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.
Waiting for modular Mac Pro 2019
- Thread starter Zarniwoop
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Maybe...
..or it could have been a reference to wrist bands and iPhone colors which have had more importance in his company than "Pro workflow".
Last edited:
Maybe...
Yes. Much like the time iPod Socks derailed a Mac Pro revision. Real shame.
CEO has to know where to pay attention. If year after year at WWDC and other keynotes they bring forth design and emojis, and not Pro workflow, he's lost in his rainbow land.
A late start. Distractions like the iMac Pro and changing buildings. The desire not to rush and get it wrong a second time. The need to over engineer it to "perfection". Too busy redesigning all the Macs to use ARM.
The iMac Pro isn't a distraction. It's the main reason Apple is putting off the nMP
The very closed iMac Pro is keeping Apple from selling another Pro machine.
People who knows what a "pro workflow" is did exist inside Apple, otherwise the advent of the original FCP could not have happened. But then somewhere along the way, these voices lost their influence, thus the FCPX fiasco came. And Shake. And Aperture. And then a Mac Pro with no PCI slots. And then a MacBook Pro with only 2 ports...
I find it really astonishing to witness this to be honest. The company that brought GUI to the scene, thrived over decades of dedication to creative pros, harvested billions of cash as of now - actually has trouble finding what professional users need.
I find it really astonishing to witness this to be honest. The company that brought GUI to the scene, thrived over decades of dedication to creative pros, harvested billions of cash as of now - actually has trouble finding what professional users need.
Why is it when I see the word 'modular Mac' all I can think of is watch bands where you adjust the length by adding or removing segments.
Now it all makes sense! This is why Apple bought liquid metal! The new pin removal tool for the Mac Pro!Why is it when I see the word 'modular Mac' all I can think of is watch bands where you adjust the length by adding or removing segments.
What that article says to me is that Apple lost the ability inhouse, to understand what creative professionals want.
Imagine that, a bunch of multi-millionaires with unlimited resources, and a full-blown case of pre-NeXT Apple NIH Syndrome, being out of touch. Quick! Let's get Bono in his five hundred dollar straw cowboy hat, and thousand dollar leather pants to tell us about the scourge of poverty...
...distracts from the real issue being that Google's tools are cross platform, and the devices are multi-vendor so schools can fulfill requirements to get competitive bids. Also, given how badly iOS performs on older hardware when upgrades are pushed on the devices, cheap devices with faster turnover are probably better products, than more expensive ones you have to keep in service for longer while they pay off. Apple's entire strategy was wrong, yet the captain of the ship says "well, we just need to hit the iceberg harder..."
That education event, and now the pronouncements about (paraphrasing) "it's time for pro customers to stop waiting, and just buy the iMac Pro", sound reminiscent of Frank Nitti talking to the shopkeeper at the beginning of The Untouchables"
I have heard, and I have no reason to doubt this is the case, since it seems to fit with the evidence, that a lot of software products in Apple basically live or die, based on whether anyone actually wants to work on them. The death of Aperture for example, wasn't so much that management deemed it to be killed, but rather that noone wanted to work on it. An independent team, who had no real affinity for professional photographers, brought up Photos, which basically cuckooed the Aperture chick out of the nest.
Noone wants to maintain the present, in a place filled with people who want to invent the future. One key person leaves, and the project they championed dies soon after, as someone else thinks that this time they're going to reinvent the wheel properly.
Imagine that, a bunch of multi-millionaires with unlimited resources, and a full-blown case of pre-NeXT Apple NIH Syndrome, being out of touch. Quick! Let's get Bono in his five hundred dollar straw cowboy hat, and thousand dollar leather pants to tell us about the scourge of poverty...
...distracts from the real issue being that Google's tools are cross platform, and the devices are multi-vendor so schools can fulfill requirements to get competitive bids. Also, given how badly iOS performs on older hardware when upgrades are pushed on the devices, cheap devices with faster turnover are probably better products, than more expensive ones you have to keep in service for longer while they pay off. Apple's entire strategy was wrong, yet the captain of the ship says "well, we just need to hit the iceberg harder..."
That education event, and now the pronouncements about (paraphrasing) "it's time for pro customers to stop waiting, and just buy the iMac Pro", sound reminiscent of Frank Nitti talking to the shopkeeper at the beginning of The Untouchables"
[doublepost=1522998758][/doublepost]
I have heard, and I have no reason to doubt this is the case, since it seems to fit with the evidence, that a lot of software products in Apple basically live or die, based on whether anyone actually wants to work on them. The death of Aperture for example, wasn't so much that management deemed it to be killed, but rather that noone wanted to work on it. An independent team, who had no real affinity for professional photographers, brought up Photos, which basically cuckooed the Aperture chick out of the nest.
Noone wants to maintain the present, in a place filled with people who want to invent the future. One key person leaves, and the project they championed dies soon after, as someone else thinks that this time they're going to reinvent the wheel properly.
The whole situation is completely laughable and retarded.
Put together a team that understands the pro workflow... isnt this why we use apple products? Its helarious! They are meant to be the pinicle of the industry and they dont understand the pro market!
I suppose looking at the Pro products atm. The under 15" Macbook Pros are laughable and outrageously expensive for what you get. The iPad pro... I dont know a single pro that uses one. The Mac Pro which was crap when it was announced. The only half decent product is the iMac pro but in 3 years time apple have you beant over again and there wont be a new iMac pro to upgrade too.
How complex is the pro market? Videographers, photographers, animators, motion graphics, graphic designers, scientists....
Seriously people want no more than a powerful workstation twin xeons 32+ cores, loads of ram, high end GPU options with the ability to use off the shelf graphics cards and PCI slots.
The iMac pro still isnt ideal and many dont want a £5k closed machine when you can spend the same on a similar workstation that you can upgrade in 18 months when you need more.
Why they couldnt just bring out a stop gap like the 5,1 is beyond me. Its all people want, not the complexities that apple seem to place on everything.
Do this or just exit it completely and stop messing people about.
6 years between any hardware improvements on the top tier machine is frankly F*****G shocking.
How about just taking the pro market seriously. Do what they used to, offer the best software and hardware. Logic and Final Cut are all thats available, take on the crap storm that is Adobe CC! Make a reason for people to use Apple products... 10-15 years ago that was the reason the software was super fast with the hardware. Now apple have pretty much left the market and everything is multiplatform it makes less sense to use apple hardware because its closed its more expensive and all the machines are gimped in some way. Also CC runs better on windows machines simply because CC runs far better on CUDA!!!!
Its not difficult. There is no mid range just an AIO and the mac pro might as well be the same but 5 years old using 6.5 year old tech and still stupid money.
I moved over to windows workstations about 3 years ago apple have lost the plot.
The mac pro is the top tier machine which pretty much ensures everything below it is created. I think Apple is in trouble, everyone is wanting to reinvent the wheel with each project it just screams as reactionary to historical apple instead of making great products.
There has been very few worthwhile improvements since 2008. Possibly victim to success.
Apple could be the next Kodak.
Put together a team that understands the pro workflow... isnt this why we use apple products? Its helarious! They are meant to be the pinicle of the industry and they dont understand the pro market!
I suppose looking at the Pro products atm. The under 15" Macbook Pros are laughable and outrageously expensive for what you get. The iPad pro... I dont know a single pro that uses one. The Mac Pro which was crap when it was announced. The only half decent product is the iMac pro but in 3 years time apple have you beant over again and there wont be a new iMac pro to upgrade too.
How complex is the pro market? Videographers, photographers, animators, motion graphics, graphic designers, scientists....
Seriously people want no more than a powerful workstation twin xeons 32+ cores, loads of ram, high end GPU options with the ability to use off the shelf graphics cards and PCI slots.
The iMac pro still isnt ideal and many dont want a £5k closed machine when you can spend the same on a similar workstation that you can upgrade in 18 months when you need more.
Why they couldnt just bring out a stop gap like the 5,1 is beyond me. Its all people want, not the complexities that apple seem to place on everything.
Do this or just exit it completely and stop messing people about.
6 years between any hardware improvements on the top tier machine is frankly F*****G shocking.
How about just taking the pro market seriously. Do what they used to, offer the best software and hardware. Logic and Final Cut are all thats available, take on the crap storm that is Adobe CC! Make a reason for people to use Apple products... 10-15 years ago that was the reason the software was super fast with the hardware. Now apple have pretty much left the market and everything is multiplatform it makes less sense to use apple hardware because its closed its more expensive and all the machines are gimped in some way. Also CC runs better on windows machines simply because CC runs far better on CUDA!!!!
Its not difficult. There is no mid range just an AIO and the mac pro might as well be the same but 5 years old using 6.5 year old tech and still stupid money.
I moved over to windows workstations about 3 years ago apple have lost the plot.
The mac pro is the top tier machine which pretty much ensures everything below it is created. I think Apple is in trouble, everyone is wanting to reinvent the wheel with each project it just screams as reactionary to historical apple instead of making great products.
There has been very few worthwhile improvements since 2008. Possibly victim to success.
Apple could be the next Kodak.
Last edited:
Not to mention that part of their process involves securing supply chain commitments. It's not just a CPU base they have to deliver on. They have to deliver on a new display as well and they're going to want to take the time to lay out the groundwork of what they think the Pro workstation for the next 5 to 10 years is going to look like. They thought it'd look like iMac Pros and tbMBPs. They got it partially right as there are plenty of pros happily using one of those right now. I count myself as one of them though if they release a spectacular modular MacPro, I would seriously consider making a desktop my daily driver again so long as a MBP can be easily weaved into the workflow.
SONY produce thousands of interesting prototypes, couldn't focus on more than a dozen, kill off the rest after 3 versions, and make it public
Apple produce dozens of castrated prototypes, can't focus on more than a few, and kill some off right after the 1st version, and keep silent for 6 years.
Apple trusts the Pros enough, that they'll hire them to consult on a new design, but not enough to give them an actual machine they can use to make their own system to their own design.
If Apple has no institutional knowledge, then what purpose does their curation of components serve?
May as well make prog-rockers the DJs for the hip-hop station on Apple Music...
[doublepost=1523010591][/doublepost]On the same day Apple announced by proxy they can't actually do the Mac Pro themselves, and have to get consultants in:
https://www.neowin.net/news/hp-announces-a-range-of-powerful-new-zbook-mobile-workstations
https://architosh.com/2018/04/gtc-2018-nvidia-technologies-are-changing-the-way-we-work-and-create/
https://gadgets.ndtv.com/laptops/features/vr-is-pc-gamings-next-crysis-moment-alienware-boss-1833268
ffs...
Apple was built on serving the pro market.
There may be more money in the consumer market but even there they arent doing as well as they once did with rehashed products removing tech for the sake of it and not really innovating. The iPhone X is no different, once the dust settled and people get over the gimiks its a £1000 phone that does no more than the iphone 8 on a day to day basis and the unlock is slower. Without the price increases we wouldn't see increased figures either, there is shrinkage in all aspects of the markets and for one of the first times in recent history apple is affected because people arent stupid and the multiplatform subscription models are taking over meaning being loyal to a company is less relevant.
Same with the macbook pro, Ive needed a new one since 2015 but they just dont serve the pro market or my needs and they have increased in cost by 30%+ with less usability.
Ive written in other threads about the state of the Macbook Pro under 15" compared to the competition. Others are using dedicated graphics with quad processors which actually warrant the cost. Instead a i7 512gb 16gb 13" hits £2400 thats insane for a dual core with integrated graphics when the competition have 1050s. The Macbook i7 is within 10% of the top pre speced macbook pro and is essentially the same recipe and in day to day use there wont be a great deal of noticable difference, the main difference is ports and both arent ideal. One port that can only support one powered device at a time or 4 but you have to live with dongle life anyway.
Thats without talking about the moot point of touch screen or tablet / 2 in one.
The surface book 2 is a very interesting product and its sad apple didnt create something similar with the polish you come to expect. They are so late. IOS Mac OS integration, IOS is useless for actual work simply because apps are barebones desktop apps. On the other hand its simpe to use more tactile and more engaging. Mac OS feels old in comparison, full of bugs and lack of inovation again on all fronts and nobody makes apps for it like IOS, why? The touch pen is so useful for creatives yet your stuck with IOS apps and there is no integration to use say an iPad pro with your mac to make adjustments, annotation etc
For photographers having a wacom syle screen that can link to a workstation with better integration, tactile interfaces etc etc its all begging for some kind of integration. The ipad is 10 years old and again is almost the same.
Essentially the 2017 MBp has the same use case as the 2006 nothing has changed just the loss of the keyboard, ports, dvd drive (noone was sad to see it go) and obvious speed improvements otherwise its the same product. 11 years...
The point is its not just the mac pro, its the whole product line. Everything is in a weird transition and apple doesnt seem to have a steer. Obvious integration doesn't exist.
Its very difficult to be a pro user and apple fan. They just dont make products to serve needs across the board.
There was a time I had Apple everything. Now I have a phone and a macbook which I dont really love, otherwise ive moved on because other machines suit my workflow and apple just hasn't delivered for me to justify buying into products that are more expensive and dont do the job as well.
For example the 2013 mac pro takes roughly 6-10 seconds to render a 100% preview of a 50mp file in lightroom. When editing a wedding say 300-500 images that time essentially adds nearly 2 hours onto an already time consuming process just waiting... My dell workstation with Cuda takes 1-2 seconds. Same with apple across the board because there isnt NVIDIA support and new hardware.
Granted if I was using 1080 screens the mac pro would be fine but with 4k, 50mp is a lot of pixels to push.
The only product that could do the job similarly is the iMac pro but i dont want to spend £5k on a machine thats sealed regardless of how good the screen is, its great now but what in 3 years things will have moved on. When the new gen of graphics cards come out I want one... and the ability to use it at 100% efficient not buy a £500 caddy to then get 80% of the power for a nearly £1500 investment. Even more stupid is apple came out recently with a list of caddys you should use. Not even their own! They arent even capitalizing on that.
In my old mac pro days having no supported graphics card options with boot screens. What 5-6 cards in the span of 10-12 years that were significantly slower than what was available elsewhere.
Its like solving problems that shouldn't exist.
Part of working as a pro is getting work done efficiently and it really kills the momentum when the workflow is slow.
Granted its not really apples fault Lightroom, Premier and After effects are slow its adobes poor optimization, for the time being only fast CPUs will make it run smoothly and twin xeons with good cooling is the answer.
Apple haven't got a workstation. If my main machine isnt apple then my others wont be.
When I first started using apple products I bought one and it spiraled when people move away they do the same and the creates big big problems. Living between ecosystems is a headache and many people have already moved. Its not emotional its ensuring work can be done efficiently.
The next gen of all products need to be something special to win people back and its all too little too late. Especially with probably a late 2019 reveal! 6 Years LOL!!!!!!!
How long would it take to implement the above correctly? 5-6 years, apple hasn't got that time.
Look at Gopro... was the market leader now the share price is an all time low and they have announce the HERO... Original... Shoots 1080p 60fps... and is £200 pretty much every phone on the market has been able to do it for years. Its easy for companies to fall from grace.
There may be more money in the consumer market but even there they arent doing as well as they once did with rehashed products removing tech for the sake of it and not really innovating. The iPhone X is no different, once the dust settled and people get over the gimiks its a £1000 phone that does no more than the iphone 8 on a day to day basis and the unlock is slower. Without the price increases we wouldn't see increased figures either, there is shrinkage in all aspects of the markets and for one of the first times in recent history apple is affected because people arent stupid and the multiplatform subscription models are taking over meaning being loyal to a company is less relevant.
Same with the macbook pro, Ive needed a new one since 2015 but they just dont serve the pro market or my needs and they have increased in cost by 30%+ with less usability.
Ive written in other threads about the state of the Macbook Pro under 15" compared to the competition. Others are using dedicated graphics with quad processors which actually warrant the cost. Instead a i7 512gb 16gb 13" hits £2400 thats insane for a dual core with integrated graphics when the competition have 1050s. The Macbook i7 is within 10% of the top pre speced macbook pro and is essentially the same recipe and in day to day use there wont be a great deal of noticable difference, the main difference is ports and both arent ideal. One port that can only support one powered device at a time or 4 but you have to live with dongle life anyway.
Thats without talking about the moot point of touch screen or tablet / 2 in one.
The surface book 2 is a very interesting product and its sad apple didnt create something similar with the polish you come to expect. They are so late. IOS Mac OS integration, IOS is useless for actual work simply because apps are barebones desktop apps. On the other hand its simpe to use more tactile and more engaging. Mac OS feels old in comparison, full of bugs and lack of inovation again on all fronts and nobody makes apps for it like IOS, why? The touch pen is so useful for creatives yet your stuck with IOS apps and there is no integration to use say an iPad pro with your mac to make adjustments, annotation etc
For photographers having a wacom syle screen that can link to a workstation with better integration, tactile interfaces etc etc its all begging for some kind of integration. The ipad is 10 years old and again is almost the same.
Essentially the 2017 MBp has the same use case as the 2006 nothing has changed just the loss of the keyboard, ports, dvd drive (noone was sad to see it go) and obvious speed improvements otherwise its the same product. 11 years...
The point is its not just the mac pro, its the whole product line. Everything is in a weird transition and apple doesnt seem to have a steer. Obvious integration doesn't exist.
Its very difficult to be a pro user and apple fan. They just dont make products to serve needs across the board.
There was a time I had Apple everything. Now I have a phone and a macbook which I dont really love, otherwise ive moved on because other machines suit my workflow and apple just hasn't delivered for me to justify buying into products that are more expensive and dont do the job as well.
For example the 2013 mac pro takes roughly 6-10 seconds to render a 100% preview of a 50mp file in lightroom. When editing a wedding say 300-500 images that time essentially adds nearly 2 hours onto an already time consuming process just waiting... My dell workstation with Cuda takes 1-2 seconds. Same with apple across the board because there isnt NVIDIA support and new hardware.
Granted if I was using 1080 screens the mac pro would be fine but with 4k, 50mp is a lot of pixels to push.
The only product that could do the job similarly is the iMac pro but i dont want to spend £5k on a machine thats sealed regardless of how good the screen is, its great now but what in 3 years things will have moved on. When the new gen of graphics cards come out I want one... and the ability to use it at 100% efficient not buy a £500 caddy to then get 80% of the power for a nearly £1500 investment. Even more stupid is apple came out recently with a list of caddys you should use. Not even their own! They arent even capitalizing on that.
In my old mac pro days having no supported graphics card options with boot screens. What 5-6 cards in the span of 10-12 years that were significantly slower than what was available elsewhere.
Its like solving problems that shouldn't exist.
Part of working as a pro is getting work done efficiently and it really kills the momentum when the workflow is slow.
Granted its not really apples fault Lightroom, Premier and After effects are slow its adobes poor optimization, for the time being only fast CPUs will make it run smoothly and twin xeons with good cooling is the answer.
Apple haven't got a workstation. If my main machine isnt apple then my others wont be.
When I first started using apple products I bought one and it spiraled when people move away they do the same and the creates big big problems. Living between ecosystems is a headache and many people have already moved. Its not emotional its ensuring work can be done efficiently.
The next gen of all products need to be something special to win people back and its all too little too late. Especially with probably a late 2019 reveal! 6 Years LOL!!!!!!!
How long would it take to implement the above correctly? 5-6 years, apple hasn't got that time.
Look at Gopro... was the market leader now the share price is an all time low and they have announce the HERO... Original... Shoots 1080p 60fps... and is £200 pretty much every phone on the market has been able to do it for years. Its easy for companies to fall from grace.
Last edited:
Yeah, I tend to believe this "news" is no more than a marketing activity for the iMac Pro. Basically just tell Mac Pro users don't wait for the update, but buy the iMac Pro now.
However, I personally see this as a fail campaign.
Thanks for correcting the poster. Even an RX580 added to the mix increases graphics power considerably.
And I saw the thread on eGPU.io with the enabler script. I just wish it was Apple-approved. At the very least it should be officially enabled for Pro TB2 systems.
Last edited:
The question is: How many of them that are using an iMac Pro are doing so because Apple offers them no other high performance system?
I don't know, but I'm using a tbMBP because I came to the conclusion several years ago that I no longer needed my Cheese Grater MP to spin up dev environments and do occasional video work. 80% of the time I still feel that way, but now and then I find myself really cursing at how long some processes take and wishing I had a few more horses and more RAM so I could shave some time off of my work.
On the other hand, not being able to grab my work and go somewhere on short notice is a bigger drag than occasional bottlenecks.
The one thing that kept me from buying an iMac or iMac Pro wasn't that it was hermetically sealed with no upgrade options. It was because it can't be used in target display mode. If they can work out the requirements to allow for an iMac to be used as a display, I'd consider one for my next purchase.
Many pro users don't actually need or want 32+ cores, just the basic ability to use multiple displays like a Cintiq and also upgrade drives, RAM and graphics instead of having to take the whole machine in for a "genius" to do something so simple.
So maybe now becoming expandable with eGPUs and other enclosures, a new Mac Mini may be more than enough to finally provide a longed-for and affordable 'mid tower' option without having to move up to a Mac Pro.
I would say motion graphics is one of the major useage of Pro machines and twin xeons are very useful. You certainly need those cores to export large complex scenes unless you want the machine to be pinned for days.
Apple doesnt need to put twins in everything, similar to how they used to having twin sockets. My Dell came with a single octo core and when I needed it I put a second one for 16 cores. Thats where the usability comes in.
One of the reasons Apple hasn't done so is the iMac. The mac mini wasn't supposed to be user upgradeable, it also always used the lower powered laptop hardware because of its form factor, it never was and I doubt ever will be a Mac Pro replacement.
It was designed for people migrating for windows... BYOKM affair. I think that boat has sailed now it was a 2000s thing and you barely see anyone moving from PC to mac these days compared to how it used to be and the sales show this too.
Simple fact for most of those consumers was that a laptop is a better machine because it boasts the same spec and you can take it with you and still hook it up to the above when you get home.
I dont see the appeal of the mac mini apart from a home server the macbook pros are better overall machines. Especially when they are the same bar the form factor and the cost.
Not saying there isnt room for a mid tower because that would be ideal, the mac mini isnt it. A mid tower will never exist while the iMac is around. In all honesty although the imac is sealed for its specs you get the display for almost nothing and apple cant control it.
Its a classic catch 22 with all apple products. Anything that gives the user more control is pretty much the opposite of apples ideology.
Apple doesnt need to put twins in everything, similar to how they used to having twin sockets. My Dell came with a single octo core and when I needed it I put a second one for 16 cores. Thats where the usability comes in.
One of the reasons Apple hasn't done so is the iMac. The mac mini wasn't supposed to be user upgradeable, it also always used the lower powered laptop hardware because of its form factor, it never was and I doubt ever will be a Mac Pro replacement.
It was designed for people migrating for windows... BYOKM affair. I think that boat has sailed now it was a 2000s thing and you barely see anyone moving from PC to mac these days compared to how it used to be and the sales show this too.
Simple fact for most of those consumers was that a laptop is a better machine because it boasts the same spec and you can take it with you and still hook it up to the above when you get home.
I dont see the appeal of the mac mini apart from a home server the macbook pros are better overall machines. Especially when they are the same bar the form factor and the cost.
Not saying there isnt room for a mid tower because that would be ideal, the mac mini isnt it. A mid tower will never exist while the iMac is around. In all honesty although the imac is sealed for its specs you get the display for almost nothing and apple cant control it.
Its a classic catch 22 with all apple products. Anything that gives the user more control is pretty much the opposite of apples ideology.
Last edited:
If the base module of the new Mac Pro is the motherboard and RAM unit, it will still need a basic onboard drive and graphics to boot from when not connected to any other module - in essence the new Mac Mini.
Illustrator/designer working on a 27" Cintiq and 2x 30" displays at his/her desk all day has no reason for a Macbook or its small screen.
Illustration and pen-wise for those artists needing to go mobile, using Procreate on the iPad Pro 12.7" with Apple Pencil is the solution in a game the Macbook's not even a player in. Microsoft Surface and Wacom MobileStudio are the options, not any Macbooks.
Illustrator/designer working on a 27" Cintiq and 2x 30" displays at his/her desk all day has no reason for a Macbook or its small screen.
Illustration and pen-wise for those artists needing to go mobile, using Procreate on the iPad Pro 12.7" with Apple Pencil is the solution in a game the Macbook's not even a player in. Microsoft Surface and Wacom MobileStudio are the options, not any Macbooks.
Last edited:
Im a graphic designer and photographer. I work for a large agency in the UK and I dont know anyone who uses a cintiq because they are so stupidly niche for what they are. Most people still use wacom tablets over a dedicated display the fact the majority are £1700+ and are only 2.5k...
Completely agree with the ipad point and I have been expressing my disappointment with the Macbook that they have essentially the same use case they did 10 years ago. 0 innovation, also the fact the competition are making much more compelling products, more powerful, better integration etc etc
Even so those products dont have the polish of a mac, they still havent got the recipe right, I would love nothing more than a macbook/ipad or mac pro/imac/ipad hybrid for lightroom photoshop and illustrator that would work in tandem with a workstation but apple isnt interested they have had the tech for years now.
The surface studio is interesting but its so underpowered and so expensive for what it is again a great product in theory with a great hinge but the execution wasn't there.
Inovation for apple in this sector is thin on the ground, honestly the Mac Pro and iMac Pro are probably used most by video editors, motion graphic designers and the photographers than can afford to. Illustrators and designers need the power but the touch interface is niche to illustration, artists and photography although it could be used for other industries I dont think apple will see value in adding that tech because its too niche. They need to sell and obviously mac OS isnt geared up to being a touch interface and IOS is too basic.
To add all of this to the OS and make a product that would fit the bill your probably looking at 3-5 years. I dont think pros have that time to wait.
Even so if an artist wanted to attach to a cintiq the mac mini is as expensive but you cant take it with you and they use the same components as a macbook pro so I dont see the benefit.
The point I was making is that the macbook is the reason why the mac mini is not a priority anymore. Like I said there is no reason why you couldn't do the above with a macbook in desktop mode.
Last edited by a moderator: