The Mac Pro Criticism

[TheGoldenApple]

Thunderbolt 2 obviously can support the demands performance wise, but going all external on that stuff means cables, potential extra power adaptors, and a hodgepodge of assorted looking device enclosures to contend with. Essentially a mess waiting to happen, not really appleish imo.

They'll probably create some all-in-one cord or something

----------

I am however glad that they at least put effort into developing it, and the engineers came up with some cool stuff, I just hope in the future they will go bigger for performance.

Apple always made things that are thin, otherwise small

----------

Tim Cook doesn't know the first thing about his business.

I totally agree, I wish Steve Jobs was still alive

----------

A couple of cables is NOT PRO? Let me show you the art of my people!

I agree. I use like a billion cables to rig up my DJ table and mixing hardware. Plus, sick setup

 

[adildacoolset]

False analogy.

Your computer and software is a tool.
It doesn't matter how the hardware or software gets the job done as long as it gets the job done. There is no difference in the job between OpenCL and CUDA.

OpenCL, CUDA, a million Chinese doing the calculations by hand. Who cares as long as it works.

Apple could get ride of GPU acceleration altogether for all I care as long as the tool (combination of hardware and software) is the best tool on the market to get the job done.

People have no idea what software developers have been working on with Apple.

Hell the developer of DaVinci Resolve said version 10 SCREAMS on the new Mac Pro.
That is the only thing that matters.

CUDA vs OpenCL / Intel vs AMD / Who gives a rats ass.
Apple could release a ARM based mac and as long the software kicks ass who cares?

Coke and Pepsi on the other hand are two distinct end products.

I'll say that you're right... But the thing is that CUDA is the industry standard right now. It's better supported. I'm sure apple will also sell Nvidias as an alternative.

----------

Honestly, for the same reason stuff is still programmed in FORTRAN. Because a good many libraries, code, etc. were written in CUDA, and since I'm not actually paid to code (I'm paid for research, which happens to involve code) - and don't have the CS chops the people who originally wrote the libraries did, going back and recoding it isn't so much an option.

Basically "Because CUDA got there first, and OpenCL is just starting to be a viable alternative".



An integrated GPU I can see - what with the whole unified thermal core thing. But the PowerPC -> Intel switch was a platform switch. I can't see a compelling technical reason for an integrated AMD GPU vs. an nVidia GPU. If you forced me to go with one, I'd pick the nVidia (what with being able to run both OpenCL and CUDA). But I'd rather not be forced - I'd prefer to see two options. I'd prefer not to have a net loss of flexibility for dubious benefit.

Right now, best case, this requires a bespoke, For New Mac Pros Only nVidia GPU to be built by someone. As a very, very long time Mac user, I generally don't put much faith in "Oh, there will be plenty of peripherals for our proprietary design."

Apple have provided Nvidias for a while as an alternative. This may happen again.

 

[TheGoldenApple]

The only thing I can see wrong with the Mac Pro, is the small amount of USB 3 ports, I struggle with the amount of USB 3 ports on the iMac .

You could use a USB hub

 

[plusnq]

I'll say that you're right... But the thing is that CUDA is the industry standard right now. It's better supported. I'm sure apple will also sell Nvidias as an alternative.

----------



Apple have provided Nvidias for a while as an alternative. This may happen again.

I was worried about this also but these articles made me feel more assured. AE seems to be the biggest issue.

http://www.philiphodgetts.com/2013/...cc-resolve-et-al-work-fine-on-the-new-macpro/

http://blogs.adobe.com/premierepro/2013/06/adobe-premiere-pro-cc-and-gpu-support.html

Cheers

Shane

 

[GroundLoop]

All media should go external IMO and have internal SSD for the applications and OS.

I think that we should take it a step further. I think Apple's new Mac Pro should be a 30" Cinema Display with a 802.11ac, 10Gbe card, and a 128gb of local cache storage built in. Then all Apple customers would subscribe to Apple's iMainframe for all compute and storage needs. Let's take the computing world full circle!



GL

 

[freejazz-man]

I'd wonder why you'd bother to post such a thing considering there aren't any other more powerful or expandable macs available!

edit: should've quoted you knowing that you would edit the nonsense out.

 

[goMac]

the mac doesn't need a floppy disc drive

I think you're missing the point. The debate over the iMac I referenced happened in 1998 when the iMac was a giant blue machine with a CRT.

 

[Wild-Bill]

Never mind copper.... That board is sexy enough to rate it's own water loop.

Down side is, I believe that "armor" cover is a seperate purchase.

 

[GermanyChris]

Never mind copper.... That board is sexy enough to rate it's own water loop.

Down side is, I believe that "armor" cover is a seperate purchase.

Nope, it comes with it..

 

[Javik]

criticism for the new mac pro on the fact of expandability and upgradability is silly.

if the old mac pro is so "perfect" and "expandable" continue using it and upgrading it for the foreseeable future. stop whining and put your money where your mouth is

 

[OS6-OSX]

Not criticizing the new mac pro on the fact of expandability and upgradability based on current and future needs is silly.

If the new mac pro is so "perfect" and "expandable" buy it and use it for the foreseeable future. Stop whining and put your money where your mouth is

 

[pprior]

criticism for the new mac pro on the fact of expandability and upgradability is silly.

if the old mac pro is so "perfect" and "expandable" continue using it and upgrading it for the foreseeable future. stop whining and put your money where your mouth is

What a stupid comment. Maybe we want faster memory, faster processors, USB3, TB, etc... (i.e. not a mac pro that really hasn't been updated in about 4 years now)

The "old mac pro" with current hardware I'd buy in a second over the "new" one - that is the question, same hardware, new form factor vs. old - which would you buy - me, the old no question.

 

[Javik]

What a stupid comment. Maybe we want faster memory, faster processors, USB3, TB, etc... (i.e. not a mac pro that really hasn't been updated in about 4 years now)

The "old mac pro" with current hardware I'd buy in a second over the "new" one - that is the question, same hardware, new form factor vs. old - which would you buy - me, the old no question.

Then what is the point of having an upgradable machine if you are just going to buy a new machine anyway.

The 2012 Mac Pro will still be great for years to come. As we've seen in benchmarks, CPU wise there isnt such an improvement

 

[pprior]

Then what is the point of having an upgradable machine if you are just going to buy a new machine anyway.

The 2012 Mac Pro will still be great for years to come. As we've seen in benchmarks, CPU wise there isnt such an improvement

Well my understanding is that TB has to be a mainboard connection, so you can't just add it on to a 2012 or earlier machine. Sometimes technology does force you to upgrade a machine. FWIW I'm still running a 2008 mac pro precisely because i've been able to upgrade it and I haven't seen a machine yet that made me think I needed to upgrade.

 

[-hh]

Well my understanding is that TB has to be a mainboard connection, so you can't just add it on to a 2012 or earlier machine.

There's a couple of ways to look at the design decisions made with TB.

For example, from a pedantic technology discussion, the early TB prototypes were a PCIe add-in card (I forget, but I believed that they did incude a cable "loop-back" to the motherboard to pick up video). As such, the technological implications are "possible, but not necessarily elegant".

From less of a "tech" perspective, just what was the real justification for why video had to have been packaged with the data signal? Simply put, that was an artificially imposed design constraint.

Sometimes technology does force you to upgrade a machine.

Sure, and from a capabilities based approach, there's multiple options:

• Firewire 1600 and 3200 were demonstrated feasible years ago (December 2007 for 1600).
• USB3 is "in the wild" and could have been an option for the 2012 Mac Pro, even if Apple chose not to redesign the motherboard and offer it as an optional PCIe card fro $50.
• eSATA's also quite mature, proven, and has been out in the wild too.

Granted, any technological approach does have downsides too, but let's not try to pretend that alternatives don't exist ... particularly since 2/3rds of these have been pretty broadly adopted in the 10x larger WinTel marketplace, which affords diversity and better value due to improved economies of scale. Personally, my biggest concerns with TB are that it appears to be an unnecessary additional expense which predominantly seems driven by the "Shiny!" perception and hype.


-hh

 

[MacMilligan]

Then what is the point of having an upgradable machine if you are just going to buy a new machine anyway.

The 2012 Mac Pro will still be great for years to come. As we've seen in benchmarks, CPU wise there isnt such an improvement

That is very short sighted. Apple keeps desktop designs for 10+ years and refreshes the hardware. Current Mac Pro users can't simply be happy with the 2012 because it will be fine for 4-5 years, they are thinking 10 years ahead and where Apple's designs are taking the Mac Pro series in general, which is away from expandability and into disposables. The new Mac Pro is pretty much as upgradable as a MacBook Pro.

Be happy with the 2012 won't work in 2018 when the only option is the dust bin.

 

[GermanyChris]

That is very short sighted. Apple keeps desktop designs for 10+ years and refreshes the hardware. Current Mac Pro users can't simply be happy with the 2012 because it will be fine for 4-5 years, they are thinking 10 years ahead and where Apple's designs are taking the Mac Pro series in general, which is away from expandability and into disposables. The new Mac Pro is pretty much as upgradable as a MacBook Pro.

Be happy with the 2012 won't work in 2018 when the only option is the dust bin.

I think the general hope is that the iTube fails and a traditional computer is re-introduced to replace it.

 

[MacMilligan]

I think the general hope is that the iTube fails and a traditional computer is re-introduced to replace it.

Let's hope so. My needs change over time, so it is hard to be locked into specific hardware (such as AMD cards.) Expandability through thunderbolt is not reassuring.

 

[GermanyChris]

Let's hope so. My needs change over time, so it is hard to be locked into specific hardware (such as AMD cards.) Expandability through thunderbolt is not reassuring.

I won't lock into specific HW nor formats, I really don't take advantage of the Apple eco-system because of that..

I mess around too much to deal well with proprietary.

 

[MacMilligan]

I won't lock into specific HW nor formats, I really don't take advantage of the Apple eco-system because of that..

I mess around too much to deal well with proprietary.

That's why I'm running a hack right now for my workstation. I'm considering getting a 4.1/5.1 Mac Pro to keep me for 4-5 years and hope for the best at that point.

 

[GermanyChris]

That's why I'm running a hack right now for my workstation. I'm considering getting a 4.1/5.1 Mac Pro to keep me for 4-5 years and hope for the best at that point.

I sold a hack for a 4,1 I wouldn't do it again.

 

[nordicappeal]

I've waited a long time for a new Mac Pro but with the new 2013 model I just went and bought a 2010 Mac Pro - I'm now safe for a few generations of the 2013 model. I can imagine it will take time to get used and convert storage etc to the new setup.

I really look forward to see how people get settled when its on the market.

 

[handsome pete]

I think the general hope is that the iTube fails and a traditional computer is re-introduced to replace it.

I just don't see that happening. If the Mac Pro was viable in the tower form, then I don't think they would have gone in such a radical new direction. If this one fails, then it seems they would just drop the product altogether.

 

[GermanyChris]

I just don't see that happening. If the Mac Pro was viable in the tower form, then I don't think they would have gone in such a radical new direction. If this one fails, then it seems they would just drop the product altogether.

Then the premise Apple is working under is that the tower is dead vs their product is out of date.

When the cube failed it wasn't an end to powermac's my hope is it will be the same here..

but then again I didn't expect the iTube.

 

[goMac]

I just don't see that happening. If the Mac Pro was viable in the tower form, then I don't think they would have gone in such a radical new direction. If this one fails, then it seems they would just drop the product altogether.

At least for the video card angle, it's difficult to do PCI-E video cards on a Thunderbolt machine. And the number of Thunderbolt ports pretty much mandated the number of cards (6 ports -> 12 displays -> 2 cards.)

Whether or not the Mac Pro is viable in tower form, the design direction was pretty much set once they decided on the number of Thunderbolt ports.