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

12357

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 135
    lorin schultzlorin schultz Posts: 2,744member

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

    Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

    So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.
    cgWerksMetriacanthosaurus
  • Reply 82 of 135
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,694member
    genovelle said:
    ...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 ?
    I’m sure they went with the best VESA adaptor possible, because I would be a huge problem for this $5000 display to find its way to the ground. 
    You raise a good 'magsafe' point - I hope the magnets are strong enough that an inadvertent knock doesn't drop this beast of a screen to the desk - think late for a meeting & jacket, shoulder bag, drawing tube, etc hitting the monitor edge...
    Surely, s u r e l y there is a locking pin of some sort to engage after the magnets seat. Not having a secure lockdown would be seen as a safety issue by many - including various government agencies around the world. It only weighs 16.5 pounds, but that could break a foot, or puncture a child's head if it fell from table height. Entropy cannot be eliminated, so you have to side step it with safety features.

    UPDATE:
    From Apple website: "These magnets guide the connection while latches automatically engage and securely lock the stand to the display. Detaching it is as simple as unlocking the slider."
    edited June 5 SolifastasleepcgWerkswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 83 of 135
    cynegilscynegils Posts: 9member
    Historically, the top Mac Model has always been a powerful computer that could be purchased by many. Today, Apple is redefining the top Mac Model as a computer available for only 0.01% of the Mac owning population. Do some people need to drive six freakin' $5000 monitors at once? I'm sure there are! But how many people seeking a powerful Mac actually need that!?! 

    $10K for a Mac that will likely be 10-20% faster than its predecessor (it always is) is absolutely obscene. Too bad for Apple. I need powerful Macs at work that are expandable, and have been a loyal Apple customer since the 80s, starting with my Apple IIc. I can't defend them for this and I shouldn't.

    $1000 for a stand? Are they out of their mind? Apple is starting to resemble those complete whackjob Hi-Fi audio companies that sell cables for $3000 a foot.
  • Reply 84 of 135
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,694member
    Does10 said:
    Total fail Apple. After years of ignoring pro users you create a machine that’s stupid expensive, a display that’s stupid expensive, put it in a really poor looking design then insult us by asking 1k for a display stand. I don’t know if you guys are loosing touch with the rest of the world or what. Better off would be to say “we fucked up in the past” and release competing desktops at slightly premium prices and get people excited. After years of being ignored I made a hackintosh that runs at a higher clock speed (i9), has 2 terabytes of nvme and a Radeon VII which is all faster then the base $6,000 model. But, mine cost $2,200 and I’m using it today. Ive owned nearly every Apple device in the last 20 years. Total fan boy. I even drove hours for the grand opening of the first Apple store but today I’m officially done. I couldn’t be more disappointed with what’s happened since Steve left.
    Translation: “I can’t afford it and I don’t actually need it”

    Sorry bro, Apple isn’t catering to hobbyist tinkerers. Try an Alienware
    The display seems to be generating the most misinformed posts here. This thing is not just a monitor for regular mac users who want an Apple display. It is designed, engineered and built for some pretty high level, specific needs - mostly video production and film. That's why they dared compare it to that Sony broadcast monitor in the keynote. Not sure which model that was, but over the years there definitely have been Sony monitors that cost $43,000 or more. If this Apple display is achieving the same features and performance, for only five or six thousand bucks, then this is quite an achievement. A lot of big post houses and color studios will buy the hell out of this thing and probably standardize on it. Later, Apple will produce a similar, but lesser version that will be more suited to general and pro use.
    cgWerkswatto_cobra
  • Reply 86 of 135
    1348513485 Posts: 73member
    For those who still don't get it: This is not necessarily a device for common use. And surely you have seen the price comparisons of 1980s and 1990s Macs and this monster. The price is not bad for what you are getting (hardware + capability). 

    The smallish SSD is irrelevant to the typical buyer of this machine; they will augment the tool with their own massive storage add-ons. The same with the RAM, it's just not relevant to the intended user. They will either buy the base unit and augment from third parties, or the BTO loaded for turn key operation. Either way the cost is a Section 179 write-off, even for a small business. If you can't use this tool to generate enough income to make a profit, then it's not the device for you. 


    fastasleepcgWerkswatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 87 of 135
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,100member
    I wanted to post this in an earlier Mac Pro article comments section, but did not get to it.

    Some random thoughts.

    • I like the design.  It looks much better than the various PC workstations I've seen.  The overlapping wholes look cool, but more importantly, are a sophisticated bit of Industrial design made for cooling.  Their primary focus is to assist in the cooling of the beast.  As someone who owned a G5 PowerMac and still has a 2008 MacPro [though it runs Windows now to exclusively control my European and Japanese N-Scale trains] -- both so-called "cheese graters" -- this is NOT a cheese grater.  It looks a lot better and has a real function.  A real function that happens, to me, to look cool.

    • I lust after it, but will never own one (of this sort of Mac Pro -- see my comments below).  I don't need it, and currently don't make enough side money to justify the expense.  But I would love to have one :) 

    • What I really wanted to say was that I think those whining about this not being the so-called xMac are missing the point.  This particular Mac Pro is not meant to be for that crowd who wants a basic modular Mac like the "cheese grater" Mac pro of yesteryear eventually became.  (My first MacPro of that series was a 2007 3.2ghz and cost me about $7K in 2007 USD, and that was with the developer discount at the time IIRC -- yes I had the $3500 dev program membership, and after having an issue with a memory riser that the local Apple Store could not get in, Apple Care replaced it with an equivalent 2008 model [which allowed me to use it for about 10 years before installing Windows on it for my trains] --- hardly a Mac Pro for the masses.)   Apple is trying to hit it out of the ballpark with the real "Pro" crowd who were the most affected by the lack of a machine for them.  They are likely production constrained, and so decided to go for the über-high end exclusively, as they will sell every one they can produce at first.  Eventually, I think they will come down market with it -- maybe with fewer PCI slots, a cheaper Xeon, etc, and get it down a few $K.  That will open up sales, when they can support production of it, to the xMac crowd, and that will also help them keep up production enough to make the Mac Pro a product worth keeping on the price list, with enough production to support it (the current über-Model may not have enough long term volume to do so -- IDK).   Watch what the next couple years brings.  I bet within a couple years we see a cheaper Mac Pro or at east a new model based on the same structure/tech as the Mac Pro, but with less expensive options for the rest of us.   Just my guess.

    fastasleepwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 88 of 135
    boboliciousbobolicious Posts: 607member
    Just a reminder on the last true large format Apple display: everymac.com/monitors/apple/studio_cinema/specs/apple_cinema_display_30.html

    $3,299 and "designed to aesthetically complement the previously introduced Power Macintosh G5 and PowerBook G4 models" available through July 2010...

    The 27" LED Cinema was introduced as a replacement @ $999US everymac.com/monitors/apple/studio_cinema/specs/apple-led-cinema-display-27-inch-specs.html

    edited June 5
  • Reply 89 of 135
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 248member
    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%?
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    Here's some quick pricing.  I rounded up to make it easy.

    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $450 64gb ram
    $250 Case
    $110 1tb NAND SSD 
    $520 1600w Power Supply
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor
    $1200 NVIDIA GEFORE RTX 2080 Ti 

    So far that's $6130, for the 28 CORE processor, not the 8 core, twice the storage, twice the ram, and a high end graphics card compared to the base priced radeon card.  

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.

    Apple just lost all the low-mid level professionals and enthusiasts.  

    The only people that can/will afford this are full time editors working on great paying jobs or a colorist doing the same, otherwise it's price prohibitive. 

    The studios I have worked with will never fork out that much money per work station.  For a small studio that needs 20 seats for 3d artists, designers, etc, what makes the most financial sense when the PC runs all the same software which operates pretty much the exact same on both platforms.  And when you can get that much more performance for a 3rd the price, it's a no brainer.  Just switching to PC saves them $200,000-$400,000 depending on configuration.  Which can either be counted as profit, or increase pay, other pipeline improvements, or a new car for the CEO that made the smart switch.  

    I can see a business being quite successful assisting studios in transitioning from Apple to PC.

    If you want to think I'm trolling, that's fine.
  • Reply 90 of 135
    Absolutely love the design of the Mac Pro and display. Absolutely not in the market for one. Insane pricing for almost all people. Sure it is designed this way, but I think it went too high.
  • Reply 91 of 135
    chadbagchadbag Posts: 1,100member
    mike fix said:

    The studios I have worked with will never fork out that much money per work station.  For a small studio that needs 20 seats for 3d artists, designers, etc, what makes the most financial sense when the PC runs all the same software which operates pretty much the exact same on both platforms.  And when you can get that much more performance for a 3rd the price, it's a no brainer.  Just switching to PC saves them $200,000-$400,000 depending on configuration.  Which can either be counted as profit, or increase pay, other pipeline improvements, or a new car for the CEO that made the smart switch.  

    I can see a business being quite successful assisting studios in transitioning from Apple to PC.

    If you want to think I'm trolling, that's fine.
    Couple comments:

    no serious studio is making their own machine from parts. 

    Your parts are not equivalent.  Much less PCIe throughput I would guess at a minimum

    go to HP.com and price an equivalent to the $5999 entry level.   It hits $8k—$9k pretty quick.   The Mac Pro saves high end users money.   No savings on the PC side.  

    Apple let will sell everyone they make for the first year probably.  Then you’ll start to see lower level versions or derivatives from Apple I am betting, once the immediate pent up demand is satisfied.  
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 92 of 135
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.
    chadbagwatto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 93 of 135
    mitchelljdmitchelljd Posts: 157member
    I'm happy there is a new Mac Pro, yet... wish they could have engineered a $3999 priced entry version. 

    why not a fusion drive variant for the low priced model?

    And have a display which isn't as much as the entire computer?

    they are pushing people to the iMac Pro. yet for many, that isn't the model they would prefer for expandabilty and upgrades.
  • Reply 94 of 135
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 248member
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs.  


  • Reply 95 of 135
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 665member
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs.  


    Except for the regular Xeon W-3275, it only supports 1 TiB of memory and isn't scalable too.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 96 of 135
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,301member
    StrangeDays said:
    Oh gosh, I hope they thought of that. /rolleyes
    Me too, but given some other more recent products (like my iPad Smart Cover), one can never be sure.

    rob53 said:
    ... 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. 
    To run when maxed out & decked out, but I would imagine most people won't ever hit that (or equip that), so could run it on a circuit with a few other lower-power things.

    rob53 said:
    ... Apple provides the iMac Pro, which is a very powerful all-in-one computer while the base iMacs are nothing to whine about. ...
    The problem (at least until the mini update) was for people who don't want an all-in-one. The 2018 mini kind of fills that hole to some extent, but given how high-end the Mac Pro is, there is kind of a gap there. I can understand someone who was waiting for the Pro, thinking it might be more like the 'cheese grater' or 'cylinder' incarnations being upset now, unless they are those high-end users with lots of cash (who are, no doubt, thrilled).
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 97 of 135
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    watto_cobrajony0
  • Reply 98 of 135
    sphericspheric Posts: 1,792member
    [Edit: I was late]
    edited June 7 watto_cobra
  • Reply 99 of 135
    mike fixmike fix Posts: 248member
    mike fix said:
    mike fix said:
    I used to buy the latest Mac when they came out and it was affordable for the performance.  Simply do yourself a favor and price out the gear that comes with the $6k machine and you'll quickly see you can insanely more power for the same money.  

    [parts list, including:
    $500 LGA 3647 motherboard
    $3100 Xeon W-3175x skylake 28 core processor]

    Yeah, you'll need to throw another few hundred bucks at it for cooling, etc.

    I think we all know that for the 28 core processor in the mac pro, that machine is going to cost well over $10k, most likely over $15k.  

    Even dumber is the fact that Apple could have gone dual socket.  Which for the PC you can, pretty much only doubling the price for the processor and you'd have 56 cores!  

    For $9500 you'd have 56 cores!  Stack in a few more of those NVIDIA cards are you'd be destroying worlds for a 3rd of the cost of an equivalent Mac Pro.
    There's a huge amount of ignorance on display here, and I haven't the energy to go through it all. But here are a few high points:

    - Your chip is previous-generation. You'd need the X3275M to match (almost) Apple's 28-core chip. That one costs about $7500.
    - Good luck finding a motherboard that supports 1.5 (or 2?) TB of RAM in 12 slots at that price. And that has 10GbE (much less two). And thunderbolt. And eight PCIe slots and a PCIe switch chip (which is insanely expensive). Etc. If you can even get close, you're probably looking at $1500-$2000.

    But the big LOL moment was your cutely naive "oh they could have stuck two CPUs in there". Know how much *those* cost? Because you can't use a Xeon W in a dual-socket system. The cheapest 28-core lists at $8700 but it's substantially slower than the Mac's 28-core CPU. To get something close (200MHz higher base clock, but 400MHz lower boost) you need to spend over $13k. Per chip, not per pair. So even if all you were going to do with those chips was hold them in your hands and dream of fast machines, it would still set you back >$26,000. Thousands more if you wanted them to work in an actual machine. You're not getting 56 cores for $9500.

    Of course any post that includes a parts list is completely missing the point of this machine.

    So. Less talking, more reading.

    The 3275w has an Intel recommended customer price of $4,449.00.

    The 3275w is an LGA 3647 socket, which there are several dual socket PC motherboards available that support 12 dimm slots.  

    If you want to compete on rendering where you buy mac pros and I buy PCs, we'll see who finishes fastesr and cheaper.  

    I'm not saying the Mac Pro isn't a great machine, it obviously is (and it better be for that price), it's just extremely overpriced for the majority of pros and their needs. 
    Reading comprehension FTW!

    Try again.
    Let's pick this up when the thing actually gets released.  
    edited June 7
  • Reply 100 of 135

    Since when was Mac Pro NOT for the top 1%?
    It wasn’t until 2013. There were affordable versions of the cheese grater. I bought one for under CAD$2500 in 2008.

    Even the cylinder was within reach of one-man shops and serious enthusiasts.

    So, in response to your question, I’d say the Mac Pro became a product for the 1% on Monday June 3, 2019.
    Yeah, that aspect is disappointing. There are many, many levels of Pro and Apple is saying that any level below the $11k mark should be satisfied with another Mac.

    Nothing would please me more than to buy this machine for $2-3k with much lower default specs (yet the same upgrade potential), and a 5k display (not 6k) for another $1500.
    cgWerkswatto_cobra
Sign In or Register to comment.