Editorial: The new Mac Pro is overkill for nearly everybody, and it hit Apple's own target...

245

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 88
    lkrupplkrupp Posts: 9,634member
    I bought a Mac IIFx back in the day. It was a little too much for me then and the Mac Pro will be too much for me now. I have two trashcan Mac Pros and they work well, and I will keep them.
    When the Power Macs were released in 1994 I bought the 8100 model not because I needed it but because I wanted it. I could have gone with the 7100 (Butthead Astronomer) model but wanted the biggest and baddest. Fast forward to today and I want the Mac Pro but it is not to be. I have two granddaughters with a grandson on the way so I have other priorities for my mad money, like college saving accounts.
    edited June 2019 muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobraurahara
  • Reply 22 of 88
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    rob53 said:
    10 years ago, it made sense to buy a Mac Pro for use with software like Adobe Photoshop. These days, that's not really a high-end software use anymore. Photoshop can easily be handled by a standard iMac. I think people who complain about what the 2019 version of the Mac Pro represents don't really understand just how much more powerful hardware is today vs. 10 years ago. The 'Pro' end for desktop is MUCH more specialized than it used to be. Only the heaviest of heavy lifting through software requires 'Pro' models anymore.
    It depends on what size Photoshop file you're working on and what you're doing. Try working on a 300-dpi file that's 6-ft by 20-ft with multiple layers and all sorts or crazy filters. Next combine data from multiple visualizations systems into one file. How long are you willing to wait just to import the data? I'm not talking about an 8x10 glossy, I'm talking about dealing with massive data sets. Yes, the iMac Pro can handle a lot of these but when you're getting visualization data from a supercomputer and want to work on it outside of the supercomputer, the new Mac Pro looks like the type of device you'd be using.
    Heh...processing image data for NASA is what I did with a IIfx 3 decades ago...the new Mac Pro will be useful for NASA projects as well...
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 88
    Great computer.

    My only complaint is the high starting price. This is meant to be a modular and upgradeable system (and it is). But the baseline is too expensive. They should have tried for a $2999 entry level price so that more customers could get in on the ground floor, and upgrade it themselves over the next 10 years or so.

    The pricing on this machine is absolutely fine for what it includes and the market it hits. I just wish they had sought to make the same machine just a little more accessible to another class of pros.
    bitmoddysamoria
  • Reply 24 of 88
    cndgoosecndgoose Posts: 16member
    Fair and balanced article. 
    I may never see one of these machines, let alone use one - but I’m very pleased that it has been developed because I know there will be knowledge trickle down to the machine I buy in the next year or so. 

    StrangeDayswatto_cobrauraharajony0pscooter63
  • Reply 25 of 88
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,764member
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    macOS is certainly a pro OS, whatever that means. macOS is a POSIX-certified UNIX OS, it’s not supposed to be “Linux-like”. 
    edited June 2019 AppleExposedtyler82dysamoriamacseekermagman1979watto_cobrajony0pscooter63
  • Reply 26 of 88
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    Frankly this is why I’m troubled by this machine, they built a box that will never ship in volume!   2-3 years from now when there are no updates people will be wringing their hands at fear of being discontinued!    It will be in the same position as the Mac Pro before the trash can.    I can see great sales for a year or two from pent up demand but after that sales will hit the skids hard.  

    Further i I don’t see a lot of hope that the machine will bring back into the fold the pros that left over the last half decade.  Apple will need amazing marketing and be able to demonstrate a commitment to frequent updates to pull the pros that left back in.  

    Now this doesn't mean the machine isn't well engineered, what we know so far seems to indicate a well engineered machine.  But well engineered and targeted at niche markets doesn’t mean success.  

    Frankly all this does is make me wish for an XMAC even more.    That could be accomplished easily on the trash can via desktop parts and a single single decent GPU.  In a nut shell Apple still doesn’t have a desktop suitable for the rest of the “pro” market.  
    runswithfork
  • Reply 27 of 88
    MisterKitMisterKit Posts: 441member
    It is really humorous in a way. As if Tim Cook said, okay team, the gloves are off, let’s show ‘em what we can do. It appears the project was undertaken with no restraints. Material, financial, or technological. I can imagine the engineers had a lot of fun with this one.
    StevieTzoooooooooomwatto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 88
    rob53rob53 Posts: 2,723member
    There is nothing such as "referenc3 display". Author makes up this term. Those are professional displays that have proper gamut. They are made by EIZO and NEC.
    Feel free to tell that to the people inside Sony and Disney that I talk to. And, to Apple too.
    https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcast-monitors ;
    https://www.dolby.com/us/en/professional/cinema/products/prm-4220.html

    Yes, they're out there and they call them reference displays.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 88
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,764member
    Great computer.

    My only complaint is the high starting price. This is meant to be a modular and upgradeable system (and it is). But the baseline is too expensive. They should have tried for a $2999 entry level price so that more customers could get in on the ground floor, and upgrade it themselves over the next 10 years or so.

    The pricing on this machine is absolutely fine for what it includes and the market it hits. I just wish they had sought to make the same machine just a little more accessible to another class of pros.
    Oops, confusing hobbyist tinkerers with workstation pros. Different markets. 
    MisterKittyler82chiamagman1979PickUrPoisonrepressthiswatto_cobrauraharajony0pscooter63
  • Reply 30 of 88
    StrangeDaysStrangeDays Posts: 11,764member

    wizard69 said:
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    Frankly this is why I’m troubled by this machine, they built a box that will never ship in volume!   2-3 years from now when there are no updates people will be wringing their hands at fear of being discontinued!    It will be in the same position as the Mac Pro before the trash can.    I can see great sales for a year or two from pent up demand but after that sales will hit the skids hard.  

    Further i I don’t see a lot of hope that the machine will bring back into the fold the pros that left over the last half decade.  Apple will need amazing marketing and be able to demonstrate a commitment to frequent updates to pull the pros that left back in.  

    Now this doesn't mean the machine isn't well engineered, what we know so far seems to indicate a well engineered machine.  But well engineered and targeted at niche markets doesn’t mean success.  
    Gosh, if only Apple had hand-wringers on the payroll and had thought of these things! Poor Apple, still clueless about what it takes to stay in the computing business, all these decades later! Woe is them...
    tokyojimuStevieTchiamagman1979watto_cobrapscooter63Rayz2016
  • Reply 31 of 88
    hmurchisonhmurchison Posts: 12,341member
    I bought a Mac IIFx back in the day. It was a little too much for me then and the Mac Pro will be too much for me now. I have two trashcan Mac Pros and they work well, and I will keep them.
    Ahhh the days of the IIFX ...."Hey ..want a $7000 computer that doesn't come with mouse/keyboard or monitor?" I always laugh when people say $3000 is expensive for a computer.  The midrange Iici was 3499 back yesteryear.  

    I'll buy this Mac Pro probably within a few years.  It's a computer designed to last 10 years. 
    AppleExposedmacpluspluschiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 88
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,746member
    gatorguy said:
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  

    Topping out at a reported $50K or thereabouts it certainly is NOT intended for prosumers. The market for these is niche and quite specialized IMO. 
    "These are not the Macs you are looking for" would be the normal answer unless dedicated to professional video production, and/or special effects, or certain engineering/modeling/scientific needs.

    I'm not sure if you misread my post or are just agreeing with me.  I thought I was pretty clear it's not for prosumers.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 88
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,302member
    sdw2001 said:
    gatorguy said:
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  

    Topping out at a reported $50K or thereabouts it certainly is NOT intended for prosumers. The market for these is niche and quite specialized IMO. 
    "These are not the Macs you are looking for" would be the normal answer unless dedicated to professional video production, and/or special effects, or certain engineering/modeling/scientific needs.

    I'm not sure if you misread my post or are just agreeing with me.  I thought I was pretty clear it's not for prosumers.  
    Obviously agreeing with you. 
  • Reply 34 of 88
    jameskatt2jameskatt2 Posts: 720member
    I remember my first Mac PROFESSIONAL computer. 

    It was the Mac IIci.  It sold for $3500 to $6700 in the U.S. in 1990. I bought mine with a student discount at $3500. 

    It was one of the most popular Macs ever.

    Given some inflation (after tall, the average car now costs $35,000 new), the new Mac Pro 2019 at $5999 is VERY COMPARABLE IN PRICE.

    So stop complaining. 

    The new Mac Pro 2019's price is about the same as the price of the Mac IIci in 1990.  No one balked at that price of the Mac IIci then.  They simply saved up or got better jobs. 
    magman1979watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 88
    keithwkeithw Posts: 65member
    Great editorial!  I have to laugh at all of the naysayers. Back in the late 80s I used to sell/support "engineering workstations" from Apollo Computer and then HP.  They cost (in today's dollars) tens of thousands of dollars and their performance was at least two orders of magnitude (maybe 3) slower than what is available today.  There are alternatives, even though people complain about those as well.  iMac, Mac Mini, or iMac Pro with eGPU are all options.  So is the new MacBook Pro.  So I'm not buying the "it's too expensive" line at all.
    edited June 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 36 of 88
    canukstormcanukstorm Posts: 2,557member
    lkrupp said:
    I am glad to see AI attempt a preemptive strike to counter the “overpriced” rants that will surely follow. Those who wanted an “almost pro” headless Mac with slots that started at $2499 are of course disappointed but then that crowd is always disappointed. It’s now clear that the machine they want will never exist as a Macintosh. Most lower level pros and “prosumers” (what is a prosumer anyway)) will do just fine with the iMac Pro, Mac Mini or standard iMac. In Apple centric tech forums we are led to believe the headless Mac with slots has a giant, untapped market to be served but I disagree. The typical Mac prospect is looking for simplicity, design, and ease of use, not a tinkerer’s machine to play with. Get ready for the barrage of complaints about the so-called market gap between the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro. We already knew that whatever the new Mac Pro turned out to be it would be savaged here.

    That the new Mac Pro will be available in a rack mount configuration was a bit of a welcome surprise. That should make it even more popular with the big pro studios. Get ready for movies produced completely on the Mac Pro.
    "Get ready for the barrage of complaints about the so-called market gap between the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro"

    you mean like this?

    https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/status/1135876051131912192
    edited June 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 37 of 88
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,648member

    wizard69 said:
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    Frankly this is why I’m troubled by this machine, they built a box that will never ship in volume!   2-3 years from now when there are no updates people will be wringing their hands at fear of being discontinued!    It will be in the same position as the Mac Pro before the trash can.    I can see great sales for a year or two from pent up demand but after that sales will hit the skids hard.  

    Further i I don’t see a lot of hope that the machine will bring back into the fold the pros that left over the last half decade.  Apple will need amazing marketing and be able to demonstrate a commitment to frequent updates to pull the pros that left back in.  

    Now this doesn't mean the machine isn't well engineered, what we know so far seems to indicate a well engineered machine.  But well engineered and targeted at niche markets doesn’t mean success.  
    Gosh, if only Apple had hand-wringers on the payroll and had thought of these things! Poor Apple, still clueless about what it takes to stay in the computing business, all these decades later! Woe is them...
    FWIW, my conclusion here is that Apple just might (might) measure success of this machine with metrics other than number of units sold. 
    entropyswatto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 88
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 2,488member
    This is the logical continuation of the cheese grater design. It's what we'd have if Apple had never gone down the trashcan route. And so in my view, it's perfect. 

    I also love that so, so many commenters were wrong about what this would be. How many people have confidently asserted that we would never see a big old tower with lots of PCI slots from Apple again? Honestly, I can't blame them for asserting that, but I'm so glad they were wrong. 

    This is a machine built by a company that listened to its actual pro users. I think it's awesome. 

    Unfortunately for me, it will be a while before I can buy one. I got a Linux+Threadripper system last fall and so won't be on the market for an upgrade until maybe 2021 or 2022. My fingers are crossed that Apple will be patient and stick with this design, providing regular (say, every two years) upgrades of the CPU. If they do that, then I'll very likely buy one the next time I'm in the market. (if, on the other hand, 2022 rolls around and they are still selling the same thing they introduced yesterday, then I'll probably stick with Linux). 


    chiaStevieTentropyswatto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 88
    sacto joesacto joe Posts: 895member
    We’ll always have the “just give me the bare bones and let me build my own” crowd. But just think, folks, about how much fun you’ll have in 5 years when you can buy the low end model for half price and really go to town!
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 40 of 88
    crowleycrowley Posts: 9,115member
    Great computer.

    My only complaint is the high starting price. This is meant to be a modular and upgradeable system (and it is). But the baseline is too expensive. They should have tried for a $2999 entry level price so that more customers could get in on the ground floor, and upgrade it themselves over the next 10 years or so.

    The pricing on this machine is absolutely fine for what it includes and the market it hits. I just wish they had sought to make the same machine just a little more accessible to another class of pros.
    Oops, confusing hobbyist tinkerers with workstation pros. Different markets. 
    It's not impossible to satisfy more than one market with the same product.
Sign In or Register to comment.