The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Tim Cook on Mac Desktop commitment Virtual Instrument Plugins
Old 14th May 2018
  #1981
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by TNM View Post
there are so many imac PRO video tests showing the cpu hitting 95 degrees and throttling. It will take you 1 minute to find. Even the 8 core does it.
Apple have designed them to never ramp up the fans, well almost never, to be quiet.. yes we need this for an imac that is in front of our face, but unfortunately they run too hot.
OK. I'll check these out later. Thanks for sharing your "data" with all the subscribers to this discussion. Very generous.
Old 14th May 2018
  #1982
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradh View Post
i5,
Won't the lack of quadcore be limiting in the long run? I don't really see why the Minis couldn't be like MBPs in another form. Build them and price them. Where's the problem?
Old 14th May 2018
  #1983
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by zephonic View Post
If you can be this mad at Apple about their perceived disregard for “pros”, you need to make more music!

At the end of the day, it’s just a stupid computer. Not worth getting worked up over.
Yes, but I think the problem is that people feel Apple makes this more difficult by not selling the actual machines and configurations they need. Don't you think?
Old 14th May 2018
  #1984
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poinzy View Post
The computer market is shrinking,
Global Apple Mac sales in the fiscal years from 2002 to 2017 (in million units)
Old 14th May 2018
  #1985
Gear Addict
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
Won't the lack of quadcore be limiting in the long run? I don't really see why the Minis couldn't be like MBPs in another form. Build them and price them. Where's the problem?
My guess is that the new "modular" Mac Pro that Apple is working on could be like this: in its simplest, most lightweight form it could be something like a souped-up Mini, and then you can add and build onto it. I'm not really sure what they mean by modular...that word can be interpreted in many ways (i.e., one form factor with modular innards that can be easily swapped in and out for upgrades, or a modular form factor that can be built out with things like external GPUs, additional drives, etc., or both).

I'm not sure how much of a future the Mini has: its main market is people who want a desktop instead of a laptop but already have a monitor so don't want to buy an iMac. People who want a desktop instead of a laptop usually are looking for more power than they can get from a laptop, which isn't really what the Mini offers. I guess the other market is people who just want the cheapest possible Mac (which is why I bought mine, since I had switched to Windows but still needed to keep a Mac around for use with some of my old Mac-only files and apps).
Old 14th May 2018
  #1986
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
No, these are your opinions and you're very welcome to express them here. But please don't pretend your shallow analysis are based on facts.
Those are not analyses, are facts.
Is not a fact this?



Is not a fact this?



Is not a fact… the fact (because there is not other word) that I am not an engineer but a composer and with some study can choice the components of the “Mac Magic Pro” that works perfect for my needs and that Apple at the moment don't offer a similar configuration if not by spending crazy money for components that I don't need and/or for obsolete hardware?


Of course there are facts.

Maybe you do to the word “fact” a meaning that I don’t know or undersand, in this case please explain your interpretation of this word so everybody can understand what you are trying to say.

Quote:
Mind you. I don't have a problem with your conclusion. I have a problem with how you present your case. It's lame. That doesn't make you the same, OK?
No, it’s not OK at all.
Is not my case but the case of lot of people that need a modern workstation and tired of waiting the Apple’s deliriums go to hackintosh or windows.
It seems that you have not read the thread or similar that you can found in many sites that argument of the same problem, where lot of people say exactly the same.

And you have not explained why you “have a problem with how I present my case” and why “it’s a lame”.
You see, all your criticism on me is based on your assumption that I have not reported facts but opinions. I am sorry but is not only because you say so that the facts reported will change their nature of facts.
Dosen't work like that and is for this that is called reality.

Quote:
That said, I'm not saying you couldn't present data on how Apple are not doing their work. But you'd have to find some actual on the field data first. I don't present my own view on this as I don't have these facts. That's quite OK.
The facts have been exposed, and not only by me, many days ago.
You can contest those facts and explain why in your opinion there are not, not simply say “there are not” because in a nonsense.

Now you have the screenshots too that show some of this facts.
If you want I can list my build and tell you even how may ports and how much and what kind of hard drives I have in my new "Mac Magic Pro".
Do you need too the results of the Logic benchmark test?

So, why the facts reported here by me and others (that are very clear and simple because IS NOT ROCKET SCIENCE) in your opinion are not facts?
Old 14th May 2018
  #1987
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by johannes2510 View Post

Now you have the screenshots too that show some of this facts.
If you want I can list my build and tell tuo even how may ports and how much and what kind of hard drives I have in my new "Mac Magic Pro".
Do you need too the results of the Logic benchmark test?
What are we discussing? I'm discussing the fact that you propose the fact you could build the machine you wanted for yourself — which is not in dispute — is proof that Apple could build and sell the machine of your dreams that Pros everywhere will want (and buy) as much as you. At least this is what I have concluded from your posts. Maybe there is a language barrier here, so please correct me if I misunderstand.

Anyway, the second proposal of yours does not follow from your first (both emboldened above). What you can build for yourself have nothing at all to do with what Apple feel they need to design, source and build in order to sell the massive amounts of machines that they actually sell. I believe your "design" doesn't satisfy Apple's requirements. I don't know this for a fact so I don't claim it is. You see a difference here?

Are you with me that far?

On the conclusion I think we are perhaps more near than what would first appear to be the case. Please be assured I respect your opinion even if I criticize both your arguments and how you argue. Please understand this has nothing to do with your person. I trust you're a professional within the field of music.
Old 14th May 2018
  #1988
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
What are we discussing? I'm discussing the fact that you propose the fact you could build the machine you wanted for yourself — which is not in dispute — is proof that Apple could build and sell the machine of your dreams that Pros everywhere will want (and buy) as much as you. At least this is what I have concluded from your posts. Maybe there is a language barrier here, so please correct me if I misunderstand.
OMG Mikael… how many time I must repeat that IS NOT ME, is lot of people that are in the very same situation. Have you read this thread? Don’t seems so…

Is not “my dream machine”, is simply a normal workstation with the configuration that feel the needs of the pros: powerfull and “modular”.
Of course Apple can do that if everybody can (not me). That’s the point. The point is if EVEN me can do that WTF are doing at Apple considering that is 5 YEARS that people like me ask a very simple thing?
They "study the workflows and the bottlencks” that is ridiculous.

Quote:
Anyway, the second proposal of yours does not follow from your first (both emboldened above). What you can build for yourself have nothing at all to do with what Apple feel they need to design, source and build in order to sell the massive amounts of machines that they actually sell. I believe your "design" doesn't satisfy Apple's requirements. I don't know this for a fact so I don't claim it is. You see a difference here?
No MIkael, is not correct to change the subject “we” in “I” when you want.
The subject is not “me”, is “we”.
Is the majority of pros that are in the same situation and the demostration is this thread where many people have say the same.
And is the pro world where collegues and coworkers don’t buy anymore Apple workstations.

Quote:
On the conclusion I think we are perhaps more near than what would first appear to be the case. Please be assured I respect your opinion even if I criticize both your arguments and how you argue. Please understand this has nothing to do with your person. I trust you're a professional within the field of music.
OMG… Is not my opinion, is facts and there are facts because you are not be able to demonstrate that are none.
You have totally jumped that part that was the point of your critisims on me but you still speaking about imaginary “my opinions”.
Is not correct in a discussion bring a critisims and after ignore the argumentations of other AND even repeat the same false statement.

Is not by repeating your opinion that can transform your opinion in a fact.

Is you that bring opinions, not me.
Old 14th May 2018
  #1989
This dialog is turning to heavy for me, I'm going back to Finnegans Wake.
Old 14th May 2018
  #1990
Ohh had a thought… what about a Mac mini design but larger.. that has one quad core processor.. then you can add in another below it to add say 2x quad or up to 32core dual xeon’s then stack a set of expansion slots… then stack another set of removable drive bays

If they make a modular setup that can scale from small Mac mini size to bad-ass desktop would be cool and have it all running along an interconnect buss top to bottom.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Gaia View Post
In a professional production environment, switching projects often means switching physical drives - so balancing internal vs. external storage requirements, frequency of unmounting and desirability of simplifying that process is one aspect that leaps to mind. Knowing whether there’s value in bringing a subset of the hardware with you is another. I could imagine a tower design where there are actually two stacked units, one like a beefed up Mac Mini sitting on another that houses expansion cards.

The point is, they want to be able to come up with ideas and bounce them off people working in the industry to see what resonates and what falls flat. I’m sure Apple legitimately thought the cylinder was brilliant, and indeed for some it was a godsend. Just like the iMac Pro. For others, they don’t want to make the same mistake again.

Producing the box isn’t where Apple would face challenges, so the notion of turning to someone like Dell for production is laughable. It’s settling on a design they think is right and being confident that it’ll satisfy the market that seems to be taking time. Keep in mind that Apple likes to solve what it perceives as problems, so it’s not always 100% hardware but a combination of hardware and software that’s part of the equation. Should external drives mount elegantly into a single logical filesystem? Is writing redundantly to multiple drives and then being able to remove one for backup after a live recording an attractive scenario?

There’s always room to make life easier, and that’s clearly what Apple prides themselves on and will always push for.
Old 15th May 2018
  #1991
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by johannes2510 View Post
Is you that bring opinions, not me.
All those opinions you expressed, I had no idea they were facts. I'm sorry I missed something as obvious. But I've seen the light now haven't I? I'll kiss your *** from now on. Happy?
Old 15th May 2018
  #1992
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by ataylor View Post
Ohh had a thought… what about a Mac mini design but larger.. that has one quad core processor.. then you can add in another below it to add say 2x quad or up to 32core dual xeon’s then stack a set of expansion slots… then stack another set of removable drive bays

If they make a modular setup that can scale from small Mac mini size to bad-ass desktop would be cool and have it all running along an interconnect buss top to bottom.

I'd love this.
Old 15th May 2018
  #1993
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
I use a 2012 quad i7 in the studio. As of right now, if I needed to replace it, Apple doesn't offer a similarly capable machine at a similar price point. As we know, Apple in fact neutered the Mini, so that's not an option anymore.

I'd buy a nice, fast hack in a minute if someone built it for me.

I kind of expected Cook to be a weak CEO, given his background, but I did not expect him to sit on his hands and do NOTHING for pros. Incredible.
Old 15th May 2018
  #1994
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
All those opinions you expressed, I had no idea they were facts. I'm sorry I missed something as obvious. But I've seen the light now haven't I? I'll kiss your *** from now on. Happy?
No happy no sad.

I have no problems with other's opinions but I can't accept that facts are presented like opinions and your sarcasm will no change the reality that you have show big difficulties to spare opinions by facts, when Apple is the theme.

I (and many others) have bring facts and you was no able to argument on this facts and no sarcasm or other kind of word games can modify the reality.

I have too express opinions of course.
This is another one:

My opinion is that your love for Apple (love that in the past was mine too) make you blind on errors that Apple have made in pro sector and the fact that you are unable to discuss on the evidences that many people have expresses here (Apple can make a superb Mac Pro today if they want), IN MY OPINION, indicate that.

My opinion is that you need to forget your love when is time to analyze something like errors that a company make.
Love is wonderful but is well known that make man blind
Old 15th May 2018
  #1995
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post

I'd buy a nice, fast hack in a minute if someone built it for me.
There are many people that do that and growing in number, that is normal because Apple are studying very hard "the workflows and bottlenecks" and have no time to do something rational.

Here in Italy after some research I have found a very competent guy and the machine runs perfect.

Sure you can find someone in your country.

I suggest someone that know "vanilla method".
Old 15th May 2018
  #1996
Lives for gear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
I use a 2012 quad i7 in the studio. As of right now, if I needed to replace it, Apple doesn't offer a similarly capable machine at a similar price point. As we know, Apple in fact neutered the Mini, so that's not an option anymore.

I'd buy a nice, fast hack in a minute if someone built it for me.

I kind of expected Cook to be a weak CEO, given his background, but I did not expect him to sit on his hands and do NOTHING for pros. Incredible.
Given Cook worked with the supply line I don't see why he couldn't have kept updating the, sadly still current, line of Mac Pros when possible. The same goes for the Minis of course.

Does neutering the Mini models give Apple a market advantage? Would a desktop variant of the current MacBook Pros with quadcores really cannibalize sales of MacBok Pros or iMacs? Would that matter to the bottom line? Maybe that's how Apple has viewed this in the past.

Also when the new Mac Pros join the iMacs and iMac Pros next year, there will somewhat of a hole in their desktop product line for not as fast or advanced machines without displays. I suppose we have to assume all of this is intentional for some obscure reason.

I don't think the Minis ever were targeted at Pro users though. I've used them as great servers in the past.
Old 15th May 2018
  #1997
Lives for gear
 
stratology's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikael B View Post
I don't think the Minis ever were targeted at Pro users though. I've used them as great servers in the past.

Of course not, they were always intended as the cheapest entry option, without keyboard and mouse, the exact opposite of pro machines.


Which also means that a long period of no updates is much less dramatic ('neutering' - seriously??).


You're also right that they made great little SMB servers. Personally I consider Apple's downsizing of macOS Server software a much greater loss than a few years without Mac mini updates.
Old 16th May 2018
  #1998
Gear Nut
 

It's a distortion of vision of reality, or a desire of change the reality based on particular vision.

It's a stupid thinking in the end:

1) We have made ultrazillions of money with brand, marketing and design-look (iPhones & co)

2) So we are the best, no question

3) We bring the same appeal-brand-design in pro market and, because we are the best, all pros will be happy and the power and expansion choice that we MUST cut off, because in that kind of design can't fit, will become secondary because all people in the world desire our design (brand etc) at first

Reality: the opposite.

But they are in delusion of grandeur and when people are in this situation don't listen others needs.
Now they say that are listening for the next Mac Pro (pro-thingh team), but this statement for me show that they are listen only if don't change the "design paradigma", because for make a wonderfull Mac Pro, modern, powerfull and modular, all is ready to do that.
Today.
Ok, maybe tomorrow but is a nonsense, in pro sector, that we must wait another year.

I cannot find other explanation for this eternal waiting.
Old 16th May 2018
  #1999
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by johannes2510 View Post
But they are in delusion of grandeur and when people are in this situation don't listen others needs.
Delusions of grandeur for sure, but also the simple fact that Apple has no immediate competitor. No other mass-market developer offers turnkey media computers like Apple. I bet my bottom dollar, if say Dell, was offering kickass media PCs with all bells and whistles, Apple would be falling over themselves to match whatever the competitor can do. Now, Apple can pretend they don't understand what we are talking about.

Alternatively, Apple really are as blind and deluded as they seem to be. Who knows.

Last edited by Tui; 16th May 2018 at 05:18 PM..
Old 16th May 2018
  #2000
Gear Nut
 

I think is both.
Apple don't need anymore pro market because the ultrazillions they made with iPhones & co, and my feelings are that they really don't care anymore to be competitive in pro market. If they will care we know that is very simple to make a WS right now that is perfect for pros because there is no mystery at all on the needs.
They do this actual theatre (the super team for discover the "mysterious bottlenecks") only for marketing-image purpose, for defend their image of company that "care of customers", image that is very important to them because is part of the marketing that have make Apple so rich.

But in the end they are people, like you and me, not gods and the design-psychosis (with the power that certain people have reach inside Apple for have make the design so central) still their most important paradigma and this is clear that is not compatible with pro needs.
Pro people have other priorities and the design is really one of the last.
Never seen a client that refuse to give a work to somebody because the composer or the sound engineer have a not good looking workstation.

Really it seems to me like a religious dogma... with all the blindness that come with.

So, they want make pro machines not for the real needs (or only for some), but first must be an object that is according with the design-paradigma because for them the image come first.
Old 16th May 2018
  #2001
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
Delusions of grandeur for sure, but also the simple fact that Apple has no immediate competitor...
In the desktop market they do, and they are not very successful in that realm. I see this statistic which shows they have 1/10 the market share of Microsoft and this chart presumably includes laptops where I think apple is more successful than in desktops. Wiki shows apple with a bit more, but still far less than Microsoft. Apple makes a personal computer that some people like a lot, but in terms of traditional metrics like market share, apple lost the desktop battle in the 1980s with their proprietary hardware and remained a niche player ever since. They only became a powerhouse when they developed non-personal computer products.

I know a guy who works in animation for major studios and he does not use apple--if his industry used apple, he would have to as well to be compatible. So where are these mythical 'creative markets' that apple has purportedly cornered? Folks may love the design and unique qualities of osx and apple hardware, but when it comes to running a studio, there is no indication that wintel systems can't get the job done. Its a matter of personal preference, not capability.

Of course apple is successful with other products, but this thread is about desktop.

https://www.netmarketshare.com/opera...%22-1000%22%7D
Old 16th May 2018
  #2002
Tui
Gear Guru
 
Tui's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by ponzi View Post
In the desktop market they do...
No they don't. You should have read my entire post.
Old 16th May 2018
  #2003
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
No they don't. You should have read my entire post.
I afraid it wasn't persuasive on a second reading either.


Last edited by ponzi; 16th May 2018 at 10:42 PM..
Old 24th May 2018
  #2004
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tui View Post
I use a 2012 quad i7 in the studio. As of right now, if I needed to replace it, Apple doesn't offer a similarly capable machine at a similar price point. As we know, Apple in fact neutered the Mini, so that's not an option anymore.

I'd buy a nice, fast hack in a minute if someone built it for me.

I kind of expected Cook to be a weak CEO, given his background, but I did not expect him to sit on his hands and do NOTHING for pros. Incredible.
This is where I'm at. In 2016 when Apple seemed to be so adamant about pushing Thunderbolt 3 that they made it the ONLY connection on MacBook Pros, would it have been so hard to concurrently update the 2013 Mac Pro with the same? Hell, they could have left everything else as it was and I would have bought one already. Instead I've been waffling on buying a 6-core for about two years, but just can't bring myself to do it. I don't think that there's anything really so bad about using a trash can for audio production. I like that I can put up to 128MB RAM in there which is my primary reason for wanting to upgrade. I don't need two graphics cards. I just can't justify the cost going into stuff I don't need / outdated tech.

Same with the Mini. Change the ports to USBC/Thunderbolt 3 and put a more recent processor in there FTW.

These would be the "phoning it in" updates. But apparently that's too hard (the poor dears). The fact that these haven't had a slight update in years is astounding to me. And it occurs in the period of time that I'm waiting for the next big thing just around the corner... (A Thunderbolt 3 updated cMP would have me throwing money at Apple).

Apple has me by the short hairs because I need something that:

A) can accept 64-128GB RAM
B) can run Logic Pro
C) doesn't cost 3 grand +
D) doesn't have a monitor attached

The best looking option to "get by" until the 2019 Mac Pro arrives is a maxed out iMac. But why should Apple be rewarded for colossal failure with my money?

Last edited by galactic orange; 24th May 2018 at 07:57 AM.. Reason: clarification
Old 25th May 2018
  #2005
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by galactic orange View Post
This is where I'm at. In 2016 when Apple seemed to be so adamant about pushing Thunderbolt 3 that they made it the ONLY connection on MacBook Pros, would it have been so hard to concurrently update the 2013 Mac Pro with the same? Hell, they could have left everything else as it was and I would have bought one already. Instead I've been waffling on buying a 6-core for about two years, but just can't bring myself to do it. I don't think that there's anything really so bad about using a trash can for audio production. I like that I can put up to 128MB RAM in there which is my primary reason for wanting to upgrade. I don't need two graphics cards. I just can't justify the cost going into stuff I don't need / outdated tech.

Same with the Mini. Change the ports to USBC/Thunderbolt 3 and put a more recent processor in there FTW.

These would be the "phoning it in" updates. But apparently that's too hard (the poor dears). The fact that these haven't had a slight update in years is astounding to me. And it occurs in the period of time that I'm waiting for the next big thing just around the corner... (A Thunderbolt 3 updated cMP would have me throwing money at Apple).

Apple has me by the short hairs because I need something that:

A) can accept 64-128GB RAM
B) can run Logic Pro
C) doesn't cost 3 grand +
D) doesn't have a monitor attached

The best looking option to "get by" until the 2019 Mac Pro arrives is a maxed out iMac. But why should Apple be rewarded for colossal failure with my money?
I like to assume that any Apple product that goes as long as the mini and trashcan has without an update (1316 days for the mini, and 1617 days for the Mac Pro). Its probably because they sell so few units, that it doesn't warrant the effort to do so. And I believe even a meaningful spec bump for either model would've not been possible because design issues.

In the last year I was playing musical chairs with computers. It started with the 2012 i7 quad core Mac Mini that everyone seems to love (the last good mini). It was brilliant for tracking and editing. But I always hit a wall with its limitations when mixing. Then I convinced myself that I could save money by switching to a PC and have a machine with gobs of power. It was the Ferrari of machines. But I couldn't ever get it to run smoothly. I couldn't get reliable performance for tracking. And I wrestled with it non stop on mixing projects. So it was out the door after a few months. Now I'm on a 2013 6-core Mac Pro with 16gb's of ram, and 256 ssd. And it runs like butter. Finally I have a machine that I don't have to think about while working. I turn it on, and then I can be creative.
Old 25th May 2018
  #2006
Gear Nut
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzoftheburn View Post
I like to assume that any Apple product that goes as long as the mini and trashcan has without an update (1316 days for the mini, and 1617 days for the Mac Pro). Its probably because they sell so few units, that it doesn't warrant the effort to do so. And I believe even a meaningful spec bump for either model would've not been possible because design issues.

In the last year I was playing musical chairs with computers. It started with the 2012 i7 quad core Mac Mini that everyone seems to love (the last good mini). It was brilliant for tracking and editing. But I always hit a wall with its limitations when mixing. Then I convinced myself that I could save money by switching to a PC and have a machine with gobs of power. It was the Ferrari of machines. But I couldn't ever get it to run smoothly. I couldn't get reliable performance for tracking. And I wrestled with it non stop on mixing projects. So it was out the door after a few months. Now I'm on a 2013 6-core Mac Pro with 16gb's of ram, and 256 ssd. And it runs like butter. Finally I have a machine that I don't have to think about while working. I turn it on, and then I can be creative.
I see your point that they don't sell many units. But that would be partially mitigated with more frequent and BETTER updates (quad-core Mini). Though having multiple Mini designs didn't please the bean counters so that was out.

If I could find a good price on a 2013 6-core, that might be the most workable solution. But the RAM for that thing is expensive and I'd need 64GB at least. I wish the prices on these things would drop a little more so I feel like I'm getting a good deal. If Apple introduces a standard iMac with 6-core and 64GB RAM capability it will be really difficult for me to choose a trashcan over that.
Old 25th May 2018
  #2007
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by galactic orange View Post
I see your point that they don't sell many units. But that would be partially mitigated with more frequent and BETTER updates (quad-core Mini). Though having multiple Mini designs didn't please the bean counters so that was out.

If I could find a good price on a 2013 6-core, that might be the most workable solution. But the RAM for that thing is expensive and I'd need 64GB at least. I wish the prices on these things would drop a little more so I feel like I'm getting a good deal. If Apple introduces a standard iMac with 6-core and 64GB RAM capability it will be really difficult for me to choose a trashcan over that.
I can't find the article right now. But I remember reading that the reason the Mini was crippled in 2014 was because of the new generation of Intel cpu's needing either more power, or more cooling (or both). And it was going to necessitate a complete redesign of the mini enclosure and psu. So Apple went with a new cpu that could meet the old designs thermal/power needs. But I fear that Apple will never return to a quad core i7 mini. I've discussed this with a few of my apple obsessed/music production friends. And we just don't think it makes sense in their lineup nowadays. The guesstimated price point would just be too close to their base 27" iMac. And the small niche market of people that need a desktop machine without an attached monitor are just too few.

I found my Mac Pro second hand on CL for $1800. Which is no small sum. But it was down quite a bit from just a few months ago. I expect the release of the iMac Pro has probably flooded the market with trashcans, and drove prices down a bit.

I'd put money on next months WWDC revealing a 6-core iMac. But I unfortunately couldn't hold until then to get back onto a Mac. That'll definitely be a beast of a machine.
Old 25th May 2018
  #2008
Lives for gear
 
stratology's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzoftheburn View Post
But I remember reading that the reason the Mini was crippled in 2014 was because of the new generation of Intel cpu's needing either more power, or more cooling (or both).
Something similar - chip manufacturer can't keep up with what Apple needs - happened on Macbook Pros, and, years ago, on Power Macs. The result back then was that Apple got rid of the chip manufacturer (Motorola), and switched to Intel. So there's hope that this time, as a long term strategy, Apple switches to in-house chip design, as they did with iPhones and iPads.
Old 25th May 2018
  #2009
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
One of the things that was cool about the mini was that it was whisper quiet even sitting on your desk--nice for a music pc. I had a powerpc based one back in the day--and a newer one driving my large screen tv for home entertainment now. So, I imagine if the fan needed to do too much, that would make it noisy. In my mind, a mac mini that still has a dvd slot on it is one of the best approaches for those who want the large monitors of a desktop setup but only need enough horsepower to do lifestyle type stuff. This thread is only of interest because a mini isn't going to cut it for big daw projects.

I avoided the initial mac pros because I read they had lots of fan noize. Later I learned they were quite enough as long as the cpu was not being asked to do too much--so used a few for daw back in the day.

And I am not sure that there is a wintel equivalent in terms of size and convenience to the mac mini. I have seen some small ones, but they are not prominent in the market--going to log into micro center and see what they are stocking--just curious.

Went wintel for the daw--though.

One thing I thought was that if apple simply made a motherboard with the latest technology that would simply slip into the case of perhaps a 4,1 mac pro, that would be a pretty attractive product--at least for this niche. Look at how we do something similar by upgrading the bios, and replacing the cpu with newer xeons. Well, that would never fly, but some out of the box thinking might have worked well for apple in this product space. And those 1,1 pros are going for under $200 these days--how about an upgrade mobo for those?
Old 25th May 2018
  #2010
Lives for gear
 
ponzi's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by fizzoftheburn View Post
...I found my Mac Pro second hand on CL for $1800. Which is no small sum. But it was down quite a bit from just a few months ago. I expect the release of the iMac Pro has probably flooded the market with trashcans, and drove prices down a bit...
That is a pretty good price. If it gets to $1,000, I might be tempted to buy a computer I don't really need--just for the fun of it. Still have logic and final cut on my apple id.

Ps. I just checked the local craigslist and I see one trashcan for $2,800 with only 32 gig of ram. I will repeat my observation that almost all computers on craigslist are priced too high and make cl more of a computing museum than a place where buyers cut a deal with sellers.

I see one on ebay wiht 64 gig ram for $1,700, so again the craigslist folks like to have their dreams more than they like to make a sale.

Last edited by ponzi; 25th May 2018 at 06:49 PM..
Topic:
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Forum Jump
Forum Jump