Editorial: The new Mac Pro is overkill for nearly everybody, and it hit Apple's own target...

124

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 88
    sanssans Posts: 56member
    . There are a lot of people out there today who are very excited by how the new hardware will change their workflow for the better, and that includes the reference monitor, to these users and businesses: this is *jaw-droppingly* low prices.
    Don't forget those of us that can't afford these, but are excited to see where this leads. In 5-10 years, I'm hoping to see this idea to spread and become much, much cheaper.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 62 of 88
    IanSIanS Posts: 39member
    I was a user of the Mac IIfx, $9,000 and $12,000, and at the time it was an incredible machine. I think a high end RasterOps video card at the time was between $6,000 and $10,000. This is what was needed to work on complex Photoshop images at a decent pace. That is what pro meant back then no one dreamed of the audio and video editing of today. Hey Apple that is one killer piece of hardware.
    watto_cobramdriftmeyer
  • Reply 63 of 88
    mjtomlin said:
    ... The most expensive part in this system is of course going to be the Intel Xeon processor. Not sure what 28-core model is used in this system, but Amazon is currently selling an Intel Xeon Platinum 28-core CPU for $15k !!!
    The current Xeon-W 28-Core (W-3275M) that supports 2 TB memory lists at $7453. But the cache doesn't match (is much smaller than) what Apple claims, so it seems Intel has a new series of these coming -- probably the same numbers, but with a different letter. And likely more expensive.

    Anyhow, Intel doesn't list a price for the closest match to the specs of the 8-Core (again, the cache is smaller than what Apple claims), but a different 8-Core is listed at $1199. So figure at least $6000 for the processor upgrade alone, probably more?


    watto_cobra
  • Reply 64 of 88
    mdriftmeyermdriftmeyer Posts: 7,502member
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    It's UNIX certified. It's UNIX and then some.
    watto_cobraMacPropscooter63chia
  • Reply 65 of 88
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 2,050member
    danvm said:
    I don't think that that Mac Pro is overpriced.  Compared to a similar HP, Dell or Lenovo workstation, it's a little bit higher (considering that the Mac Por only have 1-year warranty vs 3-3-3 in Dell, HP and Lenovo).  What Apple is missing is a low cost Mac Pro.  You can buy a HP Z4 starting at $900 and add the options that match your needs and budget.  Compare that to a Mac Pro that starts a $6000.  You may think that a Mac Mini or iMac Pro as options, but there are users that benefit, or may even need the internal expansion the Mac Pro offers.  
    I wish they made a half size (mini tower) version of this machine, but all in all it they went for the right type of computer with this.
  • Reply 66 of 88
    IreneWIreneW Posts: 261member
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    macOS is certainly a pro OS, whatever that means. macOS is a POSIX-certified UNIX OS, . 
    Well, so was Windows NT... (Posix certified, that is, not Unix.)
    edited June 2019 Rayer
  • Reply 67 of 88
    nealc5nealc5 Posts: 37member
    lkrupp said:
    I am glad to see AI attempt a preemptive strike to counter the “overpriced” rants that will surely follow. Those who wanted an “almost pro” headless Mac with slots that started at $2499 are of course disappointed but then that crowd is always disappointed. It’s now clear that the machine they want will never exist as a Macintosh. Most lower level pros and “prosumers” (what is a prosumer anyway)) will do just fine with the iMac Pro, Mac Mini or standard iMac. In Apple centric tech forums we are led to believe the headless Mac with slots has a giant, untapped market to be served but I disagree. The typical Mac prospect is looking for simplicity, design, and ease of use, not a tinkerer’s machine to play with. Get ready for the barrage of complaints about the so-called market gap between the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro. We already knew that whatever the new Mac Pro turned out to be it would be savaged here.

    That the new Mac Pro will be available in a rack mount configuration was a bit of a welcome surprise. That should make it even more popular with the big pro studios. Get ready for movies produced completely on the Mac Pro.
    "Get ready for the barrage of complaints about the so-called market gap between the iMac Pro and the Mac Pro"

    you mean like this?

    https://twitter.com/stroughtonsmith/status/1135876051131912192
    I suspect that next year, Apple might come out with a "lower" priced version of this MacPro, using the same case, with similar components used in the iMac Pro, to address those that want the iMacPro level performance, but with a modular form factor.  OTOH, Apple does it's market research, and they may feel that between the iMac Pro and the Mac Mini, they have all their markets covered.
    stompylkruppwatto_cobra
  • Reply 68 of 88
    nhtnht Posts: 4,522member
    dysamoria said:
    So this computer is awesome for companies like Pixar. Where’s the thermally well-designed modular machine for small businesses, prosumers, hobbyists, and institutions that cannot justify a $12000 setup... but also cannot justify replacing disposable computers every 3 years and want something more powerful than an obsessively compact machine?

    Everyone keeps defending Apple with the “if you cannot afford it, it’s not for you” meme. The Mac Pro used to start at $2500. Then $3000. Now that starting price is $6000. It has the same name. It has the same *general* appearance. Yet, the pricing, and, according to you apologists, the intended purpose/market for THIS new “Mac Pro” is big business that can justify spending $12000 for a workstation. Apple went WAY overboard here. They’ve utterly dropped an entire segment of computer using professionals. They’ve aimed at the 1% while shouting “SEE WE STILL CARE ABOUT PROFESSIONALS!”
    People keep saying Pixar (who will have huge render farms) but the pros that want this machine are customers of Blackmagic, RED and ARRI.  BM folks will buy the lower end $6K Mac Pro.  RED 8K users will pony up for the top end Mac Pro.

    For Pros that don't need a $6000 machine there's the mini, iMac and iMac Pro.  The new Mac Pro is more pro than the old cheese grater Mac pros.  For one, it's more easily rackable and it has a lot more expansion ability relative to most other workstations due to the thermal design and the modules.
    watto_cobragatorguyRayz2016
  • Reply 69 of 88
    andyringandyring Posts: 45member
    Keep this in mind as well. The Mac IIfx was released in 1990, at $8,970 for the base configuration. Just dollars for dollars, that's more than the base configuration of the new Mac Pro. Figure inflation into the mix though and that $8,970 comes out to $17,538 in today's dollars, more than three times the cost of the IIfx.
    watto_cobrachia
  • Reply 70 of 88
    knowitallknowitall Posts: 1,648member
    chia said:
    knowitall said:
    pakitt said:
    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 
    Try spotlight, that will work.
    macOs isn't based on Unix, its Mach.
    It does have a compliant bash shell which is seen by many as Unix.
    And (to help you a bit) Linux users like bash too. 
    Not so knowitall, macOS is a fully compliant UNIX:

    UNIX 03

    Company Name: Apple Inc.

    Product Name: macOS version 10.14 Mojave 
    Environment: on Intel-based Mac computers

    Registered on: 28-Aug-2018

    https://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3648.htm
    Ahem, didn't say it wasn't compliant, I said it isn't based on Unix (its based on mach, thats the kernel running).
    So, yes so knowitall.
    macOS is even POSIX (a standard to unify Unix) compliant, but this isn't a guarantee that (heavy) porting of software will work (see one of my earlier posts).
    Real knowledge is a bitch I guess.
  • Reply 71 of 88
    By focusing entirely on the definition of what a "Pro" this editorial misses an important point: there's a gap in Apple's computer offerings.  I don't really care if I'm defined as a pro or not, all I know is after 20 years of being a Mac only user, there doesn't seem to be a Mac computer that fits my needs.  And thats sad.  

    I'd agree with the author, this computer is not for me.  And that's a problem, because I'm sure there's people out there who want a kinda-high powered computer that doesn't have the display built in (sorry iMacPro) and they don't need a laptop (I have a iPad Pro that serves that need).

    People might want a computer that is better at at managing heat than a laptop or iMac or  can easily add hard drives to without linking all these external drives.  And I'm ok with paying about $4-5k.  But $6k starting is a bit high.

    Maybe this could have been fixed if the new Mac Pro's had lower grade processor options?  

    Either way, I don't think Apple failed with their new Mac Pro, they just failed to offer something more "pro" than an iMac but not as "pro" as their $6k start Mac Pro.
  • Reply 72 of 88
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 6,273administrator
    By focusing entirely on the definition of what a "Pro" this editorial misses an important point: there's a gap in Apple's computer offerings.  I don't really care if I'm defined as a pro or not, all I know is after 20 years of being a Mac only user, there doesn't seem to be a Mac computer that fits my needs.  And thats sad.  

    I'd agree with the author, this computer is not for me.  And that's a problem, because I'm sure there's people out there who want a kinda-high powered computer that doesn't have the display built in (sorry iMacPro) and they don't need a laptop (I have a iPad Pro that serves that need).

    People might want a computer that is better at at managing heat than a laptop or iMac or  can easily add hard drives to without linking all these external drives.  And I'm ok with paying about $4-5k.  But $6k starting is a bit high.

    Maybe this could have been fixed if the new Mac Pro's had lower grade processor options?  

    Either way, I don't think Apple failed with their new Mac Pro, they just failed to offer something more "pro" than an iMac but not as "pro" as their $6k start Mac Pro.
    That's in there too, if perhaps not as direct as you've said :D
  • Reply 73 of 88
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,405member
    gatorguy said:
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  

    Topping out at a reported $50K or thereabouts it certainly is NOT intended for prosumers. The market for these is niche and quite specialized IMO. 
    "These are not the Macs you are looking for" would be the normal answer unless dedicated to professional video production, and/or special effects, or certain engineering/modeling/scientific needs.
    Agreed. I would have bought one or more of these a few years ago for my TV production business in a heartbeat but after facing the reality that I am retired and just 'play' these days I came to a decision. I could afford one but decided it was just plain daft to get one however much I'd love one. Once I made that painful decision I studied iMacs long and hard as I have never owned one. I ended up buying the 27" iMac 5K i9 with the upgraded GPU and 8 GB RAM plus 64 GB of third party RAM to stick in myself.  Even the iMac Pro seemed overkill for my needs. I kept my 2013 Mac Pro and it is now a dedicated and very capable Logic Pro X set up. I am loving the iMac and the 5K screen is stunning. I have no regrets.  I'd love to have a play around with the new Mac Pro though.   I did buy the Sony 200-600m G lens with some of the money I saved :)
    edited December 2019
  • Reply 74 of 88
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,405member
    k2kw said:
    danvm said:
    I don't think that that Mac Pro is overpriced.  Compared to a similar HP, Dell or Lenovo workstation, it's a little bit higher (considering that the Mac Por only have 1-year warranty vs 3-3-3 in Dell, HP and Lenovo).  What Apple is missing is a low cost Mac Pro.  You can buy a HP Z4 starting at $900 and add the options that match your needs and budget.  Compare that to a Mac Pro that starts a $6000.  You may think that a Mac Mini or iMac Pro as options, but there are users that benefit, or may even need the internal expansion the Mac Pro offers.  
    I wish they made a half size (mini tower) version of this machine, but all in all it they went for the right type of computer with this.
    I had felt a mid tower for Prosumers was a gap in the range till I got myself my first ever iMac.  I suspect I would have gone the mid range tower route had it existed but I cannot deny the power, simplicity and honestly ... the amazingly low price of the  27" iMac i9 when you consider the screen that's included.  I have a 24 TB 8 bay RAID 0 hanging off the TB3 (plus a second one as a mirror) plus a second 4K Dell monitor,  and boy it's a nice set up.
    edited December 2019 chia
  • Reply 75 of 88
    MacPro said:
    k2kw said:
    danvm said:
    I don't think that that Mac Pro is overpriced.  Compared to a similar HP, Dell or Lenovo workstation, it's a little bit higher (considering that the Mac Por only have 1-year warranty vs 3-3-3 in Dell, HP and Lenovo).  What Apple is missing is a low cost Mac Pro.  You can buy a HP Z4 starting at $900 and add the options that match your needs and budget.  Compare that to a Mac Pro that starts a $6000.  You may think that a Mac Mini or iMac Pro as options, but there are users that benefit, or may even need the internal expansion the Mac Pro offers.  
    I wish they made a half size (mini tower) version of this machine, but all in all it they went for the right type of computer with this.
    I had felt a mid tower for Prosumers was a gap in the range till I got myself my first ever iMac.  I suspect I would have gone the mid range tower route had it existed but I cannot deny the power, simplicity and honestly ... the amazingly low price of the  27" iMac i9 when you consider the screen that's included.  I have a 24 TB 8 bay RAID 0 hanging off the TB3 (plus a second one as a mirror) plus a second 4K Dell monitor,  and boy it's a nice set up.
    Agreed, I have the 2019 iMac 5K, maxed the GPU, CPU, RAM (super easy to install yourself) and the thing is awesome. The retina display is also incredible and a huge part of the deal. 
  • Reply 76 of 88

    Sure, the Mac Pro’s a really great whiz-bang machine, and Apple and those who need and can afford it can celebrate. But if Apple can make that, why don’t they make great whiz-bang Macs for the rest of us - as they obviously could? The new MBP goes in that direction, but not far enough, and the rest of the line is simply disappointing.

  • Reply 77 of 88
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,405member
    MacPro said:
    k2kw said:
    danvm said:
    I don't think that that Mac Pro is overpriced.  Compared to a similar HP, Dell or Lenovo workstation, it's a little bit higher (considering that the Mac Por only have 1-year warranty vs 3-3-3 in Dell, HP and Lenovo).  What Apple is missing is a low cost Mac Pro.  You can buy a HP Z4 starting at $900 and add the options that match your needs and budget.  Compare that to a Mac Pro that starts a $6000.  You may think that a Mac Mini or iMac Pro as options, but there are users that benefit, or may even need the internal expansion the Mac Pro offers.  
    I wish they made a half size (mini tower) version of this machine, but all in all it they went for the right type of computer with this.
    I had felt a mid tower for Prosumers was a gap in the range till I got myself my first ever iMac.  I suspect I would have gone the mid range tower route had it existed but I cannot deny the power, simplicity and honestly ... the amazingly low price of the  27" iMac i9 when you consider the screen that's included.  I have a 24 TB 8 bay RAID 0 hanging off the TB3 (plus a second one as a mirror) plus a second 4K Dell monitor,  and boy it's a nice set up.
    Agreed, I have the 2019 iMac 5K, maxed the GPU, CPU, RAM (super easy to install yourself) and the thing is awesome. The retina display is also incredible and a huge part of the deal. 
    Yep same here totally maxed it out and did RAM myself.   All the reviews I read it seemed a better route than the iMac Pro for my needs.  I can't believe how quiet and cool she runs even under load.  My main applications are Photoshop 2020, Capture One Pro 20  and FCPX and they all fly.  It is probably the most fun Mac I have ever had since my first Mac Plus lol, and I've had every Mac tower ever made.  It's my first TB3 enabled Mac too (excluding MBPs which I don't attach anything to), having clung to my 2013 Mac Pro this long.  Daisy chaining with peripherals that have a second TB3 port, HDMI and DV has made this incredibly easy to extend too.

    BTW OT but my Mac Pro 2013 now has Sierra and High Sierra as well as Catalina partitions and I can state that it runs very cool in Sierra and High Sierra but even just sitting there with nothing running it is cooking temperature in Catalina.  I find this very interesting.
    edited December 2019
  • Reply 78 of 88
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,405member
    gbdoc said:

    Sure, the Mac Pro’s a really great whiz-bang machine, and Apple and those who need and can afford it can celebrate. But if Apple can make that, why don’t they make great whiz-bang Macs for the rest of us - as they obviously could? The new MBP goes in that direction, but not far enough, and the rest of the line is simply disappointing.

    I may have partially agreed but I totally disagree now I have actually tried the 27" Mac i9 and upgraded GPU and RAM.  Do yourself a favor and check one out.
  • Reply 79 of 88
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 23,252member
    MacPro said:
    gatorguy said:
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  
    sdw2001 said:
    I don't get the complaints.  This is clearly a workstation-grade Mac, something that has barely existed or not existed for a long time.  It's for A/V professionals, game designers, people who are heavily into CGI, etc.  Apple ignored this market for a long time, at least since the 2013 Mac Pro was introduced.  It's not for "pros" in other fields for the most part.  It's not a prosumer machine.  I myself have been a prosumer user.  I'm an educator in the arts, and need to do more than most people do with my hardware.  But this isn't something I would remotely need.  For the record, I think the new machine is absolutely awesome.  

    Topping out at a reported $50K or thereabouts it certainly is NOT intended for prosumers. The market for these is niche and quite specialized IMO. 
    "These are not the Macs you are looking for" would be the normal answer unless dedicated to professional video production, and/or special effects, or certain engineering/modeling/scientific needs.
    Agreed. I would have bought one or more of these a few years ago for my TV production business in a heartbeat but after facing the reality that I am retired and just 'play' these days I came to a decision. I could afford one but decided it was just plain daft to get one however much I'd love one. Once I made that painful decision I studied iMacs long and hard as I have never owned one. I ended up buying the 27" iMac 5K i9 with the upgraded GPU and 8 GB RAM plus 64 GB of third party RAM to stick in myself.  Even the iMac Pro seemed overkill for my needs. I kept my 2013 Mac Pro and it is now a dedicated and very capable Logic Pro X set up. I am loving the iMac and the 5K screen is stunning. I have no regrets.  I'd love to have a play around with the new Mac Pro though.   I did buy the Sony 200-600m G lens with some of the money I saved :)
    The lens was a wise purchase IMHO. You'll get a lot more use out if it than an 6K+ Mac Pro when you can buy well spec'd Macs for less, perhaps even more powerful than the Mac Pro entry model. 

    PM me what you think of that lens now that you have it in hand too.
    edited December 2019
  • Reply 80 of 88
    pakitt said:
    This new Mac Pro is for “Pixar”, and the such. By that I mean the true professionals out there that need all this “beef” to do whatever they need that an iMac Pro cannot do. And have the money for it. 

    I am more interested about people like “NASA”: will macOS be the right OS to support their needs? An OS that is anything but “Pro” and hardly has a Finder fit for the 21st century?...

    Although based on Unix, macOs is far from being a Linux-like OS.... 

    Do you dive into Terminal at all? macOS is right on par with any Linux system out there. I use Mac for my web development and Ubuntu Linux for my deployment (10 servers). Nearly identical experiences on both platforms. Same tools available.

    I definitely agree that Finder needs a serious overhaul!


    edited December 2019
Sign In or Register to comment.