proline

MacQuadra840av said:

jdb8167 said:

These still won't be processors for the Mac Pro or iMac Pro. Those are probably coming next year.

The Mac Pro will be using Intel chips for a few more years because Apple's M processor can't beat what is in the Mac Pro as far as memory, storage, features, and performance, especially the ability to run multiple VM environments.

Second, the iMac Pro is dead.  Apple hasn't done anything with it for four years.  It will likely be discontinued when Apple releases an iMac with hopefully a much better processor than the low end M1 chip.

Nonsense. The M1 beats the Mac Pro on single core performance by 50%. To beat the 28 core Mac Pro would require an 18 core version. That's doable. So is adding RAM. Yes, it may take until next year at the latest given the low priority, but not beyond that. 

As for the iMac Pro, it's definitely going to stick around. It has extremely high profit margins, or at least it will when they don't have to pay Intel anymore. And the chip from the Mac Pro will work in it just fine, perhaps with a few cores disabled.

saarek said:

I hope this isn’t true.

I’m hoping for a true performance king that humiliates AMD & Intel and sets the bar in terms of performance. Primarily GPU based upgrades over the M1 wouldn’t be the big step up in the true “Pro” Macs over the current M1 that I was hoping for.

Don't be silly. There is clearly a need for three chips:

M1 (MBA, small MBPs, iPads)

anantksundaram said:

But, quickly pivoting away from politics, it seems to me Apple’s HQ is destined to be stuck in CA forever. However, a lot of their incremental investments going forward may happen in places like Texas. 

That depends if its an actual space ship or not.

JamesBrickley said:

Apple PR wouldn't be a challenge.  Now Uber? Yeah, that's a challenge.  They have a soiled public image with serious challenges. 

Exactly. I gotta commend this person for going somewhere she has the opportunity to distinguish herself. 

Great artists ship!

- Steve Jobs