Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
I have to agree with you, at least to some extent; a 256gb drive just doesn’t make sense in any modern machine targeting the pro market. Hell it doesn’t even make sense for a machine targeting software developers.
I honestly believe people are working working overtime to justify Apples pricing schemes in these forums. Frankly for the last few years Apples offering have been subpar across the board. Greece an accurate description.
Last year I purchased a $700 laptop that runs circles around the 13” MBP I had. The keyboard is lightyears ahead of Apples despicable attempt at a keyboard. There are a lot of things I like about MacOS and even iOS but I really don’t like the fleecing that Apple hands out with a hardware purchase.
As for the new Mac Pro it is way too much for my pocketbook. All I really want is a desktop machine with a decent GPU card (the iMacs do not qualify).
Another guy who shows every week that he still doesn’t get it. This time with the MP and storage. 256 is enough for the OS and apps. The professional’s project files will live elsewhere...on storage bays, or external, or network, etc...
This is not a neckbeard machine. Enjoy the cheap laptop, it sounds amazing.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
When Intel charges $15k for the 28 core Xeon what do you expect? Just one more reason Apple will sooner-rather-than-later ditch Intel for AMD.
And no, they aren't going ARM people. Just like they aren't building a competing GPGPU--the Afterburner is that secret GPU project from Florida.
I don't think it's confident to say they'll never go ARM, as rumors suggest they're working on it. Secondly, since Intel is lagging on its process, and AMD has yet to put a decent mobile solution, so if there are no ARM chips I'd say the laptops will be screwed.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
I have to agree with you, at least to some extent; a 256gb drive just doesn’t make sense in any modern machine targeting the pro market. Hell it doesn’t even make sense for a machine targeting software developers.
I honestly believe people are working working overtime to justify Apples pricing schemes in these forums. Frankly for the last few years Apples offering have been subpar across the board. Greece an accurate description.
Last year I purchased a $700 laptop that runs circles around the 13” MBP I had. The keyboard is lightyears ahead of Apples despicable attempt at a keyboard. There are a lot of things I like about MacOS and even iOS but I really don’t like the fleecing that Apple hands out with a hardware purchase.
As for the new Mac Pro it is way too much for my pocketbook. All I really want is a desktop machine with a decent GPU card (the iMacs do not qualify).
Another guy who shows every week that he still doesn’t get it. This time with the MP and storage. 256 is enough for the OS and app. The professional’s project files will live elsewhere...on storage modules, or external, or network, etc...
This is not a neckbeard machine. Enjoy the cheap laptop, sounds amazing.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
Nope. This product just isn’t for you. If you don’t know why this monitor is special, you don’t need it.
Everyone shut the hell up already with this damned meme “it’s not for you”. The Mac Pro was always a machine accessible to prosumers, hobbyists, and small businesses. This new one is NOT, but it’s called the same thing and designed to look similar to the previous tower. If you people want to keep spewing this stupid meme, then get Apple to change the damn name of the machine to something like “Mac Pixar” or “Mac Plutocrat”. OR JUST SHUT UP.
It’s not for you. That’s the reality, son. Telling me to “SHUT UP” just shows how unstable and child-like you are. Do your parents know you are on their computer?
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
most of the old pro market just wants an i7/i9 and no stupid all in one sealed crippled design. Apple just puts in Xeons to justify cranking up the price. You can get killer PC i7 desktops for $700 and i9s for under 2k. Apple should do the same. We just want an iMac motherboard with handful of PCI slots and upgradable CPU,SSD,RAM,graphics and a few SATA TB3 USB3.1 connectors
That’s what you want. But the vast majority of ‘pros’ doing industrial level CG and audio production never crack their iMacs or iMac Pros open. They simply haven’t needed to because they buy the configuration they need right from the start.
Um, isn't that Apple had never offered mainstream processors in a case? If you want an i7, then you'll only get an iMac.
I'm not sure why they're complaining just now, not because they can't have different opinions, but seems like they never cared about this until today.
Just speculation, but I think over time Apple intends to bifurcate the user base and eventually the iPad will take over most of the laptop space (MacBook and MBA) and the Mac line will continue to march upmarket.
Already, most people can meet their computing needs with an iPad or iPad Pro. I would love to see Apple offer a larger screen desktop version of iPadOS on a tilting stand like the Surface Studio. I think Apple could eat the Surface Studio alive and at a better price with a desktop version of iPad OS.
I agree with most of what you're saying here, but I feel iPadOS would need to evolve considerably to challenge the Surface Studio - it's a real workhorse meant for apps like AutoCAD and Adobe InDesign.
What kind of sales does the Surface Studio enjoy? How many per quarter?
Just speculation, but I think over time Apple intends to bifurcate the user base and eventually the iPad will take over most of the laptop space (MacBook and MBA) and the Mac line will continue to march upmarket.
Already, most people can meet their computing needs with an iPad or iPad Pro. I would love to see Apple offer a larger screen desktop version of iPadOS on a tilting stand like the Surface Studio. I think Apple could eat the Surface Studio alive and at a better price with a desktop version of iPad OS.
I agree with most of what you're saying here, but I feel iPadOS would need to evolve considerably to challenge the Surface Studio - it's a real workhorse meant for apps like AutoCAD and Adobe InDesign.
"feel iPadOS would need to evolve considerably to challenge the Surface Studio"
Not necessarily. The Surface Studio is nothing more than MS' version of an iMac but with a touchscreen and stylus support and for the same money an iMac Pro would is far more powerful and bang for the buck for the types of software that you mentioned. IF Apple made a desktop-class iPadOS device, it could easily develop the processors to keep and even surpass the performance of the Surface Studio.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
"Apple is just damn greedy"? That's a new one. /s
Apple just introduced what is probably the cheapest reference-level monitor in the industry. So sad you think Apple is being greedy.
Apple went to the real "pro" people in the industry. Straight to the source. Apple listened and delivered. Sure "you" don't need broadcast-quality monitors. "We" is not "them (pros).
There are countless monitors you can buy at any price point and performance for the masses, AND thy will work just fine on the Mac Pro. So what's your issue? You want a matching monitor with an Apple logo? Do what I did and buy practically new Apple Thunderbolt-2 monitors for $300 apiece. Buy the LG 5K TB3 monitor? Why hate on Apple for giving the pro crowd something they've been asking for? People like you are a vocal minority, nothing more. Apple's not going to spend millions of dollars and resources for little to no payback.
That argument is just ridiculous. It's not like you can't find decent mid-tier monitors these days, so why would they want Apple to make it? A flagship workstation needs a flagship monitor to pair, how's that wrong?
It really feels like someone wants to criticize just because they can.
The biggest problem with iMacs are the video cards that date the fastest - as the highest build options are mid to lower-end to begin with.
I’ve had issues with slowdown in Adobe CC, and video rendering is slow on my maxed out 2017. Although I read a review that the new 8 core is a lot better.
The new MP is for Pixar / Skywalker no doubt - or a vanity piece of industrial art for the wealthy.
But it is a slap in the face for the usual’s here to determine everyone who doesn’t work for them is suddenly not a professional in their field because they don’t need this niche computer - like Apple has the leverage to make the determination based on a single product launch.
Does this mean we’ll see a MacBook Pro with built in Afterburner? Maybe the rumored 16” MacBook Pro. That would be awesome.
...16 inch Mac Book Pro configured as that would certainly do the trick. Does anyone know when USB 4.0 will arrive, and what it will offer after USBOrg absorbed TB?
Does this mean we’ll see a MacBook Pro with built in Afterburner? Maybe the rumored 16” MacBook Pro. That would be awesome.
...16 inch Mac Book Pro configured as that would certainly do the trick. Does anyone know when USB 4.0 will arrive, and what it will offer after USBOrg absorbed TB?
Given that USB 3.2 with the included TB3 support doesn't arrive until later this year, USB 4 is probably time time away.
Anyone like to guesstimate what a fully speced-out new Mac Pro with display will cost?
$50K at least. The 28 core Xenon CPU is $15,000.00 just by itself on Amazon. Pixar, Lucasfilm, Industrial Light and Magic and others will be buying truckloads of these machines.
The current 28-core Xeon W series is close to $3K, not $15K. The other 28-core processor is the Xeon Platinum 8280, and it goes to $17K, but the Mac Pro don't have that option, considering is a single socket workstation. You'll have to move to a HP Z 840, since it's a dual socket workstation.
This still isn't it, but this, by itself is over $7000.
Later I found that link with the price. At the moment I made the post, Intel had no price information on it.
I suppose you said that it isn't the same processor because of the cache memory, which half of what Intel have in it's website. Could it be an unannounced processor or maybe a typo? When you look in the Intel website, only two processors, based in the Xeon Platinum series, have +70MB of cache memory. The rest of the processors are at most 39MB of cache. Is there any way you, at AI, can check on that?
At present, we're pretty sure it's an unannounced variant.
Based in the Geekbench benchmark database, the Intel Xeon W-3275 has 28MB of L2 cache and 38.5MB of L3 cache, for a combined total of 66.5MB, the same number Apple has in their website.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
"Apple is just damn greedy"? That's a new one. /s
Apple just introduced what is probably the cheapest reference-level monitor in the industry. So sad you think Apple is being greedy.
Apple went to the real "pro" people in the industry. Straight to the source. Apple listened and delivered. Sure "you" don't need broadcast-quality monitors. "We" is not "them (pros).
There are countless monitors you can buy at any price point and performance for the masses, AND thy will work just fine on the Mac Pro. So what's your issue? You want a matching monitor with an Apple logo? Do what I did and buy practically new Apple Thunderbolt-2 monitors for $300 apiece. Buy the LG 5K TB3 monitor? Why hate on Apple for giving the pro crowd something they've been asking for? People like you are a vocal minority, nothing more. Apple's not going to spend millions of dollars and resources for little to no payback.
That argument is just ridiculous. It's not like you can't find decent mid-tier monitors these days, so why would they want Apple to make it? A flagship workstation needs a flagship monitor to pair, how's that wrong?
It really feels like someone wants to criticize just because they can.
Serious question.
It would appear from many of the comments that "pro" is just a popular moniker, so I have to assume that many people posting don't actually generate much income from "pro" work. I'm guessing that's why these same individuals are complaining about price.
Have to pay to play, and even with that, there's financing.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
Stop being so dismissive. MOST people (me included) wanted an expensive, but modular desktop Mac priced in the "enthusiast" range ($3,000+ ish). Very few people were itching to START spending $6,000 on a machine that will literally be used only by computer scientists and people who work at Pixar. And that's not even to mention the $6,000 monitor.
Apple is coming out of the gate all cocky like they did last time with the "trash can" Mac (Can't innovate my ass!) and are going to be scratching their heads when the only people who buy these things are million dollar YouTubers and people who work at CERN.
Despite how much we like Apple products, most of us don't want to spend $2,000+ on a desktop machine with all components glued to the back of a (very nice) monitor, and we don't want to spend $6,000 on a machine to play video games on, do some video editing, and run a few VMs at home.
We find ourselves in the unique position of wanting to throw thousands of dollars at a company and them adamantly refusing to take it unless we allow them to essentially give us a $3,000 iPad or a $6,000 desktop PC.
They refuse to give us what we actually want and it's frustrating. They know what we want, but don't want to make it.
And we don't complain about those monitors because we don't want them and never have. We don't care how "fair" the price is. We wanted a cheaper entry point with the ability to upgrade down the road because most of us probably wouldn't be upgrading anyway but having options is nice. You have 0 upgrade options with an iMac or Mini besides "get another one".
I hope that means the cooling overhead they gave it over the chips TDP.
Macbook pros will run at 99C all day, just a hair away from the Tjunctionmax, the cooler built for not a watt more than their TDP. The 2019 ones are a bit better there, but largely because of the Vega BTO option saving the power over GDDR.
I hope that means the cooling overhead they gave it over the chips TDP.
Macbook pros will run at 99C all day, just a hair away from the Tjunctionmax, the cooler built for not a watt more than their TDP. The 2019 ones are a bit better there, but largely because of the Vega BTO option saving the power over GDDR.
This is not why. That impacted the 2018 Vega ones, but the thermal paste is way, way better on the 2019 than the 2018 or earlier.
I hope that means the cooling overhead they gave it over the chips TDP.
Macbook pros will run at 99C all day, just a hair away from the Tjunctionmax, the cooler built for not a watt more than their TDP. The 2019 ones are a bit better there, but largely because of the Vega BTO option saving the power over GDDR.
This is not why. That impacted the 2018 Vega ones, but the thermal paste is way, way better on the 2019 than the 2018 or earlier.
'Largely', and the delta between great and meh thermal grease is usually a few degrees. I haven't seen the like for like config tested, Radeon 560X vs Radeon 560X
. I would love to see Apple offer a larger screen desktop version of iPadOS on a tilting stand like the Surface Studio. I think Apple could eat the Surface Studio alive and at a better price with a desktop version of iPad OS.
They should've done that a long time ago with that instead of beating around the bush and playing coy with 'gorilla arm' excuses. I'm an artist and have always used a slanted drafting table for years. Never had gorilla arms from it. I think the iPad Pro should've gone 17 inches so that it's a reasonable size for professional creatives. More space to split windows and do actual page layout design in actual size and scale. After all, 11 x 17 is actual 'tabloid' size for magazines or books for graphic designers. It's also the actual size that comic book illustrators use when drawing/inking pages in 100% scale. Drawing it in that scale reduces the pinching/zooming that's frowned upon in the creative field when one needs to focus on paint or line strokes instead of 'pixel pushing' zoomed up close. I'd rather have a 17 inch iPad Pro for mobility purposes.
But if Apple were to do a desktop version like the Surface with a 27 inch screen using iPad OS, then expect them to price gouge it up to at least $2,000. But most realistically, it would have to have Mac OS anyway with some iPad OS apps compatibility.
Comments
This is not a neckbeard machine. Enjoy the cheap laptop, it sounds amazing.
Putting you back onto the Ignore list....PLONK!
I'm not sure why they're complaining just now, not because they can't have different opinions, but seems like they never cared about this until today.
Not necessarily. The Surface Studio is nothing more than MS' version of an iMac but with a touchscreen and stylus support and for the same money an iMac Pro would is far more powerful and bang for the buck for the types of software that you mentioned. IF Apple made a desktop-class iPadOS device, it could easily develop the processors to keep and even surpass the performance of the Surface Studio.
It really feels like someone wants to criticize just because they can.
(Edit: But who knows? Maybe "fence-basing" is some cool new Apple cooling technology/terminology?)
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/26/usb-if-seeds-confusion-with-usb-30-usb-31-merger-into-usb-32-branding
Serious question.
It would appear from many of the comments that "pro" is just a popular moniker, so I have to assume that many people posting don't actually generate much income from "pro" work. I'm guessing that's why these same individuals are complaining about price.
Have to pay to play, and even with that, there's financing.
Macbook pros will run at 99C all day, just a hair away from the Tjunctionmax, the cooler built for not a watt more than their TDP. The 2019 ones are a bit better there, but largely because of the Vega BTO option saving the power over GDDR.
'Largely', and the delta between great and meh thermal grease is usually a few degrees. I haven't seen the like for like config tested, Radeon 560X vs Radeon 560X
But if Apple were to do a desktop version like the Surface with a 27 inch screen using iPad OS, then expect them to price gouge it up to at least $2,000. But most realistically, it would have to have Mac OS anyway with some iPad OS apps compatibility.