Last Active
  • Not every Mac Pro is assembled in Texas

    Interesting discussion, but that  imho miss the important point: if Apple use at least two factories to build them, it means they expect to sell quite a lot of them.
  • Apple gets FCC approval for Mac Pro tower, and rack-mount version

    ITGUYINSD said:
    What would one be doing when rack mounting it?  It doesn't have a true server operating system, but a server app (with minimal functionality at that) which runs on top of macOS.

    With racks typically down the hall and in a secure room, how would one use one of these?

    None ever said (other then this articole) that it was proposed as a server; it is just a new Mac Pro with a rack mountable enclosure. In place where racks are used, it may be convenient to have three or four of them mounted in a rack, may be with video equipement, huge raids, and so on.
  • Editorial: Will Apple's $6k+ Mac Pro require brainwash marketing to sell?

    madan said:
    You know, come to think of it.  You could get an iMac Pro, with 64 GB of RAM, a base Xeon, more storage and a Vega 56, stone the base Mac Pro over the head and it STILL COMES WITH A 5K LG MONITOR BUILT IN.  How nuts is that?

    Sure it doesn't come with support with 12 TB 3 lanes but srsly, you're probably not going to need that.  A base Xeon wouldn't be able to handle that throughput anyways.  So honestly, the iMac Pro is a better deal because in 5-6 years you just buy another iMac Pro and you get a whole new system, PLUS A WHOLE NEW MONITOR, to boot, for the same price.  Like I said, the Mac Pro only makes "sense" once you start cracking the 20,000 USD threshold. Once you start putting in gpus and cpu configurations that can handle the crazy bandwidth and performance than an iMac Pro just can't touch. But the base system? A Vega 56 is 30% faster than the Mac Pro's base Radeon 580.  And the system costs LESS and BRINGS  A MONITOR.
    No, i do not think you get what a new Mac Pro is.
    I have a Mac Pro 2009 running in my home studio; in 2009, i paid 3000 euros for it; it had Sata 2, USB 2, a few hard disk, and a GT120 graphic card, and an 8 core double cpu running at 2.16 Ghz. The lowest possible end.
    Today, it run with nvme SSD, has USB3, an RX580, and two 6 core 3.4Ghz CPU, and it still current.

    All this was massively less expensive than buying the 3 iMac that has become obsolete in the same timeframe.

    The Mac Pro is a PCI machine; it is evolutive, that is the whole point; of course, the stellar point is when you spend more than 20K$, but it fully make sense in
    a context where needs and gains evolve.

    But as of today, if i had the kind of needs and money, i wouldn't buy an iMac Pro, i would buy a new Mac Pro, low end, and let it evolve in base of my needs; it would
    be massively less expensive, and upgradable to technologies that today not yet exists, like USB4. In ten years from now it would be still useful.
    An iMac Pro bought today, before a refresh, will be obsolete in about 3 years, and not upgradable.

    Anyway, the point about the Mac Pro, as many poster said here, it is not a machine for gamers, it is not a machine for the masses; it is a machine for those that need it; they will reconise it.


  • Apple is using a custom connector for the SSD in the new Mac Pro

    davgreg said:
    This gives me reason to pause on ordering one of these.

    As much as I want to have a headless desktop Mac that (hopefully) will have a long service life, Apple's propensity for proprietary connectors and stuff is a serious concern. I want to see the thing for myself and see what aftermarket stuff will be possible as Apple charges a king's ransom for memory on everything it sells.

    Well, the only actual limit is for the first SSD you buy; but nobody forbid to install a 20$ nvme PCIE card with a Samsung SSD and use it a system disk; you have plenty of PCI slot on the Mac Pro.
    There are also hyper fast nvme Raid Cards that use 16 PCI lanes and give stellar performance; you are really not limited to the proprietary SSD in machine like this.
    I mean, i agree that it just make no sense, but in practice is hardly a problem, if you have the need and the money for a machine like this one.
  • Apple's new Mac Pro internal components - answers and lingering questions [u]

    There is absolutely no sign of movement in the Nvidia thing since we talked about it a few months ago.
    Yes, but the important thing here is that is a OS/political issue; there is nothing in the hardware that prevent using Nvidia card if the two companies
    get their act together.