3 ms·

But they have already developed a non-standard Mac Pro in 2013, and it is widely considered a failure. I'm not sure if they'll really make the same mistake twic

But they have already developed a non-standard Mac Pro in 2013, and it is widely considered a failure. I'm not sure if they'll really make the same mistake twice?

scarface74 9y ago
Its not just widely considered a failure, they publicly admitted it was a failure. https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-craig-federighi-and-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-c... Craig Federighi: I think it’s fair to say, part of why we’re talking today, is that the Mac Pro — the current vintage that we introduced — we wanted to do something bold and different. In retrospect, it didn’t well suit some of the people we were trying to reach. It’s good for some; it’s an amazingly quiet machine, it’s a beautiful machine. But it does not address the full range of customers we wanna reach with Mac Pro. But I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner, if you will. We designed a system that we thought with the kind of GPUs that at the time we thought we needed, and that we thought we could well serve with a two GPU architecture… that that was the thermal limit we needed, or the thermal capacity we needed. But workloads didn’t materialize to fit that as broadly as we hoped.
qubex 9y ago
It was a failure because the thermal characteristics made it extremely difficult to expand. They’re not going to market something that is essentially an Apple-branded hackintosh devoid of custom components.
whywhywhywhy 9y ago
Considering they identified one of the issues as designing themselves into a thermal corner and the next thing they do is design the iMac Pro with extreme thermal constraints too I'd be skeptical if they had learnt anything. Modern Apple doesn't backtrack lightly, just look how they're still pushing the butterfly keyboard despite it being breakable with single specks of dust.

But they have already developed a non-standard Mac Pro in 2013, and it is widely considered a failure. I'm not sure if they'll really make the same mistake twice?

scarface74 9y ago

Its not just widely considered a failure, they publicly admitted it was a failure. https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-craig-federighi-and-john-ternus-on-the-state-of-apples-pro-macs/ https://techcrunch.com/2017/04/06/transcript-phil-schiller-c... Craig Federighi: I think it’s fair to say, part of why we’re talking today, is that the Mac Pro — the current vintage that we introduced — we wanted to do something bold and different. In retrospect, it didn’t well suit some of the people we were trying to reach. It’s good for some; it’s an amazingly quiet machine, it’s a beautiful machine. But it does not address the full range of customers we wanna reach with Mac Pro. But I think we designed ourselves into a bit of a thermal corner, if you will. We designed a system that we thought with the kind of GPUs that at the time we thought we needed, and that we thought we could well serve with a two GPU architecture… that that was the thermal limit we needed, or the thermal capacity we needed. But workloads didn’t materialize to fit that as broadly as we hoped.

qubex 9y ago

It was a failure because the thermal characteristics made it extremely difficult to expand. They’re not going to market something that is essentially an Apple-branded hackintosh devoid of custom components.

whywhywhywhy 9y ago

Considering they identified one of the issues as designing themselves into a thermal corner and the next thing they do is design the iMac Pro with extreme thermal constraints too I'd be skeptical if they had learnt anything. Modern Apple doesn't backtrack lightly, just look how they're still pushing the butterfly keyboard despite it being breakable with single specks of dust.