Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
It is technically feasible, but likely would be substantively different from what Apple did with the MP 2009-2012 models. Several points.

1. The tray will likely be large and complicated. 2009 tray was not a simple 'socket' like alternative. Neither did it plug into a commodity socket. The MP 2013 CPU was on a 'tray' also.

Neither one of those were a commodity part that Apple sold at highly affordable prices.


2. The SoC is quite likely going to serve as a "Black Hole" effect and pull more stuff onto the tray (besides the GPU). The SSD controller is in the SoC. So the SSD Modules connectors would likely get pulled back over also.
Since the GPU and Thunderbolt controllers, highly likely would also get at least a couple of TB and perhaps a HDMI socket attached to the card also. ( GPU outputs are often provisioned off the same 'card' that the GPU package is soldered to for good reasons. )

The RAM? Highly likely attached.

The System Management Controller (SMC) is relatively tightly coupled to the SoC (some tasks split between the two) so it too.

The old MP 2009 era board had the "Southbridge" on the logic board.

upload_2019-7-3_20-39-50-png.846515


The SoC pulls that across onto the 'tray' also. So instead of having just the ESI/DMI link across the tray edge you now have all of that 'fan out' from the Southbridge adding to the complexity of the tray connector.
( a contributing factor to why some of the I/O like display out and at least some Thunderbolt would be far easier just to run out the back end of the tray. )

The other offset would likely be that wouldn't get two x16 PCI-e v4 lanes run out to slots but into a two input PCI-e PLEX Switch (like on the MP 2019). Just to cut down on lanes have to traverse off the card. Run 32 lanes and then fan out on the logic board. Additionally, the PCI-e switch will serve as a 're-driver' since there are much more restrictive distance limits for PCI-e v4 (and up ... faster pragmatically gets shorter. ).

Maybe another eight other x1 PCI-e v4 off the tray to do stuff like the 10GbE , Wi-Fi , etc.

The Mac Pro 2009-2012 is a fairly tall system but ends up with only 4 slots. That is an internal space trade off. Apple probably would have to 'blow away' Slot 8 in a MP 2019 chassis to both put in a monster proprietary connector and allow enough 'tall' clearance for the large heatsink. ( instead of width of the chassis now have to consume height. )


3. All of this highly likely would not be longitudinally compatible. 2-3 years down the road Intel CPU sockets aren't compatible. That SMC controller is going to need to interact with the Power Management Controller. Generally DDR5 DIMMs don't fit in DDR3 sockets. Modularity, in and of itself, doesn't buy future computability.

Same baseline reason why SSD modules 3-5 years down the road probably won't work with a 5 year old SSD controller. (even if tried to shovel the SSD module connector to the main logic board , it only presents long term problems). The more evolutionary stick I/O try to run off the tray to drive down the costs of the tray , the more the tray will get fixed in time.

If try to run TBv4 out to ports that hand off the main logic board. Are those paths and edge PHYS logic packages going to work with TBv5 ? Probably not. Current USB4 paths going to work with future USB5 paths and PHYS? Probably not.





And when did Apple show huge interest in selling MP 2010 trays to 2009 folks? Or MP2013 trays to other 2013 folks? It is still the same company.

The 2009-2012 tray was largely a inventory cost saving measure by Apple to combine two sub-products into a single shared main logic board ( single socket and dual socket workstations sharing more designed components). It wasn't a super deep love infatuation with modularity just for modularity. Nor was it sell commodity computer component parts for next 5 years exercise. Most 2009-2010 era dual socket boards from competitors were larger ones where could fan out past the 8 DIMM slots that Apple provisioned. That tray capped it 8 because it has far less room than a conventional larger main logicboard.




Even if got a tray it extremely likely would support 10 years of updates. Most likely Apple would move from one extremely proprietary tray socket to another once got the next Mn Ultra/Extreme update. The used tray market would last for 10 years, but Apple the container on active support for 10 years? Probably not. Apple's Vintage/Obsolete support policies start the countdown when the product is superceded and withdrawn from sales. Selling 'next gen' Mn Ultra/Extreme trays (and hence new MP) would put the old one on a countdown clock that at best runs 7 years.

It is unikely that Ultra/Extreme updates will come yearly, but also unlikely that they are going to be on 3 or more year update cycle either. Probably closer to 2 years ( over 1 and less than 3 ). 2+7 isn't going to get you to 10.
can you rewrite that in one phrase?
 
  • Like
Reactions: brucemr
I don't know. I kinda like not hearing the forced seal-clapping and "woooo!" from an audience (or, worse, NO reaction when the presenter is obviously expecting some :D ). These pre-produced things are error/glitch free and pretty neat to watch (the editing, transitions, graphics, etc.). Trotting out a fear-of-public-speaking CEO of some third-party tech/gaming company to rattle on for 10-12 minutes, live on stage while trying to sound breezy/witty/hip, is painful. The video-based events/presentations can bypass all that awkward, dead space of past live events. I've grown to like them. They seem a bit tighter/more focused overall.
I agree! Post-Steve, the live events grew more and more painful and groan-worthy every year. Craig is the only presenter who comes anywhere close to approaching Steve's level. Craig is a natural up on stage, working the crowd with ease. He has great delivery and timing. The rest of the post-Steve presenters are anywhere from barely watchable to downright cringe/awful.

I miss the energy of Steve's live shows, but those are gone for good. I'd much rather watch a tightly produced video than a bunch of awkward techies who, brilliant as they no doubt are, can't deliver an energetic and engaging presentation. A lot of that awkward stuff can be fixed with good editing, which is why I find the pre-recorded presentations much more enjoyable to watch.

Post-Steve, these things just aren't what they used to be. I had the joy of watching all those 1998-2010-ish Macworld (including New York, Paris and Tokyo), WWDC, NAB, standalone events, etc. with Steve holding the stage for 90+ minutes...and never once glancing at the clock and thinking "when is this going to be over?!", which is about all I do now with Tim and his rotating cast of presenters. Wanna talk about "special magic". Those too young to have sat through those - either in person or online - as they happened really missed something special; thankfully they're mostly all on YouTube.
I only got to see the Steve Show live once, at NeXTSTEP Expo in 1994 (I believe). I had a press pass and got to sit in the second row, front and center. As much as I enjoyed watching him on video, live was a whole other level. Like you, I never once glanced at my watch or felt the least bit bored. I, and the rest of the packed auditorium, hung on his every word for the entire presentation. The excitement, applause and cheers from the crowd were so palpable, energetic and visceral. After Steve, no Apple event has approached that kind of raw energy ever.
 
Other than it being a flagship for bragging, I don't see the point of a new Mac Pro. Without full expandability it'll just be a marginally faster Mac that will quickly evolve into a doorstop when the next generations of Mini Pro ( or Studio or MacBook Pro...) are released. Honestly, we are basically at the point in history when a $15,000+ computer is a foolish investment. Apple knows this and they're still trying to save face since they promised a new Mac Pro but the wisest thing they could do is continue to improve the Studio and discontinue the Mac Pro...it's the brick-sized cell phone of computers.
1000% agree! Unless the Mac Pro is truly modular and fully expandable/upgradable, what's the point? It seems like a vanity product. They can't possibly make much (any?) money from it. Like you, I feel like we've moved beyond needing such high-end workstation-type computers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3rdpath
That’s quite inappropriate to suggest that the presenters were chosen for diversity reasons. They were chosen based on their respective fields of expertise within the company. That’s why, if you actually look at their titles on the screen rather than assume they’re unqualified, you’ll see that they’re VPs of different parts of the company.

With all that being said, none of the presenters are trained actors and that obviously shows. The white male actors are not consistently great either, so you bashing diversity makes zero sense and just reveals your worldview more than anything else.
You clearly don’t understand what the word “diversity” means — it is not strictly about gender or race as you seem to think. What I’m referring to is exactly what the word means — the variety of presenters they use, seemingly just for the sake of variety. I am seeing unskilled presentations from people that you see once and then never again. Why don’t they just stick with a core group of presenters that are most skilled and effective at communicating?

I appreciate quality and consistency. The person on the stage is representing the product and the company — I want to see and hear the best, even if that means the same people show up each and every time.

Part of the problem is definitely the format — I dislike the prerecorded infomercial-type events compared to the live events. The prerecorded WWDC sessions are good, but the product events need to go back to being live, and they need to stick with people that are effective on stage. Not everyone can do it, maybe not even a CEO. I don’t think Elon Musk is a particularly good communicator, but I think Satya Nadella at Microsoft is very effective. At Apple, I believe Craig Federighi is the most unique and natural presenter they have, and I feel he is underutilized.
 
Perhaps. Modern Apple likes its profits. Any of those Pro concepts would be Apple Bean Counters dream come true.

Another key differentiator of Mac Pro (now) is price. You have to thoroughly load Studio to get into the realm of the "starting at" for a relatively old platform Mac Pro.

So if an "all new" Mac Pro only has the same Ultra, it's "starting at" price will easily be ABOVE loaded Studio. If you then pile in some of those other concepts, you pile up Apple pricing (and profitability)... which is exactly what happens now with existing Mac Pro when it is loaded up with extras also not available in Studio Ultra now.

If I was trying to guess the pricing for a 4X Pro, I might:
  • work from base Studio Ultra and multiply that price by 4
  • add in some, probably-hefty premium for slots, case etc.
  • add in some premium for macOS exclusives for Pro, and then... imagining Apple beancounters involved...
  • juice that math even more because "we really want to maximize profits on this one."
$3999 times 4 + $3000 (slots & case premium) + $1000 (macOS exclusives) times 1.5 (icing on icing on the cake) = $29,994 for a "starting at..." price for a 4 Ultra Mac Pro.

Then add additional RAM, SSD, etc at Apple very lucrative pricing. If we use existing pricing for that we might rough up a maxed out 4X Ultra Pro: $7999 times 4 + $2200 * 4 (for 4 more 8TB Apple SSDs) + $3000 (slots) + $1000 (macOS) times 1.5 = $67,194... so the Maxed 4-Ultra Mac Pro might be about $67K based on current Apple pricing and some estimates.

Let's sanity check $67K. How much is a purchased-from-Apple "loaded" Mac Pro now? It looks like it is about $54K. Seems plausible to me the way modern Apple is hunting for profits in every possible thing. Maybe they don't do that last multiplier quite so much? Take it out completely and the tally is about $45K. So maybe they target the same $54K or so ("same great price") and spin how much more power this new Mac Pro has vs. the former one in a series of attractive graphics carefully chosen to strongly imply it is superior in every way by far. That seems easy to envision too.
But is the Mac Pro profitable? How many have they sold? My hunch is, when you look at R&D costs, limited production runs, very few units sold (relative to everything else they sell), and product support, that the Pro probably isn't very profitable. I wouldn't be surprised if they actually lose money on it.

Apple got roasted over the trashcan Pro, so they flexed hard with the follow-up model. 99.9% of their customers aren't Mac Pro buyers, though. To me the Pro is more about vanity and flexing than profits and I'm not sure there's really a need for that now in the Apple Silicon era.
 
You clearly don’t understand what the word “diversity” means — it is not strictly about gender or race as you seem to think. What I’m referring to is exactly what the word means — the variety of presenters they use, seemingly just for the sake of variety. I am seeing unskilled presentations from people that you see once and then never again. Why don’t they just stick with a core group of presenters that are most skilled and effective at communicating?

I appreciate quality and consistency. The person on the stage is representing the product and the company — I want to see and hear the best, even if that means the same people show up each and every time.

Part of the problem is definitely the format — I dislike the prerecorded infomercial-type events compared to the live events. The prerecorded WWDC sessions are good, but the product events need to go back to being live, and they need to stick with people that are effective on stage. Not everyone can do it, maybe not even a CEO. I don’t think Elon Musk is a particularly good communicator, but I think Satya Nadella at Microsoft is very effective. At Apple, I believe Craig Federighi is the most unique and natural presenter they have, and I feel he is underutilized.
Musk is one of the most painful presenters I've ever watched. He makes a lot of the random Apple presenters look like total pros. Nadella is very smooth. Not many people are good on stage and I think that's especially true for techies. I 100% agree with you about Craig. He is fun to watch. He's energetic, smart, has great delivery, and his presentations deliver just the right amount of humor. I'd gladly watch him live for an entire presentation, but he's not the CEO so that's never going to happen.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kierkegaarden
I continue to think the rumors are missing something with the Mac Pro refresh. Just adding internal storage and capture card expansion doesn’t seem compelling enough to be worth it.

I feel there must be an AI and ray-trace rendering accelerator in the works. With both AI and ray-tracing taking a step backwards with Apple Silicon over Intel Mac Pros, there must be a plan. It might not be a typical GPU, but there must be something. They may be keeping it close to the chest and it might not ship right at release to prevent leaks through the supply chain, but Apple would certainly be thinking of this as they have their own teams (and teams at companies Apple’s engineers work closely with like Disney and Otoy) deep in both of these niches.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: singhs.apps
I continue to think the rumors are missing something with the Mac Pro refresh. Just adding storage and capture card expansion doesn’t seem compelling enough to be worth it.

I feel there must be an AI and ray-trace rendering accelerator in the works. With Apple and researchers taking AI algorithms like ChatGPT to new levels and ray-tracing taking a step backwards with Apple Silicon over Intel Mac Pros, there must be a plan. It might not be a typical GPU, but there must be something. They must be keeping it close to the chest and it might not ship right at release, but Apple would certainly be thinking of this as they have their own teams deep in these niches.
Are these current/future performance or user case consideration of Mac Pro users?

Consider the Mac Pro buyer as someone who has not bought a Mac Studio because they want PCIe expansion slots as those who did already bought a 2022 Mac Studio and will keep it until at least year 2026.
 
Mac Pro silicon needs to get away from “Pro, Max, Ultra” etc. It just needs a starting CPU core option with multiple upgradable tiers, and same for GPU and RAM. I Realize that it may not happen this time, but needs to be the longer play for sure. Massive chips that won’t go in anything else by a long shot, even Mac Studio.

There is no unit volume to support a radically different custom chip and super wide upgrade tiers. Folks act like Apple sells 1+ Million Mac Pro per year. They do not. It is likely way more closer to just a 0.1M (if not below) than 1M. If split that into smaller groups ( covered by "Ultra" size grouping and the rest). The upper tier gets even smaller.

To offer the range of Xeon W-2400/3400 and Threadripper Pro + high end dGPU options that Intel/AMD offer Apple would need to have similar volumes of units sales. The SoCs are only going to go into Macs. Those folks have 40+ system vendors they sell to (at least an order of magnitude higher) who sell to Millions of sockets ( again order of magnitude higher). [ The Xeon W-24/34 and Threadripper just repurpose dies which are primarily for the sever market. That is just an adjunct , 'gravy on top' usage for those dies. They are not fully paying for themselves with just workstation sales. ]

The constraining issue is that Apple doesn't try to sell everything to everybody. The number of Mac models probably isn't going past 7-9 range. [ e.g., the iMac 27" died when the Mac Studio got released. That is quite demonstrative that Apple has a 'only this many models' limits on the Mac. Can see it on iPhone side also where a large fraction of the line up is 'last year' and "year before that' old iPhones. There only one model that is consistently refreshed. Apple just doesn't do a ton of different core products in any of the line ups. Apple watch bands are just a non-core, accessory ]

The Mac Pro is likely going to need to share some overlap with the upper end of the Mac Studio to generate SoC unit volume.

What the Studio and the Mac Pro (and perhaps iMac Pro if bring that back) need is something that isn't designed to be a monolithic laptop die with relatively weak general I/O (four x1 PCI-e v4 lanes). This $129 'Celeron' class processor from Intel has more aggregate backhaul bandwidth ( 9 PCI-e v3 lanes ) than the M2 Max does.



It isn't CPU/GPU cores that is the major hole here. That doesn't mean new die function units ( memory controller, CPU cores , GPU cores , etc.), that just means a far better chiplet strategy that scales better where can attach better I/O capabilities. That way can bow-wave on the shared R&D for the building block units , but spend incrementally more on better chiplet implementation. Awkward , chunky chiplets aren't going to work.

If the cost of making the chip goes too high for a relatively very low volume product ... Apple is just as likely to cancel it as make it.
 
Not interested in MacPro with out RT cores in GPU. I don’t want a discrete PCIE GPU with 24GB ram like Nvidia. Give me a 256 GB unified RAM to go with RT cores on the Apple silicon. I would probably have to wait till M3 or may be M4.
 
Last edited:
Why do I feel that the Mac Pro is going to be underwhelming?
Depends on your expectations, expandabilty crowd will probably be disappointed. I will most likely stick to my Linux/indies workstation over M2 MacPro.
 
Related

With Siri, Apple was at the forefront of bringing an AI voice assistant to the masses. As that technology evolved, Apple fell way behind, and now Siri is often viewed as a disappointment that can’t compare with Google Assistant or Alexa. When it comes to generative AI, Apple doesn’t even have a first-mover advantage as it did with Siri. Tech companies big and small are already shipping powerful tools. Without action, Apple will simply wind up making some of the hardware upon which our generative-AI-driven future will run.

Without realizing the power of this new technology in its own software and services, Apple will let everyone else define the state of the art for what could be the most important shift in computing in decades. Perhaps the company is okay with that, but as hardware sales flatten and the software and services side of Apple’s business grows, it really can’t afford not to be a leader in the generative AI revolution.

Without realizing the power of this new technology in its own software and services, Apple will let everyone else define the state of the art for what could be the most important shift in computing in decades. Perhaps the company is okay with that, but as hardware sales flatten and the software and services side of Apple’s business grows, it really can’t afford not to be a leader in the generative AI revolution.
==========

That is a good thought to ponder.
I wonder if Apple wants to use AR running on iOS/IPadOS, and MacOS and combine that with Applications that support AI powered tasks that can automate what you do in a series of steps for content creation in its many forms. Video, Music, Art and, creating papers on various topics. WWDC 2023 will be the place to show off the capabilities of AS SoC's.
Apple doesn’t need to be Midjourney. Apple needs to provide hardware to run inferences locally. I see more custom trained models, used on beefier workstation for generative art and video. Disney could train models based on their own art and use generative AI on workstations.
 
I really hope they don't stop updating the Mac Studio. Would be a shame. It's a nice little beast.
 
Multiple SOC slots?


What if they make a motherboard that can handle expandability via Multiple SOC slots? I don`t know though since it somewhat goes against the grain of "everything on a SOC" idea... Not much hope based on that.. UNLESS they can make a silicon interconnect between each SOC slot. So when you slot in a new SOC, it in effect becomes a bigger processor with more unified RAM.

24 cpu cores and 76 gfx cores on baseline 1 SOC ULTRA version.

M2 Ultra 192 GB RAM x 4 on 4 SOC slots for a maximum of 768gb of Unified RAM AND 96 cpu cores 304 gfx cores and 768GB unified RAM.

Would need 8 slots for a behemoth system with 1,5TB RAM etc.


Yeaaaah, this one is firmly on the pipe-dream spectrum, but a fun one to speculate about all the same... It would be a very PRO platform to say the very least! (very Pro price-tag too)

It is technically feasible, but likely would be substantively different from what Apple did with the MP 2009-2012 models. Several points.

1. The tray will likely be large and complicated. 2009 tray was not a simple 'socket' like alternative. Neither did it plug into a commodity socket. The MP 2013 CPU was on a 'tray' also.

Neither one of those were a commodity part that Apple sold at highly affordable prices.


2. The SoC is quite likely going to serve as a "Black Hole" effect and pull more stuff onto the tray (besides the GPU). The SSD controller is in the SoC. So the SSD Modules connectors would likely get pulled back over also.
Since the GPU and Thunderbolt controllers, highly likely would also get at least a couple of TB and perhaps a HDMI socket attached to the card also. ( GPU outputs are often provisioned off the same 'card' that the GPU package is soldered to for good reasons. )

The RAM? Highly likely attached.

The System Management Controller (SMC) is relatively tightly coupled to the SoC (some tasks split between the two) so it too.

The old MP 2009 era board had the "Southbridge" on the logic board.

upload_2019-7-3_20-39-50-png.846515


The SoC pulls that across onto the 'tray' also. So instead of having just the ESI/DMI link across the tray edge you now have all of that 'fan out' from the Southbridge adding to the complexity of the tray connector.
( a contributing factor to why some of the I/O like display out and at least some Thunderbolt would be far easier just to run out the back end of the tray. )

The other offset would likely be that wouldn't get two x16 PCI-e v4 lanes run out to slots but into a two input PCI-e PLEX Switch (like on the MP 2019). Just to cut down on lanes have to traverse off the card. Run 32 lanes and then fan out on the logic board. Additionally, the PCI-e switch will serve as a 're-driver' since there are much more restrictive distance limits for PCI-e v4 (and up ... faster pragmatically gets shorter. ).

Maybe another eight other x1 PCI-e v4 off the tray to do stuff like the 10GbE , Wi-Fi , etc.

The Mac Pro 2009-2012 is a fairly tall system but ends up with only 4 slots. That is an internal space trade off. Apple probably would have to 'blow away' Slot 8 in a MP 2019 chassis to both put in a monster proprietary connector and allow enough 'tall' clearance for the large heatsink. ( instead of width of the chassis now have to consume height. )


3. All of this highly likely would not be longitudinally compatible. 2-3 years down the road Intel CPU sockets aren't compatible. That SMC controller is going to need to interact with the Power Management Controller. Generally DDR5 DIMMs don't fit in DDR3 sockets. Modularity, in and of itself, doesn't buy future computability.

Same baseline reason why SSD modules 3-5 years down the road probably won't work with a 5 year old SSD controller. (even if tried to shovel the SSD module connector to the main logic board , it only presents long term problems). The more evolutionary stick I/O try to run off the tray to drive down the costs of the tray , the more the tray will get fixed in time.

If try to run TBv4 out to ports that hand off the main logic board. Are those paths and edge PHYS logic packages going to work with TBv5 ? Probably not. Current USB4 paths going to work with future USB5 paths and PHYS? Probably not.





And when did Apple show huge interest in selling MP 2010 trays to 2009 folks? Or MP2013 trays to other 2013 folks? It is still the same company.

The 2009-2012 tray was largely a inventory cost saving measure by Apple to combine two sub-products into a single shared main logic board ( single socket and dual socket workstations sharing more designed components). It wasn't a super deep love infatuation with modularity just for modularity. Nor was it sell commodity computer component parts for next 5 years exercise. Most 2009-2010 era dual socket boards from competitors were larger ones where could fan out past the 8 DIMM slots that Apple provisioned. That tray capped it 8 because it has far less room than a conventional larger main logicboard.




Even if got a tray it extremely likely would support 10 years of updates. Most likely Apple would move from one extremely proprietary tray socket to another once got the next Mn Ultra/Extreme update. The used tray market would last for 10 years, but Apple the container on active support for 10 years? Probably not. Apple's Vintage/Obsolete support policies start the countdown when the product is superceded and withdrawn from sales. Selling 'next gen' Mn Ultra/Extreme trays (and hence new MP) would put the old one on a countdown clock that at best runs 7 years.

It is unikely that Ultra/Extreme updates will come yearly, but also unlikely that they are going to be on 3 or more year update cycle either. Probably closer to 2 years ( over 1 and less than 3 ). 2+7 isn't going to get you to 10.
 
I like, many iMac owners love AIO and I have zero intentions to replacing its final Security Update.

If my use case changes then buy a new Mac.

So.... 2012 iMac 27" 22nm > 2023 iMac 27" 5nm > 2033 iMac 27" 0.5nm (A5)

If no new iMac appears in 2023 then I'll follow your suggestion of a Mac mini M3 3nm + Studio Display
What if a new iMac comes out, but only 24"?
Btw, i like your update frequency: I tend to make them last just as long ;)
 
I think most of us would be ecstatic with a color 27" 5K iMac that can do at least up to M1 Max, if not an Ultra.

This separating components thing and then charging $4K for a combination is absurd. I feel the Mac Studio is a flop, it's just a Mac Mini, which now has an M2 Pro chip. The Mac Mini also crushes a $12K Mac Pro in reviews, something is seriously wrong. We're not all working at Pixar here.

I first got into Apple because of the G3 and iBook Clam which were stunning, way ahead of anything "business" at the time.
 
What if a new iMac comes out, but only 24"?
Btw, i like your update frequency: I tend to make them last just as long ;)
See last statement. I expect the M3 to top out at 32GB RAM as the M2 is limited to 24GB.

I realized that the 1990's 3 year replacement cycle does not apply in the last decade considering hardware & software performance have outpaced use cases. So for org reasons and personal reasons I looked online what is the typical replacement cycle per device and house hold appliance.

I'm not a software dev, engineer, scientist, mathematician or other persons that need to deliver a commercial output ASAP.

I'm a serious photographer that has not updated their ILC body since 2015. I've had 32GB RAM on this iMac for exactly 3,650 days. Runs great! I'm only upgrading this as final Security Update was more than half a year ago, preventive maintenance because it's a decade old, some parts of it have failed like the HDD of my Fusion Drive/left speaker/bottom LED backlight of screen, and I want to 5nm process node tech from 22nm.

Zero interest in OLCP patchers as they're not 100% functional if the macOS version's too advanced and it will slow down the Mac to a point that Apple knows that quality of life improvements diminish.
 
Having seen owners of small businesses invest in the current Mac Pro for things like music production and tasks that sit closer to the entry of the machine’s capability, only to see the M series processors destroy that performance in a cheaper and more ‘future proofed’ machine, well it’s not a great look and I feel for those that trusted in the direction Apple looked to be going for their pro machines.
Curious, do the machines still do the tasks for which they were purchased? How long ago did were they purchased? Did they understand when they bought their Mac Pro systems that there would be new machines that would be faster or did they expect that this was the last product Apple would ever release?
I’d love for them to bring out a range of M series expansion cards to upgrade the current Mac Pro especially if they’re going to be using the same design. This could also answer the question about modularity, you might not be able to buy any RAM and put it in, but maybe you could buy Apple expansion cards. It’s keeps in line with Apple’s will for proprietary tech to sell you and gives user upgrades.
Given that I expect that any new machine will be PCIe 4, I cannot see an Apple Silicon upgrade card. That is the reason that none of the "upgradable CPU" systems were ever a really good option.
 
I think most of us would be ecstatic with a color 27" 5K iMac that can do at least up to M1 Max, if not an Ultra.

This separating components thing and then charging $4K for a combination is absurd. I feel the Mac Studio is a flop, it's just a Mac Mini, which now has an M2 Pro chip. The Mac Mini also crushes a $12K Mac Pro in reviews, something is seriously wrong. We're not all working at Pixar here.

I first got into Apple because of the G3 and iBook Clam which were stunning, way ahead of anything "business" at the time.
No. That territory belongs to Studio and Mini Pro. AIO are limited to consumer grade m1 24 inch iMacs.
 
People who use Studio are thinking they might be tempted to invest in incoming MacPro.
People, MacPro is a workstation and will be priced and equipped as such. I think it may start from low 4k in bare configuration but go up all the way to 15k
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.