Future of Mac Pro

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2014


There is no question the iPhone and iPad products are great.  But these are great for personal computing and content consumption.  Laptops and iMacs are also great as desktop versions of personal computing and concept consumption.  Apple is hitting on all cylinders in these categories.  


 


The question is what is the future of the Mac Pro. The big deal about the Mac Pro is that it is really overkill and not the best tool for a personal computer and content consumption.  Where it really shines is content creation - Audio, Video, Photo.  I am sure there are a few other things too, but the point is that these apps can all benefit from massively parallel processing.  Even the current Mac Pros are not nearly powerful enough for what we wish to do.  I think Apple should get rid of the Mac Pro as we know it and design a computer, OS, and software to take advantage of this "need for more speed."  


 


I think Apple should replace the "PC" personal computer Mac Pro with a "MC" Media Computer Mac Pro, or something to that effect.  Think something like 1,000s of processors or cores.  For example, I wonder what 150 A6 chips could do for my last Logic music project.  I used 150 audio tracks, many of them stereo and with effects.  While my 8 core Mac Pro handled it all just fine, I am sure 150 A6 chips could also.  The code to take advantage of the 150 processors should not be that hard to write.  Music is a straight forward parallel process.  Same for video and for photo.


 


Apple has been dancing around the edges with Xgrid and other Core libraries like the one that is suppose to tap into the GPU for parallel processing.  Why not go the whole way and develop a computer, OS, and software to maximize this?  Most people who run Mac Pros for music recording studios or video post houses dedicate their machine to one task.  These people really do not need any personal computing software.


 


The same goes for servers.  Servers are really a classic parallel problem and they really do not need personal software.  So a massively parallel Mac Pro has huge potential.  The question is, is this what Apple is doing?


 


Apple has discontinued XServe and Raid.  Apple has lowered their OS Server to almost nothing.  Apple has not updated their Mac Pro line in a long time.  Apple also has geared Final Cut for a more amateur appeal.  Logic has not been updated lately.  Aperture is also a lot more amateurish.  The software is still top of the line, but only compared to the old way of doing things.  Many people think something is up with the pro side of things.


 


Many people think Apple may abandon the pros because they cannot make much money with the Mac Pro.  But they can also change the game and introduce a whole new paradigm.  Until that is ready, they can limp the current OS and software along.  Go ahead and let iOS be the new consumer OS but let OS X grow up into the new pro OS with massive parallel support.


 


I do not have any inside info from Apple but I, like many other people, can see something is happening at Apple.  Apple has the potential to change the game for pro users in a big way.  If a new Pro Mac is 100 times more powerful, then I'd gladly pay $10,000 or even $20,000 per machine.  It would be worth it for me.  No waiting for renders for multicam 4K 3D video, a 300 track audio project with 1,000 plug ins at 192 kH, instant feedback on photo effects and filters - Apple can go there.  Many of us would gladly buy these machines.  Forget Avid, Pro Tools, and Adobe.


 


Is something like this what Apple has up it's sleeve come 2013?  If it did, what would all you pros out there think of this?

«13456711

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 212
    winterwinter Posts: 1,238member
    I just want to see the future of computers and not "consumer" devices and this is someone who is a consumer. It would be like if BMW started making sub-luxury cars.
  • Reply 2 of 212


    Well Mac Pro is usually used for content creation the most... and Apple has job listings on their website for making a keyboard multilingual and in C++ so the future of the Mac Pro can be something similar to this...


     


     



    They'll launch an lcd keyboard to work with OS XI and that will allow to use the keyboard for the Mac Pro for editing content and using it as a tool. I also suspect that the Mac Pro will become thinner and lighter, and that it'll have SSD's and DRAM 4.

  • Reply 3 of 212

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Strat09 View Post


    Well Macbook pro is usually used for content creation the most... and Apple has job listings on their website for making a keyboard multilingual and in C++ so the future of the macbook pro can be something similar to this...


     


     



    Of course since they just released the macbook pro with retina display... this should launch around 2015. And the glass cover would be placed on it instead of aluminum like in the macbook air model shown above. They'll most likely also create a standalone lcd keyboard for the iMac and Mac Mini, and build an update to the MAC OS XI to allow for such device to exist. And the keyboard would be bluetooth enabled, and have a price range of 100 dollars to 300.





    A standalone lcd keyboard for the iMac and Mac Mini? I would love to look forward for this feature. But, 2015 may be too late for all the parties.

  • Reply 4 of 212


    I'm still rocking the MacPro 2,1.  I've wanted to upgrade for a while now, but I'm waiting for a new form factor.  It's disappointing when a current quad-core Mac Mini can match the power of my Mac Pro, but I'm waiting to see what 2013 brings.  Tim Cook said they had good things in store for the Mac Pro, and I'm really hoping they come through with a slimmer design.  This is the last year I'll be waiting though.  I'm stuck at Lion, and can't progress more than that.  Sadly, Mac Pro's aren't something Apple really cares about anymore.  They don't sell very many of them and think that we all ought to be using iMacs. 

  • Reply 5 of 212
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member


    The Mini was restricted to integrated graphics for the newest update, which is the surest sign yet that Apple is serious about the upcoming Pro revision.


     


    In addition, Thunderbolt is going to get faster and cheaper with a rev in 'early 2013', which gives incentive for a big spring announcement.


     


    There will obviously be faster chips and drives in '13, but aside from the Thunderbolt rev, I'm not hearing about any new tech that could change the Pro's appeal.


     


    Cook's obviously thinking there's something worthy of a big unveil. He's keeping the Pro market waiting for a year. He'd better be right.

  • Reply 6 of 212


    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

    The Mini was restricted to integrated graphics for the newest update, which is the surest sign yet that Apple is serious about the upcoming Pro revision.


     


    Why?

  • Reply 7 of 212
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


    The Mini was restricted to integrated graphics for the newest update, which is the surest sign yet that Apple is serious about the upcoming Pro revision.


     


    In addition, Thunderbolt is going to get faster and cheaper with a rev in 'early 2013', which gives incentive for a big spring announcement.


     


    There will obviously be faster chips and drives in '13, but aside from the Thunderbolt rev, I'm not hearing about any new tech that could change the Pro's appeal.


     


    Cook's obviously thinking there's something worthy of a big unveil. He's keeping the Pro market waiting for a year. He'd better be right.



    Lloyd Chambers (MacPerformance Guide) thinks it may be August 2013 before Apple releases a new Mac Pro because of remarks Steve made two or three years ago, brought to his attention by a reader of his site, that Apple would not release a Mac Pro until USB 3 was natively supported. The Ivy Bridge Xeon is supposed to support USB 3 natively.


     


    You will recall that all Tim said was "next year".


     


    Even when Apple does release a new Mac Pro, without much greater clarity on Tim's part, the future of the Mac Pro will remain a question mark. Many are concerned that the next release will be an end-of-life release. Such uncertainty may lead users to abandon the platform. HELLO, TIM! Talk to us!

  • Reply 8 of 212
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    Why?



     


    Because the Mini's graphics were restricted/downgraded in the latest update.


     


    That smells like sabotage to me, to protect another product line.


    And it's not the iMac, since the iMac's been doing just fine competing with the Mini.

  • Reply 9 of 212
    frank777frank777 Posts: 5,839member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RBR View Post


    Lloyd Chambers (MacPerformance Guide) thinks it may be August 2013 before Apple releases a new Mac Pro because of remarks Steve made two or three years ago, brought to his attention by a reader of his site, that Apple would not release a Mac Pro until USB 3 was natively supported. The Ivy Bridge Xeon is supposed to support USB 3 natively.


     


    You will recall that all Tim said was "next year".


     


    Even when Apple does release a new Mac Pro, without much greater clarity on Tim's part, the future of the Mac Pro will remain a question mark. Many are concerned that the next release will be an end-of-life release. Such uncertainty may lead users to abandon the platform. HELLO, TIM! Talk to us!



     


    It's a good point, though Apple doesn't have any problem getting chips early (which may have been what the 'moving to ARM' threat/leak was really about.)


     


    Apple's not investing a year and more of engineering time for an end-of-life release. That's ridiculous.


     


    Personally, the only game-changer I can think of is for Apple to use Grand Central and other tech to allow Pros to cluster/grid CPUs so that machine expansion takes the form of buying more Mac CPUs. That sentence is already well past my understanding of the whole concept, so I'll just leave it there.

  • Reply 10 of 212
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post


     


    It's a good point, though Apple doesn't have any problem getting chips early (which may have been what the 'moving to ARM' threat/leak was really about.)


     


    Apple's not investing a year and more of engineering time for an end-of-life release. That's ridiculous.


     


    Personally, the only game-changer I can think of is for Apple to use Grand Central and other tech to allow Pros to cluster/grid CPUs so that machine expansion takes the form of buying more Mac CPUs. That sentence is already well past my understanding of the whole concept, so I'll just leave it there.



    Frankly, I don't think there is that much engineering involved in whatever the new Mac Pro may be. Well, at least not on Apple's part. Intel have done most of the heavy lifting on the technical engineering side and Apple have basically wrapped a pretty shell around it. Apple may surprise me, but I don't expect any really big changes in the Mac Pro box itself. That's not to say anything one way or the other about it. It's big, but so what. Despite it being called a desktop, hardly anyone actually puts it on the desktop. 


     


    One interesting thing about utilizing multiple cores on CPUs on the (cough!) Windows side is that there is an application which allows the user to assign specific applications a certain number of cores and other applications a specific number of cores. For example, an individual of my acquaintance, uses a 6 core machine. He assigns 4 cores to Lightroom and imports the day's photoshoot, applying various pre-sets or filters based upon a few sample images he tested, and then uses the other two cores to take care of email, invoicing, browsing or running his favorite game, all without stealing a single CPU cycle from the 4 cores processing his image files. That would be something useful on the Mac side.


     


    Cheers

  • Reply 11 of 212


    If Apple really does like disruptive innovation, what would happen if they came up with a Mac Pro that was easily connected together (through Thunderbolt fibre?) to compete with the highest super computers in the world. I remember the first aluminum Mac pro made it into the top ten when so many hundreds/thousands were kluged together as a super computer.


     


    Then, if my MacPro need more umph, I would simply buy another one and cluster them together.


     


    This would be worth the wait and would push the speed down and the usability up to the more common users.

  • Reply 12 of 212


    I'd need thunderbolt and as many PCI slots as I can get (9 or more)

  • Reply 13 of 212

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by scottglasel View Post


    I'd need thunderbolt and as many PCI slots as I can get (9 or more)



    And as many USB ports as can be fit in as well.

  • Reply 14 of 212
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by lermentov View Post


    If Apple really does like disruptive innovation, what would happen if they came up with a Mac Pro that was easily connected together (through Thunderbolt fibre?) to compete with the highest super computers in the world. I remember the first aluminum Mac pro made it into the top ten when so many hundreds/thousands were kluged together as a super computer.


     


    Then, if my MacPro need more umph, I would simply buy another one and cluster them together.


     


    This would be worth the wait and would push the speed down and the usability up to the more common users.





    I somehow doubt Apple is going to approach the super computer market. Even if they wanted to, it's not like they have an exclusive license to thunderbolt. Any of the other brands can implement it at any time. I remember the G5 rig now that you mention it, although I never read about the reason for such an implementation.

  • Reply 15 of 212
    alexnalexn Posts: 119member
    Speaking of Xgrid, why did Apple remove it from OS X 10.8? Was it because nobody used it (apparently not the case according to the Xgrid list), or because they're relinquishing their position in the "pro" markets - and dumping the Mac Pro? At least three useful subsytems have been removed from OS X over the last couple of years, if you include X11 (I realise that it's available elsewhere), and Java (albeit in itself controversial wrt securit;, available from Oracle), along with Xgrid (not available anywhere).

    None of this appears to me to augur well for the future of the Mac Pro. I hope I'm wrong!
  • Reply 16 of 212


    I agree it would be nice to have a type of Mac Pro Supercomputer, I think the most we can realistically expect from Apple is an updated chipset, new single and dual processor configurations, better GPUs, faster RAM, and MAYBE a case redesign that would hopefully allow for more HDD bays, etc. Oh and Thunderbolt. And we can keep dreaming for BluRay. As a 12 Core owner, if Apple doesn't do this, then my replacement for this machine will end up being a hackintosh.

  • Reply 17 of 212
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    lermentov wrote: »
    If Apple really does like disruptive innovation, what would happen if they came up with a Mac Pro that was easily connected together (through Thunderbolt fibre?) to compete with the highest super computers in the world. I remember the first aluminum Mac pro made it into the top ten when so many hundreds/thousands were kluged together as a super computer.
    Do you have any idea as to what a real super computer is? Apple has zero chance of competeing in that world. At best they could come up with a real high performance workstation
    Then, if my MacPro need more umph, I would simply buy another one and cluster them together.
    You can cluster Macs together now. That won't do you any good though unless the software you use is written to take advantage of clustering.
    This would be worth the wait and would push the speed down and the usability up to the more common users.

    One of the reasons I suspect that Apple is working with Xeon Phi, in some form, is just that, a way to push high performance down to the user. That and addressing the affordablitity issue which pushes high performance off many desks.
  • Reply 18 of 212
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    zwhaler wrote: »
    I agree it would be nice to have a type of Mac Pro Supercomputer,
    This isn't impossible as Intel will be delivering chips for that sort of machine next year.
    I think the most we can realistically expect from Apple is an updated chipset, new single and dual processor configurations, better GPUs, faster RAM,
    Nope they have to do better than that. People have been waiting more than three years now, a simplistic update like that would piss off more people than it would impress.
    and MAYBE a case redesign that would hopefully allow for more HDD bays, etc.
    Any case redesign would likely do away with internal hard drives all together or at least get rid of the array support. Supporting disk array internally is a step in the wrong direction, the internals need to be simplified so that maybe (hopefully) Apple can update the machine at regular intervals.
    Oh and Thunderbolt. And we can keep dreaming for BluRay. As a 12 Core owner, if Apple doesn't do this, then my replacement for this machine will end up being a hackintosh.
    Don't knock it before you see it. Also rethink how you handle bulk storage. Why? Because I don't think there is a chance in hell that Apple will go in that direction. To put it simply the market neither needs nor wants such machines.
  • Reply 19 of 212
    rbrrbr Posts: 631member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    <snip>

    Any case redesign would likely do away with internal hard drives all together or at least get rid of the array support. Supporting disk array internally is a step in the wrong direction, the internals need to be simplified so that maybe (hopefully) Apple can update the machine at regular intervals.

    Don't knock it before you see it. Also rethink how you handle bulk storage. Why? Because I don't think there is a chance in hell that Apple will go in that direction. To put it simply the market neither needs nor wants such machines.


    What!!! Are you kidding? A workstation without internal hard drives. That's not a workstation at all. That would almost certainly kill the product and drive away the customers who used to purchase it.


     


    "Simplifying the internals" has absolutely nothing to do with Apple's lack of commitment to the Mac Pro lineup or the long interval between updates. 


     


    Apple have said in the past, as I think was probably pointed out somewhere in this thread, that they were not going to add USB 3 until it was natively supported, which, supposedly, will be the case with the Ivy Bridge Xeons. There really is no excuse for Apple's laggardly approach to this product in recent years.


     


    I have no idea where you get the idea that the market neither needs nor wants "such machines". That plainly is not the case.


     


    As for Blu-ray, it is unlikely that Apple will add that any time soon, if ever. On the other hand, there are third party solutions.


     


    There are more people than Apple is willing to admit who are sitting on the fence, waiting to see what Apple does next. They will go elsewhere if necessary, but, if they do, it will be because Apple drove them off.


     


    For the OP, a hackintosh will work for a number of solutions, but there are not that many Xeon hackintoshes out there and, if Apple drops the Mac Pro, there simply may not be adequate OS support for the hardware. As a 12 core user, you certainly are in need of more than an i7 quad core which is limited to 32 GB RAM (which is not error correcting). 

  • Reply 20 of 212
    hmmhmm Posts: 3,405member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by RBR View Post




    Apple have said in the past, as I think was probably pointed out somewhere in this thread, that they were not going to add USB 3 until it was natively supported, which, supposedly, will be the case with the Ivy Bridge Xeons. There really is no excuse for Apple's laggardly approach to this product in recent years.


     



    That is not actually accurate. First they'll have to support a third party usb chipset at some point if they wish to implement it in the thunderbolt display. As for Ivy Bridge Xeons, they aren't likely to change in socket/chipset. You're looking at behavior typically seen in the mainstream cpus. Xeons typically use the same boards for two cycles to maximize stability and minimize costs. They tend to change it when they change architecture. You aren't likely to see native usb3 on the E5 types prior to Haswell Heons. If they wanted to use E3s, the option was there with Ivy Bridge. Those came out months ago. They're basically Xeon versions of the imac with a slightly higher PCI lane count.

Sign In or Register to comment.