Newton Messagepad 2000 had a mailin programme to upgrade the hardware to Messagepad 2100.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
MP 7,1 What does Apple's switch to ARM based processors mean for the future of the Mac Pro
- Thread starter Korican100
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Newton Messagepad 2000 had a mailin programme to upgrade the hardware to Messagepad 2100.
Enjoy the software you have right now, because you won't be seeing any new versions.
Why would they come on here and announce they are leaving? Those of us who did (and have explained why) have been roundly hammered by the true believers. Pros (and Prosumers) tend to be less emotionally attached to our computers - they are just a tools. The true believers have an unhealthy emotional attachment to their hardware/software choices, imo.
True believers don't want to hear that some of us are getting a lot more performance for a LOT less money. A constant refrain of Why are you here? with an unhealthy side order of your <observation> or field doesn't matter. Windows SUCKS! That feature isn't important! Why do you need that? I personally am kicking myself for not jumping ship earlier - I should have jumped when Ryzen launched; instead, like an idiot, I believed that Apple would learn from the mistakes of the trash can. I am SO glad I didn't waste money on a 7,1.
For those that are holding onto their perpetual license of Adobe CS6 - welcome to software as a service. Ditto Microsoft Office.
The move to ARM is about controlling the platform, any performance increase is nothing more than an added bonus - no longer will anyone ask Why has Apple skipped multiple generations of CPU/GPU chips?
It’s too early to do so, as apple doesn’t have hardware yet to ship. The A12Z will not appear in any final shipping products,so it’s a moot point anyway. The keynote was more about the transition, not the final product. You can expect tons of apple benchmarks once they unveil their first Arm based Mac announced
I've mused about this for a bit, and I think I have a hypothetical that would be neat, if Apple is planning it already or just listening.
I've mentioned that in the PowerPC-Intel transition, there were just over 4 years between the announcement of the transition and shutting out PowerPC machines from the latest OS. For a Mac, 4 years is low on the support life for a new machine, usually the case for a low-end mac only. But in this sentiment, high-end machines were included. Even the PowerMac G5 that was refreshed after the transition announcement would only get about 4 years of support when brand new. That sucks, tho if you were ok with it "just working" on an old version running your non-upgraded software, it's ok. But a high-end PowerMac G5 didn't cost in the 5-figures like the Mac Pro introduced last year. People clamoring for an upgradable machine that could last for 8+ years, like many of the early Mac Pros, aren't getting what they expected. Many here have stated Apple should expect a lawsuit. But there is a solution just for these 2019 Mac Pros.
The Mac Pro is uniquely the only Mac with a full PCIe expansion bus. Thunderbolt puts machines in the realm too, so this can apply to all Macs, but it's a bit out of the scope of my musings. There are already ARM processing nodes in card form elsewhere in the market space. I suspect Apple could create ARM-based processing units for Mac Pros. The goal here is to have these pro systems capable of running ARM tasks via a PCIe expansion board instead of requiring a native ARM main CPU. This would enable testing of universal support for developers as well as upgrading to a new core without abandoning other hardware you've invested in for non-developer digital professionals. I doubt they'll ever do a version of Rosetta that runs ARM code on x86, but I think they could release an expansion board that lets you run ARM code natively on an otherwise x86 machine. The same board may be used to expand the number of processing cores on the next-gen ARM Mac Pro, maybe. The end game could lead to, when the time comes, the main x86 cores of the Mac Pro become just a boot-time artifact and minimal backplane support co-processor, while having userspace (and maybe most of the OS) run from the processors on the expansion board, allowing the Mac Pro investors a good return on their investment in Apple's most expensive Mac.
That last bit is not at all simple, and might not be practical in a holistic core-swap sense. But at the very least, a co-processor node should be doable if Apple so chose to. As I recall, in the 68k->PowerPC era, there were a few instances where the cache board of a 68k machine could be replaced with a PowerPC upgrade board, making it a legit PowerPC compatible Mac. So it's not entirely unheard of.
Thoughts?
I've mentioned that in the PowerPC-Intel transition, there were just over 4 years between the announcement of the transition and shutting out PowerPC machines from the latest OS. For a Mac, 4 years is low on the support life for a new machine, usually the case for a low-end mac only. But in this sentiment, high-end machines were included. Even the PowerMac G5 that was refreshed after the transition announcement would only get about 4 years of support when brand new. That sucks, tho if you were ok with it "just working" on an old version running your non-upgraded software, it's ok. But a high-end PowerMac G5 didn't cost in the 5-figures like the Mac Pro introduced last year. People clamoring for an upgradable machine that could last for 8+ years, like many of the early Mac Pros, aren't getting what they expected. Many here have stated Apple should expect a lawsuit. But there is a solution just for these 2019 Mac Pros.
The Mac Pro is uniquely the only Mac with a full PCIe expansion bus. Thunderbolt puts machines in the realm too, so this can apply to all Macs, but it's a bit out of the scope of my musings. There are already ARM processing nodes in card form elsewhere in the market space. I suspect Apple could create ARM-based processing units for Mac Pros. The goal here is to have these pro systems capable of running ARM tasks via a PCIe expansion board instead of requiring a native ARM main CPU. This would enable testing of universal support for developers as well as upgrading to a new core without abandoning other hardware you've invested in for non-developer digital professionals. I doubt they'll ever do a version of Rosetta that runs ARM code on x86, but I think they could release an expansion board that lets you run ARM code natively on an otherwise x86 machine. The same board may be used to expand the number of processing cores on the next-gen ARM Mac Pro, maybe. The end game could lead to, when the time comes, the main x86 cores of the Mac Pro become just a boot-time artifact and minimal backplane support co-processor, while having userspace (and maybe most of the OS) run from the processors on the expansion board, allowing the Mac Pro investors a good return on their investment in Apple's most expensive Mac.
That last bit is not at all simple, and might not be practical in a holistic core-swap sense. But at the very least, a co-processor node should be doable if Apple so chose to. As I recall, in the 68k->PowerPC era, there were a few instances where the cache board of a 68k machine could be replaced with a PowerPC upgrade board, making it a legit PowerPC compatible Mac. So it's not entirely unheard of.
Thoughts?
6-7 months out it would HAVE to be made, in quantity, and ready to hit the assembly line.
It probably is being currently manufactured. But that doesn't mean Apple is ready to reveal it yet.
Insecure Mac Pro 7,1 owner for 4 months here. Was hoping to get a good 10 years out of it, so while Im exited for ARM, i feel like im getting alot less value for money now.
Particulary as the 2013 Mac Pro I had was doing the job fine, i mainly treated myself with the 7.1 along with the assumption that it would outlive the 2013.
Now im feeling the 2013 and the 2019 will EOL at the same time and wish I had waited.
Particulary as the 2013 Mac Pro I had was doing the job fine, i mainly treated myself with the 7.1 along with the assumption that it would outlive the 2013.
Now im feeling the 2013 and the 2019 will EOL at the same time and wish I had waited.
I know this sucks to hear, but buying any kind of workhorse HEDT/Pro desktop computer and hoping for ten productive years out of it is a pretty wild bet. If you need bleeding-edge computing muscle to do your job today (and why would anyone spend the money on a MP if they didn’t?) it stands to reason you’ll probably need it tomorrow, too.
Ten cumulative years of connectivity upgrades, PCI lane growth, CPU security updates, and raw IPC gains is just ... a lot. Not to mention Apple being Apple and throwing in a wholesale architecture switch to keep you on your toes.
Ten cumulative years of connectivity upgrades, PCI lane growth, CPU security updates, and raw IPC gains is just ... a lot. Not to mention Apple being Apple and throwing in a wholesale architecture switch to keep you on your toes.
The State of the Union session afterwards detailed more performance specifics. They didn't offer any firm details on specific Mac chips, but talked about several reasons why they were going through the transition that could point to future chips.
It was also mentioned that Xcode will build for both Intel and ARM in the same pass out of the box. There's no reason to think Intel will be abandon when Xcode builds both at once.
There's no split code bases. There's no different builds. All one code base. All one build. All one Universal Binary.
They didn't even change the APIs, which means for the most part, ARM and Intel Macs are code compatible with each other.
[automerge]1592941620[/automerge]
My guess is the first ARM Macs will be some sort of A13Z variants. Entry level machines, not Mac Pros. The entry level iMac, MacBook Air, and 13" MacBook Pro have been put forward as options. The entry level iMac right now is basically built on laptop parts anyway.
Apple doesn't need much lead time for that.
Last edited:
I also think they’ll be able to maintain support for Intel OS’s for awhile.
no, its ready for big sur +g*
OpenCore on the Mac Pro
You can check the first few pages of this thread. We posted about how to completely spoof the cMP as iMac Pro at there. Anyway, we just need to spoof the cMP ident for installation. Once Big Sur is installed, we can boot Big Sur with the current OpenCore config and keep the 5,1 ident.
forums.macrumors.com
If Mac Pro on the Apple processor will be hypothetically introduced in 2021, it means that they absolutely already have test samples of such processors and right now they are working on them having ready-made initial options for consumers segment on the shelves.
This is the question of the presentation: they showed how confident they are in what they are doing and they have a clear plan for the future.
The only problem is that we still can’t know how long Intel machines will live without a sense of infringement and inferiority and what kind of improvements to expect exclusively for Silicone.
1000 cores or not the transition from PPC to Intel saw an immediate big performance bump. The new MBPs quickly beat a maxed out Power Mac G5 Quad.
I don't think it's mad to suspect a similar performance boost this time. The iPad Pro is beating most laptops already and if Apple really can scale that up to high end desktops we are looking at something really significant.
I'm a 12-core 7,1 owner myself. It's a big beast of a machine and it won't stop being as powerful as it is in 2 years after the Arm transition. The mega flop that was the Trashcan 6,1 is still being supported in Big Sur. If the 7,1 keeps getting updates well into the late 2020's that's pretty good imo. Maybe they drop support in 2027 (wouldn't be surprised if its later tbh) then I use slightly out of date software for a year or two then it's time tp upgrade to a new Mac Pro anyway...
I really think the staggering amount of Intel Macs in the wild today is nothing like the customer base Apple had in 2006. No way they drop Intel Mac support as quick as they dropped PPC after Leopard.
[automerge]1592947589[/automerge]
I expect a feeling of inferiority almost right away tbh like how the 2006 Mac Pro smoked the Power Mac G5 from the start! But I also expect Intel support to go on longer than PPC support did given both x86 ubiquity the much bigger Mac user base today.
Test Samples =/= Production Silicon (read my posts, I'm not talking about samples).
Exactly, the Intel Mac dev kit was a Power Mac G5 case with some random ATX motherboard and a Pentium 4. No Mac ever shipped with a Pentium 4.
It's little indication of what the real ARM Mac CPUs will be like.
You guys are taking Apple’s word like it’s a promise. Everything mentioned so far is merely a guideline. Considering that most software optimizations promised at WWDC19 have not materialized yet (I’m still waiting for Octane X for my Vega II Duo), it’s going to take double the guideline timeline, to say the least.
For anyone concerned about investing in a Mac Pro (2019) in 2020 — if you have the money, get it. If you’re on a budget, consider an iMac (not iMac Pro). For someone who doesn’t see the value in user aesthetic and usability — build a Windows machine.
Apple Silicon will take over every singe product line within the next 5y — what are you going to do? Wait 5y to find out another leap is around the corner?
For anyone concerned about investing in a Mac Pro (2019) in 2020 — if you have the money, get it. If you’re on a budget, consider an iMac (not iMac Pro). For someone who doesn’t see the value in user aesthetic and usability — build a Windows machine.
Apple Silicon will take over every singe product line within the next 5y — what are you going to do? Wait 5y to find out another leap is around the corner?
The dev kit also lacks Thunderbolt support. I can't imagine this means the future Macs won't have it, just that it's meant as a pre-release development tool. So here's an iPad Pro Mac Mini to test with. Same as the Intel dev kit not being a "real" Mac, but a testing platform.
Now, I feel bad and apologize for perhaps sounding negative, but that was/is a bad strategy to begin with. Sure, if you only plan to run whatever software you have now... ok. But the landscape keeps changing. Technology advances. There is a premium on the very high end. And Mac Pro is already a bit of a joke when it comes to price/perf.
I used to get the high-end stuff when I was younger, before learning my lessons too. Burnt by workstation GPUs. By multiprocessors. In many/most(?) cases, updating cheaper stuff reaps the benefits in a few years and on top of that, lessens the risk that the software or hardware takes a sudden new turn.
As an example, at some point they were selling the pro-level graphics cards and touted how much support one gets and how they get replaced by new ones and whatnot. But if a consumer card is half the price and you can get a new one from downstairs in 5 minutes to continue working, the selling points turned out be rather moot. Sure sure, those lies about drivers...
To be fair, the last several years have been a bit new territory, during which the progress and change have been relatively mild compared to earlier. And yes, PCs have advantage via having components to choose.
I get you and mostly agree. Guess I was under the impression that a 7 year cycle for a Mac Pro was part of the value proposition, based upon the timeline of the last 2 models. It’s pretty hard to justify the expense for many pro users if it’s half that amount of time. I believe the first Intel Mac Pro was approx half of what it costs today including inflation. At that time chip advancements were happening much, much faster and a 3 year old computer was definitely EOL.
So you could say the value proposition on the Mac Pro has been reasonably steady for quite a while. Now we have an entirely new computer thats only been out for 6 months and already devs are asked to start migrating their software away from it.
I wouldn’t have sold my 2013 a few months back if I’d known, it was working fine and would have bridged the upcoming 2 year gap ok.
Last edited:
Not to sound rude, but expecting anything more than a roughly 3-year lifespan on any technology is rather wishful thinking. In recent years performance bumps have been smaller so you could be excused for hoping for five years, but seven? The long updates on Apple's Mac Pro line have had nothing to do with value propositions and everything to do with their rather tepid interest in the "Pro" market. That's why they had to make so much noise about the new Mac Pro and ProDisplay last year, because even they knew they let the previous generation of MP languish wayyyy too long.
I ditched my first Mac Pro after five years, when the newest MacBook Pro available outperformed it. At the time I could have gotten a 5,1 but there were rumors of an update. The 6,1 was a joke to me, no expansion capability, so I ignored it. I thought Apple had totally given up on the pro market, and was pretty frustrated and *very* close to getting a Windows box for the first time in 14 years when they announced the new 7,1. It's the first real "Pro" level Mac since the 5,1. I have since bought two, a 16-core and 28-core. When I made that decision I made sure that I knew they would pay for themselves in three years or less, and I don't expect to keep them longer than that unless forced to.
If you're just a home/hobbyist user and aren't using the MP 7,1 to make your living then I'd suggest skipping it; the value isn't really there for that level of use--it's just priced too high. Of course if you've got the money to burn, it's a beast and a beautiful one at that. I think there will be a strong used market for these last generation of Intel MP's when it's time to sell mine. There will be folks who want them for running legacy MacOS software and those will want them as a workstation for Windows, Linux or whatever they want to roll onto the Intel platform.
I'm fortunate in that I don't have a lot of specialty software I use--if Adobe can get a solid and fast version of Lightroom and Photoshop on an ARM Mac, and I have Microsoft Office, then I'll be fine. I'll happily move to an ARM Mac if it's faster and consumes less power. That said, I do think that we won't see an announced Mac Pro replacement until two years from now--even Apple said two years--and it probably won't ship for longer than that. Unlike the PPC days there's no inherent reason to rush this move by Apple and more downside risk if they do. With the PPC move they were in trouble--no good mobile chips and the world was going mobile back then. No iPhones to save them (although the iPod was saving them somewhat). They had to move or risk totally going out of computer business.
This time it's different. Intel has stalled. AMD is not really a reliable option if you look at their long history. Meanwhile, Apple has built significant prowess in designing and building their own silicon, especially in the highly portable low-power space that continues to dominate computing now and clearly is the future. Intel's options there are stale and quite frankly AMD has been a no-show in that space forever.
The bigger question for me long-term is will Apple even make an effort at the high end or will they decide the return on building a niche chip version for a niche pro workstation market just isn't worth it anymore. I don't think we'll know the answer to that for a few more years. In the meantime I have work to do and the current 7,1 beasts can do it very well. By the time I need something better we should all have a lot more clarity on what Apple is really going to do in the "Pro" space. If they do build something for that space, I do expect that they will make something amazing, just like the current MP 7,1.
I ditched my first Mac Pro after five years, when the newest MacBook Pro available outperformed it. At the time I could have gotten a 5,1 but there were rumors of an update. The 6,1 was a joke to me, no expansion capability, so I ignored it. I thought Apple had totally given up on the pro market, and was pretty frustrated and *very* close to getting a Windows box for the first time in 14 years when they announced the new 7,1. It's the first real "Pro" level Mac since the 5,1. I have since bought two, a 16-core and 28-core. When I made that decision I made sure that I knew they would pay for themselves in three years or less, and I don't expect to keep them longer than that unless forced to.
If you're just a home/hobbyist user and aren't using the MP 7,1 to make your living then I'd suggest skipping it; the value isn't really there for that level of use--it's just priced too high. Of course if you've got the money to burn, it's a beast and a beautiful one at that. I think there will be a strong used market for these last generation of Intel MP's when it's time to sell mine. There will be folks who want them for running legacy MacOS software and those will want them as a workstation for Windows, Linux or whatever they want to roll onto the Intel platform.
I'm fortunate in that I don't have a lot of specialty software I use--if Adobe can get a solid and fast version of Lightroom and Photoshop on an ARM Mac, and I have Microsoft Office, then I'll be fine. I'll happily move to an ARM Mac if it's faster and consumes less power. That said, I do think that we won't see an announced Mac Pro replacement until two years from now--even Apple said two years--and it probably won't ship for longer than that. Unlike the PPC days there's no inherent reason to rush this move by Apple and more downside risk if they do. With the PPC move they were in trouble--no good mobile chips and the world was going mobile back then. No iPhones to save them (although the iPod was saving them somewhat). They had to move or risk totally going out of computer business.
This time it's different. Intel has stalled. AMD is not really a reliable option if you look at their long history. Meanwhile, Apple has built significant prowess in designing and building their own silicon, especially in the highly portable low-power space that continues to dominate computing now and clearly is the future. Intel's options there are stale and quite frankly AMD has been a no-show in that space forever.
The bigger question for me long-term is will Apple even make an effort at the high end or will they decide the return on building a niche chip version for a niche pro workstation market just isn't worth it anymore. I don't think we'll know the answer to that for a few more years. In the meantime I have work to do and the current 7,1 beasts can do it very well. By the time I need something better we should all have a lot more clarity on what Apple is really going to do in the "Pro" space. If they do build something for that space, I do expect that they will make something amazing, just like the current MP 7,1.
Well put. However the value proposition was there (if perhaps in only in hindsight) for the audio community. The 2009 and 2013 machines are still holding their own in the field, at the highest level; im around such setups constantly.
A colleague of mine has un upgraded 2009 MP and uses Logic. I believe it was about 7 years until the latest version of Logic no longer chose to run on the last last OS the machine (officially) supported.
So in this way, i could almost say the reverse that many colleagues would think me an idiot for upgrading every 3 years.
and its a bit weird to budget as if youll only have your system for 3 years when you know you’ll really have it on the dark side of a decade.
I came pretty close to buying a 7,1, but after evaluating my needs I decided the 6,1 made more sense for me. After learning about the transition I'm glad that's the decision I made. If I had a 7,1 now I would be selling it and pick up a 6,1 to tide me over until the Apple Silicon Mac Pro becomes available. No other Mac in recent history will lose as much value as the 7,1 over the next couple years.
I'd wager most of those $40k+ big spend Mac Pro builds are leased by end users, not bought outright.
Loads of tax advantages to leasing over buying. Makes updating to the latest and greatest a lot easier and you avoid the kind of issues you're describing.