It's really not complicated... Pro users want basically three things...
1) Flexible Power Users want to have power, but the power they want may not be the same. Video editors need a lot of GPU, servers need CPU. Some need RAM, some need storage. 2) Rackmounable
This is a requirement for many professional uses like sound production, video editing, server, rendering farms, etc.
However, there should be other flexible mounting options (back of screen, wall, desk, etc) 3) Modularity
I think that the "new" Mac Pro actually had a good idea... using external devices for adding additional functions. With TB3, I don't think throughput would be the bottle next for most things. I think that the rack mount option should also come with other rack mountable upgrades... Mass storage, external GPU, etc. These devices should be clusterable via TB3. Put massive GPU into the primary unit however for raw bus throughput.
"Apple has no obligation to "dance with who brung you" as the saying goes, as much as we might like. As a result, the 2019 Mac Pro will be the best Mac Pro for Apple, like the 2016 MacBook Pro was and remains, and not necessarily the best for you, or me." Yeah, that theory worked really well with the 2013 Mac Pro. If they're not making products that consumers want, they might as well stop making them.
I believe the other reason for the uproar over upgradability is that there is a huge hole in Apple's Desktop Lineup coupled with their outrageous upgrade prices at initial purchase. You have the MacMini ($500-$1000) and then you have the MacPro ($3000+). (And no, I do not consider the iMac a Desktop, that is an All-In-One. Similar function but not the same.) During the PowerMac and early MacPro eras I would buy the $1500-$2000 model. It met my needs and as it aged I could easily add RAM or bigger / faster Hard Drives to extend the life. Even forgetting the life extension of those models, my only desktop choices now are a MacMini which is small for my needs (this is even pretending that Apple has kept this model current) or the MacPro which is bigger than I need in most respects ($3600 configuration to hit all my missing needs).
"Apple has no obligation to "dance with who brung you" as the saying goes, as much as we might like. As a result, the 2019 Mac Pro will be the best Mac Pro for Apple, like the 2016 MacBook Pro was and remains, and not necessarily the best for you, or me." Yeah, that theory worked really well with the 2013 Mac Pro. If they're not making products that consumers want, they might as well stop making them.
Well, that's the point. They are making the products that consumers want.
Its great that Appleinsider is writing this article. I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment expressed.
Having performed many upgrades to my Apple machines over the years puts me solidly in the typical AI reader camp. PCI cards. Memory. HHD/SSD/Optical. So there are my tinkerer bona fides.
I make my living with my Mac. Graphic design and photo editing. There are my Pro bona fides.
Being an avowed tinkerer and pro doesn't mean I have any preconceived notion about the evolution of the Mac Pro line. I have no sacred cows so long as I can run Adobe software as fast as possible and be able to continue doing so for the next several years.
It's Apple's job to design an amazing Pro machine. I'm willing to accept occasional failures in the interest of moving the state of the art forward.
Maybe that means a rack mount device. Maybe a warmed-over cheese grater. Or maybe computing units that stack like Lego.
That's Apple's task.
In the meantime, I'm going to spend my time being a Pro: making the money to buy whatever Apple comes up for Pros in 2019.
I would buy a Dell and gut it (when appropriate)... new Ram, SD drive, video cards. Every 2 years brings such a huge boost of performance...
Of course, upgrading laptops is limited to Ram + SD. But upgrades are so easy in the PC world, if I move to a Mac I’d expect the same.
I’d purchase an A series Apple laptop expecting limited upgrades, but for Pro level devices that’s unacceptable.
You are right. We live in a different world.
I have NO interest in tearing apart a computer every couple years.
If Apple can design a better way to upgrade (their "modular" terminology implies they have not nailed down exactly what upgrading means) I'm interested.
I would buy a Dell and gut it (when appropriate)... new Ram, SD drive, video cards. Every 2 years brings such a huge boost of performance...
Of course, upgrading laptops is limited to Ram + SD. But upgrades are so easy in the PC world, if I move to a Mac I’d expect the same.
I’d purchase an A series Apple laptop expecting limited upgrades, but for Pro level devices that’s unacceptable.
The studios that purchase Mac Pro's don't have time nor do they care to tear a computer apart every 2yrs to upgrade it. Thats just nonsense and massive amounts of downtime which costs them far more than just buying a Mac, using it until it doesn't suit their needs anymore and then get a new one. I don't know if you understand the type of customers who buy these things. Its not Joe Schmo with a tower playing PUBG or something and then buying a video card in 2yrs when a better one comes out.
I guess I'm in the narrow group that actually like the Mac Pro (aka trash can). I have one and it's a very impressive machine. Yes, I wouldn't mind the option to upgrade to Vega graphics, but I'm still impressed that my RAID unit is louder than my computer, even under full load, and I can still crunch loads of data as is without crashing. I've owned and integrated multiple of the older Mac Pros (aka cheese graters) and Mac Servers in various environments. Some here might not remember just what beasts those things were. Yes, they were incredibly powerful and relatively easy to upgrade, but they were also space hogs that could get pretty noisy. The upgrades were also expensive and not nearly as readily available as some would have you believe. Only a very small group of off-the-shelf parts worked with them, and they were generally very expensive. Some unsupported upgrades were possible with hacks like flashing firmware, but that could lead to crashes and kernel panics. It was a mess, and I distinctly remember many complaints about it in the user forums of the day. Oh, and for all those 'pros' that switched platforms in protest, I'm curious to know how many of them are just thrilled to be on Windows 10 running alternative software, or Linux doing the same. How many of them would prefer to return to using macOS? After all, Macs are more than just the hardware. I use all 3 OS platforms regularly, and I far prefer macOS to the others.
It's really not complicated... Pro users want basically three things...
3) Modularity
I think that the "new" Mac Pro actually had a good idea... using external devices for adding additional functions. With TB3, I don't think throughput would be the bottle next for most things. I think that the rack mount option should also come with other rack mountable upgrades... Mass storage, external GPU, etc. These devices should be clusterable via TB3. Put massive GPU into the primary unit however for raw bus throughput.
TB3 is wonderful, but it is still overhead that gets in the way for the highest throughput devices. If you interface a nVidia 1080Ti card through TB3 -- you are basically kneecapping the performance by about 20% to 30%. And those are far from the top of the line cards. That is a significant impact if you really rely on the top performance for these cards. For laptops where there are thermal constraints, TB3 is unbeatable. It is far better to be able to use a handicapped GPU than a mobile GPU which would be far less performance. Mass storage (especially spinning rust) are best housed in external enclosures -- but it would be nice to have U.2 slots for additional SSD capacity. TB3 is not the best interface for clustering. I would prefer installing a SAS controller in a PCIe slot and cabling up an external enclosure of hard drives -- then having to basically use TB for the same purpose (it just adds cost, it does not add since you are using the same controller you are just forcing the individual to run a cable, to another box with a PCIe slot/bridge then plug in the same card, then plug in the hard drives into the SAS controller. This, of course, is a short-term issue since spinning rust will eventually rust away.
Headcount (as in number of customers and number of upgrades) is not necessarily an accurate metric.
Many of us who buy Mac Pro units spend a lot of money beyond the purchase of a single unit. When I bought my Cheesegrater Mac Pro, I bought the Wireless module, extra memory, AirPort Extreme base station, external storage, filled all the HD bays, bought Final Cut, Logic, Aperture, Wacom tablet, Canon Scanner, M Audio full size Midi Controller and pedal, and a raft of other stuff. You used to be able to buy all- or most all- of that stuff at the Apple Store. Elsewhere in the home was a MacBook Pro, a couple of Mac mini’s, an iMac, Apple TV, iPods, etc. Add in Apple Care, too. That is a far cry from the college student who buys an iPhone and a MacBook.
I also have bought countless Macs as presents for family- immediate and extended and helped friends, neighbors, co-workers and family interested in getting and getting set up on the Mac. Add all that in as a multiplier. That kind of swamps the general consumer market they have abandoned the Pro/Prosumer market for. They should be able to do both.
I have a fully up and ready to go Windows 10 Pro build on my main Mac no if I have to, switching over will not be a BFD. I am tired of patching up my 2010 era Mac Pro and have no interest in an iMac that costs $5000 and is glued shut. I have been an Apple customer since college days before the Mac and learned to code in College on Apple IIs, Commodore PETs and TRS-80’s way back in the day- writing to cassette drives. Never switched to the Mac because I never left it.
My patience with Apple is growing very thin after the abandonment of FCP users with no upgrade path/pricing and letting the desktop Mac line get stale. If they do not ship something that meets my wants and needs my next Desktop will be an H-P Workstation. If it comes to that I will be done with MacBooks as well.
If someone asked me today about buying a Mac I would not recommend it to them unless they are the most casual of users. Spend a bunch on Macs in Tim Cook’s Apple and you could find yourself and investment on an island.
I think the cylinder R2D2 Mac Pro is a wonderful machine - it is only being let down by Apple itself not upgrading it, nor offering upgrades (faster video cards etc). That is not a design fault - but Apple's own fault.
For those Pro users who criticise it for not being more expandable ... Apple's announcement that they were releasing the iMac Pro is even more of an insult ... because the iMac Pro is less expandable ... and when Apple started claiming there was a thermal sandwich on the cylinder Mac Pro --- well the iMac Pro is dramatically worse. Given all the complaints from Apple's most loyal fans, Apple replied in 2017: 'Don't worry folks - the new Mac Pro is coming.' And now it is not (well, not this year) ... which basically means that:
a) Apple actually HAD dropped the Mac Pro in 2017 b) After the iMac Pro then met with laughter and ridicule as a 'pro' machine ... they said: "Don't worry we have the new Mac Pro coming" c) But they were lying - and just buying time.
Basically, as others have said, Tim Cook doesn't understand the Pro market, he doesn't understand the Mac ... all he gets is a flat tablet, moving stuff around with a stylus and different colours for iPhones. No vision. No idea. He should go.
I would buy a Dell and gut it (when appropriate)... new Ram, SD drive, video cards. Every 2 years brings such a huge boost of performance...
Of course, upgrading laptops is limited to Ram + SD. But upgrades are so easy in the PC world, if I move to a Mac I’d expect the same.
I’d purchase an A series Apple laptop expecting limited upgrades, but for Pro level devices that’s unacceptable.
The studios that purchase Mac Pro's don't have time nor do they care to tear a computer apart every 2yrs to upgrade it. Thats just nonsense and massive amounts of downtime which costs them far more than just buying a Mac, using it until it doesn't suit their needs anymore and then get a new one. I don't know if you understand the type of customers who buy these things. Its not Joe Schmo with a tower playing PUBG or something and then buying a video card in 2yrs when a better one comes out.
What downtime? I think you are blowing smoke. It is fine to argue that most users won't upgrade, but also "most" places don't use their workstations 7/24. If we have to upgrade -- or bring systems down for maintenance -- it is scheduled during off hours as NOT to cause downtime when people are working. It is called planning...
Target markets. Pros, even if they upgrade, don't pay the inflated price for upgrades at the time of purchase ($10k Mac pro? Really?). Businesses don't pay them either. Companies that typically have IT staff don't have a ton of Macs. And companies that do group animation and video use clusters of machines for processing. They're not doing it on their own individual machines. The workplace has changed. Creative jobs have been outsourced. Large departments of Macs with designers and artists at them have been replaced by freelancers who bring their own machines (or people who work offsite). It's less overhead for the company. Lower overhead, lower inventory, more profit = good business. This is the trend.
For Apple, while they rode on the backs of the creative industry for years, they made more money touting security and the failures of Windows (until they became a target themselves). This changed their target market, because as switchers jumped on board, they weren't willing to pay for upgrades. And if a system board failed, it was easier for Apple to swap single units than it was to replace components (lower qualifications for service techs). With more non-professional voices dictating the "Pro" line of machines, it killed much of that market for Apple. With the ubiquity of the word, now companies make "Pro" doorbells. So it's lost its meaning.
There are still a few of us who would love to have a brand new loaded Mac, but they're not going to make millions of dollars off of us though. I personally wish they would open-source their OS. Then I could run what I wanted as a professional. Start charging for the OS again and make it cross-platform capable. Let companies write drivers. At the very least, split software from hardware in regard to the OS and make a different company that sells the OS for desktops. Apple can keep their Frankensteined mobile OS though. Time for competition.
How much data do you think 22 service techs spanning 18 states and 15 years has? Way, way more than this. Regarding the polling of Apple store visitors from a few years back, that is as average Apple customer as you can literally get.
Your data isn't wrong, but like the Barefeats readers you speak of, it is skewed the wrong way from a polled population standpoint. It's like asking AppleInsider readers how many have done upgrades.
And, regarding Apple's data. They know exactly who upgrades and who doesn't. What do you think gets included in those crash reports?
22 Service techs are still service techs - the vast majority of people don't use service techs for RAM upgrades. They do it themselves or get a guy like me to do it. The 'crash report' gleaning data on the precise computer shipped OEM and installed RAM - then extrapolating it into a report... man, I just don't know about that. Thats some hard-core analytics if they do.
The iMac Pro is absurd for a computer that isn't expandable. $7816 tax in (cad) - for the entry level machine with a GPU upgrade. - A new GPU architecture that won't weather the life-cycle of the machine. In an emerging AR / VR market - companies / freelancers need some assurances.
Desktop publishing 'pros' are getting by with iMacs - but in a new market such as AR, where the tech/software will be changing rapidly, publishers need an easy way to upgrade. The iMacPro is obviously not it.
How much data do you think 22 service techs spanning 18 states and 15 years has? Way, way more than this. Regarding the polling of Apple store visitors from a few years back, that is as average Apple customer as you can literally get.
Your data isn't wrong, but like the Barefeats readers you speak of, it is skewed the wrong way from a polled population standpoint. It's like asking AppleInsider readers how many have done upgrades.
And, regarding Apple's data. They know exactly who upgrades and who doesn't. What do you think gets included in those crash reports?
22 Service techs are still service techs - the vast majority of people don't use service techs for RAM upgrades. They do it themselves or get a guy like me to do it. The 'crash report' gleaning data on the precise computer shipped OEM and installed RAM - then extrapolating it into a report... man, I just don't know about that. Thats some hard-core analytics if they do.
The iMac Pro is absurd for a computer that isn't expandable. $7816 tax in (cad) - for the entry level machine with a GPU upgrade. - A new GPU architecture that won't weather the life-cycle of the machine. In an emerging AR / VR market - companies / freelancers need some assurances.
Desktop publishing 'pros' are getting by with iMacs - but in a new market such as AR, where the tech/software will be changing rapidly, publishers need an easy way to upgrade. The iMacPro is obviously not it.
Sure, they're still service techs. But, we're all smart enough to read the configuration plate to see what the machine shipped with, and check the RAM configuration, and see if we did the install or not for warranty and troubleshooting purposes, if nothing else, given that step three or so of all the service source documents was "remove third-party RAM."
So, I don't think it's as hard-core analytics as you think it is.
I might mention that many PC upgrades are done through secondary channels. I worked with a guy that did upgrades and repairs on the side. He had a brisk business.
The funny thing here is that he hardly ever saw Apple hardware in his shop. I suspect that has to do with many Apple users having more money than technical knowledge.
In any event there is an issue within the Apple community with entittlement. That is people expecting Apple to build a computer that exactly fits their needs. Guys that WILL NEVER HAPPEN! What Apple mussed with the current Mac Pro is the need to be able to configure the machine for a specific user. The trash can really isnt a bad design, even if it gets a lot of negativity, for a narrow range of users. Even in its current design Apple could have configured the machine for a broader range of user simple by adding a single GPU module and maybe using the free slot for an SSD carrier board. Apples fundamental problem with the Mac Pro oor desktops in general is their inability to get over their one size fits all mentality.
As somebody has already mentioned Apple has a huge issue its desktop line and the vacuum created by the lack of midrange Macs. This so called modukar solution will go the same way as the current Mac Pro and the chesse grater before it if Apple doesnt deliver a variant that plugs that midrange gap.
I havent even considered an Apple desktop system in years, since at least 2008 due to the very poor value they offer. I got close when i thought the last Mini update was going to be appealing but Apple screwed that up royally.
So today we have an Apple that cant make an appealing $500 computer, doesnt even knows what a $1200 computer could be and makes a $3000 machine that is a joke configuration wise.
How they got into this state is very perplexing. They are literally selling outdated crap. More importantly i realize the desktop market isnt what it use to be, that however should be an excuse at Apple to ignore the market.
I just wish Apple had never walked away from the expandable PCI slots, it would solve so many of my problems if I could just pop out my D300 GPU and slot in a 1080Ti (or two) .. Otherwise my black MacPro is working very well. The iMac Pro isn't a great fit for what I do (cine colorist) and I feel a little duped by "upgrading" to the un-upgradable trash can 4 years ago.
My industry is moving (has moved) to PC's, but I'm not thrilled about switching platforms and was trying to hold out for another year. There's a reason the "upgradable box" form factor has stayed with us for the last 30 years, for certain people it's just what they need. So there I go, but pretty bummed about it.
I would buy a Dell and gut it (when appropriate)... new Ram, SD drive, video cards. Every 2 years brings such a huge boost of performance...
Of course, upgrading laptops is limited to Ram + SD. But upgrades are so easy in the PC world, if I move to a Mac I’d expect the same.
I’d purchase an A series Apple laptop expecting limited upgrades, but for Pro level devices that’s unacceptable.
The studios that purchase Mac Pro's don't have time nor do they care to tear a computer apart every 2yrs to upgrade it. Thats just nonsense and massive amounts of downtime which costs them far more than just buying a Mac, using it until it doesn't suit their needs anymore and then get a new one. I don't know if you understand the type of customers who buy these things. Its not Joe Schmo with a tower playing PUBG or something and then buying a video card in 2yrs when a better one comes out.
What downtime? I think you are blowing smoke. It is fine to argue that most users won't upgrade, but also "most" places don't use their workstations 7/24. If we have to upgrade -- or bring systems down for maintenance -- it is scheduled during off hours as NOT to cause downtime when people are working. It is called planning...
So they don't leave them rendering something or doing something else when they're not sitting in front of it? Do they even have IT to do this? Do they even care to do this? Is it worth their time to care to do this?
Comments
1) Flexible Power
Users want to have power, but the power they want may not be the same. Video editors need a lot of GPU, servers need CPU. Some need RAM, some need storage.
2) Rackmounable
3) Modularity
With TB3, I don't think throughput would be the bottle next for most things. I think that the rack mount option should also come with other rack mountable upgrades... Mass storage, external GPU, etc. These devices should be clusterable via TB3. Put massive GPU into the primary unit however for raw bus throughput.
I would buy a Dell and gut it (when appropriate)... new Ram, SD drive, video cards. Every 2 years brings such a huge boost of performance...
Of course, upgrading laptops is limited to Ram + SD. But upgrades are so easy in the PC world, if I move to a Mac I’d expect the same.
I’d purchase an A series Apple laptop expecting limited upgrades, but for Pro level devices that’s unacceptable.
Well, that's the point. They are making the products that consumers want.
Having performed many upgrades to my Apple machines over the years puts me solidly in the typical AI reader camp. PCI cards. Memory. HHD/SSD/Optical. So there are my tinkerer bona fides.
I make my living with my Mac. Graphic design and photo editing. There are my Pro bona fides.
Being an avowed tinkerer and pro doesn't mean I have any preconceived notion about the evolution of the Mac Pro line. I have no sacred cows so long as I can run Adobe software as fast as possible and be able to continue doing so for the next several years.
It's Apple's job to design an amazing Pro machine. I'm willing to accept occasional failures in the interest of moving the state of the art forward.
Maybe that means a rack mount device. Maybe a warmed-over cheese grater. Or maybe computing units that stack like Lego.
That's Apple's task.
In the meantime, I'm going to spend my time being a Pro: making the money to buy whatever Apple comes up for Pros in 2019.
You are right. We live in a different world.
I have NO interest in tearing apart a computer every couple years.
If Apple can design a better way to upgrade (their "modular" terminology implies they have not nailed down exactly what upgrading means) I'm interested.
Many of us who buy Mac Pro units spend a lot of money beyond the purchase of a single unit. When I bought my Cheesegrater Mac Pro, I bought the Wireless module, extra memory, AirPort Extreme base station, external storage, filled all the HD bays, bought Final Cut, Logic, Aperture, Wacom tablet, Canon Scanner, M Audio full size Midi Controller and pedal, and a raft of other stuff. You used to be able to buy all- or most all- of that stuff at the Apple Store. Elsewhere in the home was a MacBook Pro, a couple of Mac mini’s, an iMac, Apple TV, iPods, etc. Add in Apple Care, too. That is a far cry from the college student who buys an iPhone and a MacBook.
I also have bought countless Macs as presents for family- immediate and extended and helped friends, neighbors, co-workers and family interested in getting and getting set up on the Mac. Add all that in as a multiplier. That kind of swamps the general consumer market they have abandoned the Pro/Prosumer market for. They should be able to do both.
I have a fully up and ready to go Windows 10 Pro build on my main Mac no if I have to, switching over will not be a BFD. I am tired of patching up my 2010 era Mac Pro and have no interest in an iMac that costs $5000 and is glued shut. I have been an Apple customer since college days before the Mac and learned to code in College on Apple IIs, Commodore PETs and TRS-80’s way back in the day- writing to cassette drives. Never switched to the Mac because I never left it.
My patience with Apple is growing very thin after the abandonment of FCP users with no upgrade path/pricing and letting the desktop Mac line get stale. If they do not ship something that meets my wants and needs my next Desktop will be an H-P Workstation. If it comes to that I will be done with MacBooks as well.
If someone asked me today about buying a Mac I would not recommend it to them unless they are the most casual of users. Spend a bunch on Macs in Tim Cook’s Apple and you could find yourself and investment on an island.
For those Pro users who criticise it for not being more expandable ... Apple's announcement that they were releasing the iMac Pro is even more of an insult ... because the iMac Pro is less expandable ... and when Apple started claiming there was a thermal sandwich on the cylinder Mac Pro --- well the iMac Pro is dramatically worse.
Given all the complaints from Apple's most loyal fans, Apple replied in 2017: 'Don't worry folks - the new Mac Pro is coming.'
And now it is not (well, not this year) ... which basically means that:
a) Apple actually HAD dropped the Mac Pro in 2017
b) After the iMac Pro then met with laughter and ridicule as a 'pro' machine ... they said: "Don't worry we have the new Mac Pro coming"
c) But they were lying - and just buying time.
Basically, as others have said, Tim Cook doesn't understand the Pro market, he doesn't understand the Mac ... all he gets is a flat tablet, moving stuff around with a stylus and different colours for iPhones. No vision. No idea. He should go.
For Apple, while they rode on the backs of the creative industry for years, they made more money touting security and the failures of Windows (until they became a target themselves). This changed their target market, because as switchers jumped on board, they weren't willing to pay for upgrades. And if a system board failed, it was easier for Apple to swap single units than it was to replace components (lower qualifications for service techs). With more non-professional voices dictating the "Pro" line of machines, it killed much of that market for Apple. With the ubiquity of the word, now companies make "Pro" doorbells. So it's lost its meaning.
There are still a few of us who would love to have a brand new loaded Mac, but they're not going to make millions of dollars off of us though. I personally wish they would open-source their OS. Then I could run what I wanted as a professional. Start charging for the OS again and make it cross-platform capable. Let companies write drivers. At the very least, split software from hardware in regard to the OS and make a different company that sells the OS for desktops. Apple can keep their Frankensteined mobile OS though. Time for competition.
The 'crash report' gleaning data on the precise computer shipped OEM and installed RAM - then extrapolating it into a report... man, I just don't know about that.
Thats some hard-core analytics if they do.
The iMac Pro is absurd for a computer that isn't expandable.
$7816 tax in (cad) - for the entry level machine with a GPU upgrade. - A new GPU architecture that won't weather the life-cycle of the machine.
In an emerging AR / VR market - companies / freelancers need some assurances.
Desktop publishing 'pros' are getting by with iMacs - but in a new market such as AR, where the tech/software will be changing rapidly, publishers need an easy way to upgrade. The iMacPro is obviously not it.
The funny thing here is that he hardly ever saw Apple hardware in his shop. I suspect that has to do with many Apple users having more money than technical knowledge.
In any event there is an issue within the Apple community with entittlement. That is people expecting Apple to build a computer that exactly fits their needs. Guys that WILL NEVER HAPPEN! What Apple mussed with the current Mac Pro is the need to be able to configure the machine for a specific user. The trash can really isnt a bad design, even if it gets a lot of negativity, for a narrow range of users. Even in its current design Apple could have configured the machine for a broader range of user simple by adding a single GPU module and maybe using the free slot for an SSD carrier board. Apples fundamental problem with the Mac Pro oor desktops in general is their inability to get over their one size fits all mentality.
As somebody has already mentioned Apple has a huge issue its desktop line and the vacuum created by the lack of midrange Macs. This so called modukar solution will go the same way as the current Mac Pro and the chesse grater before it if Apple doesnt deliver a variant that plugs that midrange gap.
I havent even considered an Apple desktop system in years, since at least 2008 due to the very poor value they offer. I got close when i thought the last Mini update was going to be appealing but Apple screwed that up royally.
So today we have an Apple that cant make an appealing $500 computer, doesnt even knows what a $1200 computer could be and makes a $3000 machine that is a joke configuration wise.
How they got into this state is very perplexing. They are literally selling outdated crap. More importantly i realize the desktop market isnt what it use to be, that however should be an excuse at Apple to ignore the market.
My industry is moving (has moved) to PC's, but I'm not thrilled about switching platforms and was trying to hold out for another year. There's a reason the "upgradable box" form factor has stayed with us for the last 30 years, for certain people it's just what they need. So there I go, but pretty bummed about it.