Yeah, I've asked a few people to show the data on their statements that they are passing off as factual. It usually leaves them stuttering for a reply. Usually recanting their previous statements after I call them on it. Or they try to deflect it back on me to prove it false...lol.
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.
Could the nMP have been discontinued?
- Thread starter xraydoc
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Yeah, I've asked a few people to show the data on their statements that they are passing off as factual. It usually leaves them stuttering for a reply. Usually recanting their previous statements after I call them on it. Or they try to deflect it back on me to prove it false...lol.
Who is passing anything off as fact? No one has any facts leading to their speculation. I think everyone has been clear no one knows what is going on...that's the problem. Yeah, I'm sure there are the occasional posters who claim to know facts. No one, well...maybe you, takes them seriously as everyone is fully aware there are no facts.
Also note the name of this web site. The key word be "Rumors" should be a dead giveaway.
Apparently the ones who state these facts takes them seriously even though we know they are just opinions. Rumors are speculation, but some people go beyond speculation and are stating them as facts, as you said yourself.
FWIW, Apple has a history of introducing new models/major upgrades when several key technologies reach inflection points. I have also speculated that they are waiting for Kaby Lake as it appears to offer a more direct link from TB3 to the CPU, which I would expect to be a better topology for eGPU support. Does that suggest we are still a year or more away from a 7,1 MP? Perhaps. Will there be any pro users left on the platform in 2018? A few diehards, sure - but enough to make it commercially successful...
From a broader perspective, what slice of the market sits between the rMBP/iMac level and racks of heavy iron? Let's call the HP840Z an example of a workstation that fits that niche. Best case scenario, if Apple came out tomorrow with a MacPro that matched the grunt of the HP840Z and ran OS X, how many would they sell? If that number is too low, the rest of the discussion is moot. Shoehorning anything close to that level of muscle into the 6,1 form factor would likely take engineering breakthroughs beyond the rosiest of expectations.
Many on these forums have noted the fundamental problem of creating a 450 watt envelope that can support "pro" use cases. Process shrink might eventually make that easy peasy - but unless there are significant new developments at the chip foundries, that's still several years out.
So the 6,1 form factor is too limiting and Apple seems highly unlikely to go back to big towers. In my dream world, Apple would stick with the cylindrical shape and central cooling - but make it taller (in part to accommodate full length PCIe cards internally) with better cooling and a 650w PSU. Then add full OS level support for nVidia GPUs and Optane. Keep the "Apple tax" at no more than $1,000 over a similarly equipped HP and all... well most ;-), is forgiven.
I'll be in the corner holding my breath...
Or Apple could just license OS X to HP and Dell to sell on select workstation configurations they sell.
You must be delusional if you truly thing Apple would let such an thing happen.
Unless, of course, Tim Cook becomes Sculley 2.0 (which is starting to feel like)
Or they could just not. A hardware update is far more possible than pipe dreams.
In my opinion, if you're buying HP or Dell, face the music and use Windows. What is OS X offering that is so drastic? iMessage?
Assuming Apple's deal with Flextronics to build Mac Pros in Austin is still viable, I don't see them letting go of those hardware profits. After 1,000 days there are plenty of reasons to trash the existing can - especially when price points have remained the same as when they were released - but that's where we're at.
I still believe that Apple will not put a 7,1 MP on the market until they have the right combination of components and newer tech to offer a dramatic upgrade from the 6,1. Robust TB3 support for starters.
I still believe that Apple will not put a 7,1 MP on the market until they have the right combination of components and newer tech to offer a dramatic upgrade from the 6,1. Robust TB3 support for starters.
The last time Apple's primary source of revenue, by far, was the Macintosh. They were a computer company first and foremost. They had a lot to lose by continued licensing of their operating system.
Fast forward to today where Apple's bread and butter is, by far, the iPhone. The Macintosh is but a rounding error of their revenue. Thus licensing makes more sense today than it did then.
I genuinely suggest reading this article: https://www.techpowerup.com/225808/...egulation-threatens-pre-built-gaming-desktops to anyone who believes that Mac Pro design was pointless, or that believes that it was completely discontinued.
In waiting for Mac Pro 7.1 thread already is discussion on this merit.
In waiting for Mac Pro 7.1 thread already is discussion on this merit.
Every day the Mac remains stagnant is another day Apple is letting go of those hardware profits.
[doublepost=1473888054][/doublepost]
At this point many people are thinking they're one and the same.
There are people who use OS X specific software (as little of it as there might be) or those who prefer OS X. Personally I don't see any tangible benefit of OS X over Windows so if I were using a Macintosh for my livelihood I'd have already been looking at switching to Windows. But there are those who refuse to make the move unless absolutely no choice is offered.
So I ask: If Apple is willing to terminate the Mac Pro what harm will come from licensing it on a select number of configurations from tier one manufacturers?
If, in fact, Apple is fully committed to a 450w PSU equipped cylinder with central cooling tower to stay in front of power efficiency/usage regulations - does that mean a 7,1 MP that can host workstation parts won't be available until process shrink makes that possible? If so, the only question to ponder is when. I'd feel comfortable forecasting 2020 for such a build - but another 1,000 days or more seems absurd.
Theoretically, internal GPUs designed for laptops with eGPUs for the heavy lifting would offer an alternative, but I'd hardly call that an elegant solution...
Theoretically, internal GPUs designed for laptops with eGPUs for the heavy lifting would offer an alternative, but I'd hardly call that an elegant solution...
As I have said in another thread: I believe that next generation GPUs we will see on 7 nm process. Upcoming lineup from AMD and Nvidia will be with us to 2020, at least. It is not only Apple affected by this issue, but everyone.
Apple will update Mac Pro with current design to current hardware, this year. The question right now is only about what hardware we will see in Apple hardware.
Apple will update Mac Pro with current design to current hardware, this year. The question right now is only about what hardware we will see in Apple hardware.
If I understand you correctly, that would mean that Apple would be telling HP "If you want to offer MacOS, then these are the configurations that we will allow you to offer". I don't know how much HP is going to like having Apple dictate terms, especially for an OS that isn't widely used compared to Windows.
Also, if you buy an HP running MacOS and there's an issue with the OS, who gets the call? What if you run an Adobe app and there's an issue? Now you have 3 companies involved which can point fingers at each other.
Don't get me wrong, I love the idea. Just don't think Apple would want to do it based on all the potential issues.
These are reasonable questions / points. It all depends on how the license is structured. Though these didn't appear to be a problem when they licensed Mac OS the first time.
I agree 100%
Unfortunately, I estimate a complete phase-out of MacOS to occur w/in 4 to 6 years.
I believe Tim will "courageously" continue to channel his "tough-love" as he forces the 100% transition to iOS and Apple branded silicon/post-silicon chips while abandoning the MacOS platform - all to the applause of shareholders, even MORE stock option bonuses, and to satisfy his histrionic viewpoint of mortality.
Last edited:
They'd just have to lock it down to each individual machine
Not the same thing. There would be no direct competition since osx license would be restricted to workstations only and apple would get out of that market.
[doublepost=1473897901][/doublepost]
Not applicable everywhere.
[doublepost=1473898051][/doublepost]
Not going to happen unless they want to corner the loony bunch that bought such a useless computer market...It will be funny when because of the Energy limits, companies like HP, Dell will start developing workstations like Mac Pro 6.1.
What most naysayers will say then?
HP & Dell already promote Energy Star certification on tons of models. There's a market for it. They are not as sexy as nMP. You'll also notice they aren't the largest, most powerful, expandable or expensive models.It will be funny when because of the Energy limits, companies like HP, Dell will start developing workstations like Mac Pro 6.1
What most naysayers will say then?
The base spec nMP is overkill for 80% (made up numbers, indulge me) of office workers - but too expensive!
A loaded nMP is probably more than enough for 10% of the remaining 20.
But for the final 10% who need a true beast... they aren't worried about Energy Star certification. They demand the power to get their work done, Bambi be damned.
We may get to the point again where most people are basically running thin clients, but in the foreseeable future, there will be users who demand HEAVY, LOCAL processing power - and they won't give a damn about electricity costs - those are passed on to the client.
ITguy2016 said: ↑
Or Apple could just license OS X to HP and Dell to sell on select workstation configurations they sell.
My suspicion points to Tim and his desire to speed up the end of PC market as best as he can.
By licensing out MacOS to HP/etc, it would only delay the future I believe Tim wants for Apple and "us".
Or Apple could just license OS X to HP and Dell to sell on select workstation configurations they sell.
My suspicion points to Tim and his desire to speed up the end of PC market as best as he can.
By licensing out MacOS to HP/etc, it would only delay the future I believe Tim wants for Apple and "us".