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

[goMac]

Technically you don't have to tell to the kernel it has a GPU connected to use it as compute accelerator, nVidia may define it's GPU as another high bandwidth peripheral and nip/tuck the libraries to handle it, as drawback being out the kernel has some performance penality and the GPU isn't usable to display anything neither is available for STD gpgpu as opencl or metal only Cuda .

That seems like one possible path. The display driver stack is only going to be available for kernel drivers, but they might be able to ship CUDA only drivers.

The issue is going to be that in since they don't ship in kernel space, they can't patch the CUDA functions in for every application. CUDA applications would have to come up with a new way to talk to the driver in user space across process boundaries. It's still kind of a hacky mess.

DriverKit doesn't really have a way for applications to just provide custom services cleanly to other applications. And not in a way that would work with existing CUDA apps.

 

[pl1984]

Please...there are no cheap trucks anymore...a decently-equipped Toyota Tacoma SR5 with 4x4 and a 5ft bed is $35K. My dad has a 2007 GMC Sierra 1500 SLE with a 5.3L V-8 and 4 wheel drive that he bought for $32,000.00 ($39,523.80 in 2019 money). The equivalent 2019 GMC 1500 SLE is $44,055.00 and I'm going easy to not overestimate the cost differential. But on every level, trucks have simply gone out of sight price-wise. Luxury variants, of which Apple should be compared, are completely ridiculous, but still sell.

The thing you're missing is Apple isn't selling a Toyota Tacoma SR5 with 4x4 and a 5ft bed for $35K. They're not selling a 2019 GMC 1500 SLE for $44,055.00. They're selling this:

When what many people need is this:

And not this:

 

[ct2k7]

It does not seem to be a good value for any application.

For software development the Mac Pro is dead on arrival, as things happening faster than Apple CEOs learn how to distract investors, what's the state of the HPC development?

People like Aiden now program in a decent PC or Mac with either VSCode in client mode and run/debug in a remote (or not so remote) host running VSCode server and Cuda/rocm etc what they want being his/her pc just a sofisticated terminal, no need for specific GPU or API to be installed in their "client workstation" (you can develop on any server/Linux technology as "local').

So if you are really engaged to develop on Cuda TF Golang etc, no need to suffering for nVidia GPUs ir Specific API or binaries, if you are engaged with macOS/i$hit environment, get a decent Mac mini or iMac with 10G lan, 16 gb ran and an 6 core CPU and 256gb SSD, and assembly a compute-box with AMD ryzen all the RAM and storage and all the GPU/FPGAs whatever accelerator you need.

Even a MacBook pro is overkill, we could see nVidia GPU later in the ncgMP but only if they have economy sense will have a chance.

Jetbrains also is working in a similar solution and somehow it's possible with current tools (not as polite as VSCode ).

Too late for the Mac Pro, will be a machine for video producers, cad 3d but not for machine learning neither hpc development

Agreed, for any application it's just awful value.

 

[Zdigital2015]

The thing you're missing is Apple isn't selling a Toyota Tacoma SR5 with 4x4 and a 5ft bed for $35K. They're not selling a 2019 GMC 1500 SLE for $44,055.00. They're selling this:

View attachment 844135

When what many people need is this:

View attachment 844130

And not this:

View attachment 844131

Apple gave you the 9-doored beast because that's what the people that they talked to asked them to build.

And the Mac Pro 4,1 - 5,1 was barely an F-150, much less an F-250 Super Duty, so everyone was in for a shock, regardless. The 2019 Mac Pro was never going to start below $5,000.00. I just don't get why people here cannot accept that. Or that Apple should also build a Mac mini Pro, a Mac and an xMac in addition to the Mac Pro. The 9-doored beast is it.

Is that Civic supposed to be the Mac mini, or is that supposed to be the iMac and the iMac Pro as well?

 

[pl1984]

Apple gave you the 9-doored beast because that's what the people that they talked to asked them to build.

And the Mac Pro 4,1 - 5,1 was barely an F-150, much less an F-250 Super Duty, so everyone was in for a shock, regardless. The 2019 Mac Pro was never going to start below $5,000.00. I just don't get why people here cannot accept that. Or that Apple should also build a Mac mini Pro, a Mac and an xMac in addition to the Mac Pro. The 9-doored beast is it.

Many Mac users issue isn't with what Apple provided but rather what they haven't provided. Nothing wrong with the 9-door beast if it's priced like the F-250 SD or they also offer an actual F-250 SD.

Is that Civic supposed to be the Mac mini, or is that supposed to be the iMac and the iMac Pro as well?

All three.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Many Mac users issue isn't with what Apple provided but rather what they haven't provided. Nothing wrong with the 9-door beast if it's priced like the F-250 SD or they also offer an actual F-250 SD.


All three.

Again, if people pining for a new Mac Pro thought Apple was going to offer a new one for $3,000 in the year 2019, they weren't paying attention. The 2017 iMac Pro should have been everyone's first clue. Xeon, 8 cores, 32GB 1TB, Vega 56 - $4,999.

This Mac Pro is it...there are no 4 slot, 2 slot or 1 slot Mac Pros on the horizon.

All three? That's too bad...but each is entitled to their own opinion., but it seems like there are quite a few on this site using the all three in quite productive capacities.

 

[Macpro2019]

The thing you're missing is Apple isn't selling a Toyota Tacoma SR5 with 4x4 and a 5ft bed for $35K. They're not selling a 2019 GMC 1500 SLE for $44,055.00. They're selling this:

View attachment 844135

When what many people need is this:

View attachment 844130

And not this:

View attachment 844131

I love how you describe the mac pro. Some reason it reminds me of going to the gym. Some are powerlifters..some are just doing zumba dance.

 

[pl1984]

Again, if people pining for a new Mac Pro thought Apple was going to offer a new one for $3,000 in the year 2019, they weren't paying attention. The 2017 iMac Pro should have been everyone's first clue. Xeon, 8 cores, 32GB 1TB, Vega 56 - $4,999.

Whether or not they were or were not paying attention is irrelevant. The point is they don't offer an F-250 for those who want it. I suspect their thoughts were we can use the 9-door beast if it's priced the same as an F-250.

As for the iMac Pro it contains a 5K screen, four times the SSD capacity, higher performing graphics, and a keyboard and mouse. Expecting a lower priced Mac Pro doesn't seem unreasonable to me (though I didn't think this).

This Mac Pro is it...there are no 4 slot, 2 slot or 1 slot Mac Pros on the horizon.

That's the complaint.

All three? That's too bad...but each is entitled to their own opinion., but it seems like there are quite a few on this site using the all three in quite productive capacities.

No one said they couldn't be productive. I can be productive with the Honda and a trailer but would it be as productive as having an F-250?
[doublepost=1561062084][/doublepost]

I love how you describe the mac pro. Some reason it reminds me of going to the gym. Some are powerlifters..some are just doing zumba dance.

The Mac Pro looks to be a very capable machine. Aside from the appearance I think Apple hit a home run with it. I may even change my mind on the appearance once I get to see it in real life (and then avoid the temptation to buy one).

 

[AidenShaw]

Aside from the appearance I think Apple hit a home run with it.

"We'll see."

NFW that I'll buy any without Nvidia support. Even with Nvidia support, not likely. If we can put CUDA eGPUs on our MacBooks - possibly.

Getting multi-socket quad GPU ProLiants will continue to be our path for the local part of our hybrid cloud.

 

[vailr]

Quote from an article on today's macrumors.com front page:
"Apple has been aiming to hit all price points with the 6th-generation iPad, iPad mini, iPad Air, and iPad Pro models."

Logically, Apple's executive gurus should certainly recognize that there are significant missing "price point" slots for similar model variations in the "headless iMac" (i.e. "Mac Pro Junior") retail space. At least one or two machines that have the same internal components as with a few of their current generation of iMac/iMacPros, but with at least 2 or 3 PCIe slots in a normal ATX or mATX sized PC chassis. Better air circulation, easier access to user upgrades.
The new 2019 mMP shows that Apple does understand the idea of good air cooling, even if their Mac Mini & other portable devices tend to be much more thermally constrained.

 

[goMac]

Many Mac users issue isn't with what Apple provided but rather what they haven't provided. Nothing wrong with the 9-door beast if it's priced like the F-250 SD or they also offer an actual F-250 SD.

People are in the 9-door beast forum asking where the F-250 is.

Yes, Apple doesn't make an F-250. That's not what the Mac Pro is or was. They just made a 9-door beast that was inexpensive enough some people bought one and used it like an F-250. Apple never actually meant to make an F-250.

Basically all the people who bought a 9 door beast and then used it as an F-250 are mad Apple released another 9 door beast, just at current 9 door beast prices.

 

[Zdigital2015]

Quote from an article on today's macrumors.com front page:
"Apple has been aiming to hit all price points with the 6th-generation iPad, iPad mini, iPad Air, and iPad Pro models."

Logically, Apple's executive gurus should certainly recognize that there are significant missing "price point" slots for similar model variations in the "headless iMac" (i.e. "Mac Pro Junior") retail space. At least one or two machines that have the same internal components as with a few of their current generation of iMac/iMacPros, but with at least 2 or 3 PCIe slots in a normal ATX or mATX sized PC chassis. Better air circulation, easier access to user upgrades.
The new 2019 mMP shows that Apple does understand the idea of good air cooling, even if their Mac Mini & other portable devices tend to be much more thermally constrained.

They haven't had multiple "headless Macs" since 1998 when Steve Jobs implemented the 4 quadrant product matrix. It's not happening...Apple recognizes that the ATX- and mATX segment is the market segment with the biggest downsides and smallest upside for product growth and differentiation. That market is defined by who can build the least worst POS the cheapest and turn a single digit profit margin on it.

Why can't people realize this is not the pool in which Apple is ever going to swim. Steve Jobs figured it out 20+ years ago, otherwise Apple would not exist today.

 

[goMac]

They haven't had multiple "headless Macs" since 1998 when Steve Jobs implemented the 4 quadrant product matrix. It's not happening...Apple recognizes that the ATX- and mATX segment is the market segment with the biggest downsides and smallest upside for product growth and differentiation. That market is defined by who can build the least worst POS the cheapest and turn a single digit profit margin on it.

Why can't people realize this is not the pool in which Apple is ever going to swim. Steve Jobs figured it out 20+ years ago, otherwise Apple would not exist today.

Mac mini. G4 Cube.

Still not going to happen though.

 

[AidenShaw]

They haven't had multiple "headless Macs" since 1998 when Steve Jobs implemented the 4 quadrant product matrix. It's not happening...Apple recognizes that the ATX- and mATX segment is the market segment with the biggest downsides and smallest upside for product growth and differentiation. That market is defined by who can build the least worst POS the cheapest and turn a single digit profit margin on it.

Why can't people realize this is not the pool in which Apple is ever going to swim. Steve Jobs figured it out 20+ years ago, otherwise Apple would not exist today.

I haven't heard anyone call for "the least worse cheapest POS", in your words.

Most of the people are lamenting that there is no $2.5K to $3K headless Mac. That's so far above the ASP for cheap Intel PCs that your comment is ludicrous.

 

[JesterJJZ]

But how many people make a living with them?

Entire markets have been priced out.

Seriously? If you were planning on spending $3-4k on workstation, and now need to spend maybe $6-9k...does that difference in price really make or break you? If it does you don't need one. That's like 1 or 2 projects for an editor. You should be able to recoup that within a month.

Do I wish it was a little less costly? Sure, who doesn't? But I will happily pay more for this beast than pay a little less for Trashcan 2.0. At least this is a real workstation.

 

[CWallace]

It's not beyond the realm of possibility that Apple has done market analyses and while some on this forum predict the market for such an "ex-Mac" would be measured in the tens of millions per year, perhaps Apple's research predicts it would be far, far less.

Tim Cook is keeping alive products that Steve may very well have axed (original MacBook Air, iPad Mini, iPod Touch, 13" MacBook without Touchbar) because the production infrastructure is already there so even if they sell in (very) low volumes, the production cost is so low that overall the program brings in enough money to justify it.

On the flip side, Cook has also killed products like the Thunderbolt Display, Airport and Time Machine line even though they also had existing production infrastructure to support low(er) volumes. This could be a sign that the actual volume was so low it could not justify keeping it.

An ex-Mac would require a new production infrastructure so upfront costs would be high. It would therefore need to show a strong business case in terms of predicted sales. There would then also be the fact that whatever we expected it to cost, it would be $500-1000 higher. How many people would balk at that premium? Especially since a not-insignificant bit of this market (buy the entry-level and update via third-party for years) likely has the technical acumen to Hackintosh at a significantly lower price point?

 

[Zdigital2015]

Mac mini. G4 Cube.

Still not going to happen though.

The G4 Cube was an unmitigated, overpriced disaster when it came out and as much an ego project and showpiece as Steve Jobs could get away with that early in his tenure as CEO.

The Mac mini was borne out of necessity and opportunity as much as any product Apple has or had ever produced. Once the iPod gained enough traction to kill off Creative Labs MP3 players and the Zune, Apple realized it needed a small, cheap switchers computer for those who didn't like or were put off by the candy colored iMacs (even though they had been out of the lineup for a time already). The mini minimized the cost of switching for people, but it never offered the expansion that people in this thread are wanting.

Neither followed the traditional PC form factors in any way, shape or form. They were and are their own unique beasts.

 

[goMac]

An ex-Mac would require a new production infrastructure so upfront costs would be high. It would therefore need to show a strong business case in terms of predicted sales. There would then also be the fact that whatever we expected it to cost, it would be $500-1000 higher. How many people would balk at that premium? Especially since a not-insignificant bit of this market (buy the entry-level and update via third-party for years) likely has the technical acumen to Hackintosh at a significantly lower price point?

It's not like Apple doesn't know there are people out there asking, I'm sure they've done the math.

Like you're saying, the problem really is how many people would pay $500-$1000 more over a custom built PC outside of this forum. $500-$1000 more for a Mac that's not even going to run all the apps (games) that the custom PC runs. Also remove all the people who'd just buy a Mac laptop, and then have a custom built PC as a second computer. Plus there are always people who want to do things like upgrade motherboards for whom the Mac will never be upgradable enough.

That's a really small market.

[doublepost=1561067872][/doublepost]

Neither followed the traditional PC form factors in any way, shape or form. They were and are their own unique beasts.

All you said was headless desktops, I pointed out the exceptions.

The G4 cube was probably closest to what everyone here is asking for, which is why Apple may not do it again. It had an upgradable GPU, hard drive, and RAM. Sure, the issue was the price was a bit too close to the Power Mac G4, but Apple also learned from that how price conscious that crowd is.

At this point it's easier for Apple to say "You want a headless Mac with a user upgradable GPU? Here's a Mac mini with an eGPU." Then they don't have to waste any R&D coming out with a product that people will still complain about the price on.

And honestly that product is probably good enough for most of the people complaining here. There's also been hints from Apple they'll continue pivoting the Mini more towards pro use cases.

 

[vailr]

They haven't had multiple "headless Macs" since 1998 when Steve Jobs implemented the 4 quadrant product matrix. It's not happening...Apple recognizes that the ATX- and mATX segment is the market segment with the biggest downsides and smallest upside for product growth and differentiation. That market is defined by who can build the least worst POS the cheapest and turn a single digit profit margin on it.

Whatever Steve Jobs had in mind when he downsized Apple's product mix has no corresponding relation to today's Tim Cook run organization. That was then, this is now. If today's Apple can offer 4 different iPad models, which (due to their lower price) have a fairly low profit measured in dollars per unit, then there's nothing hindering them jumping on the bandwagon of offering 1 or 2 "Mac Pro Junior" models with correspondingly higher profit in dollars per unit sold.
Now: argue all you want that the Cupertino characters would never "stoop so low" as to sell such a down-scaled Mac Pro. That won't change the fact, in my opinion, that they would be tossing out a significant amount of product sales, by failing to do so.

 

[Zdigital2015]

I haven't heard anyone call for "the least worse cheapest POS", in your words.

Most of the people are lamenting that there is no $2.5K to $3K headless Mac. That's so far above the ASP for cheap Intel PCs that your comment is ludicrous.

No one here is calling for the least worst cheapest POS, but the second Apple creates a Core i-based desktop mid- or mini-tower with 3 PCIe slots into the marketplace, it will immediately be dissected by the press, potential users and the general computing public. The press will call it over-priced, because they will compare it to every other comparable on the market...potential users (people on this forum) will complain that it costs too much for what it is and that they can get a cheaper PC from Dell, HP, Lenovo et al. OR tell us how they can build one cheaper that performs better, etc. and the general computing public sees what’s on sale at Best Buy and bypasses the Mac, xMac, whatever the hell its called and go buy a PC because $2,500-$3,000 is too expensive for a PC, never having any intent of paying more than $500 for some i3/8GB/500GB HDD POS that they KNOW will be fast enough for their purposes and Apple is nuts. Again, there is ZERO upside for Apple in the $2,500-$3,000 market. Hell, Dell, HP, Lenovo and the rest can’t do it either. Who here is going to buy a Dell XPS 8930 with a Core i9-9900K versus for $2999 versus building their own? Riddle me this!!!

 

[ekwipt]

This Mac Pro will sell like hotcakes. The price is irrelevant if you make a living using these.

I'm not sure about hotcakes, they will move for sure but it won't be. high volume product.
[doublepost=1561069925][/doublepost]

The big reason people use a Mac is the Finder. It's the front and center part of the user experience and it has indispensable features, especially across a network of semi-detached users.

It's the main reason user surveys always show these results...

https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...ctivity-creativity-and-collaboration.2186667/

But unless you're new to this I shouldn't need to say that.



It's a valid question but are you asking it for no good reason except for internet win points or do you really use PCIe cards? If so which ones? For pro use? Then buy the Mac Pro, business expense it, it's a deduction. The cost breakdown per day or per month or per year isn't that much if you really are a professional user who will profit from towers and PCIe cards.

If you're on a tighter budget, a hobbyist, or semi-pro user then connecting PCIe devices to all-in-one Macs is easy. There are TB3 expansion boxes with dual PCIe slots for a video capture card and an audio card, etc

It's a silly work around for something that could be fixed by having a smaller Mac Pro with 3 PCIe slots, I mean look at some of the PC X299 motherboards. You can't tell me that X299 wouldn't be used by professionals, I would hazard a guess that most professionals don't need Xeon and ECC RAM. I know I don't

https://www.gigabyte.com/au/Motherboard/X299-DESIGNARE-EX-rev-10#kf

Intel X299 Ultra Durable motherboard with Thunderbolt 3, , Triple M.2, Dual Intel LAN, Intel WIFI, Front & rear USB 3.1 gen 2 Type-C. 3-Way Graphics Support, Intel® Dual Band 802.11ac + Bluetooth 4.2 – AC 8265 Wireless Module, Quad Channel Non-ECC Unbuffered DDR4, 8 DIMMs.

Could be configured up to: Intel Core i9 9980XE Extreme Edition X-series (Base:3.00GHz, Turbo:4.40GHz / 24.75MB / LGA2066 / 18 Core / 165W, Without Fan/Heatsink, Fully Unlocked), 128 GB of RAM

 

[Zdigital2015]

Whatever Steve Jobs had in mind when he downsized Apple's product mix has no corresponding relation to today's Tim Cook run organization. That was then, this is now. If today's Apple can offer 4 different iPad models, which (due to their lower price) have a fairly low profit measured in dollars per unit, then there's nothing hindering them jumping on the bandwagon of offering 1 or 2 "Mac Pro Junior" models with correspondingly higher profit in dollars per unit sold.
Now: argue all you want that the Cupertino characters would never "stoop so low" as to sell such a down-scaled Mac Pro. That won't change the fact, in my opinion, that they would be tossing out a significant amount of product sales, by doing so.

It’s not about stooping so low, it’s about swimming in a market with zero upside. It’s about not releasing another boring product (at least in Apple’s eyes). I am almost 100% positive Apple really didn’t want to build the Mac Pro they presented at WWDC and guess what, the price is meant to make most of you choose something else.

Tim Cook is doubling down on the iPad (iPad OS) and the Watch while he sets his engineers to figuring out how what they can add to the iPhone to keep sales and revenue from dipping any further. Their re-commitment to the Mac is more rebalancing the product sales mix now that the iPhone is no longer the rocket ship it once was. Services, AppleTV+, the iPad and the Watch are the primary drivers now. They have refreshed everything but the MacBook (and the Air, sort of), but there is no doubt that a Mac Pro Junior, Mac mini Pro, Mac or xMac is so low on the agenda as to be more like a fart in the wind. Apple has had 6 years to produce something, anything with PCIe slots after the resounding thud of the 2013 Mac Pro and hasn’t. And a tower Mac is so simple that people can go out, gather the right parts and build their own. If Apple wanted to do it, it would have been so easy to have already done it 10 times over. But they didn’t and no one here can accept that harsh reality.

Apple makes 4 different iPad models, because that is the segment they want to grow, not simply maintain, as they do with the Mac, albeit with some pretty nifty Macs.

Apple is chasing 20 million iPads a quarter because they now OWN that market after today’s Google news and you think they should be chasing a million units (if that) a year on “old and busted”. That’s just crazy.

 

[vailr]

I'm not sure about hotcakes, they will move for sure but it won't be. high volume product.
[doublepost=1561069925][/doublepost]

It's a silly work around for something that could be fixed by having a smaller Mac Pro with 3 PCIe slots, I mean look at some of the PC X299 motherboards. You can't tell me that X299 wouldn't be used by professionals, I would hazard a guess that most professionals don't need Xeon and ECC RAM. I know I don't

https://www.gigabyte.com/au/Motherboard/X299-DESIGNARE-EX-rev-10#kf

Intel X299 Ultra Durable motherboard with Thunderbolt 3, , Triple M.2, Dual Intel LAN, Intel WIFI, Front & rear USB 3.1 gen 2 Type-C. 3-Way Graphics Support, Intel® Dual Band 802.11ac + Bluetooth 4.2 – AC 8265 Wireless Module, Quad Channel Non-ECC Unbuffered DDR4, 8 DIMMs.

Could be configured up to: Intel Core i9 9980XE Extreme Edition X-series (Base:3.00GHz, Turbo:4.40GHz / 24.75MB / LGA2066 / 18 Core / 165W, Without Fan/Heatsink, Fully Unlocked), 128 GB of RAM

Oddly enough, the current model iMac Pro is also an X299 chipset system. I'd predict that if Apple were to begin to offer such a "headless X299 iMac Pro" product (with user upgradable PCIe slots, non-ECC DDR4), that sales for that model would quickly surpass the current "all-in-one" iMac Pro which includes the monitor. Even if priced the same for the same list of internal components.

 

[ekwipt]

Oddly enough, the current model iMac Pro is also an X299 chipset system. I'd predict that if Apple were to begin to offer such a "headless X299 iMac Pro" product (with user upgradable PCIe slots, non-ECC DDR4), that sales for that model would quickly surpass the current "all-in-one" iMac Pro which includes the monitor. Even if priced the same for the same list of internal components.

No quiet, the chipset is the Intel c422 (so it can support Xeon processors and ECC RAM)

 

[Blair Paulsen]

1) If your product/service has a short replacement cycle, then you don't need to make as much margin each time around. For years, computers (in most segments), were expected to meet customer needs for perhaps 2-3 years. Now that most use cases for the fat part of the bell curve - email, spreadsheets, online activities, etc - are within the capabilities of even many 5 year old machines (not to mention phones/tablets), the replacement rate has slowed significantly. Unless you boost pricing to improve margins on the lower sales rates, you're a dead company walking.

The MP 7,1 appears to have serious build quality, can be upgraded with products from other vendors and potentially stay viable for many years with regular upgrades. This means Apple needs to get their "nickel" on the original sale.

2) As others have noted, the cost of developing a model between the Mini and the MP would only make sense if the sales forecasts were above a certain level. Further complicating that equation is the potential to cannibalize sales of other models. I agree that a lower cost headless Mac would attract enthusiasts priced out of the mMP world, potentially expanding the Mac universe, which is a win. That said, I doubt that is enough incentive for Apple to start down a path where maintaining double digit margins would be very difficult.