Translation: We can not innovate any more in computer segment. Look at welded four years old nMP 6,1 , and nMBP with 16 GB of RAM.
When they talk about computers, it looks like Apple, before second coming of Steve.
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 Waiting for Mac Pro 7,1 A1991 (no more)
- Thread starter Mago
- Start date
-
- Tags
- macpro 2016
- Sort by reaction score
Translation: We can not innovate any more in computer segment. Look at welded four years old nMP 6,1 , and nMBP with 16 GB of RAM.
When they talk about computers, it looks like Apple, before second coming of Steve.
Maybe they could revive the sector by coming out with watch bands that match the trash can?
Just kidding. The Mac Pro is dead.
I still may pick one up for my Pro Tools 12 rig. I'm not a gamer and I need a quiet rig that can handle all the requirements that Pro Tools 12 and Waves plugins requires while maintaining low-latency. It's be great if you could "cheat" and throw GPU might at audio tasks, but you can't. I don't need a Ferrari or a Ducati, I need a flatbed truck or a steamroller.
I'll still use my 2012 Minis as VSL/UVI slaves over ethernet, but I can't do orchestral work with an iPad or a thin-book. Even if it's not dead, do we really want to hope -that if a 7,1 is released- that it won't be a two-port neutered ARM unit with no ethernet?
I've looked into the HP840z, but the one I need is still about $5k. The Boxx machines are even more expensive. Neither one of those are quiet enough to live in my studio. Otherwise I'd pick up a cMP 3.46 6-core; and even that one properly tooled-up is only slightly less expensive than the 6-core/D500 tube.
"Help me studio folk... you're my only hope..."
I'll still use my 2012 Minis as VSL/UVI slaves over ethernet, but I can't do orchestral work with an iPad or a thin-book. Even if it's not dead, do we really want to hope -that if a 7,1 is released- that it won't be a two-port neutered ARM unit with no ethernet?
I've looked into the HP840z, but the one I need is still about $5k. The Boxx machines are even more expensive. Neither one of those are quiet enough to live in my studio. Otherwise I'd pick up a cMP 3.46 6-core; and even that one properly tooled-up is only slightly less expensive than the 6-core/D500 tube.
"Help me studio folk... you're my only hope..."
Because they are too expensive. It gets worse when one does a TCO analysis.
I know you can find a 3.46 or a 3.33 six-core cMac Pro for quite a bit less than a 2013 six-core. I'm not sure what "tooled up" means besides a SSD boot drive and sufficiant memory. A 12-core 3.46 cMac Pro would be quite a savings also.
Yes. "Apple should take a substantive hit on profits, just to make a highly narrow few happy. " is a narcissistic, wet dream that won't die on these forums.
The 10K Apple watches did little to pull that product line into volume profitable status. Expensive for expensive stake does alot of nothing to Apple's business model.
What "analysts" are these. It is relatively easy that Apple made at least $10M on the Mac Pros.
Apple's general profit margin is around 25-30% so let's take 15% as a conservative marker ( other stuff to pay for in general macOS 'overhead'. ). Take an average selling price of $3,200. ( so major dominate sales are only those of the lowest end mode. Again a conservative estimate. ).
Apple sells __________ break even covered.
35K _______ $16.8M
30K _______ $14.4M
If Apple sold just 45K per year for two years that is easily a $29-33M breakeven they could more than cleared. IHMO, Apple's low-end floor on run rate is probably in the 50-60K/year range ( if don't project selling more than that; don't bother. ). It isn't going to help them stay in the 5-7% of the classic PC market range that is the overall strategic target.
There was a backlog for the Mac Pro for 4-5 months. The notion that Apple didn't sell in the 10's of thousands is relatively weak. Sales have probably significantly dropped now in year 3+ but the notion that they couldn't have gotten there in 1-2 years is suspect. [ Apple may be taking a bit of a hit at the moment because of minimal contract pricing on run rates through the contract factory. That could have been limited by just going outside of norm and putting a estimated need into long term inventory.... and then just stopping contract. The notions that Apple is blowing tons on money building product that is going no where is deeply unmotivated. The company doesn't work that way.... at all. I saw a reference in these forums to that being a root cause and it is quite suspect. Additionally, more than kind of lame to blame that cost on the current product because that fault primarily lies in not doing the next iteration on time. ]
Additionally, There is little indicators that the Mac Pro sold in the approximately 100K/yr rate range but it didn't need to. The 2008-2010 run rate was probably not in that range either. So both designs flirting with the "floor" threshold of high enough run rates.
It would have been a drag on overall Mac product line profit margins, but didn't make their money back at all? That is a stretch.
Apple burned a more than several $100M hole in the ground with that failed sapphire screen plant in AZ. It isn't like they don't have money to survive a "learning exercise". The 'car' thing also probably has another $100+M hole in the ground aspect to it.
IMHO, Apple primary problem right now is not the current design, it is the product management. Hiding in a hole for 3 (or more) years at a time isn't going to cut it if going to adhere to Apple's standard disclosure policies. (not just Mac Pro ... Mac Mini is in the "land of the lost" too). The design needs some tweaks ( a bit more diameter and height to get a better "safety buffer" on thermal envelope. some incremental improvements so that can roll out incremental custom GPU updates without having to much depot/jig adjustments. ). Getting the Mac product line their own industrial design team wouldn't necessarily be a real increase in costs; more so a pull back of a subsidy to iOS devices that they really do not need.
I really wonder if the Campus construction has anything to do, with this problematic situation in desktop Macs?
I wouldn't count on Apple changing the nMP dimensions. They were chosen for a reason, a very Apple-like decision, and they'll stick with it.
Process nodes are shrinking but CPUs and GPUs are getting larger (more cores) and power draw remains almost the same so, no help there. If the total power consumption remains almost the same, and they tweak the PSU for better efficiency, that would be a wise decision.
Process nodes are shrinking but CPUs and GPUs are getting larger (more cores) and power draw remains almost the same so, no help there. If the total power consumption remains almost the same, and they tweak the PSU for better efficiency, that would be a wise decision.
Loving 840
[doublepost=1489748214][/doublepost]If theres nothing in march or april: im pulling the trigger and after that thats it. Gotta use up the gift card.
A PSU as a general rule is at peak efficiency when it is running at about
50-60% of peak capacity. On the trashcan that would be about 200-250 watts.
The trash can's 450 watts is what you normally see in an $800 PC.
If there is a modest spec bump later this year with that same PSU
I predict the Timinator will announce in '18 that "Gee, the Mac Pro,
isn't selling very well, here is the magical Super iPad Double Pro".
Woooooooo
I agree. It feels like Apple had a roadmap for the mac pro but because of the design constraints and delays by their component manufacturers the plan never materialized. For instance I think AMD got stuck longer than planned on 28 nm, messing up the GPU roadmap.
A standard high end desktop would be something like a 140 W Xeon plus a 250 W GPU + 50 W for the rest of the system. This puts you at the same ~450 W and would cost you thousands. I'll give you that they would probably spec a larger power supply, but thats for expandability and unnecessary in the mac pro.
Newer CPUs will be within the same power and GPUs will have to be too. if they can up the PSU rating a bit that could enable higher powered GPUs.
And they could (almost) do away with the PCH since most of the stuff is not used anyway.
Only USB3 ports, GbE, WiFi+BT and audio. I'm not sure the DMI lanes can be used as standard PCIe3 (I guess they might) and all this could be switched on those. But I guess that would be like using the PCH anyway.
I wish we had some info on the C622 (server/ws X299?) already. Specs are (mostly) known but the timings are missing.
And they could (almost) do away with the PCH since most of the stuff is not used anyway.
Only USB3 ports, GbE, WiFi+BT and audio. I'm not sure the DMI lanes can be used as standard PCIe3 (I guess they might) and all this could be switched on those. But I guess that would be like using the PCH anyway.
I wish we had some info on the C622 (server/ws X299?) already. Specs are (mostly) known but the timings are missing.
It's hard to feel sympathy for them though - they totally misread their existing customer base with the redesign. I admit I've not followed the Mac Pro crowd for a long time, but to me the enclosure design was almost universally adored even though it'd been basically reused for years and years. The last thing people wanted was a complete U turn on how the Pro worked, so that you ended up with everything hanging out of the back of it, and needed to rebuy accessories you already had. All it needed was a spec bump.
I believe behind those are the Apologetic (pathological or paid) Apple Fanboys tribe .
Quite suspect? why not just social engineering propaganda to cover a management fiasco.
Agree, the Current nMP could sell vey good with minor (cheap) incremental upgrades, Cook product mismanagement didn't notice that.
Further the 450W trashcan Form Factor could do it very well just switching from AMD-hogs to nVidia, A single Pascal GPU would be a golden solution for the nMP-TC, of course I posted on the twice volume Apple could fit a dual socket xeon plus 3 250W class GPU and even have spare PCIe lines for a ton o thunderbolt ports (also adding a 1200W PSU)
I think would be great for nVidia having some LGBT at their business units, at least will improve ties with cook's agenda.
[doublepost=1489767554][/doublepost]I think Apple sometime next 4 monts will shown (with an washed face) us an updated Mac pro, dont expect latest SkyLake Xeon, as much Xeon E5v4 paired with AMDs GPUs (rx470/480 and maybe some Vega) labelled as 'pro' gpu but actuall being 1:1 to consumer GPUs, the same for the Mac Mini, they may come with the same design with minor updtes (tb3) and low end CPUs, the same on the MBP as much.
Of course at keynote Apple will conclude thery are selling the most advanced PCs in the world (at least thist time wont claim 'most powerful').
I think Apple should 'OUTSOURCE' its PC/LAPTOP to companies like ZOTAC, MSI or RAZER then sell it with macOS and Apple branding, and lets those companies do the expense to keep the hardware updated.
Last edited:
Shhhhh. You weren't supposed to disclose that new watch band because it was specifically designed to interface with their next awesome product: The Apple Watch Pro. Just wait till you see Tim gush over it and Phil show the video of it appearing out of the blackness. The product that was specifically designed for professionals from the company of posterior innovation.
Its actually quite the opposite, on this forum. You are on of people who are on management propaganda spin.
And the numbers then show this: https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...l-time-high-for-second-month-running.2037424/
What’s that got to do with the Mac Pro. This product, (nMP), failed and failed badly. That rubbish about long lead times is due to constrained supply.
It's become Apple's "red-headed" step child. The product that is in the back corner of the store, the one missing from nearly every promotional marketing material... The one that has received so little attention no one in their right mind would buy one today. Failure is a matter of perspective in this case. By Apples own acknowledgement or lack thereof, clearly states failure to me. There have been thermal and GPU issues that have affected a good number of units that's has already been reported on, as well as it being poorly recieved by much of its intended market share, again a failure. Is it a great machine-the answer is dependent on ones own workflow and needs, unfortunately too many have left to other platforms, again is it a success or failure?
Exactly. If this is matter of perspective, why accuse Apple for management failure? Maybe for Apple it was a success in some ways, and failure in others?
@koyoot
If your ambitious prediction of it being a workhorse wireless "core" is true and we see the light at the end of the tunnel it very well may become a raging success, right now we can only judge on the evidence before us.
So please take my prior post with a grain of salt and not an attack. It's not meant to be, if anything it is only a commentary on where we stand today with the evidence before us concerning the Mac Pro.
If your ambitious prediction of it being a workhorse wireless "core" is true and we see the light at the end of the tunnel it very well may become a raging success, right now we can only judge on the evidence before us.
So please take my prior post with a grain of salt and not an attack. It's not meant to be, if anything it is only a commentary on where we stand today with the evidence before us concerning the Mac Pro.
Im not attacking anyone here.
Lately this forum(for number of reasons), and this particular subforum has became truly hard to read.
I can completely agree. I'm not sure how much of it lays on managements fault, if the 2016 MacBook Pro is any indication I'd lay fault with marketings "can't innovate my ass" Phil. When released the 2013 Pro has great promise, we are now only months away from its 4 year anniversary unveiling, and roughly 4 years later from its first controlled blind demo in a "black box" with video professionals. What is at issue is the lack since then.
From an engineering perspective both the Cube and the Cylinder had great promise, and some would argue poor execution (cooling issues that could have been more over-engineered to ensure it was top notch) at the cost of shaving millimeters. I am hoping they gleaned some of the great things that worked and took note of the things that don't work to release a truly insanely great Mac for those professionals that need the workhorse power that is available today.
[doublepost=1489772055][/doublepost]
Again I agree. There is a lot of disdain at the moment, there are a lot of people unhappy-unhappy about the election results, current US and world political climates, and even Apple who once was fairly regular (product cycles and predictability) were stable. Unfortunately there is little that is stable and consistent and for many here it's a place to vent and express just like the water coolers. It can get quite toxic as well, the "ignore" button on a members profile pop-up has become my friend in a few ways, knock out the posts from a few "bad apples" and it's a lot more pleasant.
I'm always up for discussion and debate, there are so many strengths that the community bring to help solve problems or get insights to what's coming. Then there are the apologetics that can't accept that Tim and Co are not infallible, or the other extreme. It's a great big world out there with tons of perspective and experience-I am all for learning from and understanding others perspectives to form a more informed opinion.
I probably only have 3 or 4 ignores-so it's not like you have to alienate half the forum.