16 ms·

Mac Pro: Fooled You

96 points by evo_9 7y ago

monkin 7y ago
Whoa, what a clickbait!
jagger27 7y ago
Where's the gotcha? The device is for studios, not home gamers—so what?
- bsamuels 7y ago
  Because historically the old mac pro was a more than a 6000 dollar toy that only the rich and studios purchase. Apple is basically pissing on all of their old mac pro fans who are getting priced out by this update. I think the "this is for studios" argument is just an excuse to make up for the fact that Apple completely missed the mark with this new refresh's price point. If Apple _really_ wanted to create a flagship desktop to appeal to studios, they would have not used the mac pro's name, they would have created a new brand for the SKU to reflect that its target audience is different from that of the mac pro.
  - bitcrusher 7y ago
    I disagree with this. This viewpoint is the side-effect of Apple's lifestyle brand marketing. Apple releases a machine you can't afford and they're "pissing on you"? No, they're diversifying their product towards the high-end market they want to re/capture. If your favorite car company releases a nice premium product are they also "pissing on you"?
    - bsamuels 7y ago
      I believe that selling a branded product that targets audience X, then in a refresh raising your pricing so much that a large subset of X can no longer afford the product is pissing on their target audience, yes. If Apple wanted to sell a more expensive SKU to that wealthier subset of X, then it should have been a new brand instead of using the Mac Pro's brand. I don't own any apple desktops, so there's no personal animosity on my part.
      - wtallis 7y ago
        The Mac Pro brand was basically dead for years. Your complaint would be reasonable if they made such a large change between generations for a product on a yearly cadence, but this is more like when a car company brings back a model they discontinued 15 years ago.
    - JoshTko 7y ago
      Don't car manufactures use different brand names for luxury and mainstream to indicate who the product is for? Customers would be confused if Toyota took a new mid-range Lexus, kept the pricing, but branded it as a Toyota Avalon (the highest end Toyota sedan model in US).
      - wtallis 7y ago
        > Customers would be confused if Toyota took a new mid-range Lexus, kept the pricing, but branded it as a Toyota Avalon (the highest end Toyota sedan model in US). I'm confused. I can't tell what point you're trying to make here. The Lexus ES and Toyota Avalon already are basically the same car, modulo some styling changes and about a 10% difference in base price. This clearly isn't causing Toyota much trouble, because they've been doing this for a long time.
    - BackBackBack 7y ago
      > If your favorite car company releases a nice premium product are they also "pissing on you"? If Toyota re-releases the Corolla as a 60K car, then yes. Apple is not "diversifying" their product. They are straight pushing it upmarket leaving current Mac Pro customers, the ones paying until today $3000 for a trash can Apple swore was the future, out in the cold.
      - NightlyDev 7y ago
        Who believes what Apple says? Most things Apple says are completely bullshit. From the Mac Pro trash can product page(norwegian): "Enough performance to realize all your biggest ideas" "You will never want more speed" And let's not forget why Apple is sticking to 3.5" screens. It is the perfect size, and that's why Apple won't make phones bigger. It's definetly not because Apple is lagging behind. Oh, wait... Never belive Apple's marketing. It's misleading and often false.
        BackBackBack 7y ago
        I'm not saying you should believe Apple. What I'm saying is that it is completely fair to criticize them based on what they say and do. Apple promised a Mac Pro replacement for pro customers but delivered a new Mac Pro only for the high end of those customers. That is why they are being criticized.
        NightlyDev 7y ago
        The old Mac Pro wasn't exactly pro, no matter how much Apple says it is. The new Mac Pro is an actual pro product, at least the higher specced ones. So they did make a replacement. Is Apple terrible at naming? Yes. Do they throw Pro into the product name for no reason? Yes. Is it better this way? Who knows. They still have the MacBook "pro".
    - FabHK 7y ago
      Steve's 2x2 matrix with portable vs desktop on one axis, and consumer vs pro(sumer) on the other axis, was announced and filled around 1998. It was populated initially with: iBook, iMac; PowerBook, Power Mac. Later: MacBook (Air), iMac; MacBook Pro, Mac Pro. The "pro" version had always been accessible to consumers. It was a bit more expensive, but if you wanted more power and expandability than the consumer model you could get the low-end "pro" model easily. And, yeah, the "real" professionals could spec it out and get a high-end pro machine. Now, this latest Mac Pro is a machine that's out of range of your average prosumer and even pro, even in the lowest configuration. That's what upsets people. > This viewpoint is the side-effect of Apple's lifestyle brand marketing. No, the anger is born from an expectation (namely, that prosumers can get the low-end pro model) that well predates the whole life-style brand marketing (iPod 2001, iPhone 2007).
      - bitcrusher 7y ago
        No, the anger is born from an expectation (namely, that prosumers can get the low-end pro model) that well predates the whole life-style brand marketing (iPod 2001, iPhone 2007). I believe this is also incorrect. Apple has consistently had a lifestyle brand marketing tactic when Jobs was at the helm. The clone years were a different animal, for sure, but pre and post Apple was most definitely marketed as a lifestyle brand and "experience". The difference is that it worked better the second time, with the addition of the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Steve's 2x2 matrix was obviated almost immediately upon his passing. The product teams at Apple may from time to time use it as a reference to bolster a point in their favor but those days have long since vanished. People are 'angry' because they want a desktop PC like experience within the Apple eco-system and they don't have anywhere to turn. Personally, I think it is unjustified, as there are more than enough product spans to fill that gap BEFORE the introduction of the Mac Pro. All of this silly 'anger' to me is just another iteration of people being upset at Apple because they didn't fulfill their personal 'peeve'. Honestly, if you don't like the stuff or it's not what you want, then use something else. If you CAN'T then I submit that you're a victim of the aforementioned lifestyle marketing.
  - cormacrelf 7y ago
    The article stopped right before it made any analysis of the facts presented. There wasn’t an argument for us to talk about. Yours sounds like what should have come next though.
    - rubbingalcohol 7y ago
      Right, I was kind of wondering what the point was. I'm surprised that the author got stuck on a $1,000 monitor stand.
- 27182818284 7y ago
  That's how I felt watching the presentation. It very quickly became apparent this was not a machine for me. I don't work with multiple 4K video streams let alone any instrument mixing or 8K video.
- docbrown 7y ago
  The author doesn’t mention gaming in the article at all and I don’t think any person with decent knowledge of Mac products would assume the new Mac Pro would be a gaming machine. What the author and many others are trying to convey is that Apple again has pushed out a premium product with mid to semi-high level components for a luxurious price — often out of reach for the lay consumer. If we take the common criticism of Apple and their products, especially the Mac Pro, it again comes down to them catering to a base but doing so by itemizing their product list. They know people in studios will use these products and pay what they must, so it’s simple: Studio A has old Mac Pro’s and just needs a new monitor, so they’ll buy the new 32-inch and put out some more pocket change for the stand that’s sold separately. But studio B has monitors and needs a new desktop, hence they’ll purchase a new Mac Pro w/o a screen. In the end, these products will sell, not because of their future proof parts, but more so because it’s a new machine for that niche base who most likely are too deep into the Apple ecosystem to use a PC equivalent.
  - jagger27 7y ago
    Ah, my bad. I meant "home gamer" as a colloquial term to mean something like "prosumer" or "enthusiast", not an actual gamer.
- markkanof 7y ago
  I keep hearing this argument over and over and it's frustrating. Yes, it does seem clear that Apple is targeting media studios with this Mac Pro, but that entirely misses the point about why so many people like me are upset. Apple used to make what I considered just about the perfect machine for me. It was the cheese grater Mac Pro, and one sat under my desk until a few months ago when I gave up on Apple every refreshing that machine in a way that works for me, and I got a Mac mini instead. It's a fine machine, but there is not really an upgrade path for the internal components, the graphics processor is weak, and now I have a bunch of cables all over my desk for expansion. The cheese grater Mac Pro used to be a little bit pricey for the actual performance you were getting, but it was worth it to spend a little more to get that thoughtfully designed machine that ran Mac OS. Now it just feels like anything in Apples product line that "is for me" just feels like a giant compromise. Sure Apple can do whatever they want with their product line, but that fact doesn't make the current situation any less frustrating for me and people like me.
  - NightlyDev 7y ago
    Maybe you should consider switching OS? Apple will always be behind on performance, upgrade paths, compatability and pricing. So if you want a high performance computer that you can upgrade then Apple isn't for you.
    - markkanof 7y ago
      I can't directly refute any of your points, but I also think you are still talking around the problem a bit. The point I was making is that in the cheese grater era all the items you point out where Apply is behind were also true, but the delta between Mac and PC on each of those points seemed much smaller. It was worth the tradeoff to be able to use Mac OS. This is not the case with the latest Mac Pro. The world changes over time, I get it, but I think given that at one time Apple was able to hit that sweet spot, the hope is that maybe they one day will be able to again.
Amorymeltzer 7y ago
>Naming a car Nova can cause trouble in Spanish-speaking locales (“no go”) That's an urban legend: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanish/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis...
- msla 7y ago
  It's "Philosophically True": It's true to the extent people need it to be to make a point or prove their philosophy valid, like the idea of the "tabula rasa"; we know, scientifically, that humans aren't blank slates at birth, but some people have a need for it to be true so their philosophy isn't disproven by mere positivism.
  - whenchamenia 7y ago
    So, a lie you find useful?
    - msla 7y ago
      More like a lie which gets spread because it is apparently morally wrong for some ideas to be disproven.
- voidmain0001 7y ago
  I agree with Snopes. Pronunciation is everything in Spanish. The word nova is not at all pronounced the same as no va, and a native Spanish speaker would not confuse the two. My personal experience after having lived in Central America with locals, not ex-Pats, is that accent and pronunciation are the key to speaking Spanish, not grammar.
bitcrusher 7y ago
On the one hand, this cat knows how to screw up marketing hardware/software ( Be, Inc! ). On the other hand, he's literally talking nonsense about a compute platform that is targeted at studios.
- throwayEngineer 7y ago
  Btw, are there actually companies that use Apple desktop/laptops? I had thought this was part of the Marketing. Don't they sell to high school kids going to college?
  - cglace 7y ago
    I’ve never been to a company that does not have a mix of pc/mac. From Fortune 500 to startups.
    - soperj 7y ago
      I've never worked for a company that has ever had a Mac anything.
      - r00fus 7y ago
        I think this depends on the industry. Software houses usually are agnostic/diverse unless they're chained to Microsoft.
        soperj 7y ago
        I've only ever worked as a developer (in offices)
  - mitchty 7y ago
    > Btw, are there actually companies that use Apple desktop/laptops? Yes? Lots of them use apple laptops. More than windows from my experience.
throwayEngineer 7y ago
Do we shame Apple for misleading users? Or is this the users responsibility to know what they are purchasing? I'm starting to side with the big evil coporations, it's 2019 and these Marketing stunts are nothing new. I forgive people for making 1 mistake, but repeating it, blame the human.
- maxxxxx 7y ago
  It's still important to criticize them for doing this.
elagost 7y ago
>Take an iMac Pro, break it down, put its screen in a box (that’ll revive the Cinema Display we miss), add slots to the motherboard, put it in a vintage Mac Pro cheese grater case... I think a lot of Mac faithful talked around this line like it would be an acceptable minimum, but they really wanted more than that, like "Oh, it'd be fine if they just made a tower, but what we really want is that trademark Apple Innovation!" But what they really wanted was just white-box parts in a PC case that they could swap out, not this insanely powerful, beautiful, kick-ass machine on wheels that costs more than your car. They just wanted a blessed hackintosh. (edit - just speaking from personal experience and the people I've talked to. I don't know anyone who actually needs this new Mac Pro, but I know a few who want it.)
- ajross 7y ago
  > insanely powerful I remain amazed at Apple's marketing. There's literally nothing "powerful" in this box that you couldn't plug into a Supermicro motherboard almost two years ago. You can make integration arguments or dither about Apple-specific devices or software all day. But as for "powerful"... this is a 14nm Xeon workstation board.
  - elagost 7y ago
    It's got a lot extra proprietary components in it that make it attractive for those that want those capabilities, and it runs MacOS. Often MacOS is the extra $500 or so of any Apple machine you buy. If you don't care for MacOS or the security coprocessor or the extra Apple-specific expansion stuff, you can definitely build a cheaper PC that's more powerful.
    - ajross 7y ago
      > extra proprietary components Exactly. So not "insanely powerful" by any objective measure as used by other folks in the industry. It's just secret magic applesauce[1]. Yet you feel free to throw adjective around anyway because it just "feels" like it must be "powerful" based on the language you're reading about it. To wit, I remain amazed at Apple's marketing. [1] Which, fine. Maybe you really need that applesauce and the 2017 Supermicro board wouldn't have ever worked for you. Great! Still not an argument about "power".
Areading314 7y ago
The whole idea of "reference monitors" seems incredibly fishy to me. I've never heard of this and I highly doubt that studios are paying $42000 for monitors as was claimed at WWDC. Can anyone confirm that this is real and not just a framing tactic?
- tomschlick 7y ago
  They are real: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayrbWKSFN88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayrbWKSFN88
- itsaidpens 7y ago
  It's real, and it's an awful workflow editing via "proxy" - imagine cleaning your apartment through grease-smeared glasses and you're only able to take them off and see your work when your guests are already knocking at your front door.
- CharlesW 7y ago
  FWIW, the target audience for the Apple monitor will absolutely know what reference monitors are: https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/15/sony-bvm-hx310-reference-monitor-ibc-2018/ https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/15/sony-bvm-hx310-refere...
- kgwgk 7y ago
  Not as expensive, but not cheap either: https://www.omegabroadcast.com/sales/sales-catalog/monitors-viewing/reference-monitors/?sort=pricedesc&limit=100&mode=4 https://www.omegabroadcast.com/sales/sales-catalog/monitors-...
- stuart78 7y ago
  It is true. Here [0] is a representative example, the only one I could find with a price. Correct color matters tremendously in film production, and getting accurate representation of that is quite expensive. [0] https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcastpromonitors/pvm-x550 https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcastpromonitors/pvm-x55...
- michaelt 7y ago
itsaidpens 7y ago
Apple called "Pro Users" bluff. The "pro user" that used to be served by the old Mac Pro was the same dope who gets the M-Sport BMW 3 Series, or the DSLR with the Kit Lens, etc. It's the rich dad "I want the best of X, but not the actual professional product, because I don't need it." Other examples include Arc'Teryx clothing that is worn by VC's in Silicon Valley for wealth projection that will never see the austere environments that the clothing was designed for. Apple made a true pro machine, and now the pro-poseurs are pissed. BTW I am a pro-poseur, concerned with pro-image vs actual pro features. I desperately want an Apple monitor with speakers that docks to my MBP for around $1799.
- itsaidpens 7y ago
  Addendum - I'm a marketer so I always see things through the lens of the expression of self. I totally sympathize with wanting a pro-lite Mac tower... but it won't happen. Try a Mac mini with an eGPU.
  - fooey 7y ago
    Yeah, those eGPU's that are all dead because Apple refuses to allow Nvidia to ship new drivers... That'll solve it.
    - itsaidpens 7y ago
      https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/HM8Y2VC/A/blackmagic-egpu?afid=p238%7CsF9EJrKLw-dc_mtid_1870765e38482_pcrid_204238781435_pgrid_45491873498_&cid=aos-ca-kwgo-pla-btb-3pp--slid-----product-HM8Y2VC/A-CA https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/HM8Y2VC/A/blackmagic-e... ?
      - fooey 7y ago
        What I'm talking about is Apple flat out refusing to update their Nvidia drivers, so Nvidia powered eGPU's won't work with Mojave https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/14/video-nvidia-support-was-abandoned-in-macos-mojave-and-heres-why https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/14/video-nvidia-supp... It's been a stalemate for months and months now
atonse 7y ago
They deserve all the mockery they got for the $999 stand (and more). However, my complaint about the new Pro and Display are not that they are overpriced (they're perfectly priced for what they are). But that there is no lower end option. Even if they took the display in the 5k iMac and just made that a standalone thunderbolt display, charged $1,500 for it (even though I would've slightly grumbled), I would've ordered it on day one. But $5k for a display is just something I won't spend. Same with the desktop. If they had reasonable defaults for $6k, then yes I absolutely would buy it (because of the amazing expandability, and I'm truly tired of laptops). But the display is to me truly disappointing that they solved problems only a very very small sliver of pros asked for (pro photographers and film people), rather than a secondary class of pros (developers, etc). I don't need true reference-grade color for viewing webpages and code all day. But I would generally like a 5k or 6k display for more screen real estate.
- morley 7y ago
  Forgive my ignorance, but what's stopping you from buying a third-party screen and attaching that? Right now, I'm using a MBP with a Dell monitor. It would seem insane if the Mac Pro had a priority monitor interface.
  - atonse 7y ago
    I do have a Dell 4k monitor (P2715Q), and it works really well and I have no complaints about its compatibility or picture quality. But I just like the Thunderbolt hub + monitor + charger solution, plus the webcam, and would've been great if these monitors came with Face ID. The LG monitor sort of does this. But it's just ugly.
    - Matthias247 7y ago
      I had the Dell at my old job. Great picture quality! But 4K on 27“ is however still a compromise, since everything will show up too big when using 2x scaling. And when going for 1.5x or 2x things will get blurry. I now use 2x with smalller fonts in editors and browser zoomed out by default as a compromise. But I’m really looking forward to have a real >200dpi desktop display for 2x scaling.
maxxxxx 7y ago
I remember some years ago (2012?) we looked into using Macs instead of Windows machines and back then the Macs (Macbook and Mac Mini) were quite competitive price wise when you compared specs. I can accept some premium since the hardware is better quality but recently they seem to have jacked up prices a lot. The machines were also very practical with the connectors and upgrades they offered. This also seems to have gone away Has anybody else observed this and when did the trend start?
- JeremyBanks 7y ago
  October 5, 2011
  - maxxxxx 7y ago
    Thank you. I like precise answers!
- matwood 7y ago
  Even until fairly recently many Mac models were price competitive with other premium models right at release. The problem was/is that Apple does not lower prices on a model over time, and the more recent problem where Apple let models languish for a long period of time. Apple points to Intel and says they haven't released many huge changes in awhile, and that is true but Apple should have been lowering prices over time. Apple probably thinks they have most users covered. Since the cheese grater, there has been a huge shift to laptops. If a user really wants a desktop there is the mini, iMac, iMacPro, and now MacPro. The MP is so far out in the pro realm though that Apple may have inadvertently opened a gap in their lineup between the iMacPro and MP. If they do something to fill that gap remains to be seen.
  - toyg 7y ago
    In that gap you have a well-specced MBP. With USB-C/TB3, laptop expandability has basically been solved, and Apple makes more money if it can crank out more MBP bodies (parts that are already built in much higher volumes than a desktop will ever be, hence costing less). So they were very careful to only chisel outside of MBP price ranges. IMacs are nice-looking terminals and playback-media stations, that’s your entry-level. If you want real power, you get a MBP. Only if you want huge power that the MBP really cannot deliver, you get a MP.
tinus_hn 7y ago
He’s been fooled again. The $1000 stand is nothing more than an obvious distraction; everyone is talking about the great Mac Pro and the outrageously expensive stand, but not the very expensive Mac Pro and display.
- kraftman 7y ago
  Is the display expensive for what it is? Everyone's saying it's in the same league as reference displays?
  - npunt 7y ago
    It's not at all expensive for what it is. It's just far higher specs than most here would find useful, which is the real disconnect. Others in this thread are wondering what the realistic difference between 4K and 5K is or talking about simple stuff like pixel scaling - this is definitely not the crowd to understand or appreciate the new display.
  - tinus_hn 7y ago
    It’s probably not expensive for what it is, but it definitely is very expensive. Just as the stand might not be expensive for what it is but still is really expensive.
siidooloo 7y ago
Apple is now a movie studio. ... And they’re now building computers for movie studios. The real announcements were the proress fpga, and dual chip mpx cards which most people don’t need and won’t buy.
rangibaby 7y ago
Apple makes a consumer “Pro” laptop: We want real pro machines! Apple makes an actual Pro tower with pro features: It’s too expensive!
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
brokenmachine 7y ago
What pisses me off about Apple is that, if their marketing is to be believed, I should be directly in their target market. I'm a techie with a lot of discretionary income who has creative ambitions. Also I'm still on way-out-of-date Windows 7 because I won't accept the spying that goes on in the newer versions. I love Linux but I'm unhappily tied to Windows at the moment only because one of my hobbies is playing music in Ableton, which is literally the only program keeping me on Windows. So MacOS which I imagine to be a more polished Linux that supports Ableton could be great. But then they release stuff like this and I realize that even though I'd dearly like to jump ship on Microsoft, I won't ever let myself be gouged like this and to be trapped in the kind of ecosystem where a product like this, at this price point, might be my only option. Call me a cheapskate but I do know how much the hardware costs, and won't pay that much of a premium for a shiny box that will be unsupported in a few short years when they're trying to shovel the latest hotness. Instead I'm likely to investigate options of running Ableton in Virtual machines with GPU passthrough, a bunch of hassle and clutter with extra devices and audio mixers, etc, and spend the few thousand dollars I've saved on other stuff. They clearly don't know how to satisfy a customer like me.
- draw_down 7y ago
  Sounds like, neither does anyone else.
- judge2020 7y ago
  > won't accept the spying that goes on in the newer versions Sorry to disappoint, but Windows 10's telemetry is backported to Windows 7[0]. I guess you could have done something to remove these updates, though. 0: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/213183-once-more-with-tracking-microsoft-backports-privacy-invading-windows-10-features-to-windows-7-8 https://www.extremetech.com/computing/213183-once-more-with-...
  - brokenmachine 7y ago
    I did. But who knows what shenanigans they're up to. Like I said, I'm dying to leave Windows and exploring other options.
leoc 7y ago
There's a certain context here that may not be obvious. Gassée is generally seen as the person responsible for the Macintosh II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II , the original PC-like (or indeed Apple II-like or S-100-like) modular Macintosh with a separate monitor and slots. From introduction of the original Macintosh II in 1987 through the rest of the '80s the whole Mac line was basically bifurcated between modular Macs in the Macintosh II line which were aimed at graphics and publishing professionals and were brutally expensive even compared to contemporary MS-DOS boxes, and all-in-one Macs with black-and-white (and that didn't mean greyscale) displays for everyone else who was willing to stick around. The squeeze didn't really even begin to ease up until the early '90s, AFAICT. I'm not sure to what extent Gassée was responsible for or fully supportive of those pricing decisions, but if that situation sounds pretty familiar right now, that's probably the reason that Gassée is purring about it here. In case you were wondering, Jobs apparently hated those pricing decisions, and blamed them for the Mac's failure to win market share against the PC (and compatibles). In fairness to Apple's current management, the window of opportunity to do that is probably now long closed. OTOH the number of companies employing professionals who will feel they have to stick around for these kind of prices probably isn't nearly as large either nowadays. You certainly don't need Macs to run a Photoshop or desktop-publishing shop anymore.

Mac Pro: Fooled You

96 points by evo_9 7y ago

monkin 7y ago

Whoa, what a clickbait!

jagger27 7y ago

Where's the gotcha? The device is for studios, not home gamers—so what?

bsamuels 7y ago
Because historically the old mac pro was a more than a 6000 dollar toy that only the rich and studios purchase. Apple is basically pissing on all of their old mac pro fans who are getting priced out by this update. I think the "this is for studios" argument is just an excuse to make up for the fact that Apple completely missed the mark with this new refresh's price point. If Apple _really_ wanted to create a flagship desktop to appeal to studios, they would have not used the mac pro's name, they would have created a new brand for the SKU to reflect that its target audience is different from that of the mac pro.
- bitcrusher 7y ago
  I disagree with this. This viewpoint is the side-effect of Apple's lifestyle brand marketing. Apple releases a machine you can't afford and they're "pissing on you"? No, they're diversifying their product towards the high-end market they want to re/capture. If your favorite car company releases a nice premium product are they also "pissing on you"?
  - bsamuels 7y ago
    I believe that selling a branded product that targets audience X, then in a refresh raising your pricing so much that a large subset of X can no longer afford the product is pissing on their target audience, yes. If Apple wanted to sell a more expensive SKU to that wealthier subset of X, then it should have been a new brand instead of using the Mac Pro's brand. I don't own any apple desktops, so there's no personal animosity on my part.
    - wtallis 7y ago
      The Mac Pro brand was basically dead for years. Your complaint would be reasonable if they made such a large change between generations for a product on a yearly cadence, but this is more like when a car company brings back a model they discontinued 15 years ago.
  - JoshTko 7y ago
    Don't car manufactures use different brand names for luxury and mainstream to indicate who the product is for? Customers would be confused if Toyota took a new mid-range Lexus, kept the pricing, but branded it as a Toyota Avalon (the highest end Toyota sedan model in US).
    - wtallis 7y ago
      > Customers would be confused if Toyota took a new mid-range Lexus, kept the pricing, but branded it as a Toyota Avalon (the highest end Toyota sedan model in US). I'm confused. I can't tell what point you're trying to make here. The Lexus ES and Toyota Avalon already are basically the same car, modulo some styling changes and about a 10% difference in base price. This clearly isn't causing Toyota much trouble, because they've been doing this for a long time.
  - BackBackBack 7y ago
    > If your favorite car company releases a nice premium product are they also "pissing on you"? If Toyota re-releases the Corolla as a 60K car, then yes. Apple is not "diversifying" their product. They are straight pushing it upmarket leaving current Mac Pro customers, the ones paying until today $3000 for a trash can Apple swore was the future, out in the cold.
    - NightlyDev 7y ago
      Who believes what Apple says? Most things Apple says are completely bullshit. From the Mac Pro trash can product page(norwegian): "Enough performance to realize all your biggest ideas" "You will never want more speed" And let's not forget why Apple is sticking to 3.5" screens. It is the perfect size, and that's why Apple won't make phones bigger. It's definetly not because Apple is lagging behind. Oh, wait... Never belive Apple's marketing. It's misleading and often false.
      - BackBackBack 7y ago
        I'm not saying you should believe Apple. What I'm saying is that it is completely fair to criticize them based on what they say and do. Apple promised a Mac Pro replacement for pro customers but delivered a new Mac Pro only for the high end of those customers. That is why they are being criticized.
        NightlyDev 7y ago
        The old Mac Pro wasn't exactly pro, no matter how much Apple says it is. The new Mac Pro is an actual pro product, at least the higher specced ones. So they did make a replacement. Is Apple terrible at naming? Yes. Do they throw Pro into the product name for no reason? Yes. Is it better this way? Who knows. They still have the MacBook "pro".
  - FabHK 7y ago
    Steve's 2x2 matrix with portable vs desktop on one axis, and consumer vs pro(sumer) on the other axis, was announced and filled around 1998. It was populated initially with: iBook, iMac; PowerBook, Power Mac. Later: MacBook (Air), iMac; MacBook Pro, Mac Pro. The "pro" version had always been accessible to consumers. It was a bit more expensive, but if you wanted more power and expandability than the consumer model you could get the low-end "pro" model easily. And, yeah, the "real" professionals could spec it out and get a high-end pro machine. Now, this latest Mac Pro is a machine that's out of range of your average prosumer and even pro, even in the lowest configuration. That's what upsets people. > This viewpoint is the side-effect of Apple's lifestyle brand marketing. No, the anger is born from an expectation (namely, that prosumers can get the low-end pro model) that well predates the whole life-style brand marketing (iPod 2001, iPhone 2007).
    - bitcrusher 7y ago
      No, the anger is born from an expectation (namely, that prosumers can get the low-end pro model) that well predates the whole life-style brand marketing (iPod 2001, iPhone 2007). I believe this is also incorrect. Apple has consistently had a lifestyle brand marketing tactic when Jobs was at the helm. The clone years were a different animal, for sure, but pre and post Apple was most definitely marketed as a lifestyle brand and "experience". The difference is that it worked better the second time, with the addition of the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Steve's 2x2 matrix was obviated almost immediately upon his passing. The product teams at Apple may from time to time use it as a reference to bolster a point in their favor but those days have long since vanished. People are 'angry' because they want a desktop PC like experience within the Apple eco-system and they don't have anywhere to turn. Personally, I think it is unjustified, as there are more than enough product spans to fill that gap BEFORE the introduction of the Mac Pro. All of this silly 'anger' to me is just another iteration of people being upset at Apple because they didn't fulfill their personal 'peeve'. Honestly, if you don't like the stuff or it's not what you want, then use something else. If you CAN'T then I submit that you're a victim of the aforementioned lifestyle marketing.
- cormacrelf 7y ago
  The article stopped right before it made any analysis of the facts presented. There wasn’t an argument for us to talk about. Yours sounds like what should have come next though.
  - rubbingalcohol 7y ago
    Right, I was kind of wondering what the point was. I'm surprised that the author got stuck on a $1,000 monitor stand.
27182818284 7y ago
That's how I felt watching the presentation. It very quickly became apparent this was not a machine for me. I don't work with multiple 4K video streams let alone any instrument mixing or 8K video.
docbrown 7y ago
The author doesn’t mention gaming in the article at all and I don’t think any person with decent knowledge of Mac products would assume the new Mac Pro would be a gaming machine. What the author and many others are trying to convey is that Apple again has pushed out a premium product with mid to semi-high level components for a luxurious price — often out of reach for the lay consumer. If we take the common criticism of Apple and their products, especially the Mac Pro, it again comes down to them catering to a base but doing so by itemizing their product list. They know people in studios will use these products and pay what they must, so it’s simple: Studio A has old Mac Pro’s and just needs a new monitor, so they’ll buy the new 32-inch and put out some more pocket change for the stand that’s sold separately. But studio B has monitors and needs a new desktop, hence they’ll purchase a new Mac Pro w/o a screen. In the end, these products will sell, not because of their future proof parts, but more so because it’s a new machine for that niche base who most likely are too deep into the Apple ecosystem to use a PC equivalent.
- jagger27 7y ago
  Ah, my bad. I meant "home gamer" as a colloquial term to mean something like "prosumer" or "enthusiast", not an actual gamer.
markkanof 7y ago
I keep hearing this argument over and over and it's frustrating. Yes, it does seem clear that Apple is targeting media studios with this Mac Pro, but that entirely misses the point about why so many people like me are upset. Apple used to make what I considered just about the perfect machine for me. It was the cheese grater Mac Pro, and one sat under my desk until a few months ago when I gave up on Apple every refreshing that machine in a way that works for me, and I got a Mac mini instead. It's a fine machine, but there is not really an upgrade path for the internal components, the graphics processor is weak, and now I have a bunch of cables all over my desk for expansion. The cheese grater Mac Pro used to be a little bit pricey for the actual performance you were getting, but it was worth it to spend a little more to get that thoughtfully designed machine that ran Mac OS. Now it just feels like anything in Apples product line that "is for me" just feels like a giant compromise. Sure Apple can do whatever they want with their product line, but that fact doesn't make the current situation any less frustrating for me and people like me.
- NightlyDev 7y ago
  Maybe you should consider switching OS? Apple will always be behind on performance, upgrade paths, compatability and pricing. So if you want a high performance computer that you can upgrade then Apple isn't for you.
  - markkanof 7y ago
    I can't directly refute any of your points, but I also think you are still talking around the problem a bit. The point I was making is that in the cheese grater era all the items you point out where Apply is behind were also true, but the delta between Mac and PC on each of those points seemed much smaller. It was worth the tradeoff to be able to use Mac OS. This is not the case with the latest Mac Pro. The world changes over time, I get it, but I think given that at one time Apple was able to hit that sweet spot, the hope is that maybe they one day will be able to again.

Amorymeltzer 7y ago

>Naming a car Nova can cause trouble in Spanish-speaking locales (“no go”) That's an urban legend: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanish/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/chevrolet-nova-name-spanis...

msla 7y ago
It's "Philosophically True": It's true to the extent people need it to be to make a point or prove their philosophy valid, like the idea of the "tabula rasa"; we know, scientifically, that humans aren't blank slates at birth, but some people have a need for it to be true so their philosophy isn't disproven by mere positivism.
- whenchamenia 7y ago
  So, a lie you find useful?
  - msla 7y ago
    More like a lie which gets spread because it is apparently morally wrong for some ideas to be disproven.
voidmain0001 7y ago
I agree with Snopes. Pronunciation is everything in Spanish. The word nova is not at all pronounced the same as no va, and a native Spanish speaker would not confuse the two. My personal experience after having lived in Central America with locals, not ex-Pats, is that accent and pronunciation are the key to speaking Spanish, not grammar.

bitcrusher 7y ago

On the one hand, this cat knows how to screw up marketing hardware/software ( Be, Inc! ). On the other hand, he's literally talking nonsense about a compute platform that is targeted at studios.

throwayEngineer 7y ago
Btw, are there actually companies that use Apple desktop/laptops? I had thought this was part of the Marketing. Don't they sell to high school kids going to college?
- cglace 7y ago
  I’ve never been to a company that does not have a mix of pc/mac. From Fortune 500 to startups.
  - soperj 7y ago
    I've never worked for a company that has ever had a Mac anything.
    - r00fus 7y ago
      I think this depends on the industry. Software houses usually are agnostic/diverse unless they're chained to Microsoft.
      - soperj 7y ago
        I've only ever worked as a developer (in offices)
- mitchty 7y ago
  > Btw, are there actually companies that use Apple desktop/laptops? Yes? Lots of them use apple laptops. More than windows from my experience.

throwayEngineer 7y ago

Do we shame Apple for misleading users? Or is this the users responsibility to know what they are purchasing? I'm starting to side with the big evil coporations, it's 2019 and these Marketing stunts are nothing new. I forgive people for making 1 mistake, but repeating it, blame the human.

maxxxxx 7y ago
It's still important to criticize them for doing this.

elagost 7y ago

>Take an iMac Pro, break it down, put its screen in a box (that’ll revive the Cinema Display we miss), add slots to the motherboard, put it in a vintage Mac Pro cheese grater case... I think a lot of Mac faithful talked around this line like it would be an acceptable minimum, but they really wanted more than that, like "Oh, it'd be fine if they just made a tower, but what we really want is that trademark Apple Innovation!" But what they really wanted was just white-box parts in a PC case that they could swap out, not this insanely powerful, beautiful, kick-ass machine on wheels that costs more than your car. They just wanted a blessed hackintosh. (edit - just speaking from personal experience and the people I've talked to. I don't know anyone who actually needs this new Mac Pro, but I know a few who want it.)

ajross 7y ago
> insanely powerful I remain amazed at Apple's marketing. There's literally nothing "powerful" in this box that you couldn't plug into a Supermicro motherboard almost two years ago. You can make integration arguments or dither about Apple-specific devices or software all day. But as for "powerful"... this is a 14nm Xeon workstation board.
- elagost 7y ago
  It's got a lot extra proprietary components in it that make it attractive for those that want those capabilities, and it runs MacOS. Often MacOS is the extra $500 or so of any Apple machine you buy. If you don't care for MacOS or the security coprocessor or the extra Apple-specific expansion stuff, you can definitely build a cheaper PC that's more powerful.
  - ajross 7y ago
    > extra proprietary components Exactly. So not "insanely powerful" by any objective measure as used by other folks in the industry. It's just secret magic applesauce[1]. Yet you feel free to throw adjective around anyway because it just "feels" like it must be "powerful" based on the language you're reading about it. To wit, I remain amazed at Apple's marketing. [1] Which, fine. Maybe you really need that applesauce and the 2017 Supermicro board wouldn't have ever worked for you. Great! Still not an argument about "power".

Areading314 7y ago

The whole idea of "reference monitors" seems incredibly fishy to me. I've never heard of this and I highly doubt that studios are paying $42000 for monitors as was claimed at WWDC. Can anyone confirm that this is real and not just a framing tactic?

tomschlick 7y ago
They are real: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayrbWKSFN88 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayrbWKSFN88
itsaidpens 7y ago
It's real, and it's an awful workflow editing via "proxy" - imagine cleaning your apartment through grease-smeared glasses and you're only able to take them off and see your work when your guests are already knocking at your front door.
CharlesW 7y ago
FWIW, the target audience for the Apple monitor will absolutely know what reference monitors are: https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/15/sony-bvm-hx310-reference-monitor-ibc-2018/ https://www.newsshooter.com/2018/09/15/sony-bvm-hx310-refere...
kgwgk 7y ago
Not as expensive, but not cheap either: https://www.omegabroadcast.com/sales/sales-catalog/monitors-viewing/reference-monitors/?sort=pricedesc&limit=100&mode=4 https://www.omegabroadcast.com/sales/sales-catalog/monitors-...
stuart78 7y ago
It is true. Here [0] is a representative example, the only one I could find with a price. Correct color matters tremendously in film production, and getting accurate representation of that is quite expensive. [0] https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcastpromonitors/pvm-x550 https://pro.sony/ue_US/products/broadcastpromonitors/pvm-x55...
michaelt 7y ago

itsaidpens 7y ago

Apple called "Pro Users" bluff. The "pro user" that used to be served by the old Mac Pro was the same dope who gets the M-Sport BMW 3 Series, or the DSLR with the Kit Lens, etc. It's the rich dad "I want the best of X, but not the actual professional product, because I don't need it." Other examples include Arc'Teryx clothing that is worn by VC's in Silicon Valley for wealth projection that will never see the austere environments that the clothing was designed for. Apple made a true pro machine, and now the pro-poseurs are pissed. BTW I am a pro-poseur, concerned with pro-image vs actual pro features. I desperately want an Apple monitor with speakers that docks to my MBP for around $1799.

itsaidpens 7y ago
Addendum - I'm a marketer so I always see things through the lens of the expression of self. I totally sympathize with wanting a pro-lite Mac tower... but it won't happen. Try a Mac mini with an eGPU.
- fooey 7y ago
  Yeah, those eGPU's that are all dead because Apple refuses to allow Nvidia to ship new drivers... That'll solve it.
  - itsaidpens 7y ago
    https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/HM8Y2VC/A/blackmagic-egpu?afid=p238%7CsF9EJrKLw-dc_mtid_1870765e38482_pcrid_204238781435_pgrid_45491873498_&cid=aos-ca-kwgo-pla-btb-3pp--slid-----product-HM8Y2VC/A-CA https://www.apple.com/ca/shop/product/HM8Y2VC/A/blackmagic-e... ?
    - fooey 7y ago
      What I'm talking about is Apple flat out refusing to update their Nvidia drivers, so Nvidia powered eGPU's won't work with Mojave https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/14/video-nvidia-support-was-abandoned-in-macos-mojave-and-heres-why https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/02/14/video-nvidia-supp... It's been a stalemate for months and months now

atonse 7y ago

They deserve all the mockery they got for the $999 stand (and more). However, my complaint about the new Pro and Display are not that they are overpriced (they're perfectly priced for what they are). But that there is no lower end option. Even if they took the display in the 5k iMac and just made that a standalone thunderbolt display, charged $1,500 for it (even though I would've slightly grumbled), I would've ordered it on day one. But $5k for a display is just something I won't spend. Same with the desktop. If they had reasonable defaults for $6k, then yes I absolutely would buy it (because of the amazing expandability, and I'm truly tired of laptops). But the display is to me truly disappointing that they solved problems only a very very small sliver of pros asked for (pro photographers and film people), rather than a secondary class of pros (developers, etc). I don't need true reference-grade color for viewing webpages and code all day. But I would generally like a 5k or 6k display for more screen real estate.

morley 7y ago
Forgive my ignorance, but what's stopping you from buying a third-party screen and attaching that? Right now, I'm using a MBP with a Dell monitor. It would seem insane if the Mac Pro had a priority monitor interface.
- atonse 7y ago
  I do have a Dell 4k monitor (P2715Q), and it works really well and I have no complaints about its compatibility or picture quality. But I just like the Thunderbolt hub + monitor + charger solution, plus the webcam, and would've been great if these monitors came with Face ID. The LG monitor sort of does this. But it's just ugly.
  - Matthias247 7y ago
    I had the Dell at my old job. Great picture quality! But 4K on 27“ is however still a compromise, since everything will show up too big when using 2x scaling. And when going for 1.5x or 2x things will get blurry. I now use 2x with smalller fonts in editors and browser zoomed out by default as a compromise. But I’m really looking forward to have a real >200dpi desktop display for 2x scaling.

maxxxxx 7y ago

I remember some years ago (2012?) we looked into using Macs instead of Windows machines and back then the Macs (Macbook and Mac Mini) were quite competitive price wise when you compared specs. I can accept some premium since the hardware is better quality but recently they seem to have jacked up prices a lot. The machines were also very practical with the connectors and upgrades they offered. This also seems to have gone away Has anybody else observed this and when did the trend start?

JeremyBanks 7y ago
October 5, 2011
- maxxxxx 7y ago
  Thank you. I like precise answers!
matwood 7y ago
Even until fairly recently many Mac models were price competitive with other premium models right at release. The problem was/is that Apple does not lower prices on a model over time, and the more recent problem where Apple let models languish for a long period of time. Apple points to Intel and says they haven't released many huge changes in awhile, and that is true but Apple should have been lowering prices over time. Apple probably thinks they have most users covered. Since the cheese grater, there has been a huge shift to laptops. If a user really wants a desktop there is the mini, iMac, iMacPro, and now MacPro. The MP is so far out in the pro realm though that Apple may have inadvertently opened a gap in their lineup between the iMacPro and MP. If they do something to fill that gap remains to be seen.
- toyg 7y ago
  In that gap you have a well-specced MBP. With USB-C/TB3, laptop expandability has basically been solved, and Apple makes more money if it can crank out more MBP bodies (parts that are already built in much higher volumes than a desktop will ever be, hence costing less). So they were very careful to only chisel outside of MBP price ranges. IMacs are nice-looking terminals and playback-media stations, that’s your entry-level. If you want real power, you get a MBP. Only if you want huge power that the MBP really cannot deliver, you get a MP.

tinus_hn 7y ago

He’s been fooled again. The $1000 stand is nothing more than an obvious distraction; everyone is talking about the great Mac Pro and the outrageously expensive stand, but not the very expensive Mac Pro and display.

kraftman 7y ago
Is the display expensive for what it is? Everyone's saying it's in the same league as reference displays?
- npunt 7y ago
  It's not at all expensive for what it is. It's just far higher specs than most here would find useful, which is the real disconnect. Others in this thread are wondering what the realistic difference between 4K and 5K is or talking about simple stuff like pixel scaling - this is definitely not the crowd to understand or appreciate the new display.
- tinus_hn 7y ago
  It’s probably not expensive for what it is, but it definitely is very expensive. Just as the stand might not be expensive for what it is but still is really expensive.

siidooloo 7y ago

Apple is now a movie studio. ... And they’re now building computers for movie studios. The real announcements were the proress fpga, and dual chip mpx cards which most people don’t need and won’t buy.

rangibaby 7y ago

Apple makes a consumer “Pro” laptop: We want real pro machines! Apple makes an actual Pro tower with pro features: It’s too expensive!

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

brokenmachine 7y ago

What pisses me off about Apple is that, if their marketing is to be believed, I should be directly in their target market. I'm a techie with a lot of discretionary income who has creative ambitions. Also I'm still on way-out-of-date Windows 7 because I won't accept the spying that goes on in the newer versions. I love Linux but I'm unhappily tied to Windows at the moment only because one of my hobbies is playing music in Ableton, which is literally the only program keeping me on Windows. So MacOS which I imagine to be a more polished Linux that supports Ableton could be great. But then they release stuff like this and I realize that even though I'd dearly like to jump ship on Microsoft, I won't ever let myself be gouged like this and to be trapped in the kind of ecosystem where a product like this, at this price point, might be my only option. Call me a cheapskate but I do know how much the hardware costs, and won't pay that much of a premium for a shiny box that will be unsupported in a few short years when they're trying to shovel the latest hotness. Instead I'm likely to investigate options of running Ableton in Virtual machines with GPU passthrough, a bunch of hassle and clutter with extra devices and audio mixers, etc, and spend the few thousand dollars I've saved on other stuff. They clearly don't know how to satisfy a customer like me.

draw_down 7y ago
Sounds like, neither does anyone else.
judge2020 7y ago
> won't accept the spying that goes on in the newer versions Sorry to disappoint, but Windows 10's telemetry is backported to Windows 7[0]. I guess you could have done something to remove these updates, though. 0: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/213183-once-more-with-tracking-microsoft-backports-privacy-invading-windows-10-features-to-windows-7-8 https://www.extremetech.com/computing/213183-once-more-with-...
- brokenmachine 7y ago
  I did. But who knows what shenanigans they're up to. Like I said, I'm dying to leave Windows and exploring other options.

leoc 7y ago

There's a certain context here that may not be obvious. Gassée is generally seen as the person responsible for the Macintosh II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macintosh_II , the original PC-like (or indeed Apple II-like or S-100-like) modular Macintosh with a separate monitor and slots. From introduction of the original Macintosh II in 1987 through the rest of the '80s the whole Mac line was basically bifurcated between modular Macs in the Macintosh II line which were aimed at graphics and publishing professionals and were brutally expensive even compared to contemporary MS-DOS boxes, and all-in-one Macs with black-and-white (and that didn't mean greyscale) displays for everyone else who was willing to stick around. The squeeze didn't really even begin to ease up until the early '90s, AFAICT. I'm not sure to what extent Gassée was responsible for or fully supportive of those pricing decisions, but if that situation sounds pretty familiar right now, that's probably the reason that Gassée is purring about it here. In case you were wondering, Jobs apparently hated those pricing decisions, and blamed them for the Mac's failure to win market share against the PC (and compatibles). In fairness to Apple's current management, the window of opportunity to do that is probably now long closed. OTOH the number of companies employing professionals who will feel they have to stick around for these kind of prices probably isn't nearly as large either nowadays. You certainly don't need Macs to run a Photoshop or desktop-publishing shop anymore.