Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jsheard 3424 days ago
Actions speak louder than words, and it's been 3 years and 1 month since the Mac Pro saw any action.
3 comments

They upgrade macOS every year. New iMacs should be out in March or April. Sure, something is wrong with the Mac Pro, but the overall Mac investment is still strong, perhaps a little slow at the moment.
I think Ben Thompson had the best take on this. Something was fucked up bad in the product, and they aren't budgeted to make the necessary capital investment so soon to dig out a marginal product that nobody buys anyway.
> [...] to dig out a marginal product that nobody buys anyway

I wonder if they could expand the Pro desktop to be for serious gamers as well as dev's, videographers, animators etc. It'd be interesting to see what Razor and Alienware make on their systems - could it be enough to justify a presence in the high-end desktop market?

As for bringing gamers to the platform, Apple already has experience with this...from the losing side at least. Originally Halo was meant for the Mac however Microsoft purchased Bungie in 2000 and much like GoldenEye for the N64, Halo was the game that sold enough Xboxes to make the platform solid. Apple would similarly need some top-tier titles to encourage people to embrace an expensive desktop.

Apple's Anobit acquisition seems to be what's giving it the edge in the NVMe arena. They have experience with quiet cooling solutions. The touch bar would be good for key-mapping in games. Back-lit keyboards are their jam. They have a serious investment in Imagination Technologies Group who are behind the PowerVR architectures. Smaller, more reliable PSUs. Their austere industrial design is second to none and deeply contrasting to the garish Razor and Alienware designs.

It would come down to whether there's money to be made in the area, and I suspect most serious gamers build their own systems.

> It would come down to whether there's money to be made in the area, and I suspect most serious gamers build their own systems.

Spot on. The ultra-performance professionals and the big-spending gamers often do their own builds and then keep upgrading them.

Apple has always seen itself more of a sealed-box consumer appliance supplier, basically de-skilling computing.

> The ultra-performance professionals ... often do their own builds and then keep upgrading them.

I think this claim stands in pretty stark contrast to the history of Apple products in the professional graphic/video sector.

Even for people doing stuff like CAD that is less sensitive to image quality and more performance-oriented - nobody at a company of any real size (say >25 users) assembles their own hardware. I'm sitting two feet from an HP Z400 workstation that my (architect) father-in-law snagged for me when his company upgraded their CAD workstations.

The reality is that assembling PCs, debugging them when hardware breaks, etc is not free. Once you approach a certain scale (I would imagine this is roughly around the point of a single tech) it starts becoming worthwhile to externalize the cost instead of hiding it in salaries. For a price, Dell or HP will make sure that you don't have to worry about your hardware. If you hire a bunch of new people, a bunch of new boxes will show up tomorrow. If you have a PC crap out, they'll get it back up tomorrow.

Of course they do charge for this, and they make a profit doing it (i.e. they charge more than it actually costs). Once you are at a really huge scale, it might be worthwhile to bring it back in-house and have someone do it full-time. But like any managed service, it's a viable proposition at certain scales. You buy Amazon AWS instead of running your own servers, a lot of businesses buy HP or Dell workstations instead of worrying about it themselves.

Power-gamers are pretty much always individuals, who (like tiny startups) are price-sensitive and build their own hardware. When you don't have an income stream tied to the product, it's worth spending an evening building it yourself. Although this still assumes a power-gamer with some decent knowledge of hardware. First-time builders have a bit of a hump to get over, and beige boxes sold for family PCs drastically outnumber the power-gamers.

Still though, to the more general point, Apple still has some pretty serious mind-share in the professional market, although it fades year over year especially when they're pushing shit like the trash-can Mac. I think it's premature to say that Apple can never succeed in the professional market, especially given their historic inroads in that market.

But again, they do themselves no favors by not upgrading their hardware. The current base model Mac Pro GPU uses the workstation version of the Radeon HD 7870. The high-end model uses the workstation version of the Radeon HD 7970. That's pretty ancient in tech terms, especially now that NVIDIA is moving away from Kepler. It's three generations old, they should have moved on to Fiji-based chips a year ago.

Not entirely convinced. The cheesegrater Mac design let you upgrade on the fly...

I certainly agree about the scale problem, but Apple has never really competed in that market. You could easily buy 1,500 Dells but the graphics department only got 6 Mac Pros. And they still upgraded them in ways that weren't too onerous.

> Apple still has some pretty serious mind-share in the professional market, although it fades year over year

Yes. Sadly for Apple, that self-build or custom-built PC gives you double the performance for half the price. When time is money, it makes a big difference.

And if you're running Adobe software, it's not that big a shift.

But the comment was about MacOS not the Mac Pro