-
What if there actually IS a new Mac Pro?
-
[Craig Seeman] “Apple really has very little reason to be in the NLE business outside of driving computer sales.”
The brand position of the digital filmmaking revolution is a big important “goodwill accounting” issue. Goodwill accounting is the name for the amount of cash greater than the physical assets (when one company buys another). From Apple Final Cut Pro’s brand position, anyone can be the next Robert Rodriquez if they only buy this software. Neither Avid nor Premiere have that brand position. Bottom line is: “FCP” is literally worth more than just the potential hardware sales.
-
I like the rumors of new Mac Pros using Ivy Bridge:
https://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/25943-intel-ivy-bridge-e-coming-in-new-mac-pro-lineup
Supposedly fixes the heat issues and the non-NVidia problem they had been having with the old Mac pros. Despite the fact that Apple makes most of its money in one area doesn’t mean they will abandon all of their product lines: if you make a $1 billion a year on one product line versus $10 billion on another, you’re not turning your back on $1 billion when you can make $11 billion with both. Maybe the rumor is right and it will be ready Q4 2012, but I think it will be sooner for the first lineup with the faster machines coming out a quarter later in time for NAB 2013 or Supermeet or MacWorld or something like that.
Oh and yes, I really don’t like Windows. I think its funny that its called innovation when its still 2-3 years behind the Mac. When Microsoft switches to a UNIX/Linux kernel, I’ll consider using it again.
Jonathan Ziegler
https://www.electrictiger.com/
520-360-8293 -
Andy, thanks for your detailed, engineering-oriented response. It’s very interesting to see a non-production perspective.
[Andrew Richards] “It depends very much on what it looks like and what it contains. If it is a brand new case design with crazy-good guts, I think it is a signal Apple sees a long tail for this class of product. If it is another iteration of the 9-year-old cheese grater hulk chassis, my inference is that they don’t see much of a future for that class of product at Apple.”
Great point. Honestly, I have been surprised every time the case hasn’t been redesigned. At a minimum, the non-rackability for no good reason is a continuing frustration.
“Cheese grater hulk” is a great phrase, and I think it goes very nicely with “sizzle core beast.”
[Andrew Richards] “More DIMM slots would be nice, but not essential for sock rocking.”
As long as OS X supports a maximum of 96 GB of RAM, I don’t think anyone needs more RAM slots for sock rocking.
[Andrew Richards] “ESXi 5.”
Now I’m very curious. What OSes are you virtualizing? How many VMs (and with what specs) are you running on a single machine? What’s the nature of the work the apps running on your VMs do? If this is your primary use for the Mac Pro, what makes OS X on Apple hardware more sock rocking than Linux on PC hardware?
[Andrew Richards] “I’ve speculated in perhaps all the threads you linked to above that the limiting factor in GPU choice is and has been EFI. Now that EFI is getting a foothold beyond Apple, we really ought to see better 3rd party support for GPUs and not just the few models Apple subsidizes for use as factory options.”
I agree — but I think that GPU choice is only the first hurdle to overcome.
Driver quality has been a big issue. When I started running a GTX 285 for Resolve last year, kernel panics were so common I had to buy a remote rebooter so I could get reliable access to my workstation over my VPN while I was on the road. Kernel panics were also common with the GeForce GT 330M built in to my 2010 MBP.
I side-graded to a Quadro 4000, which eliminated my kernel panics (though other users running other apps still had problems), but it took NVIDIA and Apple a long time to get on the same page for a driver release schedule. I had to remove the card and replace it with the original ATI to boot the 10.6.7 update, and OpenCL support took forever to materialize.
Ron pointed out OS X’s poor OpenGL support. This may not a problem for most, but it’s a big deal for 3D application’s viewport performance. The same hardware has historically performed better on Windows than on Mac.
10-bit DisplayPort output is still impossible with OS X.
I’m not saying that this won’t improve — I’m just saying that being able to pop the latest and greatest GTX series GPU into a Mac Pro won’t immediately address the ongoing criticisms of OS X’s graphics support.
[Andrew Richards] “To keep OS X viable for big work. Xcode developers (including those who focus on iOS), research scientists, and creatives are the traditional Mac Pro constituencies and all of them are underserved with something less than a Mac Pro.”
I agree, but I’m questioning if Apple is giving “big work” a reason to stay on the Mac platform.
I can’t speak to the systems that most developers are using, but I think Bill D. might talk about how the App Store is democratizing development, letting little guys with laptops get in on iOS development without making big-iron infrastructure investments.
Apple doesn’t seem to be actively pursuing the high performance computing market anymore. XGrid remains untouched, there’s no more XServe for high-density clusters, and Apple doesn’t have a Top 500 system anymore.
Anecdotally, I’ve seen the bulk of the creative market largely shifting away from Mac Pros toward iMacs. Graphic designers who used to buy Mac Pros are getting iMacs or MBPs instead. Thunderbolt makes the expansion needed by video editors possible on non-workstation systems. The only remaining creatives who will really need Mac Pros are on the high-end: 3D, compositing, coloring, audio — and they might be better served by Windows workstations.
Personally, I feel like Apple used to be interested in providing my solutions I could use. I’m feeling that they are less and less committed to users like me. Even a little thing like pre-announcing a new Mac Pro, like HP has done with the Z820, would go a long way towards re-assuring other longtime Apple users in my position.
[Andrew Richards] “The problem is there is no real evidence that Apple is phasing out OS X. On the contrary, they have doubled down on the desktop and will be releasing a new major version every year like they have been with iOS.”
I’m largely unconcerned about OS X. I agree that it’s not going anywhere, and I don’t really see “dumbed down” interfaces like LaunchPad (or Metro, for that matter) as huge obstacles. I spend very little time interacting with the operating system itself; most of my time on a workstation is spent in the apps I bought it to use.
The only possible concern I see at the moment for OS X is a big maybe: Apple’s potential war on hierarchical filesystems in general. Apple’s own apps may not need them, but most of the other apps I use assume a hierarchical file system. I’ll be curious to see how this shakes out in coming versions of OS X.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Richard Herd] “From Apple Final Cut Pro’s brand position, anyone can be the next Robert Rodriquez if they only buy this software. Neither Avid nor Premiere have that brand position. Bottom line is: “FCP” is literally worth more than just the potential hardware sales.”
Respectfully, I think this is how FCP users perceive the FCP brand.
Other communities have a different perception. As a counterexample, there’s a considerable indy effects and finishing community gathered around After Effects that doesn’t see what makes FCP so special. From their perspective, Premiere Pro works well, works on cheaper commodity PC hardware configurations, and provides better value with Photoshop, AE, and Encore in the Production Premium Suite.
That’s not to say that I disagree with your point that FCP is an aspirational brand — just that its ubiquity is not assumed in other circles.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Craig Seeman] “Certainly Macs in general can remain compatible, regarding OS and various apps going back several years. When it came to FCPX it was under 3 years. To put it another way, will the new MacPro replacement you buy in 2012 be able to run FCPX in 2015. My guess (obviously just a guess) is no and it there many be no simple “unsupported” swap of the GPU (again my guess).”
Maybe. I don’t think it is likely though. The hardware dividing line for FCPX is OpenCL-capable GPUs, and there would need to be some all-new, low-level, hardware-dependent APIs that 2015 FCPX requires in order for your projection to come true. I think that is unlikely. Not impossible, just unlikely.
Apple chose to draw a very modern line in the sand for FCPX’s starting point, and that would serve them well for the decade they see as its codebase’s lifespan. If they built FCPX atop older, less featured APIs, it would not be able to do all that it does (which was/is already fairly limited in the eyes of its critics).
Since FCPX is built on APIs that scale with hardware, there will be a strong incentive for users to give it the best Mac they can to get all the performance they can, but the minimum system requirements of 2011 will probably not expand much in terms of hardware requirements in the next few years. Hardware requirements for working with third party add-ons will carry their own restrictions, but that has always been true for any NLE.
I guess my bottom line is I don’t think Apple has a more aggressive duty cycle in mind as a business model for growing the Mac. Growing the Mac comes at the expense of other PCs far more than it does from forcing existing users to upgrade so they can run a new app that won’t work on a 3-year-old Mac.
Best,
Andy -
[Richard Herd] “anyone can be the next Robert Rodriquez if they only buy this software. Neither Avid nor Premiere have that brand position”
Actually, Avid has EXACTLY that brand position. At least since 2003 when I went to Avid, Robert was using Media Composer, and was very forthcoming about it. Here’s a piece he did for Avid for Predators in 2010.
Some contents or functionalities here are not available due to your cookie preferences!This happens because the functionality/content marked as “Vimeo framework” uses cookies that you choosed to keep disabled. In order to view this content or use this functionality, please enable cookies: click here to open your cookie preferences.
Robert Rodriguez: PREDATORS – From Concept To The Big Screen from Avid on Vimeo.
Avid was also one of the hosts for the debut of his most recent feature, 2011’s Spy Kids 4D.
So he may have started using Final Cut Pro at some point after his 2010 and 2011 features along the way, but if you want to start where Robert did, you start with Avid. No disrespect to FCP or you intended, but I think it’s possible to overstate FCP as the *only* golden city on top of a high hill.
For the record, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was an FCP box in the mix somewhere. His effects company is heavily Quantel, and I wouldn’t expect most people to only use products from one company.
Also for the record, I saw Macs stacked on pallets from the floor to the top of very high ceilings at Avid. They sent out fully-configured Mac Pros quite literally by the truckload. Quite inspiring to see those 18-wheel tractor trailers packed tight with Macs going to all the good little girls and boys.
I think your goodwill accounting argument is a valid one, though. I just think that the goodwill for OS and computer sales is coming from iDevices. The Hollywood halo is from the product placement of those same iDevices in Hollywood shows. You can look at the last time Apple updated their customer stories, and how prominently they’re NOT featured anymore to see their current value to Apple.
I have my long list of advice for Apple just like anybody else, but based on the results, it looks to me that the product placement vs. “made with Final Cut Pro” strategy is the right one.
-
[Walter Soyka] “Now I’m very curious. What OSes are you virtualizing? How many VMs (and with what specs) are you running on a single machine? What’s the nature of the work the apps running on your VMs do? If this is your primary use for the Mac Pro, what makes OS X on Apple hardware more sock rocking than Linux on PC hardware?”
I’ve got ESXi 5 on my Mac Pro 5,1 (not officially supported by VMware, but fully functional). It hosts everything from Red Hat Enterprise Linux for StorNext metadata controller experiments to FreeBSD to play with ZFS to Windows Server 2008 for some Active Directory testing to Ubuntu running a virtual tape library emulator to OS X Lion Server and Client to play with Xsan 2.3 (which takes some trickery to get working since 10.6 is the last officially support OS X guest on ESXi 5). The reason it needs to be Apple hardware is that is the only way OS X is allowed as a guest on a VM. You have to hackintosh it if you want to run OS X guests on non-Apple hardware.
For strictly server duty, I’ve essentially given up on OS X. Final Cut Server was the last reason to care about it for me. Stuff like Open Directory, MCX, and Profile Manager can run on a Mac mini server if you really need them, but for heavy duty stuff, I’d go with Linux or FreeBSD every time.
[Walter Soyka] “Ron pointed out OS X’s poor OpenGL support. This may not a problem for most, but it’s a big deal for 3D application’s viewport performance. The same hardware has historically performed better on Windows than on Mac. 10-bit DisplayPort output is still impossible with OS X. I’m not saying that this won’t improve — I’m just saying that being able to pop the latest and greatest GTX series GPU into a Mac Pro won’t immediately address the ongoing criticisms of OS X’s graphics support.”
These are some of the warts I alluded to, for sure. I’d put a new, modern filesystem ahead of these, but only slightly. Both are long overdue.
[Walter Soyka] “Personally, I feel like Apple used to be interested in providing my solutions I could use. I’m feeling that they are less and less committed to users like me. Even a little thing like pre-announcing a new Mac Pro, like HP has done with the Z820, would go a long way towards re-assuring other longtime Apple users in my position.”
If it is to die I wish they’d just get it over with and let the world move on. The lingering of the Mac Pro today is one of the more compelling bits of evidence that a new model is in the pipeline. This is why I feel right now is make-or-break time for the Mac Pro. Are we getting a freshly-drafted stud quarterback to lead the team for the next decade? Or are we getting one last season in the sun from a fading veteran at the end of his career?
This is also why I’m keen to see Adobe (and others) embrace Linux. I would be very sad if Windows became the only viable platform for big work should Apple shrink from the niche. Yes I’m prejudiced and biased. I just don’t like using or supporting Windows.
[Walter Soyka] “The only possible concern I see at the moment for OS X is a big maybe: Apple’s potential war on hierarchical filesystems in general. Apple’s own apps may not need them, but most of the other apps I use assume a hierarchical file system. I’ll be curious to see how this shakes out in coming versions of OS X.”
I have faith (misguided though it may be) that the “dumbed-down” veneer being incrementally added to OS X is only a toggle or two away from being disabled for the sake of power users like you and I. I think the vast majority of users are pretty clueless when it comes to filesystems, so I’m actually in favor of abstracting the storage a bit. Just so long as I can still dig in when I need to.
Best,
Andy -
[Tim Wilson] “No disrespect to FCP or you intended, but I think it’s possible to overstate FCP as the *only* golden city on top of a high hill.”
None taken. To be sure, I’m not overstating FCP’s brand position. It is coming from some low-level self-appointed literati who want to make a film or documentary. And these are snobby knowitalls who think “if that cretin can do it, so can I.” We tell the literati: to do THAT you need $10k and Avid. Can’t do that, yet they can drop $299 on the MBP, the same machine running Final Draft!
[Tim Wilson] “I have my long list of advice for Apple just like anybody else, but based on the results, it looks to me that the product placement vs. “made with Final Cut Pro” strategy is the right one.”
Yep. And this is what they see. Who sits through the credits, anyway, to see the logo bugs at the end?
[Tim Wilson] “I think your goodwill accounting argument is a valid one, though.”
Who is going to buy the moniker, “Final Cut Pro”? That would cost a lot of money. Apple is fully aware of how much that name means. How many of us dropped $299 on it?
-
[Andrew Richards] “If it is to die I wish they’d just get it over with and let the world move on. The lingering of the Mac Pro today is one of the more compelling bits of evidence that a new model is in the pipeline. This is why I feel right now is make-or-break time for the Mac Pro. Are we getting a freshly-drafted stud quarterback to lead the team for the next decade? Or are we getting one last season in the sun from a fading veteran at the end of his career?”
I’ll extend that analogy, with apologies in advance to Franz. I minored in philosophy in college and I sincerely enjoyed and appreciated his linked article. Please consider the following to be an attempt at clever rhetoric; I think the logic here stands on its own.
Maybe they’re just punting. It’s possible that they’ll stay the course for now and put off the long-term decision of what to do about workstations for another cycle.
A “stud quarterback” Mac Pro wouldn’t necessarily make me feel better, either. It’s also possible they’ll find an exciting quarterback like Tim Tebow (new Mac Pro?), but then drop him without a second thought next season and go after Peyton Manning (new consumer electronic device?) instead. Apple has demonstrated over and over that they are not afraid to change direction instantly.
I’m somewhat afraid that anything other than an EOL will just be more tea leaves to try to read. I’m not sure what Apple could do to be more reassuring, so I’ll pose these questions to the group: for those on the fence, what would make you believe? For those who do think that Apple sees a long-term future for professional and/or high-end production on the Mac platform, what convinced you of that?
[Andrew Richards] “I have faith (misguided though it may be) that the “dumbed-down” veneer being incrementally added to OS X is only a toggle or two away from being disabled for the sake of power users like you and I. I think the vast majority of users are pretty clueless when it comes to filesystems, so I’m actually in favor of abstracting the storage a bit. Just so long as I can still dig in when I need to.”
Maybe that’s the big OS X/iOS concern, then. OS X has always let you get at the internals, but only if you want to; iOS exposes none of its underlying complexity to the user. Perhaps the concern isn’t about the technical separation, but the ideological one: OS X must retain its philosophy of layered complexity, and must never inherit any of iOS’s locked-down design philosophy.
Walter Soyka
Principal & Designer at Keen Live
Motion Graphics, Widescreen Events, Presentation Design, and Consulting
RenderBreak Blog – What I’m thinking when my workstation’s thinking
Creative Cow Forum Host: Live & Stage Events -
[Walter Soyka] ” for those on the fence, what would make you believe?”
A public statement defining their road-map with a timetable and a promise to publicly announce adjustments to the timetable as need be. I think Apple would be loath to go back on a public commitment. Short of that there’s nothing they can say or do that would inspire trust.
Herb Sevush
Zebra Productions
—————————
nothin’ attached to nothin’
“Deciding the spine is the process of editing” F. Bieberkopf
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up