I think we’re all keeping our fingers crossed that whatever the new Mac Pro ends up is less trash can and more extendable desktop.
I’m also slightly hopeful that since they released a iMac Pro, they might release a non-pro Mac, aka, and expendable machine that doesn’t force you into Xeon workstation prices. Wishful thinking I know.
I suppose this makes us all crackpots!
no this Mac is using Xeons.
They’ve announced that the early-2018 Mac Pro will be a different form factor that’s much more expandable and modular, admitting that the ‘can’ design was a mistake.
I am not one who thinks the MacPro trashcan design was a mistake, maybe too far too fast. Honestly it reminded me a bit of the Mac cube (was that a G4 at the time, or G3?).
I am hoping the new MacPro looks similar to this from CurvedLabs…
As I have stated MODULAR is the key here. And I concur, there should be some chipset options like a bronze, silver, gold level (Core i5, core i7, and Xeon). I just ant to be able to replace the graphics card and hdd as needed.
I have a great affection for my old G4 Cube, but the ‘design mistake’ they refer to is the same issue the Cube ran into – it was terrific for what it was when introduced, but increasing its power or doing any upgrades quickly hits a ‘thermal wall’. A silent, fanless computer is wonderful until it needs a fan!
And yes, I agree, I’d love it to work that way. I love being able to open the side of my ‘cheese grater’ Mac Pro tower and just slide new drives and upgrades in.
“I’m ready to go back to a computer that doesn’t hate me.”
Can someone address this? I have used Macs. I use Windows 7. They really seem to me to be almost identical. I really do not understand the rationale for spending multiples of bucks to use a Mac vs a PC. The performance and user experience seems (to me) to suck as much with either - and that is, they both work really well compared to computers/operating systems of 10 years ago.
Why the passion?
I fear they have this mentality of “MUST BE DIFFERENT THAN A WINDOWS BOX” and can’t see the forest for the trees here.
Yes a base line mac mini or iMac with no upgrade options…just a disposable tech unit is fine. But there also needs to be a line of upgrade-able hardware. And that should not cost the price of a car to have. That is sort of the entire point!! I want the base macpro box. I’ll spend a little on a higher power chip right off the bat, but then I’ll upgrade to more ram, better hdd, and better gpu when I can.
Many people find the experience of using Windows to be very frustrating and convoluted compared to MacOS. I personally prefer an OS that ‘just works’ and gets out of the way to let me do my work without needing my constant attention and caregiving. Windows 7 is a vast improvement over earlier versions but many still prefer the Mac experience and workflow.
My Subaru outback gets me from point A to point B the same way that guy’s BMW 7 series does. So why did he spend 3 times the amount on his car than me? Because it has more, does more, he sees better value for his money…numerous reasons.
For me, my G5 tower was a workhorse for 9 years before I replaced it with my iMac. The only thing I ever did to that G5 was add more ram, eventually replace the graphics card because it died, and add a second hdd for more storage. my iMac has been solid and steady for 7 years now. And if I could easily replace the HDD and GPU it would keep me going for quite some time more.
Windows boxes last 3 years tops at my work and then they need to be replaced.
There is a threshold. No I do not want to spend $5,000 on an iMac. But if the average WIN rig for my needs will run me $1500 and last 3-5 years; and the same thing for a MAC rig runs me $2500 and last my 7-9 years or more…I’ll spend the extra.
Could you give me an example of an operation one might do with a PC that is loads easier to do with a Mac? I understand that occasionally, the commands are slightly different, or a procedure might be slightly different, but, once learned, don’t both computer basically do the same amount of work in the same amount of time?
As someone who had a Linux Desktop for more than a decade, this was what really converted me. I had a Windows desktop I used for gaming only back then (I didn’t linger there as my daily work tools were in Linux) and the amount of maintenance I needed to do, on both those desktops, was vastly more than I needed for OSX once I changed, especially around media compatibility, playback, and performance.
I’ve had the same OSX desktop since 2012, updated yearly to the newest version, running a full suite of unix tools via homebrew, vagrant/virtualization bits, apps from the mac app store, apps I’ve installed from .dmg files, games, and so on, and I’ve never once thought to myself “Ugh, I need to clean this all up” - everything has been self-contained and updated without issue.
Further, the hardware itself has been amazing. the 2012 iMac we purchased was maxxed out specs wise, complete with fusion drive which has kept it feeling snappy enough that I haven’t felt the need to upgrade (I did, however, upgrade ram once it became dirt cheap).
OSX, and both my mac desktop and laptop have been so worry free and fire-and-forget compared to anything I’ve used in the past that I wouldn’t recommend anything else. And that’s without discussing, at all, the benefits of having my other apple devices pass information around seamlessly (you don’t realize, for example, how awesome it is to copy text from your desktop and paste on your phone is until you need it, and realize you can do it, for example).
There’s issues with the apple ecosystem, but at the same time, I’d argue it is one of the most productive environments to work or play in, period, at the moment. And, given the long lifespan of the hardware (and the great resale value), affordable over the longterm, as well.
Sure, both a Mac and a Windows machine (or Linux box) accomplish the same basic tasks, but I’m just talking about daily use, daily tasks, and the overall look & feel of the user experience. Many people find that the Mac desktop OS is simply easier to navigate, simpler to use, better thought out, with much fewer intrusive updates, alerts, issues, upgrades, security concerns, and hassles. It just works and lets me do my Photoshopping without bothering me. And the small, smart ways that it works with my iPhone and laptop, such as automatically knowing what website I left off on and popping it up as I walk away, or passing information back and forth seamlessly, just lets me get on with my life, and I appreciate that.
But, a BMW 7 is a very different beast than a Subaru Outback. Everyone can agree on that, and you can measure the differences easily. Can we do that with a high-end Mac vs PC? Is this a real phenomenon or this like people arguing for Nikon vs Canon, or even worse - are Mac enthusiasts like high-end stereo snobs who insist a $5000.00 metallic triangle improves their room sound, but also insist that blinded A/B testing misses the point.
IOW, I am very skeptical that one operating system is so clearly superior to another using it is worth paying 3X for, and that such an advantage has remained pretty clear for decades.
Also, I am typing this on an eight-year old Dell Tower with an i7 and a measly 6 MB of RAM. Yet I routinely process RAW photo files with up to 30 layers in Photoshop. It works. It has not yet needed repair. It cost me about 1/4 of what an equivalent Mac would have cost at the time.
I hope I have not come across with too much snark - I am quite sincere in my lack of understanding. A few summers ago, I taught a photography class, and had to use one of those expensive Mac systems with a huge white screen (very nice, btw) and just a keyboard - the whole CPU inside the sleek stainless and white screen. I hated using it, even though it worked essentially the same as my home PC. BUT, the haptics were slightly different, and I didn’t know where the proper buttons were, or what the file system was called.
But, surely, this was just me preferring what I was used to using. There was nothing inherently inferior to the Mac, but it sure seemed like the “computer hated me”. Is this all we are talking about?
i suspect this will go the way of that round thing apple released a few years back. i spend time at a lot of tech companies and have never seen one being used. in fact, i’m not sure i’ve ever seen on of those in the apple store either.
re the 5grand pro imac … as an actual business line for apple it’s DOA … there’s a market for what 1000 of these machines? even if it’s 10,000 thats chump change. i guess if you start to see these in offices it’ll give the illusion apple is still cool and cutting edge not a just a toy company … but it doesn’t change the fact there’s no real professional reason to use a mac anymore.
you can build a pc that’s just as powerful and at this point apple has completely lost any advantage of having creative SW developers cater to the platform. now that fcp is garbage everything i need works just fine in widows
i have 6 imacs and will prob not replace them w macs as they start to go out of service.
My spouse is a photographer and she swears by Nikon. She has tried Canon, but just does not like the fit and feel on it compared to Nikon. I think Canon vs Nikon is an excellent comparison between Win and Mac.
I find it dubious that you only have 6mb of ram and are processing raw photo files in photoshop. I can only presume you mean 6gb of ram. This being said, 6gb of ram with a core i7 can be fine for processing a raw file because that is less about the ram or age of the machine and more about the processor. an intel i7 with four cores is still a very powerful chipset that can handle a lot.
MacOS does work more seamlessly to @orenwolf 's points. It integrates with other Apple and non apple products more easily and fluidly than Win machines do. I partially think this is why the Windows phone is just gone now. It could never do what iPhone did.
If you mean the Mac Pro, I know plenty of people who use them, and they’re quite prominently displayed at Apple Stores.[quote=“ggvp, post:95, topic:102189”]
but it doesn’t change the fact there’s no real professional reason to use a mac anymore.
[/quote]
Designers and professionals everywhere disagree with you.
As you say, the differences between the two are minor. Both are fully baked, grown up OS’s. But there are differences. Just as some people can sleep on anything, while others need a very particular kind of bed or they wake up in pain. So too, some people are more aggrieved by poor usability than others. For those who notice poor UI, using windows is like walking to work with a pebble in their shoe every day, and macs are like not having that pebble there. Mac UI is superior in many small and big ways… but some people don’t notice or care as much.
Another analogy, It’s like caring about fonts. Lots of people go through life not really noticing fonts at all, but for others, seeing something set in the wrong font can make them want to wash their eyes. Windows UI is like Wrong Font central, and Mac UI is, more often than not, Right Font central.
The thing about the Mac Pro is that the iMac is a pro level tool itself. No longer a device for the home and secretaries. That means the people that need the extra oomph except for the really high end uses. Things like Hollywood editing on a deadline. Or real-time Photoshop stuff. Things like that. And now the iMac Pro is encroaching there as well.
You fail to grasp the size of the Mac market. The current, cylinder mac pro makes up a low single digit percent of all mac sales. Assume that it’s 1%. Last year apple sold 18.5 million macs. So that’s 185,000 mac pros per year, despite it being years old hardware.
Apple is probably betting that a lot of people buying the highest high end imac they can get will be happy to upgrade to a pro imac, so the sales for the pro imac are probably going to be quite a bit better than that.
edit - hit publish too soon.
