MP All Models Everyone's complaining about the Mac Pro's 192 GB RAM limit and no video card support. Do older MPs with 1.5 TB RAM outperform it?

[impulse462]

It’s pretty much always been the case with all Mac Pros that it’s possible to build one as fast or faster on another platform (or even the same OS in the case of a Hackintosh) for much less. But for many of us, while cost is a very serious consideration, it’s not the primary consideration. A far more pressing consideration is stability/reliability! Saving a few thousand on the purchase price is nothing compared to missing the almost ubiquitous tight deadlines, failing to comply with contractual obligations and loosing clients because you had to spend half a day or more trying to figure out why your Hackintosh is crashing or taking forever to complete a task that should only take a few minutes.

G

I respect the stability/reliability aspect you want, but I'm not sure how its related to anything I said?

In the post you quoted I'm just comparing Macs. Also for the record, my 7,1 running linux is more stable than it running macOS, because again, its made of industry standard components. But regardless of that, you didn't really address the main gist of my argument which is the fact that this computer is more expensive with reduced functionality.

The fact that this computer's GPU is slower than many things a 7,1 would be slower at really counteracts your argument that you need to make "ubiquitous tight deadlines" or "lose clients". My argument is not spending half a day to do anything. I never mentioned anything about Hackintosh's. The 7,1 with upgraded components (specifically GPUs here) is faster at completing a task than the M2 Ultra GPU is unless you're doing a task which takes advantage of the specific accelerators. Furthermore, your argument is also counteracted by the fact that over time your computer will get slower and you'll be stuck with this slow performance which will result in a higher likelihood of "taking forever to complete a task that should take only a few minutes", and not meeting "ubiquitous tight deadlines".

Again, defending a slower, less useful, and more expensive computer is just mind boggling to me.

 

[GregStudio]

I respect the stability/reliability aspect you want, but I'm not sure how its related to anything I said?

It’s not, which is why I mentioned it.

Also for the record, my 7,1 running linux is more stable than it running macOS, …

As Linux won’t even run the software required, how is it more stable?

But regardless of that, you didn't really address the main gist of my argument which is the fact that this computer is more expensive with reduced functionality.

It’s less expensive and significantly faster than previous Mac Pros. The reduction in functionality is irrelevant, providing of course it has the functionality required to do the job it’s purchased for, which it has for my and many others line of work.

The fact that this computer's GPU is slower than many things a 7,1 would be slower at really counteracts your argument that you need to make "ubiquitous tight deadlines" or "loose clients".

How does it counteract my argument even in the slightest, let alone “really counteracts” it? The new MP’s GPU is significantly faster than the 7,1 but that’s largely irrelevant because the only task where GPU speed would be useful in my profession is video transcoding but we don’t spend more than about an hour and a half a month transcoding video, which can be scheduled while performing other required tasks and the new MP will reduce that time anyway.

Again, defending a slower, less useful, and more expensive computer is just mind boggling to me.

If it’s mind boggling to you, then why are you doing it? The 7,1 is significantly slower, no more useful and was more expensive than the new MP. In fact in my case, the new MP even works out slightly faster, more useful and cheaper than a Mac Studio.

CGI and grading are obvious areas within the A/V industry where eGPU is important/vital but many in these areas were not Mac users anyway and while good/powerful video cards are required by picture/video editors, top of the line eGPUs often aren’t.

Obviously, there are going to be some Mac users for whom the new MP is not suitable. Those editors, graders and CGI workers who do need powerful eGPUs and are Mac users but how many people are we talking about here? I would hazard an educated guess that it’s a very small minority. Are there many people in areas other than A/V where very powerful eGPUs are a necessity and Mac use is common? I don’t know, but in my area (of the A/V industry) Mac use is extremely common, hardly anyone needs more than 96GB RAM, the need for eGPU is nonexistent and obviously Apple were aiming the new MP at this area (and others), as their marketing specifically mentions it.

G

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

.

Obviously, there are going to be some Mac users for whom the new MP is not suitable. Those editors, graders and CGI workers who do need powerful eGPUs and are Mac users but how many people are we talking about here? I would hazard an educated guess that it’s a very small minority. Are there many people in areas other than A/V where very powerful eGPUs are a necessity and Mac use is common? I don’t know, but in my area (of the A/V industry) Mac use is extremely common, hardly anyone needs more than 96GB RAM, the need for eGPU is nonexistent and obviously Apple were aiming the new MP at this area (and others), as their marketing specifically mentions it.

G

Tyranny of the “if I don’t need or want it, I don’t want you to have it…and have no imagination of who would want it any way”.

How many 3D people, how many architects, engineers, simulation scientists, AI engineers, genetic scientists, other scientists….meh, who cares. Works better for me. They shouldn’t have it anyway despite being reliant on it and or something they enjoyed using for decades… Screw them, and let them eat cake on PCs anyway.

 

[NEPOBABY]

I like the 8,1 but it should have been about $1.5K to $2K cheaper and there would have been much less complaints.

The issue is after 2 years it will look very under specced with no upgradability.

Maybe Apple should have socketed the machine and said we can upgrade it for as long as future gen Apple Silicon remains pin compatible.

 

[theluggage]

I like the 8,1 but it should have been about $1.5K to $2K cheaper and there would have been much less complaints.

I think they just should have called it "Mac Studio Plus" or something instead of using "Mac Pro" immediately after discontinuing the 7.1 - it just doesn't have the same applications. What it's good for is people who would otherwise need to buy a $4k Studio Ultra and spend $$$$ on something like this to get PCIe expansion:

xMac Studio/Echo III

Pro 3U rackmount enclosure with three slot Thunderbolt to PCIe card expansion system for Mac Studio.

www.sonnetstore.com

...which only provides half the PCIe slots and only a fraction of the PCIe bandwidth of the 8.1.

I suspect the price is a bit of wishful thinking at Apple based on the notion that it is a lot more powerful than the $6000 base 7.1 (which had 8 cores and an iMac-grade GPU and cost the thick end of $7000 once you'd upgraded the RAM and SSD - at Apple prices - to match the 64/1TB base 8.1). Not defending it, but there's a lot of that sort of "logic" in Apple's prices. The grotesquely over-engineered case probably adds a lot to the price, too.

The issue is after 2 years it will look very under specced with no upgradability.

Maybe Apple should have socketed the machine and said we can upgrade it for as long as future gen Apple Silicon remains pin compatible.

...here's betting that future-gen Apple Silicon won't be pin-compatible after 2 years. That's kinda inevitable with a system-on-a-chip with so many disparate functions in one package. Plus, if the upgrades involve things like more PCIe lanes, PCIe5, Thunderbolt 5, USB5 the whole mainboard will need replacing. Even when I used to assemble my own PCs, things like hard drives and PCI cards got swapped around but I don't think I ever did a mid-life CPU upgrade, because the socket type, RAM type etc. had usually moved on as well.

The thing to remember about the 8.1 is that it's what Apple can do easily by fusing together two MacBook Pro-class SoC dies - it has 192GB max RAM because each M2 Max die supports up to 96GB. It doesn't have ECC because the M2 doesn't support ECC (and since the RAM limit is partly down to how many LPDDR chips will physically fit in the package adding inline ECC would reduce the max RAM and slow down access). It has 16 PCIe 4 lanes because the first M2 Max die has 16 lanes for onboard storage and interfaces so the second M2 Max die has 16 lanes free. To go beyond that would mean Apple developing a new die just for the low-volume of Mac Pro sales. Even socketing - rather than surface-mounting - the chip would mean making a new package just for the MP.

All previous Mac Pros have been built on the shoulders of Intel who have a far larger customer base for their Xeon processors (even so, the Xeon W-3265M processor used in the 7.1 24 core has a recommended retail price of $7000 for the processor alone). Making their own true Xeon/Threadripper competitor would cost Apple a fortune for a market in which they only have a small, precarious foothold. Scaling-up iPhone tech to the tablet/laptop/small-form-factor market - where they already have a significant market share - is a far better business proposition.

 

[NEPOBABY]

I think they just should have called it "Mac Studio Plus" or something instead of using "Mac Pro" immediately after discontinuing the 7.1 - it just doesn't have the same applications. What it's good for is people who would otherwise need to buy a $4k Studio Ultra and spend $$$$ on something like this to get PCIe expansion:

xMac Studio/Echo III

Pro 3U rackmount enclosure with three slot Thunderbolt to PCIe card expansion system for Mac Studio.

www.sonnetstore.com

...which only provides half the PCIe slots and only a fraction of the PCIe bandwidth of the 8.1.

I suspect the price is a bit of wishful thinking at Apple based on the notion that it is a lot more powerful than the $6000 base 7.1 (which had 8 cores and an iMac-grade GPU and cost the thick end of $7000 once you'd upgraded the RAM and SSD - at Apple prices - to match the 64/1TB base 8.1). Not defending it, but there's a lot of that sort of "logic" in Apple's prices. The grotesquely over-engineered case probably adds a lot to the price, too.



...here's betting that future-gen Apple Silicon won't be pin-compatible after 2 years. That's kinda inevitable with a system-on-a-chip with so many disparate functions in one package. Plus, if the upgrades involve things like more PCIe lanes, PCIe5, Thunderbolt 5, USB5 the whole mainboard will need replacing. Even when I used to assemble my own PCs, things like hard drives and PCI cards got swapped around but I don't think I ever did a mid-life CPU upgrade, because the socket type, RAM type etc. had usually moved on as well.

The thing to remember about the 8.1 is that it's what Apple can do easily by fusing together two MacBook Pro-class SoC dies - it has 192GB max RAM because each M2 Max die supports up to 96GB. It doesn't have ECC because the M2 doesn't support ECC (and since the RAM limit is partly down to how many LPDDR chips will physically fit in the package adding inline ECC would reduce the max RAM and slow down access). It has 16 PCIe 4 lanes because the first M2 Max die has 16 lanes for onboard storage and interfaces so the second M2 Max die has 16 lanes free. To go beyond that would mean Apple developing a new die just for the low-volume of Mac Pro sales. Even socketing - rather than surface-mounting - the chip would mean making a new package just for the MP.

All previous Mac Pros have been built on the shoulders of Intel who have a far larger customer base for their Xeon processors (even so, the Xeon W-3265M processor used in the 7.1 24 core has a recommended retail price of $7000 for the processor alone). Making their own true Xeon/Threadripper competitor would cost Apple a fortune for a market in which they only have a small, precarious foothold. Scaling-up iPhone tech to the tablet/laptop/small-form-factor market - where they already have a significant market share - is a far better business proposition.

Personally don't care about ECC. Most users are creative app users who never cared about it on their laptops or even during the PowerPC days.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Personally don't care about ECC. Most users are creative app users who never cared about it on their laptops or even during the PowerPC days.

It was a lot less relevant during PowerPC days...

Also, "since I dont need or want it, I dont think anyone else should have it"...

 

[Romain_H]

Most users are creative app users

Why is that? Could it be that other user groups (scientists, ML engineers, ...) left the eco system for some reason?

 

[GregStudio]

How many 3D people, how many architects, engineers, simulation scientists, AI engineers, genetic scientists, other scientists….meh, who cares. Works better for me.

Rubbish, you just made that stereotype up and decided to put me in it to support your obvious agenda!

I already stated I don’t know how many 3D people, AI engineers, genetic or other scientists, etc., require serious amounts of eGPU and are Mac users. However, I suspect not huge numbers as (AFAIK) other platforms have always been able to provide more/more powerful eGPU support than Mac Pros. I certainly did not state or imply “who cares” and “screw them”!!

Tyranny of the “if I don’t need or want it, I don’t want you to have it…and have no imagination of who would want it any way”.

No, you have this completely the wrong way around! I was responding to the “tyranny” of the “if I do need or want it, I want you to have it…and have no imagination of who would not want it” and then falsely asserted the new MP is therefore essentially useless (slower, more expensive, less useful). I have given my use scenario, which is a common scenario with many thousands of Mac users, that disproves this false assertion.

G

 

[Romain_H]

(...) essentially useless (slower, more expensive, less useful). I have given my use scenario, which is a common scenario with many thousands of Mac users, that disproves this false assertion.

The Mac platform was a platform supporting general high end computing in years prior.

Now, not any more.

Up until High Sierra / MP 5.1 you could use Win or Mac, irrespective of a users workflow.

Not any longer.

Sorry, but I find that really sad.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Rubbish, you just made that stereotype up and decided to put me in it to support your obvious agenda!

I already stated I don’t know how many 3D people, AI engineers, genetic or other scientists, etc., require serious amounts of eGPU and are Mac users. However, I suspect not huge numbers as (AFAIK) other platforms have always been able to provide more/more powerful eGPU support than Mac Pros. I certainly did not state or imply “who cares” and “screw them”!!

No, you have this completely the wrong way around! I was responding to the “tyranny” of the “if I do need or want it, I want you to have it…and have no imagination of who would not want it” and then falsely asserted the new MP is therefore essentially useless (slower, more expensive, less useful). I have given my use scenario, which is a common scenario with many thousands of Mac users, that disproves this false assertion.

G

I agree with one thing about the above.

 

[NEPOBABY]

Why is that? Could it be that other user groups (scientists, ML engineers, ...) left the eco system for some reason?

Crunching numbers for science has been cloud based for years. You see scientists walking around with MacBook Airs these days and they just send the batched jobs to a server in the cloud.

ECC is really irrelevant to creative users. Most video editing, 3D modelling and VFX is done on PCs that don't have ECC. They just don't care about it because they won't see it matter 99.99999999% of the time.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Crunching numbers for science has been cloud based for years. You see scientists walking around with MacBook Airs these days and they just send the batched jobs to a server in the cloud.

ECC is really irrelevant to creative users. Most video editing, 3D modelling and VFX is done on PCs that don't have ECC. They just don't care about it because they won't see it matter 99.99999999% of the time.

ML engineers, architects, simulation scientists, many other scientists still use workstations. They may send big jobs out but still do many sizable projects locally.

 

[ksgant]

The typical line of the Apple apologist: it’s everyone’s fault but Apple’s. Apples products are so great because I watched their carefully crafted 2 hour advertisement and I’ll just parrot what they say. No one who does something other than make iOS apps used Metal.

You know what programmers who write applications for workstations want to do? Use CUDA. But they can’t with this abomination of a machine.

Question: Do you use Apple products at all? It seems you have nothing but hatred and loathing towards the company and the people that use their products. So, do you use their products? If so, why...if (by the tone of this post) you don't like them. If you don't, why are you even on a forum on a website that's for Apple products? Just to argue with others?

I'm not apologizing for Apple here, or praising them. I'm asking what YOUR motivation is to come to a website like this and just complain about "this abomination of a machine"? I don't go to Windows websites and then say how bad they are...why would I? Nevermind. I forget sometimes where I am. This site has devolved into more Apple haters than Apple apologists. Everything Apple does is wrong. They're not going to last much longer blah blah blah. We get it.

 

[goMac]

ML engineers, architects, simulation scientists, many other scientists still use workstations. They may send big jobs out but still do many sizable projects locally.

People have such short memories. Apple used to specifically target markets like genetics and simulations.

Apple has seemingly withdrawn from those markets, but that's a very different thing than "OMG why would you need ECC on a Mac?" It's because three months ago that was still a market Apple supported.

System X (supercomputer) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

ECC was specifically something Virginia Tech needed to run their simulations.

 

[AndyMacAndMic]

Question: Do you use Apple products at all? It seems you have nothing but hatred and loathing towards the company and the people that use their products. So, do you use their products? If so, why...if (by the tone of this post) you don't like them. If you don't, why are you even on a forum on a website that's for Apple products? Just to argue with others?

I'm not apologizing for Apple here, or praising them. I'm asking what YOUR motivation is to come to a website like this and just complain about "this abomination of a machine"? I don't go to Windows websites and then say how bad they are...why would I? Nevermind. I forget sometimes where I am. This site has devolved into more Apple haters than Apple apologists. Everything Apple does is wrong. They're not going to last much longer blah blah blah. We get it.

No disrespect, but did you get the context of the post you are reacting to (and you are clearly offended by) was replying to? If not, read that post and the post(s) before that again. Also what has (not) using Apple products to do with someone's credibility?

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Question: Do you use Apple products at all? It seems you have nothing but hatred and loathing towards the company and the people that use their products. So, do you use their products? If so, why...if (by the tone of this post) you don't like them. If you don't, why are you even on a forum on a website that's for Apple products? Just to argue with others?

I'm not apologizing for Apple here, or praising them. I'm asking what YOUR motivation is to come to a website like this and just complain about "this abomination of a machine"? I don't go to Windows websites and then say how bad they are...why would I? Nevermind. I forget sometimes where I am. This site has devolved into more Apple haters than Apple apologists. Everything Apple does is wrong. They're not going to last much longer blah blah blah. We get it.

I don't get that at all from his posts. I think he likes apple a lot. And is not pleased with their current product direction. Must he only sing praises of apple and never criticize them? That's not a forum, that's a cult.

Always praising apple regardless of how bad they mess up is a sure way to encourage them to continue to mess up.

Apple has botched many things over the years and deserve criticism for it. They've also done many amazing magical things, and deserve accolades for those. They can and do both, an it's not unreasonable for people to share their their thoughts either way.

 

[impulse462]

Question: Do you use Apple products at all? It seems you have nothing but hatred and loathing towards the company and the people that use their products. So, do you use their products? If so, why...if (by the tone of this post) you don't like them. If you don't, why are you even on a forum on a website that's for Apple products? Just to argue with others?

I'm not apologizing for Apple here, or praising them. I'm asking what YOUR motivation is to come to a website like this and just complain about "this abomination of a machine"? I don't go to Windows websites and then say how bad they are...why would I? Nevermind. I forget sometimes where I am. This site has devolved into more Apple haters than Apple apologists. Everything Apple does is wrong. They're not going to last much longer blah blah blah. We get it.

1. this is a forum and as long as I follow the forum rules I can talk about whatever I want. no one is forcing you to read the forum or my posts

2. you contend that you don't visit windows websites since you don't use their products. using your own logic, you should come to the conclusion that I use apple products, because if i didn't why would I bother posting on this forum?

3. trying to ascertain someones qualifications rather than countering their arguments is the hallmark of an apple apologist (and a poor debater)

4. i don't have hatred towards apple the same way as I don't "love" their products, something that apple apologists always rave about for some reason showing their sophomoric qualities.

5. which leads me to my most important point. you suggest that you have read my posts but i don't think you comprehend them, so allow me to explain the motivation behind my 2023 mac pro posts in plain in english: This new computer has LESS FUNCTIONALITY for an INCREASED PRICE. if you don't mind putting up with this ******** from a 3 trillion dollar corporation, be my guest, but know that people who actually use computers for real work don't appreciate getting price gouged by a company that is worth more than the GDP of many small countries

6. you clearly seem offended that I insulted the 2023 mac pro. I suggest not tying your personality or self worth to an inanimate object/tool or the company that makes it

7. apple doesn't care about you. they don't even care about their previous customers (clearly). they care about extracting as much money from people as possible. tim cook will not come to your house and thank you for defending their product. i suggest you stop defending a 3 trillion dollar corporation, they don't need it. this aint the apple of the 80s.

8. This site has way more apple apologists than "haters". if you think my post is one of an "apple hater" i truly feel sorry for you.

9. I never suggested that everything apple does is wrong nor that they aren't going to last much longer

10. You clearly don't get it.

 

[impulse462]

I don't get that at all from his posts. I think he likes apple a lot. And is not pleased with their current product direction. Must he only sing praises of apple and never criticize them? That's not a forum, that's a cult.

Always praising apple regardless of how bad they mess up is a sure way to encourage them to continue to mess up.

Apple has botched many things over the years and deserve criticism for it. They've also done many amazing magical things, and deserve accolades for those. They can and do both, an it's not unreasonable for people to share their their thoughts either way.

said it way more succinctly than i did

 

[Yebubbleman]

Question: Do you use Apple products at all? It seems you have nothing but hatred and loathing towards the company and the people that use their products. So, do you use their products? If so, why...if (by the tone of this post) you don't like them. If you don't, why are you even on a forum on a website that's for Apple products? Just to argue with others?

I'm not apologizing for Apple here, or praising them. I'm asking what YOUR motivation is to come to a website like this and just complain about "this abomination of a machine"? I don't go to Windows websites and then say how bad they are...why would I? Nevermind. I forget sometimes where I am. This site has devolved into more Apple haters than Apple apologists. Everything Apple does is wrong. They're not going to last much longer blah blah blah. We get it.

This site has more apologists than haters. But, largely both camps do not respect the fact that both points of view are valid and that folks have reason for having them. Incidentally, in the case of this topic, you have people who are hating on Apple for making a Mac Pro that, to them, seems useless and are Apple Apologist level blind about the fact that, while not meeting THEIR needs, the 2023 Mac Pro is far from a useless machine; just useless to them and what they need out of it.

 

[impulse462]

This site has more apologists than haters. But, largely both camps do not respect the fact that both points of view are valid and that folks have reason for having them. Incidentally, in the case of this topic, you have people who are hating on Apple for making a Mac Pro that, to them, seems useless and are Apple Apologist level blind about the fact that, while not meeting THEIR needs, the 2023 Mac Pro is far from a useless machine; just useless to them and what they need out of it.

But it's so not that because the 2019 mac pro actually catered to a wide variety of people's needs

 

[Yebubbleman]

But it's so not that because the 2019 mac pro actually catered to a wide variety of people's needs

It did. And many of those people are still catered to with the 2023 Mac Pro. Just not all of them.

 

[impulse462]

It did. And many of those people are still catered to with the 2023 Mac Pro. Just not all of them.

So then I really dont think you have a leg to stand on here. You're saying "yeah the previous one catered to more people, but this new one caters only to a subset of the previous ones. the other people should just get over it."

now those people are resentful - i wouldn't describe it as "blind to the fact" as you mentioned in your previous post

 

[Yebubbleman]

So then I really dont think you have a leg to stand on here. You're saying "yeah the previous one catered to more people, but this new one caters only to a subset of the previous ones. the other people should just get over it."

What are the options that people for whom the new machine does not cater to that the old one did have?

(a) Hold onto the 2019 model?

(b) Look for something new that replaces it?

(c) a + b?

(d) Moan and groan about it (whether justified or not)?

(e) All or any combination of the above?

What other options am I missing here? And let's say (d) is included no matter what. What is it that you want from this community? Consolation? Commiseration? "There there, big fella" style pats on the back? Yeah, reduction in upgradeability DOES suck! Apple alienating you and your use case DOES suck! There's no question about that. [And guess what? I've been there too (just long ago and not with the Mac Pro)]! But, now that we've already established that (and like fifty times already), what else do you want?

What leg do I need to stand on? I'm laying out the facts and it's all stuff you already know. It ultimately is what it is and your options are inherently limited to the above.

now those people are resentful - i wouldn't describe it as "blind to the fact" as you mentioned in your previous post

Yes. Apple is alienating those users. If this was a new phenomenon, I might be a bit more empathetic. Try being a MacBook Pro user in 2013 and having them nix the ability to upgrade your RAM and then, starting in 2016, your SSD. Then it becomes thinner, runs like crap because it isn't thick enough for what's inside of it, and gets a keyboard that inevitably fails. Then wait as Apple keeps fruitlessly trying to make it work when it obviously can't.

Sure, I didn't have the 6-year winter that anyone with a 2013 Mac Pro had, but I know firsthand what it's like to have Apple alienate me as a customer. I understand the resentment. I'm not here to tell you that it's fine. I'm here to tell you that it is what it is because that's how Apple rolls and there's nothing either of us can do about it. Get over it or don't; it's up to you. Taking out that resentment on others because reality isn't going your way is not the recommended approach, which is the only point I'm trying to make.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

What are the options that people for whom the new machine does not cater to that the old one did have?

(a) Hold onto the 2019 model?

(b) Look for something new that replaces it?

(c) a + b?

(d) Moan and groan about it (whether justified or not)?

(e) All or any combination of the above?

What other options am I missing here? And let's say (d) is included no matter what. What is it that you want from this community? Consolation? Commiseration? "There there, big fella" style pats on the back? Yeah, reduction in upgradeability DOES suck! Apple alienating you and your use case DOES suck! There's no question about that. [And guess what? I've been there too (just long ago and not with the Mac Pro)]! But, now that we've already established that (and like fifty times already), what else do you want?

What leg do I need to stand on? I'm laying out the facts and it's all stuff you already know. It ultimately is what it is and your options are inherently limited to the above.



Yes. Apple is alienating those users. If this was a new phenomenon, I might be a bit more empathetic. Try being a MacBook Pro user in 2013 and having them nix the ability to upgrade your RAM and then, starting in 2016, your SSD. Then it becomes thinner, runs like crap because it isn't thick enough for what's inside of it, and gets a keyboard that inevitably fails. Then wait as Apple keeps fruitlessly trying to make it work when it obviously can't.

Sure, I didn't have the 6-year winter that anyone with a 2013 Mac Pro had, but I know firsthand what it's like to have Apple alienate me as a customer. I understand the resentment. I'm not here to tell you that it's fine. I'm here to tell you that it is what it is because that's how Apple rolls and there's nothing either of us can do about it. Get over it or don't; it's up to you. Taking out that resentment on others because reality isn't going your way is not the recommended approach, which is the only point I'm trying to make.

Um bitching an moaning (justified as you've just admitted to so not sure why youre trying to taint it by questioning it again) did work.

See: trashcan Mac-->bitching moaning-->apple multi year multi region apology tour-->2019 Mac.

Also, it just seems an awful lot like you telling us to shut up and not complain despite, admittedly, having valid cause to complain.