
Apple Is Listening - dankohn1
https://marco.org/2019/06/09/apple-is-listening
======
linguae
I’m glad that Apple is finally updating their Macs again, but at the same time
Apple has doubled-down on its refusal to sell user-serviceable, upgradeable,
and expandable hardware at prices that are within reach for most customers.
The laptops have soldered RAM and soldered storage. The Mac Mini and iMac Pro
thankfully have DIMMs, but in order to keep the warranty, you have to visit an
Apple-approved repair center to have a specialist perform the upgrade, which
costs more than doing it yourself. After over two years of waiting, the Mac
Pro announcement was a huge letdown since the cost of the only user-
serviceable Mac has doubled from $2999 to $5999, alienating Mac Pro users who
can afford a $2999 computer but not a $5999 one.

It’s one thing for me to buy a “disposable computer” when it is priced very
low. It’s another thing for me when you can’t upgrade or service computers
with premium-priced parts in them. This is a trend I don’t support.

Unfortunately the only way to protest Apple’s business decisions is to leave
the Mac, which means giving up macOS, which I find a more productive
environment for me than Windows or any of the Linux desktops like KDE and
GNOME. I started using macOS back when Macs were user-serviceable,
upgradeable, and reasonably affordable. I continue using the Mac for macOS,
but I’m finding myself alienated by Apple's business decisions.

I wish the situation for personal computer operating systems were better. I
want PC hardware with an operating system that has the same power, attention
to detail, usability, and reliability that macOS has. At this point I am
willing to spend my spare time on such a project.

~~~
RickSanchez2600
With Apple making the Mac Pro so expensive it opens up the grey market for
Hackintosh PCs to run MacOS at a fraction of the cost. If Apple wants to beat
the Hackintosh they need an ATX based Mac that doesn't cost $5999 but more
like $999 that can be upgraded with a better graphics card and etc.

~~~
root_axis
Hackintosh is fun for a tinkerer but not really practical for someone that
just needs to get work done. I say this as someone who dislikes macOS and has
tried the hackintosh approach in an attempt to build iOS apps without having
to buy a mac. You can make it work, but it's a big pain and all bets are off
when an update comes down the line.

~~~
oldgradstudent
I know a few people who work from home as freelancers in the visual effects
industry around here. They are all rabid Apple fanboys/fangirls, owned pre-
trashcan Mac Pros, but just couldn't stomach the trashcan version. They all
switched to Hackintosh or Windows in the last few years.

Even for technically challenged artists, it is not difficult because there are
several technicians around here that install Hackintosh machines for this
industry and update them from time to time. Their names are passed by word-of-
mouth.

The bigger production houses will probably buy the new Mac Pros, but the
entire freelance sector will keep their Hackintoshes or move to Windows. The
pricing is just crazy.

~~~
root_axis
> _there are several technicians around here that install Hackintosh machines
> for this industry and update them from time to time. Their names are passed
> by word-of-mouth._

Like I said, it can work, but relying on "word of mouth technicians" isn't
very practical. There are also times when, after an update, things just
_break_ , and the "technician" may not even be able to fix the issue in a
timely fashion, especially issues related to sound or QE/CI. I've done enough
digging around and tinkering with kext files and video drivers to know that it
can sometimes take _days_ of concerted effort to fix these issues. I'm sure
mileage varies depending on one's needs or the particular hardware
configuration but you're rolling the dice every time you update.

~~~
oldgradstudent
> but you're rolling the dice every time you update.

Definitely, they've all become paranoid about updates or installing anything
which is not absolutely necessary. They are a version or two of macOS behind,
and never update without confirming with the technician.

I shudder at the security implications, but I'm told it has become quite
common after the trashcan came out.

------
jarjoura
I think Apple released this Mac Pro & Display at the wrong event. From every
indication, it was designed for Hollywood. Developers don't need expansion,
but Audio and Video producers do! Announcing at an LA event for producers and
artists would have cleared any confusion.

It wasn't designed for AI or ML either, because Apple is having a war with
NVidia now, probably over component pricing, but who knows.

Developers didn't ask for this machine or a $6k reference monitor. They just
wanted something they can swap out the video cards or memory or hard drives
occasionally as time goes on. They wanted a nice display that gave them 200%
scaling and proper color correction in a matching aluminum body.

Whether I can afford this machine or not at home is beside the point. It's
just that after the keynote high wore off, and we returned to reality, it's
clear Apple revealed the machine at the wrong event.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
I think they probably felt they had to reveal it at this event for PR reasons,
if nothing else; you're right in that this is clearly a machine made for A/V
editors, but I can't see Apple introducing the new Mac Pro at NAB. A new Final
Cut Pro, sure, but not a new Mac Pro.

I think they dropped the ball by not having _two_ displays, though -- the $6K
Pro Display XDR for the crowd who goes "OMG that's so cheap for a monitor like
that," and a $1500 Pro Display (sans XDR) that's basically the 5K panel from
the iMac Pro. I am hoping that either that's still coming, or at least there
are people with some weight in the company looking at the reaction to the XDR
display and its "optional" stand and saying, "Did we tell you so? Yes, yes, we
did, Doug. We told you so."

~~~
JumpCrisscross
> _they dropped the ball by not having two displays, though_

As you said, they’re going for a specific market with this product. They can
always release a general-market display down the road. Focusing on a specific
set of power users first is how Apple built its renowned culture, and it’s
nice to see it returning to those roots.

~~~
chipotle_coyote
I see people downvoting this comment, but...it's kind of true.

The "kind of" part is this: Apple arguably built its culture first around the
_extremely_ hacker-friendly Apple II, then around the original Macintosh --
which was certainly _expensive,_ but was very specifically pitched as "the
computer for the rest of us." That segment is one that they're ironically a
bit wobbly on right now. (The MacBook Air and the iMac are close.)

But: the Mac got adopted by the high end graphic design and print layout
industry, and Apple started making higher end machines specifically targeted
to that market like the Mac IIfx -- which was a $9K machine at its
introduction in 1990, and that is _not_ adjusted for inflation. As far as I
can tell, that was their high water mark in pricing, but they've regularly had
"flagship" models breaking the $4K mark at introduction, e.g., the Power
Macintosh 9500. The sub-$3K flagship era of the Power Mac G5 and original Mac
Pros is something of an anomaly. (Which isn't to say that I wouldn't like to
see a headless Mac with internal expansion slots that starts at $1999.)

~~~
linguae
_The sub-$3K flagship era of the Power Mac G5 and original Mac Pros is
something of an anomaly._

Apple actually was able to maintain this pricing for entry-level Power Macs
and Mac Pros from 1999 (I haven't checked earlier prices) through the 2013 Mac
Pro model. Here is a list of prices I compiled:

    
    
      Blue and White Power Mac G3 (January 1999) -- $1,599 ($2,453 in 2019 dollars)
      Graphite Power Mac G4 (December 1999) -- $1,599 ($2,453 in 2019 dollars)
      2001 Power Mac G4 (January 2001) -- $1,699 ($2,453)
      2001 Quicksilver Power Mac G4 (July 2001) -- $1,699 ($2,453)
      2002 Mirrored Drive Door Power Mac G4 (August 2002) -- $1,699 ($2,413)
      2003 Power Mac G5 (August 2003) -- $1,999 ($2,776), reduced to $1,799 ($2,499) in November 2003
      2006 Mac Pro (August 2006) -- $2,199 ($2,787)
      2010 Mac Pro (July 2010) -- $2,499 ($2,929)
      2013 Mac Pro (December 2013) -- $2,999 ($3,289.83 in 2019 dollars, but you can still purchase an entry-level 2013 Mac Pro today from Apple for $2,999 in 2019 dollars).

~~~
m463
interesting! Looked up some old datapoints on wikipedia

Apple Lisa 1983 $9,995 ($25,143 in 2018 dollars)

Apple Macintosh 128k 1/24/84 $2,495 ($6,000 in 2018 dollars)

Macintosh II 3/2/87 $5,498 ($12,125 in 2018)

Next Cube 9/18/90 $10,000 ($19,177 in 2018 dollars)

------
colmvp
Back in 2012, I bought the original rMBP.

It fit everything I needed: it was thinner than my previous laptop as it had
no optical drive, it was lightweight, it had a gorgeous screen, good enough
keyboard, and seemed like a reasonable price for a higher end laptop work
computer. I've used it everyday since 2012, and aside from the battery which I
eventually replaced, it's been functioning without a hitch. From the 90s to
the late 2000s, I used a variety of PC laptops and this was the only laptop
that survived a huge amount of abuse from travel and daily usage (obviously,
YMMV).

I'd love to upgrade to a new MBP, but I truly don't understand what they were
thinking with this current iteration. The touchbar feels gimmicky and over the
top. Call me old school, but give me physical buttons any day of the week and
keep the keyboard simple. Most importantly, give me a keyboard that has more
room to press so that random dust getting in there isn't going to screw shit
up.

~~~
jasonkester
The worrying part is that in order to keep using the good MacBooks from the
past, you need to keep them on the OS version that they shipped with.

I have a 2012 MacBook Air that was crazy fast, weighed four grams, and even
ran windows 7. Sure, the drive was small, but it was perfect.

But some time in 2015 or so I made the terrible strategic blunder of upgrading
to the latest OS version. Performance immediately dropped to zero, and now
when I open it up for any reason, I just spend my whole time watching it spin
uselessly trying to idle along with one browser tab open. It's sad to see it
so reduced.

I've had the same experience with every iPad I've ever owned. Delightful,
responsive machines that get auto-updated to brick status over the course of
about three years. (I have every model up to air 3, and the only one still
working perfectly is the old 1st gen air that I've kept on iOS 8 and spend a
minute every day carefully dismissing the auto update prompt).

I have one of the sacred 2015 MacBook Pros, which now can't edit videos using
the new format exported from my wife's iPhone x. An OS upgrade would solve
that. But the machine is too precious to risk it.

I don't know what the solution is.

~~~
bitL
Upgrade your drive with a dedicated mSATA adaptor (you can still get Samsung
1TB mSATA drives). That could boost your performance.

~~~
kyboren
Actually, you can still get _2TB_ Samsung mSATA drives. The Samsung T5 and T3
external drives are just enclosures around mSATA parts.

------
clay_the_ripper
Once they replace this travesty of a generation of MBP, I’ll agree with this.
I’ve been impressed recently with the improvements in software and hardware.

I have a maxed out 2015 MBP and I won’t buy the most generation under any
circumstances. I buy laptops with the expectation it will last at least 4
years, and I have no confidence that this generation will last that long. I
have full confidence though that the rumored replacement will be amazing, much
like the new Mac Pro adessed the past criticisms.

~~~
tomduncalf
To be fair it should last for four years, as that’s how long the keyboard
replacement program covers it for. I’m not aware of any other critical flaws,
although repairiability of this generation is probably quite bad overall.

Whether it will last much more than 4 years I’m not sure, I’m not that
confident - could be worth mashing some biscuit into the keyboard just shy of
the 4 year mark to get a replacement ;)

------
jac_no_k
Actually, I think Microsoft's effort is putting much needed pressure on Apple.
My wife about a year ago got a Microsoft Surface 6, the tablet with keyboard +
trackpad. It was about the same price as a MacBook and with a bundle, the
Microsoft Office suite came included. It works well for my wife's use case and
she's able to stay with her preferred interface.

Hardware has been trouble free, Windows 10 with One Drive makes it straight
forward to change machines, apps run well as a normal user account, and to my
knowledge it hasn't been hit with any malware. The screen being capable of
touch interface, can actually be cleaned!

In comparison, my last of the "good" MBPr from 2015 has a partially fouled
screen because the slightly greasy keys touched the screen. I am so annoyed
when the screen is dark but I'm in a well lit room.

~~~
SkyMarshal
My late 2013 MBPr battery finally died recently, and I took it to an Apple
store for service. Two days and $199 later I have it back with a new battery
(and keyboard, which is attached to the battery) and in like-new condition. It
looks and feels like a brand new computer.

Probably worth seeing if having Apple Service can do the same for yours, but
via a screen replacement.

~~~
sensecall
I had a similar experience with my 2012 rMBP last year. Out of warranty:
screen, logic board, keyboard and battery replaced.

Charge? £0.

------
coldtea
Well, I'm not so sold on this.

1) Pro users wanted a replacement for the Mac Pro of yore. Instead they got
something suitable only for high end pro studios, willing to pay $6k starting
price for the new Pro (or are in need of a very-cheap-for-what-it-does (even-
with-the-stand-included) but still very expensive reference quality monitor).

Where's my $3K-$5K Mac Pro (basically a headless iMac Pro grade machine) for
regular videographers, graphic designers, etc, that don't make more than
$100K/year and don't work for Nike or Hollywood? We used to have several
options from Apple back in the day, now it's either the iMac Pro or, I dunno,
the mini. Still no extensibility.

2) Where's a redesigned keyboard as a first priority? Why do they wait for a
"new redesign" of the whole laptop? Meanwhile forcing people to keep buying
the same broken design, even for the 2019 model? Just release the same current
design with a decent 2015 style keyboard and the minimal tweaks needed to make
it fit.

3) Where's a pro apple monitor that people who don't need /can't afford a $6K
reference beast can buy? Where's the iMac / iMac Pro monitor in standalone
form?

~~~
pier25
> now it's either the iMac Pro or, I dunno, the mini

What about the 5K iMac? With an i9 it becomes a very powerful machine that
describes your use case perfectly.

It's not as repairable as a tower though, but neither are the iMac Pro or the
Mini.

~~~
coldtea
It's not upgradable (nor is the mini and iMac Pro) and like the iMac comes
with a screen that can't be used on its own (when the computer part is old in
5-6 years).

~~~
pier25
True, but you can upgrade the RAM, use eGPU via TB3, and add more storage via
TB3/USB3. It's not like an iPad.

------
cromwellian
I'm wondering why you need so much power in 1 machine for DCC work. Wouldn't
it be better to have a relatively cheap model, and when you need to Render, to
farm it out to a cluster of computers?

For example, they claim the beefiest model will be 4x the old Mac Pro. But at
what cost? $10,000-15,000 for maxed out system? How many cheap PC renderfarm
computers can I get for that? How many cloud rendering instances could I rent?

To me, it's like they "listened" and built a Bugatti Veyron instead of a Ford
F-350. The people wanting an upgradeable workstation are not looking for a
max-out computer off the shelf. They simply want the capability to upgrade it
over time or modify it according to their needs. In particular, for rendering
3d workloads, it seems renting cloud computers is far more scalable. If I am
time limited, I can easily buy enough power to render 20x faster than this
system in a crunch.

This seems more like a vanity project.

~~~
swerner
Remember the joke of “never underestimate the bandwidth of a 747 full of hard
drives”? That’s the render farm. Throw a ton of work at it, and it’ll get done
faster than a big single machine could. What would have taken a week now takes
a day.

The Mac Pro in our analogy is 5G wireless: not nearly as much bandwidth as the
747, but at much lower latency. Lots of interactive/real time applications are
possible that in a farm would be bottlenecked by network bandwidth alone.

~~~
swerner
Besides, we’re already using render farms where each machine has 20+ cores and
256GB RAM. A future render farm might as well be built from machines with
specs similar to the new Mac PRo.

~~~
cromwellian
As far as I can tell, this Mac Pro's specs are on par with 2017 PC
workstations.

------
kjhughes
I'll believe it when they produce a MacBook Pro that developers love again or
a Mac Pro that (not yet independently wealthy) developers can afford again.

~~~
scarface74
As far as a desktop Mac, a suitably configured iMac is more than powerful
enough for development. A $2100 5K iMac - 6 Core I5 3Ghz (turbo boost to
4Ghz), 256GB SSD, 16GB of RAM. The RAM is user upgradable and an external SSD
drive would be as fast as any normal internal SSD drive.

As far as a laptop? I'm not spending my own money on a development class
laptop. I hate developing with just a laptop. I have a dual external monitor
setup at home and at work. My next personal computer will definitely be a
desktop. You still get more power and more thermal headroom on desktops than
more expensive laptops.

~~~
giancarlostoro
Dunno nowadays with all the Electron apps, the RAM jacked up by open JIRA
browser tabs, needing Outlook open plus JVM based IDEs from JetBrains having
16GB of RAM is not enough. I need at least 32GB and even then I would feel
better with 64GB cause I fear it will only get worse. I am partially hoping
JetBrains makes their IDEs fully Kotlin based and compile them natively to
much lower memory footprints.

I am also ashamed of Slack and how they dont even take advantage of Electron
to add things that Chromium supports, might as well convert it to a native app
and make it worthwhile. I feel like Slack could do so much more and yet it
sits there nothing new or special. Theres plenty that could be improved for
Slack. I could share a dozen ideas but I rather see them get off their own
lazy butts and give everybody their moneys worth.

~~~
scarface74
I wouldn't pay $600 for the 32GB upgrade from Apple. I would buy the 8GB
configuration from Apple that would take the price down to $1899 and buy 3rd
party RAM.

[https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/imac-2019-27-inch](https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/imac-2019-27-inch)

I refuse to use Slack or Outlook on my computer. I keep them both running on
my phone.

~~~
giancarlostoro
Except the RAM is soldered on their laptops. It's company provided so I rather
not argue against a laptop, plus I am effective in using it anyway.

I wish I could buy 3rd party RAM for a MacBook Pro unless they finally stopped
soldering on the RAM recently, then I would love to buy a new MBP with my own
cash if I can get a normal keyboard.

~~~
scarface74
The 13 inch comes with 8GB and only support 16GB - a $200 upgrade. The 15 inch
comes with 16GB and only supports up to 32GB - a $400 upgrade.

You would probably only save up to $200 on third party memory. Which is not
nothing but if you get a 15 inch you’re already talking about $2400

~~~
giancarlostoro
I think I get what you're saying, so you rather get the 8GB model and add on a
8GB RAM stick? For a total of 16GB and a few hundred bucks saved, cause afaik
they solder all RAM. I'm all for putting new RAM on a laptop, but unsoldering
RAM sounds like too much effort to me.

~~~
scarface74
No I’m saying if hypothetically the RAM wasn’t soldered onto to the 13”
MacBookPro and you could buy third party RAM, you wouldn’t save “a few hundred
bucks”. The maximum ram that It can handle is 16GB and that’s $200. Just
taking a cursory look, you could save maybe $150. Which is not nothing but
you’re already willing to spend Apple prices on a MacBook Pro, I can’t see how
$150 in savings would be the deciding factor.

On the other hand, the price delta between Apple prices for the 16GB -> 32GB
upgrade is about $250 more for the 15 inch than you could get from a third
party if that were an option but you’re already spending at least $2400 on a
15 inch MacBook Pro.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m arguing hypothetically. I’m not spending my own money
for an expensive laptop. I don’t need portability for my personal computer. I
need portability for my work computer and a job will give you a work computer
- and hopefully one that is beefy enough to do what you need.

My personal development computer will always be a desktop. You get more bang
for your buck and I hate developing on just a laptop without external
peripherals anyway. I’ve never been interested in Apple laptops enough to
spend my own money over just getting a much cheaper mid range Dell when I
needed the portability.

------
secstate
I think I might just be done with Apple. That culture of saying nothing and
the surprising customers with things is like betting in Vegas. And
unfortunately for Apple, the house always wins. They can repair the damage of
the Mac Pro debacle with a new Mac Pro, but they haven't owned the train wreck
of a keyboard on the Macbook Pro. Sure, they might be ready to hit it big on a
double down on black, but in the meantime, my Lenovo keyboard is a delight.

~~~
fastball
What about the trackpad though?

I just can't get over how inferior everyone else's trackpads are.

~~~
NeedMoreTea
If I had a Thinkpad I wouldn't care about the trackpad. The biggest annoyance
of my 2015 Macbook pro is the lack of trackpoint.

~~~
dagw
Having recently gotten my first Thinkpad since IBM stopped making them, I was
very disappointed that the trackpoint is nowhere near as good as I remember
them being. Don't know if it me or the laptops that have changed though

------
bartread
The article mentions it in passing but they still need to fix the Macbook Pro:
the keyboard sucks, it doesn't have enough ports of any kind (and I _hate_
carrying dongles - they eventually always get lost), it's not upgradeable[1],
the battery is too weak to sustain heavy workloads for long when running
unplugged. They do at least seem to be introducing models with more
horsepower.

I'm still "surviving" on a late-2015 15" MBP, which is making me twitchy
because I'm down to one machine after my late-2011 17" MBP - which I used as
my studio machine (built-in Firewire FTW) - died last week due to the somewhat
infamous discrete GPU overheating issue (and Apple will no longer repair it;
possibly fair enough after 8 years trouble-free use). I've resorted to buying
a heatgun and some thermal paste to try fixing it, and will probably source a
spare machine from that era for scavenging parts in future. I'm also
considering a used 27" iMac from a similar era for the studio, although it's
not so convenient to tote around.

Other options include buying a Windows laptop (probably Lenovo, which seem
decent), although I hate Windows so would prefer to avoid it. Linux, although
perfectly fine for a lot of what I do (and would I think be fine on many
Lenovo models), will only run Ableton Live via Wine, which is not a prospect
that fills me with joyful anticipation (ditto, Microsoft Office, I believe).

 _[1] A lot of people love the 2015 models and, I agree, they 're not bad, but
the rot had already set it. For me, peak MBP occurred a few years earlier,
back in 2011: HDD and memory are both upgradeable, battery is easily replaced,
and in fact the modular design of the interior makes it fairly straightforward
to pull out and replace or clean most internal components (motherboard,
optical drive, fans, etc.). The GPU overheating design flaw is, however, a big
fail, so these machines are still far from perfect._

------
belazeebub
To give people a bit of perspective, the Macintosh IIfx was released in 1990
for US$8,969 which in inflation-adjusted dollars is ~$17,500 today. The
PowerMacintosh 8100 released in 1994 for ~$4,250 which in today's prices is
~$7,300. The original 128kb Macintosh would be ~$6,100 in today's dollars.
Those are all the bottom-end models. By contrast, a Chevy S-10 pickup truck
was about $7,000 in 1990 (if my googling was accurate).

~~~
sjwright
> Those are all the bottom-end models.

I think you misspoke; the 128k, IIfx and 8100 were all unequivocally top-end
models at the time of release.

~~~
belazeebub
Sorry, I meant that the pricing were for the entry-level configuration, not
cherry-picked top configurations.

------
natch
I was ready to upgrade when the touchbar came out, but no, have been holding
back for however many years that is. Still stuck on a 2013 MBP. Hoping Apple
fixes the MBP soon. What's broken? We all know -- keyboards, needless and
costly touchbar, and SSD prices out of step with market prices. Yes I know you
can get it without the touchbar, but not with top of the line specs, which I
usually go for.

------
rbanffy
On the new MacPro, we have to consider the target audience.

It's doubtful the machine is a good choice for anything other than an artist
doing crazy sound/video stuff. It's simply too much compute power. Of course
I'd love to have a 56-thread monster (I always wanted Intel to invest more
seriously on Xeon Phi as a homogeneous CPU/GPU replacement because I got tired
of the VAX+supercomputer arrangement from the 80's that survives today as the
normal clever x86 driving stupid-but-can-lift-heavy-things GPU) but I simply
can't justify one for me. When I actually need to do some heavy lifting, there
is always Google or AWS to help me with it (and Azure can rent me some really
big Cray iron if I really, really need that kind of power). I have a cousin
who was into computational chemistry that has mastered programming the classic
Cray boxes and even he would probably be very happy with ad-hoc swarms of
cloud-based boxes these days.

The main advantage of the Mac Mini is the size, but if you match specs with an
iMac Pro or even an iMac, you'll kind of end up with the same price for a
machine without a monitor. It's cute, but I wouldn't get one. And the actual
desk footprint of an iMac is more or less the same as a Mini with a monitor.

It'd be nice if Apple decided to sell the iMac LCD panels as standalone
monitors (because I'd love to have a monitor with the same color responses as
my iMac, just so that the background looks the same on all screens - or even
the black background of the terminals were all the same shade of black, FFS).
Maybe they will, but, again, considering all machines that can run macOS, all
practical options in the low-to-mid-to-high-end (MacPros are waaay above that)
have pretty nice free screens attached to the machine.

One minor complaint: the stand... Asking $999 for a monitor stand is beyond
ridiculous. If it costs that much to make, then just sell the ultra-HDR 8K
wundermonitor for $999 more and put the stand in the box. It's not like it's
not much cheaper than the reference monitors it goes against. I'd totally get
one without a Mac if I had to edit 8K video for money (lots of it). The stand
is 2019's version of the "I'm rich" iPhone app.

All in all, we should think of the Pro as the SGI Tezro of our time - exotic,
expensive, ugly (it _really_ looks like a cheese grater) and probably more
than we need.

------
TurbineSeaplane
Sure - working great for somebody like Marco who’s already loaded.

~~~
scarface74
You know that's an old popular meme in the Apple community...

"That might work for Marco".

Marco didn't come from money or have any connections. He found a job on
Craigslist working for a random guy named David Karpe as his first employee.
They started Tumblr and he lucked out when it got acquired by Yahoo and made a
few million.

But the acquisition happened after he started a blog that became popular,
wrote Instapaper, and started a podcast that became popular. I'm sure Overcast
was helped by his popularity but if it had sucked, no one would have
downloaded it. Even for that he tried three different monetization strategies
until he landed on one that worked -- writing his own non scummy ad platform.
All of this with no outside funding.

And he lucked up and made money by being an early investor in Gimlet Media but
that was way later.

But on a personal note. If I needed it, a $5,000 iMac Pro wouldn't break the
bank and I'm just a regular old enterprise developer. That's less than two
weeks billable work for a halfway competent cheap software contractor.

Heck my college computer was $4000 in 1992. A Mac LCII with 10MB of RAM, a //e
card, a 5-1/4 disk drive, a Personal Laserwriter printer and a copy of Soft AT
to run Dos compilers and a 12" monitor. Over the next two years I upgraded it
with a larger monitor, an external hard drive, and an accelerator card using
money I got doing a contract for a college.

~~~
Barrin92
I don't think the OP was saying that he doesn't deserve his money, but it
really is absolutely absurd. Apple is an international company, worth a
trillion dollars selling millions of devices.

I work in the UK. I make about 80k a year pre-taxes. That's an average, if not
relatively high salary for a developer. "Regular old enterprise developers"
don't make 5000 bucks in two weeks, at least not in 99% of the developed
world, not to speak of the rest.

And it's true that technology in 1992 was very expensive, but _technology is
actually supposed to get cheaper_ , that's the entire point, you get more for
less. If you pay more for the same, that's anti-technology

~~~
nixgeek
$5k in two weeks is $130k a year, you make ~$104k a year with some currency
conversion. They’re not incredibly far apart.

~~~
root_axis
In a world where you pay no taxes sure, in the real world it's closer to $160k
a year and almost certainly more for someone living in Europe. Even if your
math was correct, 30k a year at that income level is _massive_ , that's an
extra $1000 per pay period, definitely a brow-raising sum the first time you
see that boost.

~~~
scarface74
I mentioned how many hours a low paid 1099 contractor in Atlanta would have to
work to pay for this. If I were a 1099 contractor, this would be a business
expense - therefore pretax.

------
imagetic
Apple took it to the max in terms of what IS possible with the Mac Pro. That's
awesome.

I don't see any of the post-houses I work with on a regular basis chomping a
the bit for the power they're offering at $6k though. Most have already
switched to PC/Windows after Final Cut X and the Mac Pro trashcan came up very
very VERY short.

This is definitely aimed at the highest budget niche audience. I'm sure a few
very successful independent media people will buy them. I'll be jealous.

I've owned 3 Mac Pros in my life, but this breaks any budget I could possibly
lay out for anything I have ever worked on in my entire career.

------
vinay_ys
It is quite plain that Apple never really listens to the user feedback in a
traditional way (and rightly so). Their business strategy for Mac hardware and
MacOS (specifically, pricing strategy) may not align with what most early and
advanced users of Mac want. But this post seems to be sugarcoating it.

------
nkkollaw
I'm not giving them a cent until they remove those awful keyboards from their
laptops.

I'm on a Mid-2015 MacBook Pro which works great. Waiting.

------
bitL
Now, when can I get 8-core 15" MacBook Pro without touch bar or 13" MacBook
Pro with 32GB RAM? I'd pay premium for non-touch bar option...

------
altitudinous
Pro & screen is a great machine. I think that because people are talking about
it it is already a success. They will sell a lot, because Ferrari sell a lot,
Red cameras sell a lot. They won't sell one to me, because even though I am a
successful indie dev I am clearly not the market they seek. The machines they
make for me are - Mac mini, iMac Pro and hopefully the upcoming Macbook Pro,
because my barely alive, coating missing from the screen, doesn't hold any
charge late 2013 Macbook Pro is still far better than the current brand new
one.

------
antidaily
The iMac 5k and Pros dont get enough love. They look great, are blazingly
fast, and the display is ridiculously good. But i suppose the Pro is
post-2017.

------
intellix
Half of the keyboard started acting up on my 6 year old Early 2013 15" MBP
yesterday. Was waiting for the rumoured 16" rework but had my hand forced to
the 2019 15". The touch bar is already winding me up as I'm used to resting my
fingers on the edge of the top of the keyboard. It's constantly like: Siri,
mute, brightness! siri! siri!

It looked cool on iMessage that I could scroll through smileys but that's
about it. Just about ready to completely disable the thing. Not sure how
they'll be able to backpedal on it cause replacing it would mean admitting it
was a failure.

Perhaps replacing all keys with mini screens to allow total customisation of
what's displayed with the ability to still scroll on them?

~~~
drags7er
You can remove Siri from the touchbar. I did because I kept activating it when
authenticating with Touch ID.

------
pupdogg
Apple's 2013 "trash can" design of MacPro actually helped HP Z8 series
desktops finally get recognized for their power! No one realized that there
existed a beast much more powerful than a MacPro.

------
acroback
Stockholm syndrome is strong with this one.

On a serious note, problem seems to be extremely long product cycles for Apple
Hardware products with "my way or highway attitude" from Apple.

These 2 make for a disaster recipe. Putting form before function is a fallacy
which is bound to boomerang sooner or later.

E.g The monitor stand fiasco speaks volumes of either a disconnect or ridicule
raised by wrong audience.

The latest MacBook pro is a bad and good design both depending on audience.

Last Mac Pro was laughably form before function for a fortune.

------
overgard
Releasing a hilariously overpriced and ugly computer that can cost as much as
a new car and might appeal to a niche of a niche, to me, doesn’t really
demonstrate any change in direction. (I love how people keep saying “the most
powerful Mac ever”. Ok, but the laptop I bought 7 months ago for 2k has about
the same amount of power as the base 6k Mac and it’s not housed in a giant
garish cheese grater)

I say this as a person that bought exclusively macs from 2009 - 2015 but they
don’t have a single computer I even remotely want at the moment.

~~~
scarface74
It’s not for you. The market that it is for are chomping at the bit to buy
one.

But as far as it’s “garish appearance”, that’s exactly what Pro’s were asking
for something that didn’t put form over function.

~~~
overgard
Well you’re right, it isn’t for me. Which is exactly my point. I am their
target market (user of creative software that’s willing to pay a bit of a
premium), who has been willing to buy their computers in the past, and none of
what they sell holds any appeal. It’s either ridiculously priced (Mac Pro),
shoddy (MacBook) or not very modifiable (iMac) “The market” that it’s for
(“creatives”) is saying things like “why can’t I get an Nvidia card?” And “I
can’t afford a twelve thousand dollar computer” (what this thing costs if you
pair it with the monitor)

I’ve worked in games and CAD so I’m no stranger to needing powerful computers,
but those numbers are absurd and most of that software doesn’t need to run on
Mac. I don’t care much about the OS I’m on and I’m perfectly fine with windows
or Linux if I save 8 thousand dollars and can use a broader range of hardware.

As far as I can tell the only people that NEED macOS are iOS developers. If
I’m working on films or games or design almost all of that software runs on
windows.

~~~
analognoise
FPGA developer here. Access to a Linux cluster at work, everyone has 96GB ECC
ram, dual Xeon on win 10 as a backup in case of any issues or if they prefer
running locally.

Our badass computers were a hair over 10k a piece. I have no idea why anyone
would pay what Apple is asking. I remember when it was "counterculture" to
give people more compute, for less money - do real work, on machines that made
financial sense - that was sticking it to "the Man" (IBM, the suits who
thought they knew anything).

Now Microsoft is the counter culture, increasingly open, value for money.

I don't understand this timeline at all.

~~~
scarface74
What point are you trying to make? You said your computers are a hair over
$10K a piece. The base price of the Mac Pro is $6000. Unless you think that
Apple is going to charge $4000 to upgrade from 32GB to 96GB.

~~~
michaelmrose
On the iMac pro 32 to 128 costs 2k, there is no 96. Then there is storage,
display, gpu and the fact that the referenced machine was purchased months or
years in the past vs months in the future.

Assuming the user can do basic numeric comparison I'm assuming that his 10k
includes substantial extras beyond ram that would also have to be added to the
equivalent Mac.

~~~
scarface74
Well seeing that

\- none of the upgrades have been announced.

\- he didn’t say anything about specs besides the memory and processor

\- you can get third party RAM for the iMac Pro.

So the question remains - what point was he trying to make? Unless he like the
other poster was bundling the cost of the monitor with the Mac Pro as if you
have to buy both.

~~~
analognoise
The 6k config comes with dual Xeons? That might not be a bad deal. I thought
that was the base configuration, with dual processors available as an upgrade.

It says "up to 28 cores".

~~~
scarface74
The base just says “8 core”. How many cores are per per processor?

But the point remains - with the specs that he quoted, unless he thinks that
upgrading to 96GB of RAM and matching the core count is going to be more than
$4000. What point is he trying to prove?

~~~
michaelmrose
Logically the 8 core option is a single cpu with 8 cores as 2x4 would cost
more.

I think the point being made is that apple is and was overpriced. What you
could have bought for 10k from apple when user actually purchased his computer
would have been a joke by comparison.

New data doesn't lead user to change that assessment given that the $5k base
model looks equivalent to a $1k->$2k pc.

You are comparing a pc you can't even buy yet to one that was purchased
previously months prior in order to come to the conclusion that there doesn't
exist a pricing disparity.

~~~
analognoise
They're charging $999 for a stand. I think that assumption is safe.

------
todd8
I’m not sure Apple is listening. I’ve had four Mac Pros over the years, and
I’ve been waiting for years to replace my current (6-core, 32GB/512GB) 2013
Mac Pro. I won’t be buying the new Mac Pro. I’ve ordered an upgraded new Mac
Mini for MacOS work instead.

I really like my low end Dell servers running Linux so I’ll probably look for
a Dell workstation to get a system with Xeon cpu and ECC memory. Maybe I’ll
build a Threadripper system.

------
musicale
> Apple has doubled-down on its refusal to sell user-serviceable, upgradeable,
> and expandable hardware at prices that are within reach for most customers

Apple needs to bring back something like the Quadra 700, which was only $5700
in 1991. ;-)

Though I suppose what you are asking for is actually the 1st gen Mac Pro,
which was $2500 in 2006.

------
mark_l_watson
Nice rig! In a way I guess I am happy that they don’t have CUDA/deep learning
support so I am not tempted to buy one.

It pays for Apple to provide very fast dev machines to support iOS and macOS
platforms, and my Dad has been waiting for a new release to support 3D
animation and video production.

------
steveharman
Building a Hackintosh is no fun any more.

It used to be a challenge but with the right hardware choices (plenty of
lists) it's only really one extra step than installing macOS on genuine Apple
hardware

In the immortal word of Monty Python; there's no pleasing some people :-)

~~~
inspector-g
Is this _really_ true these days? I've heard this same statement made
repeatedly over the last 4-5ish years, but each time I've tried to find one of
these lists and experiment with a hackintosh the experience has been FAR from
straightforward.

It usually comes down to some NIC, Bluetooth, or audio device not working
nearly as well as is claimed by whoever put together one of these lists, and
then of course the updates to macOS will break something after having
_finally_ configured the machine correctly after several weekends of painful
forum searching.

------
ksec
I see a lot of people complaining about Mac Pro not for them and iMac / Pro
doesn't fit their needs / price point.

Is there any reason why Apple isn't considering the option of using AMD?

~~~
swhitt
The main rumor these days (well, it's been a rumor for quite a few years) is
that they'll be dropping Intel and switching to house-designed ARM chips
across the board.

~~~
ksec
Well that would be the case if they didn't introduce Mac Pro. And now it is
obvious that Apple don't want to do that, at least there is no way Apple is
going to design a 250W CPU just for the Mac Pro.

------
gonvaled
I would like to remind international users that making use of American
technology makes you a pawn in the current trade war.

The US is a counterparty risk.

~~~
kyboren
Huawei is a nice example here: even Chinese SOEs are critically dependent upon
US technology.

It is just not possible to buy any modern workstation/desktop, laptop, or
smartphone without exposure, as you put it, to "US counterparty risk". Buying
an Apple workstation is not significantly riskier than, say, a Lenovo
workstation.

And by your logic, wouldn't buying a workstation from a Chinese manufacturer
_also_ make you a pawn in the current trade war, albeit a pawn for the other
side?

------
rotrux
Gotta love posts with more comments than votes.

Steve Jobbs was a visionary tyrant who miraculously knew all this shit. They
better be listening.

~~~
rotrux
I can't figure out how to delete this. Pretend I didn't say it.

------
lucasverra
today's proof ==>
[https://twitter.com/_JulianoRossi/status/1137840401904209920...](https://twitter.com/_JulianoRossi/status/1137840401904209920?s=20),
Craig is responding email :)

------
udev
Apple is listening to the shareholders.

~~~
scarface74
I doubt that the shareholders care about the new Mac Pro. It won't move the
needle as far as revenue and profit.

I also doubt that they care about improvements to SiriKit, the Audio APIs, and
SwiftUI....

------
DDH-182
No they aren't. If Apple were listening, we wouldn't be expected to shell out
$6000 for a machine where we're going to have to disable half the cores (and
lose 40-60% of the remaining performance) to achieve "it might work" security
(until the next Intel vuln is found). If Apple were listening they wouldn't be
selling a freaking monitor stand for $1000. If Apple were listening, they
wouldn't be forced to abandon bash because they can't be bothered to actually
comply with the GPL (v3). Nobody can justify Apple at this point and the
sooner it dies, the better.

~~~
scarface74
The people who care about “GPL3 compliance” (what are you referring to?) are
such an insignificant minority it doesn’t matter. _You_ probably aren’t
expected to buy a Mac Pro. You aren’t the target audience. There are plenty of
desktop Macs that would meet your needs. What exactly was Apple suppose to use
if not Intel chips at the high end?

------
visionscaper
The 2019 Mac Pro is what you get when you let "Pro's", the users of the
intended product, influence the vision of the product. Something I don't think
has Apple has done ever, and rightly so. Users aren't product designers, they
should not be involved in the vision of the product; they must be involved in
getting the details right for them.

I would have liked to see a much more innovative product where not only the
internals were replaceable and extendable, but that also allowed users to
string multiple Mac Pro's together, making it's compute and memory almost
infinitely expandable. Maybe even in some sort of lattice network form.

In this way a single Mac Pro could be cheaper and appeal to a broader range of
Pro users (e.g. 4000 USD with 2 high-end GPUs). If you'd really wanted
computational power, like the hollywood studios need to have, you could string
three or four Mac Pro's together. If you are a heavy machine learning Pro,
maybe you would put 16 Mac Pro's in a lattice setup, who knows.

I would have expected that the Mac Pro would have some sort of high-bandwidth
interface, almost directly exposing the PCI bus, making it possible for
software to see all resources (GPUs, CPUs, memory) of all connected Macs as a
single machine. Apple, with their software and hardware design capabilities
could have pulled that off.

[edit] PS: The Mac mini is not a good replacement for the suggestion I made to
string multiple Mac Pro's together, because it lacks to possibility to install
one or more powerful GPUs.

~~~
visionscaper
Why is my comment downvoted? If you have any beef with it, please reply.

