Sidebar Sidebar
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)

deconstruct60 said:
Some parts of iMac Pro , Mini , and MBP 15" probably do greatly foreshadow what the new system will have. 4 Thunderbolt ports; probably yes. The MacBook corner case aside, Apple hasn't wavered in commitment to Thunderbolt and TBv3 with the last several rounds of updates. A T2 (or T-series); probably yes. (it is on the new MBA also). Apple wanting to be a visiable player in security and privacy is a drum that the company as a whole is banging on loudly. The Mac Pro probably isn't going to be an 'except for" corner case. A primary role for an SSD drive in the system is pretty much a whole Mac product line up mandate.

The highly sealed cases aren't. The Mac Pro 2013 didn't go that way and neither did the previous ones.

The Mac Pro can't be a headless iMac Pro with an almost 100% match in characteristics. However, few are likely confused about the differentiation of the Mac Mini , MBP 15" , and iMac Pro even though they all have 4 Thunderbolt ports. Differentiation doesn't have to limited to just 'x86 core count' or 'GPU chip used in primary display duties'.
Click to expand...

This is a fair point I wasn't really referring to. Thunderbolt 3 was basically a given, and I guess you can assume it'll include >2 USB-A 10GBps ports as well. But that's not much to sketch a machine out of.

deconstruct60 said:
If Apple is waiting on Cascade Lake derivate Xeon W solutions then Q2-Q3 would line up with being radio silent this last month. [ If so I'd still expect them to say 'something' by April though. ]

The Xeon SP (cascade lake) won't ramp to volume and all SKUs until Q2 19.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1361...oses-cascade-lake-xeon-scalable-launch-window

How Intel gets Copper Lake out in late 2019 is somewhat of a 'go figure' if they aren't even getting its predecessor out the door a quarter and change before that. Unless it is more so of a socket change and microarch tweak.
Click to expand...

I just assume "delays" for every bit of Intel news I see. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: askunk
fuchsdh said:
I just assume "delays" for every bit of Intel news I see. :)
Click to expand...

As the announced or leaked windows shrink in time to arrival though, your delays should as well. We're only talking about 4-5 months at this point (~1.5 quarters), delays aren't generally too long once time windows shrink to numbers that small.
 
askunk said:
Yeah... It reminds me of IBM when they promised a 4 GHz G5. Moving to proprietary chips would be a wise move to improve performance... but OUCH, the hell with transitions...
Click to expand...

but everyone else then was on a better CPU platform, so PPC lagging had a real effect. Now, it's not like every other Pro computer / Workstation maker in on some other architecture , against which Apple has a disadvantage. It doesn't really matter if Intel has slowed progress, if everyone is using Intel's CPUs.
 
deconstruct60 said:
If Apple is waiting on Cascade Lake derivate Xeon W solutions then Q2-Q3 would line up with being radio silent this last month. [ If so I'd still expect them to say 'something' by April though. ]

The Xeon SP (cascade lake) won't ramp to volume and all SKUs until Q2 19.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/1361...oses-cascade-lake-xeon-scalable-launch-window

How Intel gets Copper Lake out in late 2019 is somewhat of a 'go figure' if they aren't even getting its predecessor out the door a quarter and change before that. Unless it is more so of a socket change and microarch tweak.
Click to expand...

Apple should switch to AMD CPUs...
 
askunk said:
Yeah... It reminds me of IBM when they promised a 4 GHz G5.
Click to expand...
Actually, the failed promise was for a 3 GHz G5 :eek:

Apple CEO Steve Jobs' promise to announce a 3GHz Power Mac G5 within a year of the processor's launch will not be made, a senior company staffer has admitted.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/06/09/apple_g5_promise/
Click to expand...

Meanwhile, I've just ordered a new Lenovo 1.3 kg 14" ultrabook with a quad core Intel® Core™ i7 that turbos to 4.2 GHz... ;)
 
askunk said:
Yeah... It reminds me of IBM when they promised a 4 GHz G5. Moving to proprietary chips would be a wise move to improve performance... but OUCH, the hell with transitions...
[doublepost=1542398540][/doublepost]
btw... USB-A is stuck with USB 3.0 speeds. 5 Gbps tops.
Click to expand...

Ah yeah, my bad. I misread the recent specs and transposed the TB3 USB specs to the USB-A ports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: askunk
mattspace said:
but everyone else then was on a better CPU platform, so PPC lagging had a real effect. Now, it's not like every other Pro computer / Workstation maker in on some other architecture , against which Apple has a disadvantage. It doesn't really matter if Intel has slowed progress, if everyone is using Intel's CPUs.
Click to expand...
I think this specific point of comparison is very understated. Back before PPC to Intel transition, we didn't have a hackintosh scene which clearly demonstrated that it's Apple's hardware component and form factor choices that are the limiting factor in Mac performance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: askunk, teagls, Biped and 3 others
Aldaris said:
Complete sidebar here*** but just wanted to leave this here for anyone who said ‘Apple doesn’t care about third party events like NAB’ or something similar...

https://9to5mac.com/2018/11/16/final-cut-pro-update-mac-demos-fcpx-creative-summit/

Alright back to our regualr scheduled program.
Click to expand...

Man, if Apple had just marketed the launch of FCPX better, they would be in such a better position than they are now. Release FCPX as a beta, keep FCP7 legacy support going for another year or two until X had the stuff like native exchange support and more logical library support. You'd still have people who wanted FCP8 but X wouldn't be met with the same sneer I see among some editors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aldaris and Manzanito
askunk said:
Yeah... It reminds me of IBM when they promised a 4 GHz G5. Moving to proprietary chips would be a wise move to improve performance... but OUCH, the hell with transitions...
[doublepost=1542398540][/doublepost]
btw... USB-A is stuck with USB 3.0 speeds. 5 Gbps tops.
Click to expand...

With the Power6 CPUs (2007), IBM delivered 4.25GHz, (not the 3Ghz that Steve was promising). The big hold up was the fact that Steve wasn't willing to spend the money necessary for what would have essentially been a custom chip (due to quantities Apple would have purchased).
 
fuchsdh said:
Man, if Apple had just marketed the launch of FCPX better, they would be in such a better position than they are now. Release FCPX as a beta, keep FCP7 legacy support going for another year or two until X had the stuff like native exchange support and more logical library support. You'd still have people who wanted FCP8 but X wouldn't be met with the same sneer I see among some editors.
Click to expand...
Couldn’t agree more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aldaris
fuchsdh said:
Man, if Apple had just marketed the launch of FCPX better, they would be in such a better position than they are now. Release FCPX as a beta, keep FCP7 legacy support going for another year or two until X had the stuff like native exchange support and more logical library support. You'd still have people who wanted FCP8 but X wouldn't be met with the same sneer I see among some editors.
Click to expand...
Sometimes I look at Adobe and wonder if they have learned a thing or two from Apple. Their Lightroom CC roll out was done like how you described, obviously lacking in feature initially so Lightroom Classic is kept being updated on tandem, while the CC version is obviously more intuitive for new users and generally runs smoother, has better integration with the mobile version etc. Depending on how CC will be developed and received, I can see them phasing out Classic eventually, but they don't get the immediate back lash like FCPX had. The Classic version almost feels like intentionally unoptimized and runs like a dog in macOS, so whenever the CC version matures, few will miss the old version.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fuchsdh
fuchsdh said:
Man, if Apple had just marketed the launch of FCPX better, they would be in such a better position than they are now. Release FCPX as a beta, keep FCP7 legacy support going for another year or two until X had the stuff like native exchange support and more logical library support. You'd still have people who wanted FCP8 but X wouldn't be met with the same sneer I see among some editors.
Click to expand...
Apple just barely within the last few point updates finally brought iWork mostly back to par with where it was prior to the iOS-Mac version merges... it’s been like a 5 year transistion— overall apples software has been one step forward two steps back over the last 7 years or so, hopefully apple is getting it together now a lot of stuff is back where it was years ago.
 
Aldaris said:
Apple just barely within the last few point updates finally brought iWork mostly back to par with where it was prior to the iOS-Mac version merges... it’s been like a 5 year transistion— overall apples software has been one step forward two steps back over the last 7 years or so, hopefully apple is getting it together now a lot of stuff is back where it was years ago.
Click to expand...

The transition from PPC to Intel really took it's toll with Cocoa and all. Especially in the graphics area.
Apple's still working on that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Aldaris
Chancha said:
Sometimes I look at Adobe and wonder if they have learned a thing or two from Apple. Their Lightroom CC roll out was done like how you described, obviously lacking in feature initially so Lightroom Classic is kept being updated on tandem, while the CC version is obviously more intuitive for new users and generally runs smoother, has better integration with the mobile version etc. Depending on how CC will be developed and received, I can see them phasing out Classic eventually, but they don't get the immediate back lash like FCPX had. The Classic version almost feels like intentionally unoptimized and runs like a dog in macOS, so whenever the CC version matures, few will miss the old version.
Click to expand...
Probably, although I think for the most part Adobe's software has gotten worse as they don't have to justify new purchases with cloud rental pricing and no real direct competitor in a lot of areas. Aperture existing did more to keep Lightroom around than Apple's missteps. Aldaris calls Apple's software efforts one step forward two steps back and I'd argue you can say the same about Adobe, except that they're not even dramatically redesigning their programs.

Meanwhile, where Adobe has no competition, After Effects lost multiprocessor rendering in 2014 and it still doesn't have it back. I'd have loved Apple to turn Motion into a more versatile linear compositing and motion design program, if only to get Adobe off its ass. Part of the reason my old Mac Pro (and even the Mac minis I used on occasion) is still viable for work is partially because whatever much faster in theory computer I get, I know a lot of that power is going to be wasted on Adobe programs compared to companies like Autodesk which push software performance aggressively.

With that said at this point Apple has to practice what it preaches and bring Logic and FCPX to the iPad to some degree. It's led the charge on mobile apps in a lot of ways but it's risking Adobe and others actually getting there first with a compelling product at this point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Biped and Aldaris
fuchsdh said:
I'd have loved Apple to turn Motion into a more versatile linear compositing and motion design program......
Click to expand...

Apple actually tried when they bought Nothing's Real. Apple had the money and nreal had Shake and the knowledge. The people at nreal were looking to improve the 3D aspect of Shake (and it not being 64 bit) which were really the only things missing. ILM and some folks involved in "The Lord Of The Rings" and "Kong" developed their own 3D space tools for Shake. Apple was pushing a "linear compositing" (motion pro) app code named phenomenon. The people from nreal were interested in node based and "pushed" the door open and left for The Foundry to work on NUKE!

OK! Time to get off the ole soapbox and put it back in storage.
Untitled.png
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back