I'm sure I'm not alone in my frustration...

[comatory]

I bought 2009 4 core Mac Pro for video editing. It works for my needs but if I were in position to buy a truly powerful desktop for next 4-5 years I would probably build i7 hackintosh or just go Windows way.

There are other options out there. If Mac Pro was cheaper at this point I would advise it but the price today is ridiculous, at least for the base models.

Windows 7 is a good OS, I dont see a lot of incentive for individuals needing MPs sticking with them. I ike OS X too and invested in software as well but if youre startng from scratch I would think about it. You can still use the macbook as portable and personal machine.

Mac Pro is great, Im glad I have one but Ill be building hackintosh probably next time or just tune up high end Mac Mini. As I said I have different needs. i dont need great GPUs, fast storage and quad CPU is all I need really, with Thunderbolt on Mac mini it is now possible.

 

[Tesselator]

No need for frustration here at all.

Here's my frustration, I am in school and NEED a new computer. I do heavy video editing and have taken several classes on Protools and other music production software. I want to get into film editing and music and there will be a point soon at which I won't have access to the school computers. If I take a summer class, I'll be okay through the end of summer.

I'm getting sick of waiting for a new Mac Pro. As someone who is trying to convert to Mac and planning on giving them thousands of dollars, the secrecy is somewhat insulting.

Acceptance (of some things) is important to mental health. Apple is secretive, accept it.

I have a hard time stomaching the idea of buying a decked out iMac, knowing that I essentially can't replace any parts except the RAM. That is just seems foolish to me. Generally, I can 'milk' a computer for a very long time by replacing parts and not replacing the whole computer every three years.

You can do that with any MacPro too. Everything is upgradable except the motherboard. CPUs, Drives, RAM, Power supplies (secondary and primary), Optical drives, USB/SATA revisions/Other I/O, Video Cards, etc. It's all upgradable... So maybe some of your frustration is based on erroneous information?

Since we are not even remotely wealthy, I'd rather pay more up front for a Mac Pro and use it for a really long time.

I just wish Apple would tell us something. I've been holding off for over a year hoping they will give a substantial update to the Mac Pro line, but my inkling is that they are trying to get rid of it altogether.

Who cares what /they/ are doing or not? That kind of speculation is silly. Some here think it's fun but for a guy like you I guess it's best to ignore it. It just doesn't matter. Whatever they do they do and that's it.

Meanwhile you have a great opportunity right in front of you. The MacPro4,1 upgrades beautifully!!! As an initial purchase it's both cheap and fast enough to do everything you describe here with ease. It upgrades to a really high-spec MacPro5,1 which right now is a little expensive to do but by the time you actually need that much horse power it will likely only be a few hundred.

In the same way that the last version of Final Cut Pro was dumbed down, they may be trying to dumb down their desktop line as well. I refuse to buy another Windows machine, but I can't wait forever.

Frustrated, like many others.

So don't use FCP or don't use the version you think is dumbed down... problem solved. And there's no need to keep waiting for anyone or anything. You have your options in front of you now. Choose one or choose not to decide. That's it. Simple. Nothing to get frustrated about.

 

[CaptainChunk]

I'm a film editor, AE and DIT by trade, and my 2008 Mac Pro 8-core continues to serve my needs just fine. Is it the fastest machine available? No. Is it the slowest? No. Would I like to upgrade? Sure, but it's still not a pressing issue that's affecting to ability to deliver (not yet, anyway).

When you use computers for professional creative work, you can't always think in terms of having the latest and greatest. You also need to think in terms of getting the job done while remaining cost effective. It's easy to spend over $6k on a 12-core Mac Pro (and thousands more on upgrades and software) and if you're not doing enough paying work to justify these costs, something is very wrong.

With that said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with starting smaller. For example, the single-processor hex-core machines are still very solid performers. And if you're the adventurous type, you can buy an old base 2009 quad-core, flash it with the 5,1 firmware and drop in a hex-core 3600 series Xeon. The end result is a very fast Mac Pro (even by today's standards) for under $2,000, even with RAM upgrades. In a price/performance argument, I believe it can be generally agreed upon that it's REALLY hard to beat the hex.

And for the record, you don't necessarily *NEED* a 12-core for video editing. Unless you find yourself constantly encoding and rendering in applications that can take advantage of all those cores, it's a lot of wasted money.

 

[softwareguy256]

You don't need a Mac pro. the logic is if you need food you don't wait for a sale. if you really needed one you'd already have one by now.

So, I've been lurking on these boards for quite awhile and been checking out macrumors for a good year or so. Here's my story, I have a really crappy old Dell that is pretty much done. I am using my wife's 7 year old Macbook Pro to answer emails and print out eBay labels, etc.

Here's my frustration, I am in school and NEED a new computer. I do heavy video editing and have taken several classes on Protools and other music production software. I want to get into film editing and music and there will be a point soon at which I won't have access to the school computers. If I take a summer class, I'll be okay through the end of summer.

I'm getting sick of waiting for a new Mac Pro. As someone who is trying to convert to Mac and planning on giving them thousands of dollars, the secrecy is somewhat insulting. I have a hard time stomaching the idea of buying a decked out iMac, knowing that I essentially can't replace any parts except the RAM. That is just seems foolish to me. Generally, I can 'milk' a computer for a very long time by replacing parts and not replacing the whole computer every three years. Since we are not even remotely wealthy, I'd rather pay more up front for a Mac Pro and use it for a really long time.

I just wish Apple would tell us something. I've been holding off for over a year hoping they will give a substantial update to the Mac Pro line, but my inkling is that they are trying to get rid of it altogether. In the same way that the last version of Final Cut Pro was dumbed down, they may be trying to dumb down their desktop line as well. I refuse to buy another Windows machine, but I can't wait forever.

Frustrated, like many others.

----------

of course they don't need it. you have backend servers with optimized kernels for heavy duty work. and these video editing guys take themselves way too seriously, these guys can argue about needing a supercomputer to do their format conversion LOL...

I'm a film editor, AE and DIT by trade, and my 2008 Mac Pro 8-core continues to serve my needs just fine. Is it the fastest machine available? No. Is it the slowest? No. Would I like to upgrade? Sure, but it's still not a pressing issue that's affecting to ability to deliver (not yet, anyway).

When you use computers for professional creative work, you can't always think in terms of having the latest and greatest. You also need to think in terms of getting the job done while remaining cost effective. It's easy to spend over $6k on a 12-core Mac Pro (and thousands more on upgrades and software) and if you're not doing enough paying work to justify these costs, something is very wrong.

With that said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with starting smaller. For example, the single-processor hex-core machines are still very solid performers. And if you're the adventurous type, you can buy an old base 2009 quad-core, flash it with the 5,1 firmware and drop in a hex-core 3600 series Xeon. The end result is a very fast Mac Pro (even by today's standards) for under $2,000, even with RAM upgrades. In a price/performance argument, I believe it can be generally agreed upon that it's REALLY hard to beat the hex.

And for the record, you don't necessarily *NEED* a 12-core for video editing. Unless you find yourself constantly encoding and rendering in applications that can take advantage of all those cores, it's a lot of wasted money.

 

[td2243]

You don't need a Mac pro. the logic is if you need food you don't wait for a sale. if you really needed one you'd already have one by now.

True. There will be a point at which I won't have access to the computers at school. Then...I'll have to make a decision. That being said, if they release a new version, I'd buy it before I was out of school regardless.

 

[deconstruct60]

I'm "bitching and whining" because while the current machines may be fast, they aren't current in the least.

But the bulk of your explanation is that you want to buy and then proceed to "sit" on a Mac Pro for a long time. So let's say that is 6 years. Even if Apple came out with a new Mac Pro next Tuesday and you bought it in 2013. In the years 2014-19 it would be "old tech". So essentially it is "I don't want to deal old tech unless I already own it".

Since you are in school and your work generation zero revenue , a 10-15% faster machine would generate just as large amount of revenue as a 2012 Mac Pro would. For folks who are missing out on increased revenue generation because their current 2009-2012 Mac Pro runs at 90-100% capacity, 20hrs a day, 300 days a year generating money can get their underwear in a twist, but this is clearly not one of those cases.

When Apple released the speed bumped Mac Pros in 2012 and 'leaked' the "working on something for next year" stuff that was a clear indication that nothing was coming for a relatively long term. There was no "secret". That was communicated. There is a difference between listening what is said and hearing what you want to hear.

Some folks turned that into a mantra of "don't buy the Mac Pro 2012 models". That's kind of goofy. For those who needed a newer Mac Pro those were viable options to buy. If what you have now is an old crappy Dell ... those 2012 models were and still are a better machine.

Furthermore, the increasing number of Mac Pro buyers who buy and then "make last forever" are one reason why Apple has dragged its feet on getting out a new Mac Pro. If folks buy less, Apple will produce less and eventually drop the product if the feedback cycle continues long enough in that direction.

Even if your business after school starts to generation revenue and you ran into limitations on your 2012 Mac Pro you could just buy a new faster one in the future. If not generating revenue to fund a new one then likely also not running the machine at capacity. What is extremely unlikely to happen is running the machine full blast 24/7/365 and not generating very much money. If that is happening it isn't anything that Apple is doing that is the primary blockage.

Mac Pro tend to have pretty decent resale value. If you have to flip in 2-3 years because ran into a performance cap a good chunk of that upgrade cost can be offset by selling the by that time older machine. Whether Apple did or did not drop a new machine that basic mechanism would be present.

In short, the notion being required to hold onto a machine for very long time is a constraint that doesn't make alot of sense. It is independent of what the actual work and workload is.

 

[snberk103]

... Since we are not even remotely wealthy, I'd rather pay more up front for a Mac Pro and use it for a really long time.
...

I too needed a new Mac Pro, so I went to the refurbished store. Also there is a thread somewhere here on MR about Best Buy selling Mac Pros at a heavy discount. The sweet spot for Mac Pros seems to be the 6 core machines. Certainly when they hit the refurbished store they don't last long. You may get "older" technology, but it works perfectly fine and will blow your mind compared to the hardware you are currently using. You save money by going to the refurbished store. The quality is the same as the buying new, and will certainly last the 3 years (AppleCare) and probably 6 years. And in 6 years will still have some residual value on the resale market.

When Apple does finally release whatever it is they are going to release later this year it is either going to be basically the same as the current Mac Pros... in which case the current Mac Pros will not have been eclipsed at all and you'll be happy with it for another 4 years at least. Or it will be totally eclipsed by a new product, in which case there will be thousands of people who hate the new product and will want the old product. You'll have no problems selling a slightly used Mac Pro in the event of a revolutionary new Mac Pro. Plus, I wouldn't touch a revolutionary new product in the 1st year for anything.

So just buy a d*** refurbished system (6 cores really are the sweet spot) and move on. Spend less time fussing the technology, and more time creating cool music videos that will make you money. Really.

Congratulations and Good Luck with the new degree!

 

[DPUser]

Too bad ya' missed the $2500 12 core blowout from Best Buy...

 

[Zaap]

Well, there's always Hackintosh...
I've very happily not been on Apple's treadmill for years now, using great hardware of my own choosing to get my Final Cut work done. Never looking back. They can release a new Pro or not, matters not much one way or another. If you can assemble and maintain your own hardware (not at all difficult as some make it out to be) just roll your own and let Apple do whatever it is Apple does.

Or... hang around and wait years for them to release hardware, or pony up for planned obsolescence. To each his own. That's the beauty of consumer choice.

 

[td2243]

Snerk, by 6 core, do you mean the 12 core with two sixes? Or is there one between the quad and 12 core that I don't know about. Thanks

 

[ActionableMango]

It's so absurd to me that thousands of people are hanging on the one sentence that Tim Cook said late last year. There may be no new Mac Pro for all we know.

To be fair, the following day I believe either the NYT or the WSJ confirmed over the phone with an unnamed Apple executive that Tim Cook's quote was indeed referring to a new Mac Pro model in 2013 and not something else. It was also then confirmed again to European Apple dealers just shortly after the news of MP discontinuation in Europe, that a replacement was coming soon. There are also GPU drivers appearing in ML that are almost certainly not related to the other Mac models in 2013.

You may or may not find that to be convincing information, but it's not just "hanging on the one sentence".

 

[snberk103]

Snerk, by 6 core, do you mean the 12 core with two sixes? Or is there one between the quad and 12 core that I don't know about. Thanks

The 12 core machine has two CPUs, each being 6 cores. The 6 core machine has a single CPU of 6 cores... It's not quite the same CPU as the ones being used in 12 core machines, I believe. But it is pretty close.

Why it seems to be the sweet spot is that it balances CPU clock speeds with multiple cores. With some exceptions, software is not taking advantage of 12 cores... so paying for those excess cores gets you very little in return. There are some exceptions, and you need to check to see if your software can in fact use 12 cores. You may be one of those people who needs 12 cores.

On the other hand, opening up several productivity applications can easily use all 4 cores so having 2 more cores can be beneficial.

On the other hand, the 4 core machines tend to have faster CPU clock speeds than the 12 core machines. Some software that can only use 1 core at a time benefits much more from fewer but faster CPU cores.

The 6 core machines combines a faster CPU - good for software that benefits from faster CPU cycles - and also gives you 50% more cores than a quad core for those applications that can take advantage of more cores.

In the Apple Store, start with a quad core and start to configure it. Then choose the 6 core option.

One other note about the 6 core. The RAM clock is 1333 versus 1066 for the quad core machines. My belief is that for things that are memory intensive having faster RAM is better. Apple officially supports up to 32GB of RAM in the 6 cores and 64GB in the 12 cores. However, check with OWC. They often find that Apple understates how much RAM will actually work, and they will back their own memory even if used above the Apple 'official' limit.

The 6 core machines are hitting the Refurbished Store, though not frequently. They are snapped up pretty quickly. I got one. If you are not in a panic, set up your Apple Store ID and clear your credit card. Then check the refurbished pages a couple times a day, every day, religiously. When you see one snap it up. I expect mine to last me for at least 4 years... and then I will sell only because it is out of AppleCare. I expect to get a few hundred dollars at least for it, and maybe more. Which helps with whatever I buy in 4 years.

 

[Liquidstate]

After spending months doing research, I just bought a refurb 2010 Mac Pro Snow Leopard from Apple (with Applecare) on purpose. Why?

1. Apple is committed to market disruption as part of its DNA, and the new Mac Pro, whatever it is, will probably be no exception.
2. It's likely that it will be Thunderbolt and USB 3, and I have Firewire music hardware I am not going to give up because the new emulation gear doesn't have the sound I want.
3. I am not about to invest thousands of dollars in upgrades.
4. I have work to do now, I've been on the bleeding edge before, and I have no desire to endure 2 years of "issues."
5. I tried to find a used Mac pro that would run the software I need, and there's next to nothing used out there from 2010 to 2013. Everyone seems to be holding on to what they have, afraid that Apple is going to release a radical machine that will result in productivity chaos for pro level work.
6. The 2008 MP has expensive ram and benzine emission issues (Google this if you want to know more), and the 2009 MP has audio playback issues in the Intel circuitry (again, Google it to find out more). That's probably why there are lots of used 2008 and 2009 MP's out there.
7. I saved nearly $700, which brought the refurb within a couple hundred dollars of the few unsupported used MP 2010's out there.
8. I get to build it, meaning matching the ram and so forth, which means a more stable and higher performance machine.
9. I targeted a Snow Leopard machine because it will run all of the software I need, is lean, and has backwards compatibility with a few earlier apps I'd like to keep using.
10. I wanted to avoid overbuilding, because more cores means more heat and power consumption. Plus, a 2.4 12 core would be slower for nearly everything I do (no intense video, etc.).

Anyway, my approach was to write out what I'd need for hardware and software requirements and compatibility, and then target the best available machine. It was time-consuming, but what else can we do, given the current situation?

 

[PowerPCMacMan]

There was no real mention from Tim Cook specifically saying a NEW MAC PRO would come out.. all he said was something "wonderful".. I have a hunch as I have been speculating all along that this "wonderful" machine is going to be a hybrid of a mac mini or iMac with PRO stuck on the name.

I think the days of highly expandable Mac Pros is numbered and given Apple's current direction towards the consumer and not the Pro User, this will mean a less capable and expandable system. Sure it will be a bit faster and might be better, but we pro users need the extra PCIe slots for expanding our machines which I am assuming the new ones won't have that.

To be fair, the following day I believe either the NYT or the WSJ confirmed over the phone with an unnamed Apple executive that Tim Cook's quote was indeed referring to a new Mac Pro model in 2013 and not something else. It was also then confirmed again to European Apple dealers just shortly after the news of MP discontinuation in Europe, that a replacement was coming soon. There are also GPU drivers appearing in ML that are almost certainly not related to the other Mac models in 2013.

You may or may not find that to be convincing information, but it's not just "hanging on the one sentence".

 

[OS6-OSX]

I'm a film editor, AE and DIT by trade, and my 2008 Mac Pro 8-core continues to serve my needs just fine. Is it the fastest machine available? No. Is it the slowest? No. Would I like to upgrade? Sure, but it's still not a pressing issue that's affecting to ability to deliver (not yet, anyway).

When you use computers for professional creative work, you can't always think in terms of having the latest and greatest. You also need to think in terms of getting the job done while remaining cost effective.

And for the record, you don't necessarily *NEED* a 12-core for video editing. Unless you find yourself constantly encoding and rendering in applications that can take advantage of all those cores, it's a lot of wasted money.

Hear! Hear!

Also "It's the software stupid!" You can have the 12-core trying to edit multicam Epic R3D or H.264 and think your new MP sucks! Is the problem:
1. The amount of ram?
2. HD speed?
3. HD vs SSD?
4. Raid speed or no raid?
5. CUDA cores or no CUDA
6. 12 cores not enough?
7. Does your SW only uses 1 core?
Chasing the latest greatest HW is not the answer.

MacPro 2008 3.1 | 14GB Ram | Quadro 4000 | MC6.0 | OS 10.6.8 | MOTU HDX-SDI | ATTO R644| LaCie 324

 

[Tesselator]

Chasing the latest greatest HW is not the answer.

Maybe not in all cases, but it sure is fun!

 

[thekev]

I'm a film editor, AE and DIT by trade, and my 2008 Mac Pro 8-core continues to serve my needs just fine. Is it the fastest machine available? No. Is it the slowest? No. Would I like to upgrade? Sure, but it's still not a pressing issue that's affecting to ability to deliver (not yet, anyway).

When you use computers for professional creative work, you can't always think in terms of having the latest and greatest. You also need to think in terms of getting the job done while remaining cost effective. It's easy to spend over $6k on a 12-core Mac Pro (and thousands more on upgrades and software) and if you're not doing enough paying work to justify these costs, something is very wrong.

With that said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with starting smaller. For example, the single-processor hex-core machines are still very solid performers. And if you're the adventurous type, you can buy an old base 2009 quad-core, flash it with the 5,1 firmware and drop in a hex-core 3600 series Xeon. The end result is a very fast Mac Pro (even by today's standards) for under $2,000, even with RAM upgrades. In a price/performance argument, I believe it can be generally agreed upon that it's REALLY hard to beat the hex.

And for the record, you don't necessarily *NEED* a 12-core for video editing. Unless you find yourself constantly encoding and rendering in applications that can take advantage of all those cores, it's a lot of wasted money.

I thought you wanted to update due to the cost of more ram upgrades being too high to be practical for older hardware? I agree on the 4,1 to 5,1 firmware flash. The best buy 12 core clearance models also seem like a fairly strong value. I'm with you about considering costs. Adding up storage, displays, computer, software, large wacom, etc. gets quite expensive.

 

[d-m-a-x]

man, i can't wait till the day i don't have to read these forums to see if / will a new one will come. I prefer to come here for tech support on an up-to-date screaming fast machine.

 

[Tesselator]

man, i can't wait till the day i don't have to read these forums to see if / will a new one will come. I prefer to come here for tech support on an up-to-date screaming fast machine.

Yeah, all the vexing is a little weird huh?!

The Trolls are digging it though! LOL

 

[flat five]

In short, the notion being required to hold onto a machine for very long time is a constraint that doesn't make alot of sense. It is independent of what the actual work and workload is.

a thousand dollars to get a new machine up and running though.. dunno, it's an invisible cost of upgrading computers and you (not u specifically) shouldn't be doing it too often..

 

[AFDoc]

So, I've been lurking on these boards for quite awhile and been checking out macrumors for a good year or so. Here's my story, I have a really crappy old Dell that is pretty much done. I am using my wife's 7 year old Macbook Pro to answer emails and print out eBay labels, etc.

Here's my frustration, I am in school and NEED a new computer. I do heavy video editing and have taken several classes on Protools and other music production software. I want to get into film editing and music and there will be a point soon at which I won't have access to the school computers. If I take a summer class, I'll be okay through the end of summer.
I'm getting sick of waiting for a new Mac Pro. As someone who is trying to convert to Mac and planning on giving them thousands of dollars, the secrecy is somewhat insulting. I have a hard time stomaching the idea of buying a decked out iMac, knowing that I essentially can't replace any parts except the RAM. That is just seems foolish to me. Generally, I can 'milk' a computer for a very long time by replacing parts and not replacing the whole computer every three years. Since we are not even remotely wealthy, I'd rather pay more up front for a Mac Pro and use it for a really long time.
I just wish Apple would tell us something. I've been holding off for over a year hoping they will give a substantial update to the Mac Pro line, but my inkling is that they are trying to get rid of it altogether. In the same way that the last version of Final Cut Pro was dumbed down, they may be trying to dumb down their desktop line as well. I refuse to buy another Windows machine, but I can't wait forever.
Frustrated, like many others.

You're right... Apple should be clearing their plans with you, how dare they keep you out of the loop. Damn them!!! Op, IF you need a computer buy one, don't worry what is coming down the pipe, there will always be another, better computer on the way.

where as your method of going onto a random forum and throwing a tantrum is better How?

It makes people feel better to share their complaints. It's not like any of else can help the issue, simply agree with OP so he doesn't feel alone. Not sure why some need this type of reinforcement but it seems some do.

 

[ActionableMango]

There was no real mention from Tim Cook specifically saying a NEW MAC PRO would come out.. all he said was something "wonderful".

I know. If you'll read my post that you quoted, I wasn't referring to Tim Cook.

I found the quote I mentioned, actually from Forbes (and not NYT or WSJ):

"An Apple spokesman just told me that new models and new designs of the Mac Pro are in the works and will likely be released in 2013."

As to whether or not it's going to be some PCIe-less consumer computer as you state, that is anyone's guess. But this reporter is saying there will be a new "Mac Pro".

 

[deconstruct60]

a thousand dollars to get a new machine up and running though.. dunno, it's an invisible cost of upgrading computers and you (not u specifically) shouldn't be doing it too often..

If a Mac Pro is generating $100K/year in profits and could generate $130K/year in profits if it was 30% faster then you should be updating each year in years where faster machines appear. That could be every year if Apple dropped new product with that kind of yearly increase at the price points you buy at.

But yes for the folks buying "overkill" where a faster machine doesn't really do much more than supposedly "future proof" the investment, it doesn't.