Apple’s Mac Pro rethink is a good idea, but will it be good enough?

“Apple’s recent acknowledgment it is planning a design reset on its Mac Pro desktop was a much needed shot in the arm for longtime Apple loyalists,” Tom Mainelli writes for Tech.pinions. “Make no mistake, the company’s decision to go back to the drawing board on its professional desktop has less to do with the bottom line and more to do with pleasing its base, full stop.”

“That said, there is still real money to be made in the desktop market, especially at the high end,” Mainelli writes. “Moreover, there are some interesting personal computing developments happening in this space. Which leads me to wonder: Is Apple’s yet-to-be-revealed Mac Pro rethink going to be ambitious enough?”

“I’d argue there is at least one more reason Apple needs to focus its attention on the desktop,” Mainelli writes. “It’s an area where the company risks falling behind: Design Cachet.”

Read more in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Whatever artwork Apple comes up with, as long as it’s properly extensible, professional Mac users will consider it a masterpiece.

SEE ALSO:
Laggard, trailing Apple needs to catch up HP’s workstation designs – April 7, 2017
Why Apple’s promise of a new ‘modular’ Mac Pro matters so much – April 6, 2017
Apple’s cheese grater Mac Pro was flexible, expandable, and powerful – imagine that – April 6, 2017
More about Apple’s Mac Pro – April 6, 2017
Apple’s desperate Mac Pro damage control message hints at a confused, divided company – April 6, 2017
Who has taken over at Apple? – April 5, 2017
Apple’s embarrassing Mac Pro mea culpa – April 4, 2017
Who’s going to buy a Mac Pro now? – April 4, 2017
Mac Pro: Why did it take Apple so long to wake up? – April 4, 2017
Apple sorry for what happened with the Mac Pro over the last 3+ years – namely, nothing – April 4, 2017
Apple to unveil ‘iMac Pro’ later this year; rethought, modular Mac Pro and Apple pro displays in the pipeline – April 4, 2017
Apple’s apparent antipathy towards the Mac prompts calls for macOS licensing – March 27, 2017
Why Apple’s new Mac Pro might never arrive – March 10, 2017
Dare we hold out hope for the Mac Pro? – March 1, 2017
Apple CEO Cook pledges support to pro users, says ‘we don’t like politics’ at Apple’s annual shareholders meeting – February 28, 2017
Yes, I just bought a ‘new’ Mac Pro (released on December 19, 2013 and never updated) – January 4, 2017
Attention, Tim Cook! Apple isn’t firing on all cylinders and you need to fix it – January 4, 2017
No, Apple, do not simplify, get better – December 23, 2016
Rare video shows Steve Jobs warning Apple to focus less on profits and more on great products – December 23, 2016
Marco Arment: Apple’s Mac Pro is ‘very likely dead’ – December 20, 2016
How Tim Cook’s Apple alienated Mac loyalists – December 20, 2016
Apple’s not very good, really quite poor 2016 – December 19, 2016
Apple’s software has been anything but ‘magical’ lately – December 19, 2016
Lazy Apple. It’s not hard to imagine Steve Jobs asking, ‘What have you been doing for the last four years?’ – December 9, 2016
Rush Limbaugh: Is Apple losing their edge? – December 9, 2016
AirPods: MIA for the holidays; delayed product damages Apple’s credibility, stokes customer frustration – December 9, 2016
Apple may have finally gotten too big for its unusual corporate structure – November 28, 2016
Apple has no idea what they’re doing in the TV space, and it’s embarrassing – November 3, 2016
Apple’s disgracefully outdated, utterly mismanaged Mac lineup is killing sales – October 13, 2016
Apple takes its eye off the ball: Why users are complaining about Apple’s software – February 9, 2016
Open letter to Tim Cook: Apple needs to do better – January 5, 2015

93 Comments

  1. The irony is the “magical design” has existed for years – it’s called a “tower.” Unless the paradigm of PCIe slots, USB & TB ports, video cards, RAM slots, disc burners & backup devices (LTO), etc. changes I just don’t see why the design must change. It seems anything else will just make another interconnected mess as it does with the current cobwebbed & non-upgradeable 2013 Mac Pro using AMD cards few pros want.

    1. Plus it depends on how promptly they deliver. Historically, the G4 “Yikes!” Took only 9 months. Matching that today (with today’s greater resources) means a new Mac Pro by Christmas 2017. Not 2018.

      -hh

      1. If Apple’s smart they will surprise and deliver sooner than later. People and pros tire of these Apple dead ends, games and excessive revision time that should’ve started at LEAST a year ago. If they end up delivering something again that doesn’t fill the bill I fear Apple will have conceded a large part of the pro market to Windows or Hackintosh. Apple Wait + Apple Tax is not a viable or tenable situation regardless of any macOS advantages.

        At any rate I surely hope somewhere in Cupertino a Bunsen burner has been turned up maximum high under the Mac Pro team’s ample derriere.

        1. Hackinsosh will never be an alternative. As a professional, stability is more important than speed. Being down tinkering does not pay the bills, working slow, at least you get to bill clients.

          In the past I have seen Apple deliver under pressure, so I expect we will see a viable solution sooner rather than later.

        2. “At any rate I surely hope somewhere in Cupertino a Bunsen burner has been turned up maximum high under the Mac Pro team’s ample derriere.”

          Now that, is well said!

        3. “If they end up delivering something again that doesn’t fill the bill I fear Apple will have conceded a large part of the pro market to Windows or Mackintosh.”

          If Apple ends up delivering something as bad at “filling the bill” as the 2013 Mac Pro (or even worse), then Apple will cede almost all pro work to Windows or Linux. The current Mac professionals won’t give Apple a third chance at a real pro design (which likely would not happen until 2020, if ever). The Mac Pro world will be dead. There will be no coming back from such a catastrophe.

          Conversely, if Apple delivers a truly state of the art machine with professional level flexibility and updatability along updated macOS and applications, we could be looking at a strong revival of the Mac Pro lines.

    2. Similarly, Apple needs to eschew soldered RAM and technologies that make user upgrades difficult or impossible. All Macs should be easily and inexpensively upgraded.

      1. I disagree. Only a small percentage of users upgrade anything on there computers. Now I am not advocating to not having an upgradable solution, but not all Macs need to be upgradable. I do agree that the Mac Mini, the iMac and the MacPro should be upgradable to en extent. Possibly being able to swap storage, ram and GPU if possible. But laptops, I don’t agree with you.

        1. Maybe some people wouldn’t upgrade their Macs themselves, but that is no reason that many people couldn’t upgrade if they so desired.

          Also, your argument that only a limited number of Mac models be user upgradable is illogical and nonsensical.

          1. Here is your explanation for his (and Apple’s) argument.

            I bought my iMac five years ago. When I bought it, I got it with 16GB of RAM. I have never needed to upgrade anything on it (yet).

            In my office, I have a Mac Mini. Also 16GB of RAM. About four years old. Also two MBPs; one is five years old. 16GB of RAM originally. Neither of these were ever upgraded.

            For all these Macs, time will soon come to be replaced with newer models. And for none of them did I have the need to upgrade (even though all of them are fairly upgradable, especially when it comes to memory and HD).

            If non-upgradable hardware makes manufacturing simpler and cheaper (and it does), then I’d take cheaper and simpler computer over more expensive and more complicated (more likely to fail) any day. Also, while at it, no optical drive either for me. I don’t want to pay for something I never use (two out of the four Macs above have the optical drive, and I’m not sure I had ever put a disc inside in the five years that I had them).

            The problem is, vast majority of Mac users are likely like me, and they prefer cheaper and simpler over more expensive and more complex. If it is a laptop, lighter is better than heavier, so removing that DVD drive that is never used is a good move.

            I don’t know where this leaves the high-end, high-demand pro users. Let us hope the new Mac Pro does meet all of your demands, so that there again IS a Mac for everyone.

        2. “But laptops, I don’t agree with you.”

          just curios, you don’t think someone who bought 8 GB Macbook and then decided (maybe when he had use more high end apps) he needed 16 GB it won’t be helpful to him if the RAM was upgradable? You don’t think it’s also useful to be able to drop in bigger drives when they become cheaper?

        3. Totally disagree. ALL MACS SHOULD BE UPGRADEABLE. The percentage of users that take advantage is a useless metric.

          If I want to upgrade I don’t give a rat’s ass how many agree with me…

          1. Right, because you run Apple and that is that. Fuck the numbers Apple, base your business decisions on what GoeB says. He knows because he has run numerous companies with hundreds of billions in sales and handled the attendant supply chain. No fucking problem, right? And Cook is a dumbass because he’s gay and advocates for those pushed down and taken advantage of. Hey, GoeB, if you go Windows, you can build the piece of shit from ground up so go do it. PS, drag the POS botwidick with you.

            1. ?????

              (posting this with a different handle as I don’t want a flame war with unstable people)

              @buzzy1955

              if a person drove a car and complained that the car seats are uncomfortable and says “darn, I wish (Toyota, Ford, or whatever) had made the seats wider … he can do that, he does NOT have had to run a ‘ a company with billions in sales like the car company’ to have that opinion, like wise with Mac Pro…

              . We as users have a right to say stuff about products and those us of which are many who are AAPL INVESTORS (like me) can also complain about how the company is run . (Investors OWN the company… )

              I scanned through GeoB’s posts and I can’t see any ‘anti gay’ stuff at all. I’m a social liberal but it cheeses me off when people throw the ‘gay’ ( OR prosecuted white, Jew, Black) etc card to shut discourse. What I’m saying is that let’s get off the idiocy where you can no longer criticize somebody just because he’s gay etc. We should be ‘colour blind’ and that goes BOTH WAYS – no advantage to anybody.

              ” Hey, GoeB, if you go Windows, you can build the piece of shit from ground up so go do it.”
              Almost ALL the complainers about the MP here are long time Apple users, we are the ones who will spend $5000 or more on a Mac . We are justifiably complaining that the MP has been neglected and has a poor design (BOTH ISSUES were ADMITTED recently by Apple SVPs THEMSELVES !! So are they ‘gay’ haters too? ).

              If we go Windows it’s because Apple dropped the ball in providing what we need. The MP has not been updated since 2013 (and can’t have it’s GPU upgraded) , so if they fail on their promise to build another tower (as they have failed from the recent promise to drop cylinder prices — the top Cylinders are STILL unavailable on the Apple store) do we JUST KEEP TO APPLE — that’s kind of stupid ain’t it?

          2. I disagree. Not all Macs need to be upgradeable by the end user (or a 3rd party shop to which the user takes it).

            The higher end machine of each segment of the Mac line, yes. Those need to be upgradeable. The low end, no.

            Let’s take just one example: the iMac line. There are currently six different base configurations: two with HD screens, one with 4K screens, and three with 5K screens. There are build to order options with every one of those sub segments. Virtually 100% of the people who buy the HD screen variants are going to order the iMac with the build to order options they want and never (yes, never) even think about upgrading them until they think it is time to get a new one. The same goes for the vast majority of the people that will buy the 4K iMacs.

            The 5K iMacs are different. Those are bought by “prosumers” and lower range professionals. The majority of those individuals will want to upgrade their iMac in a couple years when faster SSDs are cheap or their work/hobby takes them to new levels of capabilities and this needs a more capable machine. Yes, many will buy the very top of the line build to order 5K iMac and never think about upgrading it, but those people are not in the majority.

            The same could easily be said for the MacBook Pro line.

            The exception is the Mac Pro line. Every one of the sub lines of the Mac Pro line needs to be upgradeable by the users. The fact that the “current” (and I use that term extremely loosely) 2013 Mac Pro barely upgradeable (and only in specific, limited ways) is THE biggest failure of that machine. It is even a bigger failure than the fact that it ships today with nearly four year old technology.

            1. I respect your well reasoned arguments.

              Possibly my point was a bit naive and pie in the sky wishful thinking.

              That said, my basic point was if you buy any Mac and something goes awry or something better comes along, it would be advantageous to upgrade parts rather than buy a new machine.

              I tend to believe that upgrade exclusivity should trickle down from the pro market, but I could be wrong …

            2. The main argument against upgradability is price and complexity (and for portables, weight).

              I have two 5-year old Macs that came with optical drives (yes, that old!). I don’t know if these drives actually work; never even tried to find out. In five years, those optical drives (one on an iMac, the other on MBP) have collected dust inside my Macs. From my point of view, that is obviously a colossal waste of money (and additional weight, for the MBP) for a feature I hever ever used.

              Eliminating optical drive enabled Apple to make simpler, lighter, smaller and cheaper computers. Same logic goes for eliminating the complexity needed for user upgradable RAM or HD. Why expend engineering effort, increase manufacturing complexity, total number of parts, total number of possible points of failure, if nobody really bothers to use the feature?

              For the high-end pro models, I completely agree. That is the market segment that has always seen significantly higher rate of user upgrades (although even that isn’t saying much, and I’m sure even there, those rates were still quite small). If the device costs $3,000, and that upgradability increases cost by about $40, Apple could presumably absorb that cost without a meaningful impact on the bottom line. After all, how many Mac Pros do they really sell in the end? It is a sliver of their Mac product line anyway.

            3. I don’t want to pay for a feature I never use. Most users don’t. Upgradable RAM or HD adds complexity (and, for portables, weight), and price.

              I much prefer cheaper, simpler, lighter MBP, as I (and many others) will never consider upgrading anything until my MBP is ready for a replacement.

            4. See…this where cynic becomes part of my name. IMO, at Apple’s premium, you are paying for it, just not getting it…

              Yes, I think it ought to come out of their premium. Classic buyer/seller negotiation.

        4. That may be true, but given that, it wouldn’t matter either way, so why not leave the option open? The ‘average’ user will never notice, but to the pro, it’s a smack in the face and wallet. Soldering in components was a big mistake, IMHO.

          1. Apple claims they are the sole purveyors of sophisticated technologies; however, if Apple was the leader in consumer technology Apple ought to be Apple to design Macs that are easily upgraded.

  2. Cylinder MP misguided design, no up date since 2013, they say they will drop price yet high end models still not available on website, (btw off the shelf PC video cards more than 3 times faster than the highest end D700) ….

    Then we read about the new Campus TREES. How they were already working on it 5 years ago, how they hired the top arborists to scour the USA for proper trees — they want mature specimens for example –thousands of trees, how they bought orchards to store the trees and set up nurseries . They were so determined (cost is No object ) they caused a tree shortage! etc etc.

    do people (like my flamers who say Apple management is ‘too stretched, not enough resources’ etc ) see the disconnect with priorities ?

    1. No doubt there has been many major decision making screweps in the past few years… the list is long.

      But i doubt the hardware/software engeeniers , managers, department heards are the ones worrying about the threes.

      I dont see disconect with priorities… i just see screwed up, misguided priorities… and i see laziness and complacency and overinflated egos ( the ives gold leafed book ..a perfect example….
      Funny how much respect i have lost for this guy over this gloating fiasco )

      1. “But i doubt the hardware/software engeeniers , managers, department heards are the ones worrying about the threes.”

        oo7 I usually agree with your posts but did you see…..

        Apple’s Official Jony Ive Bio:

        “Jony is responsible for all design at Apple, including the look and feel of Apple hardware, user interface, packaging, major architectural projects such as Apple Campus 2 and Apple’s retail stores, as well as new ideas and future initiatives.”

        MAJOR ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS SUCH AS THE APPLE CAMPUS 2

        Reports show that Ive and team are so into the Campus the architects are complaining. One said the tolerances they want for DOORS is so fine the doors will stick when they expand.

        1. thinking about trees:

          Jony’s official Apple bio also lists his responsibilities for Apple Stores and one of the biggest changes to the new Stores are trees. Apparently he agonized over their choice and precise placement.
          ( I don’t fault him working on the Stores as they are important to Apple )

          Also for his own personal project he spent a lot of effort on the Christmas Tree at Claridge’s together with his pal and Apple part time employee the designer Marc Newson. The whole Christmas scene was rigged with animatronics.
          Ive’s statement on the tree: “There are few things more pure and beautiful than nature, so that was our starting point, layering various iterations of organic forms with technology”

          For the Campus Ive thought it important enough that his work on the Campus was officially recorded on his Apple page. I have a suspicion with his obsessiveness (on things he likes like the Campus) he would have spent a lot of time on the landscaping aspect, he wouldn’t have wanted the whole thing to be spoilt by poor landscaping .

          (Note though initially in my first post i was just making a point that Apple management IN GENERAL — not Ive in particular — seems to be not focused on some product priorities. if all the PRODUCT issues at Apple from TV remote, to Cloud etc were fixed I wouldn’t be complaining so much for them spending so much time on the other stuff).

        2. “Reports show that Ive and team are so into the Campus the architects are complaining. One said the tolerances they want for DOORS is so fine the doors will stick when they expand.”
          Totally a non-story. Thermal expansion is one of the most understood engineering disciplines. If zero tolerance, airtight hatches on the space station withstanding temperatures ranging from -250 to +250 F…then engineering doors in a building with constant air conditioning control…is a piece of cake. Any expansion is taken up in the frame enclosure clamps, just like the two half tonne glass doors in the side of my house in full sun. It’s not an issue to any competent engineer…my business.

          1. Reuters also spoke to former architect on the project German de la Torre, and dozens of others on the project.

            Reuters Feb 2017:
            “Apple seeks design perfection at new ‘spaceship’ campus


            Tolerances, the distance materials may deviate from desired measurements, were a particular focus. On many projects, the standard is 1/8 of an inch at best; Apple often demanded far less, even for hidden surfaces.

            The company’s keen design sense enhanced the project, but its expectations sometimes clashed with construction realities, a former architect said.

            “With phones, you can build to very, very minute tolerances,” he said. “You would never design to that level of tolerance on a building. Your doors would jam.”

            —-
            Fanatical attention to detail is a key tenet. Early in construction, Apple managers told the construction team that the ceiling – composed of large panels of polished concrete – should be immaculate inside and out, just as the inside of the iPhone’s audio jack is a finished product, a former construction manager recalled.

            Thus, each of the thousands of ceiling panels had to win approval from both Apple’s in-house team and the general contractor, once at the shop and then again at the construction site.

            “The things you can’t see, they all mattered to Apple,” the former construction manager said

            One of the most vexing features was the doorways, which Apple wanted to be perfectly flat, with no threshold. The construction team pushed back, but Apple held firm.

            The rationale? If engineers had to adjust their gait while entering the building, they risked distraction from their work, according to a former construction manager.

            “We spent months trying not to do that because that’s time, money and stuff that’s never been done before,” the former construction manager said.

            Time and time again, Apple managers spent months perfecting minute features, creating a domino effect that set back other parts of the project, former construction managers say.


            DOOR HANDLES:

            When Apple tapped general contractors Holder Construction and Rudolph & Sletten to finish the main building in 2015, one of the first orders of business was finalizing a door handle for conference rooms and offices.

            After months of back and forth, construction workers presented their work to a manager from Apple’s in-house team, who turned the sample over and over in his hands. Finally, he said he felt a faint bump.

            The construction team double-checked the measurements, unable to find any imperfections – down to the nanometer. Still, Apple insisted on another version.

            The construction manager who was so intimately involved in the door handle did not see its completion. Down to his last day, Apple was still fiddling with the design – after a year and a half of debate.”

            ——-

            I guess you know more than the architects there (I’m just quoting what I;ve read in many articles on the Campus) , and anyhow is there any debate Apple management is spending an inordinate amount of time of the Campus while the MP is from 2013 and all the other stuff?

            1. I don’t understand your point. If Apple wants things done their way regarding all ielements of the building project, it’s their right. How is that any different to their philosophy and standards regarding say, the iPhone?
              And since when did Apple ever ‘not’ do what everyone else says is impossible? Just because Reuters(a renowned Apple naysayer) quotes a ‘former’ architect’s opinion on tolerances 1/16th” v 1/8th”, it in no way invalidates Apple’s approach. Further quoting others concerned with the project that they “kicked back” against Apple’s demands, would have been a red rag to a bull moment to SJ. He would have had none of it, only he wouldn’t have been polite about it.
              Where is the problem?

            2. you don’t understand?
              maybe you should read my first post?

              I’m saying they are spending such inordinate amounts of time on the Campus while letting their PRODUCTS like Mac Pro languish so much so that their SVPs had TO APOLOGIZE RECENTLY FOR FAILING TO UPDATE IT. (this is very unusual and the first time they take about a future product without a launch model or prototype etc).

              The MP has not been updated since 2013. And Apple marketed to pros and people buying into their marketing spiel have spent thousands in the eco-system and their livelihoods (them , their staff, families) depend on getting their hardware. Until two weeks ago Apple didn’t put in a timeline, didn’t inform whether they would discontinue the desktops etc (so pros couldn’t even figure out a strategy — do they go windows, retrain staff etc) and they have numerous other issues from the Apple TV remote, siri, Home automation, fading education market etc — and yet they have time to fiddle with the Campus to such standards. They are not in th business of making BUILDINGS but COMPUTING DEVICES — and their customers are frustrated, get that now?

              as for downing Reuters, up to you, Iike I I said I’m just quoting the report , I guess you know more than those several dozen people they say they interviewed who worked on the project including one of the main architects (plus numerous other articles that echo the same points).. You must point me to your several billion dollar work.

              I’m not really finicking about ‘doors’ (just using it as example as they were mentioned in the articles – i didn’t make it up), my main complaint based on the reports on the Campus is that Apple is spending so much time on the things like the building while they have so many issues like : the MP, the Mini, TV remote, Siri, Education sector fading to 10% while Chromebooks climb to 50-60%, Siri, Home automation etc. etc left unattended (and too many people have defended them saying they don’t have ‘enough resources’ etc) . Get my point now?

            3. To take 3.5 years to finally figure the future path of the 2013 Mac Pro was untenable (something many pros have known since day one) means there is something seriously wrong with their neglected or ignored Apple roadmap ahead. (Must have been driven by one of Apple’s self-driving cars merely nodding pleasantly & mindlessly to the scenery it’s passing while ignoring the fact the road is a dead end with a deep chasm dead ahead and applying the brakes hard at the last second.)

            4. Apple is still beholden to their stockholders … and gratuitously excessive requirements which fail to unambiguously highlight the benefit for their higher cost is a hallmark of very, very bad engineering: someone needs to have their P.E. License revoked. Seriously.

            5. “The rationale? If engineers had to adjust their gait while entering the building, they risked distraction from their work, according to a former construction manager.”

              If your engineers are that easily distracted (by a DOOR THRESHOLD?) what in Gods’ name would make anyone think they could design ANYTHING!

  3. How can a company that’s used to building desktops mess up if they really want to build a great pro desktop computer. All Apple would have to do is fall back to the old cheese-grater model and upgrade the components to the latest and greatest. Imagine stuffing a couple of NVidia Titan XPs in that thing.

    The sky is the limit for Apple unless Jony Ive wants to put his “thin” design touches on the coming MacPro. Seriously, the technology is already out there and all Apple has to do is use it. Already admitting they completely messed up with the trashcan MacPro shows they have half a clue.

      1. Or … as Pablo implied ‘Good designers borrow & Great designers steal.’

        There are lots of great workstations out there than run reliably for years. Review them all and copy the best, plus some innovation thrown in from the Apple team.

    1. All it would take is one other major mistake – like not supporting Nvidia cards – for the Mac Pro to continue to languish. A total nonstarter. By emphasizing AMD Apple shows us they are not listening to the pros. It’s truly maddening.

      I’d love Cher to step up to Cook, Schiller, Cue, Ive & Co. and deliver this stinging rebuke:

          1. The Irish harridan shines through, and the Cherokee adds blush to it. I enjoy that peterblood71 offers this correction to Apple’s lapses symbolised by a clearheaded woman excoriating a muddleheaded man.

    2. Not an unprecedented idea. The minute Steve Jobs came back to Apple, he repackaged existing Mac tech in a new stylish case, sold it as an iMac, and had a financial hit on their hands. No real technical innovation needed – just satisfying the customers who had grown tired of brown, square “Macintosh 5770” products. This bought Apple time to re-factor corporate structure, and begin work on the next thing (iPod).

      Apple would really benefit from a similar approach on the Pro Mac users. Stuff existing components in a new (but conventional) chasis which allows user expansion and customization, put a bunch of IO ports on it, and let their users get back to work. Shouldn’t take longer than 7-8 months to pull this off,

      This will buy Apple the time/goodwill they need to spend a year or two making the Pro Mac that they really want to make (you know, with “exquisite chamfored edges” or something).

      1. Exactly. Pros don’t need to be wowed by innovation or lured with marketing magic. You already have us, for God’s sake. Just revive the cheese grater and pack it with firecrackers, and quietly make it available, without ceremony. Try not to make everything you do better than sliced bread just to prove your mojo to yourselves in front of a mirror.

      2. Not a bad idea. Also, they could update the trash can with the latest innards immediately, no? If not, would prove how wonderfully expandable the model is. Probably not a good idea. No one at this point wants to buy a computer reminder of Apple’s years old ignorance of Pros in favor of design worship.

        “This will buy Apple the time/goodwill they need to spend a year or two making the Pro Mac that they really want to make (you know, with “exquisite chamfored edges” or something).”

        I hope they don’t make the same mistake TWICE and TOO LONG … 🐰🐣

  4. Peter, Dave, Jimbo and Mag7 — you guys (assuming) have been at the forefront of the PRO PUSH since the beginning of Apple malaise under Cook.

    Keep it up and fingers crossed we will see the finest and most powerful expandable desktop computers EVER made!

    Sorry Jony, I don’t give a rat’s ass what they look like …

        1. They are both trying to be pragmatic about the realities (as they see it) of the market for computers. They are peering into the future a little bit, and helpfully explaining to us why we ought to lower our expectations.

          That is all well and good, but they neglect what I believe are the main points. — namely, that high-end Macs are indispensible in the ecosystem that Apple has established; and that those who work with these machines are passionate, not coldly rational.

          There is a spectrum of use cases for computers, and five per cent form a leadership caste that vitalises all the rest. Eliminate that group of superusers and developers, and you degrade the entire rainbow.

          When you go to sharpen or replace your tools and the shop is unexpectedly boarded up, or your supplier on holiday.. You respond emotionally — dismay, worry, anger. Your livelihood is disrespected, your trust ruined.

            1. The word construct is simply delightful, wonderful and incredibly insightful at times. Unfortunately, this is not one of them.

              Speaking for others is HER opinion, nothing more. Although I certainly respect the right to express yourself … ✌️

            2. Predrag is verbose, so I have captured more of his intent than from other commenters. Thelonious’s viewpoints are meticulously articulated. What I boiled them down to is a fatalism, an idea that Apple and the rest (for better or worse) follow some sort of destined path of technological and sociological progress, one that we all had better get accustomed to. I don’t go along with that. Like you (I imagine) loyalty counts for something and ought to be acknowledged, and if not, defection to the other side is to be expected, the path paved by bitterness. As professionals we still have clout in the marketplace, as much or more than the braindead millenials they seemed to be counting on, until just the other day..

            3. Their fatalism is NOT our future. Glad to read you agree. As long as I have a voice will continue to remind Apple to serve ALL customers with the finest products. Bean counters and status youths deserve the same level as legacy loyal consumers that have been around forever and depend on Apple for a professional living …

            4. That’s the problem with proportional representation without weighting — you get these weird outputs. Agreed that bean counters should not drive the process. Their findings are informative, little more. Command decisions based on solid intel remain the focus of strong leadership, the pivots of history.

  5. I was very pleased to see the news of new nVidia drivers for the Mac. I hope this relates to a new Apple Mac Pro product. If not, I’ll wait until I can use it in a Hackintosh.

  6. That is way too long. Apple should just ship a Hackintosh.

    Go to HP or one of the better PC makers, order half a million units, replace the exterior plastic, write whatever drivers are needed, and then ship. That should take a month at most.

    Then when they FINALLY remember how to make their own tower, ship that.

  7. Apple already said it is not happening in 2017. But the fact that Apple has reached out to the professional community and has gotten feedback on what they want means it will be a very special Mac Pro when it does come out. I think this one will be something that will stand out if they really absorb the feedback in the design. Don’t rush it, that could lead to poor quality and poor performance. They look like they are really serious about this because Apple is usually hush, hush, on anything they build. But this they have openly made a video and admitted they need to listen, admitted they need until 2018 to bring out the best. I think they will do just that. Hackintosh? you can do that yourself but what you will end up with is a miss mosh of whatever that won’t work well. That’s not the answer.

        1. The design is interesting but that’s my take on it as well – it can still be too small and that’s what I’m afraid of with Apple. Or building a small but better connected box again that still radiants out to peripherals yet Apple charges for the small box about the same price or more what just a single tower could easily manage, all in. And THEN you still need to buy peripherals on top of a premium Mac Pro purchase. This doesn’t work me either. Pros ain’t lookin’ for small and tiny tighty tidy.

          It’s so no-brainer how to build it and I don’t know why they would pursue a anything close to the same direction that might trip them up again. It’s like a moth to an overly-designed & over-thought flame. I hope they “get it.”

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.