MP All Models 2023 Mac Pro! [MERGED]

[theluggage]

Where are their sales? The iPhones and iPads. Really.

Not sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing here, but the point is that the Mac Pro is NOT, and has never been Apple's halo product. Its now a niche product for people who'd be happy with a Mac Studio if they could just connect a couple of specialist PCIe cards (not GPUs) to it. Even the 2019 was of zero interest to anybody who wasn't already committed to Mac.

Looking at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halo_effect#Marketing the first example cited is the iPod.

For the modern Apple, the iPod and subsequently iPhone are the "halo" product. Before that, the original iMac. Before that, we're back to a different Apple that pioneered desktop publishing and was a major force in nonlinear video editing - but even then I'd argue that the "halo product" was the classic Mac, not (say) something high-end like the Mac IIfx.

Now, I think, Apple are betting the farm on Vision Pro being the next halo product.

Another "halo" candidate is Apple Silicon - and the showcase for that is probably the MacBook Air or maybe the Mac Studio where it offers a lot of processing power in a small, low-powered package. Apple Silicon lets Apple build everything from an iPad to a Studio Ultra (plus their goggles) out of just two underlying dies (Mx and Mx Max).

The new Mac Pro is getting a distinctly "meh" reaction because it is nothing to write home about compared to a Threadripper tower with multiple NVIDIA or AMD high-end GPUs because it's not the ideal use of Apple Silicon technology. The alternative would have been for Apple to sink a huge amount of investment into an ARM-based Xeon/Threadripper contender just for the Mac Pro. They've never put that much into a Mac Pro before - Apart from the Trashcan they were just Xeon towers with - in the case of the 2019 - some nice PCIe plumbing refinements.

 

[mastermamo]

Didn't see that coming, With the new M2 Ultra chip.

I saw it the day they launched the Mac Pro. They could have easily slotted the M2 into it but didn't...deliberately. And now they laugh it with the M2 Ultra. They recovered the cost of the R&D and now the early adopters are sitting with a Mac Pro that costs a fortune which have half the power of the new one. Its the rip off of the century excluding the ridiculously priced Vision Pro which will after months of release be released with a new version ....again

 

[mastermamo]

The M2 Ultra Mac Studio is not much cheaper than the Mac Pro

Both are ridiculously priced and keep it out of reach of the average consumer.

 

[mattspace]

OK, makes sense. So your 'eyes' shown at the front are via a display or some type of mirror?

It's, and I might be wrong, something like an LG LookingGlass 3D display. So it's a display panel which holds a 3D view so as you move around the headset, you see a different angle of the projected face.

 

[mastermamo]

It's, and I might be wrong, something like an LG LookingGlass 3D display. So it's a display panel which holds a 3D view so as you move around the headset, you see a different angle of the projected face.

The front display as seen by someone looking at you wearing the headset is actually another LED screen that shows your face as the cameras see you. Clever for future application use but the development cost almost triples because of this

 

[Jethro!]

Mac Studio without PCIe slots get refreshed in less than 1.3yrs while a Mac Pro with PCIe slots gets refreshed every ~4 years in the last decade?

With AS Mac Pro expect a refresh in sync with the Mac Studio.

"Refresh" here means throw it away. Buy a new one.
Disposable computers are not "Pro." Not what we want or asked for. No sale.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Flawed logic. Original iMac is a great example. There was a lot of demand to still have a floppy drive and almost no demand for USB. Yet we lost the former and got the latter.

Once again, somehow, some way, they managed to provide a well-rounded machine w/ PCIe slots for just a few hundred $$ more than a MacBook Pro 15" back around 2010. You can defend it all you want, but I assure you that jacking up the price another $1000 on top of an already-outrageous $6000 sticker (while simplifying and removing capability) when I could pick up pretty much any PC anywhere for under $1000 TOTAL and get slots is unreasonable and not the result of Apple not gearing up to cater to everyone...it's just faulty logic and greed.

I would bet there's so much pent-up demand for a Mac Pro like the "good old days" where enthusiasts and pros alike could get their hands on a nicely expandable and powerful system at a reasonable price that their "business model" would be set on its ear if they were to make it and price it that way.

Now do the the cube. Now do the trashcan. Yea, apple f’s up too. This is one of those.

 

[mattspace]

The front display as seen by someone looking at you wearing the headset is actually another LED screen that shows your face as the cameras see you. Clever for future application use but the development cost almost triples because of this

Yes, it's rendering the 3D scan of the wearer's face that's used for Facetime calls, and taking expression cues from the internal eye-tracking cameras. BUT, if you move to the side of the wearer, you see a different angle on the face, as you would moving around their real head - that's what LookingGlass displays do.

 

[mattspace]

"Refresh" here means throw it away. Buy a new one.
Disposable computers are not "Pro." Not what we want or asked for. No sale.

And the secondhand market, which for so long sustained higher prices of new machines because you could sell your old one to finance the new, is going to collapse because Apple is getting more aggressive about ending OS support, and importantly Security Updates at a faster pace.

 

[Longplays]

"Refresh" here means throw it away. Buy a new one.
Disposable computers are not "Pro." Not what we want or asked for. No sale.

A complaint among Mac Pro users is that it gets refreshed in 2013, 2019 and now 2023.

Now they'll likely get it every in less than 1.3 years.

Why would anyone throw away their Mac after a year's use? Apple expects macOS devices to be replaced in 4 years time. Intel by 5-6 years.

Apple provides macOS Software Updates up to 8 years and Security Updates up to an additional 2 years. Making it a nearly decade of support.

Replace that Mac with a model after the final Security Update for another decade of use.

Also, you can hand me down the Mac or sell it. The difference would be made up by the jobs you did with it.

 

[jasonmvp]

Not sure if I'm agreeing or disagreeing here, but the point is that the Mac Pro is NOT, and has never been Apple's halo product.

Agreeing. You literally said the same thing I did, just in a different way.

 

[Longplays]

And the secondhand market, which for so long sustained higher prices of new machines because you could sell your old one to finance the new, is going to collapse because Apple is getting more aggressive about ending OS support, and importantly Security Updates at a faster pace.

Do you have any data to support this?

2013 Mac Pro is still supported by 2021 macOS Monterey. It received 12.6.6 19 days ago.

 

[theluggage]

If the 8,1 was just going to be an Ultra + slots, it's puzzling why it didn't get released last year. Perhaps:

They wanted to see how people reacted to the Studio, to decide whether there was a market for a "Studio with slots"?

I don't think a like-for-like replacement for the 2019 Mac Pro was ever on the cards - even the Extreme (the whole idea of which was geometrically challenging) wouldn't match it on RAM or satisfy the customers demanding AMD (or, better NVIDIA) GPUs (which would throw away all the advantages of integrated GPUs and unified memory).

It will be interesting to see a PCIe block diagram for the 8,1. The Ultra + slots option had been discounted by most, on the assumption that it wouldn't have sufficient PCIe lanes. Apple made no comment about the 8,1's I/O bandwidth, so it's probably nothing to write home about; the PLX switch is likely doing much of the heavy lifting.

This with bells on. Worst case it's two TB4-to-PCIe bridges (you can get TB4 enclosures with one x16 and two x8 slots - just don't ask about the bandwidth) in which case people are not going to be happy. Best case, the M2 Ultra has maybe 32 spare PCIe lanes we didn't know about. Even the 2019 couldn't offer full-width dedicated bandwidth to all of its slots at once.

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

With the ARM Mac Pro finally here, I'm officially putting "get a Mac Pro" on my bucket list (even though it's waaaaaaay too much computer for what I do and a Mac Studio would be a better fit, I want beeg)

 

[mastermamo]

"Refresh" here means throw it away. Buy a new one.
Disposable computers are not "Pro." Not what we want or asked for. No sale.

Apple can kiss my a$$.... I am keeping my 5.1

 

[Spaceboi Scaphandre]

Apple can kiss my a$$.... I am keeping my 5.1

You know I kinda want to take a Mac Pro 5.1 and turn it into a sleeper PC

 

[kvic]

Maybe it's time Apple put some younger people in charge.

The day who let go the Nuvia team a couple of years ago to retire, Apple may be able to go through some interesting changes.

I'm not saying the decision (not to do server chips) was terribly wrong. It made lots of sense business wise. To do server/workstation chips, Apple need to find new business that is able to grow well.

Apple was trying to build a chip with enough cpu and gpu cores that would make the machine worth the tradeoffs of not being able to upgrade the CPU or GPU. They failed to do so, delayed the product, then realized they couldn't produce the chip afterall and stuck the m2 Mac Studio chip in the machine instead. Then they released the product at the marketing-driven price point of $1000 more than the last model while glossing over it at the keynote knowing that the less they say the better.

In hindsight, the decision to delay Mac Pro for a year went not as planned. But that's because of TSMC's problem with N3 process I believe. If Apple was moderately confident N3 won't go well as planned, perhaps they would have announced with M1 Ultra and started shipping by the end of 2022 or early 2023.

Look at the giant M2 Ultra in Mac Pro a few pages back. M1 Extreme will be twice that size. This requires non trivial changes to component placements, and air flow design.

If you're going to spend a gigantic sum of money on a computer you're going to want to upgrade over its life... that's what the pro was designed for! Now it's even more expensive and you must max it out from the start because it's not upgradable later on... even a daughter card to change the processor would have been a good idea.

Socketed SoCs or single daughterboard of SoCs makes little sense for Apple. Apple isn't selling SoCs but they sell you a system (bundled with software).

Nevertheless, people can dream of Apple to start selling new insurance policies in a year or two. That is IMO Apple Store or authorized service providers offer motherboard upgrade for Mac Pro users. So that's a kind of upgrade to CPU, GPU, memory or storage by keeping Mac Pro chassis relative stable from 5 to 10 years.

 

[mattspace]

Do you have any data to support this?

No, just been at this for almost 30 years.

2013 Mac Pro is still supported by 2021 macOS Monterey. It received 12.6.6 19 days ago.

I expect that pattern to contract, and for Macs to become more like iPads in their usable longevity - in the past EVERY mac was a "maximum ram capable" mac, now the vast majority of machines will be lower-spec versions, so when you buy one, it will be under-equipped for modern workloads, and have no way to change that.

 

[mattspace]

Nevertheless, people can dream of Apple to start selling new insurance policies in a year or two. That is IMO Apple Store or authorized service providers offer motherboard upgrade for Mac Pro users. So that's a kind of upgrade to CPU, GPU, memory or storage by keeping Mac Pro chassis relative stable from 5 to 10 years.

Just wait till Obsolescence Taxes stat to come in, and companies have a sales tax added to their retail price based on the percentage of components that are soldered / glued. Framework is on the leading edge of this.

 

[mastermamo]

You know I kinda want to take a Mac Pro 5.1 and turn it into a sleeper PC

This is more than sufficient for me. I have 3

 

[Longplays]

No, just been at this for almost 30 years.

I've been on Macs since 2000 so I've seen it is lengthy considering PC replacement cycle in the 90s was pegged at every 3 years.

become more like iPads in their usable longevity

IIRC 2011 iPad 2 was supported for 100 months.

2017 iPad is still supported 74 months and counting. It has the potential of up to 88 months or longer.

Those are pretty lengthy when Apple expects it to be replaced every 3 years.

 

[Jethro!]

A complaint among Mac Pro users is that it gets refreshed in 2013, 2019 and now 2023.

Now they'll likely get it every in less than 1.3 years.

Why would anyone throw away their Mac after a year's use? Apple expects macOS devices to be replaced in 3 years time. Intel by 5-6 years.

Who says a year? A real "Pro" machine is UPGRADEABLE WHENEVER. This one is not.
Now when you've hit your performance ceiling your only option is to throw it away. Unacceptable for a "Pro" machine that starts at $7,000. It's rather insulting.

 

[Longplays]

Who says a year? A real "Pro" machine is UPGRADEABLE WHENEVER. This one is not.
Now when you've hit your performance ceiling your only option is to throw it away. Unacceptable for a "Pro" machine that starts at $7,000. It's rather insulting.

How about selling it and buying something newer/faster?

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

Who says a year? A real "Pro" machine is UPGRADEABLE WHENEVER. This one is not.

A 'pro' machine is one that enables a professional to do their job appropriately. Apple uses the phrase 'Pro' entirely as a marketing term, and whilst I don't agree with how they use it sometimes, it's still clear what demographic this machine is aimed at. Apple knows this relatively small market enough to satisfy their needs, and my guess is that they have direct relationships with the majority of these customers.

Now when you've hit your performance ceiling your only option is to throw it away. Unacceptable for a "Pro" machine that starts at $7,000. It's rather insulting.

$7,000 gets you a machine that is significantly more capable than the equivalent Intel version - even if you spent the extra money on the Intel machine to match the price.

Keep in mind the Intel 7,1 started with 32gb RAM and 256gb storage. Today you're getting double the RAM (the new RAM being unified, which performs better). So you can't upgrade yourself - do any of us have a source for how many users consider this a deal-breaker?

1TB of storage versus 256gb. No explanation needed.

Aa CPU that blows the Xeon out of the water and a very capable GPU. We don't have direct comparisons of the M2 Ultra versus W6800/6900, so this will be interesting.

It also continues to support PCIE cards, which was the main complaint on these forums (not that this is a particularly good gauge of interest).

We still don't know what the future holds for M3 or how Apple could potentially use the slots to add their own accelerator cards, so how about we just wait and see before writing it off?

 

[Jethro!]

How about selling it and buying something newer/faster?

Sell it to who? You?
How about making something upgradable? Ya know, like they did for DECADES.