#83

Does it charge the 15in sufficiently now? I remember that being a problem with the original

#84

Main issue for me with this monitor is that it has a lower PPI.
I wish they had an average spec monitor a la iMac.
Maybe something up to $3000 but not $6000 (inc stand).
I do wonder if they’d release something matching with a future iMac?

#85

24" 4k Dell from 2016 here. cheap-o-matic, runs well.
there’s much choice out there now.
so the Mac Pro and the Pro Display XDR are kinda separate on the whole

#86

There isn’t much choice beyond 4k at a low PPI though.

#87

After Effects will still be slow on this thing

2 Likes
#88

Though it seems like Adobe finally added some GPU support to the latest version of After Effects and Premiere. So maybe it will be a bit better.

#89

Havent noticed any issues, pegging the cpu as well. Likewise with the ppi, I’ve gone between iMac, smaller 4k and this newer one with nothing bugging my eyes.

#90

Another thing about logic, I haven’t paid for an update in 5 years and it was only $200 when I bought it. Compared to Ableton it is one of the best software deals I have ever gotten. I actually downloaded the update and switched back and Logic makes a lot of reverb and delay plugins unnecessary.

one more little point. If I was thinking of using a MacPro for business I would plan to amortize it over a 5 year period. (Probably will not be obsolete for 10)
Guessing ~10K or 2K a year or about $165 a month. These numbers are not scary vs iMac pro at $5k and replace every 3 years. Not that I currently have a use for such a powerful computer but if I was using Zbrush or Maya on a regular basis having the ram expansion that is possible with the Mac Pro would be a really great thing. I currently max out 64gig on my iMac all the time in Zbrush. So yes it’s a scary number for a hobby but in a business not so much.

6 Likes
#91

How does one define obsolete? I’ve seen various references in this thread to “future proofing”, and I wasn’t sure what that really meant, either. New MacOS releases can typically only be installed on machines from the last 6-7 years or so. We’ve also endured a blizzard of peripheral interconnect changes over the last decade (various Firewire, USB, Thunderbolt) that remain head-spinning to this day.

#92

That’s a very valid point. It needs a bit of effort to not letting the machines become obsolete because of the software side of things. It’s doable, but you need to be very deliberate about it.

I’m still running most of my graphic design business on a mid 2010 Mac Pro, with the lousy AMD 4870 GPU and only 12Gb of RAM. Of course I don’t do 4K Video editing, and my use of Blender is very limited. Most of the Adobe CC applications which I heavily rely on, run just fine and I can keep Photoshop, Illustrator and other stuff open at the same time. I usually refuse to update if I don’t have to. Last year I updated to Sierra because some software would not run anymore.
I could probably keep using this for a bunch more years, except I need to update to Mojave for a project now, but Apple won’t let me, because of Metal.
So I’m getting a Mac Mini and will perhaps expand it over the years with some more RAM and an eGPU (though I need to figure out if the latter will be worth it).
I have the feeling that it’s getting harder to keep these machines from falling into obsolescence, right now it’s probably still doable if you restrain yourself a bit, but who knows what the future will bring. What will the computing landscape look like in 5 years? And in 10? Hard to say.

It’s been often said that the Mac Mini is the Mac Pro for the rest of us. It’s relatively upgrade-able and has a good value for the money. I hope I can make it last at least 6-7 years.

2 Likes
#93

Sometimes software is the culprit and although with some things you can just not upgrade with a lot of production level software, Maya, Blackmagic etc. you are tied to keeping current to be able to deliver the expected part in the correct format when collaborating, so if I was going to buy a computer for say freelance or collaborative work I would want to know that it would be able to handle whatever changes were coming. Having an large and expandable chassis, ram etc would make it possible. No matter what we think today about good enough, the target is moving. I think things like virtual sound and vr will be driving the platforms forward especially on the creator side. Sure, the consumer level of playback is going to be affordable but thinking more about being on the creator side means 8k video, 192K audio etc. not to mention things like being able to test vr and games while also recording them for clients it’s pretty easy to see what type of computer will become necessary. So, will my 4.7 ghz i7 be obsolete, yep pretty sure in about 2 years if I want to do things that involve realtime surround sound.
So it really depends on your strategy, if you are recording acoustic instruments in 48k then probably a very long time but reactive sound or vision is coming and the hardware will be changing.

#94

I guess I’m way in the minority on this. It’s the first mac in many many years that doesn’t make me angry. This is an upgradeable machine for very demanding video work that I can’t do on any existing mac. It’s going to be popular with people who do what I do using Avid, Resolve and Fusion. I suspect the main market is not individual users, but post houses. It may be too little too late to stem the tide of windows-switching in this field though.
As for the price, the fact that this is the equivalent of a boutique product for a very small market is, I suspect, responsible. I see the premium as the cost of having the FPGA/Afterburner for ProRes (that doesn’t mean it reflects actual parts/labor/design cost).
IF the monitor is what it claims to be, the price might be justifiable (not the stand though), but I’m skeptical. Real hi-res monitoring for grading theatrical films is extremely expensive.
I would never even consider this machine for audio work of any kind, though. Or even for most other video applications. You don’t need it to edit or do the most commonly used effects / compositing / etc.
Maybe I’d feel differently if I was a big Adobe user. I don’t imagine it has great advantages for AE or Premiere Pro, but could be wrong - I don’t use them much anymore. I may not ultimately buy one, but it is exactly what I’ve wished they’d make for a long time.
Now back to my griping about the T2 chip rendering my 2018 MBP useless.

3 Likes
#95

Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m pretty sure Linus tech tips broke it down and said that the baseline Mac pro would be nearly 3000 less or half as expensive if you built a PC with the same parts.

Obviously there are some big advantages to the Mac OS system already for a good portion of users, and the I/O + extreme pcie stuff is worth something.

I’m just hoping the gap closes a bit on the higher end ones but I wont hold my breath.

Edit: that being said I do commend Apple for the upgradeability at least. A huge step in the right direction.

2 Likes
#96

These comparisons are always a bit of a mixed bag. For example it might be hard to find a “DIY” PC casing solution that will equal that of the Mac Pro. Though of course one can counter-argue that the case is maybe not what one would throw money at. The same could apply for other components.

#97

FYI, you can definitely upgrade to Mojave on a 2010 Mac Pro. There are plenty of how-tos out there.

Get a new GPU, check this thread.

Get some RAM if you want. Cheap on eBay to find 32GB or 64GB kits for reasonable money. ($50-150)

You might need some new power cables to power the GPU. ($20)

Cheaper than a new Mac Mini, by far, and it will last you a few more years.
Spend the money saved on some music gear :slight_smile:

1 Like
#98

Totally aware of that and actually that was my initial plan. I ended up deciding against it and in favour for the Mac Mini for a series of reasons. The Mac Pro will now move on to my wife and we might indeed upgrade it a bit.

1 Like
#99

Yesterday I spent way too much time catching up on WWDC media, and I noticed that Apple personnel have made several informal statements that new Mac Pro technology would “trickle down” into future products. Given how Apple rolls, I would not at all be surprised to see a scaled down “Mac Pro Mini” next year. Unlike the unsexy Mac Mini, a scaled down Mac Pro would be something they could crow about. It would still be expensive, but by then they might be able to put together an entry level configuration around that $2500 price point they love so much.

3 Likes
#100

Not sure how they would scale it down unless they will finally bow down to the “xMac” that people have been clamouring for.
The entry level Mac Pro isn’t exactly super high spec (8c CPU, 32gb RAM, 256gb SSD, 580X) as the iMac Pro has a higher level of SSD and GPU which is $1000 cheaper with a display.

What I expect is that the design will filter down. Maybe offer a “prosumer” display.

#101

Honestly the best thing that has come from this is that Apple has finally shown that they care somewhat about cooling now. If what @mdoudoroff mentioned is true then hopefully they will start putting out more products that compromise aesthetics over better temps to prevent thermal problems.

#102

I’m not up on the depth of Intel’s product line. Scaling down might mean dropping back down to the Core architecture, or using a cheaper Xeon. Regardless, focusing on expandability (RAM, PCI and internal storage) and heat/noise management at a lower price point would be the point—I guess that’s more or less the “xMac” notion. If some MPX compatibility could be maintained, that might be good for MPX.

Here’s a recent editorial on the topic:

As discussed earlier in this thread, there’s not much obvious point in Apple making their own prosumer display, because the market is already awash in options. The XDR—assuming the actually deliver what they promise—is (for the moment) unique.