MacPro-where next?

[Hellhammer]

- Apple uses the Mac Pro pretty heavily internally.

Source? This is just your guess if you can't back it up. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple employees moving away from Mac Pros to iMacs. iMacs offer more power than the low-end Mac Pros and the heavy number crushing can be done by a server cluster anyway.

Besides, what they use internally doesn't really matter. You don't make decisions like these based on what your employees use. I bet Apple used and still uses XServes heavily but that didn't stop them from EOLing them.

- Apple is adding the pro features back into FCPX. I don't buy the "FCPX is abandoning the pros" argument. Like OS X, it's not going to have everything at launch.

The biggest issue so far for FCPX is that QuickTime is dead. You can imagine the sorts of rewriting Apple had to do to get FCP away from QuickTime. Most the missing features so far are because OS X hasn't even re-added that functionality post QuickTime.

It doesn't really have anything to do with Apple abandoning pros as much as Apple abandoning QuickTime.

So what is FCPX at the moment? It lacks several features (e.g. multicam support) that are a must for pros which makes it redundant at the moment. If Apple really cared about the pro users, then they wouldn't push out crap like that because they know nobody in the pro market can use it. Apple still decided to release FCPX so consumers can buy it, they most likely don't need all of the pro features and thus won't complain.

It doesn't matter what is the root of this FCPX fiasco. What matters is that Apple released FCPX although they clearly knew that it's useless for pros at its current state.

Every year? Just like they always did?

Last update took a nice 16 months, and there wasn't even any chips to wait for.

 

[goMac]

Source? This is just your guess if you can't back it up. I wouldn't be surprised to see Apple employees moving away from Mac Pros to iMacs. iMacs offer more power than the low-end Mac Pros and the heavy number crushing can be done by a server cluster anyway.

No, I know it, but I can't cite for obvious reasons.

Besides, what they use internally doesn't really matter. You don't make decisions like these based on what your employees use. I bet Apple used and still uses XServes heavily but that didn't stop them from EOLing them.

They don't use XServes.

So what is FCPX at the moment? It lacks several features (e.g. multicam support) that are a must for pros which makes it redundant at the moment. If Apple really cared about the pro users, then they wouldn't push out crap like that because they know nobody in the pro market can use it. Apple still decided to release FCPX so consumers can buy it, they most likely don't need all of the pro features and thus won't complain.

It's like OS X 10.0. They released it because they needed to release something.

It doesn't matter what is the root of this FCPX fiasco. What matters is that Apple released FCPX although they clearly knew that it's useless for pros.

So? There is no other way. The replacement feature set for QuickTime isn't in place.

It has nothing to do with Apple caring about pros. The components of the system for a lot of the stuff just isn't in place yet. Lion may change that. On top of that, there is simply no way the existing FCP7 code could have been updated for 64 bit.

There are a lot of technical things going on here that people are glossing over and turning into "Apple doesn't care about pros!" Really, it was either FCPX or waiting another year and a half.

You do realize QuickTime doesn't at all work under 64 bit, right?

 

[Hellhammer]

No, I know it, but I can't cite for obvious reasons.

They don't use XServes.

And you know all this because? Just to add that it's against the rules to make claims that you cannot back up:

From the Rules for Appropriate Debate:

Sources. If you make claims of fact but don't cite sources when requested, the posts may be removed. If you started the thread then the thread may be closed or removed.

So? There is no other way. The replacement feature set for QuickTime isn't in place.

It has nothing to do with Apple caring about pros. The components of the system for a lot of the stuff just isn't in place yet. Lion may change that. On top of that, there is simply no way the existing FCP7 code could have been updated for 64 bit.

There are a lot of technical things going on here that people are glossing over and turning into "Apple doesn't care about pros!" Really, it was either FCPX or waiting another year and a half.

So why not wait then? Why release alpha software? I would understand if this was FCPX Beta but this is the release version we are talking about. Bugs are understandable but the fact that many crucial features are missing is laughable.

FCPX is just one example how Apple has lost some of their interest towards the pro market. It doesn't mean that Apple has totally lost their interest but at least this isn't showing that pros are their #1 concern.

 

[ActionableMango]

Who cares how fast a video card works on Thunderbolt, do you people really want an external video card, in its own enclosure, using its own power supply, plugged into the wall with an AC/DC wall wart, cluttering up your desk? Do you really want all your hard disks like that too?

Thunderbolt is an upgrade for external buses like FW/USB/video. It not a good replacement for internal storage and video cards.

 

[goMac]

So why not wait then? Why release alpha software? I would understand if this was FCPX Beta but this is the release version we are talking about. Bugs are understandable but the fact that many crucial features are missing is laughable.

FCPX is just one example how Apple has lost some of their interest towards the pro market. It doesn't mean that Apple has totally lost their interest but at least this isn't showing that pros are their #1 concern.

Well that's the question. Would it have been better to release now, or wait and let people think Apple didn't care about FCP?

Again, none of this has anything to do with Apple abandoning the pro market. It has to do with API shift. 90% of the features that are missing are gone because they were part of QuickTime and likely will be returning in the future.

This entire thread is speculative. If you want to start removing posts without citation you have a lot of cleanup to do here...

 

[Hellhammer]

This entire thread is speculative. If you want to start removing posts without citation you have a lot of cleanup to do here...

But others don't make claims like this:

No, I know it, but I can't cite for obvious reasons.

Speculation is allowed but when you claim you know something, you should be able to back it up.

 

[maflynn]

Every year? Just like they always did?

You're right, I'm mistaken

I have heard this argument so many times over the years, and it's never happened.

They make tons more Pro apps than FCP, some of which, like Logic, are extremely core hungry. XCode is also very core hungry.

I just don't see it. Again, they use the Mac Pro heavily internally because the iMac is often not enough to cut it.

And there is just no way the iMac can cut the high end graphics or RAID that is a requirement for a lot of pros besides the FCP crowd.

This argument is not new is because apple has clearly embraced the consumer sector. Just look at the Aperture to as an example. Its has consumer type features that are of dubious value to a profession, i.e., faces. FPX is another example where apple is catering to the prosumer. Its not that it hasn't happened, in past tense but it is happening, current tense.

Like it or not, the role of the MP has diminished to the point where its conceivable for apple to drop it from their line up in the near future.

 

[clyde2801]

Who cares how fast a video card works on Thunderbolt, do you people really want an external video card, in its own enclosure, using its own power supply, plugged into the wall with an AC/DC wall wart, cluttering up your desk? Do you really want all your hard disks like that too?

Thunderbolt is an upgrade for external buses like FW/USB/video. It not a good replacement for internal storage and video cards.

I thought the whole point that it is a good replacement for internal storage... you know, hard drives? Like e-sata, isn't it supposed to handle external drives at roughly the same speed and throughput the logicboard handles internals? There's a whole lotta people lusting over setting up an external SSD on TB in the iMac and booting off of it.

And if it can daisy chain and handle an external GPU, hallelujah! Seems the mobile graphics cards are always the first thing to become obsolete; having an option to plug in a newer one side of a external enclosure and using it would let people soldier on with their current machines.

 

[goMac]

And if it can daisy chain and handle an external GPU, hallelujah! Seems the mobile graphics cards are always the first thing to become obsolete; having an option to plug in a newer one side of a external enclosure and using it would let people soldier on with their current machines.

With the key being that Thunderbolt only works, for at best, mid end GPUs. This is great for mobile where your onboard GPU is usually integrated, but for Mac Pro usage scenarios? Not so much.

This argument is not new is because apple has clearly embraced the consumer sector. Just look at the Aperture to as an example. Its has consumer type features that are of dubious value to a profession, i.e., faces.

I think that's valuable to a lot of users (certainly not all users) for automatically tagging clips. But regardless...

FPX is another example where apple is catering to the prosumer.

Again, this mostly has to do with QuickTime being replaced. It has nothing to do with the app. Go look at the makeup of AVFoundation currently. Look at the WWDC videos this year. They're certainly moving back in the direction of FCP7, but replacing QuickTime is taking tine.

AVFoundation in it's current state is still missing QuickTime features.

You can say it's some sort of marketing decision to drop pros, but I'm telling you, the APIs simply aren't there right now.

Its not that it hasn't happened, in past tense but it is happening, current tense.

I totally disagree. If you have access, watch the WWDC videos for Lion. Specifically the Lion video editing videos.

Like it or not, the role of the MP has diminished to the point where its conceivable for apple to drop it from their line up in the near future.

I think people are making a lot of armchair judgements without context. Which is the same thing that happens every time this discussion crops up.

 

[ActionableMango]

I thought the whole point that it is a good replacement for internal storage... you know, hard drives?

I agree it's an improvement for external storage, and that's a good thing. What I don't like are the people suggesting that internal storage capacity in the next MP can go away. For many of us, 2+4 drive bays is plenty and we don't want to covert that into desktop clutter.

Seems the mobile graphics cards are always the first thing to become obsolete; having an option to plug in a newer one side of a external enclosure and using it would let people soldier on with their current machines.

I would agree for laptops, but this is the Mac Pro forum!

But, even so, it would be even better for laptops to have decent upgrade support for the MXM sockets so that graphics could be upgradeable internally. This way you wouldn't HAVE to lug around an external card, enclosure, and power supply. Of course there is no incentive for manufacturers to do this.

 

[maflynn]

I think people are making a lot of armchair judgements without context. Which is the same thing that happens every time this discussion crops up.

I disagree, I have plenty of context. You seem to be taking this to a whole new personal level. My opinion is such that apple is moving away from the professional sector. They've killed off the xserve, FPX and Aperture is more prosumer features. You can disagree, but the context is there.

 

[goMac]

I disagree, I have plenty of context. You seem to be taking this to a whole new personal level. My opinion is such that apple is moving away from the professional sector. They've killed off the xserve, FPX and Aperture is more prosumer features. You can disagree, but the context is there.

Again, this discussion continuously comes up, and I don't see any evidence to back it up.

XServe wasn't a pro market machine. Aperture is just as pro as it was at 1.0. And I've already stated my opinion of FCPX.

The same argument has been made repeatedly. It was made very strongly at the launch of Mac OS X, and at the launch of the iPod, and neither time did it come true.

Apple's video strategy is making an architecture shift. It has nothing to do with Apple not wanting to target professionals any more.

 

[maflynn]

Again, this discussion continuously comes up, and I don't see any evidence to back it up.

I disagree and I see apple going that way. You have your opinion on this matter and I have mine. Clear enough, I think this horse has been beaten enough.

 

[derbothaus]

Again, this mostly has to do with QuickTime being replaced. It has nothing to do with the app. Go look at the makeup of AVFoundation currently. Look at the WWDC videos this year. They're certainly moving back in the direction of FCP7, but replacing QuickTime is taking tine.

AVFoundation in it's current state is still missing QuickTime features.

You can say it's some sort of marketing decision to drop pros, but I'm telling you, the APIs simply aren't there right now.

They should have concentrated on QTX. A year or more now? No features added like promised. What have they been doing with it? Even Lion has no new features to get it in spec with 7.x Pro. They have had plenty of time.

 

[goMac]

They should have concentrated on QTX. A year or more now? No features added like promised.

How would they have added these features to QTX? QTX is hardware accelerated playback of H.264. Editing features aren't compatible with a hardware accelerated H.264 pipeline. That's why QTX was a non starter for FCPX, and it's why QTX is also dead.

What have they been doing with it? Even Lion has no new features to get it in spec with 7.x Pro. They have had plenty of time.

It's dead, that's what they've been doing with it. QTX is fundamentally not compatible with 7.X Pro features because of how it was designed. You can't simply add or remove frames from a compressed H.264 stream. Very good for playback, not so much for editing.

If anything, QTX was the step away from the Pro market, and AVFoundation is Apple fixing that.

 

[derbothaus]

How would they have added these features to QTX? QTX is hardware accelerated playback of H.264. Editing features aren't compatible with a hardware accelerated H.264 pipeline. That's why QTX was a non starter for FCPX, and it's why QTX is also dead.

I thought when QTX was introduced they promised to add features and to use QT7 in the meantime. Features like the A/V controls, full colorsync integration with all types of colorsync (v.2, V.4). Better subtitle controls, etc.

It's dead, that's what they've been doing with it. QTX is fundamentally not compatible with 7.X Pro features because of how it was designed. You can't simply add or remove frames from a compressed H.264 stream. Very good for playback, not so much for editing.

Do you know offhand what makes H264 so different from all the other compressed formats that can be edited easily? So you can cut via "trim" command but they can't write something to insert? Truly the quality of the compression is not worth the tradeoffs if this is the case. Guess Apple see it differently.

If anything, QTX was the step away from the Pro market, and AVFoundation is Apple fixing that.

I am aware of QTX being a step away. That was my point. I am looking into AVfoundation as I have not cared about iOS and it's developments. I don't need to write a fart app or something forgettable. But seeing as how 10.7 is shaping up and apple consolidating development I should brush up. Thanks.

 

[goMac]

I thought when QTX was introduced they promised to add features and to use QT7 in the meantime. Features like the A/V controls, full colorsync integration with all types of colorsync (v.2, V.4). Better subtitle controls, etc.

All of which could have been added, but it doesn't fix the issue of QTX being completely unsuitable for movie editing.

The one very nice part of QTX was that it was great for working with live audio and video sources, but all those things have been rolled up almost verbatim into AVFoundation.

Do you know offhand what makes H264 so different from all the other compressed formats that can be edited easily? So you can cut via "trim" command but they can't write something to insert? Truly the quality of the compression is not worth the tradeoffs if this is the case. Guess Apple see it differently.

H.264 doesn't let you insert a new frame without re-encoding a larger number of frames. QTX doesn't even have any facilities for these sorts of operations.

AVFoundation takes an entirely different tact. It actually uses CoreAnimation as it's rendering backend, meaning for editing you create an entire CoreAnimation tree, and push it into AVFoundation when it's time to render. CoreAnimation itself let's you do the realtime previews.

This is incidentally why importing a FCP7 into FCPX is a bad idea. CoreAnimation is not going to be a pixel accurate representation of what you had in your FCP7 project.

I am aware of QTX being a step away. That was my point. I am looking into AVfoundation as I have not cared about iOS and it's developments. I don't need to write a fart app or something forgettable. But seeing as how 10.7 is shaping up and apple consolidating development I should brush up. Thanks.

I would not brush off iOS development for fart apps. I do both Mac and iOS development, and many very powerful APIs like AVFoundation are already present on iOS. It's possible to create some very powerful iOS apps with these tools, especially on iPad where screen size is not a limiting factor.

 

[philipma1957]

I am not sure where the mac pro will go but T-bolt will allow huge storage and fast access to mac mini's (2011 t-bolt ?) macbook pro 2011 and iMac 2011. The sonnettech echo express will allow a esata pcie card as far as i can tell


http://www.sonnettech.com/news/nab2011/
Echo Express PCIe 2.0 Expansion Chassis







Expand Your Adapter Card Possibilities
Sonnet’s Echo™ Express PCIe 2.0 Expansion Chassis with Thunderbolt™ Ports enable you to connect one high-performance PCI Express® 2.0 adapter card to any computer with a Thunderbolt port. Imagine using full-size professional video capture cards, 8Gb Fibre Channel cards, 10-Gigabit Ethernet cards, and RAID controller cards with your new iMac® or MacBook® Pro—the Echo Express expansion chassis makes it possible! Available in two sizes, the standard Echo Express PCIe 2.0 Expansion Chassis with Thunderbolt Ports supports one half-length, double-width, x16 (x4 mode), PCIe 2.0 card, while the XL model supports one full-length card; both models have fans to cool the cards. The standard model includes a built-in 75W power supply, while the XL model includes an integrated 150W power supply with a 75W PCIe power connector. Two Thunderbolt ports support daisy chaining of up to six devices to a single port on the host computer.

Room to Expand—Connect one half-length (full-length in XL model), double-width PCIe 2.0 adapter card to a computer with a Thunderbolt port.
High Bandwidth—x16 (x4 mode) 2GB/s PCIe 2.0 slot perfect for special-purpose PCIe cards for video capture, Fibre Channel, 10-Gigabit Ethernet, digital audio, RAID control, multiple screen video, etc.
Power for Powerful Cards—Integrated 75W power supply (150W including one 75W PCIe power connector in XL model).
Two Thunderbolt Ports—Daisy chain up to six devices to a single port on the host computer.


It seems to me a Macmini could use the above and put in a card like this :


https://secure1.sonnettech.com/prod...d=165&osCsid=a9ff67067eec0761d8c605b9bc6f6edb





this could attach to two of these



http://www.sansdigital.com/towerraid/tr8mb.html


giving you 16 3gb hdds.

this has to hurt the mac pro this could also be done with macbook pros or iMacs.

 

[derbothaus]

Good info. Thanks goMac.

 

[IceMacMac]

Sigh. The Mac Pro is not going anywhere. FCP X will get more pro features. The earth will continue spinning.

I don't think you are paying attention. High-end every day pro video producers are running from the building. I should say they are SPRINTING to the exits. En masse. Just go to any of the leading forums and you'll understand.

Shake was buried. Color is gone.

I was told by an Apple Genius four years ago, "Well you know, the MacPro is a very niche product."


The writing has been on the wall for awhile. It's not a matter of if the MacPro will be EOL'd, just a matter of how soon.

 

[WardC]

The writing has been on the wall for awhile. It's not a matter of if the MacPro will be EOL'd, just a matter of how soon.

I will have to agree with this.

I have had long discussions with my various Mac friends and acquaintances about the Mac Pro and the future of the Mac Pro platform as Apple moves forward. Out of all the computers that Apple sells, Apple sells the LEAST amount of the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is often hidden in a corner at the Apple Store, with only one machine on the floor, and nobody touching it. They might go a whole week or two and not sell ONE Mac Pro at any given Apple Store. The market *is* very niche, but it is us. We are power users, some pros, some just enthusiasts (like me) who like having a tower machine with good expandability (like being able to add drives, cards, and SSDs), and being able to use our own external displays like the old matte Cinema Displays (which are still great)....

Apple is focusing on the iPad, the iPhone, iCloud, and as far as the Mac goes, mainly the MacBook Pro, the MacBook Air, and the iMac...just like the White MacBook is probably on the chopping block, so is the whole Mac Pro lineup. Apple continues to produce these machines for the Pro market because of their ability to speedily render heavy audio and video projects, but as far as gaming goes, they are promoting the iMacs now which offer up to 2GB of video RAM and a better video card than on the Mac Pro. Apple may update the Mac Pro this year with Sandy Bridge, but I don't see much of a future for the Mac Pro going forward past 2013 on to 2014 or 2015, I think Mac Pro will be EOL by then. Apple really doesn't sell that many Mac Pros, and they are quite expensive machines to produce. With iMacs offering 16GB RAM expandability, 2GB of video RAM, SSD and 2TB HD options, a huge 27" display, and Quad-Core i7 processors, they are a contender and even a faster meatier machine than the base-level Mac Pro (and a better deal). Apple is still doing well with sales in the iMac department and this will likely continue, but I do not see Apple's sales of the Mac Pro increasing at all in the upcoming future. The demand for these machines (and the market that can afford them) is quite small. Most people don't recognize the benefits to having the expandability of a Mac Pro and decide to go for the iMac, an entirely disposable machine. A Mac Pro, on the other hand can last for the long haul and be a power machine even 5 or 6 years from now.

Since my first tower Mac, a Power Macintosh 9500/120 that I got in 1995, I have always had tower Macs since then because of their speed and expandability. Going from that to a G3 tower, a G4 tower, and then a Mac Pro 1,1, a 2,1, a 4,1 and then my current 5th generation Mac Pro, I have enjoyed having a true Powerhouse computer that I could use with my own peripherals and monitor and upgrade as I wish. Sadly, I don't think Apple cares about this aspect to owning a tower or desktop anymore and wants to close the system for good (aka iMac).

 

[ActionableMango]

A Mac Pro, on the other hand can last for the long haul and be a power machine even 5 or 6 years from now.

Going from that to a G3 tower, a G4 tower, and then a Mac Pro 1,1, a 2,1, a 4,1 and then my current 5th generation Mac Pro

They obviously aren't power machines for 5 or 6 years in your case!

 

[IceMacMac]

For anyone still doubting what Apple has done in dummying down FCP and utterly deserting the pro market... here is a link to check out.

This guy actually authored several Final Cut Pro books that sold quite well (Dummy series).

Despite his deep loyalty to FCP, he's pisssed at Apple for destroying yet another pro app and ismoving on. He seems to like what he sees with Adobe PP.

http://library.creativecow.net/kobler_helmut/FCP-vs-Premiere-Pro/1

 

[maflynn]

For anyone still doubting what Apple has done in dummying down FCP and utterly deserting the pro market... here is a link to check out

Its sad, here's a quote from the article you linked

• Apple took nearly 2.5 years to upgrade Final Cut Studio from version 2 to 3 (and v.3 was only a moderate upgrade at that). Until then, updates had come at a much more aggressive pace.
  
• Apple cancelled the popular Shake, promising to replace it with a new tool that never came.
  
• Apple got lazy with its Logic Pro app as well, letting development creep along with an upgrade about every two years.
  
• Apple stopped updating the Pro page on its web site long ago. There hasn't been a new item posted in almost two years: http://www.apple.com/pro/
  
• Apple took more than a year to fix a glaring Final Cut 7 bug that made its Close Gap command unreliable. To break a core Timeline feature like Close Gap and not fix it for 14 months was offensive and inexcusable.
  
• Apple cancelled its Xserve RAID then its Xserve hardware.
  
• Apple started taking longer and longer to release Mac Pro workstations, and absolutely phoned in the latest upgrade last July. 511 days in the making, the newest Mac Pro was one of the most un-inspired hardware upgrades I've ever seen from Apple.
  
• Apple pulled out of industry trade events like NAB.
  
• Multiple rumors (and confirmation of rumors) of significant layoffs in the Pro Apps division.
  
• Multiple rumors that Apple was trying to sell off its Pro Apps division.

 

[goMac]

I have had long discussions with my various Mac friends and acquaintances about the Mac Pro and the future of the Mac Pro platform as Apple moves forward. Out of all the computers that Apple sells, Apple sells the LEAST amount of the Mac Pro. The Mac Pro is often hidden in a corner at the Apple Store, with only one machine on the floor, and nobody touching it. They might go a whole week or two and not sell ONE Mac Pro at any given Apple Store. The market *is* very niche, but it is us. We are power users, some pros, some just enthusiasts (like me) who like having a tower machine with good expandability (like being able to add drives, cards, and SSDs), and being able to use our own external displays like the old matte Cinema Displays (which are still great)....

It's Apple's least selling machine (now that the XServe is gone), but it's not Apple's least important machine. If you ask me, the plastic Macbook is Apple's least important machine and is most likely to go.

The Mac Pro is a critical machine for developers, scientists (which is one of Steve's favorite markets), and pro users (who despite the naysaying, still pipe a lot of money and goodwill into Apple.)

It doesn't matter how many Mac Pros Apple sells, as long as it's making money, why would Apple cut them? It really comes down to that. Does anyone here honestly think Apple is not making money on the Mac Pro?