The 2019 Mac Pro will be what Apple wants it to be, and it won't, and shouldn't, make ever...

191011121315»

Comments

  • Reply 281 of 289
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,058member
    lorin schultz said:

    Oh please tell me you didn't actually indulge that ridiculous behaviour. I was embarrassed to the point of cringing when I saw that post.

    😒
  • Reply 282 of 289
    cornchip said:
    lorin schultz said:

    Oh please tell me you didn't actually indulge that ridiculous behaviour. I was embarrassed to the point of cringing when I saw that post.

    😒
    LOL! Aw, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to make you feel bad!

    My fear is that getting a response to his challenge will just embolden him, but maybe the fact that you COULD prove it will encourage him to think before he posts. :)

    Usually he's one of the first to respond to a story with "predictions" of all the negative things people will post in response.
    cornchip
  • Reply 283 of 289
    20+ year Graphic Designer here that also dabbles in light video work and web work...

    What I personally want from my Mac:
    The ability to add/replace RAM, Internal Hard Drives, PCI-style cards including Graphics cards, and in the ultra rare occasion, processor upgrade... all with items I can EASILY find through NewEgg, Best Buy, B&H, etc...

    I do not have the luxury of disposable income to max out my Mac from the starting gate. I would much rather start off with a minimal amount of RAM and upgrade with cheaper, third-party modules down the road as needed. I would much rather have 4 internal drives than externals taking up desktop space. If there are not enough USB/ThunderBolt ports built-in I would like to have the option of installing a PCI card for more ports. Finally, I would love to be able to run two video cards to my multi-monitor set up, The first card driving my main, larger screen and the second card running my ancillary screens.
    cornchip
  • Reply 284 of 289
    bkkcanuckbkkcanuck Posts: 736member
    k2kw said:
    danvm said:
    k2kw said:
    Soli said:

    Bottom line: Apple owes you nothing over what they purchase agreement included, just as you own them nothing but the cost of the machine that you choose to by.

    Apple's success was built on the long term commitment if its Macintosh user base and before that the Apple II base. Without this commitment, it most likely would have gone extinct sometime in the 1990-ties. 

    The expectation from the committed user base is that Apple keep investing in them and their needs, and not just deliver a point in time box like most PC manufacturers do.

    Apple used to deliver products that in sum comprised an ecosystem that their committed user base could live happily in, and Steve Jobs in particular understood how important this is for the longevity and continued success of the company.  

    Under Tim Cook, Apple has started peeling away components of the ecosystem removing items such as screens, not upgrading network components, TM capabilities and capacity, lobotomizing the server software, remove server configurations, not refreshing existing systems for literally years, remove the ability for the users to add and replace components to their system such as disk, memory, GPU, battery and other techcnologies gets cheaper and more capable over the lifetime of the system. Now most configurations are frozen in time, while before they could evolve and serve the user better over its lifetime.

    Their obsession with anorexic thinness produce as a result systems cannot be fully utilized or expanded because there is no more room in the thermal envelope for faster components (we see this both in the trashcan and the new iMac Pro), or connecting the system for use in a real world situation leaves the user with a dongle and docking station hell, or a bunch of additional box clutter on their desktops (MacBook Pro, Mac Pro, iMac Pro.) Just to illustrate the madness of the situation, do a quick search for "rack mount for Mac Pro" and have a good laugh!  

     
    Some would say this

    "Apples survival was built on the long term commitment of his Macintosh user base during the 90's before Jobs returned.
    Apples long term success began by extending its "It Just Works" ethos  into consumer products beginning with the iPod.
    As its success grew with multiple smart mobile products iPhone and iPad Apple dropped the 'Computer' from its name reflect its mainstream consumer emphasis.
    With new priorities Apple dropped some existing products like the AirPort Extreme & Express and (temporarily) the MacPro."

    Despite the iOS business being much larger Hopefully they will put significant resources into their Pro Computers with this new group.
    This also why the new hire of the the Google AI guy is so good.

    Lots of Windows programmers like the "It's just works" (and works better) philosophy of Macs when we come home.     
    (MS is re-inventing itself as a cloud company) because they know they will loose the Wintel monopoly they've had on desktops eventually.   Hopefully it is to iOS and not Chrome.



    MS is moving it's priorities to the cloud, not because they are losing the desktop market, but because their cloud businesses are growing quicky.  The lead they have in the desktop market still huge, and now they are expanding to the ARM processors to keep / expand their lead.  And looks like it will a long time until we see something making a difference in the desktop market.

    On the article, I noticed that the issue Apple has is to give options to users.  For example, HP has four models of desktop workstations, starting as small as the Z2 Mini (it's as small as a Mac Mini), one with a single CPU and two with dual CPU.  They made sure entry-level and high end users were covered.  That's something Apple is missing.  Personally I think the current MacPro is an excellent option for many users, but not all of them.  They should had add the MacPro to their workstation line, and not replaced the "grater cheese" model, as they did.
    I've had the Cherry Hill Surface 3 with 4GB RAM and 128 GB SSD  and LTE.   It worked but was extremely slow.   Only nice thing was the Kickstand which was nice to have Laying in bed. Because of that S3 I'm doubtful about the QualComm 845 giving decent performance.    I have a new Surface Pro i5 for work. Its nice as a light laptop but windows is still subpar as a tablet.   I expect the 845 to be slower than the i5.
    I was watching Leo Laporte play around with one of the new ARM/x86 emulator devices - and the performance for anything that was basically being emulated (not ARM code) was very very bad.  I use a Macbook which for a lot of stuff is actually quite reasonable -- so not everything I do needs the big horsepower (some dev work on it, web, video, spreadsheets, documents, editing compiling, etc.  - for all that it works fine.  I watched and although he was saying it was "sluggish but workable" - I would have thrown it against the wall in 5 minutes at most... it was not.  The x86 emulation just is not doable on that machine in any reasonable useable way.
    cornchip
  • Reply 285 of 289
    cornchipcornchip Posts: 1,058member
    kindredex said:
    20+ year Graphic Designer here that also dabbles in light video work and web work...

    What I personally want from my Mac:
    The ability to add/replace RAM, Internal Hard Drives, PCI-style cards including Graphics cards, and in the ultra rare occasion, processor upgrade... all with items I can EASILY find through NewEgg, Best Buy, B&H, etc...

    I do not have the luxury of disposable income to max out my Mac from the starting gate. I would much rather start off with a minimal amount of RAM and upgrade with cheaper, third-party modules down the road as needed. I would much rather have 4 internal drives than externals taking up desktop space. If there are not enough USB/ThunderBolt ports built-in I would like to have the option of installing a PCI card for more ports. Finally, I would love to be able to run two video cards to my multi-monitor set up, The first card driving my main, larger screen and the second card running my ancillary screens.

    right there with ya. I'm definitely excited to see what they come up with.
  • Reply 286 of 289
    The Owl said:
    What are the chances of this new computer having Intel processors? I'm guessing zero. As Apple is planning on switching to its own ARM-based processors in 2020, an Intel-based machine in 2019 would be obsolete in a matter of months.
    What ARM processor would be able to run the kind of software pros need? If Apple does that they’re basically telling Pro uses to go Windows.
    The design for all current ARM processors - are designed with very tight requirements for them.  Expand those thermal limits to that of a desktop and then it makes it easier to make more powerful chips.  ARM compatibility, after all, is just an instruction set on the processor.  I don't see why it could not be merged into a design for a higher power processor -- or even support 3 architectures if they figure out how to transparently support 2 (though that last thought - not likely).  I doubt however that in 2020 you will see the complete Mac line go ARM... more likely you will see a few niche computers on the low power end.   Moving the entire framework to llvm based languages was a huge step in being able to support multiple architectures.
  • Reply 287 of 289
    cornchip said:
    Shouldn’t the Mac Pro be the most boring product in Apple’s lineup?  Why do they need to spend all this time rethinking the pro desktop?
    I mean, I know what you’re getting at, and I think it’s a valid argument. There’s something to be said for just going with what works. But it’s Apple we’re talking about. This is a corporate culture that’s just not satisfied unless they’re pushing the boundaries somehow. A translucent all in one. Branching out into the music player business. A clear cube where the discs pop out the top. A half sphere with a floating monitor. A music player with no buttons. Carving a laptop body out of a solid brick of aluminum. 

    The cheese grater is cemented as one as one of the greatest pieces of industrial design in history. I love my ‘09 to death. I also greatly appreciate the trash can and may wind up getting one as a stopgap. Apple tried something different with it and it didn’t really catch like they hoped. Just like the cube and buttonless shuffle. No doubt they learned a great deal on that project and their failures will make the next machine that much stronger. But they’re not going to retreat into mediocrity. And if all you want them to do is build an updated cheese grater... well I have a feeling you are going to be very disappointed.
    I think Apple is making this much harder than it needs to be. Either get out of this market all together or swallow hard and give these people what they want which is a boring expandable box. Apple doesn’t need to reimagine or reinvent anything here. There’s plenty of other places for them to do that. Oh and while they’re at it how about shit or get off the pot re: Mac Mini. Either kill it or update it.
    We don't know what the total rethink is, the 2013 trashcan mac can be considered modular - but I am pretty sure it is seen as a failure right now.  Modular could mean nothing, or it could mean things like replaceable memory, graphics card, storage subsystems -- or it could go further and mean replaceable single or dual power supplies, and CPU modules (multiple).  We just don't know - but whatever they are doing they are going back to the drawing board... it could be good... or it could be bad.
  • Reply 288 of 289
    jdw said:
    No surprises that this article on "AppleInsider" is very pro-Apple regardless of what Apple introduces to the market  But as an exclusively "Mac" user since my 128k in 1984, I believe I have a voice and a voice that matters.  

    The article starts off with the experience of the author saying that few people (at that point in time) performed their own upgrades.  That surely holds through to this day, now that Apple makes it nearly impossible to perform upgrades even by those who want to.  That thinking in the article is then extended with this: "Apple knows this better than we do. They have all the data, back to the dawn of Apple-certified service departments."  So the premise of the article is that "Apple knows best, and nobody cares about your needs because you are just a miscreant Apple product lover who will likely keep buying Apple products anyway."  

    The fact remains though that the current Mac Pro is a niche product not only because it is a Mac but because of the way it is priced -- into the stratosphere!  Certainly, some "pros" justify the cost, but the pros that do are flush with cash and can earn that cash back by working on high dollar commercial products.  But think about this.  Just how many of those pros are out there versus prosumers?  Answer: very few.  Yet we prosumers want many or most of the things the pros want, just at a price point we can afford.  

    In years past, the Mac Pro was purchased even by non-Pros.  I'm 47, but even my father purchased a PowerMac G5 (basically an older style Mac Pro) when it came out because he already had a display and wanted to keep using it.  Sure the old Pro Macs were big and bulky, but they offered the Apple II appeal of expandability.  

    Expandability at Apple has always been a war between the memory of Woz and the memory of Jobs.  I still feel that one of the best compact vintage Macs in existence is the SE/30 -- machine that came out after the ousting of Jobs.  That's not to deride the critical importance of Apple's founder.  Without Jobs returning with NeXT tech in 1996, there would be no Apple in existence today.  And while the Apple of today is very much a company of smartphones and tablets (profit-wise), it's heart is still very much tied to the Mac, and that is unlikely to ever change.  But the argument is over how the Mac is changing.  I believe the Mac should and must evolve, but does that mean removing all user customizability?  Does Macintosh evolution justify removal of the SD card slot on a 15" MBP with more than enough space to accommodate that technology, which still is very much alive and well today?  Does evolution of computing technology dictate yet another non-expandable Mac Pro, priced so high "the rest of us" can only sit back at laugh at how ridiculous the price tag is, all the while we drool over the specs like we did back in the day when the Mac IIfx was on the scene selling at $10,000?

    At the end of the day, I love Apple but...  When Steve Jobs was at Apple, Apple really seemed to know what I wanted before I knew I wanted it.  But after Jobs' departure to the land beyond, Apple has been merely refining existing products (Apple Watch excepted) based on what they think is the Jobsian ideal of minimalism.  What drives Apple though is the Johnny Ivian ideal of minimalism, which is basically so minimal that one day we will end up with a round metallic sphere with no buttons or obvious means to know how to use it.  In other words, minimalism taken to an extreme is fascinating (like alien tech from space) but not necessarily practical.  And even though Jobs was far to minimalist for my taste (I prefer the SE/30 over the Mac Plus), even Jobs had balance in his thinking, which is why he retained Scott Forstall to balance out Johnny Ive.  Steve also loved the rivalry between the Apple II and Macintosh camps back in the day.  But today Jobs is gone, Forstall is out, and everyone is pushing the Johnny Ive design aesthetic far more than the Steve Jobsian ideal of balance.  Remember that Steve was a fan of skeuomorphism and Ive eliminated that from the iOS UI.  Steve Jobs was a big Ive fan, but Steve still had balance.  Remember also that Ive was at Apple long before Steve returned, yet Ive did not revamp the company, and no, I don't believe that was due to Ive not having the power he has today.  Steve was the man who led Ive to create greatness by Steve guiding Ive in a particular direction, while at the same time listening to other voices in Apple, which included Ive rivals like Scott Forstall.

    I think it would be great if Apple replaced the Mac Pro with an upgradable machine that was very powerful out of the box but which could be made much more powerful through upgrades, both from Apple and from third parties.  It would go against the minimalism of Johnny Ive, so many would say that is not what Apple is working on today, and they are probably right.  But it would be a machine that would appeal to more people than the niche product Apple is likely concocting now but speaking secretly to ultra-high-end pros who have very specialty use cases for a computer.  

    I like upgradable Macs because you can get more life out of them.  At the prices we pay for Macs, we ought to expect more, and I personally expect 10 years of life from any expensive Mac I buy.  In the past, such as was the case with my Quadra 650, you could get that many years from it, or more.  But modern Macs are not built as well.  They need repair, and after about 4-5 years, they need accelerators to stay current.  Imagine buying an iMac Pro for $5k or more today.  Five years hence, you want to upgrade it but you can't.  You can't use it as an external display either.  And if you are in Japan like me, you cannot trade it in for a discount on a new Mac like you can in the USA.  No, you have to pay $50 equivalent to dispose of your old Mac!  Insane!  Selling it online might be an option, but it's not always easy or safe to do that, even here in Japan where the buyer is God and picky as hades.   The promise of a modular Mac is that you don't really need to worry about it becoming a paper-weight over time like an iMac, because by definition it is upgradable.  At some point it will not be able to be upgraded further, but by then (10 years or more later), the electrolytic capacitors are likely drying out or leaking to the extent that you'd want to get a replacement machine anyway.

    Citing data and telling us how "Apple Inc" thinks vs "Apple Computer" does not persuade people like me from thinking like I already do.  I know what I want and what I can afford.  I want a module Mac Pro, but not if it's $5000 or more, and not if expandability is artificially limited for the sake of maintaining the Johnny Ive ideal.  Macs are already a tiny segment of the PC market anyway, so Apple is not losing or gaining much by offering the buyer what the buyer wants, as opposed to offering a product that Apple and Johnny Ive want.  In the end though, it makes good PR sense to, at least occasionally, give the buyer what they want.  And that is a modular Mac that doesn't look like a trash can and which is affordably priced and will last (with upgrades) 10 years.  Nothing is impossible when you put your mind to it.  Hopefully, Apple keeps "the rest of us" in mind like it once did.
    Several good insights here and you mention the kind of Mac that I believe many want. Aside: my first Mac was a used SE/30. Great machine. 
  • Reply 289 of 289
    kindredex said:
    20+ year Graphic Designer here that also dabbles in light video work and web work...

    What I personally want from my Mac:
    The ability to add/replace RAM, Internal Hard Drives, PCI-style cards including Graphics cards, and in the ultra rare occasion, processor upgrade... all with items I can EASILY find through NewEgg, Best Buy, B&H, etc...

    I do not have the luxury of disposable income to max out my Mac from the starting gate. I would much rather start off with a minimal amount of RAM and upgrade with cheaper, third-party modules down the road as needed. I would much rather have 4 internal drives than externals taking up desktop space. If there are not enough USB/ThunderBolt ports built-in I would like to have the option of installing a PCI card for more ports. Finally, I would love to be able to run two video cards to my multi-monitor set up, The first card driving my main, larger screen and the second card running my ancillary screens.
    This gets at the root of the argument that goes on here. It's not about who is a "Pro" and who is not, it's about who has money up front and who does not. If you don't have it, then buying a base machine that you can upgrade later on when you can afford it is a good approach. It allows people to be more responsible about debt.

    Your first two items are a given for any new Mac Pro -- easily upgradeable RAM and multiple internal storage bays. This is likely to be part of the main "module."

    I don't think your third item is a given. The judgment will be that people who need more than the built-in number of ports should use a hub -- that having more than eight USB/Thunderbolt devices plugged into the back of your Mac Pro means you've already got a big mess o' wires and the presence of a hub isn't going to change that, and might well improve the situation.

    I do think there's a very good chance that your fourth item, multiple, upgradeable video cards, is going to be addressed. My guess is a separate "module" that allows for the kind of expandability/flexibility you describe. Apple does not want to be wrong-footed again re: GPU industry trends. They are going to separate the CPU from the GPU -- that's the primary meaning of "modular" here, given the context where the term first appeared. It was all about GPU "thermals" and power needs.

    PS: I doubt you'll get your CPU-upgrade ability. Recent history is against you. But maybe? It's likely to use the Xeon-SP ("Purley") platform, and that is designed/optimized for switching out processors in data centers. So it's not outlandish to ask for it -- they could do it if they wanted to, obviously. It might not be quite so simple, though -- remember that there will be a T2 (or T3 or T4) chip built-in, and there are also macOS headaches/costs to consider.
    edited April 24
Sign In or Register to comment.