Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The iMac Pro pushed norms. The Mac Pro 2013 certainly pushed norms.

Yes they did push the envelope, and so would I if I tried to eat a boiled egg through my nose with a straw .
And like the iMP and tcMP, it would be a disgusting display that not many would want to watch, much less be involved with .
[doublepost=1536607065][/doublepost]
Simple question, right? Should Apple bother with a 7,1 MP?


Wrong question, I think .

The real question is, should Apple bother with OSX ?
They've been treating it like iOS in the past few years, a release every other day that breaks compatibility for the sake of adding gadgets .

Which works fine when you sell toys to people who don't do serious work with computers, not so much in a professional environment .
 
Talking with a colleague at Lunch who has a 27" iMac Pro 3.2 8 Core with 32 Gigs of RAM. "I Wish I had my old iMac. I went from a Mac that I wouldn't reboot for months to a mess that needs to be multiple times a day. The lack of user upgradable RAM is a joke. How is this can Apple call this a Pro? " The workflow is basically Adobe Apps for Graphic Design / HTML.

If Apple plans to deliver a Mac Pro platform on-par with the iMac Pro, then Apple shouldn't bother.
 
If Apple plans to deliver a Mac Pro platform on-par with the iMac Pro, then Apple shouldn't bother.
+100%

If Apple doesn't come up with something that's comparable to a Z4 on the low end and a Z8 on the high end - Apple is simply walking away from the pro market.

Something "shiny" just doesn't get any traction in the pro market. (And "shiny" doesn't count at all if the system is horribly flawed - like the MP6,1 and its GPU problems.)
 
AidenShaw

Thanks for the " Send Apple a report " link in your sig.
I just sent off my comments on what I think the 2019 Mac Pro should be like.
 
I have to disagree regarding fcpx. Sure, the launch was a complete disaster, the program wasn’t ready for prime time, and apple seemed to want to shove it down everybody’s throats.

Now that it has all (or most) of the features fcp7 had, it’s a very competent editor. And it’s very fast too.

With Aperture, yes, apple made a huge mistake and burned a lot of goodwill for absolutely no reason. I’m still mad at them for discontinuing Aperture.

I've tried to get into editing with FCPX since it was released. After all, I did buy it (plus another upgrade). But, I just cannot get into it. I prefer the timeline layout of FCP7/Premiere/Avid, I do most of my editing by using keyboard shortcuts (yey Avid!), and I just absolutely despise the magnetic timeline. To be fair though, I've not tried the most recent version. But I cannot be bothered to spend more money on an app that only works on a particular OS that I may not be using in a couple years. I've mostly migrated to using Adobe CC, which also works on Windows, since Apple seems more keen to make toy devices now.

The new Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme looks like it will be a brilliant mobile editor. Better specs, more ports, upgradeable, no thermal throttling, and cheaper. So I am already planning on buying it over another MBP. I've a Lenovo Legion that I've been enjoying editing with while on the go. So, I think I would be happy with another WIN10 Lenovo.

If Apple does not deliver with the nMP, I'll likely just buy a Z8 and give the cMP to my children.
 
I've tried to get into editing with FCPX since it was released. After all, I did buy it (plus another upgrade). But, I just cannot get into it. I prefer the timeline layout of FCP7/Premiere/Avid, I do most of my editing by using keyboard shortcuts (yey Avid!), and I just absolutely despise the magnetic timeline. To be fair though, I've not tried the most recent version. But I cannot be bothered to spend more money on an app that only works on a particular OS that I may not be using in a couple years. I've mostly migrated to using Adobe CC, which also works on Windows, since Apple seems more keen to make toy devices now.

The new Lenovo ThinkPad X1 Extreme looks like it will be a brilliant mobile editor. Better specs, more ports, upgradeable, no thermal throttling, and cheaper. So I am already planning on buying it over another MBP. I've a Lenovo Legion that I've been enjoying editing with while on the go. So, I think I would be happy with another WIN10 Lenovo.

If Apple does not deliver with the nMP, I'll likely just buy a Z8 and give the cMP to my children.

It takes time to feel comfortable with the magnetic timeline, and of course even if you get used to it, you may not like it.

Regardless of that, as you pointed out, if you’re not going to use fcpx, nor logic, nor aperture (thanks a lot for that Tim ), there’s no point anymore in buying computers that are overpriced, underspecced and in the best case scenario, with several months old components. But hey, they are thinner, thin is good, right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josiana
Simple question, right? Should Apple bother with a 7,1 MP?

More and more, I think the answer is no. (Putting aside that Apple has said it will release the 7,1 in 2019.)

The first reason is that it seems as if most the MP's target audience has moved on, which means Apple will have to rebuild the MP customer base from scratch. It seems unlikely that Apple will put in the work required, because it is unlikely that it would provide the ROI that seems to be as far as Apple can see these days. Killing off apps like Aperture has done more damage to Apple's reputation than it cares to admit, with people openly wondering when FCPX (itself an abomination relative to FCP, according to many) will be killed off.

Second, Apple seems certain to get it wrong, and quite possibly as spectacularly wrong as it did with the 6,1. Instead of building the Mac version of the HP Z8, which is what most people and organizations I've talked to want, it seems certain that Apple will provide needlessly limited hardware at a significant cost premium, again missing what it's supposed target audience needs - and has told Apple it needs. While I'm not a hardware engineer, it's impossible to accept that Apple couldn't have already designed, built, tested, and marketed precisely that which their remaining customer base has said it needs. That Apple has not done so is a powerful signal that it will not.

So if Apple is has no target customer base left, and will get it spectacularly wrong, why bother?

I think they should.

Their sales depend on what they release and for how much they sell it for.
 
Actually, more I think about it, the more convinced I am that Apple shouldn’t produce a 7,1.

Mac Pro should just be a range, like Macbook, starting from something like the old Powermac 6500 (consumer cpu /core i(x)) and 2 pci slots, through to the dual Xeon slotmonster.

Probably won’t happen, but let’s face it, chance I’ll have any interest in an iMac Pro without a monitor, is about zero.
 
Unfortunately, it's becoming a question of should I bother with Apple and a mac pro 7,1 vs the alternatives. As 6,1 trashcan owner it's difficult. The last bootcamp video drivers we got are a year old and many features have broken due to lack of updates. This is on top of an already criminal lack of innovation from Apple on desktop/home computing and pro/semi-pro solutions and is puzzling. Apple is clearly moving away from intel and nvidia/amd as a long term strategy and that is where their energy is focused. Whether that leads to some leap in experience in 5 - 7 years is something that remains to be seen. I hope they succeed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josiana
With Aperture, yes, apple made a huge mistake and burned a lot of goodwill for absolutely no reason. I’m still mad at them for discontinuing Aperture.

This is EXACTLY where Apple lost me (a 40 year customer). When they dumped me by dumping Aperture I became a Switcher! I built my own "mMP" with the exact specs I wanted and needed. (New PC) macOS is buggy as hell these days and I find Win 10 far more stable and productive with no iOS bull5hit.

I still have my beloved cMP on my desk next to my new PC but it will soon be gone. It's just sitting there like a museum piece with a sign that say's "The best computer Apple ever made". Take that to the bank.

A year and a half to design ONE new mac pro that will surely disappoint the Pro's??? In that amount of time they could design a whole new Series of Mac Pros which is what they really needed to do to win the Pro's back.

Apple is the largest company in the world now. They could accomplish anything they wanted to, IF they really wanted to. Remember that.

Hell, I'm still PO'd at them for killing AppleWorks..... (I'm pretty old)
 
Last edited:
Apple is the largest company in the world now
Highest market cap - not largest in any other metric. Many other companies have higher sales and/or profits.
[doublepost=1536715434][/doublepost]
When they dumped me by dumping Aperture I became a Switcher!
Only a few of my photographer friends moved to Aperture - they were Photoshop based and added LightRoom to their workflows.

Of those that adopted Aperture - they were really pissed off, and moved to Adobe. Half of them dropped Apple OSX and moved to Adobe on Windows. Some of those who stuck with Apple OSX are realizing that Apple doesn't care about pros and they wish that they'd moved to Windows when they dropped Aperture.

It's really hard to use "Apple" and "pro" in the same sentence without laughing (or crying).
 
Last edited:
I am an avid Amateur Photographer. Have been for 50 years. Unfortunately I jumped on the Aperture boat, I could have easily jumped on the Lightroom boat at the time, but in hind-site I picked the wrong fricken' boat. I picked the wrong boat because still believed in Apple (at that time) and wasn't too thrilled with the Lightroom UI. But I now have 25k+ digital images in 20+ Aperture libraries the majority with many versions and edits that will be lost by moving them to Lightroom. Those edits constitute many years of editing. It's not like, so just move on and use another program. It's more like, just spend another 5 years and re-edit them all again. Like I said, I'm kinda old and at this point those edits will probably never be done again in any other program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josiana
side_open0525_web2.jpg


This is what Mac Pro should have been, but most likely they will try to "innovate" on the areas no one asked for.
 
I am an avid Amateur Photographer. Have been for 50 years. Unfortunately I jumped on the Aperture boat, I could have easily jumped on the Lightroom boat at the time, but in hind-site I picked the wrong fricken' boat. I picked the wrong boat because still believed in Apple (at that time) and wasn't too thrilled with the Lightroom UI. But I now have 25k+ digital images in 20+ Aperture libraries the majority with many versions and edits that will be lost by moving them to Lightroom. Those edits constitute many years of editing. It's not like, so just move on and use another program. It's more like, just spend another 5 years and re-edit them all again. Like I said, I'm kinda old and at this point those edits will probably never be done again in any other program.
I really feel for you. At I guess the same moment in time I had a similar choice to make, and fortunately I chose LR over Aperture, I think LR was still at version 2 and was quite atrocious, where Aperture already felt polished and snappy. Despite that, I sticked with LR because my work at that time was heavily print-based, and I frequently had to move job files between Adobe CS apps which LR of course was friendlier with. I also much preferred using plain Finder directories to organize my photos than the Aperture singular library approach which required a huge drive as the photo count grows.

However, my father was retired and he shoots wild life, for his age it was already a demanding task to be proficient on a computer, therefore I chose to teach him using Aperture since he managed to learn using iPhoto by himself, and iPhoto and Aperture were analogous in many ways. Big mistake in retrospect... He probably had 100k of shots, mostly rated and tagged, about a good 1/10 of those had seen adjustment. I tried various ways migrating these into LR, the metadata and albums are the easy part, but the adjustments are just not possible, at least not in a non-pernament way like a RAW is supposed to be. At one point I had to settle for him with baked/flatted TIFF which at least preserve a lossless quality in LR for print/export, but no further RAW based adjustment is possible. To this day he still complains on how the LR interface makes little sense to him, but at the same time he understands the incompetence of Photos.app while he tried using it.

I can't imagine how gutted I would have been, had I invested my professional photographic part of my career onto Aperture. The brand would be permanently blacklisted from my studio.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josiana
Honestly they (Apple) should just dust off the 4,1/5,1 blueprints and restart from there for the 7,1.

Dump the newest AMD/Intel platform in it.

3.1, nvme, thunderbolt and the latest technological advancements etc

Send it to market.

If they don't come out with a 7,1 with EXPANDABILITY in mind it will not sell.

Just look at the the 4,1/5,1 for example the platform is close to 10 years old at this point.

But still to this day we still push forward to keep these machines alive because of one huge reason expandability.

If Apple doesn't learn from the one of the 6,1 biggest main failures of being mostly proprietary and being non expandable.

I don't know what will teach them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Josiana
Honestly they (Apple) should just dust off the 4,1/5,1 blueprints and restart from there for the 7,1.

Dump the newest AMD/Intel platform in it.

3.1, nvme, thunderbolt and the latest technological advancements etc

I think that's what a whole lot of people would be just fine and dandy with. While I'd like to see Apple continue to improve that design, it would have been a perfect stopgap to simply update cMP's internals and bring it back to life. Then, after getting something selling that's not 5+ years old w/ ZERO CHANGE (ahem, trashcan), they could still build a new, innovative mMP for 2019. The fact that it is taking so long really makes me worry that they are over-Apple'ing it. They're like more and more folks out there these days— they wanna talk plenty but they just don't really wanna listen.
 
I think that's what a whole lot of people would be just fine and dandy with. While I'd like to see Apple continue to improve that design, it would have been a perfect stopgap to simply update cMP's internals and bring it back to life. Then, after getting something selling that's not 5+ years old w/ ZERO CHANGE (ahem, trashcan), they could still build a new, innovative mMP for 2019. The fact that it is taking so long really makes me worry that they are over-Apple'ing it. They're like more and more folks out there these days— they wanna talk plenty but they just don't really wanna listen.

Exactly Apples "innovation" and "Apple'ing" it is what doomed the 6,1.

Pros don't want Apples way of "innovation" and "apple'ing" everything

we want a stable solid, non proprietary platform with tons of expandability in mind.
 
Ok I get that a lot of the vocal people are photographers and videographers. I get that you guys feel that apple dropped the ball for your use case scenario. You are absolutely right. From an audio engineer prospective, they may have sidestepped a bit, but not completely dropped the ball. I am in no way fond of the nMP but I have several colleagues who use it daily with zero complaints.

My point is that your use case is an important point. Not everyone you know uses a computer in the same way as you do. Does your use case make said computer completely invalid? Hardly. Is there a market for the 2019 Mac Pro? Absolutely! If there wasn't then no one would bother to post on this thread unless they were in fact trolls with an agenda. Apple wouldn't have a test group to suss out the specifics of the new machine with if no professionals were interested and they certainly do have exactly that (who they've been working with for the past year BTW). Let's face it the "pro" market is not a huge profit maker when it comes to computer sales profit but when was that ever not the case (Maybe the SGI days but certainly not with Apple). Apple has always been a consumer focused computer company. Apple wants to be the computer manufacturer that helps creators because they know they profit off of the creation. How is that point never made? They are sometimes shortsighted, sure, but not so shortsighted as to not remember that creatives make them money. They may make mistakes (huge ones at times i.e. Aperture & nMP) but I am quite happy with them owning up to those mistakes as compared to other tech giants in the past who never admit anything. Will they make it right? Who knows but I'm willing to wait to find out.

I, BTW, have never gone to a Dell centric sight and posted about how much I hate their proposed products now, even though I was quite loyal to them in the early nineties. That seems to be quite the norm with supposed Apple expats. Why is that? Are these people actual expats? I have my doubts. Look, if you legitimately have issues with the way Apple has treated the "Pro" market, why haven't you dropped them a line and explained your grievances or at least moved the f*ck on. I have sent hem my grievences and they responded with a pretty decent response that was mirrored in their public response. I will wait till the product is delivered before I judge but I never even got a single response from Dell or HP when I complained to them in the past. Not a single one! That should mean something. I still use some of their product too but will never expect good customer service from them. I do expect service from Apple and usually get it.
 
Last edited:
I am in no way fond of the nMP but I have several colleagues who use it daily with zero complaints.

It's good for some people, but disabling for the production processes of others.

Apple wants to be the computer manufacturer that helps creators because they know they profit off of the creation. How is that point never made?

If Apple truly wanted that, they'd put their own ego aside, and build the sort of machine that enables Pro customers, ALL Pro customers, to get their work done, the way they want to do it. The generic slot and bay chassis IS that solution. It's the bare, empty cargo, sliding door delivery van, in which one person installs shelves to be filled with plumbing fittings, in which another fits a desk and builds a mobile media studio - the thing that is "professional" about the van is its radical reconfigurability. It's not the things the van maker fits that makes it professional, it's the space they leave to let the customer fit out.

But, that's not what Apple wants to do, because Apple wants to pursue ITS art, and ITS art is "pushing the boundaries of what a computing device can be" - they want to change things, all things, even those that do not need to be changed. Their deep need to "make their impact on the universe" reduces the ability of those using their products to make their own impact on the universe, by making the tools more expensive, or less capable, or requiring people to keep turning over their entire toolchain as backward-compatibility is ditched.

Apple's overwhelming psychological issue is that, if it can't make the computers it (for aesthetic reasons - the performance art of products) wants to make, it would rather not make a product at all. That's where "Apple makes the products it wants to make" leads.

They are sometimes shortsighted, sure, but not so shortsighted as to not remember that creatives make them money. They may make mistakes (huge ones at times i.e. Aperture & nMP) but I am quite happy with them owning up to those mistakes as compared to other tech giants in the past who never admit anything. Will they make it right? Who knows but I'm willing to wait to find out.

Creatives, who need products that aren't their consumer appliances, don't make them money, in relative terms, that's the problem. The Mac Pro is largely a pride (and defensive play) issue now. If Apple actually took the gloves off the Mac Pro team, gave a pirate-flagged division free reign to make any machines they wanted, without need to consider the larger business, but just be profitable on their own, the first thing it would do is cannibalise iMac sales, and those large 5k screens are super expensive unless you have volume - that's why Dell had to charge as much for a monitor, as Apple could charge for a whole iMac using the same panel.

I, BTW, have never gone to a Dell centric sight and posted about how much I hate their proposed products now, even though I was quite loyal to them in the early nineties.

Dell's products are largely interchangeable with those of other vendors. Your user experience, documents etc are going to be the same between Dell, or HP.

When Apple makes something we don't like, it's very different - we feel trapped, and so we lash out. We take it personally, that as customers, we're being told we're wrong. This of course would not be a problem if Apple were legislatively forced to structurally separate their software and hardware businesses, and to licence their operating systems to anyone, including DIY builders on a FRAND basis. Personally, I think that would be a much better outcome all round. The wider utility of Apple being the small player who does things differently has passed its particular moment in history. Now, it's just another bigcorp, like IBM and Microsoft were in their times, and it needs to be treated as such.

Look, if you legitimately have issues with the way Apple has treated the "Pro" market, why haven't you dropped them a line and explained your grievances or at least moved the f*ck on. I have sent hem my grievences and they responded with a pretty decent response that was mirrored in their public response.

Have done many times, never heard anything in response. Perhaps because I tell them what solution I need (which doesn't align with their strategy), not just what's wrong with what I have.

I never even got a single response from Dell or HP when I complained to them in the past. Not a single one! That should mean something. I still use some of their product too but will never expect good customer service from them. I do expect service from Apple and usually get it.

Dell and HP have a bazillion options if the one you want doesn't suit. Apple usually has one. As for good service? Is there an onsite support package for individual purchasers of the iMac Pro?
 
Honestly they (Apple) should just dust off the 4,1/5,1 blueprints and restart from there for the 7,1.

Dump the newest AMD/Intel platform in it.

3.1, nvme, thunderbolt and the latest technological advancements etc

Send it to market.

If they don't come out with a 7,1 with EXPANDABILITY in mind it will not sell.

Just look at the the 4,1/5,1 for example the platform is close to 10 years old at this point.

But still to this day we still push forward to keep these machines alive because of one huge reason expandability.

If Apple doesn't learn from the one of the 6,1 biggest main failures of being mostly proprietary and being non expandable.

I don't know what will teach them.
From the interview Apple gave I came away with the impression Apple feels the 6,1 was a failure because of power / thermal limitations and not because it lacked expandability.
 
From the interview Apple gave I came away with the impression Apple feels the 6,1 was a failure because of power / thermal limitations and not because it lacked expandability.

Thats what I heard too, but there were lots of GPU technology that came out after the 6,1 was released that provided for more performance at much lower wattage/TDP.
 
From the interview Apple gave I came away with the impression Apple feels the 6,1 was a failure because of power / thermal limitations and not because it lacked expandability.

There are a couple in the April 2017 session if read objectively. It isn't solely power design corner. Much of it was not 100% binary ( wrong or right ).

" ... ‘This is a great opportunity to change what had been a conventional build a big card rack and slot a bunch of cards in there. We said: ‘a lot of this storage can be achieved with very high performance with Thunderbolt. So we built a design in part around that assumption, as well. Some of the pro community has been sort of moving that direction, but we had certainly in mind the need for expandability. If you wanted a great RAID solution in there, it probably made a lot more sense to put it outside the box than actually be constrained within the physical enclosure that contained the CPU. So, I think we went into it with some interesting ideas, and not all of them paid off. ..."
https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/t...-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/

So Thunderbolt was not a complete failure here, but there are cases that it missed. The iMac Pro continued down the track of only one drive (and trend line of storage outside of a single system is continuing to grow ).

However, the next Mac Pro doesn't necessarily have to follow the same path. That doesn't mean that the next one has to have all the drives of the even older Mac Pro. However, one , and only one, drive could easily be a bet that didn't pay off. Storage demands past 1-2TB is probably highly common among the Mac Pro users (and folks who bolted) that didn't pick up either the MP 2013 or iMac Pro. If Apple isn't shooting for RAID inside the box, then 1-2 more drives ( of some kind) would not be primarily RAID oriented but would offer more capacity than a single SSD drive ( that primary focus on single boot drive is probably still going to be there. 3.5" HDD default configuration boot drives is extremely likely dead. Casual RAID has been subsumed by SSDs in performance. That's a bet they didn't loose on. ). if they choose to go back to deskside then a few more drives may make the cut, but still won't be aimed at "big" RAID targets of more than a few drives.


Likewise are they going to do a complete 180 on as many 'slot cards' as possible? Probably not. Does it absolutely mean zero? Again that isn't really directly supported above either. Again, if drop the default configuration compute GPU (2nd GPU), then can leave that an "open" slot like the older Mac Pros. Having more than one GPU worked for some of the Pro users. Why would they want to cut them off in a new Mac Pro? [ The GPUs in the Mac Pro 2013 were still on cards. The notion that all cards are disappearing there either. ]

Pushing absolutely everything onto Thunderbolt isn't the point. However, doesn't mean there is zero Thunderbolt. ( six ports if kind of ridiculous. Four works and two other existing Mac systems. No reason why it wouldn't work on the next Mac Pro. )
[doublepost=1536763523][/doublepost]
Thats what I heard too, but there were lots of GPU technology that came out after the 6,1 was released that provided for more performance at much lower wattage/TDP.

There are multiple dimensions to the issue than just power. One is probably resources applied ( the iMac Pro was probably higher priority and other much higher priority problems outside the Mac space. ). Another is a vendor 'war' ( pricing and cooperation.) . The 'left turn' out of OpenCL and into Metal contributed also ( a smaller degree was Apple jumping much deeper into the GPU business. That's partially tied to Metal. ) .

Even two lower ones could be an issue if unbalanced to the CPU. Finally, the Mac Pro is at the top end of the Mac market. The market push would be to swap in something that puahed right back up into the same zone as what they were replacing.

Apple could have 'bump' the MP 2013 design with AMD Polaris and newer CPUs but by the time all of that got ready.... I suspect the iMac Pro took priority. An no, probably didn't have concurrent teams working on both. The number of people resources applied is probably bigger issue than the technologies involved. Even the single larger GPU inside approximately same enclosure design could have addressed with some real engineering think time (it wouldn't be super symmetrical but it could have worked better. )
 
Last edited:
There are multiple dimensions to the issue than just power. One is probably resources applied ( the iMac Pro was probably higher priority and other much higher priority problems outside the Mac space. ). Another is a vendor 'war' ( pricing and cooperation.) . The 'left turn' out of OpenCL and into Metal contributed also ( a smaller degree was Apple jumping much deeper into the GPU business. That's partially tied to Metal. ) .

Even two lower ones could be an issue if unbalanced to the CPU. Finally, the Mac Pro is at the top end of the Mac market. The market push would be to swap in something that puahed right back up into the same zone as what they were replacing.

Apple could have 'bump' the MP 2013 design with AMD Polaris and newer CPUs but by the time all of that got ready.... I suspect the iMac Pro took priority. An no, probably didn't have concurrent teams working on both. The number of people resources applied is probably bigger issue than the technologies involved. Even the single larger GPU inside approximately same enclosure design could have addressed with some real engineering think time (it wouldn't be super symmetrical but it could have worked better. )

You seem to have enormous amounts of justification and rationalization in your post for what essentially amounts to a colossal f*ck-up regarding their flagship Mac. I don't give them a free pass because of THIS market condition or THAT unanticipated thing. The fact is this: They sat on their asses and didn't do (STILL HAVEN'T DONE!) ANYTHING to make even the slightest update or pricing adjustment for FOUR YEARS. In the computer industry, there is ZERO explanation you can feed me to justify both a stagnation in any spec improvement and keeping the exact same price as 4 years prior. Thermal corner or not, they still could have made minor internal improvements at the very minimum as technology progressed. And failing that, you start lowering the price. They did neither for 4 years, and only did the latter a year ago.

Bottom line: They weren't sitting by, gnashing teeth over all the reasons you give, lamenting the fact that, boo-hoo, their hands were completely tied and they couldn't make a single improvement to their Mac Pro product or its pricing year after year. They were either arrogant/greedy in expecting their pro users to keep ponying up for the same kit as time went on, ORRRR....they were so caught up in this awesome and incredibly important, life-changing technology on the horizon called "animojis" that they just couldn't spare any attention for their flagship computer product. </rant>
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.