TB is certainly not slower than eSATA. Even 1st-gen Thunderbolt was already faster.
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
TB is certainly not slower than eSATA. Even 1st-gen Thunderbolt was already faster.
I don't see the next Mac Pro tower ever being a modular "slot-box".... that you can build a 4x Nvidia 1080ti type maxed out, liquid cooled, $20,000+ machine.
Apple is always focused on selling an "as-is" product that's optimized for their own software suite of Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic Pro, Xcode, and their various developer tools... etc.
If that's not what you want then you're just a PC person in denial that really likes their new iPhone.
Apple is always focused on selling an "as-is" product that's optimized for their own software suite of Final Cut Pro, Motion, Logic Pro, Xcode, and their various developer tools... etc.
If that's not what you want then you're just a PC person in denial that really likes their new iPhone.
For a sound card I doubt eSATA is faster than the current thunderbolt 2 cards like Presonus Quantum...And the 2013 Mac Pro doesn't throttle or make much noise from what I can gather in youtube tests where they put a head gun to it and test it maxed, and besides the fan doesn't even go further than around 2000rpm which is much much more sensible than the freaking 6200rpm turbine that is the macbook pro. So ya TB soundcards do solve a big problem indeed, for us that need fast round trip latency that just got a hell of a lot better than using USB or Firewire, and you can use the same sound card and get the same results going directly to and from a desktop to a laptop.
Incorrect. We're just believers in the Apple that used to care about professionals. The old Mac Pro was a perfect machine for its time. Just because we don't like Tim Cook's direction doesn't mean we're "in denial." We simply want good products. It's not too much to ask for, and it's not outside the realm of possibility either. Apple just needs to screw their heads on straight and then they'll be set.
Exactly ! Please tell this to all the iPhone X notch defenders, no pro photographer in their right mind would choose that over a clean uninterupted 16:9 or similar display. No pro ever asked for the headphone jack to be removed. I just bought another brand new 6S (sold the other one to my mom) am I to also go out and buy a "brand new" cheese grater product in late 2018 ? I'm seriously looking at 2012 mac mini or 2013 mac pro because I can't wait any longer and need something that's okay, not too archaic, faster than my early 2011 macbook pro and something that doesn't rape my bank account, that means 2017 iMac Pro is out, anything but stock macbook pro is out, because 1tb upgrade option means I could buy two used mac pro 2013's or 6 mac mini's for the same money
They've half heartedly been trying that idea for the past few years and it tanked .
In reference to your sig - they now cater to people who like iPhones so much that they give Macs a shot, and are now in denial about the decline of the ecosystem they invested in .
How are people still going on about the iPhone X display when it's not interrupting your image unless you specifically want it to?
My understanding is that many pro photographers do use the iPhone X because I think general consensus is that it has the best camera - and since many pro photographers also use Macs it makes sense that they remain in the Apple ecosystem. And as others have said, the notch is not visible during image capture or viewing. And, inevitably, most high-end Android phones have copied the notch anyway.
Likewise audio pros have long had no use for the headphone jack as they use external DACs via the Lightening port.
Not really sure from the rest what specifically you are looking for - and the impression that I get is that price is a key part of the issue for you, performance isn’t really an issue for you, so not sure that the next Mac Pro is going to be the right product for you either I’m afraid.
Lol wut ?!
I believe the consensus out there is while IphoneX has the best cameras in any apple phone, offerings from google and others are probably more desirable at camera-ing. Most pro photos carry a snap and shoot / phone for sampling and geotagging, so they can come back with their mortgaged Hasselblad medium formats, and crews of unpaid interns shuffling through duffle bags of lenses, and misplaced power supplies for the lightning equipment. I have yet to see a NG spread showing a nature photographer decked out in a ghillie suit on the side of a mountain, with a 1200mm glass canon gaffer taped to their iPhoneX.
Most 'Pro Street' photogs, sport Leicas, because their image is as important/fashionable as the ones they take ( jab at elitist street photogs ).
Selfie masters, iJustsomethinged, etc ... sure they are pro photographers .. if you want to be pedantic about semantics. But let us be pragmatic here. You could give these people a toilet plunger instead of a camera, and their results would be nearly indistinguishable.
Likewise, I don't know of one professional sound engineer with their UA/RME/Apogee/Focusrite/etc converters plugged into their iPhones, mixing a live show from a VIP booth. Or in any studio... Maybe.. just maybe as a field recorder, but most pros I know have dedicated units for those, that have pro quality mics, preamps, and removable media in one small handheld package. Nor do I know any working audio engineer professional that doesn't gag at the mention of a 2.5mm headphone jack ( jab at elitist pro audio engineers )
You are describing usage scenarios straight from Apple's marketing team, that in my experience do not exist in the 'real world'
What if we had a Mac that we could stuff a couple of these babies in
https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/20/...-rtx-2080-specs-pricing-release-date-features
https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/20/...-rtx-2080-specs-pricing-release-date-features
Last edited:
Tim cook: “this looks too powerful....let’s just soldier and give low end product.”What if we had a Mac´s that we could stuff a couple of these babies in
https://www.theverge.com/2018/8/20/...-rtx-2080-specs-pricing-release-date-features
No, because the "modular Mac Pro" is planned for a 2019 release.
The revised Mac Mini is supposedly for October, 2018.
I was being facetious. But I'm a bit curious how this thing is going to fit in with a module mac pro, it is basically the headless iMac a lot of us have been hoping for. Maybe it will free up Apple to not care about the low end Mac Pro market.
Pretty good chance it will be far more a "headless" MBP than and headless iMac. Remember Apple's largest (most units) 'Pro' category Mac product is the MBP. It is not the iMac and by a huge margin not the Mac Pro. The iMac has a "go Pro" option. Are they really going to put on both sides of the regular iMac ????
From the Bloomberg article.
"... The computer has been favored because of its lower price, and it’s popular with app developers, those running home media centers, and server farm managers. For this year’s model, Apple is focusing primarily on these pro users, and new storage and processor options are likely to make it more expensive than previous versions, the people said. ..."
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...plan-revamped-low-cost-macs-to-reignite-sales
home media centers...... cover that with a headless MBP.. Yep. Especially if pair it up with a decent mobile GPU.
I don't think that is a 'Pro' segment though.
app developers ( 4-6 cores ) probably would be happy. This is definitely in the scope of what they classify as 'Pro'. [ Large fraction of app development is done on MBP. ]
sever farm Mac-Mini-colocation was/is a sizable bizness. But likely Apple would tag that as 'Pro'.
A Mac Mini Pro with a Kaby Lake G ( Intel + AMD GPU mash up). 4 cores and a on-package dGPU in a 45W-100W range. System would have to get a bit bigger but..... it would be far away from filling the role a Mac Pro could/would fill.
Also relatively likely that "Pro' here means costs more than a mini classically has ( "more expensive" in the quote). If Apple to completely tossing HDDs from the Mac Mini and assigning T2 driven SSD to the Mini then there will certainly be substantially higher price creep. That could be the bulk of the cost increase at the rates Apple charges for SSDs.
Those Kaby Lake G mash ups would be something Apple would latch onto if wanted a more "beefy" Mac Mini. Those are all relatively solid use cases covered by Mini Before. ( if there is an HDD , perhaps Fusion drive is lower bound, then still can do some reason media serving. )
Even if not the Mash up the MBP 15" top end 6 core + mobile dGPU with significantly better cooler would be huge bump over previous Mac Mini, but still not really getting past the upper ranges of iMac 27" line up ( presuming they get bumped to 4-8 cores with similarly new tech over next 10 months. ) .
[doublepost=1534816145][/doublepost]
if they have substantively ( or radically) grown the Mac Mini that's a bit doubtful. Only if Apple was going to ship a Mac Pro in Jan-Feb. Decent chance they have slipped out of that window. Perhaps not far out, but probably have work to finish.
there is nothing practically to support that at all. It was relatively clear just from the outward design of the product. However, a Hot Chips session today was about the Intel + AMD mash up package. It is just a CPU that is hooked to an AMD mobile dGPU via x8 PCI-e lanes. That's it. Notes points 5 and 6 on this slide
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13242/hot-chips-2018-intel-on-graphics-live-blog
One of the major tasks of the project was how to do it without doing major cross share of IP under development. In fact, that part of the package isn't even EMIB. It is just older muliti chip package tech.
" ...
02:39PM EDT - Several constraints
02:39PM EDT - Taking off-the-shelf components (minimal changes)
02:39PM EDT - Connections had to be PCIe
02:39PM EDT - in discrete form
Some more quotes from the slide
....
02:46PM EDT - No shared interfaces between the parts
....
"
The one thing there is this
"... 02:32PM EDT - A multi-generational project (!) (!) ..."
I think Intel intends to put their own dGPU in that place. If they have something by 2020 then they probably started their dGPU effort before this mashup did. At least in the early design. Intel has a GPU. They need scale and have being handed at 2x sized transistor budget then what they were limited to.
If they Intel design hits a speed bump then they can probably sub in another generation of AMD dGPUs on the next revision.
Intel would likely use HBM2 ( or whatever is next ) since that is part of the space 'shrinkage" they were shooting for here.
IMHO, I think Intel will ship something in the smaller end of the GPU 'pool' ( desktop or 'mid-high' end mobile ) first. Then do the big compute GPU version.
Intel GPU ship in far more Macs that do AMD GPUs. So macOS (and mac only apps) is going to have Intel GPU optimizations in it whether this mashups exists or not.
Last edited:
It's slightly off topic, but while we're talking about it... The Vega/i7 combo might be a good fit for a higher end Mac Mini.
...But I'd also love to have a six core in a Mac Mini, and I don't think Intel is making any of the six cores with Vega on board yet?
...But I'd also love to have a six core in a Mac Mini, and I don't think Intel is making any of the six cores with Vega on board yet?
6 core is almost a must if "pro" moniker is on the line. (I hope Apple won't pull a nTB again and just slap Pro to it). And I doubt the dGPU, if any, will be substantial if we look at the Mini's history, particularly when TB3 is present and eGPU is already a focus across Macs/macOS. In fact I think most will be happy to have a 15" 2018 6 core equivalent if it means no-nonsense cooling.
[doublepost=1534823782][/doublepost]
There was already a large downward void that the tcMP did not fill, since many people refused to consider the 2014 Mini even existed as an option, and the notion of bundling a permanent display with the iMac/MBP(as desktop) was also forced it off wish lists for many realistic scenarios. Given the modular Mac Pro's potentially high throughput, high (heat) budget, and higher cost, the void is even larger now than before. The question Apple asked is if the customer base of needing a small scale desktop had already shifted to laptops to make it worthwhile investing a newer Mini form factor, and it seems they are willing to at least walk one step for now.
Even if the new Mini is priced slightly higher than the 2014, as long as it provides a reasonable amount of upgradability and I/Os then I can see many use cases prefer it over other Macs in the entire line up. Headless server, 4kHDR HDMI HTPC, iOS development / VM, print & pre-press that need a calibrated 3rd party display etc all will love a new and more powerful Mini even if it comes at a cost.
Last edited:
The TDP budget isn't that high. I also suspect that few of the system vendors wanted to pay that much also. If add the 6+ core cost to the cost of the Vega + 'custom' HBM2 then it would be a lot. ( these are z-height optimized so your 'thin system" BOM prices are rising quite high. ]
Will get into same problem that Mac Pro 2013 did with painting into a corner when the GPU and CPU are each up in the 80W range and competing on the same cooler with only indirect, decoupled at a low level thermal control.
Not at all clear though whether the “pro” moniker is something Apple is putting on this, or that’s just the interpretation of the reporter based on several of the Mac mini use cases being niche use cases. This might be (and indeed may be most likely to be) nothing more than the existing mini with some higher spec options.
As a pro photographer, I can say with authority that iPhones don't have cameras - they have holes in them which capture snapshots of shoddy quality .
Seriously, that is hilarious .
As for the Apple ecosystem, that's another good one .
The other day I spent an hour getting a custom ringtone from my Mac onto my iPhone .
Thanks, iTunes ...
Anecdotal, but just one of many similar experiences I had .
OSX and iOS don't play well with each other, especially when you don't share all your stuff with the Apple cloud .
Sigh. I wasn’t suggesting that pro photographers use an iPhone as their primary camera. That would clearly be ridiculous. I was suggesting that pro photographers have iPhones as their smartphone - and apparently you are an example of that.
But nevermind, I probably misunderstood what the previous poster was saying.
" ...For this year’s model, Apple is focusing primarily on these pro users, and new storage and ...... more expensive than previous versions, the people said.
The pronoun these links it back to the examples.
That last clause, 'the people said' implies that the reporter is paraphrasing the what the Apple sources said. It is a complicated sentence, but it is a bit or reach to say that it only applies to that "second half" major clause about "new storage ...".
Lumping developers ( app developers) into what Apple considers who are in the 'Pro' classification is entirely consistent with their earlier sessions with media. I'm not sure how a server farm manager who is renting/leasing/hosting Mac minis for pay is not a 'Pro'. The only one that is squishy is the "home media server' subset outlined.
Doubtful these three cases are 100% of the use cases that Apple used to drive the Mac Mini into an update, but likely major subsets that they have seen in marketing research. ( Apple has problems in countries where the US dollar has higher ratio to local currency so "lowest affordable Mac' is an issue there but not uniformly a problem globally. )
Folks thinking the that Mini was going to turn into a small "box with slots " are probably way off base. Same for desktop CPU or desktop GPU.
However, "new storage options .... more expensive" could be Apple moving to toss the internal HDD only option. If the SSD is already present there is a pretty good chance they tweak the case design. ( e.g., on iMac Pro Apple tossed the HDD to add a bigger cooling solution. ). It may be still be a bit too soon to go flash only on entry level priced systems, but if this is the new case for the "next 5 years" then could pull the trigger on that now.
(or they could grow the Mini a bit in height. Or go vertical; standing rectangle. ). An evolutionary step. If they are still tracking media server use cases then more height and taking one 14mm 2.5" drive could get them capacities in the 4TB range. ( which is enough for more than a few folks. )
One of the reason Mini didn't have decent dGPU before is that there wasn't reasonable enough room to put it in. There are better options now 3-4 years later.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/13242/hot-chips-2018-intel-on-graphics-live-blog
There is a decent chance that the 2014 model was just an intermediate step to where they are trying to go. ( and that the new Mini won't be a retreat back to the 2010-2012 models .. or earlier. )
Not that all of the Mini's would have that but if expand the logic board just a bit into 'recovered' 2.5" drive space they could have an optional board for the top end Minis that had a good option for GPU 'horsepower' for decent augmented reality , app development.