Mac pro and XDR display orders available now + unboxing

[mr moose]

23 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

Apple was part of the PowerPC initiative. The other two that was part of the AIM alliance were simply the manufacturers.

So they had even less reason to move away from it and still did.

[Mira Yurizaki]

Just now, mr moose said:

So they had even less reason to move away from it and still did.

At that point there was likely no reason for Apple to remain. They were a prime customer for the parts, but IBM and Motorola (who I think was just a footnote in the alliance by mid 2000s) couldn't deliver. Not to mention it was largely formed to combat WinTel.

 

There was also no real contractual obligation between the parties, as far as I can tell.

[Kilrah]

  

11 minutes ago, sneazzy95 said:

Maybe there's a reason that we don't know 

 

Maybe the Intel kickbacks so high that 1 million free AMD CPUs couldn't make up for them. (text version)

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, Kilrah said:

  

 

Maybe the Intel kickbacks so high that 1 million free AMD CPUs couldn't make up for them. (text version)

Sounds like we won’t be seeing an AMD mac for a while then.

[Bombastinator]

3 hours ago, Thaldor said:

Given that Apples recent track record for compatibility and openness is well... Mac Minis complete disassembly = upgradeable memory (while yes, it's upgradeable, but no, that's a lot of work to upgrade the one and only part that you can upgrade) and storage has gone from partially proprietary to completely proprietary (from having only the proprietary connector to completely incompatible with anything that doesn't have T2-chip and proprietary connector) and soldering everything and anything possible.

 

I don't say Apple couldn't do it but I will wait for a lot more knowledge and facts before saying that Apple has done complete 180-degree turn and brought completely freely upgradeable and tinkerable computer to the market when their current track record is closing all of that completely out from their devices.

I have highlighted the problem part. Mac Pro hasn't been freely upgradeable for such a long time that I wouldn't be surprised if the 2019 Mac Pro has some kind of "precautions to ensure complete Apple® Experience®". That you need to have right firmware or whatever BS that doesn't really change anything else than tell the computer that "I'm bought from Apple, you may use me" does mean that the computer isn't freely upgradeable, it does mean you can upgrade it a lot cheaper if you know what you are doing but if you don't be ready to pay Apple® iTax® for that upgrade.

 

Considering the upper point of Apple going even more closed and proprietary than the last time they made other than Mac Trashcan, I wouldn't be surprised if the SATA-ports on 2019 Mac Pro would be somehow locked.

 

I don't hope things are this, but I wouldn't be surprised if they were. More or less I hope that Apple would finally pull their head out of their walled asshole and make a computer that isn't expensive as fuck and outdated HW-wise in couple of years because their upgradeability is basicly "buy a new, more expensive one". Apples late developments just don't give much hope for that, more or less they have done such a things that the very thing would look like a miracle, and even if it looks like they are doing it, I still play the "fox tail in their armpit"-card and hope that I am wrong. Apple at the year 2019 just doesn't look like a company that would make basicly a PC that every other company makes that you can do whatever you want to do without making Apples wallet fatter with every step you take.

 

If you can walk to any store, buy any AMD GPU (without anything special "made for Mac"-tags or anything), go home, take the GPU out of the box and without any tinkering (no flashing the firmware, no touching to the MacOS or UEFI, no anything just) slam it into a Mac Pro and after installing drivers after the GPU is inside the Mac, it works, you can paint me impressed by the parkour Apple has made with one product.

Apple has developed a serious right to repair problem.  It’s pretty common in the industry as a whole though.  Can’t go after apple alone for it or it would put them at a competitive disadvantage they can’t afford.  I support right to repair, but it has to be applied universally.

[Bombastinator]

42 minutes ago, Blademaster91 said:

Besides the lower TDP, higher IPC, more cores,and lower price there's no reason for them to use Epyc?

And Intel is having some security vulnerability almost every month,so AMD would actually be more secure.

Heh.  Maybe.  Part of the issue seems to be that intel instituted a bunch of security features that had AMD beat stupid but some of them are falling.  I’m not sure that makes them less secure so much as less more secure.  Whether it is enough to ACTUALLY make them less secure in total is another question.

[mr moose]

14 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

  

 

Maybe the Intel kickbacks so high that 1 million free AMD CPUs couldn't make up for them. (text version)

Adoredtv is not a valid source for anything.   He's just a troll who would unfairly denigrate anyone for a few clicks. 

 

 

 

[MintyCMS_]

MKBHD made his video on it a couple days ago!

[Thaldor]

10 minutes ago, Bombastinator said:

Apple has developed a serious right to repair problem.  It’s pretty common in the industry as a whole though.  Can’t go after apple alone for it or it would put them at a competitive disadvantage they can’t afford.  I support right to repair, but it has to be applied universally.

At least my point has quite little to do with right to repair, it does come close but not that close. More of the point is that earlier Apple has had quite a wall around their garden that has holes in it but mostly Apple wants to have their little furry hands over anything that may touch Macs and thinking that the new Mac Pro would basicly has an open gate to that garden is pretty crazy optimistic thinking. Like you could go and buy the cheapest Mac Pro and upgrade it to be the most expensive or even better by using parts that Apple doesn't provide and get a cut from and all that without any restrictions except having support (RAM speeds, CPU socket and other normal limitations that any PC has) and having drivers for them. That would be crazy parkour moves for Apple since the closest they have come for something like that is to have some socketed components in iMac Pro and Mac Mini which both need almost complete disassemblies to be changed (in comparison to early 2000's iMacs which had a lid hold by couple of screws through which you could take out the 2 RAM sticks and put other ones in).

[Bombastinator]

1 minute ago, Thaldor said:

At least my point has quite little to do with right to repair, it does come close but not that close. More of the point is that earlier Apple has had quite a wall around their garden that has holes in it but mostly Apple wants to have their little furry hands over anything that may touch Macs and thinking that the new Mac Pro would basicly has an open gate to that garden is pretty crazy optimistic thinking. Like you could go and buy the cheapest Mac Pro and upgrade it to be the most expensive or even better by using parts that Apple doesn't provide and get a cut from and all that without any restrictions except having support (RAM speeds, CPU socket and other normal limitations that any PC has) and having drivers for them. That would be crazy parkour moves for Apple since the closest they have come for something like that is to have some socketed components in iMac Pro and Mac Mini which both need almost complete disassemblies to be changed (in comparison to early 2000's iMacs which had a lid hold by couple of screws through which you could take out the 2 RAM sticks and put other ones in).

So right-to-repair AND walled garden (the “i wasn’t talking about rich to repair!” Thing I reject.  You were.

 

The walled garden thing is an outlook thing.  Some hate the walled garden.  Some love it. I fall kind of in the middle myself.  I think the walled garden is a hard thing to maintain, it has crack in it that compromise its value, and it has a serious size issue.  I wouldn’t say they should necessarily abandon it though.

[mr moose]

4 minutes ago, Thaldor said:

At least my point has quite little to do with right to repair, it does come close but not that close. More of the point is that earlier Apple has had quite a wall around their garden that has holes in it but mostly Apple wants to have their little furry hands over anything that may touch Macs and thinking that the new Mac Pro would basicly has an open gate to that garden is pretty crazy optimistic thinking. Like you could go and buy the cheapest Mac Pro and upgrade it to be the most expensive or even better by using parts that Apple doesn't provide and get a cut from and all that without any restrictions except having support (RAM speeds, CPU socket and other normal limitations that any PC has) and having drivers for them. That would be crazy parkour moves for Apple since the closest they have come for something like that is to have some socketed components in iMac Pro and Mac Mini which both need almost complete disassemblies to be changed (in comparison to early 2000's iMacs which had a lid hold by couple of screws through which you could take out the 2 RAM sticks and put other ones in).

They still won't let you use Nvidia unless it is through windows through bootcamp,  Other GPU's can't be installed along side the MPX (with exception's I linked to he apple article earlier) and apple still heavily control which third party drivers work.  Which basically reduces the "install your own GPU" argument to , specific models with our permission and you can't use mac os with nvidia at all.

 

In reality I don't see any great strides toward this new model of user upgradable. 

[Thaldor]

7 minutes ago, mr moose said:

They still won't let you use Nvidia unless it is through windows through bootcamp,  Other GPU's can't be installed along side the MPX (with exception's I linked to he apple article earlier) and apple still heavily control which third party drivers work.  Which basically reduces the "install your own GPU" argument to , specific models with our permission and you can't use mac os with nvidia at all.

 

In reality I don't see any great strides toward this new model of user upgradable. 

I'm too lazy at the moment to look for what you have mentioned in other article but I kind of keep some hope alive that Apple had done at least a small move towards upgradeability. After all the Mac Pro has alongside of those two MPX connectors 4x 8-pin and 1x 6-pin "AUX" connectors (those 4 are close to the MPX connectors and the 6-pin one is above them) and they are already selling power cable kit for them. so there is hope that you can skip the part where you buy the probably so much overpriced MPX models and just stick GPUs bought with less taxed prices elsewhere and stick them in. And I count that as a huge leap towards more open Apple, they could have just as easily leave the "AUX" (probably just PCI-e power) connectors out and fanboys would have still screamed that "you can upgrade your Mac Pro".

And I still wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of firmware/UEFI/other artificial blocks in place to prevent people from just going and sticking something like Radeon VIIs to the Mac Pro without tinkering with them first to get the Mac Pro accept them.

 

Also huge minus is that while the SATA-ports are completely normal, the power plug meant for them is Apple proprietary 10-pin connector and there basicly isn't any mounting place for HDDs/SSDs without building/buying a rig for them.

 

And I would guess Nvidia is just pleased that Apple doesn't want their GPUs. Considering that Apple quite probably scalped Nvidia in the past with older Mac Pros with their EFI/firmware rigging and blocking just any Quadro GPUs from working and forcing people (who didn't know better) to buy the GPUs from Apple with higher prices. It's a minus for consumers but the walled garden is the walled garden, either people get fed by it and force it down or people are just something enough not to care and continue piling money in it.

And quite specifically if you have brain power, reason, time and patience to think whether Nvidia or AMD GPU is better for you, you kind of aren't Apples most wanted customer in the first place. That just because you are critical what hardware you want and you know what you need and that doesn't fit well into Apples business motto "We know better what you need and want".

[mr moose]

2 hours ago, Thaldor said:

I'm too lazy at the moment to look for what you have mentioned in other article but I kind of keep some hope alive that Apple had done at least a small move towards upgradeability.

 

The first half of the article titled "PCIe cards you can install in your Mac Pro (2019)"   is all about the mpx module and what you can get from apple, the rest is (in typical apple fashion) an ambiguous rabble of words trying to insinuate you should use the MPX modules from apple and in a not so ambiguous way that GPU's are not a straight up "put in what every you want".

 

It leaves non tech oriented people with the distinct impression that anything other than the MPX is a gamble or requires eGPU and windows in bootcamp.

 

 

[hishnash]

10 hours ago, Blademaster91 said:

Besides the lower TDP, higher IPC, more cores,and lower price there's no reason for them to use Epyc?

And Intel is having some security vulnerability almost every month,so AMD would actually be more secure.

AVX512 is something that applications built using apples frameworks can make extensive use of (unlike other platforms were this normally needs the developer to actively support AVX512). So in the case of some tools the AVX512 support on the intel cpus is a factor but i would still feel that a Zen2 based solution

[hishnash]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

It leaves non tech oriented people with the distinct impression that anything other than the MPX is a gamble or requires eGPU and windows in bootcamp.

So one would assume your `average` consumer is not buying this machine right? someone who is spending (even for the base) model $5k or more will take the needed time to research things. 

the MPX cards are have advantages over other GPUs, thermals/noise and all that extra thunderbolt IO.  But i don think it is intentionaly hidden that these PCIe slots are PCIe slots.

[Kilrah]

13 minutes ago, hishnash said:

So one would assume your `average` consumer is not buying this machine right? someone who is spending (even for the base) model $5k or more will take the needed time to research things. 

You're highly overestimating the typical Apple-using "pro".

They usually have no idea of what they need technically, they just need "a mac", it doubles as a status symbol so they'll want the latest and greatest, so they'll get "the newest mac pro" specced out based on what they can afford rather than what they need.

 

As mentioned by many the base config is horribly overpriced for what it is and inferior to even an iMac Pro, but still it'll likely be the most sold model just becasue what matters is displaying the newest piece of tech in front of the client. Doesn't matter that it's the cheap version and is actually a "dog"...

 

Professionals in general usually have no idea about what the box under their desk does, they just use their software to do their job.

[mr moose]

12 minutes ago, hishnash said:

So one would assume your `average` consumer is not buying this machine right? someone who is spending (even for the base) model $5k or more will take the needed time to research things. 

 

I know an awful lot of professionals in their respective fields that need a decent workstation,  none of them are tech literate nor care to be, they are enthusiasts in their respective fields.    Being a video editor or special effects artists doesn't mean you know shit about computers and being a structural engineer who models civil construction doesn't mean you care about GPU workloads.  My first job was selling PC's,  the number of "enthusiasts" who came in thinking they knew what they needed and asked for the most inane parts was almost comical. 

 

 

 

Quote

 But i don think it is intentionaly hidden that these PCIe slots are PCIe slots.

That's not what I said.

[hishnash]

9 minutes ago, Kilrah said:

it doubles as a status symbol so they'll want the latest and greatest, so they'll get "the newest mac pro" specced out based on what they can afford rather than what they need.

 

As mentioned by many the base config is horribly overpriced for what it is and inferior to even an iMac Pro, but still it'll likely be the most sold model just becasue what matters is displaying the newest piece of tech in front of the client. Doesn't matter that it's the cheap version and is actually a "dog"...

I think you are confusing people who might buy a Mac Pro and people who are using a Mac Pro. 

People who are Buying a Mac Pro are companies and to be clear they are IT/Tec departments of companies who own a lot of very costly technology already. These people who work in those departments will re-search what works with what very closely before buying, they are used to the world of mad high end items that are super specific compatibly matrices. 

[mr moose]

12 minutes ago, hishnash said:

People who are Buying a Mac Pro are companies and to be clear they are IT/Tec departments of companies who own a lot of very costly technology already. These people who work in those departments will re-search what works with what very closely before buying, they are used to the world of mad high end items that are super specific compatibly matrices. 

Some will be those companies, and they likely won't be reading the apple website for the information they need.  All the other professionals looking to buy a new workstation will be though. 

 

Also, last time I worked in a large company, the tech department wasn't that good at deciding what the engineer needed to do his job. In fact the R+D department had control of that.  Setting up domain servers and emails is one thing, spec'ing out a tool that someone else has to use, not so much.  

[captain_to_fire]

Big recording studios are probably buying a few Mac Pros

But as stated by Jonathan himself, 28 cores is an overkill for a recording studio. 12 cores is probably their sweet spot.

[DrMacintosh]

14 hours ago, GDRRiley said:

I'm not saying they wouldn't want to but given the year between epyc/threadripper gen 2 demoed I'm sure they could have done it.

You have to realize that until VERY recently, AMD wasn't even a competitor in the CPU space. Why would any major system builder partner with them after a few demos and product launches? AMD has to prove themselves in the Pro space for system builders like Apple to start using them. They have only begun doing that now, after the release of TR2 and and EPYC. 

[GDRRiley]

1 minute ago, DrMacintosh said:

You have to realize that until VERY recently, AMD wasn't even a competitor in the CPU space. Why would any major system builder partner with them after a few demos? AMD has to prove themselves in the Pro space for system builders like Apple to start using them. They have only begun doing that now, after the release of TR2 and and EPYC. 

we saw a few demos.

AMD already has a history with apple I'm sure apple could have gotten more than the 1 or 2 cherry picked tests they originally showed off

[RedRound2]

This is what the Mac Pro is meant for, and this use case and similar others are enough to justify the price and why people prefer and love this product more than anything else on the market (the ecosystem and how AirDrop just made it that easy, is honestly reason enough for me)

 

 

[DrMacintosh]

7 minutes ago, GDRRiley said:

AMD already has a history with apple

With their GPU division. The Radeon Division and Ryzen/TR/EPYC Divisions are all VERY different. Just because one is doing well doesn’t mean business partners will trust and commit to another. 
 

Corporate life doesn’t work like a PC hardware enthusiast. Corporate life requires the overall picture be taken into account. Going with TR2 or EPYC for the Mac Pro after 4/5th if the development cycle was already complete would have been ignoring the overall picture. Not to mention irresponsible and a disservice to the Pros who require a new modern Pro Workstation that runs macOS and have been waiting on this Mac Pro. 
 

Delaying the Mac Pro for another year or two just to get TR2/EPYC would have hurt Apple more than it would have benefited them. 

[Maticks]

or for 50K USD, you could build the same system and watercool it with pipes dipped in gold.