Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
"My only criticism, and what kept that home run from being a grand slam, is (1) the puny storage on the base model Pro (2) pricing the monitor stand separately (3) the misstep in announcing the price of the monitor separately."
I agree. Especially considering that the base-model iMac Pro comes with 1TB SSD storage. This should have been the storage on the base-model Mac Pro. Other than that, great computer and display.
Imo the price of the stand could have been a non-issue in the press if Apple had simply announced a $5999 monitor with the bonus of an $800 discount for choosing a VESA adapter instead of the stand. Exact same pricing, exact same components, completely different emphasis. Putting the spotlight on the stand was not good, but the overall presentation was the best WWDC opening Apple has done in a long time. They actually got me excited for iPads again.
Why do you care so much what people think of Apple? The stand is overpriced.
However, if Apple really wanted to be clever and hide the price they are charging for the stand they should have priced the monitor $500 higher, and given I’d bet the vast majority of folks will want to stand, the stand should have been default configuration, with options for additional VESA for $200 additional, or VESA-only for $399 discount. The press would infer the stand at $599 and that would be that.
I wouldn’t worry about your precious darling, though, many customers of theirs will find the stand attractive precisely because of it expense. Call it perverse inferiority complex.
WTH are you talking about? I rendered my opinion about WWDC and the MP and monitor. I couldn't care less about what people think of Apple. You call Apple my precious darling. That's funny, incorrect and ironic since a fair number of forum members consider me an Apple hater. There are a number of ways Apple could have mitigated the fallout from the "Standgate". Your idea is one of them, but not a good one imo. I like mine better since it implies no cost for the stand and a discount for the VESA adapter, where yours still assigns an additional cost to the stand. It invites discussion about cost where there needn't be any.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
Not at all dramatic. The top Mac has always been a product within the reach of many. Apple has now redefined that, to say that the top Mac will be a product for <0.01% of the Mac using population. With a base price of at least $12K for all parts needed, Apple is essentially giving the finger to the loyal Apple base that was waiting for a new Mac Pro. I'm sure some people need a machine that can drive six $5000 monitors at once, and need to see 1600 nits or whatever "extreme" other nonsense Apple is hyping up to justify the exorbitant price, but what about others that needed a powerful and expandable computer that couldn't care less about a million to 1 contrast (that is unlikely to be imporant to anyone)?
An absolutely not. The $6000 charged for the lowest 3.5ghz 8-core chip and accessories, is obscenely above parts and labor. Apple is going the way of those whack job Hi-Fi audio companies that sell cables for $3000 a foot.
What an absurd metric of entitlement — whether or not you can afford the top-tier offering! Nuts. When Ford Motor Co. was a younger company the top offering was affordable to many. Now they make many different models across a spread, and the biggest Ford trucks are not affordable to many. Does that mean they shouldn’t make or sell them? Of course not! That’s absurd. Your metric here is flawed.
The rest of your post is whining, and ignorant whining at that. Yes, pros in the business care about sustained nits. It’s not extreme nonsense.
This machine isn’t for you. And that’s OK. It’s not a hobbyist tinkerer machine.
Let’s just hope this Pro Workflow Group has been a vocal critic of the Touch Bar, so that we soon can get to choose MacBook Pros without it. I’d be very happy to buy one, but can’t accept that Apple is still trying to sell me the two year old 13-inch model, with older butterfly keyboard and only dual core CPU.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
Nope. This product just isn’t for you. If you don’t know why this monitor is special, you don’t need it.
Anyone like to guesstimate what a fully speced-out new Mac Pro with display will cost?
$50K at least. The 28 core Xenon CPU is $15,000.00 just by itself on Amazon. Pixar, Lucasfilm, Industrial Light and Magic and others will be buying truckloads of these machines.
The 28 core Xeon-W with the requisite memory capacity lists at about $8000.00 — Apple seems to be using an as-yet unreleased edition of this, so somewhat more ... But yes, the full compliment of RAM will be god-only-knows how much. $50K seems a good guess.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
Nope. This product just isn’t for you. If you don’t know why this monitor is special, you don’t need it.
I do agree with @jumpcutter ; that a base storage amount of 256GB on the base-model Mac Pro isn't justified especially considering that the base-model iMac Pro comes with 1TB SSD. Given its target market, 1TB SSD should be standard on the new Mac Pro. Other than that, I have no issue with the new hardware announced.
I think the Pro Workflow Team is going to turn out to be one of the best ideas Apple has had in a long time. It's sort of a wonder why they didn't have them before. The new Mac Pro, though obviously not for me, seems to be a damn good machine. I said the other day Apple hit one out of the park with the Pro and the monitor. That was just my first impression. A couple of days worth of reflection and I still think they hit one out of the park. A home run. My only criticism, and what kept that home run from being a grand slam, is (1) the puny storage on the base model Pro (2) pricing the monitor stand separately (3) the misstep in announcing the price of the monitor separately.
Imo the price of the stand could have been a non-issue in the press if Apple had simply announced a $5999 monitor with the bonus of an $800 discount for choosing a VESA adapter instead of the stand. Exact same pricing, exact same components, completely different emphasis. Putting the spotlight on the stand was not good, but the overall presentation was the best WWDC opening Apple has done in a long time. They actually got me excited for iPads again.
(1) IMO, a bare minimum base makes sense, now that components can be swapped out by end users. Anyone in the market for a higher-spec Pro might be able to save a few bucks by getting the base model and installing their own drive and memory to get to the higher spec if they have the time and inclination to do so. (Not sure what this does to warranty though).
I kinda agree with (2) and (3).
Nah, we disagree there. That is literally cellphone levels of storage (amounts not types)... and not even top tier levels. Not a good look on a $2K MBP. Terrible look on a $6K MP imo. I'd assume anyone buying one of these is going to be adding "goo gobs" ← technical term - of storage like the TB's that Promise is going to have on offer. So that small amount that comes with the MP isn't really going to be a big consideration. It's the perception that I'm talking about. It looks "money grabby" ← another technical term -coming from Apple, who already has a reputation for being stingy with storage and overcharging for any storage beyond the minimum. It's like they said, "Let's make the base model's storage so anemic that no one would go for it. We'll charge out the "ying yang" ← yet another technical term (yes, yes, yes, I know the principles are yin and yang but the technical term is ying) - for the next level of storage and above." Now we all know Apple didn't do that, but that's the vibe that level of storage gives off. Other's probably feel differently.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
When Intel charges $15k for the 28 core Xeon what do you expect? Just one more reason Apple will sooner-rather-than-later ditch Intel for AMD.
And no, they aren't going ARM people. Just like they aren't building a competing GPGPU--the Afterburner is that secret GPU project from Florida.
The Mac Pro uses a Xeon W series, designed for single socket workstations. The current Intel Xeon W-3175X cost around $3000, very far of the $15K you mention. If you move to the Xeon Platinum, specifically the 8280, it goes close to the USD$18K. You are going to see this kind of processor in dual-socket workstations, like the HP Z-840.
Anyone like to guesstimate what a fully speced-out new Mac Pro with display will cost?
$50K at least. The 28 core Xenon CPU is $15,000.00 just by itself on Amazon. Pixar, Lucasfilm, Industrial Light and Magic and others will be buying truckloads of these machines.
The current 28-core Xeon W series is close to $3K, not $15K. The other 28-core processor is the Xeon Platinum 8280, and it goes to $17K, but the Mac Pro don't have that option, considering is a single socket workstation. You'll have to move to a HP Z 840, since it's a dual socket workstation.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
Nope. This product just isn’t for you. If you don’t know why this monitor is special, you don’t need it.
I do agree with @jumpcutter ; that a base storage amount of 256GB on the base-model Mac Pro isn't justified especially considering that the base-model iMac Pro comes with 1TB SSD. Given its target market, 1TB SSD should be standard on the new Mac Pro. Other than that, I have no issue with the new hardware announced.
The storage is just enough for the OS and the target apps. It is clearly user upgradable for those that want more. But I suspect the people actually buying this would not use internal storage for their very large content anyway. So for this particular”ar product it is probably right. It is not right for a nonuser upgradable iMac with a very different use case.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
When Intel charges $15k for the 28 core Xeon what do you expect? Just one more reason Apple will sooner-rather-than-later ditch Intel for AMD.
And no, they aren't going ARM people. Just like they aren't building a competing GPGPU--the Afterburner is that secret GPU project from Florida.
Ummm, I'm pretty sure they will. The writing is kinda on the wall for ARM chips in the near future for the Macs. Project catalyst is the first step. They've migrated before, and will do it again.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
That's because they never knew reference monitors at those price points exist. Just what they see at Best Buy and Amazon.
The 'closed' vs. 'open' Mac debate goes back as far as the 1980's. The new Mac Pro is NOT the upgradable machine for the average consumer. It's the overpriced and under-spec'd (in my opinion) machine for Mac-centric video and audio professionals. It's really a niche product...
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
When Intel charges $15k for the 28 core Xeon what do you expect? Just one more reason Apple will sooner-rather-than-later ditch Intel for AMD.
And no, they aren't going ARM people. Just like they aren't building a competing GPGPU--the Afterburner is that secret GPU project from Florida.
The Mac Pro uses a Xeon W series, designed for single socket workstations. The current Intel Xeon W-3175X cost around $3000, very far of the $15K you mention. If you move to the Xeon Platinum, specifically the 8280, it goes close to the USD$18K. You are going to see this kind of processor in dual-socket workstations, like the HP Z-840.
The 28 Core part that the Mac Pro will be using is something like the 3175M, supporting 2 TB of memory, which is listed at about $7500, and even then, I'm understanding that Apple is looking at an unreleased version with near double the cache memory, from about 38.5 MB to 66.5 MB, which might be more expensive again.
I think that you might want to roll back you statement about that $3000 price, and state that you don't actually know how much it will cost.
Lets hope that one of those lessons is not "Pricing will start at cost X eleventybillion!"
Stop being so overdramatic. The Mac Pro is priced similarly to WinTel counterparts of EXACT specs and the monitor is far cheaper than the competitors reference-level monitors. Funny how you folks don't complain about the prices of those monitors.
We do not need Broadcast quality monitors first of all. You do not know if the WinTel counterparts had the same specs. All Ternus said was one priced at $8,000. No one knew the specs. Why did the iMac Pro's basic configuration have a 1TB SSD and the Mac Pro starts at 256 GB. That is being very stingy despite the high cost! Comparing that Studio Display to a Sony BVM is a bit absurd. A $999 monitor stand is just as absurd. No one asked for a 6K monitor anyway. How is it the 27" iMac has a 5K monitor without the "Apple Tax". Apple is just damn Greedy.
Nope. This product just isn’t for you. If you don’t know why this monitor is special, you don’t need it.
I do agree with @jumpcutter ; that a base storage amount of 256GB on the base-model Mac Pro isn't justified especially considering that the base-model iMac Pro comes with 1TB SSD. Given its target market, 1TB SSD should be standard on the new Mac Pro. Other than that, I have no issue with the new hardware announced.
The storage is just enough for the OS and the target apps. It is clearly user upgradable for those that want more. But I suspect the people actually buying this would not use internal storage for their very large content anyway. So for this particular”ar product it is probably right. It is not right for a nonuser upgradable iMac with a very different use case.
Exactly right. This is like complaining about how much storage is included on data center servers. The people who need these types of machines are going to be working with massive files and will use appropriate storage solutions.
Comments
Can I get a Mac Pro with that wonderful case, but inside is only a Mac Mini hanging in the center?
I agree. Especially considering that the base-model iMac Pro comes with 1TB SSD storage. This should have been the storage on the base-model Mac Pro. Other than that, great computer and display.
The rest of your post is whining, and ignorant whining at that. Yes, pros in the business care about sustained nits. It’s not extreme nonsense.
This machine isn’t for you. And that’s OK. It’s not a hobbyist tinkerer machine.
I’d be very happy to buy one, but can’t accept that Apple is still trying to sell me the two year old 13-inch model, with older butterfly keyboard and only dual core CPU.
I think that you might want to roll back you statement about that $3000 price, and state that you don't actually know how much it will cost.