What's new

Poll: Should Apple release a model between the Mac Pro and the Mac Mini?

Should Apple release a model between the Mac Pro and the Mac Mini?

  • Yes

    Votes: 61 67.0%
  • No

    Votes: 26 28.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 4 4.4%

  • Total voters
    91

Vik

Vi-k
Should Apple, in your opinion, release a model between the 2019 Mac Pro and Mac Mini?

I appreciate that Apple has released info about their upcoming and very impressive Mac Pro. But it seems, to some degree, to be aimed at the video market. Many composers/musicians/recording studios don't need 8 PCI slots or a way to add 1.5 terabyte of RAM. Likewise, many of us would prefer a model which didn't come with soldered SSD or which had to be bought with 32 gb 'Apple priced' RAM.

Max. 256 gb RAM would be OK with me, and room for max. 4 internal SSDs would be fine. And, btw, I'm not in the market for $1000 stand or a $5000 display either.

I'm sure the new stuff is brilliant for high end video editing companies and some recording studios also, of course. But personally, it feels as if a product is missing in the Mac range; a product for 'normal', professional composers/producers/musicians/VI-users.
 
Should Apple, in your opinion, release a model between the 2019 Mac Pro and Mac Mini?

I appreciate that Apple has released info about their upcoming and very impressive Mac Pro. But it seems, to some degree, to be aimed at the video market. Many composers/musicians/recording studios don't need 8 PCI slots or a way to add 1.5 terabyte of RAM. Likewise, many of us would prefer a model which didn't come with soldered SSD or which had to be bought with 32 gb 'Apple priced' RAM.

Max. 256 gb RAM would be OK with me, and room for max. 4 internal SSDs would be fine. And, btw, I'm not in the market for $1000 stand or a $5000 display either.

I'm sure the new stuff is brilliant for high end video editing companies and some recording studios also, of course. But personally, it feels as if a product is missing in the Mac range; a product for 'normal', professional composers/producers/musicians/VI-users.
Doesn't the iMac Pro fall into that category, that is, between the specs of the maxed out Mac Mini and the new Mac Pro.
 
something with stronger single core performance then the new MacPro, a case that can house PCI cards and storage devices. Its not nuclear science
 
Doesn't the iMac Pro fall into that category, that is, between the specs of the maxed out Mac Mini and the new Mac Pro.
For some people, it does. I prefer the modular architecture of Mac Pros, and to have a separate display + and full access to changing internal drives... but I don't even like the weight of my 2010 Mac Pro. with an iMac, if the Mac or the display in it needs repair, I also have to send both away.

I've seen the Mac Pro section in the clip from yesterday's event, and it's a great move (and interesting that they mention use of virtual instruments and demonstrate Logic with Kontakt) – I just think that there's a market between those who need to connect several 8k displays etc and the Mini where you can't even add or replace the internal SSD, and also generally would be good to offer something really good and 'pro' but without the price tag the new MP has.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JPQ
No, I don't think it's a sufficiently big market. But the iMac Pro should have user-upgradable RAM like the normal iMac does (something I've taken advantage of). Ideally the SSD would be user-upgradable as well, but I'm not holding my breath.

For the most part, people seem to have abandoned internally upgradable computers. Normal users often have laptops as their primary computers. Thunderbolt/USB-C means that adding high-speed external storage, large monitors, and power is straightforward for end users.

What didn't make sense to me was the trash can Mac Pro. The very top workstation audience sometimes will still want serious upgradability. The new Mac Pro acknowledges this. But I just don't see an in-between market that justifies the R&D and support expense. PC desktop sales have been falling for years, it's just not a market worth going after.
 
Well they won't, so this is all a bit pointless.
That’s what some people stated when they heard the suggestion that Apple should move away from the 2013 Mac Pro design and instead develop the 5,1 Mac concept further too. :)
 
Last edited:
With any understanding of Apple's business psychology you would know this is a non-starter. The money Apple will make from the new MacPro is like loose change down the back of a sofa. It's insignificant.

The Mac Pro is a halo product. It's there to say '"okay, we've listened to your moans about the trashcan and how people loved the cheesegrater so now we are going to make the most powerful, most advanced and best designed cheesegrater that we can. We know all you directors, video editors, colourists, games artists, 3D modellers all wear iWatches, use iPhones, have MacBooks and iPads; now you can use our workstation as well (or at least pressure your company to) without embarrassment"

There's simply no business or strategy case for a 'mid-modular' in the Apple scheme.
 
I’m with vinrice here. Apple has not produced a proper Mid tier prosumer machine since decades. The 5,1 was not mid tier when it came out many of us had to wait to buy a used one. They have consistently addressed the consumer markets with iMacs, mini’s and laptops, which have professional application also but only for people that don’t need to mess around much with hardware expansion and third party devices. For that they force you to their top tier severely over priced solution and have not ever provided mid and lower tier options for expansion beyond thunderbolt daisy chaining.

They will not do so now either, vinrice is right. When the cheesgrater first came out I basically made a hackintosh because I had no option to buy that mid tier machine; I had to choose between a mini or a tower I couldn’t afford. This remains the case today and will be in the future that is apple’s MO.
 
Yup, you can build an 8 core i9 with 128GB ram Hackintosh, fairly cheaply right now, and it's relatively painless, was for me at least. Not sure about the future, but that's enough machine to do some serious work and make enough $$$ to afford the big boy Mac Pro...
 
There's simply no business or strategy case for a 'mid-modular' in the Apple scheme.
That's possible, but I'm not actually talking about what fits Apple's business psychology, but rather about which direction I think it could take in the future. And I believe they'd make more money if they would have released something like the 5.1 today, just faster cores/more cores/using Thunderbolt and M2 drives etc - but without the extravaganza 2019 Mac Pro extravaganza. The pro market around those who don't need 1.5 terabyte RAM or six 6k monitors is probably a lot larger the the pro market which needs all these options.

Apple has gone through many phases, and I, for one, hope they will end up with more focus on the pro market that I belong to - in addition to making great monsters like the new MP.


Here's, just for fun, a pic from another Apple phase:

Unknown.jpg

Things have changed since then, and I think they'll keep changing.
 
By now, I really believe Apples first directive in designing a product is making a shitload of profit on it. I believed, they would make the new Mac Pro more proprietary and closed regarding extensions and upgrades. So, I was pleased to see the new design ... but not much longer than for 10 minutes! :-(
The base model is pretty weak, worse than the entry iMac pro, yet costs more. Sure, they made a nice design and it probably works great for getting a good performance out of the processor! But nobody can tell me, that this case design and motherboard is worth what they are asking for! That is just ridiculously overpriced and I can only interpret that as a way of Apple telling us ... „You asked for a machine that enables you to upgrade your memory and other expansions from other companies? Well, here you go! But this is what we charge you for the base model!“
Would I want Apple to build something in between! Sure! But I am sure by now, they will find another way to make some obscene profit on that device as well. I think I am now finally cured from Apple Computers! A company can not keep telling me „F You“, then apologize they made a mistake with the last design, to finally say „F you“ again ...
I like the OS better than windows, but there are limits to what I am willing to pay for that.
 
As far as I'm concerned, the original Mac Pro form factor is the best desktop ever made. There are a number of YouTube videos out there that demonstrate how to upgrade the later cheese grater models to today's specs. You're getting a bit into Hackintosh territory when you do that—it's essentially a Mac/PC hybrid—but it's probably today's best bet for the kind of computer we're talking about.

Best,

Geoff
 
If you hang around VI control long enough, you might think that every composer uses a power hungry, multi template setup with a machine to match.

But actually, I think the wider Apple musician user base is more than happy with a MacBook Pro, iMac or Mac Mini. The vast majority of musicians and producers have no idea who "Spitfire", "VSL" etc are. They're making tracks on Ableton, recording guitars.

So, Apple shouldn't make a machine "for us" as we're far too small a market.
 
Yesterday I was inspired to do some research on the MacMini... what if....

I determined in short order I could get a 2018 maxed out MacMini with 128GB ram, 1TB SSD, the fastest Cpu possible...avoiding apple for as much of that as possible.... $3000. Multicore performance on that would be a tie with the multicore performance I get on my 5,1. Single core, however, would be double what I get.

But no internal storage for my sample SSD's

and most importantly, it would not work with my Lynx AES16e-50 PCIe card, which in combination with my X32 gives me very low latency with a lot of ins/outs.

I looked all over for alternative audio interface solutions and as it turns out...There simply aren't any that don't cost half as much as a new MacPro, especially if you want a lot of ins and outs. Simple truth is that Lynx, RME, MOTU and a few others provided the lowest latency possible, for years...over PCI..and that still remains the best solution. And as of today, the only way to continue on the Apple Train with PCI audio is via an extremely expensive computer.
 
PCI is fine and useful, but Apogee and others have some good solutions with low latency as well. How many of us need 8 PCI slots or 1.5 terabyte RAM?
 
Last edited:
PCI os fine and useful, but Apogee and others have some good solutions within low latency as well. How many of us need 8 PCI slots or 1.5 terabyte RAM?

Please be more specific.

Check this: https://www.gearslutz.com/board/mus...erface-low-latency-performance-data-base.html

the top contenders are ALL PCIe. Its no contest. USB and Firewire have no chance. TB3 is the only solution which might be able to compete and there are very few solutions using the TB3 bus.

most people have just learned to live with the limitations of USB and firewire latency for the convenience and cost factor. But truthfully, even the ancient MOTU PCI-424e still outperforms a lot of stuff, on PCIe.

There is also the question of how much will some TB3 solution cost me, especially if I need more than 4 or 8 inputs.
 
PCI os fine and useful, but Apogee and others have some good solutions within low latency as well. How many of us need 8 PCI slots or 1.5 terabyte RAM?

Non of US obviously. There'll be a few scientists and financial quants who will be thrilled though.
 
The pro market around those who don't need 1.5 terabyte RAM or six 6k monitors is probably a lot larger the the pro market which needs all these options.

Of course it is, and that's what the iMac Pro is for.
 
Top Bottom