Either that or they are working with totally new non Xeon hardware.
This seems the most plausible.
I think to make a truly modular computer, it requires an entirely new bus system - one that will play nice with everyone. This would require a new shell.
Say hello to OS XI - 2019?
You and a few others seem to give Apple's use of the term "modular" a lot of weight. Isn't it much more likely that, to Apple, the term simply means individual components (CPU, RAM, storage, GPU) can be removed without using dynamite?
Either that or they are working with totally new non Xeon hardware.
This seems the most plausible.
I think to make a truly modular computer, it requires an entirely new bus system - one that will play nice with everyone. This would require a new shell.
Say hello to OS XI - 2019?
You and a few others seem to give Apple's use of the term "modular" a lot of weight. Isn't it much more likely that, to Apple, the term simply means individual components (CPU, RAM, storage, GPU) can be removed without using dynamite?
I think that's if what Apple meant, they'd have said that specifically. Apple has never said PCI-E, or socketed processors. They say "modular."
I really don't like the cylindrical design. For one, the fan intake at desk level is not well suited for my workflow since I have lots of printouts and paperwork cluttering my desk which would potentially block the airflow. Furthermore, I could care less that it is quieter than the cheese grater, which is pretty quiet anyway, because I have two full racks of servers and a blasting AC in my office in addition to phones ringing and people talking. Also, I really like the ports on the front of the cheese grater. Having to deal with ports only on the back of a machine is an annoyance when you just need to plug in something for temporary use. Those things and the complete lack of upgradability make the cylinder Mac Pro a non-starter for me. My cheese grater has been completely upgraded with new SSD, graphics, faster Xeons with more cores, max RAM, USB, Black Magic capture card, etc. Why do they have to make things so unnecessarily complicated? You don't have to always reinvent the wheel. If it weren't so difficult to make a Hackintosh, I would definitely go that route. But for now I'm reasonably content with my iMac 5K except for the ports on the back - what a nuisance!
I didn’t like that narrative... “Not this year”, “understanding from soup to nuts” [still?], “internal workflows with real content” sound like bla bla bla to my ears.
Those quotes from Apple sound horrible. They should have just said the Mac Pro will be available in 2019, and left out these weird statements or rationale, which sound devoid of sense to me. Designing for workflows? That’s what drove them down the 2013 Mac Pro route.
So it wasn't just me then. Was that rambling nonsense an example of what happens when a marketing drone has nothing to spin?
Still. I'm very, very, happy to see Apple opening up a little on the communication side, allowing corporate and institutional customers some fodder for planning.
It’s not nonsense per se, it’s the implications of what the comments mean if they are being sincere. They said they hired “professional users” to essentially help design this new Mac Pro and have now formed a pro workflow team or group to that effect.
That implies:
1. Apple gave the 2013 Mac Pro a try. It was something different, targeted. They didn’t see much success with it, and instead of doing the work to keep it updated or make it more attractive to buyers, they let it die and had no interest in replacing it. Also means whatever decisions and research they did to design the 2013 Mac Pro was wrong. Every organization has a brain fart, that’s the way it breaks sometimes, but they didn’t even do the work to update it. You would have to conclude they were planning on abandoning the market.
That implies nothing more than a loose-leaf narrative, obviously a communication/PR mistake.
To understand why Apple couldn’t update the Mac Pro one must dig through ark.intel.com to get an idea about the evolution of Xeons. If Apple achieved some progress with the current generation within the footprint of an iMac then this is welcome. On the other hand Apple is one of the creators / investors of Thunderbolt and there is nothing wrong in making Thunderbolt one of the pillars of their whole conceptual world. Those who still live in the USB-A ecosystem cannot understand that.
Hasn’t the proposed Mac Pro been outed for almost a year now?
Getting the team together a half year or more after deciding to produce the product doesn’t speak to any sense of urgency.
Perhaps the wait is for the next iteration of thunderbolt, or some other item that is critical to the project. Any thoughts on what that could be other than thunderbolt? New apple monitor? Some form of storage or cpu/gpu?
Looking forward to seeing what they come up with, but wow, why does it take so long? I guess they want to try to do something different that's going to be a platform for the next decade, but yikes, talk about having dropped the ball. Oh well, once they're back in the game everyone will forget they left.
I suppose I should post this mockup again (more pictures behind link), since I really like it even though it doesn’t have nearly the modularity of the cheese grater. I understand that the days of spinning disks are gone and that four SATA and two M.2 slots are going to be enough for most anyone, but don’t some pros need more than two PCIe? I guess TB3 can handle that. Bonus point to anyone who can find out what’s wrong with the mockup based on Apple’s existing model!
Talk abut slow training crawling geez. Read all about it!! Apple is releasing a computer in about 20 months.
Get rid of little timmy cookie and his slow motion minions.
Bring back the Guy and let the good times roll again!
Stop spamming the forums. If you have something useful to say, say it.
One more time with this juvenile outburst, and you're done.
He could at least explain why he wants Guy Kawasaki back at Apple, and what he thinks that will do for them.
Unless there's someone else he means when he says "the Guy", but no-one seems to be clear on who it might be.
Based on a previous forum comment, he is in fact talking about Kawasaki. Its' not the message. However, given his last six comments have been within three or four words from being a copy-paste job, I'm reaching the limits of my patience.
No, I get that it's not what he's saying, it's that he keeps saying it again and again without change, or even any indication that there's actual thought going into it. Almost the classic definition of spamming.
I am however curious as to whether he's serious about Guy Kawasaki being the person to "Make Apple Great Again". (Having done a little digging, I do see he mentioned "Guy K." explicitly, so yeah that does seem to be who he wants back.) Either he really thinks going back to an evangelistic approach to marketing will help them somehow make better computers, or he's going for a good, old fashioned troll - trying to evoke a reaction by spouting nonsense.
Maybe he's just someone who's read The Macintosh Way and thinks it holds all the secrets to Apple's original success.
Stop selling those iMac Pros like in the article. I am not sure why you still do not understand that professional needs CPU and drive separate from display.
Because that’s just your opinion and nothing more? As a software developer, which is Apple’s most common pro per Craig, I have no problem with the AIO design. I’ve switched to an AIO iMac for my pro needs years ago. I’m completely fine using it for years and then selling, donating, etc. Craig said many of their pros do the same.
Either that or they are working with totally new non Xeon hardware.
This seems the most plausible.
I think to make a truly modular computer, it requires an entirely new bus system - one that will play nice with everyone. This would require a new shell.
Say hello to OS XI - 2019?
You and a few others seem to give Apple's use of the term "modular" a lot of weight. Isn't it much more likely that, to Apple, the term simply means individual components (CPU, RAM, storage, GPU) can be removed without using dynamite?
My interpretation based on what they actually said is that they mean a desktop box without an integrated screen. It's been mentioned in the context of new displays coming as well, so I always assumed the "modules" are the headless desktop and the display(s). Anything above and beyond that I think is pure speculation and in some cases wishful thinking, but we'll see. They may not even know the answer to that yet, and given how vague this whole info dump is, I'm thinking that's even more likely the case now.
macxpress said: [...] This isn't just slapping parts together like a DIY PC and call it good.
Fair enough, but it's not exactly rocket surgery either, is it? It's a computer. A better than average computer with a desirable operating system, but at the end of the day it's just a computer. When the time between updates exceeds the duration of depreciation write offs, the claims of special sauce, fairy dust, and omniscience start to wear a little thin.
Either that or there have been so many restarts of this project that the team simply isnt making progress. Sadly this is also a real possibility!!! I really dont believe anybody at Apple even understands what a "pro" line up should be.
Note the phrase "pro line up" because if Apple folliws past practice and delivers just one box then they will have failed to understand their customer base. At a minimal they need to deliver the following out of the gate: 1. A pro monitor! 2. A storage subsystem (key to many pro needs) 3. A high performance box 4. A revised trash can Mac Pro
The storage subsystem and the performsnce Mac need to be rack mountable ideally in half width modules. The performance Mac needs at least two processor options, a single GPU option and reasonable internal storage expansion. A side note the trash can with one internal storage slot was beyond stupid. The storage subsystem needs to be expandable and capable of very high capacity. RAID on that storage system shoukd be an option.
In other words they could just do the Pro monitor and use it as a thunderbolted MacOS dongle to whatever hardware you want to rack up in an air conditioned cupboard (or warehouse if that is more your style). Put a ARM CPU to run the users FaceID, email, music and other light duties, add space for eGPU to reduce bandwidth and Apple have their value add front and centre.
Talk abut slow training crawling geez. Read all about it!! Apple is releasing a computer in about 20 months.
Get rid of little timmy cookie and his slow motion minions.
Bring back the Guy and let the good times roll again!
Stop spamming the forums. If you have something useful to say, say it.
One more time with this juvenile outburst, and you're done.
He could at least explain why he wants Guy Kawasaki back at Apple, and what he thinks that will do for them.
Unless there's someone else he means when he says "the Guy", but no-one seems to be clear on who it might be.
Based on a previous forum comment, he is in fact talking about Kawasaki. Its' not the message. However, given his last six comments have been within three or four words from being a copy-paste job, I'm reaching the limits of my patience.
No, I get that it's not what he's saying, it's that he keeps saying it again and again without change, or even any indication that there's actual thought going into it. Almost the classic definition of spamming.
I am however curious as to whether he's serious about Guy Kawasaki being the person to "Make Apple Great Again". (Having done a little digging, I do see he mentioned "Guy K." explicitly, so yeah that does seem to be who he wants back.) Either he really thinks going back to an evangelistic approach to marketing will help them somehow make better computers, or he's going for a good, old fashioned troll - trying to evoke a reaction by spouting nonsense.
Maybe he's just someone who's read The Macintosh Way and thinks it holds all the secrets to Apple's original success.
Maybe he's actually Guy and angling for getting his old job back.
God, I hope Jony doesn't have any input into the design of this machine. Otherwise we'll be seeing something that looks pretty and is totally unfit for pro use.
Omigosh go away.
I know im in the minority, but I think 2013 MP is gorgeous aside from being an engineering masterpiece.
Of course Jonny is going to have final say on ID and of course it’s going to look good! It’s frikkin Apple!
Talk abut slow training crawling geez. Read all about it!! Apple is releasing a computer in about 20 months.
Get rid of little timmy cookie and his slow motion minions.
Bring back the Guy and let the good times roll again!
Stop spamming the forums. If you have something useful to say, say it.
One more time with this juvenile outburst, and you're done.
He could at least explain why he wants Guy Kawasaki back at Apple, and what he thinks that will do for them.
Unless there's someone else he means when he says "the Guy", but no-one seems to be clear on who it might be.
Based on a previous forum comment, he is in fact talking about Kawasaki. Its' not the message. However, given his last six comments have been within three or four words from being a copy-paste job, I'm reaching the limits of my patience.
No, I get that it's not what he's saying, it's that he keeps saying it again and again without change, or even any indication that there's actual thought going into it. Almost the classic definition of spamming.
I am however curious as to whether he's serious about Guy Kawasaki being the person to "Make Apple Great Again". (Having done a little digging, I do see he mentioned "Guy K." explicitly, so yeah that does seem to be who he wants back.) Either he really thinks going back to an evangelistic approach to marketing will help them somehow make better computers, or he's going for a good, old fashioned troll - trying to evoke a reaction by spouting nonsense.
Maybe he's just someone who's read The Macintosh Way and thinks it holds all the secrets to Apple's original success.
Maybe he's actually Guy and angling for getting his old job back.
I don't think Guy would stoop to that. He's much more likely to get a group of Guy Kawasaki Evangelists to go round and convince people to hire him. Which this guy is probably one of.
Stop selling those iMac Pros like in the article. I am not sure why you still do not understand that professional needs CPU and drive separate from display. There are better displaus for professional in publishing and editing on the matrket than Apple display in iMac. Maybe one should look at EIZO and NEC professional displays. Some of them offer far more, but Apple is not in this business - otherwise your iMac Pro would cost $15000 - not $5000. Plus prose may be using 2-4 displays like this on one CPU unit. Is it hard to understand how proffessional (real -not basement Joe wannabe pro) studio is built and operates?
This is extremely arrogant, assuming that what you need is what everybody needs. I don't contest that there are Eizo and NEC displays, but that's a red herring.
Enterprises, say IBM and whatnot, are ordering iMac Pros by the hundreds and plunking them on desks, where they will never see an upgrade again. Also, I guarantee you real, professional studios are buying, and using, them. Lucasfilm and Disney has about a thousand of them -- are they not a real studio?
Do some professionals need discrete CPU and monitor? Yes. Do all or even a majority? Not even remotely.
Some people... Sounds like that person forgot that Apple still sells a Mac Pro. It may be getting long in the tooth, but it is still a good option. Apparently he's not considering that one can still connect six separate ~1920x1080 displays to a Mac Pro. Never mind three 5K displays. Or an Eizo.
I like the iMac design. I want it to get even thinner.
I don't begrudge you your preference, but if I may ask purely out of curiosity, why do you want the iMac to be even thinner? What's the benefit? How is your use of it affected by its thickness?
The usual reason. I want it thinner because I think it would look better. It’s a physical object and I would pay more for it to look better. A rather significant chunk of the market would do this. The stand would be a little shorter, maybe an inch shorter, so it would save some desk space but it’s really about having a nice object to look at. I’ve been waiting. Maybe in another couple years when our 2013 iMac 27 could be replaced.
Maybe the current iMac has reached the thin enough point at about 1.5” to 2” thick, and not enough customers would pay for a thinner version. Technology wise, I think of it as MBP with the display flipped over, and it being 20 to 30 inches, or perhaps the iMac G4 display but with all the computing guts stuffed inside. So, it’s technically achievable. The bigger footprint over a MBP would allow for a 90 W CPU and 150 W GPU in use in the current iMac. I also am curious if Apple can implement a heterogenous mode if you happen to have two iMacs networked together through TB3, where a user can say run Handbrake and distribute jobs across both machines.
I would not want this prospective Mac Pro to be slim or small box either. It’s a headless “pro” computer and should be big enough for two CPU sockets and at least 3 PCIe slots, 4 3.5” HDD, etc. I do want Apple’s Best effort at ID with it, and would fine a white box style ID disappointing.
Either that or they are working with totally new non Xeon hardware.
This seems the most plausible.
I think to make a truly modular computer, it requires an entirely new bus system - one that will play nice with everyone. This would require a new shell.
Say hello to OS XI - 2019?
You and a few others seem to give Apple's use of the term "modular" a lot of weight. Isn't it much more likely that, to Apple, the term simply means individual components (CPU, RAM, storage, GPU) can be removed without using dynamite?
How is that future proofing for anything? Or forward thinking? Or different from what has been done in the past? Why the development into external GPU architecture? smells like modular components to me.
Comments
To understand why Apple couldn’t update the Mac Pro one must dig through ark.intel.com to get an idea about the evolution of Xeons. If Apple achieved some progress with the current generation within the footprint of an iMac then this is welcome. On the other hand Apple is one of the creators / investors of Thunderbolt and there is nothing wrong in making Thunderbolt one of the pillars of their whole conceptual world. Those who still live in the USB-A ecosystem cannot understand that.
Getting the team together a half year or more after deciding to produce the product doesn’t speak to any sense of urgency.
Perhaps the wait is for the next iteration of thunderbolt, or some other item that is critical to the project. Any thoughts on what that could be other than thunderbolt? New apple monitor? Some form of storage or cpu/gpu?
No, I get that it's not what he's saying, it's that he keeps saying it again and again without change, or even any indication that there's actual thought going into it. Almost the classic definition of spamming.
I am however curious as to whether he's serious about Guy Kawasaki being the person to "Make Apple Great Again". (Having done a little digging, I do see he mentioned "Guy K." explicitly, so yeah that does seem to be who he wants back.) Either he really thinks going back to an evangelistic approach to marketing will help them somehow make better computers, or he's going for a good, old fashioned troll - trying to evoke a reaction by spouting nonsense.
Maybe he's just someone who's read The Macintosh Way and thinks it holds all the secrets to Apple's original success.
So you don’t speak for us pros.
Maybe he's actually Guy and angling for getting his old job back.
Try this:
https://www.amazon.com/Satechi-Aluminum-Type-C-Reader-Silver/dp/B078859974
I know im in the minority, but I think 2013 MP is gorgeous aside from being an engineering masterpiece.
Of course Jonny is going to have final say on ID and of course it’s going to look good! It’s frikkin Apple!
This is all very good & exciting news!
I just hope it’s not starting at seven grand...
Sounds like that person forgot that Apple still sells a Mac Pro. It may be getting long in the tooth, but it is still a good option. Apparently he's not considering that one can still connect six separate ~1920x1080 displays to a Mac Pro. Never mind three 5K displays. Or an Eizo.
Maybe the current iMac has reached the thin enough point at about 1.5” to 2” thick, and not enough customers would pay for a thinner version. Technology wise, I think of it as MBP with the display flipped over, and it being 20 to 30 inches, or perhaps the iMac G4 display but with all the computing guts stuffed inside. So, it’s technically achievable. The bigger footprint over a MBP would allow for a 90 W CPU and 150 W GPU in use in the current iMac. I also am curious if Apple can implement a heterogenous mode if you happen to have two iMacs networked together through TB3, where a user can say run Handbrake and distribute jobs across both machines.
I would not want this prospective Mac Pro to be slim or small box either. It’s a headless “pro” computer and should be big enough for two CPU sockets and at least 3 PCIe slots, 4 3.5” HDD, etc. I do want Apple’s Best effort at ID with it, and would fine a white box style ID disappointing.
Why the development into external GPU architecture?
smells like modular components to me.