Mac Pro Rising

[Reticuli]

The Apple nMP is form over function and belongs in the museum of modern art not on a desktop!
View attachment 640066

All apple products are form over function.
They may not be lacking in function, but every single one of them prizes form over function.

 

[iBug2]

All apple products are form over function.
They may not be lacking in function, but every single one of them prizes form over function.

Not really, the original iMac having handles was an example of function over form. Same with PowerMac G3, G4, G5 and then cMP.

The nMP being small is an example of function over form, not vice versa. Apple could have put the same internals into a much larger box with so much more ease. Squishing all that into an almost portable box was the actual challenge, and the device being tiny does not add to the form, it adds to the function. You may argue that they could have done the same with a rectangular box of same volume, which would have been easier, and choosing cylindrical is an example of form over function, since as long as the mobility is the same, who cares if it's a cylinder or rectangular?

 

[koyoot]

Form over function is true if you are not seeing the functions of the form.

Maybe here lies the problem?

 

[iBug2]

Form over function is true if you are not seeing the functions of the form.

Maybe here lies the problem?

This. Form is part of the function, I wonder how anyone fails to see this. For me, nMP being tiny added to its function rather than its form.

I had to empty a suitcase and put my cMP inside it to carry it to the Apple Store every time there was something wrong with it. If you have a car, it's much more easier yes, but I didn't. With the nMP, if something happens to it, I can just put it in my backpack and bring it to the Apple store, like a laptop.

 

[ITguy2016]

I understand some folks have no interest in any external boxes for storage, eGPU, etc via TB3. For those of us that need such things, being able to park a noisy box away from your workspace via tactical fiber is a welcome feature.

The ability to do this was not introduced with the nMP. One can use external storage with the cMP. If you're going to extol benefits of the nMP be certain to do so with something that is unique to the nMP. The ability to use external storage is not one of them.

 

[Reticuli]

The ability to do this was not introduced with the nMP. One can use external storage with the cMP. If you're going to extol benefits of the nMP be certain to do so with something that is unique to the nMP. The ability to use external storage is not one of them.

What form factor do you think the 2016 iteration of the Mac Pro will take (if there is indeed a 2016 iteration)?
Are you confident that enough people have shared your view of it as a failure (and therefore refrained from purchasing) to impact the sales figures sufficiently to force a change in direction?

Im not being confrontational, I'm just curious.

Macworld shared a concept design from here a while back, of a still compact, yet square Mac Pro.
Interesting, but unlikely.

Personally I reckon the cylinder will be here for at least one more iteration.

 

[ITguy2016]

This. Form is part of the function, I wonder how anyone fails to see this. For me, nMP being tiny added to its function rather than its form.

I had to empty a suitcase and put my cMP inside it to carry it to the Apple Store every time there was something wrong with it. If you have a car, it's much more easier yes, but I didn't. With the nMP, if something happens to it, I can just put it in my backpack and bring it to the Apple store, like a laptop.

If form (i.e. smaller size) is important to you then Apple offers an even more attractive solution for you in the form of the Mac Mini.

 

[koyoot]

If form (i.e. smaller size) is important to you then Apple offers an even more attractive solution for you in the form of the Mac Mini.

I thought you didn't wanted anyone to tell you what to prefer.

Yet you do the same to others.

As I have said, Form is over function if you fail to see the functions of the form.

 

[iBug2]

If form (i.e. smaller size) is important to you then Apple offers an even more attractive solution for you in the form of the Mac Mini.

Mac Mini is not fast enough, yet, to be my desktop, and it's way too loud. But if it's good enough for you, go for it.
[doublepost=1468411224][/doublepost]If Apple ever makes a circular watch, then people can scream "form over function", because a circular screen does not make any sense if you are going to read text from it.

If size is part of the form, not the function, why the hell did they invent laptops?

 

[ITguy2016]

What form factor do you think the 2016 iteration of the Mac Pro will take (if there is indeed a 2016 iteration)?
Are you confident that enough people have shared your view of it as a failure (and therefore refrained from purchasing) to impact the sales figures sufficiently to force a change in direction?

Im not being confrontational, I'm just curious.

Macworld shared a concept design from here a while back, of a still compact, yet square Mac Pro.
Interesting, but unlikely.

Personally I reckon the cylinder will be here for at least one more iteration.

I doubt Apple will change their direction. The way I look at it Apple has too much invested in the new design and total demand, even with the previous form factor, is too low to warrant spending significant money on a redesign. They need to milk, er I mean obtain an ROI, out of the existing customers on the current design.

 

[AidenShaw]

What form factor do you think the 2016 iteration of the Mac Pro will take (if there is indeed a 2016 iteration)?
...
Personally I reckon the cylinder will be here for at least one more iteration.

There is an implicit assumption of EITHER a cylinder OR a tower in this question.

There is no reason that Apple couldn't make BOTH an updated cylinder AND a re-imagined tower. (E.g. the new tower wouldn't have four 3.5" disk bays - how about a couple of 2.5" slots and six NVMe blade slots instead? Add a slot for a laptop-like optical. Two PCIe 3.0 x16 double-wide slots, and three x4 and x8 slots not blocked by a GPU.)

 

[ITguy2016]

Mac Mini is not fast enough, yet, to be my desktop, and it's way too loud. But if it's good enough for you, go for it.
[doublepost=1468411224][/doublepost]If Apple ever makes a circular watch, then people can scream "form over function", because a circular screen does not make any sense if you are going to read text from it.

If size is part of the form, not the function, why the hell did they invent laptops?

IOW form factor (in this case size) is not the most important thing to you. Capability is. That's what the cMP advocates mean when they say "Form over function". That Apple focused on the form while removing functionality. What if Apple wanted to take it a step further and discontinue the Mac Pro altogether and stated the Mini was its replacement? You wouldn't be too happy with that would you? Welcome to the side of the cMP advocates!

 

[tuxon86]

Efficiency. Thats what you get after removing internal expansion.

Not really. All those external PSU end up consuming more power than a full tower.

 

[JimmyPainter]

Too risky.

macpro7,1 will be much like the tick of the tick tock cycle. Very few technical changes, radical form factor change. Don't expect the latest AMD silicon. Remember this is Apple, you will buy what they offer and you will like it.
​

If you saw something .... It was most likely an Addition to Tube. Possibly the return of "XSERVE". If Apple is planning to stay in the game at the level of Studios and such this would make sense and allow the macpro 7,1 to hold true to the "Design for next 10 years". Could even be a Thunderbolt expansion box for the tube. With the disappearance of the Thunderbolt Display as I have said before an Expansion chassis for the iMac Pro and MacBook Pro could make sense as well as a Headless XSERVE that you connect from iMac and other surviving Macs. It is a very REAL possibility APPLE will no longer offer any Desktop Mac that comes with out a screen (MacPro and Mini).

What ever they are doing ..... Come on with it !!! ..... please ???

 

[koyoot]

Not really. All those external PSU end up consuming more power than a full tower.

But also it gives you more capabilities. Tower will have 1200W PSU.

You can add as many GPUs and as powerful as possible PSU for GPU rack-cluster.

Also, Adding external expansion to Mac Pro tower will make it even more inefficient in that way of thinking. Do not equate efficiency of the computer with what you have to connect to it.

 

[iBug2]

IOW form factor (in this case size) is not the most important thing to you. Capability is.

If Apple offered the exact same cMP with updated internals, and the nMP, I'd buy the nMP. So you are wrong on that one. Size is important to me as long as the functionality is not worse than before.

That's what the cMP advocates mean when they say "Form over function". That Apple focused on the form while removing functionality.

They removed some functionality (the ability to use PCI-e for something other than GPU's), and added new functionality (portability and whisper quietness).

What if Apple wanted to take it a step further and discontinue the Mac Pro altogether and stated the Mini was its replacement? You wouldn't be too happy with that would you? Welcome to the side of the cMP advocates!

A Mac Mini is slower and less functional than the current nMP in all fronts except size and weight. So I don't know how you can make such a comparison. nMP was faster than cMP in basically all areas.

 

[Reticuli]

There is an implicit assumption of EITHER a cylinder OR a tower in this question.

There is no reason that Apple couldn't make BOTH an updated cylinder AND a re-imagined tower. (E.g. the new tower wouldn't have four 3.5" disk bays - how about a couple of 2.5" slots and six NVMe blade slots instead? Add a slot for a laptop-like optical. Two PCIe 3.0 x16 double-wide slots, and three x4 and x8 slots not blocked by a GPU.)

That would be nice, but aren't we all in agreement that the size of the pro customer base is quite small? Would it warrant two devices? The product lineup is already cluttered

 

[tuxon86]

But also it gives you more capabilities. Tower will have 1200W PSU.

You can add as many GPUs and as powerful as possible PSU for GPU rack-cluster.

Also, Adding external expansion to Mac Pro tower will make it even more inefficient in that way of thinking. Do not equate efficiency of the computer with what you have to connect to it.

I work in the electricity generation business, I know how much electricity those cheap external psu consume thank you.
You don't have to get a 1200W GPU. The Z series don't have those unless you upgrade them and then it's your choice to do so and it's according to your needs.

As for your GPU cluster, are you going to buy one for each of your workstation? If not then it's way more practical and less wastefull of your company $$$ than to just cram a few inside those workstation.
[doublepost=1468413457][/doublepost]

That would be nice, but aren't we all in agreement that the size of the pro customer base is quite small? Would it warrant two devices? The product lineup is already cluttered

The lack of an expandable workstation has driven off a sizable chunk of their pro customer, so yea it would make sense to offer such a device. Unless you wanty that part of their customer base to shrink even more...

 

[JimmyPainter]

Well 6,1 didn't have gpu upgradibility unless you consider choosing your gpu from Apple website as upgrade.

Seriously .... LOL Apple .... sadly does NOT like that word upgradability. Going to have to ask you Pat and others to use the correct terminology when referring to Apple Products "Disposable" ... LOL. Just watch what's to come or even better list any products that exist today that have any measure of that unspoken word. Soldered-in is another term Apple LOVES.

Really Sad .... but they are NOT the only ones. Our whole planet it seams is designated to be one GIANT landfill.

 

[ITguy2016]

If Apple offered the exact same cMP with updated internals, and the nMP, I'd buy the nMP. So you are wrong on that one. Size is important to me as long as the functionality is not worse than before.

No, I am not wrong on this. Currently you have a choice of form (Mac Mini - i.e. smaller size, consumes less power) and functionality (nMP - i.e. larger size, consumes more power). If form (i.e. size, consumes less power) were really important to you then you would choose the Mini. You do not because you value the added capability the Mac Pro offers over the Mini.

This is no different than those who value the expansion capability and faster speed of the cMP configuration over the nMP configuration. You are arguing the nMP's strengths over the cMP to be smaller size and less energy consumption despite the fact these people tell you they value expansion of the cMP configuration above that. At the same time you're doing the exact same thing when I say you should be using a mini if form factor is at the top of your list...as you have done to the cMP advocates. Then you perform a complete 180 as argue capability is most important to you and then form factor. It's the same arguement.

They removed some functionality (the ability to use PCI-e for something other than GPU's), and added new functionality (portability and whisper quietness).


A Mac Mini is slower and less functional than the current nMP in all fronts except size and weight. So I don't know how you can make such a comparison. nMP was faster than cMP in basically all areas.

This is the exact same argument cMP advocates have been making. The nMP is slower and less functional than what it replaced (this argument assumes an updated cMP which would have included the technology used in the nMP).

However you slice and dice it you value speed and capability over size. That's exactly what the cMP advocates have been telling you. They value speed and capability over size and therefore they're disappointed with the nMP. But you continue to tell them they should value size, weight, and energy consumption despite your unwillingness to do so yourself.

 

[Draeconis]

It's not very robust though as it's a piece of hinged aluminium & easy enough to open with a crow bar.

So.. now there is a lock? Have you even seen the back of a Mac Pro?

I'd like it if Apple returned to making a tower chassis. Takes far less R&D to make, makes everyone happy.

 

[goodcow]

There is an implicit assumption of EITHER a cylinder OR a tower in this question.

There is no reason that Apple couldn't make BOTH an updated cylinder AND a re-imagined tower.

They couldn't even be bothered to design two logic boards for the 2014 Mac mini in order to support quad core.

 

[msh]

Apple should add a new tab to their products page labeled "Professional" and put products in there that cater to all professionals. Doesn't need to be wildly profitable. It would be for prestige, product completeness and diversification, a technology incubator lab. The consumer products would emphasize form while the professional products emphasize function, each informing the other.

 

[pat500000]

Seriously .... LOL Apple .... sadly does NOT like that word upgradability. Going to have to ask you Pat and others to use the correct terminology when referring to Apple Products "Disposable" ... LOL. Just watch what's to come or even better list any products that exist today that have any measure of that unspoken word. Soldered-in is another term Apple LOVES.

Really Sad .... but they are NOT the only ones. Our whole planet it seams is designated to be one GIANT landfill.

Maybe Apple will tell us that Mac Pro will give us 3 year expiration and will state that on their website so that they won't get sued. But yeah their terminology is really weird. Lol

 

[BornAgainMac]

Seriously .... LOL Apple .... sadly does NOT like that word upgradability. Going to have to ask you Pat and others to use the correct terminology when referring to Apple Products "Disposable" ... LOL. Just watch what's to come or even better list any products that exist today that have any measure of that unspoken word. Soldered-in is another term Apple LOVES.

Really Sad .... but they are NOT the only ones. Our whole planet it seams is designated to be one GIANT landfill.

I wouldn't be surprised if Apple solders the ram in the next Mac Pro. They really need to understand why people toss their computers in the first place. When they first started talking about the recycling process at the keynote with one of their laptops I was thinking to myself "Great, I'll can hardly wait to spend 3K for my laptop and throw away that obsolete technology in a few short years.".