Apple's 2019 Mac Pro: eight things we want to see

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 63
    macxpressmacxpress Posts: 5,175member
    macxpress said:
    tht said:
    The biggest issue is to just keep the machines updated at a 12 to 18 month cadence, preferably 12. They are even fine with keeping the 2013 Mac Pro industrial design as long as it is updated with state of the art parts. This is basically the iOS device model strategy. Instead of upgrading the machines internally, people sell old models to buy new models. Maybe Apple could have a convenient exchange program.

    Minimally, 1 Xeon and 1 Vega means 150+300 = 400 W of power for those two alone. I/O, RAM, storage is going to be another 100 W. So the next box needs to be handle 500 W. Give it 50% margin and make a 750 W box. This way, the box could be retrofitted for 2 250W GPUs, or whatever unforeseen new capability the box wasn’t designed for. There was zero excuse for painting themselves into a thermal corner.

    The internally expandable box is great for hobbyists and tinkerers, but Apple could just easily fall into the same rut of not updating that type of design with state of the art components. It’s really not the box that is the problem, it’s Apple’s commitment to continually offer state of the art workstation level machines.
    Of course it also helps to have something to upgrade to as well. What I don't want to see if Apple updating the Mac Pro for the sake of updating it. Some either forgot or have never experienced the PowerMac G4 days where Apple would release this minuscule update basically just for the sake of updating it and sometimes the outgoing model was technically faster than the new model in certain applications. This constantly pissed customers off so if Intel doesn't have anything worthy of upgrading to for 2yrs then I can understand Apple waiting. Is it really worth Apple's time putting a new Xeon chip in thats only marginally faster just to shut people up?
    Yes, because new gpus will be available, as well as updated ram and storage requirements for whatever workflow/apps you use.  And 2 years is a really long time in the computer industry.
    You totally missed the point...if there's nothing to update to, then there's nothing to update to. People will be just as pissed if all Apple does is release a 200MHz upgrade with slightly more RAM, and a slightly better GPU...like they used to do back in the day. If there isn't anything worth upgrading to then I can see Apple waiting until its really worthy of an upgrade. Intel can release new Xeon CPU's every 12 months if they want...but its they're only marginally better then whats the point?
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 42 of 63
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 2,441member
    Professor Frink said:
    I predict that within 100 years, computers will be twice as powerful, 10,000 times larger, and so expensive that only the five richest kings of Europe will own them
    I think part of the issue is that the term is broad. There are graphics professionals like Alex Lindsay, or folks working at National Geographic, or those in huge movie studios. Then again, that customer base is a much smaller pool than what some would call "pro-sumers". This can be someone in his bedroom using photoshop because that is his home office where he edits wedding photography he shoots. Or what about me? I work on video for a living, doing freelance work (commercial and personal), as well as multiple YouTube channels. I also do lots of front-end web development and design. That isn't editing a blockbuster or working at Google, but it is how I make my living.

    The pro-sumer market is much bigger than the highest end professionals, and they tend to buy a lot more machines. Those that are striving to be better, and want a powerful machine to help them. I'm not saying Apple needs to cater to that market exclusively, but they need to consider it. Have a range of machines that will work for those pro-sumers, as well as industry leaders.

    At the time of Apple’s founding, the conventional view among leaders of the established corporate hierarchy was exactly that of professor John I.Q. Frinc. Computers are for people working in big companies doing big things that big important people approve of and profit from. Computers are not for people like you – exceptional individuals operating outside of that established corporate hierarchy. 

    Apple, and NeXT, were founded with the objective of providing powerful tools to these types of exceptional individuals operating outside of that hierarchy. Indeed – these companies were founded by exactly those types of exceptional individuals. Their computers were never cheap, but they were powerful and accessible. They could be owned and operated without the need for expensive IT support. 

    Those are the people who I think make up the core of Apple’s past and potential future “pro” users. In recent years, we have thought of Apple’s pro users as people who use software like Final Cut Pro or Logic. We also sometimes remember the software developers using Xcode. And of course they are a big part of the existing base. But the potential pro market is larger, and includes architects, engineers, statisticians, and a wide range of researchers (people who used to be part of Apple's pro base). There are many such people operating in environments where computing resources are controlled by myopic bean counters. These folks need powerful tools that they can use in their basements on nights and weekends to create the future. 

    watto_cobrabitmod
  • Reply 43 of 63
    Let's make this simple.  Because Apple, without Steve Jobs, just can't keep things simple (but they can do the stupid...)



    Insanely 'sane.'  STEVE GIVES YOU THE CORE 7 MARKETS OF THEIR CORE BASE CUSTOMERS!!!  (IE. Who the G3 Tower is built for.  Now they DON'T know what those markets are?)  And using industry standard parts and why!



    The look of love...and here's Phil telling you what their 'core base' customers want.  Telling you it's 'real easy' to upgrade with the 'door.' :PPP  He even used the word 'simple.' 

    'Building the fastest machines in the industry is what drives us.'

    So, yeah, it's IO, it's CPU, it's GPU, it's storage, it's accessibility, it's expandability, it's sexy...it's...music, it's art, it's 3D, it's games, it's programming it's 'fill in blank' as it was twenty years ago with all the additional markets of today (Today?  It's VR as well, it's development, it's science, it's simulation.  It boils down to 3-4 SSDs in a tower, 2-3 GPUs in there, 1 or two CPUs, 128 gigs of RAM in a 'box' with a door.  Basically.  So, go take the cuboid and round its edges off.  Four models from £1500-£2999 before customisation.)

    ...what Apple told you twenty years ago!!!  IT'S WHAT APPLE GAVE YOU TWO DECADES AGO!!!

    Lemon Bon Bon.


    tallest skil
  • Reply 44 of 63
    thttht Posts: 4,042member
    mcdave said:
    tenthousandthings said:

    There could have been a mid-2016 update, for sure. Broadwell-EP and I-don't-know-what in terms of GPU. ...
    I think they had a real issue with Xeon & AMD GPU updates.  Intel provided only incremental updates to Xeon and they backed the wrong horse with AMD; Vega took forever and was/is still too power-hungry.
    This has been discussed through the years. They could have updated every 12 to 18 months if they wanted too. Here’s a sampling of what base, top end single-threaded and top-end multi-threaded performance SKUs could have been:

    Late 2013 (Ivy Bridge and Pitcairn/Tahiti)
    Xeon E5-1620 v2 4C 3.7/3.9 GHz, 10 MB L3, FirePro D300 2 GB
    Xeon E5-1680 v2 8C 3.3/3.9 GHz, 20 MB L3, FirePro D500 3 GB
    Xeon E5-2697 v2 12C 2.7/3.5 GHz, 30 MB L3, FirePro D700 6 GB
    Up to 64 GB RAM, Up to 1 TB SSD, Thunderbolt 2, Gbit Ethernet

    Late 2014 (Haswell and Tonga)
    Xeon E5-1650 v3 6C 3.5/3.8 GHz, 15 MB L3, FirePro D500, 3 GB
    Xeon E5-1680 v3 8C 3.2/3.8 GHz, 20 MB L3, FirePro D700, 4 GB
    Xeon E5-2697 v3 14C 2.6/3.6 GHz, 35 MB L3, FirePro W8100, 8 GB
    Up to 128 GB RAM, Up to 2 TB SSD, Thunderbolt 2, Gbit Ethernet

    Mid 2016 (Broadwell and Polaris)
    Xeon E5-1660 v4 6C 3.6/4.0 GHz, 15 MB L3, FirePro D700, 4 GB
    Xeon E5-1680 v4 8C 3.4/4.0 GHz, 20 MB L3, FirePro W8100, 5 GB
    Xeon E5-2697 v4 18C 2.3/3.6 GHz, 45 MB L3, FirePro Wx7100, 8 GB
    Up to 128 GB RAM, Up to 4 TB SSD, Thunderbolt 3, 10 Gbit Ethernet

    This is the minimum path of using Xeon processors with the same LGA2011 package, GPUs that are <150 W, and the standard increases in RAM and storage. The option that they didn’t do was to redesign the internal architecture for one 150W CPU and one 250W GPU. They didn’t have to stick with a dual GPU architecture and a triangular heatsink design. They did 3 or 4 internal redesigns for the cheese grater Mac Pros, so it wouldn’t have been unusual.

    Apple decided to retrofit the iMac for one 150W CPU and one 250W GPU, instead of retrofitting the 2013 Mac Pro or designing a new Mac Pro box. Probably started the iMac Pro in late 2015, or maybe early 2016 at the latest. A year or so after that, the level of wrongness of that decision finally sank in. Nice to have an iMac Pro, but it looks like GPU compute has matured to be broadly more usable for a lot of applications, making multi-GPU setups more desirable and usable.

    Why they would make all these wrong decisions would have to be left to a leaker or a book in a few years. It was multiple wrong decisions, not just one, and the wrong decisions may continue in the future. The Pro workflow team is a dangerous idea. This team and the quotes from the Panzerino’s article are telling me Apple is designing the 2019 Mac Pro for workflows in 2018, not for workflows in 2022. What the workflows in 2022 are going to be not many people know, and that’s the point.

    The 2019 Mac Pro has to be the most computing power that can be achieved inside a box that can placed on a desk for prices starting at $3000 or whatever the base price they want, and hues to Apple’s aesthetics of quiet, elegantly designed machines, and be adaptable enough accommodate “workflows” as they change in the future. 
  • Reply 45 of 63


    Here's another one from the 'retro archive.'  G4 'Quicksilver' (nice an' teh sexy...) with up to Dual 1+gig processors.  $1699-$3499.  Yes.  They went up from the G3 tower prices...  (Apple, just can't help themselves...)  ...but still 'doable.'  Especially when converted to UK Pounds.

    Memories...

    They can still do this in a sexy gloss black plastic or Alu Space Grey or Trash Can finish.  Any Apple style will do.  I'm more concerned with the underlying principles of the Tower that Steve (yes, the man himself...) underlined.  Kick ass, leading performance across the board.  Access.  Expandability.  VALUE engineering.

    The way you capture those 'disparate' 'Pro' markets for creative & science types is to offer a couple of configs under 2k UK pounds.  And a couple of configs above 2k UK pounds.  Before customisation.  Access to two GPU makers.  (How hard is that?  It's not like when the PC industry used to have ten GPU markers...)  Access to two CPU makers (!)  Access to industry standard parts.  Two motherboards that can accommodate i9s.  Two mother boards that can do Xeons IF necessary.  That way you can have two prices points.  Low, medium and then, high and higher.  Extreme DUAL process option for the £££ version.  (Ie the Doctors and Lawyers that can afford that...)

    That way you can capture all the PC tower owners that want to try the Mac but 'can't' and all the tower buyers that want a Mac but can't because 'iMac.'  It doesn't matter that they overlap with the iMac.  It has it's own market for people that want that.  The tower is its own market for those that want that.  That isn't an excuse to jack up a Tower price to £3k UK pounds.  That's shareholder thinking.  Not product thinking.  

    Finally.  Displays.  3 choices.  £500.  4k.  £995.  5K.  £1999.  8k.  Apple beat everyone to the punch with displays before with the old studio displays and the 5K iMac.  Why can't they offer an 8K iMac with 'computer.'  Why can't they create dual link powered 8K monitor...like Steve boasted about before with the 30 incher Alu monitors?

    It's like the tech' press have collective amnesia...and especially Apple.  Phil was there...right with Steve...and he doesn't know what Apple's core base is anymore?

    And I thought Gibson Guitars was in trouble.  At least Apple has 250 Billion in the bank...

    Lemon Bon Bon.
    edited April 2018
  • Reply 46 of 63
    You used to be able to get an iMac for what Apple is charging for the ten inch iPad.

    That's what the problem is.  Apple want to iOS to be all under 1k.  All over 1k for Mac.

    Some people want affordable Macs.  They're stale.  And the tower represents that more than anything.

    Affordable tower.  Expensive tower.  Why can't we have both?

    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 47 of 63
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,265administrator




    It's like the tech' press have collective amnesia...and especially Apple.  Phil was there...right with Steve...and he doesn't know what Apple's core base is anymore?

    And I thought Gibson Guitars was in trouble.  At least Apple has 250 Billion in the bank...

    Lemon Bon Bon.
    No, they know full well what Apple's "core base" is, and it isn't Mac tower users and hasn't been for a very long time.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 48 of 63
    Wipe out the Mac Mini, have a config for 999$ with a dual-core i5, 8gb RAM. It's 100$ more than the current equivalent Mac mini and toss in the keyboard and mouse to balance it out. I know I could sell 'em.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 49 of 63
    crowleycrowley Posts: 8,766member
    You used to be able to get an iMac for what Apple is charging for the ten inch iPad.
    The lowest priced 21.5" iMac is $1099.  When have they ever been significantly cheaper than that?

    And the 10" iPad can be maxed out to $1129, so what you say is still true.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 50 of 63




    It's like the tech' press have collective amnesia...and especially Apple.  Phil was there...right with Steve...and he doesn't know what Apple's core base is anymore?

    And I thought Gibson Guitars was in trouble.  At least Apple has 250 Billion in the bank...

    Lemon Bon Bon.
    No, they know full well what Apple's "core base" is, and it isn't Mac (...snip...) users and hasn't been for a very long time.
    I think Mac users would agree with that.  :)

    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 51 of 63
    http://lowendmac.com/1999/apples-1999-financials/

    PowerMac sales not too far behind the outrageously popular iMac.

    Ah, fond memories...

    Lemon Bon Bon.

    PS.

    As for not knowing your key Mac markets...compared to the current 'mess' grid they have.  Crystal clear.

    https://blog.smartdraw.com/steve-jobs-simple-yet-powerful-lesson/

    ...with 'iOS' included (and Mac desktop excluded...)

    http://www.casestudyinc.com/apples-four-quadrant-product-grid

    ie.  They make 'bell curve' products that suck up most of the revenue.  Sure, it's working.  They dominate profits in PCs (5 million Macs a quarter, they didn't use to sell that many in a year...) and iPhones and iPads.  However...

    PPS.  ...and some historic Mac prices.  i.e. Affordable engineering.  They're always been pricey on the top end.  But they always had affordable entry models that offered a decent step on the ladder.

    https://everymac.com/global-mac-prices/mac-prices-uk-united-kingdom-gb-great-britain-england.html

    (As for the historic iMac prices.  I'm sure they drove the iMac down to £595 here in the UK.  It's not on the list.  But I remember it.  I remember a guy in Gordon Harwoods - a UK Mac seller... - saying he was picking up one of them for his daughter.  ie.  Cheap enough to add a second computer to a house hold...)

    Of note.  3 dual G5 processor models under £2k.  And the entry 1.8 gig G5 as £1099.  (I don't see the G3 tower prices on the list?). My.  How things have changed.  It's called 'getting greedy.'  And it's never enough.

    But there is still a demand for an affordable Mac.  (see iMac) And still a demand for an affordable Tower. (See 'Power'Mac.)

    It just means, as a consumer/prosumer/pro, I can buy behind the curve, spread out my purchases, use my iPhone until it dies a death.  The 'fashion' buying of iOS for me, is over.  Same with Macs.  No money for old rope.

    Steve Jobs, 'I'd milk the Mac for all it's worth and move onto the next big thing.'

    Which has some relevancy to both this thread and the Tim Cook denial of Mac OS/iOS merging.  
  • Reply 52 of 63
    All that said, I'm looking forward to the new Mac Pro.  But will they charge proprietary prices for standard model parts they've customised to not be easily upgradeable?  The Mac Pro and iMac Pro don't look promising in that regard.

    Be interesting to see if Apple can design a machine that delivers to the other half of their core Mac base.

    Can they get ahead of the curve with a TB 4?  PCIE 5?  Will it have a customised ARM co-procesor to keep the interface responsive when workloads bog down the computer?  Will it power an 8k monitor?  Will there be an Apple 8k monitor?

    Will there be a tower £2k-£2500 inc VAT?  Or will it now start at £3k?  or even £5k?

    Lemon Bon Bon.
  • Reply 53 of 63
    If it doesn't have multiple user-accessible PCI-e slots, sufficient power and cooling for a pair of high end GPUs, fiel-upgrable RAM and internal storage, along with a dual COU option, Apple shouldn't bother.

    As it is, Apple has already admitted it didn't care about the user base of the Mac Pro, and there is zero reason to believe the spin coming out of Cupertino given the abandonment of the MP for the last few years.  

    It is already late enough that most potential customers who need quasi-serious power have left Apple and are not likely to return.
  • Reply 54 of 63
    I am an Audio Professional aka Music Producer Protools/Logic X user. I am sick to death of waiting. Hell I am ashamed to admit I came damned close to moving to a PC, which I would've never considered until I felt like Apple had moved on from the pro user. I would've jumped on the 2013 MacPro but it's lack of storage and no ability to add multiple storage drives without inundating my desk (not mention the added expense in addition to a new mac pro) a bunch of Thunderbolt drives.... UGHHH !!!!

    So I am quite thrilled to get my hands on a newly designed MacPro. I honestly believe people got it wrong when they said the Trash can MacPro just isn't a big seller for Apple any more..... It was simply the design that did them in. I saw a lot of my peers choose to buy the last MacPro tower long after the 2013 Trash Can Mac release, just so they could keep the internal storage capabilities and increase the power in the process. I almost did the same, and then looked into a PC option. Apple thankfully blindsided me at the last minute just when I was ready to move to a PC, when they announced they were finally creating a new MacPro.... so here I am waiting another 2 years making due with my 2008 8 Core. HURRY APPLE GEEZ !!!!

    On another note, I won't be buying any new Apple Display unless it's UltraWide....... I bought the LG 34" Ultrawide (Not the curved one it's not as great), and got rid of the 2 monitor setup. DAMN I LOVE IT !!! Creating that monitor was a stroke of genius on LG's part. It is so awesome to be able to work and see so a very wide view when using Protools, Logic, or Final Cut .... Unless Apple makes an Ultrawide 34" monitor, I'll be an LG user for life .... 
  • Reply 55 of 63
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    lkrupp said:
    Two definitions I’d like to see talked about. First is the definition of Pro user. Who is a pro user? I’ve been around long enough to question anyone who says they are a professional user. Like “mechanic” anybody can  hang out their shingle and call themselves a pro. For example I can easily call Alex Lindsay of Pixel Corps a true professional. Some guy in his bedroom using Photoshop not so much. Second is to define what a pro needs vs what a pro wants. Again I’ve been around the track a few times and wonder sometimes at the comment that starts, “I’m a pro and I need this or that.”

    So bottom line I hope Apple listens to professionals like Alex Lindsay and others and not someone who built a hackintosh with stuffed in parts from Fry’s and calls themselves a pro user. Don’t fall into the specs trap.

    Rest assured, though, that whatever Apple comes up with will be torn to shreds by the Internet technorati and their constant negativity. Can you tell I’m a bitter cynic when it comes to know-it-alls who know nothing?
    Most ‘Pro Users’ are guys in their home office’s. Video, photography, coding, illustrator’s, designers, AR, VR, audio... these are the guys pushing the envelope on modern computing and trends. Most large companies outsource to small companies or have staff that work from home. Freelance is exactly where it’s at. They are small, agile, and can adapt quickly.  Large corporations are slow to change. Even large bio-medical companies outsource to small research. It’s where the work gets done. 

    You are are obviously not a ‘Pro user’ if you don’t understand this. If Apple designs a system for the Pixar’s of the world and ignores the actual market again - then it’s pretty much game over for Apple with the creative ‘professional’ industry.
    Small guys aren’t going to pay $15,000 for a comparable $6000 windows machine just to be on Mac OS. 
    Adobe and other companies aren’t going to support Mac OS for a handful of large companies - they barely support it now. 

  • Reply 56 of 63
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member
    The irony of all the "pro user" talk is that the standard iMac of today wipes the floor with the old Mac Pro cheese grater machines. That's just how computer technology works. The hardware advances much faster than the software. The majority of users that bought a cheese grater Pro machine for what they did professionally 10 years ago are not going to need to buy a Pro machine today. Apple's current (and future) Pro lineup of desktops is serving a smaller and smaller niche of users...the heaviest of the heavy lifters. 
    I partially agree with this. For running Adobe CC apps, sure, The iMac can get there with a few updates. But no chance with video editing. 
    I currently have the most powerful maxed-out iMac and it can’t come close to video editing speeds on my 2008 cheese grater with 8 cores. 
    Then factor in that I can’t upgrade the iMac - so no way am I going to get a decade out of this iMac like I did my 2008 Pro. 

    For the most part, the imac is fine. But it’s a glorified laptop. I want a pro machine that I can design to suit my needs. The iMac Pro is a joke. 
  • Reply 57 of 63
    bitmodbitmod Posts: 267member




    It's like the tech' press have collective amnesia...and especially Apple.  Phil was there...right with Steve...and he doesn't know what Apple's core base is anymore?

    And I thought Gibson Guitars was in trouble.  At least Apple has 250 Billion in the bank...

    Lemon Bon Bon.
    No, they know full well what Apple's "core base" is, and it isn't Mac tower users and hasn't been for a very long time.
    Hubris took them down before, what makes you think it won’t happen again?
  • Reply 58 of 63
    bitmod said:
    lkrupp said:
    Two definitions I’d like to see talked about. First is the definition of Pro user. Who is a pro user? I’ve been around long enough to question anyone who says they are a professional user. Like “mechanic” anybody can  hang out their shingle and call themselves a pro. For example I can easily call Alex Lindsay of Pixel Corps a true professional. Some guy in his bedroom using Photoshop not so much. Second is to define what a pro needs vs what a pro wants. Again I’ve been around the track a few times and wonder sometimes at the comment that starts, “I’m a pro and I need this or that.”

    So bottom line I hope Apple listens to professionals like Alex Lindsay and others and not someone who built a hackintosh with stuffed in parts from Fry’s and calls themselves a pro user. Don’t fall into the specs trap.

    Rest assured, though, that whatever Apple comes up with will be torn to shreds by the Internet technorati and their constant negativity. Can you tell I’m a bitter cynic when it comes to know-it-alls who know nothing?
    Most ‘Pro Users’ are guys in their home office’s. Video, photography, coding, illustrator’s, designers, AR, VR, audio... these are the guys pushing the envelope on modern computing and trends. Most large companies outsource to small companies or have staff that work from home. Freelance is exactly where it’s at. They are small, agile, and can adapt quickly.  Large corporations are slow to change. Even large bio-medical companies outsource to small research. It’s where the work gets done. 

    You are are obviously not a ‘Pro user’ if you don’t understand this. If Apple designs a system for the Pixar’s of the world and ignores the actual market again - then it’s pretty much game over for Apple with the creative ‘professional’ industry.
    Small guys aren’t going to pay $15,000 for a comparable $6000 windows machine just to be on Mac OS. 
    Adobe and other companies aren’t going to support Mac OS for a handful of large companies - they barely support it now. 


  • Reply 59 of 63
    My points are being made based on experience, and both quoters are correct. The definition of a professional isn’t just the big name at Pixar but also the pros that make a solid living in this new “gig economy”. You can google me, Glenn Swan, to verify that I am a music business professional in the true sense of the old school definition of “professional” as well as the new school version. 

    I decided I’m going to buy one of the new Thunderbolt Mac Mini’s fully loaded and see how it holds up to having it’s power put to the test. Maybe it will make it so that whenever that never coming Mac Pro finally shows up, I can say no need for it. However, I am also that guy u mentioned who wants what he wants LoL 

    take care guys !!
  • Reply 60 of 63
    thttht Posts: 4,042member
    jazzyswan said:
    On another note, I won't be buying any new Apple Display unless it's UltraWide....... I bought the LG 34" Ultrawide (Not the curved one it's not as great), and got rid of the 2 monitor setup. DAMN I LOVE IT !!! Creating that monitor was a stroke of genius on LG's part. It is so awesome to be able to work and see so a very wide view when using Protools, Logic, or Final Cut .... Unless Apple makes an Ultrawide 34" monitor, I'll be an LG user for life .... 
    Curious, side by side, stacked on top of each other, or side by side in portrait? Sounds more like an arrangement for a control station than a typical 5” work desk.
Sign In or Register to comment.