Editorial: New Mac Pro highlights the gap Apple isn't filling

1234568»

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 151
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    With all that said, let's see what you really can do:

    Case 1: I have a MacBook (A1342) with 4GiB of RAM and a tiny 120GB SSD.

    I can definitely swap out those RAM for 2x8GiB @ 1600MT/s, the same amount many current Macs had, for drives, some OWC 3G will do.  If I swap my optical drive out, I can get 2TB running in RAID 0 (if the OS supports it).  Finally, if I really want, I can get that 2.4GHz with a 320M chipset - In fact, I could go beyond that with the fastest P-series available.  The heatsink can handle it as long it won't pass the 25W limits.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors#"Penryn",_"Penryn-3M"_(medium-voltage,_45_nm)


    I can't install more RAM than 16GiB nor making it any faster.  There are some 32GiB (2x16) exist, but only works with 5th-gen quad-cores: https://www.ebay.com/itm/32GB-2x-16GB-DDR3-1600-MHz-PC3-12800-SODIMM-204-pin-Sodimm-Laptop-Memory-32G-RAM-/332180586104). The limitation comes from the chipset.

    Now for the drive, even if I can RAID it, they're nowhere near even to a single SATA III.  Then there are software limitations for the RAID, they might work, but not 100% reliable.  That said, even if I manage to put two SATA III in RAID, they still can't beat even an NVMe drive running in PCIe 3.0 x2 - 12" MacBooks, and we know how fast that is.

    While I can upgrade the processor to 2.8GHz, good luck faring it against a core m3.

    https://hwbot.org/submission/2516691_varachio_cinebench___r15_core_2_duo_t9600_152_cb
    https://hwbot.org/submission/3273015_stingeryar_cinebench___r15_core_m3_6y30_223_cb

    That's about it.  RAM is pretty easy to max out, the speed limit is everywhere.  I can only do so much because the platform is set in stone, still can't change the fact that it's obsolete.  While I certainly enjoyed it, I certainly don't expect it to replace a modern laptop - even with less upgradable options.
  • Reply 142 of 151
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 24,086member
    DuhSesame said:
    lmg said:
    For the average consumer, the iMac is probably pretty optimal. But, for businesses or prosumers, I think many would pick something more like the xMac if that choice existed. Many of us, would even pay more money for it. I suppose Apple could do some surveys, but aside from that, how could they have research on it, when they haven't tried it?

    I somewhat agree with the idea that the majority of users don't upgrade machine, at least not anymore. But, again, that might be a chicken-and-egg thing in that most consumer devices have become throw-away these days. People just don't think like that anymore (though they are starting to swing back, IMO). Back in the day, I think most people upgraded machines, even Macs. When I did Mac consulting, almost every client added more RAM or changed out storage at some point. I did, and all my family members did. I'd say it used to be odd not to at some point.
    Yeah, businesses in particular may find them especially appealing. 

    I would agree. Once upon a time, I used Windows PCs, and I regularly opened them up to upgrade - hard drive, memory, graphics card, and optical drives. Since switching to Mac, I’ve never made an upgrade. Part of that is the nature of the computers - I’ve mostly had laptops and iMacs, and neither is especially upgradeable (or even reparable - I had a 2010 iMac that started having issues with its HDD, so I took it to Apple and they were unable to fix it as it was then considered a vintage product (this was a few years back now), and so referred me to a third party reseller. They wanted about $600 to replace the drive in it, and they cautioned me that during the replacement process, it’s possible that they’d break the display and would not be liable for that. That was ridiculously expensive, so I simply replaced the computer with a new,
    much faster model with an SSD. The non-reparability was, admittedly, a little irritating... but, on the other hand, by the time it failed, the hardware had gotten old enough that it was starting to struggle to keep up, running slowly and in need of replacement. Not only that, but in that timeframe, the iMac had transitioned to Retina displays, and having adopted and grown accustomed to them on my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro, it had become a little difficult to look at the lower-res display. 

    But another part of it, I think, is that the necessity of upgrades feels lower than it once did. Part of that, in my case, is I simply have more money now and can (1) max out my systems at purchase to maximize their capabilities and their lifespans, and (2) replace my computers often enough (usually about five to six years) that upgrades aren’t really a need, for the most part. My current MBP has 16GB of RAM and it’s still so fast... my next will have 32GB and possibly 64GB depending on the specs of their next-gen model! Either way, I don’t really expect the need to upgrade that until the time comes to replace the laptop altogether.

    (I’ve given it a lot of thought, and I really want to see a MacBook Pro with the footprint of the previous 17-inch model again. I never actually bought a 17-inch MBP when they were available, because at that time the computers were much thicker and heavier than they are now, primarily relying on HDDs, and I wanted to be able to carry the computer easily, and to be able to hold it in one hand, standing, and use it with the other, if I needed to. Since then, iPhones and iPads have proliferated, so the need for mobility in a laptop has been greatly diminished. Most of the time, I find myself using my laptop in the same spot or two, and while it’s great to be able to move it around, I have much less need to use it the way I described. The rumour, of course, is that we will soon see a 16-16.5-inch MacBook Pro with similar dimensions to the current 15-inch model, but with the display stretched to the edge of the glass. That sounds nice, but I think Apple should go a step further: build a laptop with dimensions similar to the previous 17-inch model, but with the display stretched to the glass to make an 18-19-inch display. Use the extra space to make the computer more powerful, and consider offering a Xeon processor as an option on that unit. The battery life would be bad, I’m sure, at least without putting a much larger battery in it, but I’m sure there’d be some users that would appreciate a true mobile workstation from Apple. I’d probably stick with the i9 to keep some battery life, but I’m sure there are those who’d love the increased power - and maybe the selection of that processor and top-end GPUs would make the chassis thicker to accommodate a larger battery and increased airflow. If they offered a bigger version of the MacBook Pro, I’d almost certainly buy it! Seeing as how they put out a pro version of the iMac with a Xeon, and a Mac Pro with incredible specs, it’d be nice to see them give similar treatment to the MacBook Pro.)

    If the products were built to be more upgradeable, would I hang onto them longer and upgrade rather than replace? Possibly, at least when it comes to the desktops. (I have my doubts that a high-quality laptop could be built that is fully upgradeable and anywhere near as compact as the current MacBook Pro.) But I guess I like getting the latest and greatest thing, and replacing the entire unit from time to time. Each time I move from one Mac to the next, I’m upgrading CPU, RAM, SSD, GPU, I/O, and display all at once, and it would be difficult, I think, to make most of their computers such that everyone of those components could be upgradeable, particularly if they aim to maintain any semblance of a cohesive system design. Part of the excitement for me, I suppose, is the design and aesthetics of the new things they put out, and that is, of course, missing in the upgrades. Very different story, needless to say, when you have to consider the ROI on a piece of equipment in a business use case, but for my personal use, these things matter to me. 

    What I do wish is that’s Apple would make its MacBook Pro chargers a lot more durable so I wouldn’t have to shell out $95 a pop when they inevitably fray! For a company that is as particular as they are when it comes to most of their products, they make truly terrible cables! The MacBook chargers, the Lightning cables, and the Time Capsule 3TB have easily been the worst Apple products I’ve ever owned! Over-priced and not very durable! Switched to Anker Lightning cables, and they are not only cheaper, but much longer-lasting. 
    You can only do so much on a modern computer, especially laptops.

    Intel used to sell socketed CPUs for laptops until the 5th-generation.  Despite that, you can't upgrade them across platforms as newer processors always required a redesign.  Still, you can upgrade within a generation by desoldering.  MacBooks never offering PGA sockets, though still possible to swap if you try.

    RAM - that's limited by the processor.  The current i9 supports 128GiB total - four slots, dual-channel.  Most laptops offer two slots, which you can only go half as much - 64GiB.  On top of that, they don't support XMP, it stays as whatever the processor can support.  The 16" maxed out the best one can offer, as almost every MacBook does.  By the way, as far as my knowledge goes, you can't swap your 2x16 RAM sticks into 2x32, those older memory controllers can't support newer chips.  You can only go so far with RAM.

    SSD - to be fair, that's one thing I think it's worth upgrading for, yet the T2 locks it down with specific speed, probably to balance between the performance and consumption.  I do hope to see at least two modules like the (i)Mac Pro while offering upgrade options.

    Graphics - While there are dedicate mobile graphics cards, they require extra cables and beefier heatsinks.  You never know how much more power and cooling some other cards would take, which they're only available for thicker ones.  Most people with them never tinkered it, then there's the eGPU where you can upgrade like a desktop...

    Wi-Fi, Bluetooth & misc - the only time I saw people took them out is when they need to repair.  I assume the better case design matters more.
    I did add an additional TB hard-drive (traditional) and bumped the memory from 8 to 16GB after the fact on my previous laptop (Dell) used for photo-processing from the easy chair. :)
    When I first got it I thought 8GB was enough, Adobe said so LOL, and a 256GB SSD was OK too if I used an external drive for photo storage/organizing. It wasn't, so I'm glad the Dell was relatively easy to "improve" after the purchase. Otherwise I would have been looking for a new machine far sooner than I did. 

    On my latest laptop I made certain that components were not soldered in for the same reasoning.

    This one has a 1TB SSD for programs and associated data and 32GB memory with a 9th gen i7. I don't think I'll be needing to change anything in the next 5 years or so but who knows, maybe the SSD will need a change out. I did consider 2TB internal but I'm a big proponent of using external Samsung T5's for photos so it's easier to move between the slightly faster and larger display (32") desktop at home and the design stations at work,  and the more comfortable laptop by my chair.

    Yeah I could'a overbought like I have before, maxed out the memory at 64GB and choosing a 2TB SSD but that bumps the price another thousand dollars. Now I have the option to add it later and almost certainly for less, if I discover I need to. It would suck to buy a new computer and less than a year in have buyer's remorse, kicking myself for locking into a computer with unsatisfactory resources. 
  • Reply 143 of 151
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    gatorguy said:
    DuhSesame said:
    lmg said:
    For the average consumer, the iMac is probably pretty optimal. But, for businesses or prosumers, I think many would pick something more like the xMac if that choice existed. Many of us, would even pay more money for it. I suppose Apple could do some surveys, but aside from that, how could they have research on it, when they haven't tried it?

    I somewhat agree with the idea that the majority of users don't upgrade machine, at least not anymore. But, again, that might be a chicken-and-egg thing in that most consumer devices have become throw-away these days. People just don't think like that anymore (though they are starting to swing back, IMO). Back in the day, I think most people upgraded machines, even Macs. When I did Mac consulting, almost every client added more RAM or changed out storage at some point. I did, and all my family members did. I'd say it used to be odd not to at some point.
    Yeah, businesses in particular may find them especially appealing. 

    I would agree. Once upon a time, I used Windows PCs, and I regularly opened them up to upgrade - hard drive, memory, graphics card, and optical drives. Since switching to Mac, I’ve never made an upgrade. Part of that is the nature of the computers - I’ve mostly had laptops and iMacs, and neither is especially upgradeable (or even reparable - I had a 2010 iMac that started having issues with its HDD, so I took it to Apple and they were unable to fix it as it was then considered a vintage product (this was a few years back now), and so referred me to a third party reseller. They wanted about $600 to replace the drive in it, and they cautioned me that during the replacement process, it’s possible that they’d break the display and would not be liable for that. That was ridiculously expensive, so I simply replaced the computer with a new,
    much faster model with an SSD. The non-reparability was, admittedly, a little irritating... but, on the other hand, by the time it failed, the hardware had gotten old enough that it was starting to struggle to keep up, running slowly and in need of replacement. Not only that, but in that timeframe, the iMac had transitioned to Retina displays, and having adopted and grown accustomed to them on my iPhone, iPad, and MacBook Pro, it had become a little difficult to look at the lower-res display. 

    But another part of it, I think, is that the necessity of upgrades feels lower than it once did. Part of that, in my case, is I simply have more money now and can (1) max out my systems at purchase to maximize their capabilities and their lifespans, and (2) replace my computers often enough (usually about five to six years) that upgrades aren’t really a need, for the most part. My current MBP has 16GB of RAM and it’s still so fast... my next will have 32GB and possibly 64GB depending on the specs of their next-gen model! Either way, I don’t really expect the need to upgrade that until the time comes to replace the laptop altogether.

    (I’ve given it a lot of thought, and I really want to see a MacBook Pro with the footprint of the previous 17-inch model again. I never actually bought a 17-inch MBP when they were available, because at that time the computers were much thicker and heavier than they are now, primarily relying on HDDs, and I wanted to be able to carry the computer easily, and to be able to hold it in one hand, standing, and use it with the other, if I needed to. Since then, iPhones and iPads have proliferated, so the need for mobility in a laptop has been greatly diminished. Most of the time, I find myself using my laptop in the same spot or two, and while it’s great to be able to move it around, I have much less need to use it the way I described. The rumour, of course, is that we will soon see a 16-16.5-inch MacBook Pro with similar dimensions to the current 15-inch model, but with the display stretched to the edge of the glass. That sounds nice, but I think Apple should go a step further: build a laptop with dimensions similar to the previous 17-inch model, but with the display stretched to the glass to make an 18-19-inch display. Use the extra space to make the computer more powerful, and consider offering a Xeon processor as an option on that unit. The battery life would be bad, I’m sure, at least without putting a much larger battery in it, but I’m sure there’d be some users that would appreciate a true mobile workstation from Apple. I’d probably stick with the i9 to keep some battery life, but I’m sure there are those who’d love the increased power - and maybe the selection of that processor and top-end GPUs would make the chassis thicker to accommodate a larger battery and increased airflow. If they offered a bigger version of the MacBook Pro, I’d almost certainly buy it! Seeing as how they put out a pro version of the iMac with a Xeon, and a Mac Pro with incredible specs, it’d be nice to see them give similar treatment to the MacBook Pro.)

    If the products were built to be more upgradeable, would I hang onto them longer and upgrade rather than replace? Possibly, at least when it comes to the desktops. (I have my doubts that a high-quality laptop could be built that is fully upgradeable and anywhere near as compact as the current MacBook Pro.) But I guess I like getting the latest and greatest thing, and replacing the entire unit from time to time. Each time I move from one Mac to the next, I’m upgrading CPU, RAM, SSD, GPU, I/O, and display all at once, and it would be difficult, I think, to make most of their computers such that everyone of those components could be upgradeable, particularly if they aim to maintain any semblance of a cohesive system design. Part of the excitement for me, I suppose, is the design and aesthetics of the new things they put out, and that is, of course, missing in the upgrades. Very different story, needless to say, when you have to consider the ROI on a piece of equipment in a business use case, but for my personal use, these things matter to me. 

    What I do wish is that’s Apple would make its MacBook Pro chargers a lot more durable so I wouldn’t have to shell out $95 a pop when they inevitably fray! For a company that is as particular as they are when it comes to most of their products, they make truly terrible cables! The MacBook chargers, the Lightning cables, and the Time Capsule 3TB have easily been the worst Apple products I’ve ever owned! Over-priced and not very durable! Switched to Anker Lightning cables, and they are not only cheaper, but much longer-lasting. 
    You can only do so much on a modern computer, especially laptops.

    Intel used to sell socketed CPUs for laptops until the 5th-generation.  Despite that, you can't upgrade them across platforms as newer processors always required a redesign.  Still, you can upgrade within a generation by desoldering.  MacBooks never offering PGA sockets, though still possible to swap if you try.

    RAM - that's limited by the processor.  The current i9 supports 128GiB total - four slots, dual-channel.  Most laptops offer two slots, which you can only go half as much - 64GiB.  On top of that, they don't support XMP, it stays as whatever the processor can support.  The 16" maxed out the best one can offer, as almost every MacBook does.  By the way, as far as my knowledge goes, you can't swap your 2x16 RAM sticks into 2x32, those older memory controllers can't support newer chips.  You can only go so far with RAM.

    SSD - to be fair, that's one thing I think it's worth upgrading for, yet the T2 locks it down with specific speed, probably to balance between the performance and consumption.  I do hope to see at least two modules like the (i)Mac Pro while offering upgrade options.

    Graphics - While there are dedicate mobile graphics cards, they require extra cables and beefier heatsinks.  You never know how much more power and cooling some other cards would take, which they're only available for thicker ones.  Most people with them never tinkered it, then there's the eGPU where you can upgrade like a desktop...

    Wi-Fi, Bluetooth & misc - the only time I saw people took them out is when they need to repair.  I assume the better case design matters more.
    I did add an additional TB hard-drive (traditional) and bumped the memory from 8 to 16GB after the fact on my previous laptop (Dell) used for photo-processing from the easy chair. :)
    When I first got it I thought 8GB was enough, Adobe said so LOL, and a 256GB SSD was OK too if I used an external drive for photo storage/organizing. It wasn't, so I'm glad the Dell was relatively easy to "improve" after the purchase. Otherwise I would have been looking for a new machine far sooner than I did. 

    On my latest laptop I made certain that components were not soldered in for the same reasoning.

    This one has a 1TB SSD for programs and associated data and 32GB memory with a 9th gen i7. I don't think I'll be needing to change anything in the next 5 years or so but who knows, maybe the SSD will need a change out. I did consider 2TB internal but I'm a big proponent of using external Samsung T5's for photos so it's easier to move between the slightly faster and larger display (32") desktop at home and the design stations at work,  and the more comfortable laptop by my chair.

    Yeah I could'a overbought like I have before, maxed out the memory at 64GB and choosing a 2TB SSD but that bumps the price another thousand dollars. Now I have the option to add it later and almost certainly for less, if I discover I need to. It would suck to buy a new computer and less than a year in have buyer's remorse, kicking myself for locking into a computer with unsatisfactory resources. 
    Well, I wasn't talking about the price when I'm talking about the RAM, rather the upper limit is very easy to hit.  If you have a DDR3 system on that Dell, you will never go beyond 16GiB except it's a 5th-gen.  

    Sure I do agree about the additional cost-saving in the long run, especially true about the SSD, but lots of arguments aren't based on the price.  We're talking about soldered RAM or not makes no difference in performance & reliability.  Teslas and many electric vehicles are running on LPDDRs, yet those platforms have stricter stability requirements to hit.  Some RAM modules never come with sockets, that's also a consideration.  While you might not be comfortable about the price when you're purchasing, once you're there, you're there.


    Just a side note, another reason for the current 16" to use soldered RAM is the board size.  The left half of the board has been taken by video RAMs and you have to utilize both sides to get your two banks of 32GiB.  If we're going to install a socket here, it will make the machine have only a single-channel to work with, then I'm not sure whether they'll be able to achieve 64GiB as no 1x64 available or whether the processor will support it.
    edited December 2019 fastasleep
  • Reply 144 of 151
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,952member
    DuhSesame said:
    RAM - that's limited by the processor.  The current i9 supports 128GiB total - four slots, dual-channel.  Most laptops offer two slots, which you can only go half as much - 64GiB.  On top of that, they don't support XMP, it stays as whatever the processor can support.  The 16" maxed out the best one can offer, as almost every MacBook does.  By the way, as far as my knowledge goes, you can't swap your 2x16 RAM sticks into 2x32, those older memory controllers can't support newer chips.  You can only go so far with RAM.

    SSD - to be fair, that's one thing I think it's worth upgrading for, yet the T2 locks it down with specific speed, probably to balance between the performance and consumption.  I do hope to see at least two modules like the (i)Mac Pro while offering upgrade options.
    ...
    I think the main people who get hurt by the more modern trend, are people who are on a tighter budget who used to buy the base model and then add over time. I used to do that, just as standard practice, regardless of budget (though my budget was usually tight). But, if you're stretching a bit to buy, and then you have to buy the usually initially inflated prices to expand beyond what you actually need to try and future-proof a bit, it can add a LOT more to the cost than necessary.

    But, the good thing is that a lot of it can now be easily expanded externally. For example, my Mac mini only has 256GB (which is fine for now), but if I ever need, I can easily just throw a 1TB TB3 SSD on the outside and not really know the difference. A bit more pain with a laptop, but those things are getting near dongle-size these days, so just add some SSD to one's necessary-anyway dongle collection.

     I added an eGPU, which I can change for a better one someday. While I can upgrade the RAM on the mini, that would be more the problem on many models.

    I guess you just have to think through the limitations in regards to upgrades for the particular model and your future projections.
  • Reply 145 of 151
    DuhSesameDuhSesame Posts: 1,278member
    cgWerks said:
    DuhSesame said:
    RAM - that's limited by the processor.  The current i9 supports 128GiB total - four slots, dual-channel.  Most laptops offer two slots, which you can only go half as much - 64GiB.  On top of that, they don't support XMP, it stays as whatever the processor can support.  The 16" maxed out the best one can offer, as almost every MacBook does.  By the way, as far as my knowledge goes, you can't swap your 2x16 RAM sticks into 2x32, those older memory controllers can't support newer chips.  You can only go so far with RAM.

    SSD - to be fair, that's one thing I think it's worth upgrading for, yet the T2 locks it down with specific speed, probably to balance between the performance and consumption.  I do hope to see at least two modules like the (i)Mac Pro while offering upgrade options.
    ...
    I think the main people who get hurt by the more modern trend, are people who are on a tighter budget who used to buy the base model and then add over time. I used to do that, just as standard practice, regardless of budget (though my budget was usually tight). But, if you're stretching a bit to buy, and then you have to buy the usually initially inflated prices to expand beyond what you actually need to try and future-proof a bit, it can add a LOT more to the cost than necessary.

    But, the good thing is that a lot of it can now be easily expanded externally. For example, my Mac mini only has 256GB (which is fine for now), but if I ever need, I can easily just throw a 1TB TB3 SSD on the outside and not really know the difference. A bit more pain with a laptop, but those things are getting near dongle-size these days, so just add some SSD to one's necessary-anyway dongle collection.

     I added an eGPU, which I can change for a better one someday. While I can upgrade the RAM on the mini, that would be more the problem on many models.

    I guess you just have to think through the limitations in regards to upgrades for the particular model and your future projections.
    A single Thunderbolt connection gives you four lanes of PCIe, so the higher-end Pros have 8 lanes to expand, don't think there are other laptops offering that.

    4 lanes are the same amount your PCH offers and it does support multiple devices, you could theoretically have a box full of expansions.  You certainly can add multiple cards in a big expansion box, if someone is willing to do it.


    As for RAM, AFAIK the on-board RAM module in the 16" is wider than SO-DIMMs, as well as using bigger chips on both sides.  It only took half of the horizontal space than two banks of SO-DIMM does, making space for the video memory.  There are also RAM chips that don't have slot options (LPDDR).  We've talked about why OEM charges a ton more and sure it will be cheaper from a personal standpoint, but most people in our forum believed whatever on-board must mean they're less reliable & with lower performance, which isn't true.
  • Reply 146 of 151
    My needs and wants are probably fairly unique. I currently have 3 Macs, 2 as servers and the newest Mac Mini as my regular Mac. They are all connected to my 27" Dell monitor (LOVE all of those connectors) and a USB switch. It takes about 5 seconds to go from one to another: *DELL screen switch*, *USB SWITCH trackpad, mouse, and keyboard*.

    I waited over a decade for a Mac Pro to replace my first gen, Mac Pro 1,1 (server #1-Snow Leopard Server, 4 4TB media drives). I gave up in 2014 and bought a Mac Mini (server #2 High Sierra, running my Adobe Creative Suites and all my other 32-bit apps).

    When the new Mac Pro was debuted I almost cried. All this time and this Pro is way too much "pro" for me. So, after bitching and moaning for a few weeks, I kitted out the latest Mac Mini as a custom build with max everything. But what I really, really wanted was a MODERN cheese grater -> upgrades of the internals and leave the rest alone.
    cgWerks
  • Reply 147 of 151
    Anyone else catch this? Color me skeptical, but an interesting rumor. I’d imagine some kind of box with i7/i9 options and a beefier GPU, but would it be PCIe? Some options similar to iMac Pro? So confused as Apple kinda fumbled positioning ATV as a console, I have trouble imagining them caring so much about esports. 



  • Reply 148 of 151
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,813administrator
    Anyone else catch this? Color me skeptical, but an interesting rumor. I’d imagine some kind of box with i7/i9 options and a beefier GPU, but would it be PCIe? Some options similar to iMac Pro? So confused as Apple kinda fumbled positioning ATV as a console, I have trouble imagining them caring so much about esports. 



    The source that PA derived the report from is notoriously bad.
    fastasleep
  • Reply 149 of 151
    Anyone else catch this? Color me skeptical, but an interesting rumor. I’d imagine some kind of box with i7/i9 options and a beefier GPU, but would it be PCIe? Some options similar to iMac Pro? So confused as Apple kinda fumbled positioning ATV as a console, I have trouble imagining them caring so much about esports. 



    The source that PA derived the report from is notoriously bad.
    Color me doubly-skeptical then. 
  • Reply 150 of 151
    cgWerkscgWerks Posts: 2,952member
    DuhSesame said:
    A single Thunderbolt connection gives you four lanes of PCIe, so the higher-end Pros have 8 lanes to expand, don't think there are other laptops offering that.

    4 lanes are the same amount your PCH offers and it does support multiple devices, you could theoretically have a box full of expansions.  You certainly can add multiple cards in a big expansion box, if someone is willing to do it.


    As for RAM, AFAIK the on-board RAM module in the 16" is wider than SO-DIMMs, as well as using bigger chips on both sides.  It only took half of the horizontal space than two banks of SO-DIMM does, making space for the video memory.  There are also RAM chips that don't have slot options (LPDDR).  We've talked about why OEM charges a ton more and sure it will be cheaper from a personal standpoint, but most people in our forum believed whatever on-board must mean they're less reliable & with lower performance, which isn't true.
    Yeah, I can understand the tradeoffs more in a laptop. My issue is more that the issues apply, for the most part, to Apple's entire lineup (except the new Mac Pro). There is no box for the semi-pro/prosumer who wants to buy on a budget and then bump things up when they get more money. The Mac mini is the closest thing to that, I guess (which is why I bought one).

    But, one would think they could make one model in-between the current lineup and the Mac Pro. I'd think there are more users like that than Mac Pro users (ie. a bigger market). I suppose most of them (like me) just compromise and get something from the existing lineup. But, they could be better served.

    liney said:
    My needs and wants are probably fairly unique. I currently have 3 Macs, 2 as servers and the newest Mac Mini as my regular Mac. They are all connected to my 27" Dell monitor (LOVE all of those connectors) and a USB switch. It takes about 5 seconds to go from one to another: *DELL screen switch*, *USB SWITCH trackpad, mouse, and keyboard*.

    I waited over a decade for a Mac Pro to replace my first gen, Mac Pro 1,1 (server #1-Snow Leopard Server, 4 4TB media drives). I gave up in 2014 and bought a Mac Mini (server #2 High Sierra, running my Adobe Creative Suites and all my other 32-bit apps).

    When the new Mac Pro was debuted I almost cried. All this time and this Pro is way too much "pro" for me. So, after bitching and moaning for a few weeks, I kitted out the latest Mac Mini as a custom build with max everything. But what I really, really wanted was a MODERN cheese grater -> upgrades of the internals and leave the rest alone.
    Yep, my point above exactly. Apple has done a ***GREAT*** job of covering the ultra-high-end now. That is a good thing for everyone, as just like Ford and the GT40, we'll all benefit from Apple chasing the best. But, they have done a fairly poor job of filling in that middle. We can now, thankfully, get by with a Mac mini or iMac, but they aren't an ideal fit. Don't get me wrong, I love my mini, but I'd rather have had a small tower type unit (or cylinder, octagon, etc.) with similar hardware, more adequate cooling, and maybe a bit better access/expandability for RAM and storage.
Sign In or Register to comment.