
Opinion: The Mac Pro isn’t overpriced, it offers something nothing else does - ako
https://flip.it/AEj48p
======
unlinked_dll
The only thing that Mac Pro offers that "nothing else" does is a valid MacOS
license in a workstation class tower suitable for pro media production.

I don't know why the author needs to spout bullshit about the specs like you
can't build an equivalently (or higher) spec'd machine for less money. You
just can't put MacOS on it without some effort and violating the ToS.

As for the MPX connectors, I don't see how those are different than the kinds
of PCIE slots you'd see in top of the line ATX/EATX mobos.

As an aside, the improvement over the iMac Pro is largely proper cooling
(Apple's AIOs haven't been able to take a fast multicore processor to
respectable loads in like a decade) and availability of disk space worth a
damn.

~~~
mseidl
The afterburner card ...

------
throwGuardian
> "if you needed a 28-core computer with 1.5TB of RAM, would you really be
> quibbling on the price"

Yes - when you need a few thousand of these to render your SFX, you shop
around for alternatives. Then some startup that recently built a cloud render
farm for this exact use case will save you the CapEx, give you a manageable
OpEx and prove this Op-Ed wrong. SFX studios are legendary for hiring and
firing elastically, you think they care about Apple hardware lock-in?

Also, if you're a software business built on Apple, do some research - they'll
fuck you over in a heartbeat. Maybe they'll block you on the Mac Store for
using a private API [1], or retroactively apply a bogus rule [2] if they want
to compete with you. Control your destiny by moving off an exclusive-Apple
strategy

[1]:
[https://m.slashdot.org/story/362994](https://m.slashdot.org/story/362994)

[2]:
[https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2...](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theverge.com/platform/amp/2018/6/5/17430532/apple-
app-store-rules-valve-steam-link-game-streaming)

~~~
alfalfasprout
Don't most VFX packages now have linux renderers? At least Autodesk Maya's own
documentation shows how to kick off renders on a linux CLI and most of the
renderers nowadays have headless linux clients.

I guess the mac pro makes sense for animators, etc.

~~~
throwGuardian
> I guess the mac pro makes sense for animators, etc.

Is that because animation software is Mac only? Is there any hardware or
software benefit unique to the Mac that they (animation software developers)
rely on?

~~~
mseidl
Maya , imho , the best animation software, has a native client for Linux.

------
ken
On the flip side, it's the only offering from Apple that offers what everyone
else does. Nobody is complaining that Apple offers a $6K tower. They're
complaining that Apple doesn't offer any towers less than $6K.

I could put a Mac Mini on my desk with half a dozen adapters sticking out of
it, but even then I still can't upgrade the RAM. The last Mac Mini with user-
upgradeable RAM was 2012.

The 2019 Mac Pro feels to me like an Apple Lisa. Even at 1/4 the price, it
would seem steep to me. I want what it has, but there's no way I'll ever be
able to justify that.

This is new territory for OSX-era Apple. It didn't used to be so expensive to
buy an expandable Mac. You could get a PowerMac G5 for $1800, and a PowerMac
G4 from $1500.

~~~
malshe
Although Apple says that users can't upgrade memory, you can.
[https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/owc/apple-mac-
mini/20...](https://eshop.macsales.com/shop/memory/owc/apple-mac-mini/2018)

------
ksec
>It is Apple’s attempt to meet the needs of people like Ridley Scott and
Calvin Harris.

We have already established [1] that even ColdPlay level musicians or
Hollywood level Audio effects does not Mac Pro level computational power.
Something we assumed for a long time I guess we now have evidence to call this
a fact.

And everything in that video could have been done on a iMac Pro or even latest
MacBook Pro.

So apart from SFX or Data Science / AI, I cant think of anything that requires
these level of Computation power. And none of those are on the Mac Platform.

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv5HIrOrn2o](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jv5HIrOrn2o)

------
wiseleo
It’s a legal Hackintosh. You finally get access to workstation class hardware
legally from Apple. Running a Hackintosh on an inexpensive surplus server (40
core servers cost less than $1000 on eBay) would serve similar purpose but not
be legal.

~~~
Mo3
Afaik, Hackintoshes are not illegal.

------
Cyder
It's just first on the consumer market with 32 cores. Wait until AMD and
Intel's comparable chips hit the mass market. 32 cores isn't unbelievable l
like it use to be.

    
    
      Putting multiple graphics cards in a machine has been common for a long time in gaming rigs. Crypto-miners run +12 graphics cards in an attempt to be profitable.
    
     There's nothing unique mentioned in the article except the proprietary video stream processing, and I guarantee you, there's other high end machines that do the same thing if not more. 
    

I really wonder what the author's specialty is, since he thinks these specs
are actually unique to Apple.

~~~
alwillis
It’s the integration and testing and support that Apple offers.

In fact, the more demanding your requirements, the more likely you need all of
these fairly exotic components to work seamlessly together.

If you’re working on the next Star Wars movie, there are billions of dollars
at stake; you can’t rely on some Linux box a guy you know put together, no
matter how good the specs supposedly are.

Even if you could get comparable components, you’re not going to have the
driver support you need. If you have downtime, you can’t wait for some guy on
an email list who’s day job is not supporting this mission critical driver, to
get back to you.

And you’re not going to get the performance of Apple’s APIs like Metal2, etc.
which blow OpenGL, etc. away.

~~~
jnwatson
You get get that from Dell. They and HP have been selling this stuff forever.

~~~
alwillis
Yes, Dell and HP sell perfectly fine workstations.

No, there's nothing like the current Mac Pro.

A quick look doesn't show a Dell Precision desktop workstation that goes
beyond 48GB RAM, for example, while the Mac Pro goes to 1.5 TB.

I also didn't see anything like the MPX Module:

 _The MPX Module starts with an industry-standard PCI Express connector. Then,
for the first time in a graphics card, more PCIe lanes integrate Thunderbolt
and additional power provided to increase capability. With up to 500 watts,
the MPX Module has power capacity equivalent to that of the entire previous-
generation Mac Pro._

Didn't see a way to have up to 8K streams going at the same time or the
ability to attach up to 12 4K displays on the Dell site.

It goes on and on. You can _approximate_ a lot of what Apple is offering, but
you can't _duplicate_ what they're offering at a lower price.

There's so much Apple-designed silicon in this box, it's literally impossible
for Dell, HP or anyone else to compete with off-the-shelf, commodity
components.

For the target market Apple is going for, the cost of even a tricked-out Mac
Pro is a rounding error.

~~~
detaro
look again at e.g. the Dell 7920:

Up to 3 TB RAM, 4 GPUs with 4 DP ports each if you want, dual processor if you
want (so 56 cores), ...

Costs more or less the same as the Mac though, or more if you go higher-spec.
MPX might be interesting, although I notice the Apple marketing comparing it
to previous Macs and not competing PC-workstation cards, and of course
application-dependent.

~~~
alwillis
_MPX might be interesting, although I notice the Apple marketing comparing it
to previous Macs and not competing PC-workstation cards, and of course
application-dependent._

They were saying this one card has more processing power than the last
generation Mac Pro.

------
cprayingmantis
The Mac Pro is worth exactly what people pay for it. If it sells then who are
we to judge it’s price/utility?

~~~
topkai22
I've always hated the "it's worth what the market will bear truism." We are
all part of the market, we all get to contribute to the assessment of value.

~~~
throwGuardian
As much as I disagree with apple's BS pricing, this take on the fundamental
definition of market and customer is even less true. They literally didn't
expect and count price sensitive buyers as their target customers, so no, you
are not the market.

However, I agree with you that their business acumen is lacking, pricing at
25-50% over their best quality competitor would have vastly expanded the
market, and their bottom line. But someone is advising them to be the
Hermes/Versace of computers and somehow making business sense to decision
makers, so this is what we get.

~~~
topkai22
I’m not part of the target market segment, but I am part of the market. As
another poster pointed out, I could buy one but won’t, depriving Apple of
revenue. More importantly though, that truism is used to shutdown discussion
of value and worth of products and ideas, Even though those discussions in
fact actively changing the. We are having a public discussion of price, which
may effect purchases of others. If a major publication published an article
about how new Mac Pros were failing catastrophically with data loss, it would
effect the general assessment of value of a Mac Pro and change the market,
even if the author never purchased one.

