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

135

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 88
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    rob53 said:
    I was going to comment on the other article but this one states exactly what I was going to say. There are people on this forum who can't see the forest for the trees. The housing/rack is a straightforward and secure method of housing the modular components for a Mac Pro that all pro users wanted. It's been a real long time since I saw a Mac that could be opened so easily. Twist the lock and lift off the cover, that's it. Full access to everything inside in a couple of seconds. I like Apple's idea instead of the Lego-type ideas tossed around for stacking the MP.

    Apple lists it as weighing 39.7 lbs but I have to wonder if that's with a basic configuration and how much a fully loaded configuration would weigh. For those who have seen it in person does it appear like the CPU board is replaceable or are you stuck with your initial configuration? As for starting at 256GB SSD, it all depends on the anticipated workflow. For some people all your data storage will be on massive RAID or NAS storage so why waste the money of 2TB internal storage if you're not going to use it. 

    For the first time, I wish I hadn't retired because this Mac would be one I would have ordered several of. I can also see a bunch of them being ordered by several departments even though some might end up being loaded with a version of linux.

    I can't wait for someone to max out the xMP (extreme Mac Pro) and run LINPACK and HPCG benchmarks against it. I'd like to see how it compares to the massive cluster systems in the TOP500 list (https://top500.org/lists/2018/11/ DOE supercomputers back at the top 2 spots). #500 is 874 Tflops so it won't be in the top 500 but we're talking about a legitimate supercomputer in a very small package.

    One thing many people might not realize is each of these systems (xMP, display, some peripherals) will require a dedicated 120V 20A circuit, most likely through its own UPS system along with an air conditioned room. Apple's talking about 1280W and I hope that's fully loaded. I could see this workstation rack mounted in a desk with a RAID rack and UPS connected to a 220V 20A circuit. I'd roll this desk/table around instead of just the Mac Pro. 
    An UPS would last a few minutes and is mostly dead when needed (I know because I experienced that, and yes it was tested like scheduled). Maybe use a Tesla powerpack for that.
    Than again 1280W is less than my vacuum cleaner (1500W) and that works like a charm on 220V (20A).
    An air conditioned room is overkill and thats precisely why the eMP is designed the way it is.
    edited June 2019
  • Reply 42 of 88
    AppleExposedAppleExposed Posts: 1,805unconfirmed, member
    For any one new it goes like this:

    "Apple needs to hurry and release a new powerful Mac Pro"

    *Apple releases a new powerful Mac Pro*

    "I don't want it!"

    *They buy it anyways*

    Repeat.
    cornchipwatto_cobra
  • Reply 43 of 88
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    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.... 
    Try spotlight, that will work.
    macOs isn't based on Unix, its Mach.
    It does have a compliant bash shell which is seen by many as Unix.
    And (to help you a bit) Linux users like bash too. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 44 of 88
    spice-boyspice-boy Posts: 1,445member
    They should have called it "this is not a new version of that 1990's tower we used to make, things have changed a lot since those days and this gear is not for you unless you work for NASA or edit 8K video for a living, Mac"
    dysamoriazoooooooooom
  • Reply 45 of 88
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    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.
    This is the general sentiment of the masses. 
    They did this with the G3, G4, G5, Mac Pro’s up until 2013. Then Greedy Tim took over. 
    Apple is saying “give us insane monies now or we’ll keep you in throw-away computers and get our monies eventually”. 
    dysamoriazoooooooooom
  • Reply 46 of 88
    macguimacgui Posts: 2,062member
    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.
    I'd go so far as to say those people don't really understand just how much more powerful this Mac Pro is compared to a lot of other computers. Sure a Cray is more HP, but this MP is a beast in its own right.

    iOS_Guy80 said:
    The term “Pro” is a relative term. 
    Which is a/the problem. Everybody who's made one of those old ugly websites on wallpaper or built a flashlight app thinks they're a 'pro' and is on the same playing field as people an ILM or similar. This machine and display aren't for those people. They want to believe they're in the same rarified atmosphere and are qualified to cry 'Overpriced!' when they're out of there league.

    Detractors will be free to shout their I told you sos when Apple fails to sell any of these overpriced boxes. Except Apple won't fail. The people who can utilize the power and configurability of the MP and monitor will be scooping them up. They'll know a great thing when they see one.
    pscooter63watto_cobra
  • Reply 47 of 88
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    I really like that Apple has a rack mounted system again Xserve 2.
    I also like the insane amount of memory (2TB) that can be configured, this will make it a true performance beast. 4TB SSD seems small in comparison and is absolutely needed for high performance because 2Tbps ethernet is an order of magnitude slower ...
    I also like the use of an FPGA, I hope its possible to configure that from software ...

     

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 88
    StevieTStevieT Posts: 2member
    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.
    Why would they make spend all that development time and money to deliver a Mac Pro with a starting price $2000 less than the starting price for an iMac Pro?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 88
    tyler82tyler82 Posts: 974member
    I watched the recent Godzilla movie and was in awe of the special effects. 

    This is the type of Pro market the MP is made for. Hobbyists should stick with iMac.  
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 88

    All I want is an xMac with a socketed i7, RX590 PCIE card, RAM slots, and NVME slots...

    I don't care about the encryption features of the T2 chip, I just want a cheaper mac that I can also use to boot into Windows and play games with when I want to

    I'd also like the ability to actually upgrade the machine a few years down the line when components get cheaper rather than being forced to buy it all upfront

    I wish apple would make this product, but I don't think they will...

    This is why people build hackintosh machines, I really think if Apple made mid-range mid-towers that the market share for macOS would increase drastically

    edited June 2019 dysamoria
  • Reply 51 of 88
    bigtdsbigtds Posts: 167member
    That's a powerful machine. Bet I can heat my basement with it.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 52 of 88

    I got fed up waiting for a new reasonably priced expandable Mac Pro a few months ago, and boy I'm glad I stopped waiting based on this stratospheric pricing. I’m a lifelong apple fan but have been disillusioned lately with the bean counter upsell shenanigans under Cook. Every Apple product these days has a serious omission, defect, upgrade lockdown or pricing issue with upsells. It’s disheartening for someone who has been owning and using macs since 1987. I am the definition of a fanboy - but I won't waste hard earned money and shouldn't have to to stay in the apple universe.


    Ordinarily if Apple had equivalent products me buying a hardware update to my old trusty 'ol maxed out 2008 MacPro would be expected – however Apple simply has no products I want for a desktop at any reasonable price. I just want a comparable cost update to my 2008 Mac Pro format – big case lots of slots and drive bays, dedicated high end graphics – most everything is upgradable (and I have upgraded most everything on my 2008!)

    As a note using a standard PC desktop price decrease graph I found and taking the ratio for my $2,689 dual processor 8 core mac pro in 2008 -  I would expect to pay $1,900 for my next 8 core mac Pro with a 1 TB SSD which is the norm these days, not $5999 starting for 256GB! Most of small pros like me just want an i7/i9 not a Xeon. An example a Dell precision 5820 tower i7 is $1739. If you upgrade to 1TB SSD and an i9 with tons of upgrade options it is $2800. Apple should match that. I also would like an open machine not locked down SSDs via the Apple T2 chip. I’d also like a choice of NVIDIA graphic cards. Also I've done gov work - no project is going to spring for the new Mac Pros - projects have IT budgets and you can only justify Macs if they are a little more - price gouging doesn't pass procurement checks.

    So I took matters into my own hands – and built a new mac desktop a "PoweriMac G3-i7" to hold me for the next decade. It will almost for sure be my last Mac. In a decade at the current trend there will be so few Mac users left and the apps availability will be so subpar that it won't be worth it. iPhones made it because of the initial first to market huge install base. Steve rescued the Mac because of reasonable pricing to rebuild market share - Tim's apple is a short-sighted money grubbing bean counter that is slowly killing off the mac. A few big hollywood corporate clients can't support an entire computer platform.

    So I bought a 2017 iMac 5k i5 with a broken display on eBay for $985, upgraded the memory ($271) i7-7700k CPU ($279) and 1 TB High End HP EX920 4xPCI NVMe SSD ($149) plus adapter (faster then Apple SSD), OWC drive dock ($50), plus a bit on fans, coolers ($152) cables and lots of time and trial and error on the cooling system. I shoved the whole $2k kit into my old PowerMac G3 Blue and White case which I gutted (kinda of sad actually to gut it – but I was never going to turn it on again – at least it got a second life!). I had to do a major cooling system redo when the iMac fan was too loud and insufficient - so I added a dedicated CPU cooler at the expense of a memory slot. I already own 3 big good monitors and don't want any more. 

    I was going to get a 2019 iMac 5k /i9 when it came out and upgrade the motherboard – but the Vega 48 graphics weren’t much faster than mine – it definitely wasn’t worth extra $2k!

    My $2k 1TB SSD 40GB RAM PoweriMac G3-i7 Pluses over an iMac
    -        Retro Cool as heck !! (priceless) – all front panel buttons work!
    -        Use my existing monitors – with antiglare coatings 1x 38” and 2x 24” monitors
    -        Easily upgradable – just open up the side! Want a 2 TB SSD - 10 min and $250
    -        Easy to fix and clean – just open up the side!
    -        Easy to check the power and boot status – motherboard status LEDs are visible through the case
    -        NVMe read write status light is optically piped to the front – computer not responsive – see if SSD is working!
    -        CD/DVD R/W Drive! Yes I still sometimes need it.
    -        2x Internal SATA slide in hard drive bays with room for 1 more with case power switches. All locked up securely – try that iMac!
    -        Improved cooling with dedicated twin low RPM fans for CPU and GPU - doesn’t get above 100F/38C running flat out for hours and is quieter than my 2008 Mac Pro.
    -        Extra heatsink from my old PowerMac G3 CPU heatsink parts on Intel Platform Controller Hub Die which got quite hot – not available on iMac!
    -        Extra heatsink from my old PowerMac G3 CPU heatsink parts on SSD Controller which got warm under heavy write operations – not available on iMac!
    -        No T2 chip!!! unlike the new MacPro
    -        Don’t want the camera (can always attach one if I need it, and my apple 24” has one but I never use it.
    -        Don’t want the speakers – my other monitors have them
    -        Wifi / Bluetooth antennas are far from my head and body and I have external high gain antennas with way improved performance.


    Repost of original Mac Pro article comment.


  • Reply 53 of 88
    netroxnetrox Posts: 1,095member
    Thank you! I am so tired of those whining about how expensive the Mac Pro is when in fact, it's actually a good value designed for professionals where time costs money. The Mac Pro is truly a technical speed demon and rivals the competing PC workstations. And the display is gorgeous too. Also, most professional photographers do NOT need a Mac Pro! iMac Pro is excellent for what it does. I use iMac 5K and I don't even think, "Oh I need iMac Pro." I am a software engineer and I do NOT need a Mac Pro because I don't "compile" since my languages do not require "compilation". I don't do videos so iMac Pro is less of a value for me. Honestly, reading all the comments makes me think this forum is full of amatuers that just don't know what their place for computing productivety is, value-wise.
    chiawatto_cobra
  • Reply 54 of 88
    netroxnetrox Posts: 1,095member
    pakitt said:
    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    You do not know what Unix is? macOS is UNIX and it is UNIX certified. I use Linux and MacOS for work. The terminal commands I use in Linux also works the same as in MacOS terminal.
    watto_cobrachia
  • Reply 55 of 88
    chiachia Posts: 712member
    knowitall said:
    pakitt said:
    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    Try spotlight, that will work.
    macOs isn't based on Unix, its Mach.
    It does have a compliant bash shell which is seen by many as Unix.
    And (to help you a bit) Linux users like bash too. 
    Not so knowitall, macOS is a fully compliant UNIX:

    UNIX 03

    Company Name: Apple Inc.

    Product Name: macOS version 10.14 Mojave 
    Environment: on Intel-based Mac computers

    Registered on: 28-Aug-2018

    https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3648.htm
    dysamoriagatorguywatto_cobra
  • Reply 56 of 88
    dysamoriadysamoria Posts: 3,430member
    So this computer is awesome for companies like Pixar. Where’s the thermally well-designed modular machine for small businesses, prosumers, hobbyists, and institutions that cannot justify a $12000 setup... but also cannot justify replacing disposable computers every 3 years and want something more powerful than an obsessively compact machine?

    Everyone keeps defending Apple with the “if you cannot afford it, it’s not for you” meme. The Mac Pro used to start at $2500. Then $3000. Now that starting price is $6000. It has the same name. It has the same *general* appearance. Yet, the pricing, and, according to you apologists, the intended purpose/market for THIS new “Mac Pro” is big business that can justify spending $12000 for a workstation. Apple went WAY overboard here. They’ve utterly dropped an entire segment of computer using professionals. They’ve aimed at the 1% while shouting “SEE WE STILL CARE ABOUT PROFESSIONALS!”

    Unrelated:
    HOW THE HELL HAS APPLE MANAGED TO BREAK TEXT EDITING UNDO in the last couple of minor revisions???? I made one mistake and hit command-z to undo, which gave me a corrupted pile of text with missing letters and a duplicated paragraph. THIS is the state of iOS today!! It does it in Notes and Mail as well. WTF???
  • Reply 57 of 88
    Abalos65Abalos65 Posts: 64member
    Rayer said:
    This is the computer that Phil Schiller should have saved the "can't innovate anymore, my ass" line for.
    It's actually not all that innovative. It is a desktop computer with Intel's latest (assumed) Xeon CPU, off-the-shelf RAM, a custom motherboard (which Apple has always done to my knowledge), and a copy of Nvidia's SLI technology that they invented 15 years ago.

    Yes, it is a super powerful computer, but that is because of the components that make it up. Nothing special that Apple did here that hasn't already been done by other companies. Even the "case comes with optional wheels" isn't original.
    I would have to agree. While it is great that Apple finally made a real workstation for 'pro' users who need or prefer MacOS, it is not like they are pushing computational power of a workstation to another level.  It is just a workstation. I do find the video accelerator interesting (similar to the RED ROCKET X, but more powerful), but this has a limited audience. I do not have a problem with the price, workstations like this are always expensive.

    A big drawback is the lack of NVIDIA cards. CUDA is important or essential for a lot of pro users, myself included. I am also not sure how the upgrading of the GPUs is going to happen. Are only special packaged GPU's in a MPX module going to work? This would limit the upgradability of the machine drastically.
    Rayerzoooooooooom
  • Reply 58 of 88
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,320administrator
    Abalos65 said:
    Rayer said:
    This is the computer that Phil Schiller should have saved the "can't innovate anymore, my ass" line for.
    It's actually not all that innovative. It is a desktop computer with Intel's latest (assumed) Xeon CPU, off-the-shelf RAM, a custom motherboard (which Apple has always done to my knowledge), and a copy of Nvidia's SLI technology that they invented 15 years ago.

    Yes, it is a super powerful computer, but that is because of the components that make it up. Nothing special that Apple did here that hasn't already been done by other companies. Even the "case comes with optional wheels" isn't original.
    I would have to agree. While it is great that Apple finally made a real workstation for 'pro' users who need or prefer MacOS, it is not like they are pushing computational power of a workstation to another level.  It is just a workstation. I do find the video accelerator interesting (similar to the RED ROCKET X, but more powerful), but this has a limited audience. I do not have a problem with the price, workstations like this are always expensive.

    A big drawback is the lack of NVIDIA cards. CUDA is important or essential for a lot of pro users, myself included. I am also not sure how the upgrading of the GPUs is going to happen. Are only special packaged GPU's in a MPX module going to work? This would limit the upgradability of the machine drastically.
    AMD PCI-E cards from any vendor can be used. The power headers are the lumps on the left side of the motherboard as you're facing the open case.
    edited June 2019 watto_cobra
  • Reply 59 of 88
    Abalos65Abalos65 Posts: 64member
    Abalos65 said:
    Rayer said:
    This is the computer that Phil Schiller should have saved the "can't innovate anymore, my ass" line for.
    It's actually not all that innovative. It is a desktop computer with Intel's latest (assumed) Xeon CPU, off-the-shelf RAM, a custom motherboard (which Apple has always done to my knowledge), and a copy of Nvidia's SLI technology that they invented 15 years ago.

    Yes, it is a super powerful computer, but that is because of the components that make it up. Nothing special that Apple did here that hasn't already been done by other companies. Even the "case comes with optional wheels" isn't original.
    I would have to agree. While it is great that Apple finally made a real workstation for 'pro' users who need or prefer MacOS, it is not like they are pushing computational power of a workstation to another level.  It is just a workstation. I do find the video accelerator interesting (similar to the RED ROCKET X, but more powerful), but this has a limited audience. I do not have a problem with the price, workstations like this are always expensive.

    A big drawback is the lack of NVIDIA cards. CUDA is important or essential for a lot of pro users, myself included. I am also not sure how the upgrading of the GPUs is going to happen. Are only special packaged GPU's in a MPX module going to work? This would limit the upgradability of the machine drastically.
    AMD PCI-E cards from any vendor can be used. The power headers are the lumps on the left side of the motherboard as you're facing the open case.
    Aah, that is great news! If there are enough standard power headers to power a couple of next gen GPU's the Mac Pro is a lot more future proof. Relying on Apple alone to make special versions of GPU's would not be great.
  • Reply 60 of 88
    sanssans Posts: 56member
    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.
    That sounds like specialized use case to me.
    gatorguy
Sign In or Register to comment.