Is the new Mac Pro a failure?

[Bytehoven]

My guess would be, especially looking at the 50 cMP problems for every nMP problem here on MacRumors, that we were costing Apple money.

Hmmm... maybe those observations indicate 50 times as many cMP users...

For anyone who has been using and developing for Apple hardware, history repeats itself. I recall maximizing the Mac IIci for digital audio/midi production. Then I recall how many loved the Mac IIfx with all of the nubus slots. Then what did Apple do with the next workstation? They gave us a nMP-esque solution and forced many into expansion bay solutions.

I don't know what percentage of professional folks use a cMP, nMP or something else. But IMHO it's the creative pro users and developers that help grow and maintain the Apple mythology which enabled Apple to hypnotized the general public. AND Apple has demonstrated on more than one occasion a willingness to "challenge" the professional user base with hardware updates which undermine the needs of those users. I never understood the mind set, but in a final calculation, staying with Apple remained a lesser of two evils.

That said... I must admit Apple was on a redemptive hardware roll with the G5 and then cMP solutions. Then some "form over function" Elf got promoted to a position of power and influence .. badda boom, badda bing... nMP.

 

[AidenShaw]

...
That said... I must admit Apple was on a redemptive hardware roll with the G5 and then cMP solutions. Then some "form over function" Elf got promoted to a position of power and influence .. badda boom, badda bing... nMP.

I don't know whether the Elf got promoted -- or whether he no longer had adult supervision after 5 October 2011...

 

[Arron Rouse]

None of this could be added to the cMP form factor? It required a complete redesign of the Mac Pro in order to add this technology?

You mean the people who are asking questions about doing things Apple never intended them to do? Such as flashing PC video cards? Upgrading processors? Those kinds of issues? As for asking about USB 3...hmmm...what's wrong with that? People asking for recommendations...how odd...I've never seen that before.

Nothing is wrong with it from our perspective but it's not where Apple wants to be. It was the Woz gang vs the Jobs gang and the latter won. If you're in the Woz gang, there's a PC, a Raspberry Pi and an Android phone waiting for you.

Why would they build a new cMP? It wouldn't generate headlines. As I've already pointed out, the cMP was a liability to Apple Care. The nMP removes the liability but adds all the new stuff.

So that leaves only four real reasons for the cMP chassis.

• Storage - for storage, go buy a NAS. All of your machines can use it and it'll only use 20W to keep it running. If there's anything to moan about, it's that Apple hasn't realised that Fusion could be used to create seamless tiered storage: M.2 >> Local drive >> NAS >> Cloud.
  
• Optical drives - reminds me of the German journalist who literally cried when they announced the iMac didn't have a floppy drive. Optical drives are history. Get over it.
• PCIe slots - if it uses less than 20 Gbit/s, a Thunderbolt connection works just as well. So that's pretty much every mainstream item except graphics cards. PCIe slots are history. Get over it.
• Graphics cards - it isn't a PC and it isn't for games. Go buy a Steam machine and get over it.

Hmmm... maybe those observations indicate 50 times as many cMP users...

For anyone who has been using and developing for Apple hardware, history repeats itself. I recall maximizing the Mac IIci for digital audio/midi production. Then I recall how many loved the Mac IIfx with all of the nubus slots. Then what did Apple do with the next workstation? They gave us a nMP-esque solution and forced many into expansion bay solutions.

I don't know what percentage of professional folks use a cMP, nMP or something else. But IMHO it's the creative pro users and developers that help grow and maintain the Apple mythology which enabled Apple to hypnotized the general public. AND Apple has demonstrated on more than one occasion a willingness to "challenge" the professional user base with hardware updates which undermine the needs of those users. I never understood the mind set, but in a final calculation, staying with Apple remained a lesser of two evils.

That said... I must admit Apple was on a redemptive hardware roll with the G5 and then cMP solutions. Then some "form over function" Elf got promoted to a position of power and influence .. badda boom, badda bing... nMP.

I soldered my first computer together in the seventies, had an Apple II and have fond memories of when the Lisa was launched. But that doesn't change the fact that Apple is not really about us creative pros any more. For better or worse, Apple belongs to the hipsters. You should only be as loyal to a brand for as long as that brand is loyal to you and Apple has passed us by. I still prefer using a Mac to a PC but that doesn't change the fact that Apple's core customers now buy iPhones, iPads and watches.

So, no, I doubt it's 50 times as many cMP users. The nMP contains at least some of the lessons from the hipsters and is more reliable for the simple reason that there are very few excuses to open it up.

We've just got an echo chamber here. A bunch of us cMP users trying to hold onto what was instead of admitting what is. Good as my cMP is, as much as it still carries out useful work, just like all technology, it's well on its way to becoming a relic. So is the nMP, but it's got a few more years of life than the cMP.

 

[monokakata]

Why are you surprised? The nMP is a nice system and it's suitable for a number of environments. The problem many people have with the nMP isn't so much the nMP itself but rather the lack of a cMP form factor.

I was surprised because, although I can't remember every posting in this long thread, I only remember a few people talking about using the nMP in large-ish environments, particularly those where shared storage is required. Certainly my memory could have failed me about that. And there's the issue of things like Red cards, too, isn't there?

And I'm not personally anti-nMP. When my cMP failed, I was going to buy one, but in the interim I had gotten addicted to a retina display. So I went for a loaded retina iMac, went all-in on TB storage, and now I'm just waiting for a monitor as good as the 27 retina, and for the nMP to get upgraded. At that point I might get one, although I'm happier with the iMac than I ever thought I'd be. It's still laggier with Lightroom than I'd like, though.

 

[flat five]

not exactly the same since apple doesn't have cad software of their own but..
apple computers are designed using windows software..

Alias and Rhino... probably NX & Catia &/or Solidworks too.

(well, rhino now has a mac version but it wasn't officially released until this year.)

60minutes aired a thing on apple the other day in which they (sort of) gave a look inside the design studio..
http://www.cbsnews.com/videos/inside-apple-part-one/

looks like (for the watch at least), they're using the mac version of Alias via mac pro..

----
@Demigod Mac
so it's apple hardware with (made for) mac software.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

What did the Romans ever do for us? I mean Apple. What did Apple ever do for us? Aside from space, weight and slightly quieter operation. And built in PCIe SSD. And faster processors. And dual graphics cards. And lower electricity bills. And USB 3. And Thunderbolt. And Bluetooth 4. And 4k monitor support out of the box. Aside from those, what did Apple ever do for us?

PCI SSD are faster for the cMP. Processors are the same speed for cMP. Graphics cards are faster for the cMP. USB 3 is available as well as USB 3.1 is available for the cMP. Bluetooth 4 and ac are available. So, basically, the cMP is better.

What links? One goes to a drive review and the other to some benchmarks from an old version of Resolve. And the cMP ibn those benchmarks has mods that you'd have a tough time persuading even most die-hard cMP fanatics to pay for let alone a business.

Um, this one. http://barefeats.com/tube16.html

Resolve whatever, any benchmark is a benchmark. Point is the top of the line 12 core 3.46Ghz Xeon on the cMP is as fast (in some cases faster) than the 2.7GHz 12 core on the nMP. You can hold your breath, stamp your feet, like it, not, doesnt change the fact that it's true. There's nothing to do, just get the turnkey from OWC. It's easier than putting in a new video card.

I'm not so glad that you're trying to put words in my mouth. I do NOT agree that it's faster. Especially as newer Resolve benchmarks (though still not the current version) show it's not: http://barefeats.com/imac5k18.html

Good, because I guarantee you I didnt appreciate your glib and arrogant retort acting like you made a point when you simply changed goal posts. changing of goal posts

And congratulations, you successfully set up your very own strawman! You must be so proud. I showed you performance from the top of the line for each model. They chose a cMP that was 6core and raced it against 8 core nMP and won. WOW amazing result, if you are not in the least lucid. But, back to my point and not your shifted self aggrandized arrogantly delivered strawman point, at the top of each models performance metrics, the CPUs are basically even.

Around here there are a lot of horse owners. They don't buy horse trucks to move the horses around, they buy a Range Rover and a horse box. They don't expect people who want a Range Rover to buy horse trucks either.

One last thing. Being an ex-journo, I got off my backside and went down to the local Apple dealer this afternoon to get their input. They're only 150m from my house. Apparently the sales are about the same for the nMP as they were for the cMP; the buyers are happy with them; the majority bought them for Photoshop, Illustrator and InDesign.

Wow, a master of goal post moving. Lovely. And shock, the people that bought them, are happy with them, because that's clearly the point. /sarcasm

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

So that leaves only four real reasons for the cMP chassis.

• Storage - for storage, go buy a NAS. All of your machines can use it and it'll only use 20W to keep it running. If there's anything to moan about, it's that Apple hasn't realised that Fusion could be used to create seamless tiered storage: M.2 >> Local drive >> NAS >> Cloud.
  
• Optical drives - reminds me of the German journalist who literally cried when they announced the iMac didn't have a floppy drive. Optical drives are history. Get over it.
• PCIe slots - if it uses less than 20 Gbit/s, a Thunderbolt connection works just as well. So that's pretty much every mainstream item except graphics cards. PCIe slots are history. Get over it.
• Graphics cards - it isn't a PC and it isn't for games. Go buy a Steam machine and get over it.

Um, get over yourself instead of telling people what they should get over.

If youre doing 4k capture, the PCI will be better quality/performance. Further, if you want have a 5900MB/sec (ie over 47Gbit/s) SSD transfer rate like this card (http://barefeats.com/hard210.html), thunderbolt cant give you full bandwidth. A PCI card can also let you get new things like USB 3.1, available on the cMP directly, and you'll need to buy that pesky PCI chasis to get it to work on the nMP. Having more than 1 TB of local storage is needed by a great diversity of professionals; NAS are too slow for many professional purposes (i.e., 4k video).

So, you know, other than being wrong, you'd have a point.

 

[Bytehoven]

We've just got an echo chamber here. A bunch of us cMP users trying to hold onto what was instead of admitting what is. .

I'd say in many cases it's cMP users trying to hold onto and upgrade a "tool" already in their toolkit. I'm just glad the market place provided alternatives to not only extending the life of my cMP, but help it remain competitive for less $$$.

 

[Mago]

Um, get over yourself instead of telling people what they should get over.

If youre doing 4k capture, the PCI will be better quality/performance. Further, if you want have a 5900MB/sec (ie over 47Gbit/s) SSD transfer rate like this card (http://barefeats.com/hard210.html), thunderbolt cant give you full bandwidth. A PCI card can also let you get new things like USB 3.1, available on the cMP directly, and you'll need to buy that pesky PCI chasis to get it to work on the nMP. Having more than 1 TB of local storage is needed by a great diversity of professionals; NAS are too slow for many professional purposes (i.e., 4k video).

So, you know, other than being wrong, you'd have a point.

BIased, Please check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)#Thunderbolt_2

4K capture devices on TB Chassis work as well as on PCIe bus period, 4K video capture hasn't enough bandwidth to jamm a Thunderbol 2 bus (TB in nMP is the TB2 variety).

For storage, the card you quoted uses full 16 PCIe lanes to host 4 m.2 SSD, actually you can host 2 m.2 SSD on a single TB2 port (the nMP has 6), so the nMP actually can host 12 m.2 SSD., the updated nMP will have TB3 with double bandwidth, so with current offering I can install on my nMP 6TB of SSD M.2 storage (12x512GB).

Further on TB2 you have Flexibility to daisy chain more than that, when not using one storage device you can use another on the daisy chain, you can't do that on PCIe, also I can Link My TB2 devices using Optical Fiber cable at 100 ft (and more as long there is a optical fiber cable as long as required) from my mac, actually isolating the capture device form any electronic noise source, try that on PCIe.

FYI LaCie's Little Big Disk TB2 SSD actually is an dual SSD M.2 Enclosure (I have One), this sis the Workhorse of 4K editing studios, GET OVER this.

Message to the friend Arron Rouse dont care this poll, just check those who voted negative how many coments have made (most <20) they are most clones working for some body out there selling WorkStations (actually trying to dell workstations)

 

[bahndoos]

I voted failure because it simply does not do what the classic Mac Pro's have done previously, i.e. offer great expandability and let you make it your own creative powerhouse. Sure, the current one has a lot of power, but its not much different than souped up iMac without the display.

Having said that, Apple could save it if they were to think up some real innovation, e.g. an outer shell with expandability options to the gills in which the desktop module could sit, or attach to some way. Have it look like something you could put on your desk or under it. Make that your desktop powerhouse, and be able to simply detach/remove the core desktop module for portability, since it is so portable. Re-brand it as the ultimate desktop/mobile power Mac.

 

[Mago]

PCI SSD are faster for the cMP. Processors are the same speed for cMP. Graphics cards are faster for the cMP. USB 3 is available as well as USB 3.1 is available for the cMP. Bluetooth 4 and ac are available. So, basically, the cMP is better.

Biased, also the new iMac has an faster SSD than the nMP, what about external SSDs? I can Install 12 LaCie LBD TB2 with 1.5GB/s can you do that on the cMP, what about the NVMe SSD which will replace current PCIe SSD o the upcoming updated nMP (2.5GB/s).

So basically th nMP is faster, smaller, uses much less power, indeed its much better than the cMP

Um, this one. http://barefeats.com/tube16.html

Resolve whatever, any benchmark is a benchmark. Point is the top of the line 12 core 3.46Ghz Xeon on the cMP is as fast (in some cases faster) than the 2.7GHz 12 core on the nMP. You can hold your breath, stamp your feet, like it, not, doesnt change the fact that it's true. There's nothing to do, just get the turnkey from OWC. It's easier than putting in a new video card.

This CPU on the cMP was n CTO option or an DIY upgrade? if this was an DIY upgrade you should then compare a CMP with an nMP with DIY upgaded CPU.

Good, because I guarantee you I didnt appreciate your glib and arrogant retort acting like you made a point when you simply changed goal posts. changing of goal posts

The language tells me here where exactly the arrogance resides.

And congratulations, you successfully set up your very own strawman! You must be so proud. I showed you performance from the top of the line for each model. They chose a cMP that was 6core and raced it against 8 core nMP and won. WOW amazing result, if you are not in the least lucid. But, back to my point and not your shifted self aggrandized arrogantly delivered strawman point, at the top of each models performance metrics, the CPUs are basically even.

Benchmarking a System on specific applications its un fair, since those application may not have all the optimization to take advantage of the new hardware, for this is what std benchmark test are made, I rely on GeekBeench it doesn't lies on which machine sis superior (either single thread and multi-thread, single or double precision the nMP is superior

Wow, a master of goal post moving. Lovely. And shock, the people that bought them, are happy with them, because that's clearly the point. /sarcasm

Most Mac Users comes to the forums just to search for help, very few are fanboys (as me) to come here and vote for what they consider is the Best OS/X Workstation yet.

Do you wanna see sarcasm, look at eht pool, seems the results were announced by Steve Harvey (as the negative votes comes mostly from users with less than 20 post, some also have only 3 post ever).

 

[Simon R.]

Incredible to continue to watch people trying to convince people that the nMP is a proper cMP replacement. It isn't, probably never will be. And also incredible to see some people arguing that price isn't an argument, "because Apple has never been cheap", or "because a real pro won't care". I give up, you people just can't accept that the nMP is not as well suited as the old one for some/many pro applications. "Use a NAS" - lol, that one really gave me a good laugh.

 

[996085]

Nothing is wrong with it from our perspective but it's not where Apple wants to be. It was the Woz gang vs the Jobs gang and the latter won. If you're in the Woz gang, there's a PC, a Raspberry Pi and an Android phone waiting for you.

Why would they build a new cMP? It wouldn't generate headlines. As I've already pointed out, the cMP was a liability to Apple Care. The nMP removes the liability but adds all the new stuff.

So that leaves only four real reasons for the cMP chassis.

• Storage - for storage, go buy a NAS. All of your machines can use it and it'll only use 20W to keep it running. If there's anything to moan about, it's that Apple hasn't realised that Fusion could be used to create seamless tiered storage: M.2 >> Local drive >> NAS >> Cloud.
  
• Optical drives - reminds me of the German journalist who literally cried when they announced the iMac didn't have a floppy drive. Optical drives are history. Get over it.
• PCIe slots - if it uses less than 20 Gbit/s, a Thunderbolt connection works just as well. So that's pretty much every mainstream item except graphics cards. PCIe slots are history. Get over it.
• Graphics cards - it isn't a PC and it isn't for games. Go buy a Steam machine and get over it.

Who the hell put you in charge of deciding others peoples wants / needs? Perhaps you're OK with someone else dictating your life to you but I'm not. So get over yourself.

I was surprised because, although I can't remember every posting in this long thread, I only remember a few people talking about using the nMP in large-ish environments, particularly those where shared storage is required. Certainly my memory could have failed me about that. And there's the issue of things like Red cards, too, isn't there?

And I'm not personally anti-nMP. When my cMP failed, I was going to buy one, but in the interim I had gotten addicted to a retina display. So I went for a loaded retina iMac, went all-in on TB storage, and now I'm just waiting for a monitor as good as the 27 retina, and for the nMP to get upgraded. At that point I might get one, although I'm happier with the iMac than I ever thought I'd be. It's still laggier with Lightroom than I'd like, though.

I think most here, even those who advocate the cMP, feel this way. The issue isn't the nMP per se but rather how the nMP eliminated the only expandable Mac left.

 

[Mago]

I wanna see the arguments against the updated nMP when it launched in April.

 

[996085]

Um, this one. http://barefeats.com/tube16.html

Resolve whatever, any benchmark is a benchmark. Point is the top of the line 12 core 3.46Ghz Xeon on the cMP is as fast (in some cases faster) than the 2.7GHz 12 core on the nMP. You can hold your breath, stamp your feet, like it, not, doesnt change the fact that it's true. There's nothing to do, just get the turnkey from OWC. It's easier than putting in a new video card.

One thing people like Arron continue overlook is the cMP scores as well as it does against the nMP because it was upgraded. Without this ability the cMP would no longer be competitive. It is the lack of upgradability in the nMP which is going to render it obsolete faster than the cMP at the same point in its life. When Thunderbolt 3 is released the nMP will not be able to utilize it. Same with USB 3.1...the nMP will never be able to utilize it. Meanwhile the cMP will...ironic isn't it?

 

[Mago]

Who the hell put you in charge of deciding others peoples wants / needs? Perhaps you're OK with someone else dictating your life to you but I'm not. So get over yourself.


I think most here, even those who advocate the cMP, feel this way. The issue isn't the nMP per se but rather how the nMP eliminated the only expandable Mac left.

You should write the only Mac with internal hdd bays, the only "expandable" dismisses the nMP allows external expansion beyond the cMP possibilities, the only "limitation" (which actually only worries to DIY and gamers no to corporate pros) is about the GPU you have to choice it carefully for its lifespan, beyond that you can upgrade or expand cpu memory and internal ssd (still pending to see if AMD releases update or upgrade GPU packs for the nMP when the u'nMP is released.

 

[lowendlinux]

You should write the only Mac with internal hdd bays, the only "expandable" dismisses the nMP allows external expansion beyond the cMP possibilities, the only "limitation" (which actually only worries to DIY and gamers no to corporate pros) is about the GPU you have to choice it carefully for its lifespan, beyond that you can upgrade or expand cpu memory and internal ssd (still pending to see if AMD releases update or upgrade GPU packs for the nMP when the u'nMP is released.

I'm a corporate pro and that lack of internal expansion is the reason I got a cMP in May of 2014

 

[Mago]

One thing people like Arron continue overlook is the cMP scores as well as it does against the nMP because it was upgraded. Without this ability the cMP would no longer be competitive. It is the lack of upgradability in the nMP which is going to render it obsolete faster than the cMP at the same point in its life. When Thunderbolt 3 is released the nMP will not be able to utilize it. Same with USB 3.1...the nMP will never be able to utilize it. Meanwhile the cMP will...ironic isn't it?

Most u'nMP will replace cMP at end of life cycle not the current nMP, those exploiting the nMP will not need the nMP new features for a while and those with pockets will purchase a new system instead upgrade as usual and sell the old nMP or give it to an less demanding teammate.

 

[Mago]

I'm a corporate pro and that lack of internal expansion is the reason I got a cMP in May of 2014

Please don't sent me applications to replace you in case you decide to go, I'm not interested to move to your corporation....

 

[996085]

We've just got an echo chamber here. A bunch of us cMP users trying to hold onto what was instead of admitting what is. Good as my cMP is, as much as it still carries out useful work, just like all technology, it's well on its way to becoming a relic. So is the nMP, but it's got a few more years of life than the cMP.

There you go again confusing what it is with what it could have been. Imagine how impressive a new Mac Pro would have been had Apple updated the internals of the cMP to contain current processors, memory, PCIe, USB, SATA, and Thunderbolt. Nothing in the cMP form factor prevented Apple from doing that. Such a systems would match the nMP in terms of performance and perhaps even outperform it as upgrades become available (given it's been two years since the release of the nMP I'm sure third parties would have already released some pretty cool upgrades / expansion options by now).

 

[lowendlinux]

Most u'nMP will replace cMP at end of life cycle not the current nMP, those exploiting the nMP will not need the nMP new features for a while and those with pockets will purchase a new system instead upgrade as usual and sell the old nMP or give it to an less demanding teammate.

I'm actually not sure what I'm going to do at lifecycle replacement. It'll be just as hard to convince the budget folks to switch to PC as it will to convince them to switch to the nMP either way expensive things will need replaced.

 

[lowendlinux]

Please don't sent me applications to replace you in case you decide to go, I'm not interested to move to your corporation....

OK?

That's fine you don't need to work where you don't want.

 

[Mago]

There you go again confusing what it is with what it could have been. Imagine how impressive a new Mac Pro would have been had Apple updated the internals of the cMP to contain current processors, memory, PCIe, USB, SATA, and Thunderbolt. Nothing in the cMP form factor prevented Apple from doing that. Such a systems would match the nMP in terms of performance and perhaps even outperform it as upgrades become available (given it's been two years since the release of the nMP I'm sure third parties would have already released some pretty cool upgrades / expansion options by now).

Only well argumented response. With an simple answer:

The cMP form factor is power and space inefficient and most of its goodies actually worth to an small minority of users, I concede Apple would have saved few dollars with the cMP form factor and actually deliver the same capabilities also more, thanks God this doesn't happen (and thank to EPA).

 

[-hh]

Nothing is wrong with it from our perspective but it's not where Apple wants to be...

Which is really the only "Bottom Line" that matters.

Why would they build a new cMP? It wouldn't generate headlines...

The cMP always generated a different kind of headline, namely that it was THE beast for the most demanding Pro. That wouldn't have changed. Do note that the nMP has been beaten in some of its benchmark comparison tests by iMacs...which is a change.

So that leaves only four real reasons for the cMP chassis.

• Storage - for storage, go buy a NAS. All of your machines can use it and it'll only use 20W to keep it running. If there's anything to moan about, it's that Apple hasn't realised that Fusion could be used to create seamless tiered storage: M.2 >> Local drive >> NAS >> Cloud.

Sure ... but now kindly tell us just which NAS (make/model & price) can at least match what the cMP could provide in terms of I/O bandwidth performance. Specifically, something between 200 MB/s and 500 MB/s would be a start.

And this is a point that I made awhile back: the 'old vs new' comparison isn't merely about ticking off checkboxes to see if a particular capability is possible: it is also about if that capability can be provided at an equal or better value than the status quo. This is an example where the nMP's paradigm of "everything external" fails, and fails catastrophically: the financial examination of my personal use case results in a +35% cost growth ... just to tread water.

• Optical drives - reminds me of the German journalist who literally cried when they announced the iMac didn't have a floppy drive. Optical drives are history. Get over it.

A fair enough comment, if only the Apple App Store didn't have some really major issues. And what this reminds me of is that one of the really bad strategic moves that Apple has done with the nMP is that they made the expense of transitioning from a cMP to a nMP unnecessarily expensive to swallow. Specifically, it impacts those generally smaller organizations/businesses who lack super-deep pockets, because they couldn't break down the introduction of Thunderbolt into smaller pieces.

For example, when USB came out, existing PowerMac users could buy an expansion card and then take some time to replace their non-USB peripherals with USB peripherals, in anticipation of when the Mac was lifecycled out, and at that time, their budgetary expense was just for the {Mac} instead of the {Mac+USBprinter+USBscanner+USBetc}.

• PCIe slots - if it uses less than 20 Gbit/s, a Thunderbolt connection works just as well...

But is that approach a better financial VALUE for the customer? Nope. There's a hefty "Thunderbolt Tax" that has to be paid.

• Graphics cards - it isn't a PC and it isn't for games. Go buy a Steam machine and get over it.

The people jumping through hoops for more powerful GPUs aren't generally gamers, so this defense is invalid.

I soldered my first computer together in the seventies, had an Apple II and have fond memories of when the Lisa was launched. But that doesn't change the fact that Apple is not really about us creative pros any more...

Translation: we've become old goats who are more demanding hardnosed customers who want value, whereas Apple is going for the easy buck of the populist fad. That really worked out well for Sony, didn't it?

So, no, I doubt it's 50 times as many cMP users...

Frankly, I'm of the opinion that the number is much higher than 50:1. Do keep in mind that the legacy Mac Pro went through six (6) design iterations over the greater part of a decade (7 years), whereas the nMP has had just one, and because of its delayed introduction and supply constraints, has really only had just over one real year of actual availability.

Particularly since the $100M spent to establish the US manufacturing line for it has been called out in the Press as a "token gesture" and "... little more than a glorified and expensive publicity stunt.", as well as how even the nMP has been conspicuously absent from Cook's presentations of their product lines.

-hh

 

[Zorn]

We've just got an echo chamber here. A bunch of us cMP users trying to hold onto what was instead of admitting what is.

It's pretty flip & dismissive to suggest anyone that criticizes the new design is just some wayward dreamer. I think the nMP is an amazing looking machine, and for a moment in time, it had really powerful components.

My dislike of it stems from the simple, irrefutable fact that for something that was marketed as a Pro Desktop, the machine has no longevity whatsoever. If you want to upgrade the 2011-era graphics, add I/O such as USB-C or 3.1, or make any other type of updates to try and keep your $3000-$10000 piece of art somewhat current, nMP owners have one solution:

1) Carefully pick up nMP

2) Place nMP into dumpster (or recycling bin if you feel particularly green)

3) Visit Apple Store and purchase new $3000-$10000 nMP

Unless someone is literally handing these things to you for free, this makes no sense at all.