4 ms·

I did in the past (2011). Had an i7 with 16GB of RAM. It was pretty stable. Though I had problems with iMessage & OS X upgrades. Nevertheless I think it's fairl

I did in the past (2011). Had an i7 with 16GB of RAM. It was pretty stable. Though I had problems with iMessage & OS X upgrades. Nevertheless I think it's fairly easy to build one and there is big benefit, since Apple's iMac is now the only 32GB capable machine that they sell.

stephenr 10y ago
> iMac is now the only 32GB capable machine that they sell. The Mac Pro supports up to 64GB of RAM.
- redial 10y ago
  I doubt they sell many, if any mac pros any more.
- mountaineer22 10y ago
  Or a Hackintosh for less than $1,200?
- minikites 10y ago
  The Mac Pro hasn't changed internally since 2013, calling it a professional computer is a joke at this point.
  - rbanffy 10y ago
    The reasoning was that newer Xeons were not fast enough to warrant a redesign. I am curious about the kind of usage a fully loaded Mac Pro is inadequate for. Of course, you can buy a similarly capable Dell (OSX not included) for less, but you lose the hassle-free Macintoshness.
    - CPLX 10y ago
      > I am curious about the kind of usage a fully loaded Mac Pro is inadequate. Financial sanity, mostly. Those things cost $10,000+
      - rbanffy 10y ago
        If you spend more than 2 weeks of lost productivity over the lifetime of the machine because the hardware is not supported, the financials no longer make sense.
        mamcx 10y ago
        Not everyone is a rich guy with dream-like paychecks. With iOS you are stuck with OSX and currently the value proposition is bad.
        rbanffy 10y ago
        This is a business decision. Being unable to be sure whether deadlines will be met is a cost you should factor in when acquiring hardware.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        stephenr 10y ago
        Building iOS apps doesn't require 32GB of memory. You don't need a mac pro if your only reason for having a Mac is to run Xcode.
        mamcx 10y ago
        No. But building the backend and development for other things aside iOS, YES. Is not the current fad "Full-Stack developers"? I'm one since I start this 17 years ago (way before it was called "Desperate developer do anything for food!" instead of be "full-stack" ;). Is not ideal to have more than 1 machine.
        stephenr 10y ago
        Very few development environments need 32gb. Would I like 32gb in my mbp? Yes. But 16gb gets the job done. The inconveniences of using another platform (or lack of support with macOS on unsupported hardware) far outweighs the slight benefit of 32gb vs 16gb of ram.
- Shivetya 10y ago
  however Apple should be ashamed that they still sell this in the configuration it has and worse for the price they want. No machine should be left so long without updates. I really don't understand why Apple does that, they should be embarrassed
  - toyg 10y ago
    > I really don't understand why Apple does that Margins. The more they can flog the same hardware, the higher the margins: you need less changes to the production chain (which are the real cost) and components get cheaper over time. Guess who's in charge of Apple since 2013? A production-chain guy.

stephenr 10y ago

> iMac is now the only 32GB capable machine that they sell. The Mac Pro supports up to 64GB of RAM.

redial 10y ago
I doubt they sell many, if any mac pros any more.
mountaineer22 10y ago
Or a Hackintosh for less than $1,200?
minikites 10y ago
The Mac Pro hasn't changed internally since 2013, calling it a professional computer is a joke at this point.
- rbanffy 10y ago
  The reasoning was that newer Xeons were not fast enough to warrant a redesign. I am curious about the kind of usage a fully loaded Mac Pro is inadequate for. Of course, you can buy a similarly capable Dell (OSX not included) for less, but you lose the hassle-free Macintoshness.
  - CPLX 10y ago
    > I am curious about the kind of usage a fully loaded Mac Pro is inadequate. Financial sanity, mostly. Those things cost $10,000+
    - rbanffy 10y ago
      If you spend more than 2 weeks of lost productivity over the lifetime of the machine because the hardware is not supported, the financials no longer make sense.
      - mamcx 10y ago
        Not everyone is a rich guy with dream-like paychecks. With iOS you are stuck with OSX and currently the value proposition is bad.
        rbanffy 10y ago
        This is a business decision. Being unable to be sure whether deadlines will be met is a cost you should factor in when acquiring hardware.
        deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
        stephenr 10y ago
        Building iOS apps doesn't require 32GB of memory. You don't need a mac pro if your only reason for having a Mac is to run Xcode.
        mamcx 10y ago
        No. But building the backend and development for other things aside iOS, YES. Is not the current fad "Full-Stack developers"? I'm one since I start this 17 years ago (way before it was called "Desperate developer do anything for food!" instead of be "full-stack" ;). Is not ideal to have more than 1 machine.
        stephenr 10y ago
        Very few development environments need 32gb. Would I like 32gb in my mbp? Yes. But 16gb gets the job done. The inconveniences of using another platform (or lack of support with macOS on unsupported hardware) far outweighs the slight benefit of 32gb vs 16gb of ram.
Shivetya 10y ago
however Apple should be ashamed that they still sell this in the configuration it has and worse for the price they want. No machine should be left so long without updates. I really don't understand why Apple does that, they should be embarrassed
- toyg 10y ago
  > I really don't understand why Apple does that Margins. The more they can flog the same hardware, the higher the margins: you need less changes to the production chain (which are the real cost) and components get cheaper over time. Guess who's in charge of Apple since 2013? A production-chain guy.