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

[ZombiePhysicist]

I'm not sure scientists need custom cards. I do my research in genomics and send all work jobs to remote compute clusters. All my data is stored there. These days, scientists (at least the ones I'm familiar with), don't do computations on their workstations.
Graphics artists need powerful GPUs, but these don't have to come on standard PCIe cards. There are two big problems with standard graphics cards. They are noisy and they don't output video through thunderbolt ports. These issues can be solved by custom connectors and cooling systems, which I believe Apple will use.

True not all scientists are alike. I worked at a research institute and we needed some custom DSPs for data capture. A lot of audio professionals still prefer pci cards for some higher rent audio work. However, you may need 12 cores and the audio guys might be fine with 4 or vice versa.

Furthermore, video not going through thunderbolt is no big deal. Wow, I'll just plug it in this video port instead. The video through thunderbolt is a solution to a non-existent problem. As for noise, I have video cards in my 5,1 that drive 6 displays with no fan. Dead silent. That's the great thing about a slot, you can fill it with what satisfies your needs. You have that flexibility.

The point is it's not one size fits all.
[doublepost=1491759054][/doublepost]

I think the number of slots is going to be defined by the supportability strategy. I'd guess probably 1 slot, maybe 2, and occupied by Apple approved GPUs with AppleCare voided and no Apple support available at any price if you put your own cards in there. Apple will not ever support again a device that can't be returned to factory condition in 30 minutes at a Genius bar without opening the case. A chassis full of third-party PCIe cards and drives doesn't fit that bill, with the customer arguing with the Genius technician that the third-part RAID controller isn't why it's not booting up.

Apple still is ok with different components in the 5,1 if they clearly have nothing to do with the tech issue. But it's no big deal to put the original supplied apple parts back to get the device serviced. You just slap the useless original ram/vidcard/drive back in the case and they service it just fine. Same with their laptops that used to have serviceable parts.

Even for the 2013 Mac Pro, if you got 3rd party ssd or ram, you just put the originals back and no problem.

Of course you may be right. It's all speculation. But after this spectacular and public failure, I think we will see slots, or they would have learned absolutely nothing.

But again, that's my speculation, and your speculation may prove more right. I guess we will have to wait and see!
[doublepost=1491759760][/doublepost]

lol.
i don't even know what you're trying to say i'm wrong about and you're right about.. what am i dancing my funny dance over? what's my funny dance anyway?


are we talking about the future of mac? or something else?

The thread speaks for itself. Your dance is well known here by everyone, you're a known quantity here.

 

[ManuelGomes]

Hey flat, nice to see you again.
What I was wondering was that if they're keeping the nMP around for at least one more year, what will they do about the GPU problems? Some folks have issues with Sierra, that should have been addressed by now. Will it continue with 10.13, whatever it will be called (not a landscape anymore it seems)?
It would be a good time to slap a D800 (maybe Polaris) in there and do away with it.
There are now 2 GPU options so a D600 (RX570 4GB or Pro WX5100) and a D800 (RX580 8GB or Pro WX7100) would replace those nicely while we wait for the mMP.

 

[filmak]

D300, D700, D800, D600...
We 're talking about Apple or Nikon?

 

[flat five]

Hey flat, nice to see you again.
What I was wondering was that if they're keeping the nMP around for at least one more year, what will they do about the GPU problems? Some folks have issues with Sierra, that should have been addressed by now. Will it continue with 10.13, whatever it will be called (not a landscape anymore it seems)?

oh. i see what you're saying now.
i haven't really followed the nMP/GPU problems very closely but if there are still issues with it, i'd certainly be hesitant to buy an 8core today.

is there a link to a description of the issue or is it more just sprinkled throughout user based forums?

 

[Mago]

I think it will have standard pci slots. How many? Between 2 and 4. If it doesn't, they will continue to lose pros.

PROs don't account PCIe slots, neither cheap DIY upgrades, what a pro want are timely solid upgrade solutions, not messing with GPU compatibility issues, neither slot alignment, much neither need to hire local DIY to keep up their WORKstations (a different approach to the workSTATION).

For me its OK an proprietary GPU as long Apple releases Official Apple Certified GPU Update/Upgrades I just can buy at Apple store and the slide into the corresponding Mac Pro GPU Module.

Also there is no other PCIe peripheral a Pro maybe interested to insert into the Mac pro as to require 2 extra PCIe slots, and those pro's requiring Dual Socket Xeon and 4 GPUs they are very comfortable on linux workstations.

I remember Apple plan was to support a Single 300W class GPU as the solution for VR/AR since very few software running MacOS actually is enable for multi-GPU (even today macOS don't support concurrent GPUs), they accused thermal balance issues with the tMP, I don't buy this excuse.

Every other peripheral dont need to be internal, most pro don't need 4 3.5"hdd spinners, most like me uses a DAS/NAS for this (which it much more convenient).

As most Mac targeted peripherals since 2013 migrated to TB2/USB3 and TB3/USB-C 3.1 (a/v capture, special comm, etc).

I don't want a bulkier Workstations with 4-8 3.5" slots I'll never use, neither PCIe slots for peripherals that aren't available now.

Also consider PCIe3 peripheral its not a good investment (hard to sell) by 2018 as PCIe4 should be mainstream by 2020, no body will spend money on cards to be obsolete 2yr later.

I consider very very unlikely the mMP to include any ISA PCIe3 slot for its modular apporach, its GPUs will be problematic on ISA PCIe3 due need to route DP1.2 to the logic board I dont see Apple shipping a DP<->LogicBoard cable with MacPros, this is not Apple Style, also I dont believe Apple to allow commodity GPUs into the mMP.

Most likely for me Apple will ship sligty customized Reference GPUs with PCIe and DP lines router to a custom connector similar to the one used by tMP but more robust, and those modular GPUs to include independent cooling solution instead to depend on a collective solution (thermal core), and Apple promise to sell Upgrades(even opensource the GPU conector design, so nVidia/AMD could sell later those semi-custom GPUs).

of course, besides a bunch of TB3 the mMP should include few TB2, HDMI2b and DP1.4 slots.

 

[CWallace]

IMHO, however, I could never believe that this dumb touchbar and the lack of ports made the new MBP sales increase 20% .

Considering the thousands of posts on this forum by people who swore they'd never buy a 2015 MacBook Pro because it used "ancient" technology, if they were not all being hypocrites, that should nicely cover a 20% boost in sales.

I remember Apple plan was to support a Single 300W class GPU as the solution for VR/AR since very few software running MacOS actually is enable for multi-GPU (even today macOS don't support concurrent GPUs), they accused thermal balance issues with the tMP, I don't buy this excuse.

I imagine if they cranked the fans to a few thousand RPM to get a real wind tunnel going inside they could handle higher thermal loads, but then it would be like having a Dyson on your desktop. Not exactly congruent with doing things like audio mixing.

 

[Blair Paulsen]

Hopefully, Apple is serious about a modular design that would support a wide variety of configs. Imagine a "base" piece that houses the PSU and has a "snap in" connector for the primary "brain" module, housing the mobo/RAM/CPU/Graphics co-processor and at least one pair of M.2 chips in RAID 0 for the OS/secondary cache/etc. From that "core", one could add up to 4 modules - all of which could be bomber GPUs if that's your key need. Each module could be designed to host a standard PCIe4 card, so only the module shell would be proprietary.

I'm imagining a lego like design for module attachment coming off the corners of the "brain" that would keep the distance from the mobo to the modules short. Each module would have it's own heat sink exterior and/or active cooling. PSU would be designed to offer high capacity when needed, but also able to run in "low" mode to avoid wasting power when not required. Think V-8 that turns off 4 cylinders when not needed. I am a big proponent of efficiency and reducing the power consumption of computers. That said, modern power management strategies - and the move from spinning drives to SSDs - should make it possible to engineer PSUs that can handle big loads, and also run very lean when loads are trivial.

 

[AidenShaw]

PROs don't account PCIe slots...

Sorry, but this post of yours is word salad. Even the amigos admit that pros are all over the spectrum - yet you're trying to push your experience as the "only true Pro" path.

You are so far from the pro reality it's not worth a couple of screens of point-by-point rebuttal.

It's not about you.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

PROs don't account PCIe slots, neither cheap DIY upgrades, what a pro want are timely solid upgrade solutions, not messing with GPU compatibility issues, neither slot alignment, much neither need to hire local DIY to keep up their WORKstations (a different approach to the workSTATION).

For me its OK an proprietary GPU as long Apple releases Official Apple Certified GPU Update/Upgrades I just can buy at Apple store and the slide into the corresponding Mac Pro GPU Module.

You couldn't be more wrong imo and thankfully you are not the arbiter of what constitutes 'pro'. You're joining the crowd that constantly talked about how great a pro machine the nMP was, decreeing to the rest of us your opinion of a pro, seemingly based on what is ok for YOU. And yet, even apple acknowledged what a failure the nMP with its proprietary graphics cards were to the pro market. For a newer definition of 'pro' see Phil Schiller's ramblings during the apology for putting the piece of junk nMP out there for pros to choke on:

Phil Schiller: Yeah, yeah. First of all, when we talk about pro customers, it’s important to be clear that there isn’t one prototypical pro customer. Pro is such a broad term, and it covers many many categories of customers. And we care about all of these categories, and there’s a variety of different products those customers want.

There’s music creators, there’s video editors, there’s graphic designers — a really great segment with the Mac. There’s scientists, engineers, architects, software programmers — increasingly growing, particularly our App development in the app store. So there are many, many things and people called pros, pro workflows, so we should be careful not to over simplify and say ‘pros want this’ or ‘don’t want that’; it’s much more complex than that.​

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/t...-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/

 

[goMac]

Furthermore, video not going through thunderbolt is no big deal. Wow, I'll just plug it in this video port instead. The video through thunderbolt is a solution to a non-existent problem. As for noise, I have video cards in my 5,1 that drive 6 displays with no fan. Dead silent. That's the great thing about a slot, you can fill it with what satisfies your needs. You have that flexibility.

Thunderbolt ports must carry video, that's a requirement that's just part of the specification.

Non-Thunderbolt video ports could still be included. But Apple won't want to make the Thunderbolt ports lesser ports by having them work off of integrated graphics or something.

I'm hoping they copy what the PC vendors do for Thunderbolt support with PCIe GPUs.

(And there is no way Apple makes this thing without Thunderbolt 3 ports.)

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Thunderbolt ports must carry video, that's a requirement that's just part of the specification.

Non-Thunderbolt video ports could still be included. But Apple won't want to make the Thunderbolt ports lesser ports by having them work off of integrated graphics or something.

I'm hoping they copy what the PC vendors do for Thunderbolt support with PCIe GPUs.

(And there is no way Apple makes this thing without Thunderbolt 3 ports.)

Thunderbolt ports must carry video, that's a requirement that's just part of the specification.

Non-Thunderbolt video ports could still be included. But Apple won't want to make the Thunderbolt ports lesser ports by having them work off of integrated graphics or something.

I'm hoping they copy what the PC vendors do for Thunderbolt support with PCIe GPUs.

(And there is no way Apple makes this thing without Thunderbolt 3 ports.)

I don't think that is correct. They don't have to route video. They may. But thunderbolt can carry as much or as little data as wanted.

Agreed on your other point, they could put a cheap integrated video chip on the motherboard and feed that through thunderbolt and let the plug in pci cards handle their own video through their own ports; a bit like the dual video chips on the mbp and you are right on the money in that is how many pcs handle it.

 

[goMac]

I don't think that is correct. They don't have to route video.

They do. We've discussed it previously, but it's a requirement.

Agreed on your other point, they could put a cheap integrated video chip on the motherboard and feed that through thunderbolt and let the plug in pci cards handle their own video through their own ports; a bit like the dual video chips on the mbp and you are right on the money in that is how many pcs handle it.

They might even be able to dig up an ARM chip with a custom GPU somewhere.

 

[deconstruct60]

Thunderbolt ports must carry video, that's a requirement that's just part of the specification.

Intel of late has given an 'out" of that requirement for systems that don't naturally have a logic board DispalyPort stream. For example a standard Xeon E5 based system were there is no iGPU.

Some folks swore up and down that the limitation was what was holding back Thunderbolt and if Intel only allowed TB on optional add-in PCI-e + GPIO boards that TB adoption because PCI-e card options would solve that and world hunger at the same time. *cough* didn't happen.

For the context of the Mac ecosystem, the vast majority of the TB systems do have an iGPU so do not get that "out". That means that most of the TB peripherals for the Mac ecosystem need to deal with that. Especially if they have two TB ports. All the Apple TB systems with two TB ports have to without option. Since MP is a very small subclass of Mac TB system ..... it would be way outside the mainstream for a Mac ecosystem user to not get that expected behavior.

Non-Thunderbolt video ports could still be included. But Apple won't want to make the Thunderbolt ports lesser ports by having them work off of integrated graphics or something.

Striping TB off the Mac Pro completely is an option that makes the Mac Pro very odd duck. The MacBook is an very odd duck at the moment. ( I think that is temporary, but Apple has done the odd duck. ). I doubt that a "long term baseline design" would go that route.

That said I do question whether Apple is going to sit with the 6 TB ports thing. 4 and not consuming one of them for power is better than any of the new MBP. There are much more "bang for buck" items that could apply that other x4 PCIe to. 10GbE (especially if still not doing internal SATA and this is a network storage oriented system. ) , another SSD drive slot ( preferably M.2 standard. ) for higher internal capacity as more reasonable prices,


There is a middle ground. It is embedded more so that integrated graphics. The latter is too often used to denote integration into the CPU package. It isn't a "lesser" point on the top end 27" iMac with a dGPU that is embedded on the logic board. It wouldn't be "lesser" if there was an Apple module card in the Mac Pro that could have its own cooler, but still no outside edge connectors (DisplayPort is funneled onto the logic board).

If going with a desk side like case with tons more volume to "overage" and misaligned 3rd party coolers, they could have one standard slot that could take a 2nd video card. You'd always have an Apple card for boot and Thunderbolt.

The notion were Apple slips over the edge is that all GPU cards have to feed TB. That's isn't even true where the 2nd GPU is a 'compute' card. That isn't never going to "display out" anyway. So whether it does or does not feed into TB is immaterial.

What is probably not going to happen is the ability to evict all of the Apple GPUs from the system. There is nothing in what Apple talked about in that round table that said they though they were "missing desired market" with that capability at all.

I'm hoping they copy what the PC vendors do for Thunderbolt support with PCIe GPUs.

so far that has been contrived Rube Goldberg, loop-back cables.... Apple is extremely unlikely to do that. It is a highly inelegant solution. When you have opened up even the 2008-2012 era Mac Pro you don't see inelegant cable layout. PC vendors on the other hand do "cheap hacks" all the time for edge markets. I don't see them doing anything elegant at all. PC vendors weren't major contributors to USB Type-C.

Laptop GPU cards feed DisplayPort but I'd be very surprised if the PC vendors pushed to ramp up those card sizes.
[doublepost=1491788346][/doublepost]

They do. We've discussed it previously, but it's a requirement.

Hmm, the Dell , HP and other cards all seem to the loop back. I remember an article where Intel was suppose to be considering it... but yeah looks like pragmatically it is required to get out into the TB ecosystem.

They might even be able to dig up an ARM chip with a custom GPU somewhere.

that can drive multiple displays? Apple has a low power, one screen GPU. I don't think short or intermediate term they are going to have anything in the iMac or Map Pro class even for modest uses.


If there is a iMac Pro and Mac Pro that have closer GPU thermal enevlopes they could do a custom insert card that could use across both lines to get the volume up (and hence the cost controlled). If the iMac Pro broke out as a separate design ( as opposed to just being the more expensive 27" models) that could happen. Would alot more "oomph" and certainly 6 (or more) displayPort channels out.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

They do. We've discussed it previously, but it's a requirement.

Strange. Never heard that. Learn something new all the time. Thanks.

 

[deconstruct60]

You couldn't be more wrong imo and thankfully you are not the arbiter of what constitutes 'pro'.
.....
. For a newer definition of 'pro' see Phil Schiller's ramblings during the apology for putting the piece of junk nMP out there for pros to choke on:

Phil Schiller: Yeah, yeah. First of all, when we talk about pro customers, it’s important to be clear that there isn’t one prototypical pro customer. ...So there are many, many things and people called pros, pro workflows, so we should be careful not to over simplify and say ‘pros want this’ or ‘don’t want that’; it’s much more complex than that.​

https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/t...-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/

Schiller's quote is as equally applicable to your "gotta have standard PCI-e slots" position as it is to Mago's. The "pro market" that Apple is targeting is not defined by you either. It is defined by Apple. There are some pros they are going to target and some they aren't.

That quote and much of the commentary is suggestive they are not going after an overly narrow group. However, it is also not indicative that they are trying to cover the whole group either. Apple is highly likely going after enough of the pro market to make it worthwhile. Just like how Apple only targets a subset of the overall PC market with the limited number of Mac they meke. ( there is a Schiller quote about limited range of products too they you are conveniently ignoring. )

"Phil Schiller: Well, you know that we’ve always tried to strike that balance between meeting as large a group of users’ needs as possible, while making the fewest number of products that enable that. ... "

That balance is very much apart of that of the "more complex" that he is referencing in your highlighted quote.

And yet, even apple acknowledged what a failure the nMP with its proprietary graphics cards were to the pro market.

The only acknowledgment Apple made was that they could not build an upgrade with the constraints they had placed upon themselves. There is no announcement of a 180 turn in direction there at all. The admissions were far more about what Apple could make. Your presumption is that Apple has to punt this making aspect to 3rd party's and their complete control designs. I'm not sure why Apple would be sitting in a machine lab where they make things of their own design if that was deeply about what they were trying to say. We suck.. we give up; we are just going to build a container and put other peoples stuff in it. That's what Apple said? Trying reading that transcript again without a preconceived agenda.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

Schiller's quote is as equally applicable to your "gotta have standard PCI-e slots" position as it is to Mago's. The "pro market" that Apple is targeting is not defined by you either. It is defined by Apple. There are some pros they are going to target and some they aren't.

That would be a meaningful insight if the machine that forced him to do that statement as part of hugely embarrassingly disastrous admission of that failed machine, which eschewed pci slots and expandility, were not the context of that statement.

Context. It matters people.

Further, if you don't need pci slots, don't use them. It won't hurt you. Clearly others will. If you're trying to service a broader cross section of pros, taking away features is not how you accomplish that. See nMP for reference. Hint, the 5,1 was that container and the nMP wasn't.

This is obscenely simple stuff for those that haven't lost the plot.

 

[mattspace]

The "pro market" that Apple is targeting is not defined by you either. It is defined by Apple.

The 2013 Mac Pro, and to the extent that it caused a run on the model it was replacing, the 2016 Macbook Pro, show pretty clearly that Apple isn't in a position to define "Pro" anything. Or rather, that noone is listening to their opinions any more.

Wheeling Phil Schiller out to do damage control about products seems to be getting to be a pretty common occurrence. If Apple has to take the time to explain to the public *why* the 2016 MBP is limited to 16GB of RAM, due to power constraints, then it's pretty clear they screwed up bigtime with their estimation of what the customer actually wants, and what they'll compromise to get it. The entire narrative of that machine is that the "innovation" in the touch bar is a dinky-toy whose inclusion only adds to the insult of the lack of RAM and battery - splurging on the frivolities, while ignoring the necessities.

The nMP was a gamble on the idea that Apple's ecosystem - their "Pro" apps and macOS, were good enough that it would allow them to direct the future path of "Pro" software & hardware. That was an understandable attitude, because when it comes to most things, Apple is better at what they do, than most other companies are at what they do. Apple is better at making pocket computers that make phone calls, than Nokia was at making phones that have computing functions. Apple is better at making a biometrically-secured contactless payment system, than banks are at making bank accounts, so we have standoffs like in Australia, where NFC is ubiquitous, and three of the four big banks are losing customers to the one who has signed up to ApplePay.

BUT Nvidia is better at making GPUs and software to exploit GPUs, than Apple is at making Pro hardware and software. That's the brick wall Apple has hit - one they built themselves. Neglect OpenGL, there's a brick. Neglect OpenCL, there's a brick. Kill Aperture, offering only a toy product as a migration path, there's a whole prefab section.

Apple likes to talk about the growth of the Mac during a general contraction of growth in the overall PC market as if this validates their strategy, ignoring that enthusiast / gaming PCs - which like professional workstations, exist as a life support infrastructure for GPUs, are growing sales faster than Macs, and are almost universally more capable of work in "Pro" apps than any of Apple's offerings, even with Apple's own software if they're built as Hackintosh-capable.

Most importantly the venn diagram of "people who need a Mac Pro style configurable computer" pretty much overlaps with "people who buy software from developers who will only make cross-platform apps".

I'm throwing up in the back of my throat saying this, but Adobe was right. The OS is just a commoditised layer, and for Apple to have a future where it's worth the investment to develop a "modular" system, Apple has to be unambiguously the best system, by any measure, not just the ones that depend on using Apple's own apps and APIs.

 

[singhs.apps]

Very well put.

 

[mattspace]

I'm going to add one more idea - the need for aspirational expandability in systems. Yes, Apple might have stats that show most Mac Pro buyers don't upgrade their graphics, similarly, most SUVs, even proper ladder-frame centre-differential offroad optimised ones like Jeep's Wrangler don't ever go offroad. However, people buy them because they aspire to be able to go offroading, and the knowledge they can do that, without having to buy an entire new car, means they'll buy the SUV and be happier about their purchase even when they're not using it offroad.

 

[Peace]

I'm going to add one more idea - the need for aspirational expandability in systems. Yes, Apple might have stats that show most Mac Pro buyers don't upgrade their graphics, similarly, most SUVs, even proper ladder-frame centre-differential offroad optimised ones like Jeep's Wrangler don't ever go offroad. However, people buy them because they aspire to be able to go offroading, and the knowledge they can do that, without having to buy an entire new car, means they'll buy the SUV and be happier about their purchase even when they're not using it offroad.

The only reason Apple "stats" show users don't upgrade graphics is because they CAN"T upgrade graphics.

 

[Chancha]

Considering the thousands of posts on this forum by people who swore they'd never buy a 2015 MacBook Pro because it used "ancient" technology, if they were not all being hypocrites, that should nicely cover a 20% boost in sales.

I am among one of the many who bought a refurb maxed out 15" 2015 right after the 2016 announcement, and while I can see many others sharing the same sentiment and did the same action, I am still well aware that we are just a vocal minority.

You can just go into the MBP subforum right now to see. Lately there's a thread speculating if the talks surrounding Mac Pro means Apple may rethink their MBP2016 direction as well, the poster instead faced quite one-sided flames.

I am quite confident that the guy who said "Apple saw a surge of orders for older MacBook Pros instead of the new model" purely pulled this out of his rear.

 

[flat five]

. For a newer definition of 'pro' see Phil Schiller's ramblings

you're setting yourself up for a letdown with misconstruing what those execs were saying instead of taking what they're saying at face value.

according to them, a newer definition of pro has the users mostly on MacBookPros.. the second highest percentage of pros are using iMacs.. then a single digit % are on MacPros.

the 'old' definition of pro would be what you're thinking of.. box-with-slots types.

as in, you're attempting to use schiller's words to support your stance when in fact, his words are opposing your stance..


i get it that you're most certainly not going to change your perception on this issue after reading this post and will instead, dig your heels even deeper into that trench you're digging but so-be-it.. when the redesign shows up, i expect to see you sitting around this forum griping for years on end and blaming everybody except yourself.
[doublepost=1491830822][/doublepost]

That would be a meaningful insight if the machine that forced him to do that statement as part of hugely embarrassingly disastrous admission of that failed machine, which eschewed pci slots and expandility, were not the context of that statement.

Context. It matters people.
.

it sure does.
the machine behind these statements is predominantly the 2016 MBP

 

[BB8]

Apple just spent the last four years proving they don't give a damn about pros enough to dedicate significant resources to them. How the hell do people think they're going to come up with fancy proprietary modules for the next iteration when they've made it pretty clear they just want a hot-swappable box you can set and forget?

 

[Chancha]

Apple just spent the last four years proving they don't give a damn about pros enough to dedicate significant resources to them. How the hell do people think they're going to come up with fancy proprietary modules for the next iteration when they've made it pretty clear they just want a hot-swappable box you can set and forget?

The only "clear" bit from them was Schiller's pitch of the change with the phrase "by definition modular if you will". The rest of the picture is more or less allured but never confirmed, such as the lengths in which they admitted the individual shortcomings of the trashcan MP, that we can assume are places that they will avoid in the next design.

Matter of fact what "worries" us is if the next MP is "just a hot-swappable box you can set and forget" then why wouldn't they say that detail right away, and why would it take them longer than this year to have it roll out.

 

[ZombiePhysicist]

[doublepost=1491830822][/doublepost]
it sure does.
the machine behind these statements is predominantly the 2016 MBP

Agreed, and considering how wrong your insights have been around here, I filed them with the nMP.