So, I have the resources to purchase a complete entry level configuration but...

[Mr. Dee]

So, I really had high hopes for the new Mac Pro and its actually a great system, but my goodness, the pricing makes me quiver.

I have the funds to buy pretty much everything: entry level config, monitor, stand and keyboard/mouse. But lets be real, who would really purchase the entry level with 256 GBs SSD in 2019? I'm barely getting by with 256 GBs on my Early 2015 MacBook Pro.

I really was hoping the specs would be equal to or surpass the iMac Pro.

For a top of the line system unit in the Mac line up, I was expecting:

- 1 TB SSD by default
- 64 GBs of RAM
- AMD VEGA GPU 16 GBs
- 8 Core Intel Xeon

$5000 without monitor.

My additional $5000 would go towards upgrades and accessories:

- XDR display for $2000 x2
- Keyboard and mouse $230
- $600 on Apple Care

But what Apple is offering is just not desireable for what I would be willing to spend. The specs I truly would want would instead cost $20,000.

Yes, I don't work for Mr. Lucas, Spielberg, Netflix, not a developer (but even pro devs are saying, this system is way out of their budget).

I keep my computers for long, I still have a HP Workstation from 2011 and its still working, previous Dell Desktop lasted for 8 years.

We all know Apple systems last long, even the obselete ones go for good money. An Apple group in my home country is selling 1,1 Mac Pro's for $400, the same for a 5,1 and even 6,1 which go for around 7,1.

But, I really was expecting the Mac Pro would be in a more earthly price range. For me, its a partly want and need purchase. I work from home more, I use a lot of VM's and also wanted a system with a lot of open room for potential creative projects in the future. I recently migrated and applied for a scholarship in software development; I was thinking about dabling in video for the first time and I thought this system would be the perfect start to that.

I guess, it was not meant to be. Right now, my future upgrade is looking more like next years potential 16 inch MacBook Pro and LG 5K display. Not a bad consolation and still a very expensive setup itself.

Maybe when I hit the big 4.0., I'll treat myself to the Mac Pro, but for now, it seems like Apple made a system with intention of gouging and upselling you to more expensive configurations, with an already expensive entry price to start.

 

[Zen_Arcade]

This does not have the hallmark of a design for the prosumer or enthusiast.

The case alone is expensive; the motherboard to support everything is expensive, etc. The best "value" is likely to be the 16 core model.

 

[Mr. Dee]

This does not have the hallmark of a design for the prosumer or enthusiast.

The case alone is expensive; the motherboard to support everything is expensive, etc. The best "value" is likely to be the 16 core model.

I don't think making 10 minute 4K unboxing videos is particularly pro worthy either.

 

[AustinIllini]

ATP talked about this. The time to buy a computer to keep long term was 2008.

This was never meant to be it. This is squarely aimed at pros at major design and development houses.

 

[sevoneone]

Yes, it is interesting, but I think not unexpected. A truly upgradable and modular modern Mac was always going to come at a high cost. This is to appease a low volume high margin market that Apple was has been losing in high-end media production. The display alone telegraphs that... and it is not that far off from the price of a similarly equipped Dell or HP Xeon workstation.

More of these are going to end up in edit bays with Blackmagic Design hardware and software installed than are ever going to be used with Final Cut Pro. Despite the fanfare and keynote demos, this isn't for the typical FCP X user do corporate or event videography. This is for the guys that need top of the line capture/playback hardware and Resolve/Fusion Studio and don't want to have to deal with Linux or Windows.

Apple's answer for the "middle pro" is the iMac Pro, or MacBook Pro and Mac mini with an eGPU and Thunderbolt expansion. Which is a bit insulting as most of us just want a self-contained box we can load with ram, storage and upgrade the GPU on to get a solid return on a 6-year investment.

The streamers and YouTubers doing 10 min 4k videos can get by with a $1,500 21-inch iMac or really any Mac currently on sale.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Good God Apple..

Can’t we get a headless something that’s literally anywhere between the Mac Mini and this new Mac Pro?

The Grand Canyon occupies less space than what’s between those two products.

 

[Supermacguy]

It's the Pro Mac that pro's have wanted. But not at the price any semi-pro or amateur-pro could possibly afford. We all know Apple has huge profit margins on their products. The $1000 monitor stand is evidence of this. Apple wasn't going to make a mediocre new super computer, and I completely applaud them for making this monster. But Apple really needs to stop being so greedy. Let more people afford this and make it up in volume, and all us Mac Pro cheese grater holdouts will love them again. But I simply can never afford nor justify $5k base price; even if it does last me 10 years, that's still a lot of up front cash. I will have to wait for a used unit at the very least.

 

[turbineseaplane]

even if it does last me 10 years

And it likely won’t anyhow...ATP podcast was just talking about that on their preview show since Siracusa just did exactly that (10 years on a Mac Pro)

 

[sevoneone]

Good God Apple..

Can’t we get a headless something that’s literally anywhere between the Mac Mini and this new Mac Pro?

The Grand Canyon occupies less space than what’s between those two products.

Yes and no... Price gap and expansion gap, yes. The performance gap between a top end Mac mini and the base 2019 Mac Pro likely is not as wide as you think. I don't think we know which 8 core Xeon W Apple is using yet, but compare it to the 8 core in the iMac pro and the benchmarks fit right on the scale. Maxing at 64GB of memory, the Mini + eGPU can take you right up to the stepping off point to an iMac Pro or Mac Pro for $3,000.

The gap is covered, just not in the way some of us would like. As I said earlier, it is a bit hurtful, but Apple told the middle/enthusiast users exactly what products they see fit for them with this New Mac Pro.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Egpu = no thank you.

 

[sevoneone]

It's the Pro Mac that pro's have wanted. But not at the price any semi-pro or amateur-pro could possibly afford. We all know Apple has huge profit margins on their products. The $1000 monitor stand is evidence of this. Apple wasn't going to make a mediocre new super computer, and I completely applaud them for making this monster. But Apple really needs to stop being so greedy. Let more people afford this and make it up in volume, and all us Mac Pro cheese grater holdouts will love them again. But I simply can never afford nor justify $5k base price; even if it does last me 10 years, that's still a lot of up front cash. I will have to wait for a used unit at the very least.

The price point stings, but it is in line with what similar workstations cost. I am sure they either crunched the numbers and found that a lower spec/price option would not return significant volume or are trying to be greedy and force people into a product with super high margins like an iMac or Mac mini. I would love it if Apple made a $2,400 tower mac with a i7 or i9 processor, 4 or 8 RAM slots, 3 PCIe slots, Thunderbolt and a couple of slots for SSDs. I just don't think there are enough of us that would buy one...

Egpu = no thank you.

I agree. Why should I have to pay a $200-$300 premium for a decent TB enclosure plus the card. If Thunderbolt accessories didn't cost such a premium I'd definitely feel different. I'm not going to spend $500 or $699 for RX 580 performance that shouldn't cost more than $300.

Like I said: covered, just not the way we'd like or in any way that makes financial sense.

 

[Mr. Dee]

Yes, it is interesting, but I think not unexpected. A truly upgradable and modular modern Mac was always going to come at a high cost. This is to appease a low volume high margin market that Apple was has been losing in high-end media production. The display alone telegraphs that... and it is not that far off from the price of a similarly equipped Dell or HP Xeon workstation.

More of these are going to end up in edit bays with Blackmagic Design hardware and software installed than are ever going to be used with Final Cut Pro. Despite the fanfare and keynote demos, this isn't for the typical FCP X user do corporate or event videography. This is for the guys that need top of the line capture/playback hardware and Resolve/Fusion Studio and don't want to have to deal with Linux or Windows.

Apple's answer for the "middle pro" is the iMac Pro, or MacBook Pro and Mac mini with an eGPU and Thunderbolt expansion. Which is a bit insulting as most of us just want a self-contained box we can load with ram, storage and upgrade the GPU on to get a solid return on a 6-year investment.

The streamers and YouTubers doing 10 min 4k videos can get by with a $1,500 21-inch iMac or really any Mac currently on sale.

My budget on this was set at $8 to 10 grand, for me thats a lot of money and I am sure for most people it is. But why did Apple have to pull the rug from under me with the specs and added cost to have a truly complete end to end Apple setup?

I’m not rich, I work hard to earn my income and keep my hardware for long, I don’t splurge like this, but I thought after a rough 9 months, I would invest in this to take my career and future forward.

There was a time when Apple was expensive, but not impossibly out of reach. A Power Mac G3 in 1999 was reasonably powerful and priced well at around $1,700. But, I have noticed since 2016, something has brutally changed within the company, the MacBook Pro’s are way more expensive, the iPhones, iPads, Mac Mini’s, iMacs and now the Pro desktops.

Remember, this was a company that was once on the brink of bankruptcy in the late 90’s. I think after years of loyalty from the same customers that kept it from the brink of death, there should be some gratitude. I am not asking for a $500, $1000, $2000, heck $4,000 Mac Pro. I just asked to be reasonable with this.

This is nothing but a reflection of the 1% mentality and inability to relate to the rest of us. Which is ironic, because the Mac was designed as the computer for the rest of us, now its designed only for Kim, Anna Wintour, Kanye, Taylor, Oprah, iJustine and MKBHD.

 

[minifridge1138]

I'm not disagreeing with anything said already, but here's an observation. The original Macintosh that launched in January 1984 cost $2,495. Adjust for inflation from 1984 to 2019 that's $6,136.60 in today's money.

So I won't argue that Macs are expensive, but I would point out that they always have been. And I'd much rather have today's hardware than 1984's.