John Siracusa perspective on Mac Pro Successor

[Oliver Peters]

Spot on.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Chris Harlan]

[Oliver Peters] “Spot on.”

Sadly, yes.

[Oliver Peters]

[Chris Harlan] “Sadly, yes.”

Well, it only becomes a lament if the bean-counters win. In fact, I think it becomes pretty stupid for Apple to worry about changing the Mac Pro form factor. Simply revamp the design with modern technology (CPUs, GPUs, Thunderbolt, USB3, SSDs) and lets get on with it. I want a reliable, fast workhorse that will last the next 4-5 years and not an iMac that will probably be relegated to an e-mail machine in 2.

– Oliver

Oliver Peters Post Production Services, LLC
Orlando, FL
http://www.oliverpeters.com

[Michael Phillips]

Remember that Apple is a brand with look and feel that is just as important to them as what it actually does. I don’t see Apple adding updated technology to an existing hardware platform design as that could have been done all along. It’s about the whole experience… now what their definition of high end professional workstation looks like will be interesting. There will be (needs to be) some sort of “look how clever we are, better than, factor to the offering. I think one thing it won’t have is CD/DVD support. 🙂

Michael

[Chris Harlan]

[Oliver Peters] “I want a reliable, fast workhorse that will last the next 4-5 years and not an iMac that will probably be relegated to an e-mail machine in 2.”

Me too. I’ll be happy if it happens, but won’t be surprised if it doesn’t.

[Jeremy Garchow]

Also, from the article:

“Apple should keep pushing the limits of PC performance because it’s a company that loves personal computers. If Apple can’t get on board with that, then all the other completely valid, practical reasons to keep chasing those demons at the high end are irrelevant. The spiritual battle will have already been lost.”

I would argue that a MacPro, is not a halo car.

It is the “top of the line” (read: most expensive) model that you can go in to almost any show room and drive it off the floor, or in computer terms, wait 3-4 days to get the BTO options. The same is true for all Mac computer models, when you need them fully maxed out, they come direct from the factory in a few days.

Using the current MacPro as an example, Apple is not designing the engine, the load balance, the CPU hardware and systems, the GPU systems, they are designing the chassis, to hold all of that purchased technology together, keep it cool enough to run, and practical enough to swap out what you need on the inside, and then write the software to integrate all the purchased technology and chassis together. They are not, however, designing the power plants. And really, this should be the end of my comment as there is no Xeon proc that carries Thunderbolt technology, that’s why we haven’t seen a new MacPro.

With the other current Macs, Apple has taken a different direction. They are, in fact, pushing the limits of the PC performance in ways that the author does not mention or perhaps simply ignores. Hard-wired RAM, non-standard SSD hard drives, high resolution integrated displays, ability to hook to ultra fast networks with computers that simply could not handle the speed or connection protocols, married to the fact that all of this tech was released to a lot of different types of working environments, which means that Apple (and intel) will have data on what works, what doesn’t, and therefore be able to incorporate such findings in to a higher performance machine.

I have argued in the past that Apple was never a part of the moon race. As a company, it doesn’t provide the fastest, biggest, loudest, gas guzzling machines on the planet to get you to the moon. That has never been a part of Apple history, and I don’t think it will be a part of their future. The halo car is not needed for their business model to succeed. In fact, Apple has gone pretty far in ensuring that no matter what Apple product you have, it will be compatible with any other product you have, as long as the hardware is current enough to run the OS. Right now, the MacPro is the odd person out in the current Mac line up. You cannot by a Thunderbolt Apple display and plug it in to a MacPro, for instance.

I am not arguing that Apple does not need a MacPro, they do, I am just saying that building a special car that doesn’t function as well as the rest of the cars in your lineup is not a business model that Apple seems to be chasing.

[Franz Bieberkopf]

[Michael Phillips] “There will be (needs to be) some sort of “look how clever we are, better than, factor to the offering.”

Michael,

Agreed. I think we’re long past the “simply revamp the design with modern technology” phase (and I know Oliver Peters was being exasperatedly hopeful, not predictive). On the other hand, that “clever” impulse might bear something useful.

What John Siracusa doesn’t really acknowledge though is that Apple are no longer a PC company – they’re a gizmo and media company with a PC division. I’m not sure they’re “company that loves personal computers” as he hopes, except in the sense that an iWatch is a personal computer.

Franz.

[Joseph Owens]

[Oliver Peters] “I want a reliable, fast workhorse that will last the next 4-5 years “

That’s ambitious.

I bought one quad G5 in 2006 that didn’t make it one year. Of course that was due to Apple’s sea-change to Intel and ramping up the OS, while completely changing their hardware/software strategy. It didn’t help that actually within that one year, I had to replace that G5 three times because of internal failures of one kind or another. Serious hangar-queen-in-the-making, like early triple-Weber Ferrari V12s.

So, notes on the Siracusa article. Saw the Viper revival special on Speed a week ago or so — interesting fight to keep the halo car, but in reality the Viper and Corvette are almost “daily drivers” compared to the really ridiculous supercars; the Veyron, MacLarens, and all the Italians. Even sensible Audi is producing a street legal LeMans car. Personally experienced a Viper 0-138 mph in a straight quarter-mile a few years back — but here is the lesson — almost the same experience in an SRT-10. That’s “trickle-down”. BTW, Jeremy Clarkson hates computers with a purple fury probably more than Akio Toyoda loves cars.

Toyota’s foray into F-1 was also mostly a failure, where they blew at least a billion for a couple of podiums and not one win. But the cachet! Out there with Ferrari — one of the most-recognized “brands” in the world, and what do they sell? Not anything you or I could buy, anything that you can get in and drive, anyway. They don’t advertise, but you have to wait for a year or so for your order to be processed…. if it is accepted, because there is a very, very long line of buyers who have already put down their cash. No, the Ferrari street cars aren’t even their “halo” cars — the Scuderia handles that item, which is not for mere mortals at all. And that is why FIAT tolerates them. I don’t think its exactly why JLo is running around Brooklyn in a Cinquecento, but.. it is the same company.

In fact, this is why Maserati has staged a form of comeback — acquired by FIAT and moved into Maranello, with its step-brothers, the Ferraris.

I have to wonder if this is Adobe’s problem — as good as their product is, it just doesn’t really have the sizzle. Not like the “I edit with AVID” kind of pedigree, whatever that might be good for. McLuhan put it, “the Medium IS the message”… not the zen koan it used to be, hey?

jPo

“I always pass on free advice — its never of any use to me” Oscar Wilde.

[Craig Seeman]

[Jeremy Garchow] “And really, this should be the end of my comment as there is no Xeon proc that carries Thunderbolt technology, that’s why we haven’t seen a new MacPro. “

Quoting this because I think it needs to be hammered out loud over again every time someone decries the languishing MacPro.

The company that has pushed the envelope in the past has had to wait for a new envelope to push.

Some might argue about the long interim period between 2010 to the present but once Thunderbolt arrived in 2011 I suspect Apple decided to steer in that direction and, for reasons we can all speculate about, decided the next MacPro would have Thunderbolt to maintain the peripheral ecosystem.

[Craig Seeman]

[Oliver Peters] “In fact, I think it becomes pretty stupid for Apple to worry about changing the Mac Pro form factor”

That would be if you believed the form factor were only changed for show and not some potentially utilitarian purpose. If there’s a change in the form factor I suspect it’ll have very good utilitarian value. That might include things from space efficiency, cooling, rack mounting, transportability, component accessibility (although some would argue they’re moving away from that). Of course we won’t know until we see it but I can’t see any reason to believe a form factor change is just to have a new pretty box (which it might be as well).