Macocalypse

cloudguy said:

I can't believe that I am actually defending Apple products from Apple fans on an Apple site but here we are. But if you are going to get upset over stuff like this: well Windows and ChromeOS beckon. You can run all the Android apps you want on a Chromebook or Chromebox, and with BlueStacks and its competitors running Android apps on Windows is easy too. 

This, Also..

 I have been an Apple user for a while now (my first Apple product was an Apple //c). And let me tell you, Apple has NEVER been big on having an open platform. The Apple //c had almost zero internal upgrade options.  The first Mac was not really upgradeable, used proprietary screws, and could probably kill you if you don't know CRT safety. Apple has been working for decades to keep people from running their software on something other than the specified Hardware/Platform (See 5 Clones  The updates to stop Hackintosh and Jailbraking, etc.).  I tried making a Hackintosh once and stopped because the whole point of a Mac and macOS is the ease of use and benefits of a tightly integrated design.  When I jailbroke my first iPhone it became an unstable mess. I have a PC I built for gaming, and I have VMs to run various versions of Linux, Android for x86, and other OSes so I can get my micro managing fix.

The point I'm trying to make is...just stop, stop it please. Stop trying to make Apple products into something they never were intended to be. Stop complaining about trying to run software that isn't optimized and will give you a crappy user experience.  The "features" you keep thinking you want would destroy the current experience you have and make it as buggy, and as cumbersome to use as Android/Windows.  Apple is doing quite well financially without these "features" you are asking for. Which means you are either a very small portion of the user base, or you don't take advantage of the option to use Apple's own official feedback channels. If there truly is a massive segment of the Mac user base that wants theses so called "features", and they actually took the time and provided that feedback, Apple might take it into consideration. Keep in mind that they aren't obligated to make those changes (especially if it violates existing distribution and licensing deals). When you buy a Mac or an app you are buying a license for the use of the software, not the exclusive rights to do whatever the heck you want with the software and it's source code, that has never been the case with software licensing (unless its open source).  If that's unacceptable, then there are other platforms. 

I don't understand the surprise and outrage over something that has been Apple's MO for decades. Don't act like you have been violated when Apple makes a change to something that clearly was never intended to be a "feature" in the first place. 

retrogusto said:

A 10% weight reduction seems like a lot to hope for, but it would be enough to make a noticeable difference in everyday use (and even when you’re just carrying it around and not using it), more than an ultrawide camera, a processor speed upgrade or smaller bezels. Plus, titanium looks great.

Heavy is good, heavy is reliable. If it doesn't work you can always hit them with it.

slow n easy said:

There is absolutely nothing wrong with what Tesla is doing,…

If you ever want to know if a Muskovite is in the room just say something negative about Tesla.

AniMill said:

The death of the Mac Pro has started. The Mac Studio was always meant to become the content creators’ workhorse. Shame. How cool would a render beast be with multiple video cards. But really, who needs so much local render power any longer - web render farms have become so cheap that keeping up your own farm simply isn’t worth it.

Then why the hell would apple have spent the time and money to integrate the M2 Ultra into it? It does the equivalent off 7 afterburner cards as is. Its not cheap to spend R&D money to design these devices. You are also forgetting Audio cards, high speed networking, Internal SSD space.. etc etc.  In the future try and think just a tiny bit more before typing it into a forum post.

mikethemartian said:

saarek said:

I'm not the target market for this machine, so am not bothered. But I don't really see why anyone would buy this over an M2 Ultra Studio? I had assumed that Apple would have an M2 Ultra Max, or something, that really pushes the envelope for the Mac Pro and justified its existence...

Probably for people who need a portable rig where all the main connections are inside and don’t have to be disconnected and reconnected every time it is moved.

Off the top of my head you could add a dual 100GBe card, 8x4TB PCIe 4th gen SSDs, and still have 16x PCIe lanes left over. And thats just internal I/O, it still has the same amount of external I/O as the MacStudio on top of all

kendog52404 said:

I actually could see, in the future, there being an option for additional "Apple GPUs" Cards, to increase video memory capability.  I mean, the current gen is apparently enough for even 8K Video, but as video needs increase, I can easily see them offering it as an option.  I'm not talking about an Nvidia or AMD graphics package add-on, but an Apple based GPU add-on, which would also ease software and driver support.

Or a card that is just a bunch of neural engine cores. The only issue i can think of is at the additional physical distance from the SoC you start to deal with additional latency in nano seconds. Speed of light is only so fast.


s.metcalf said. 

DOA.  Nuff said.

To paraphrase Q from ST:TNG "Oh very good S.Metcalf, eat any good books lately"

Because porn has NEVER been used as a vector for malware.

Though the servers won't have a high speed type-C IO controller because its been....thunderstruck.

slow n easy said:

All I have to say about it is that it’s got a pretty cool code-name.

planetary paul said:

Surely, these tests are performed as soon as the devices first appear and not after several years. What's the conspiracy here?

Most likely they are, and don't call me Shirley.

Though I don't think applying 33.333% more voltage to the battery than recommended by the manufacture is a very good idea. Having said that iFixit has had a poor track record when it comes to following manufacture safety procedures for embedded batteries and power supplies.