This particular sub forum is at least populated by professioals who tend more to reason than actual flames. If you have problems with even this level of discussion then I guess the internet is not for you.
Um, there has been a lot of posts here since the 2013 release that apple "Abandoned the professional market". I have never seen evidence of this. We have had to deal with it for YEARS here. I used to LOVE this place. it is not "this discussion", it is that "this discussion" has been discussed since 2014. Until there is proof that the 2013 Mac Pro cannot even LAUNCH programs, they are certainly suitable for "professional" work. Does it suit YOUR "professional" work? I do not know. Each pro has their own needs. Mine is different than yours. And yours is different than Joe Somebody's walking down the street. If your professional workflow needs dual or triple $5,000 Quadro video cards, obviously the Mac Pro does not suit your needs.
The 2016 Macbook Pro "issue" just got me so frustrated with this, but this has been going on since 2013. "Can't upgrade the components", "Can't add additional internal drives" and more things like that. Were you here in 2013 when the system was released? People are still calling it the trashcan because IT IS SO HORRIBLE!
Price wise, I get you. It should have had a price drop or the starting RAM increased.
And I get you guys, I really do. I love NVIDIA cards WAY WAY WAY WAY more than AMD cards. But AMD cards DO have their advantages, like with FCPX. AMD also does more "custom" cards for OEMs and NVIDIA does not. Maybe if NVIDIA did something similar, we would have a choice.
On my Windows systems, I would NEVER use an AMD card. NVIDIA all the way. But Apple software works BETTER with AMD cards. So for Apple systems, I prefer AMD. It sucks if your program is locked to using the proprietary CUDA to do its job.
But until the 2013 Mac, or any mac, states "sorry, you cannot even open X program. Thanks!", how are these not "professional" systems? Why are people still thinking it is the 90s or early 2000s with processor generations? So the Xeons are two generations old. Are the new ones 2,000% better?
My 2010 6-core Xeon at 3.33Ghz performs at the same speed as my 2015 Windows desktop 6-core i7 at 3.33Ghz with the latest generation at the time. Why is that? These days, processor generation does not matter at all. Now I wouldn't go out and buy the first generation i7 or anything like that. But something two generations old is NOT THAT BAD. People are still getting "professional" work done on a G5! How many generations old is that processor?
"internet is not for me" so the internet is just these forums then? You do realize you cannot get by without the internet these days right? For most of us, it is the only way we can even apply for a job.
Anyway, sorry for my 2016 Macbook Pro frustrations being brought up here, and the frustrations since 2013! Back to the topic!
I think now that TB3/USB-C is being HEAVILY pushed, we will see a new Mac Pro when the new Xeons are available. That might be the "last Mac Pro", but that would be okay. I am mostly holding out from buying the 2013 one (even though it beats anything else for what I need - FCPX) due to it coming with TB2 and a non-standard port. I do think we will at least see one more update to it.
