts they love so much.

 

[StuAff]

The Nvidia thing is politics, nothing more. Apple has decided not to do business with them, for whatever reason, therefore it doesn't. Pointless and stupid but that's the way it is for the time being.
As much as I like the performance of the RX 580, I know I'd rather have a (officially supported) 1070 or 1080…

 

[Derived]

Development of which, I'd argue, is dependant on Apple showing a consistent presence and effort in the space. Which it hasn't.

Why is it dependent on that? That's never really true for any set of events, past performance is never anything more than a vague guideline for future performance. Especially for a company like Apple...using the same argument, they'd have never made the original iMac, the original iPod, the original iPhone, or even the cylinder Mac Pro - and again - they've already stated they're making an effort, we don't really have to infer something or just hope that they do...they've already made several statements regarding it. I get why people are pessimistic on here, but I think it's vastly overblown.

I'll say this, if they screw up again, it won't be out of apathy - as I've said before, it's not that they *don't care* - it's that they made mistakes, mistakes that they obviously didn't think would be mistakes. Given that they probably started working on the nMP shortly after the cMP got its 2010 update, the rest of recent Mac Pro history starts to make quite a bit of sense. Again - it's a screw up, not an example of "who cares, not us" - big difference between the two, and that's a much more useful data point from which to extrapolate future decision-making from them.
[doublepost=1516750381][/doublepost]

The great sin of the nMP isn't that Apple guessed wrong about the future of computing, it's that the fundamental design relied on their guess being right, to the extent that it was unrecoverable when it turned out that they were about as wrong as it was possible to be.

That's kind of the same thing as "guessing wrong" - just from the other side. Of course, all guesses are made with the intent to be right - again - does anyone here think Apple intentionally set out to build a bad product after all that time & effort? I think not.

 

[AidenShaw]

That's kind of the same thing as "guessing wrong" - just from the other side. Of course, all guesses are made with the intent to be right - again - does anyone here think Apple intentionally set out to build a bad product after all that time & effort? I think not.

Yes, Apple intentionally decided to build a bad product when they decided to make it a piece of art, rather than functional.

The extreme delay in the release of the MP7,1 makes me worry that the artists are designing it - rather than the engineers.

 

[fuchsdh]

Being stuck with AMD right now feels like being stuck with Motorola back in the days when Intel was really eating their lunch. I bet there would have been a lot less complaining had Apple provided a mid 2016 nMP bump with underclocked 1070s & 1060s - Then went on to actually support eGPU in a timely fashion.

Maybe they couldn't make Nvidia cards shine in the FCP performance charts they love so much.

I think the reality is that AMD was willing to provide cut-down FirePros in a custom SKU as the underdog. Nvidia wasn't, certainly not to the price Apple would want. It's not something they really needed.

It's also true that Nvidia was at the time pretty terrible with OpenCL performance. From what I've seen with recent BareFeats benchmarks, that's much less of an issue than it once was (and of course if you have a piece of software that's CUDA only, it's CUDA or bust) but in late 2013 I can see only one option being available.

Really though, Apple's excuse is partially their own fault, above and beyond the initial design constraints. While AMD's had its ups and downs with power-hungry GPUs, considering the DX00 series were already cut down from full-TDP models it seems like it's in Apple's court they didn't choose something from the 300 or 400 series to swap in, even if it was just as a D800 and moving the D500 and D700 down the line like they did. Likewise with Intel's terribly slow Xeon rollout, they still could have updated to Haswell-E or Broadwell-E as small but nice spec bumps. The tube Mac Pro might have still been an evolutionary dead end, but Apple didn't have to let the line totally wither in the meantime.

 

[goMac]

I think the reality is that AMD was willing to provide cut-down FirePros in a custom SKU as the underdog. Nvidia wasn't, certainly not to the price Apple would want. It's not something they really needed.

Ding ding ding.

This sort of thing would require Nvidia to change their mind, not Apple.

You can fault Apple for not having standard PCIe GPUs. But if we're talking the can, that's Nvidia not being willing to bend.

I'm actually pretty convinced people like MacVidCards are avenues/agents for Nvidia to put pressure on Apple for negotiating strength. But, if Nvidia didn't want to make custom cards for the can, at least not at a price that made sense, it was going nowhere.

 

[mattspace]

That's kind of the same thing as "guessing wrong" - just from the other side. Of course, all guesses are made with the intent to be right - again - does anyone here think Apple intentionally set out to build a bad product after all that time & effort? I think not.

Not being user-upgradable, not being built on commodity parts that could be exchanged in the field, not being flexible enough to have parts changed to a different brand when the original vendor can't deliver, these are the hallmarks of a bad design.

People (primarily Mac bloggers) defend it as an "engineering marvel" - it endemically cooked its freaking graphics cards for smeg's sake. It's as much an engineering marvel, as the Ford Pinto.

So yes, when Apple made the decision to build something that did not have characteristics that protected the customer from Apple's lack of effective industry precognition, they intentionally built a bad product.
[doublepost=1516753425][/doublepost]

I think the reality is that AMD was willing to provide cut-down FirePros in a custom SKU as the underdog. Nvidia wasn't, certainly not to the price Apple would want. It's not something they really needed.

Another way to look at this - AMD was willing to allow Apple to put the "FirePro" brand on cards that were in reality just cheap Radeon parts with extra VRAM, not actual FirePros with ECC etc, because they were due to terminate the FirePro branding entirely within a year or so, so it didn't matter to them if Apple put a workstation into the market that looked relatively cheaper than a pair of their standalone retail Pro GPUs

Nvidia, on the other hand, was going to require Apple to actually purchase Quadro parts, in order to get the Quadro name and "Pro GPU" nomenclature (which is what Apple felt was important), which if you believe a certain leaker to a certain podcast, was going to add ~US$2000 per machine to the price.

 

[singhs.apps]

Apple doesn’t have the same influence over its Mac hardware vendors as it does for iOS devices.

Maybe apple didn’t intend to make a bad product ( and TBH it’s marketing team with ancillary apple enthusiast tech sites tend to go over board ohhing and aahing over its engineering marvel whilst having little clue of how that engineering thing works. There are very few sites that look under all that shiny surface to dissect and put it through its paces before taking a call on whether it truly is an outstanding product or more oomph than substance)

It is for a reason the PC industry didn’t scamper to imitate the tcMP. It is not a coincidence that almost immediately HP led a campaign to woo over Mac Pro users. Any industrial designer ( the correct term for artists who design for hardware - the ones who are supposed to have aesthetic skills with good understanding of engineering) worth his/her salt would have immediately seen its shortcomings.

If Apple had continued to maintain the tcMP with small updates or if they saw the light sooner and reacted sooner to the issues , we might still have a robust Eco system around the Mac Pro.

AMD is showing signs of some tangible performance in its lineup, but the success of Nvidia in the compute space has as much to do with its software support as with its hardware.

And yes Nvidia’s exit from Apple lineup was just pure business politics and nothing else.

Anyway it’s all water under the bridge now, and Apple has shown a willingness to rethink its strategy. At the very least hopefully it has realised it can’t apply the same metric across its lineup.

Let’s see.