That makes my guess of a 6-month window from announcement to shipping seem reasonable then.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Chances of a modular Mac Pro update at WWDC?
- Thread starter whitedragon101
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That makes my guess of a 6-month window from announcement to shipping seem reasonable then.
doneCrater the sales of a 4 year old machine that has seen no updates? Crater relative to what? It is already really bad hence the defacto price cut 12 months ago. ( move higher specs down to lower prices). With the release of the iMac Pro sales probably tanked even more. I seriously doubt Apple is even making any new Mac Pros at this point.
The most of the customers who bought a Mac Pro 2013 the iMac Pro 2017 is the replacement. Apple hinted in april 2017, pre-release demo WWDC 2017 , sold in Dec 2017. That's done. For that subset of the Mac Pro market a replacement is already out. Apple hasn't completely pulled the MP 2013 model yet, but it is kind of in the same state as the iPod Touch. Comatose.
There already were "fire sales" on the Mac Pro during last Black Friday / Cyber Monday windows last Holiday sales season. Highly doubtful there are that many to "clear out" at this point.
I suspect they may do another small meeting thing. Technically they have already announced the end of the line for the current Mac Pro form factor. So don't need the "end of the line" announcement the WWDC 2013 was for the older format. However, due to the high visibility I think they are going to have major problems keeping this secret. I don't think it will be WWDC , but October is probably too late for a "reveal". If the new system has slots for internal 3rd party cards at some point some of those vendors are going to get looped in to the beta hardware. As the beta groups gets bigger and biggers the leak is going to bust. Plus there are ton of impatient people at this point.
while the name is the same in large sense it will be a 'new' product they haven't done before if is a somewhat of a merge between the 2013 and previous designs. ( boxy but thunderbolt and T2 (apple boot disk) and perhaps some other things. ). New products Apple never have produced before often get a preview intro.
That would be odd. 2nd half of 2018 there will be fixed versions of the Intel W ( article is about Xeon SP but the W models are derivative die from those so fixes to the x86 core's designed shared by both will hit Intel W also.) https://www.macrumors.com/2018/03/15/intel-8th-gen-processors-spectre-meltdown-fix/
There is a minor speed and memory capacity bump in these fixed processors too. Plus it is more time for some kind of GPU upgrade also. Release in June (or before ) and likely won't get updates in Decemeber-Febuary when all of the other competitive workstations get their Intel W updates.
Additionally, giving macOS team time to finish off eGPU this Spring-Summer should leave the Mac Pro in a more solid position later in the Fall as would have a more full focus of those graphics stack teams mid-Summer through release on macOS 10.14. Rushing to get hardware out the door with flakey software isn't going to help them. ( also macOS folks probably busy with 6 core 8th gen updates for WWDC. ). Given that Apple is trying to both get the 10.14 beta ready for WWDC and probably doing other Mac hardware upgrades in the June-July window I think Apple would probably want to put the Mac Pro in a cleaner windows. ( its target started off being 10.14 as a release point. )
The T2 was quirky in getting updates. All those teething problems should be flushed out before push the Mac Pro out the door.
Problem for Apple is that they'd probably have a small scale riot if they wait that long. The folks who skipped the MP 2013 ( the primary target audience) have been waiting since 2013 for something while sitting on an almost 10 year old machine. That's five years of waiting on aging stuff. The MP 2009-2010 are on the Vintage list. Those folks are sitting on unsupported hardware (and not going to get macOS 10.14). The 2012 models probably will go on the Vintage list in October too. It would be very prudent for Apple to tell those folks there was a concrete path before putting their system on Vintage status ( been done for the 2009's but Apple knows there are lots of folks 'cheating' with the firmware upgrade hack)
If Intel's schedule of when they are going to be firmly committed to shipping the fixed Intel W is presented to Apple in late June or July they and the other components all have solid schedules then they should announce. If they get early commits in May (and production can start in Nov-Dec) then they can do WWDC. A 4-6 month window in advance would help them a lot since they have screwed up so badly with keeping the "Mac Pro" product up to date. Apple has blown a huge amount of trust. They need to build that back up by doing something. A super "cheap' way of doing that is to preview and then release the exact same thing ( "we will deliver in December. Then deliver in December"). That isn't a cure for the trust problem, but it would be a start.
My problem with Apple doing a bunch of other Macs and Phones around the same time is that Apple doesn't seem to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Their ability to upgrade the whole Mac line up concurrently seems completely broken.
I think everything seems to have gone out the window with Matthew Panzarino's revelation about a 2019 release date for the MMP. There's a Macrumors story and comment thread already.
[doublepost=1522946371][/doublepost]Plenty of speculation ahead about the MMP but this gives a chance for a second generation iMac Pro to hoover up more sales - FaceID, next gen Vega and Kaby Lake Xeon being top of that list I guess.
[doublepost=1522946371][/doublepost]Plenty of speculation ahead about the MMP but this gives a chance for a second generation iMac Pro to hoover up more sales - FaceID, next gen Vega and Kaby Lake Xeon being top of that list I guess.
Honestly, I wrote that before looking at a link to this just now posted recently in another thread.
"....
I was given the day’s first piece of news: the long-awaited Mac Pro update will not arrive before 2019. ..."
https://techcrunch.com/2018/04/05/apples-2019-imac-pro-will-be-shaped-by-workflows/
So WWDC announcement? Yeah probably zero chance at this point with that update.
As alluded to not really surprising. Good chance the Intel W updates are going to slide into 2019 due to much higher than usual upgrades of Xeon SP systems to fixed hardware solution. Many big data cloud data centers are going to want to dump those broken SPs with fixed ones without the software kludge fix. That will push the Intel W out as the fab will be quite busy with SP.
P.S. further down in the article
"... Or, it can choose to engage in a meaningful way with pros on their actual workflows and ingest their pain points as actionable intel that helps them head off issues before they become headlines or Medium posts or viral Twitter threads. That’s what the Pro Workflow Team is all about. ..."
I think the main point is to do smaller things on a more frequent basis rather than engage in once in a while dog and pony show spectacle events. Focusing on WWDC hype waves is wrong solution for the customers to keep hyping on also.
Last edited:
(not so) shocking, a trickle before NAB 2018...
https://www.macrumors.com/2018/04/05/apples-revamped-mac-pro-to-launch-in-2019/
https://www.macrumors.com/2018/04/05/apples-revamped-mac-pro-to-launch-in-2019/
Last edited:
That deepens on what part of 2019 they are talking about. There is decent chance the second generation iMac Pro doesn't see release before 2019 also. If the iMac Pro and Mac Pro both upgrade in January-March time frame then iMac Pro won't be in front of the Mac Pro. They'd probably have the same CPU upgrade from what the current iMac Pro uses. Intel W or next gen Vega availability in relatively large volume numbers still has a decent chance of sliding into early 2019 (or at least very late 2018 which means the factories would start extremely late so not get to sufficient numbers to ship until early 2019.).
I agree in going through the article that Apple is not going to hold back the iMac Pro ( more MBP ) in any extra way to clear out room for the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is going to have to compete for what is "left over" from the rest of the line up. They'll minimize GPU differences as much as they can and then what is left over the Mac Pro could cover.
However, I think Apple also needs time to figure out how to price the Mac Pro and iMac Pro to minimize fratricide between the too. So they need to measure a "normal" iMac Pro market and that carefully insert the Mac Pro relatively close to that. [ I think the iMac Pro is priced too high, but how many folks bolt to the 6 core iMac is also an unknown at this point. ]
I don't think they are artificially holding the Mac Pro back though just for the iMac Pro. They do appear to not be able to walk and chew gum at the same time. Minor bumps to the iMac Pro allows them time to work new Mac Pro. If the hardware overlaps more than a bit it is a "kill two birds with one stone" move. ( if new CPU and new Vega are just respectively socket and ball grid compatible upgrades then iMac Pro doesn't need much work; minor firmware bump.)
However, if the Mac Pro doesn't appear until the last half of 2019.... Then Apple is deeply lost in the weeds. That's relatively inexcusable even with their inability to walk and chew gum at the same time limitation.
It's a fair call to suggest that rev B iMac Pro appears at the same time as a 2019 Modular Mac Pro, but anything longer than an annual refresh of some sort will make professionals very twitchy. Imagine the grousing when a full year passes by with no refresh of any type.
There's many things that Apple could do to differentiate between iMac Pro and Modular Mac Pro.
More powerful GPU than the iMac Pro, perhaps even using a traditional PCIe 3.0 x16 card.
More powerful CPU, but I think dual CPU systems might not be an option for Apple.
Internal drive bays - for 2.5" drives
Lots of Thunderbolt 3 ports
All within a more cooling powerful solution more able to keep the system quiet too
I'd never buy another iMac. Not worth the money. The lack of air flow in the housing is so poorly designed, all of the ones at my old office cooked their screens into a yellowed tinge with water stain like blemishes on them.
2019 launch it is then. October looks like the earliest possible preview of what a 'modular' Mac Pro means. I doubt we'll hear anything about it at WWDC.
That's common in the Xeon E5 and SP space. Intel hasn't rolled on 12 month upgrades in the server targeted CPUs in ever since they switch over to the "E5" naming system.. The chipsets typically sat on the same iteration for an entire tick/tock cycle.
It is happens to Intel SP (and likely Intel W) in roughly 12 months in late 2018-2019 largely because of two abnormal events. One the Meltdown/Spectre stuff. Two, Intel is stuck on process. It is almost the same exact process tech 14nm++ (maybe 14nm+++ whatever negligible thing that is) and the exact same microarchitecture. The average for E5 was over 12 months. This isn't the desktop/mainstream stuff. It is the sever stuff that goes through longer and deeper QA before release. Few folks really wants yearly updates in the server space. 14-18 for an average range is an expectation that is closer matched to the reality of this product space for Intel. ( big die GPU aren't that much better than that. there is more rebadging and hocus pocus to make it look like it isn't, but it is roughly in the same boat. )
When Intel hits a micro architectural change step in the cycle it is extremely likely going to be longer than 12 months. Shrinking primarily the same implementation down can more easily fit in a 12 month cycle ( presuming that the process shrink works. ). Where they have to extend the stay on a process size for a long time.... Apple may/may not skip some of those if the relatively minor tweaks don't make much difference.
The iMac and iMac Pro aren't going to move at the same rate because they are using substantively different product line in terms of CPU SKU.
They don't really need a more powerful one. One that isn't being substantively underclocked could be a 15-30% boost in performance. Two would be a doubling of performance for apps that scale close to linear. 1.5x for those that scale a bit less than that. Couple that 15% + 50% together and there is a very sizable difference.
the iMac's are slightly clocked down but that is a trade-off the Turbo isn't tuned down that much and the base difference is very incremental. if Intel will give a Apple a bigger discount if they buy more of there "custom tuned" ones then those would probably get shared. If just buying in the Xeon W class is good enough then just use the 'regular' W products but 'more powerful" is a bit of an oversell. It isn't going to be a huge cap.
Thermal management though can be a player here. If the Mac Pro has bigger, overcapacity coolers the Mac Pro could run on longer jobs at higher rates even if the even hotter GPU(s) are also running full blast. the Mac Pro could also handle crappier external environments (e.g., being put into a box that is only "good enough" ventilated. )
For the new relatively large capacity, but super duper expensive 2.5" SSD drives? For 2.5" HDD and older/much cheaper but significantly slower SSDs. I'm not sure Apple would go there. If looking to put a major capacity gab (at reasonable prices) between an iMac Pro single drive and a Mac Pro with 10's of TB then 3.5" is a gap maker. (adapter goes down to 2.5").
For 2.5" that cap out at 2-4GB there is probably going to be a bet those could get covered by an SSD.
More than four TBv3 on any system gets into the point of diminishing returns. More than the iMac Pro won't help. Apple would probably make more folks happier with more than four USB Type A ports ( e.g. add two Type A to the front. or perhaps a Type A and a Type C USB only on front ) than more TBv3 ports.
More than four TBv3 ports as an attempt to get rid of mDP and/or HDMI ports is very bad idea. Trying to get rid of all of the USB Type-A ports for TBv3 is also bluster for no good reason. The iMac Pro isn't lesser because it has four Type-A ... it is probably better off.
More that four in some kind of port pissing match versus an MBP 15" is kind of loopy. The laptop is going to "loose" one to power. So four is already bigger than three.
Again quieter than a iMac Pro shouldn't be a metric. Quieter than a 2010 Mac Pro would be sufficient. (trying to surpass, or even match, the MP 2013 would be also a dubious move. Multiple fans and bigger power curve makes that hard. If throw in a HDD than likely toast on that front. )
In the absence of a predictable update cycle based on hardware, then, perhaps there should be something else on that annual track - other spec bump (eg RAM, storage),
We know there won't be a published roadmap from Apple but there are things they can do to keep professionals interested. They can't afford to be seen to be neglecting expensive top of the line hardware. Thanks to the halo effect they have a pronounced effect on sales of the rest of the range.
Any sustained radio silence regarding will only bring doubt to professionals. The 2012 was a misstep, the 2013 was a major error. They can't afford to lose the trust of the professionals .
As you say, a Modular Mac Pro shouldn't have to cope with the compromises that the iMac Pro has. If the case design can be made to work for longer at 'full pelt' AND without sounding like a jet engine that's good.
With music being a strong player here in the absence of a full photographic workflow I'd say silence is a USP that certain configurations of the Modular Mac Pro will have to meet. Those configurations may also interest professionals who need silence users and those desktop users who really value silence.
Musicians in studios may beg to differ - remember they are mentioned as part of the 'workflow' consultation. And they will be demanding something with decent compute power and SSD but silent with it.
The keyword there is predictable. If apple got to a predicatble 18-24 month cycle that would be fine since the major aren't changing any faster than that anyway. Plus the customers are not buying at rate anyway. Customers have been trending from 3-4 out into 5-7 year cycles. Apple churning out upgrades that 50% of the folks who used have a shorter upgrade cycle don't buy isn't going to cause them to buy. They are buying less no matter what Apple does.
Apple could do something like "lavaish" attention to the iMac Pro in even years and then switch to the Mac Pro in odd years and cycle those two in a tick/tock pattern. There would be yearly activity. Likewise if making their own video cards then dropping a new card and augmenting the BTO every 18 months would work too.
It is not professionals. The professionals in the rest of the Mac line up greatly outnumber the ones who require a Mac Pro. Apple can afford it. They are affording it now with no extreme top end option.
Apple doesn't need to be "too small". It would be useful to have a broader base in case there are unexpected hiccups. A Mac Pro with a PCI-e slot would help lift the eGPU options for the other Macs ( and vice versa). There is synergistic effects that would be helpful, if not essential.
if look at the tech specs for the old Mac Pro it is actually pretty decent.
in the sub 40 db and if toss out the noisy spinning disks substantially lower.
https://support.apple.com/kb/SP589?viewlocale=en_US&locale=en_US
The the CD is toast. It won't be there. The HDDs might be too. The problem with generic PCI-e slots is that can't really control what kind of noise maker someone puts in. However, for segregated studio control room it wouldn't be that bad.
Folks who want to put the Mac Pro in the recording area can do what was done with the older Mac Pro and put it into a box for dampening. Even the MP 2013 is in the "rustling leaves" to "whispering" range. If need almost zero db then need some kind of larger mechanical damping anyway.
Now a dampening box is not a lazy excuse to let the noise level rise. This will be placed near people who don't have hypersensitve mics placed nearby far more often that corner case.
That's where Apple could go wrong. Some kind of contest where every single metric of all previous Mac has to be bettered for it be "good enough" to be a Mac Pro. If there was a straight linear line from the 2010 model to this one that might have merit but the 2013 model went out of its way to be extreme on a few dimensions. Trying to out do it could both paint Apple into the same corner (already covered by the iMac Pro) and/or add tons of time to the development schedule ( the system is going to be at least 5 years late for many user's perspective.)
Incrementally beating the 2010 model's db level is a decent challenge if use the same number of fans. ( the 2013's singular fan is going to be extremely tough to beat. The issue is that going to need more than one. )
It's a difficult tightrope for Apple to walk after the 2013 nMP debacle. It feels as though another misstep will be the end for Apple as far as their credibility among high end compute users is concerned.
On the other hand, since Sandy Bridge it's fair to say that Intel CPUs have stagnated either through R&D difficulties with the process shrink or lack of competition from AMD. Apple have asked for and got Iris Graphics which are evolving towards lower powered CPUs rather than being a fixture in more powerful desktop CPUs since desktop buyers tend towards buying their own discrete GPU. The extra cores available in the Coffee Lake series were prompted by the impact of Ryzen while Apple have decided that GPU development is outpacing the incremental increases offered by Intel's CPUs in recent years.
Perhaps a refresh of the GPU every year with a CPU improving every 18-24 months might be a compromise worth having if the implicit understanding was made clear.
That would be acceptable if Apple allowed journalists to 'conclude' that was the way ahead.
Ironically, one scenario where hardware doesn't change for years and that's ok by the people who buy it is in the games console arena. A single standardised piece of kit such as the Playstation is released and doesn't change spec for years (Roughly 6 years for each incarnation if we're using the Playstation as an example). People don't really complain that Sony don't release a speed bumped version every year because the price drifts downwards at regular intervals throughout the lifetime of the console while the software keeps coming. It could be called a loss leader as Sony control the software that goes on that console while charging a cut through the Playstation Store. Sound familiar?
With the much mooted move to A series CPUs coming could we see a switch to exclusive delivery for software in the games category by Mac App Store for A series macOS devices and Apple takes a cut of revenue? We see how powerful games on the iPads are, how about testing the water with a low cost device to replace low end Mac Mini SKUs to test the water? Of course that's a discussion for another thread, not one where we're valuing silence for users who either really need it or subjectively want it.