MP 7,1 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)

[namethisfile]

Exhibit 1: the guy who's ruining Apple.

View attachment 675463

That's kinda funny except that there is a bit of sadness behind it. I mean, would you rather Apple announce "something" about the new Mac Pro and say it's coming sometime in 2017? Or, nothing because it's not coming out until next year?

I would prefer nothing. The 2013 nMP is like still relevant. I mean, how many 2013 nMP owners are really itching to buy another $3000+ Mac Pro, as rich as they are for being able to afford a Mac Pro to begin with so they can have a few more cores, TB3 and... let's wait here for a bit...

...AMD RX 480 equivalent GPU's? Because the GPU for a nMP if they were to have announced it would be an RX 480-equivalent since AMD doesn't have a higher end card out yet. Not until next year when Vega supposedly comes out.

And also, current Broadwell Xeon CPU's aren't that much better than the Ivy Bridge in the 2013 nMP.

I feel like the people complaining about Apple leaving customers in the dust without new shiny Mac Pro's are people really wanting to undermine or maybe perhaps convince people to switch to HP. Who knows, they could be HP shills... or whathaveyou. It's the internet. It's possible.

And, yes, my tirade about the Surface Studio is to undermine MS design. But, I'm just like a poor aspiring artist so I kinda know about good taste and design and my viewpoint is coming from that. I'm not like an Apple shill or something if that's what you think.

Also, Apple leaving the display business? Good. The Apple Thunderbolt Display that sold for $1000, as good as it is, is not as good as a 27" NEC PA series monitor or an Eizo monitor that has wider-gamut, which is more suited for "Professional" use. I gather the Apple Thunderbolt display is more convenient for attaching a MBP or even a nMP via TB and so on, as well as having built in speaker and facetime camera. But, at most, the Apple Thunderbolt Display is a "Prosumer" product. If I was a rich professional, I would buy an NEC or Eizo monitor to connect to my Mac. Not the Apple TB Display!

Or, the new LG monitor. It's wide gamut. The Apple TB Display isn't.

Apple leaving the wireless router business? Good. There's like other routers available that are... better spec'd and will work on a Mac just as well as the Apple one.

And, one more thing to announce...

The HP Z series is like massive and runs... Windoze...

 

[Derpage]

The iMac with the round Hershey's Kisses base and articulating arm that connects a monitor from like the early 2000 is like...

design-wise...

so much...

sexier!

This Microsoft "design" language borrowed from phone/TV manufacturers is not only boring, trite and totally void of any thought...

it's been disguised, misappropriated by dumb tech "reviewers" as something like successful design or even "beautiful."

Now, I know, it's subjective. But, my argument is the part about design that is as close to objectivity as possible. And, that is the part about the shape of the Surface Studio... which is shaped like every other smartphone or TV that is out right now. So, how can a product like this be deemed "beautiful" if it looks like a giant Nokia Phone or TV-computer?

I'm just talking about the aesthetics.

And, that Wacom-like screen? And that pen and round input device thing? Is this a computer for making "art" or like an unnecessarily complicated tool for making art?

Also, those arms holding the screen is a total failure, design wise. And, it's a failure design wise because it's not "elegant." And, yes, I know this part is subjective and my opinion.

Your post is exactly the kind of thinking that I am trying to counter-argue that MS is not really good at design (Xbox, this Surface Studio, etc.). This product is kinda of like a "Halo" product for MS, right? I mean, look at the price? I'm not sure if that price is bumped higher just so it's even more "Halo-er" and "exclusive." I don't know how much the components actually cost. But, it's an expensive PC. It's a Halo PC. It's called The Surface Studio. Who has a "studio?" No one will probably buy it except for maybe businesses and rich people and maybe artists with actual "studios."

For those who think the new Macbook Pro is not "Pro...." Pro just means more. It's above the Macbook line. It doesn't really mean "professional." The MB "Pro" is a higher spec'd Macbook. That is all.

But, MS... MS spells it out for us. The Surface "Studio!" It's not just a PC. It's a "Studio." It's not just an acronym or a ubiquitous "Pro" moniker. It's a whole damn word, "Studio..." in a PC.

Also, MS would like us to see this "Studio PC" as a work of art. How? The price! This is where I draw the line. Pun intended.

Like I said, I don't really care if people think it's beautiful or that it isn't. Personally, I think the early 2000 iMac that looks similar to this "Studio PC" is more "beautiful."

My qualm is that like the post above, people think MS is somehow a "design" company now.

If they are a design company, they have a long way to go. I mean, look at their products, the Xbox, this Studio PC... those are the only two MS products I can think of that was "designed" by MS.... they're like "knock-off designs" at best. Sure, the Studio has some tech in it. But, the design, the "clothing" of the thing is like Target/Walmart-grade at best...

MS "designing" things? Oh, please! I think they need to design Windows better first. Then move on to hardware, maybe! Oh, wait, they are doing both at the same time already. We're doom. MS will BSOD the word, "Design!" I bet you!
[doublepost=1480527094][/doublepost]

I say failure because design is suppose to solve things. That arm solved it alright. But, in an ugly way!

I've got a degree in talking out of my a$$ however it's called an MFA. And "my opinion" is not a defensible position. However, very cringe worthy.

I did say "nor do I care ..." lets not jump all over this obtuse thing. Lots of things can have functions for specific markets that you or I wouldn't care about, that doesn't make us obtuse to say so.

Ah so you found the iPad pro and pen accessory just as flabbergasting? No, it is being obtuse. I call it like I see it. Sorry if that bothers you.

 

[wallysb01]

I've got a degree in talking out of my a$$ however it's called an MFA. And

Ah so you found the iPad pro and pen accessory just as flabbergasting? No, it is being obtuse. I call it like I see it. Sorry if that bothers you.

Yeah, and I'd call your "calling it like you see it" behavior something too, but I'll refrain because I'm smart enough to know it adds nothing to the discussion.

 

[namethisfile]

x

--deleted--

--this post was a mistake---

 

[deconstruct60]

It's bizarro world, when Microsoft is the hardware company and Apple is the software company.
..... Compare this to the stagnation in the Mac Hardware and Microsoft's innovation (even attempt at innovation for the apologetics) and even Wacom has a fancy new tablet for design workflows.

New PC models this year:

Apple 1 ( 1.25 if count minor bump to MacBook. )
MS 1

Apple is stagnant with the same count as MS ? The Surface 4 ( and 3 ) are languishing approximately as much as the MBA. MS phones? nothing. MS "Surface Table" Pixelsense ? nope. Surface Hub ( conferencing screen)? nope.

MS did something they were not doing before, but all of the stuff there were already engaged in ..... not much of anything happened in 2016. At least not on a scale radically different from what Apple did in the same 12-16 month time period.

 

[Bubba Satori]

Yeah, and I'd call your "calling it like you see it" behavior something too, but I'll refrain because I'm smart enough to know it adds nothing to the discussion.

 

[Aldaris]

I am no HPZ shill. I am probably one of the biggest Mac heads/fanboys I know. My first Mac was a PowerBook 520c. I had a G3 iBook and powerMac G4 MDD, 17" PowerBook G4 before they switched to intel. I have 2 MacBook Pros and am really in the market for a Mac Pro. However being this far into the product life cycle I would be an idiot to pay introductory price for a 3 year old machine. Which is partly why the Thunderbolt Display suffered, introductory price 3-4 years into the life cycle. For those that need a workstation the writing is on the wall and we still cling to a glimmer of hope, but we're not stupid and ignoring what our options may be when we individually make that decision for ourselves to move. No one is convincing you or anyone else. No one is suggestion the "studio" belongs in the Louve. More of an observation of what the competition is doing and where are they pushing the market.

 

[namethisfile]

I am no HPZ shill. I am probably one of the biggest Mac heads/fanboys I know. My first Mac was a PowerBook 520c. I had a G3 iBook and powerMac G4 MDD, 17" PowerBook G4 before they switched to intel. I have 2 MacBook Pros and am really in the market for a Mac Pro. However being this far into the product life cycle I would be an idiot to pay introductory price for a 3 year old machine. Which is partly why the Thunderbolt Display suffered, introductory price 3-4 years into the life cycle. For those that need a workstation the writing is on the wall and we still cling to a glimmer of hope, but we're not stupid and ignoring what our options may be when we individually make that decision for ourselves to move. No one is convincing you or anyone else. No one is suggestion the "studio" belongs in the Louve. More of an observation of what the competition is doing and where are they pushing the market.

If you're using your Mac for productivity work (not gaming) I don't see why an Ivy Bridge Xeon CPU (up to 12 cores, 24 threads as option) and dual D700 as highest option (equivalent to AMD HD7950's if I am correct) cannot satisfy your needs.

What kind of work will you be doing on the mac?

As an option, you can just get the new LG 5K TB3 Display and the nMBP (AMD 460) to tie you over. That will be like $3000+. Almost like a Mac Pro but more portable I think. You can even upgrade the CPU's to the highest possible option. And the SSD storage to highest possible option.

Or, wait.

Like, the saying goes... good things come to those who...

...

...wait!!!

 

[Aldaris]

If you're using your Mac for productivity work (not gaming) I don't see why an Ivy Bridge Xeon CPU (up to 12 cores, 24 threads as option) and dual D700 as highest option (equivalent to AMD HD7950's if I am correct) cannot satisfy your needs.

What kind of work will you be doing on the mac?

As an option, you can just get the new LG 5K TB3 Display and the nMBP (AMD 460) to tie you over. That will be like $3000+. Almost like a Mac Pro but more portable I think. You can even upgrade the CPU's to the highest possible option. And the SSD storage to highest possible option.

Or, wait.

Like, the saying goes... good things come to those who...

...

...wait!!!

I do lots of video and graphics as well
as CAD and BIM, I dual boot for those that don't run native on the Mac side but prefer macOS. I despise windows honestly and truly I do. I mainly have windows boot camp for ArcMap (GIS) and Revit. I also like the hardware to be relevant. Let's be honest, generally we are not going to be seeing Thunderbolt 2 devices much longer as everyone is headed to Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C. So again to invest into three year old tech when a potential release is around the bend I would consider myself to be an idiot. Wouldn't you?

Right now I am on a MacBook Pro retina with a Thunderbolt Display. I love it, I just want more or a workhorse and a longboard life span of a workhorse. Not incest in older tech as far all the new I/O on the horizon, again namely Thunderbolt 3 and USB-C.

 

[goMac]

If you're using your Mac for productivity work (not gaming) I don't see why an Ivy Bridge Xeon CPU (up to 12 cores, 24 threads as option) and dual D700 as highest option (equivalent to AMD HD7950's if I am correct) cannot satisfy your needs.

Because the price Apple is charging for that is insane. How much is the D700 upgrade? For cards that should cost around $100 each?

The $3000 Mac Pro is a $1000 PC at this point.

 

[namethisfile]

Because the price Apple is charging for that is insane. How much is the D700 upgrade? For cards that should cost around $100 each?

After quick googling, I found out that the Mac Pro D700 is equivalent to the AMD FirePro W9000.

The AMD FirePro W9000 are selling at B&H right now for $3,398.50 each.
[doublepost=1480545136][/doublepost]

The $3000 Mac Pro is a $1000 PC at this point.

I wish. Even used 2013 nMP prices are still high on eBay!

Sadly, that's not how it works. We'd all wait 2 years later and get 2016 tech in 2018 for half the price (brand new). But, that's not how it works.

In fact, in tech, it seems to work the reverse. The older the tech, the more expensive it seems to become.

 

[Derpage]

After quick googling, I found out that the Mac Pro D700 is equivalent to the AMD FirePro W9000.

The AMD FirePro W9000 are selling at B&H right now for $3,398.50 each.

It's a down clocked Tahiti from 2011 on a custom board. Nothing more nothing less. This discussion has been had ad infinitum. If we could harness electricity from your comment, we'd have the worlds power solutions solved.

 

[namethisfile]

It's a down clocked Tahiti from 2011 on a custom board. Nothing more nothing less. This discussion has been had ad infinitum. If we could harness electricity from your comment, we'd have the worlds power solutions solved.

You could say the same for Firepro branded AMD cards. Or, Quadro Nvidia cards. So, the card in the Mac Pro is the workstation version of those cards. The workstation card will have 10-bit color support for monitors that support 10-bit. I dont think the consumer cards from the gaming division supports that.

I'd charge you money to harness electricity from my comments, though.

From 2011 doesn't mean poop in productivity because MacOS leverages that card very well. Now, if the D700 runs hot and hungry, then it might be "old." But, I think AMD made power management changes to these cards so they run efficiently with their Zero-core tech or whatever. So, it's one of the newer GPU's in regards to power efficiency gains. Now, is it as efficient as the new AMD Polaris cards? No because Polaris cards are new and in smaller 14mm dies.

But, to keep pointing out 2011 as if 2011 is ancient is misguided.

Also, remember... software lags behind hardware.

PS--And... no, Firepro or Quadro cards are not nothing more, nothing less Geforce or AMD Radeon cards. They're nothing more and nothing less "workstation" cards to be precise!

PS--Are Intel Xeon's nothing more than an Intel... nevermind. I tried...

 

[Derpage]

You could say the same for Firepro branded AMD cards. Or, Quadro Nvidia cards. So, the card in the Mac Pro is the workstation version of those cards. The workstation card will have 10-bit color support for monitors that support 10-bit. I dont think the consumer cards from the gaming division supports that.

I'd charge you money to harness electricity from my comments, though.

From 2011 doesn't mean poop in productivity because MacOS leverages that card very well. Now, if the D700 runs hot and hungry, then it might be "old." But, I think AMD made power management changes to these cards so they run efficiently with their Zero-core tech or whatever. So, it's one of the newer GPU's in regards to power efficiency gains. Now, is it as efficient as the new AMD Polaris cards? No because Polaris cards are new and in smaller 14mm dies.

But, to keep pointing out 2011 as if 2011 is ancient is misguided.

Also, remember... software lags behind hardware.

10 bit has been available on consumer cards since the early 2000s.
The rest just sounds like marketing drivel without any numbers to back it up. Why don't you post some benchmarks showing this optimization being put to use. I'll wait...I mean, maybe there have been major changes since the last time I had this discussion in early 2014 when the benchmarks were first released.

 

[namethisfile]

10 bit has been available on consumer cards since the 2000s.
The rest just sounds like marketing drivel without any numbers to back it up. Why don't you post some benchmarks showing this optimization being put to use. I'll wait...I mean, maybe there have been major changes since the last time I had this discussion in early 2014 when the benchmarks were first released.

No. Current Nvidia GTX 10 series cards or AMD RX 4xx series cards don't support 10-bit color. Only the Radeon Pro/Firepro and Quadro cards says it supports it. And I reckon, previous generations don't support them either.

I checked. I am running GTX 460 in my Mac Pro. No 10-bit color support.

PS--Sorry. I'm not interested in googling for benchmarks. My point about optimization is that Apple optimizes MacOS and previous OS X's to their appropriate hardware.

 

[goMac]

I dont think the consumer cards from the gaming division supports that.

They do.

The Mac Pro card is literally a 7950 with some more VRAM. That's it.
[doublepost=1480546441][/doublepost]

No. Current Nvidia GTX 10 series cards or AMD RX 4xx series cards don't support 10-bit color. Only the Radeon Pro/Firepro and Quadro cards says it supports it. And I reckon, previous generations don't support them either.

They do. The Radeon 5870 and 4870 on the Mac did.

 

[Derpage]

No. Current Nvidia GTX 10 series cards or AMD RX 4xx series cards don't support 10-bit color. Only the Radeon Pro/Firepro and Quadro cards says it supports it. And I reckon, previous generations don't support them either.

I checked. I am running GTX 460 in my Mac Pro. No 10-bit color support.

PS--Sorry. I'm not interested in googling for benchmarks. My point about optimization is that Apple optimizes MacOS and previous OS X's to their appropriate hardware.

You don't know what you are talking about. Have a nice day.

 

[namethisfile]

They do.

The Mac Pro card is literally a 7950 with some more VRAM. That's it.
[doublepost=1480546441][/doublepost]

They do. The Radeon 5870 and 4870 on the Mac did.

You're wrong. The 10-bit color support is confusing. Trust me. 10-bit color support are only supported from workstation cards. And, you need a 10-bit color display to see it.

The HD7950 Mac Edition does not support 10-bit color nor the cards before it that aren't Quadro or Firepro.

nMP and the nMBP are the only ones that support 10-bit color. Notice the Radeon "Pro" in the new Macbook Pro moniker? That's not just an AMD RX series card. But, the Radeon Pro workstation line card.

PS--Also current 5K & 4K iMacs seem to support 10-bit color as well with the new 10-bit capable screens. The GPU in those iMacs are not Radeon "Pro," though. So, Apple might have hacked it to specifically to support 10-bit color because... well, they can?

 

[goMac]

You're wrong. The 10-bit color support is confusing. Trust me. 10-bit color support are only supported from workstation cards.

The HD7950 Mac Edition does not support 10-bit color nor the cards before it that aren't Quadro or Firepro.

nMP and the nMBP are the only ones that support 10-bit color. Notice the Radeon "Pro" in the new Macbook Pro moniker? That's not just an AMD RX series card. But, the Radeon Pro workstation line card.

How does the iMac do 10 bit color then? I'm verrrry interested in your answer.

Oh, and how does the 13" MacBook Pro have 10 bit?

And how is it when people buy 7950s and put them in their Mac Pros, they suddenly become D700s with 10 bit output?
[doublepost=1480546960][/doublepost]

PS--Also current 5K 27" iMac seems to support 10-bit color as well with the new 5K screens. The GPU in that iMac is not Radeon "Pro" though. So, Apple might have hacked it to support 10-bit color for that particular display!

You said consumer cards simply totally lacked the hardware to do 10 bit. Yet here is a consumer card with 10 bit! Amazing!
[doublepost=1480546997][/doublepost]

Trust me. 10-bit color support are only supported from workstation cards.

Not really trusting you here.

 

[namethisfile]

How does the iMac do 10 bit color then? I'm verrrry interested in your answer.

Oh, and how does the 13" MacBook Pro have 10 bit?

And how is it when people buy 7950s and put them in their Mac Pros, they suddenly become D700s with 10 bit output?
[doublepost=1480546960][/doublepost]

You said consumer cards simply totally lacked the hardware to do 10 bit. Yet here is a consumer card with 10 bit! Amazing!
[doublepost=1480546997][/doublepost]

Not really trusting you here.

You wouldn't be able to hack a Geforce card to support 10-bit.

Only Apple or a GPU company with access to that can do it.

Sort of unlock it.

Again, Apple unlocked it because their new iMacs have 10-bit screens. Whoopi!

I didn't say "consumer cards simply totally lacked the hardware to do 10 bit."

I said, only "workstation" cards support 10-bit out of the box.

Look it up HD7950 Mac Edition does not support 10-bit color.

GTX 680 Mac Edition also does not support 10-bit color...

It does not mean a GTX 680 is not capable of it. Although, I don't really know for sure if it's simply software unlocking or a specific hardware thing. I'm not an engineer.

But, for the most part, "workstation" cards are the only ones that support 10-bit color.

Except for the iMac, which Apple specifically hacked to support 10-bit color for their 10-bit color iMac screens. But, then again, the GPU's in those iMacs are specific to iMacs so who knows (not me) if it's software or hardware thing.

But, in general... trust me... geforce/radeon/gaming grade cards lack the support to support 10-bit color...

again, let me repeat... I do not know if this is hardware or software limitation. But, there must be a reason that Firepro and Quadro cards cost so much more.

"And how is it when people buy 7950s and put them in their Mac Pros, they suddenly become D700s with 10 bit output?"

They do not. Ask them.

 

[goMac]

You wouldn't be able to hack a Geforce card to support 10-bit.

Only Apple or a GPU company with access to that can do it.

Sort of unlock it.

Again, Apple unlocked it because their new iMacs have 10-bit screens. Whoopi!

Well ignoring that AMD's consumer cards support 10 bit color for gaming, at least you're saying that the hardware is identical and doesn't actually cost more to make.

 

[namethisfile]

Well ignoring that AMD's consumer cards support 10 bit color for gaming, at least you're saying that the hardware is identical and doesn't actually cost more to make.

Well, I don't know. Is it hardware thing, software thing? Maybe now with GPU's becoming more powerful that Apple can just hack through their own drivers to support 10-bits even if there aren't any dedicated hardware.

I have an RX 460 in my Mac Pro. Can I buy a 10-bit monitor and see in About This Mac reflect that my RX 460 which is just like the Radeon Pro in the new MBP output to 10-bit? I doubt it.

In all the specs and product page for RX 460, I don't see it saying supporting 10-bit color anywhere. So...

 

[Daniel Reed]

10-bit color support are only supported from workstation cards.

Incorrect.

It is difficult to find any discreet graphics cards made in the last 6 years that DO NOT support 10-bit color.

I've already written an extensive guide on how to enable and confirm 10bit "Deep Color" mode works on all 2011 or newer iMacs w/ discreet graphics, as well as on Thunderbolt displays connected to MBP models w/ discreet graphics going back to early 2011:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...in-Redcine-X&p=1582176&viewfull=1#post1582176

 

[namethisfile]

Incorrect

I've already written an extensive guide on how to enable and confirm 10bit "Deep Color" mode works on all 2011 or new iMacs, as well as on Thunderbolt displays connected to MBP models going back to early 2011:
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showth...in-Redcine-X&p=1582176&viewfull=1#post1582176

This article seems to contradict about it working.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7364710?start=30&tstart=0

Also at the end of your own linked article, a user also has a contradictory comment.

I can only comment from my end, an RX 460... no support (officially) of it supporting 10-bit color.

But, the newly released AMD Radeon Pro WX4100 does. lol! For $370!

PS--I did a little more digging. It seems that Polaris and Pascal supports HDR, which is 10-bit and above. But, it seems only probably under DirectX games. And, of course, you would need a monitor that supports HDR. I'm not sure if that is the same as a 10-bit panel like from NEC for example. "HDR" (High Dynamic Range) as a term is a relatively new buzz word. While, 10-bit monitors have been made for a while now.

So, a game that supports HDR (in Windows mind you) is not the same as an OS supporting 10-bit color space, which MacOS does. But, only through a select number of Macs and GPU's. So...

 

[Derpage]

This article seems to contradict about it working.

https://discussions.apple.com/thread/7364710?start=30&tstart=0

Also at the end of your own linked article, a user also has a contradictory comment.

I can only comment from my end, an RX 460... no support (officially) of it supporting 10-bit color.

But, the newly released AMD Radeon Pro WX4100 does. lol! For $370!

PS--I did a little more digging. It seems that Polaris and Pascal supports HDR, which is 10-bit and above. But, it seems only probably under DirectX games. And, of course, you would need a monitor that supports HDR. I'm not sure if that is the same as a 10-bit panel like from NEC for example. "HDR" (High Dynamic Range) as a term is a relatively new buzz word. While, 10-bit monitors have been made for a while now.

So, a game that supports HDR (in Windows mind you) is not the same as an OS supporting 10-bit color space, which MacOS does. But, only through a select number of Macs and GPU's. So...

From "you need a professional grade gpu to"...."well Macs haven't supported it"
What was your original assertion? Something along the lines of 10bit is a pro feature...
Keep moving the posts! You'll be on target eventually.