This Mac Pro is a Formula 1 car. ... Doesn’t mean we aren’t professionals just because we aren’t Formula 1 drivers.
Many car manufacturers make purpose built race cars. Those are "professional" vehicles designed to show off the engineering prowess of the company, test new tech, and be used for marketing. They are not designed for bus drivers, Uber drivers, or delivery drivers - who are equally "professional".
This new Mac Pro is for the top-tier "professionals" who need massive computing power on their desktop. Are there many other types of professionals who need less power? Yes. But this machine is an engineering showcase intended for those with extreme needs.
Are there other machines with better GFlop/$ ratios or TByte/$ ratios? I suspect so - but Apple seemed to claim this machine offers a jump up from any other available machine - in specific areas.
Would it be nice to see a 3 slot version? Yes. But maybe Apple sees that hardware space is already filled by Windows machines and they don't want to compete there. Apple is a prestige brand and this is a prestige piece of hardware. (But $1000 for a monitor stand!? LOL.)
A very nice but very conventional design Apple released in the end. Still, sweet and very expensive. Mind you, I was shocked more by the ridiculously high price of the new monitor.
Who/what are enthusiasts? Are they so-called professionals or not? I’m struggling to understand why an iMac Pro or a Mac mini wouldn’t meet their requirements.
Apple missed the mark completely on this... completely.
They custom designed a Mac Pro for Pixar... what about the rest of us?
FFS...
Yes. You know Apple's pro customers better than Apple does. Why on Earth didn't they call you for advise?
"The rest of us"
Do you need a "Mac Pro" or do you need a Mac to get your work done? Sounds like all you care about is having a "Mac Pro", because I'm pretty sure Apple sells other Macs that aren't as powerful or expensive.
This is just the whining of the headless Mac crowd who’ve been clamoring for a cheap tower with slots for years now. They can’t get out of the 1990’s in their wants. They can put together a cheap Hackintosh with all the slots they want but, no, they keep coming to tech blog comment sections to bitch and moan about it. Well, it’s now clear that Apple isn’t going to listen to their carping. They are not going to get their cheap, upgradeable headless Mac... EVER. That crowd is irrelevant now, having no influence on anything. But still they moan and groan. Ignore them.
Never say never. That crowd definitely isn't irrelevant. If the Mac Mini exists as a headless mac then there is room for a headless pro tower like the G3, G4 and G5 lines. The iMac would take a hit but that's a different story.
Wow - this so Pro they might sell 100 of them. Cheese grater design is boring. After the criticism of the R2D2 Mac Pro for not being pro enough (when Apple didn't even offer upgrade options over 5 years!), they have gone to the other extreme and produced a machine that only a tiny proportion of Pro users will want, or be able to justify. Apple have lurched far too far to the other extreme. Same goes for the monitor: they should be providing a suite of monitors in different sizes for different users - not some ridiculously over-specced $6000 32 inch monitor with a an optional $1000 stand.
Ya know, this isn't the only computer Apple makes and sells. They do have other models, both cheaper and less powerful. Most of the "pros" you speak of are fine with Apple's 27" iMac - not even the iMac Pro, which is also a beast.
Yar. Per Craig most pros are devs, and most devs were using iMac...thus they created the iMac Pro.
The enthusiasts complaining about this machine are justified. The people pointing out that this machine is for an extremely niche and specific market are also correct.
IMO Apple messed up here, and they're going to get a lot of crap for it. This is a form factor that could, and should, have scaled to make multiple market segments happy. Instead Apple went as far to the extreme end as they could, to the exclusion of the middle road, and completely priced out individuals.The enthusiasts just wanted an expandable i7 with like 16-64GB of RAM and a good GPU they could upgrade. That should have been possible with this design.
Feels like a swing and a miss to me. Apple is either completely out of touch with the enthusiast market, or it might be time for the enthusiast market to give up on Apple. I think they probably sold a fair amount of PCs today.
Also, I know it's personal preference but man is that thing ugly. Can Ive stop trying to make every Apple product look like a Braun appliance from the 60s and 70s?
I guess everyone's entitled to their opinion, but I am surprised to see this from an AI Administrator.
As both a pro and personal user, I think the new MacPro is frikkin awesome and looks cool too. And there is a rack mount version! Using one of these to drive huge blended or tiled screens in commercial environments (which there are more and more of everyday) will be amazing.
So what the hell is an "enthusiast" anyway? I thought I was an enthusiast, but the way you put it, maybe not. If you mean tinkerers or gamers, well OK, I'm not one of them, but I think that community has plenty of other platforms to play around with.
Stunning products. Apple won't go AMD until Zen2+ is out next year and can upgrade iMac/iMac Pro/Mac Pro/Macbook/Macbook Air/Macbook Pro/Mac Mini in one shot. The ultra low power Ryzen Pro APUs with NAVI won't arrive until later this Fall or early Spring. That gives Apple 2020 to go AMD and adjust prices across their entire line up while actually increasing their gross margins.
Apple missed the mark completely on this... completely.
They custom designed a Mac Pro for Pixar... what about the rest of us?
FFS...
You're not the target market. Buy the iMac Pro or iMac.
This is perfect for Logic Pro X and looking forward to buying one while also working on Solid Modeling and in FCP X. Logic Pro X making soundtracks, complex arrangements for music will be boundless now. Can't wait for the new version of LPX to arrive.
The stand cost $1000. Lots of companies will offer compatible stands far cheaper.
They won't offer a cantilever balanced stand and ease of use that one offers. People will buy the stand. Studios will buy the stand and the VESA expansion kit.
Stunning products. Apple won't go AMD until Zen2+ is out next year and can upgrade iMac/iMac Pro/Mac Pro/Macbook/Macbook Air/Macbook Pro/Mac Mini in one shot. The ultra low power Ryzen Pro APUs with NAVI won't arrive until later this Fall or early Spring. That gives Apple 2020 to go AMD and adjust prices across their entire line up while actually increasing their gross margins.
I don't see Apple going to AMD. Either they will move to ARM or stick with Intel. Beginning with Ice Lake, I don't see what AMD offers that Intel doesn't.
I think I'm just going to put all the whiners on this thread on permanent "ignore." If you can't find ANYTHING positive to say at all (or even constructive criticism) on your first post about this amazing new machine, I don't need you in my life, and frankly AI will be a far better read without your relentless, boring negativity.
The stand cost $1000. Lots of companies will offer compatible stands far cheaper.
They won't offer a cantilever balanced stand and ease of use that one offers. People will buy the stand. Studios will buy the stand and the VESA expansion kit.
Looks impressive, however there are a few drawbacks.
1. Single CPU only. Most professional workstations offer a dual CPU option. 2. AMD graphics only. Curious as to whether nor not nVidia GPU's will even work in this machine. 3. Limited storage bays. Two (2) SSD's seems quite limited compared to most professional workstations. 4. Price. $6K seems a bit over-priced for an 8-core workstation with minimal RAM, SSD, and Graphics.
Overall, this is a niche product and likely not a huge money maker for Apple. That said, I am glad they are re-engaging with professional video and audio producers who've been waiting years for Apple to (re)introduce a truly modular professional workstation...
1. I was waiting for this complaint. Why do you think dual sockets is a plus? Because its not. It adds EXTREME complexity, severely limits the number of chipsets and CPUs that are available to pick from, and caps the max clock frequency that CPU's can run at because higher clock speeds affect reliability over distance and at high GHz speeds every millimeter counts - among other things.
"Most professional workstations" are still dual socket because they are riding on old designs. This is a new design, crafted from the ground up around modern, high core CPUs. How many PCI Express lanes are in those dual core workstations you are thinking of? What's their memory bandwidth compared to this Mac Pro? And what are the price points for similar configured/capable machines?
Thank goodness we have finally got enough cores in a single socket where dual sockets are not needed. My big complaint on previous Pro's was them sticking to Xeons and dual sockets - driving the costs up and tying to Intel's glacial server chipset timelines.
2. Unless you are doing CUDA I have a feeling the GPUs in this beast will hang with or surpass Nvidia's offerings. Benchmarks will be interesting, but I can't wait to see real world application performance. This box is going to be a screamer for video! Did you notice the second interconnect for multiple card setups? I think Final Cut Pro X is going to absolutely kill on this machine. You can do amazing things when you own the hardware, OS and application software I don't think Windows/Linux boxes are going to be able to match video performance at any price; time will tell but boasting they can do three 8K streams in real time should hint that this just isn't a warmed-over PC workstation design. There's quite a bit more going on under the hood (as there should be for this long of a wait and at this price point!).
3. Meh - 4TB of flash is more than enough for in the box (as much as it pains me to say that). Most video houses have all their video on a SAN or beefy NAS, not local. And this isn't normal SSD - it's the same turbocharged SSD architecture power by the T2 for the SSD controller. Except in this Mac Pro it isn't soldered to the board - woot! The performance on this stuff should be amazing compared even to NVMe SSDs thanks to the T2. If you really need more local storage a Thunderbolt 3 array should more than make up for any missing internal drive capabilities. The amount of native TB3 ports you can hang a large number of arrays on their own TB3 port not shared with anything else - this thing is a beast when it comes to I/O. A mini mainframe, really...
4. Compared to what I spent on my 2007 Mac Pro this machine isn't a steal, but it's a better value for what you get. Yeah, it starts with a higher baseline - but feature for feature there is no comparison. If you don't need the extreme expandability then that's what the iMac Pro or a tricked out iMac is for. It would be nice if they had a smaller two or three slot Mac Pro (ala the IIcx/IIci) but really the case and slots aren't were the cost is. The bulk of cost is in the chipset, the CPU, the RAM, the power supply - the engineering to make all of that work. If they could shave $1K off would it be enough to justify a totally different SKU? Nope. Which is why we won't see the xMac any time soon (despite me still wanting one).
The Mac Pro was always a niche product. At least this iteration re-establishes that they wish to uncontestedly own that high end niche again
A very nice but very conventional design Apple released in the end. Still, sweet and very expensive. Mind you, I was shocked more by the ridiculously high price of the new monitor.
Not really that expensive compared to what else is out there now. Plus, it seems workstations have been in the $6-10K range for decades.
The monitor is also reasonably priced compared to the other things on the market (I mean, they did compare it to a $43K monitor, and it out-performs it).
I have to say, I did gasp about the $999 stand though (and while watching the stream, I could hear members of the audience doing so too).
The enthusiasts complaining about this machine are justified. The people pointing out that this machine is for an extremely niche and specific market are also correct.
IMO Apple messed up here, and they're going to get a lot of crap for it. This is a form factor that could, and should, have scaled to make multiple market segments happy. Instead Apple went as far to the extreme end as they could, to the exclusion of the middle road, and completely priced out individuals.The enthusiasts just wanted an expandable i7 with like 16-64GB of RAM and a good GPU they could upgrade. That should have been possible with this design.
Feels like a swing and a miss to me. Apple is either completely out of touch with the enthusiast market, or it might be time for the enthusiast market to give up on Apple. I think they probably sold a fair amount of PCs today.
Also, I know it's personal preference but man is that thing ugly. Can Ive stop trying to make every Apple product look like a Braun appliance from the 60s and 70s?
Or maybe there's a Mac tower in the future that will slot in below this device. If they want to sell as many Mac Pros as they can right out of the gate, it would probably unwise to roll out an "economy" version at the same time. Just looking at the naming convention of the current line-up of MacOS devices, there's one missing where a "Mac" would be.
While I'm fairly certain that Apple doesn't develop product lines in response to internet chatter, it's nonetheless true that some people have been, for the last few years, fostering a narrative that Apple has "abandoned" real "Pros" in favor of offering sleek, slim, underpowered, non-upgradable, non-modular hardware. This new Mac Pro kind of destroys that narrative, doesn't it? So this device is aimed squarely at the Pro market, not the "enthusiast" market. In six months or a year, they'll offer some upgrades to the Mac Pro, making it even more spectacular, and maybe at that time, hit the 'enthusiast' market with a Mac tower that emulates some of the aesthetics of the Mac Pro, but smaller, with less power under the hood, and a lower price to go with it.
Comments
This new Mac Pro is for the top-tier "professionals" who need massive computing power on their desktop. Are there many other types of professionals who need less power? Yes. But this machine is an engineering showcase intended for those with extreme needs.
Are there other machines with better GFlop/$ ratios or TByte/$ ratios? I suspect so - but Apple seemed to claim this machine offers a jump up from any other available machine - in specific areas.
Would it be nice to see a 3 slot version? Yes. But maybe Apple sees that hardware space is already filled by Windows machines and they don't want to compete there. Apple is a prestige brand and this is a prestige piece of hardware. (But $1000 for a monitor stand!? LOL.)
This is awesome.
As both a pro and personal user, I think the new MacPro is frikkin awesome and looks cool too. And there is a rack mount version! Using one of these to drive huge blended or tiled screens in commercial environments (which there are more and more of everyday) will be amazing.
So what the hell is an "enthusiast" anyway? I thought I was an enthusiast, but the way you put it, maybe not. If you mean tinkerers or gamers, well OK, I'm not one of them, but I think that community has plenty of other platforms to play around with.
1. I was waiting for this complaint. Why do you think dual sockets is a plus? Because its not. It adds EXTREME complexity, severely limits the number of chipsets and CPUs that are available to pick from, and caps the max clock frequency that CPU's can run at because higher clock speeds affect reliability over distance and at high GHz speeds every millimeter counts - among other things.
"Most professional workstations" are still dual socket because they are riding on old designs. This is a new design, crafted from the ground up around modern, high core CPUs. How many PCI Express lanes are in those dual core workstations you are thinking of? What's their memory bandwidth compared to this Mac Pro? And what are the price points for similar configured/capable machines?
Thank goodness we have finally got enough cores in a single socket where dual sockets are not needed. My big complaint on previous Pro's was them sticking to Xeons and dual sockets - driving the costs up and tying to Intel's glacial server chipset timelines.
2. Unless you are doing CUDA I have a feeling the GPUs in this beast will hang with or surpass Nvidia's offerings. Benchmarks will be interesting, but I can't wait to see real world application performance. This box is going to be a screamer for video! Did you notice the second interconnect for multiple card setups? I think Final Cut Pro X is going to absolutely kill on this machine. You can do amazing things when you own the hardware, OS and application software
3. Meh - 4TB of flash is more than enough for in the box (as much as it pains me to say that). Most video houses have all their video on a SAN or beefy NAS, not local. And this isn't normal SSD - it's the same turbocharged SSD architecture power by the T2 for the SSD controller. Except in this Mac Pro it isn't soldered to the board - woot! The performance on this stuff should be amazing compared even to NVMe SSDs thanks to the T2. If you really need more local storage a Thunderbolt 3 array should more than make up for any missing internal drive capabilities. The amount of native TB3 ports you can hang a large number of arrays on their own TB3 port not shared with anything else - this thing is a beast when it comes to I/O. A mini mainframe, really...
4. Compared to what I spent on my 2007 Mac Pro this machine isn't a steal, but it's a better value for what you get. Yeah, it starts with a higher baseline - but feature for feature there is no comparison. If you don't need the extreme expandability then that's what the iMac Pro or a tricked out iMac is for. It would be nice if they had a smaller two or three slot Mac Pro (ala the IIcx/IIci) but really the case and slots aren't were the cost is. The bulk of cost is in the chipset, the CPU, the RAM, the power supply - the engineering to make all of that work. If they could shave $1K off would it be enough to justify a totally different SKU? Nope. Which is why we won't see the xMac any time soon (despite me still wanting one).
The Mac Pro was always a niche product. At least this iteration re-establishes that they wish to uncontestedly own that high end niche again
The monitor is also reasonably priced compared to the other things on the market (I mean, they did compare it to a $43K monitor, and it out-performs it).
I have to say, I did gasp about the $999 stand though (and while watching the stream, I could hear members of the audience doing so too).
While I'm fairly certain that Apple doesn't develop product lines in response to internet chatter, it's nonetheless true that some people have been, for the last few years, fostering a narrative that Apple has "abandoned" real "Pros" in favor of offering sleek, slim, underpowered, non-upgradable, non-modular hardware. This new Mac Pro kind of destroys that narrative, doesn't it? So this device is aimed squarely at the Pro market, not the "enthusiast" market. In six months or a year, they'll offer some upgrades to the Mac Pro, making it even more spectacular, and maybe at that time, hit the 'enthusiast' market with a Mac tower that emulates some of the aesthetics of the Mac Pro, but smaller, with less power under the hood, and a lower price to go with it.