First look: Mac Pro and Apple Pro Display XDR [u]

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 135
    mike54mike54 Posts: 347member
    I like the design. Seems a powerful machine for professionals and other individuals who can afford it.
    But how about a reasonably priced user-upgradeable headless mac for the rest of us.
    watto_cobrah2p
  • Reply 62 of 135
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,304member
    Who wrote this?!? It's rife with errors.

    - Price of the Mac is wrong (correct start price is $5999).
    - Max RAM is 1.5TB, not 2TB. (Tells us something interesting about the Xeons being used, they're the first M series)
    - Description of the MPX is inaccurate and/or speculative. Each one takes up two double-wide slots, two will take four slots. We don't yet know if the infinity fabric will link the cards (you'd think so but I see no evidence).
    - Pro display nano-etching is an option, for $1k more.
    - "84GB per second of data migration"?? Who thinks up these things?
    - "The display does come with a basic stand." Really? You could be right about this, but I've seen no evidence of this. Source?

    Computer hackers aren't engineers. It's 84GB/second squared (s^2)

    edited June 4 watto_cobra
  • Reply 63 of 135
    netroxnetrox Posts: 795member
    Grater style is definitely common in workstations and racks - I don't think people really understand how much heat is generated in workstations. You need a lot of "vents" for heat to escape the case.
    fastasleepAppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 64 of 135
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,095member
    The similar specs for the Pro XDR monitor in the market (Atomo Sumo) cost around $40,000. Yes, Atomo has more features/IO but still, Apple's $6000 is way too cheap for a 1,000 nit display. Luckily with the grated design at the back just like Mac Pro Apple should be able to avoid superheat problem.
    fastasleepcgWerkswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 65 of 135
    rain22rain22 Posts: 46member
    Similar statements were abound for and against the trash can design and philosophy. It ended with Apple abandoning the Mac Pro for 6 years. This doesn’t bode well for sustained sales - such a niche machine. Could be the last iteration of the Mac Pro we see. Of the 4 design houses I’m familiar with, all have migrated away from Apple and I don’t see them coming back. This makes me question how many sales can be out there at this price as mid - small business will struggle to justify this - at the start of a trade war.
  • Reply 66 of 135
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,095member
    rain22 said:
    Similar statements were abound for and against the trash can design and philosophy. It ended with Apple abandoning the Mac Pro for 6 years. This doesn’t bode well for sustained sales - such a niche machine. Could be the last iteration of the Mac Pro we see. Of the 4 design houses I’m familiar with, all have migrated away from Apple and I don’t see them coming back. This makes me question how many sales can be out there at this price as mid - small business will struggle to justify this - at the start of a trade war.
    Mid - small business has no business with the new Mac Pro and its display. iMac is more than enough for Photoshop. This machine is for those who have cried a lot in the past for the lack of super workstation from Apple, those who work in Disney, Pixar, NASA, Research Centre Labs, etc. And these people invest millions of dollars annually for a new equipment, so the price range is really nothing for them.
    edited June 4 fastasleepAppleExposedwatto_cobrah2p
  • Reply 67 of 135
    jdwjdw Posts: 786member
    A milking of the Mac for all its worth.
    chemengin1
  • Reply 68 of 135
    kevin keekevin kee Posts: 1,095member
    jdw said:
    A milking of the Mac for all its worth.
    Really? You don't have to buy it and for those who need the power, it's actually CHEAPER than what you can get for the same specs in the market right now.
    SoliAppleExposedwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 69 of 135
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,278member
    1) I'm glad it's finally here and back, despite not needing it.

    2) The old styling was and is iconic. I loved it immediately, but this one isn't very attractive to me—the ones with 2 holes look like aliens peeking over a hole. 

    3) People bitching about this machine not coming with enough internal storage are making me shake my head and people bitching about the price after years of bitching about Apple not supporting "Pro" users are making me laugh.

    4) The only part that struck me as odd were the wheels. How heavy is this thing?
    edited June 5 AppleExposedcgWerkswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 70 of 135
    fastasleepfastasleep Posts: 3,171member
    Soli said:
    1) I'm glad it's finally here and back, despite not needing it.

    2) The old styling was and is iconic. I loved it immediately, but this one isn't very attractive to me—the ones with 2 holes look like aliens peeking over a hole. 

    3) People bitching about this machine not coming with enough internal storage are making me shake my head and people bitching about the price after years of bitching about Apple not supporting "Pro" users are making me laugh.

    4) The only part that struck me as odd were the wheels. How heavy is this thing?
    Took me a day but the design is growing on me. The feet look very "furniture" to me, but practical I guess? I don't really get the wheels thing either, but I'm assuming that means heavy AF in spite of the softer handles? I mean the old cases were a bitch to carry but mostly because of the sharp edges. 
    watto_cobrah2p
  • Reply 71 of 135
    Who wrote this?!? It's rife with errors.

    - Price of the Mac is wrong (correct start price is $5999).
    - Max RAM is 1.5TB, not 2TB. (Tells us something interesting about the Xeons being used, they're the first M series)
    - Description of the MPX is inaccurate and/or speculative. Each one takes up two double-wide slots, two will take four slots. We don't yet know if the infinity fabric will link the cards (you'd think so but I see no evidence).
    - Pro display nano-etching is an option, for $1k more.
    - "84GB per second of data migration"?? Who thinks up these things?
    - "The display does come with a basic stand." Really? You could be right about this, but I've seen no evidence of this. Source?

    Computer hackers aren't engineers. It's 84GB/second squared (s^2)

    Quite a few are. What's your point? In any case, AMD is making a rather glaring mistake there. It's obviously not "per second squared", that's nonsensical (units are broken). They probably meant to write "84 GB/s x2 (bidirectional)" or some such.

    Besides, as I already mentioned, I wasn't complaining about the number, but about the choice of words. "Data migration" is almost as ridiculous as "84GB/s^2".
  • Reply 72 of 135
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 248member
    So they went for the top 1% of the pro market.  Thanks Apple for the last 40 years!  My PC days are now beginning.
    chemengin1mike54
  • Reply 73 of 135
    ...and at $200 is the vesa adapter both questionable in need (vs four threaded holes) and more than the cost of many stands and arms ? There are four high capacity Ergotron arms in this studio and they were all less than $200 US and came with multiple adapter plates, albeit one must turn (undo) four knurled knobs to detach... Would magnetic attachment be better as a BTO option or kit vs all in ?
    The monitor magnetically attaches to the vesa mount and the stand. They're both over priced to us mere mortals but nothing to a movie studio or large developer.
    AppleExposedwatto_cobra
  • Reply 74 of 135

    At FIRST glance the hole patterns look a bit odd, but somewhere on the Mac Pro webpage they show a hunk of metal getting hogged-out from both sides, creating the overlapping holes which leads to the pattern.

    I suspect in-person the look is way better than a static photo.  As the viewers head moves about, the view of the metal would change, in an organic, coral or natural-cave sort of way.

    This machine is unbelievable.  I bet fully spec'd out it might be able to divide by zero.

    E.
    fastasleepuniscapewatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 75 of 135
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,086member
    Soli said:
    1) I'm glad it's finally here and back, despite not needing it.

    2) The old styling was and is iconic. I loved it immediately, but this one isn't very attractive to me—the ones with 2 holes look like aliens peeking over a hole. 

    3) People bitching about this machine not coming with enough internal storage are making me shake my head and people bitching about the price after years of bitching about Apple not supporting "Pro" users are making me laugh.

    4) The only part that struck me as odd were the wheels. How heavy is this thing?
    Of all people, I figured you would have gone to Apple's website to get the specs, https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/. Documented weight is 39.7 lbs, depending on the configuration. 

    #1. I don't need it anymore either but at one time I could definitely have used several within the system I was managing.

    #2. When I first saw it, I immediately said it's a reincarnation of the 2006-2012 models and I did have a hand in purchasing dozens of these. I like this version better because it's easier to get into and its vent hole design actually provides more cooling capability than the older ones. Some people just don't understand thermal dynamics. I don't understand why people criticize this design. Have you seen all the wild and crazy PC boxes being sold? Are any of them designed for anything other than to look weird?

    #3. Apple long ago understood they couldn't compete with large storage arrays (RAID and NAS) so they instead went with SSD storage and high-speed peripheral interfaces. The last version of the Mac Pro (I refuse to degrade it by calling it a trash can, these types of terms are from people who don't understand anything about design) was very minimalist on storage but had six Thunderbolt ports for displays and storage. It makes a whole lot more sense to get only as much internal storage as required for your workflow and spend the money on fast, large external storage, including external SSDs. As for the bitching, I see way too many comments from people who aren't going to buy a new Mac Pro anyway. I'm retired and don't need one but if I were starting a system again, it's definitely a system I'd get.

    #4. I thought the wheels were actually nice. I am thinking Apple designers assumed this monster supercomputer would need to be moved around to different locations depending on the needs of the user. Having it one wheels when it could weigh as much as 50 lbs would be nice. The handles look sturdy and shouldn't cut into your hands like the older model could. If I were getting one for film, animation, and scientific work (previous system did all of these) I'd get a strong desk and rack mount the Mac Pro as well as storage and a dedicated UPS system. The Mac Pro will need at least a dedicated 120V 15A supply, which I haven't seen people talk about. Here again, this is something a pro, corporate, or government user will be able to configure into their workspace. I'd also provide for plenty of air circulation. 
    edited June 5 fastasleepcgWerkswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 76 of 135
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,086member
    mike fix said:
    So they went for the top 1% of the pro market.  Thanks Apple for the last 40 years!  My PC days are now beginning.
    Sounds like you were or are already a PC guy. Apple provides the iMac Pro, which is a very powerful all-in-one computer while the base iMacs are nothing to whine about. When you mention 1%, I know what you're referring to but think about how many Mac Pros Apple would sell if they only sold to 1% of current Mac users. Estimates from 2017 say 20M Macs so 1% of that is 200K. Figure a moderately configured Mac Pro will end up costing $20K, that's sales of $4B. 

    200,000 x $20,000 = 4 + 9 zeroes so yes $4B!  Sounds like a nice little "project" to me.
    Soliwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 77 of 135
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,538unconfirmed, member
    netrox said:
    ensoniq said:
    The new modular Mac Pro is going to ruffle a lot of feathers for a variety of reasons.  Apple being stingy about base storage on a $6000 computer is what annoyed me.
    Please stop this non-sense. There is a PC version of that machine and it costs $8000!!! Seriously, this is a Mac Pro we're talking about, it is a very expandable Mac machine and it comes with a premium price. Hardly stingy.
    And it runs Mac.

    The PC version runs a virus-infested malware OS.
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 78 of 135
    SoliSoli Posts: 9,278member
    rob53 said:
    Soli said:
    1) I'm glad it's finally here and back, despite not needing it.

    2) The old styling was and is iconic. I loved it immediately, but this one isn't very attractive to me—the ones with 2 holes look like aliens peeking over a hole. 

    3) People bitching about this machine not coming with enough internal storage are making me shake my head and people bitching about the price after years of bitching about Apple not supporting "Pro" users are making me laugh.

    4) The only part that struck me as odd were the wheels. How heavy is this thing?
    Of all people, I figured you would have gone to Apple's website to get the specs, https://www.apple.com/mac-pro/specs/. Documented weight is 39.7 lbs, depending on the configuration.
    That wasn't yet an option during the event.

    #4. I thought the wheels were actually nice. I am thinking Apple designers assumed this monster supercomputer would need to be moved around to different locations depending on the needs of the user. Having it one wheels when it could weigh as much as 50 lbs would be nice. The handles look sturdy and shouldn't cut into your hands like the older model could. If I were getting one for film, animation, and scientific work (previous system did all of these) I'd get a strong desk and rack mount the Mac Pro as well as storage and a dedicated UPS system. The Mac Pro will need at least a dedicated 120V 15A supply, which I haven't seen people talk about. Here again, this is something a pro, corporate, or government user will be able to configure into their workspace. I'd also provide for plenty of air circulation. 
    The wheels are definitely a nice touch, but during the presentation it caught me off guard (for lack of a better term). My perception of its size next to the monitor was that it was smaller and therefore lighter than what the wheels would suggest. The monitor is 32" which also helped throw off my initial perception of this as a mini-ish tower.
    edited June 5 watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 79 of 135
    erannerann Posts: 38member
    "The monitor is way overpriced."
    Nope. I bought 22" Apple Cinema Display on 2000 and it cost $8.400 in today's money in my country (not USA). Real pros make so much money that these prices are no concern.

    I have now LG 27" 5K display, but I'm gonna replace it with this cheap beauty. I am a poor retiree but I can easily afford it even though the prices a way higher in my country than in USA. If I can afford it, true pros can as well.
    welshdogwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 80 of 135
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,538unconfirmed, member
    mike fix said:
    So they went for the top 1% of the pro market.  Thanks Apple for the last 40 years!  My PC days are now beginning.
    Old troll tactic.

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    watto_cobrajony0
Sign In or Register to comment.