5 ms·

How is this not another Trashcan Mac Pro? It is a beautiful, expensive device at launch but has no capability of being upgraded, expanded or experimented with.

by toufka 9y ago

How is this not another Trashcan Mac Pro? It is a beautiful, expensive device at launch but has no capability of being upgraded, expanded or experimented with. It looks to have same thermal conundrum as the trashcan needing to dissipate the heat of the screen - all while trapped in a consumer-level shell designed specifically for exterior looks at the cost of performance. Is it not just philosophically incorrect for the pro market? And compared to the enthusiasm for their iOS here, the pro customer is clearly no longer of value to Apple.

goodroot 9y ago
I'd say an external GPU introduces pretty significant upgrade potential.
- toufka 9y ago
  That was the exact statement made about the Mac Pro when it was released in 2013. Look how well that went.
  - Joeri 9y ago
    The mac pro did not feature external GPU, just external storage. The only thing you won't be able to upgrade in this machine is the CPU. The RAM is not soldered on those high end iMacs, and disk and gpu can be external over TB3.
    - toufka 9y ago
      Thunderbolt promised there would be external GPUs, but IIRC there were licensing and corporate disputes that prevented such hardware from ever materializing (after the design and debut of the Mac Pro). But it definitely was the promise of such a compact machine: "external everything!" Non-soldered RAM is a good start, but what about multiple ethernet ports, what about any standard scientific/medical/experimental PCI card, what about the new SSD/HDs that come out in 3 years? What about upgrading the CPU? What about upgrading the screen! Much less using Apple's "most powerful computer" headless?
      - Joeri 9y ago
        External ethernet over TB3 is also a thing. Honestly, all these "what about" things are doable over TB3, with the exception of a CPU upgrade and Optane (I'm assuming TB3 doesn't quite give you that level of latency). So, as far as expandability I don't think it is that bad. The only question is whether you want a carefully designed machine like the iMac surrounded by a sea of dongles and enclosures.
masklinn 9y ago
> How is this not another Trashcan Mac Pro? In that it's not a Mac Pro at all. They have (uniquely) pre-announced a tower-style Mac Pro for "not this year"[0] back in April: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives [0] and given how precise their wording was, it's not necessarily 2018 either.
- nickm12 9y ago
  OP's point was that the failing of the Trashcan Mac Pro was that it was non-modular design that user's couldn't upgrade and (apparently) Apple couldn't refresh. Maybe there is the thermal envelope in this design to support a more frequent refresh rate, but this still doesn't address the fundamental "pro" need to be able to mix and match or upgrade core components like the display, RAM, GPU, and storage.
- intoverflow2 9y ago
  It's pretty obvious that decision was made when this product was almost complete and this product was supposed to replace the entire Mac Pro line. Obviously something changed their minds though.
  - toufka 9y ago
    Huh, that's an interesting thought. Imagine Cupertino had (nearly) finished designing this sleek machine, thought it was a wonderful answer to refresh their Mac Pro, then they get completely railed in January for failing to provide professionals a pro machine when they expected it. They're late, they know it, but no biggie - they'll introduce this pro machine this summer and everyone will love it. The pros then proceed to articulate exactly what their grievances are, and the machine that is sitting under the black cloth in the back room looks nothing like what their most loyal users are hurting for. And if listened to closely, the machine that's mostly finished is actually an insult to their most valuable customers. What do you do in that case? Completely scrap the beautiful machine you've already made? Or eat (silent) crow and promise a completely new product that you start working on tomorrow, and tell the engineers who were working on their pet dream computer to quickly finish up - let it be introduced mid-keynote by a non-executive, go back and painfully re-etch a diminutive 'i' in on each of the just-printed 'Mac Pro' bezels - likely to never recoup their R&D costs on this 'lost' product. That's a good point. I bet that's exactly what happened here. Because if Cook would have given this exact keynote, but had introduced this grey iMac as their 'next new thing' that was replacing the Mac Pro, he'd have been booed off his own stage during Apple's most sacred moment. Apple had enough sense to avoid that moment. They have enough cash to produce an entire (temporary) product line that loses money. They don't have enough cash to lose their most die-hard and influential customers en masse and hear a crowd of 'boos' at the height of their hallowed keynote.

by toufka 9y ago

goodroot 9y ago

I'd say an external GPU introduces pretty significant upgrade potential.

toufka 9y ago
That was the exact statement made about the Mac Pro when it was released in 2013. Look how well that went.
- Joeri 9y ago
  The mac pro did not feature external GPU, just external storage. The only thing you won't be able to upgrade in this machine is the CPU. The RAM is not soldered on those high end iMacs, and disk and gpu can be external over TB3.
  - toufka 9y ago
    Thunderbolt promised there would be external GPUs, but IIRC there were licensing and corporate disputes that prevented such hardware from ever materializing (after the design and debut of the Mac Pro). But it definitely was the promise of such a compact machine: "external everything!" Non-soldered RAM is a good start, but what about multiple ethernet ports, what about any standard scientific/medical/experimental PCI card, what about the new SSD/HDs that come out in 3 years? What about upgrading the CPU? What about upgrading the screen! Much less using Apple's "most powerful computer" headless?
    - Joeri 9y ago
      External ethernet over TB3 is also a thing. Honestly, all these "what about" things are doable over TB3, with the exception of a CPU upgrade and Optane (I'm assuming TB3 doesn't quite give you that level of latency). So, as far as expandability I don't think it is that bad. The only question is whether you want a carefully designed machine like the iMac surrounded by a sea of dongles and enclosures.

masklinn 9y ago

> How is this not another Trashcan Mac Pro? In that it's not a Mac Pro at all. They have (uniquely) pre-announced a tower-style Mac Pro for "not this year"[0] back in April: https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives https://daringfireball.net/2017/04/the_mac_pro_lives [0] and given how precise their wording was, it's not necessarily 2018 either.

nickm12 9y ago
OP's point was that the failing of the Trashcan Mac Pro was that it was non-modular design that user's couldn't upgrade and (apparently) Apple couldn't refresh. Maybe there is the thermal envelope in this design to support a more frequent refresh rate, but this still doesn't address the fundamental "pro" need to be able to mix and match or upgrade core components like the display, RAM, GPU, and storage.
intoverflow2 9y ago
It's pretty obvious that decision was made when this product was almost complete and this product was supposed to replace the entire Mac Pro line. Obviously something changed their minds though.
- toufka 9y ago
  Huh, that's an interesting thought. Imagine Cupertino had (nearly) finished designing this sleek machine, thought it was a wonderful answer to refresh their Mac Pro, then they get completely railed in January for failing to provide professionals a pro machine when they expected it. They're late, they know it, but no biggie - they'll introduce this pro machine this summer and everyone will love it. The pros then proceed to articulate exactly what their grievances are, and the machine that is sitting under the black cloth in the back room looks nothing like what their most loyal users are hurting for. And if listened to closely, the machine that's mostly finished is actually an insult to their most valuable customers. What do you do in that case? Completely scrap the beautiful machine you've already made? Or eat (silent) crow and promise a completely new product that you start working on tomorrow, and tell the engineers who were working on their pet dream computer to quickly finish up - let it be introduced mid-keynote by a non-executive, go back and painfully re-etch a diminutive 'i' in on each of the just-printed 'Mac Pro' bezels - likely to never recoup their R&D costs on this 'lost' product. That's a good point. I bet that's exactly what happened here. Because if Cook would have given this exact keynote, but had introduced this grey iMac as their 'next new thing' that was replacing the Mac Pro, he'd have been booed off his own stage during Apple's most sacred moment. Apple had enough sense to avoid that moment. They have enough cash to produce an entire (temporary) product line that loses money. They don't have enough cash to lose their most die-hard and influential customers en masse and hear a crowd of 'boos' at the height of their hallowed keynote.