You’re not looking for a Mac Pro, then.
Apple isn’t changing the price. There’s probably at least $1000 of R&D expense (if not more) built into every single one of these as well.
How many of these garbage fire threads do we need.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 Poll - So what should the base MP 2019 be sold for then??
- Thread starter mtasquared
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You’re not looking for a Mac Pro, then.
Apple isn’t changing the price. There’s probably at least $1000 of R&D expense (if not more) built into every single one of these as well.
How many of these garbage fire threads do we need.
People have been doing these threads since 2006 with the original tower Mac Pros. Everything is back to normal. The tower Mac Pros, with a few exceptions, have generally been priced higher than whatever custom build people want to throw together.
And people have also been complaining about no Core 2/i7 option since 2006 too.
You're not wrong. Admittedly, the 1,1 was a (probably never to be repeated) bargain, and at that price, and with the available GPU options, better suited to the enthusiast than the new one (at least until/unless the price/performance gap narrows). I received mine exactly a month after the launch. £1862.50, including a huge 3GB of RAM, 250GB HD & Radeon X1900XT- swapped out for a DIY flashed 4870 in 2009, and exchanged for an nvidia 8800GT under Apple's replacement programme (that card is still unused). And it absolutely annihilated the equivalent iMacs in everything you could throw at it.
I remember a few cases with the 1,1 where the retail CPU cost was more than the entire machine.
But that was because Apple was getting special deals from Intel for switching over. Those deals aren’t a thing any more, and haven’t been for a while.
Indeed so. About £700-750 less for a 1,1 than the same-CPU Dell Precision at the time, if I remember correctly.
Who cares if it has a monitor. Mac pro price was never below imac’s standard price.
I don’t even think there should be a “base model” honestly.
The whole concept, done better IMO, is to offer the “frame & Mobo” at $1499 and make it completely BTO, including a non-Xeon BTO path.
The whole concept, done better IMO, is to offer the “frame & Mobo” at $1499 and make it completely BTO, including a non-Xeon BTO path.
...and someone looking at the entry-level Mac Pro would need all of those things because...?
The 8 core uses less power than the 28 core (surprise!) and can't support the full memory complement of the 28 core (go read the specs on apple.com) and nobody in their right mind is going to pay for quad Vega IIs or the equivalent Quadro (which will surely suck the juice) and then cheap out on the 8 core processor in the entry-level MP - so 1000W should be more than enough. If you're not worried about graphics then a cheaper GPU will be fine - if you are worried about graphics then the 580X is probably going in the spares bin anyway.
NB: funny how, for some people, anybody complaining about the complete lack of any PCIe slots in the iMac Pro or the trashcan was a hater who didn't get how computing was changing, but now suddenly we're not getting out of bed for less than 8 of the things...
As for the case - its going to sit under your desk and you'll open it once in a blue moon. At least the HP has the front-mounted sockets on, you know, the front rather that the top where they'll be blocked by the desk. Don't confuse good design with the form-over-function bling that Apple's rockstar designers produce without Steve there to whack them with the clue-bat.
Even at your price, you've got $600 to sort out your problems (or pay someone to build a custom system) and still have $1000 change from the Mac Pro.
Its a similar problem to the iMac - if you want a 28" 5k display then the iMac is terrific value for money, and even the iMac Pro looks OK - if you prefer, say, a pair of 4k 23" or a single 32" screen you're suddenly paying for a really expensive display that you didn't want. The entry-level Mac Pro isn't that system, and isn't even a sensible base to upgrade to that system, with a non-upgradeable (officially) 8 core processor.
(* Well, the HP web site is horrible - I tried to find the system I linked to on the UK site on the US one and failed, but I guarantee that the UK version won't be cheaper... anyway, - if I were getting a $3-5k workstation for myself I'd build it - people have already posted low-$3k prices for that - and if I were getting it for work I'd send out a spec and get quotes and probably - from anyone other than Apple - a discount).
[doublepost=1560102183][/doublepost]
...but it was never far above the price of an iMac (non-pro) with maxed-out CPU and GPU either. Certainly not thick-end-of-2x-far as it is now... and that was still true when the iMac was relatively less powerful.
def somewhere around 3k-4k, i can get a 580 for 150 now from microcenter, for 6k at least include a vega 56.
At the price they usually charge for the RAM, which should be punishable by law, by the way, I guess many people will buy it with base RAM and order the RAM from other suppliers. We’ll have to see if the GPU and CPU are worth the hassle. As for storage, it also remains to be seen if the t2 will make things complicated (not to add more storage, but if it will be bootable).
Remember the furore when the 2016 MBPs pricing was revealed? We're still rolling with those price tiers 3 years later, and not getting significantly more for the money either (faster CPU, similar GPU, same amount but slightly faster storage, same RAM). There's a chance Apple will listen if people vote with their wallets and don't buy it, but they're not going to drop prices because of people making noise about it online. Perhaps eventually they will offer the case with consumer grade CPU, GPU and RAM for a more modest price if enthusiasts want something to tinker with (why leave money on the table?) but I think it will be a good couple of years before the production costs have amortised enough for them to consider this.
Just my personal observation...
It sounds like what is missing here is a Macintosh PC. Not a Mac Pro, not a Mac mini, not an iMac. Just a plain old Mac.
Apple eliminated that line/designation years ago, but it seems to be what many people want. I'm good with the MP 7,1 personally, but I'll still be using my 5,1 for a pretty long time too.
It sounds like what is missing here is a Macintosh PC. Not a Mac Pro, not a Mac mini, not an iMac. Just a plain old Mac.
Apple eliminated that line/designation years ago, but it seems to be what many people want. I'm good with the MP 7,1 personally, but I'll still be using my 5,1 for a pretty long time too.
Last edited:
Not sure what you mean by a 'plain old Mac'.
The original 1984 Mac was an all-in-one with mainly external expansion - the iMac is very much the descendent of that, re-named after it went away for a bit in the 90s.
I think pretty much everybody here has long accepted the fact that there will never be an 'xMac' to compete with a vanilla home/small business mini-tower PC in the $599-$1500 price range. Would have been great, but ain't gonna happen and today, probably, most home/small business users would prefer a laptop or an iMac, while the power users who still want a tower are probably looking for something with a bit more poke.
What we have had, pretty continuously since the first 'Cheesgrater' tower in 2003 (and arguably the G4 tower before it) starting at around $2500 and competing with 'workstation-class' PCs. Since 2006, these have been 'Mac Pro' Xeon systems with ECC RAM - which is slight overkill for power-users/development/enthusiasts, but at $2500-$3000, still within reach. In the Intel era, that has always been a few hundred bucks more more than the best iMac CPU/GPU configuration.
Even the trashcan fell into that category - if you bought into the courageous new design as being the future of computing (spoiler: it wasn't, and Apple have admitted that it wasn't so we don't have to argue about that any more).
That ended last week (well, it really ended a few years ago when the trashcan became seriously outdated and wasn't replaced) when Apple hiked the entry level price up to 6 grand.
If you were the sort of power user/enthusiast that didn't want an all-in-one and could previously stretch to a Mac Pro - Apple just told you that they no longer want your business.
Wow, you didn’t need to waste all that typing to get an answer to this... I truly don’t need a historical account as you see it.
It’s obvious... They want an expandable Mac Tower, that isn’t a Mac Pro.
No they didn’t. They were likely talking to you.
All they said to me was “Hey, we’ve designed your new Mac Pro. It’ll be ready in a few months, but it costs more than the last one. I’ll let you know when you can buy.”
Last edited:
I expected $3,999 to be the retail price for the new base model Mac Pro (iMac Pro is $4,999 with a built-in 5K screen, better GPU, and larger SSD), but the $999 monitor stand makes it clear that Apple is appealing to a specific customer base and I'm not a part of it.
Apple shouldn't be nickle and diming on the base model if they are selling this at $6000. How about keeping it as $6000 and using a 12 core Xeon as the base model. The base model should have a clear distinct advantage in multi core over it's 8 core desktop cousins.
In many ways the Mac Pro is now officially dead (for soooo many people). Nobody wanted a $6000 entry price for a ho hum performance entry machine. Nobody.
In many ways Apple DIDNT listen to its customers with this dead on arrival asking price. Sure some businesses and some successful pros will buy some, but not many enthusiasts can or will be willing to cough up that much cash for a computer that inevitably will end up in a landfill.
Another weird thing about this very expensive MacPro is that it's targeted directly at professionals as a serious high end workstation, yet MacOS is anything but a serious professional OS.
What does a workstation need with iTunes, Messages, iPhoto, Garage Band, Endless notifications, IOS apps (now) and pretty much every consumer grade app on the Mac?
It doesn't.
The new Mac Pro needs a no nonsense pared down MacPro OS. Not an OS targeted to the masses.
The real power users already switched to Windows long ago. Once you make that commitment, you're done with the Mac and there's no going back.
This MacPro (in my opinion) is too late and too expensive. If someone loathed the iMac before, they'll despise it with utter hatred now as there's no other option but to be forced to use it.
Many people would rather use a PC, any PC rather than an iMac just on principle alone.
In many ways Apple DIDNT listen to its customers with this dead on arrival asking price. Sure some businesses and some successful pros will buy some, but not many enthusiasts can or will be willing to cough up that much cash for a computer that inevitably will end up in a landfill.
Another weird thing about this very expensive MacPro is that it's targeted directly at professionals as a serious high end workstation, yet MacOS is anything but a serious professional OS.
What does a workstation need with iTunes, Messages, iPhoto, Garage Band, Endless notifications, IOS apps (now) and pretty much every consumer grade app on the Mac?
It doesn't.
The new Mac Pro needs a no nonsense pared down MacPro OS. Not an OS targeted to the masses.
The real power users already switched to Windows long ago. Once you make that commitment, you're done with the Mac and there's no going back.
This MacPro (in my opinion) is too late and too expensive. If someone loathed the iMac before, they'll despise it with utter hatred now as there's no other option but to be forced to use it.
Many people would rather use a PC, any PC rather than an iMac just on principle alone.
Because the flaming ****pile that is Windows is paragon of the pared down, lean mean Workstation OS with only Pro apps on it such as Paint3D, Notepad, Windows Video Maker, Minesweeper, Solitaire, Photos, Music, Messaging and Xbox.
Windows is THE poster child of an operating system targeted to the masses.
The real power users?!? LOL! You missed an epic eye roll...give me a break. Windows has its strengths and weaknesses like every other OS...it is far from being the best. There is no best.
I used Windows for many many years, and I left and I never looked back. I am not the only one.
Those people who loathe or despise Apple can keep on using their Windows machines...the Mac Pro is not designed to entice someone who loves their PC, however a tainted love it might be, now I know I’ve got to run away.
And that’s not nearly all!
youre paying for the engineering into the custom proprietary MPX GPUs that will probably only get one generation of cards before it goes to MPX2 or whatever, which of course will not be backward compatible.
my sole, single, solitary complaint with the new mac pro is that they have yet again gone with proprietary graphics cards that not only carry the typical apple premium but will also have additional engineering costs as well. 8 years from now when the next mac pro comes out, we'll have people shoehorning RTX8800s or whatever GPUs into the extra slots while the long obsolete MPX cards will probably sit unused.
Give me a Mac Pro with as close to an "off the shelf" GPU as Apple can get and a $4500 price point and I will happily open my wallet.
my sole, single, solitary complaint with the new mac pro is that they have yet again gone with proprietary graphics cards that not only carry the typical apple premium but will also have additional engineering costs as well. 8 years from now when the next mac pro comes out, we'll have people shoehorning RTX8800s or whatever GPUs into the extra slots while the long obsolete MPX cards will probably sit unused.
Give me a Mac Pro with as close to an "off the shelf" GPU as Apple can get and a $4500 price point and I will happily open my wallet.
As said in many threads, apple would not do this because they are trying to "protect" the sales of the imac & imac pro. If a company has to "protect" the sales of any one item in a product line, what does it say about "that" item. If apple believed the imac & imac pro could stand on their own merits, an expanded Mac Pro line would not be threatening! They are afraid of the mad exodus!
Also the "anger/disappointment" over the price is not all based on "I'm priced out"! It may have to do with the obvious continuing apple money grab.
Examples:
1. Years of applying "the apple tax"
2. Freezing out nVidia (CUDA)
3. Implementing Metal
4. Selling Afterburner cards for pro rez raw
So if apple was "all inclusive" there would be "options".
1. Use nVidia (CUDA) because of DNxHD, DNxHR in addition to prorez raw
2. Etc
Apple seems to not be able to compete unless they rig the system.
1. Aperture vs Lightroom- Aperture gone
2. Shake vs Nuke- Shake gone
3. FCP vs Premiere vs Avid- FCP still a distant 3rd!
But now apple tries to give FCP an advantage with Metal Afterburner cards. No problem but don't nix nVidia for this advantage!
Last edited:
I wonder how long it will be until someone comes out with an MPX-6/8 pin power adapter?