[Quagmire]

We finally get the xMac and now won't be bothered if it is just a temporary product until iMac Pro is ready?

Nah, the Mac Studio is exactly what I have wanted from Apple.... The power of the 27" iMac, but in an enclosure that has a suitable cooling system. Now I will contend with the Studio inheriting the Mini's bring your own keyboard and mouse..... At the price of the Studio, it can certainly come with a mouse and keyboard.......

[kscherer]

I'm just talking about the price point, not so much the size or form factor.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 We're about two days out from October, and there's no sightings yet of an October event. There's even a report that Macs will be released by press release only, which makes no sense unless the Mac Pro has been pushed to November.

The Mac Pro is still a big question mark.

I think it simply isn't coming soon. Instead, we'll see an M3 Mac Studio and M3 Mac Pro next year.

Originally Posted by Frank777 What new features do we think the 2023 Mac Pro will have? • USB4 Version 2.0 is a good bet. Don't think the new FireWire...ahem...Thunderbolt will be ready.

USB4 Version 2.0 spec isn't finished yet. That hasn't stopped Apple before, but I just don't think they care that much. After all, they already have Thunderbolt.

Originally Posted by Frank777 • I figure M2 SSDs are the new Zip Drives of the future, so I think some kind of front-access port to plug-in drives might show up.

I do think it's a bummer we didn't get a return of hot-swap internal storage with the 2019. But I also don't think we'll see it now.

Originally Posted by Frank777 • Hopefully, user-upgradable RAM

I still don't quite know how that'll work.

Originally Posted by Frank777 • A less-expensive version that takes the place of the Mac Studio with M1 Ultra.

But… you're describing the M1 Ultra.

Originally Posted by kscherer Depends on their PCI/GPU support. If there's no support for PCI, then the case can be half the size. If there is, then the same enclosure makes sense. Nope. The M-series processor line should be an indicator that Apple is all-in on Unified Memory.

If the Mac Pro doesn't have PCI slots nor expandable memory, how does it differ from the Mac Studio at all? I don't think that works. It needs to have something significant to distinguish it.

I'm also not sure Apple wants to deal with the PR headwinds of "yeah, we made a big deal about the 2013 Mac Pro being a misstep, but then we just did the same thing again just one revision later".

As for RAM, I dunno. I still think a heterogenous approach is a possibility — you get built-in fast RAM, and then you get expandable, but slower RAM. You need to decide at app launch which one you want.

[kscherer]

Originally Posted by chucker As for RAM, I dunno. I still think a heterogenous approach is a possibility — you get built-in fast RAM, and then you get expandable, but slower RAM. You need to decide at app launch which one you want.

I mean, yeah, it's possible, but it sounds like a hardware/software engineering headache.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by kscherer I mean, yeah, it's possible, but it sounds like a hardware/software engineering headache.

It does, but a Mac Pro that’s simply a Mac Studio with two M1 Ultras inside sounds like a pointless project to me.

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by chucker It does, but a Mac Pro that’s simply a Mac Studio with two M1 Ultras inside sounds like a pointless project to me.

Hmmm. The upper-tier Mac Studio is USD$3,999. The Mac Pro starts at USD$5,999

Apple will essentially be charging $2K more for a faster chip and 8 PCI slots. I have no idea whether that is a good value.

[PB PM]

Good value? That's never stopped Apple before... I mean $699 Mac Pro wheels anyone?

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Hmmm. The upper-tier Mac Studio is USD$3,999. The Mac Pro starts at USD$5,999 Apple will essentially be charging $2K more for a faster chip and 8 PCI slots. I have no idea whether that is a good value.

I mean… a Mac Pro is only going to be interesting for the nichest of niches. The SoC, if it works as presumed, is just two or four Ultras. So, more RAM, more cores. Critically, one thing it likely won’t do is increase the clock. An M1 Ultra at a single core is only slightly faster than an M1 Noadjectives, and that’s mostly because of higher memory bandwidth. An M1 Extreme Quadzillionaire, likewise, will be the same speed per core. In other words, unless you benefit from a ton of RAM, a ton of GPU cores, or more than 20(!!) CPU cores, no, this SoC isn’t for you.

So to me, that leaves internal expansion.

The Ultra vs. Max alone is $1,400 more on the Studio (so, $4,000). So it stands to reason that two Ultras would cost about $2,800 more ($5,400). I guess they could offer the Mac Pro with an Ultra for $4,999, then with two Ultras (and other higher specs) for $6,999, then four for $8,999.

[Frank777]

Well it's about time. SSD prices have been too high for too long.

Hopefully, Apple's upcoming iMac will feature some of the savings and Cupertino won't keep its SSD upgrades so insanely high.

[PB PM]

Don’t count on it, Apple doesn’t tend to change those prices much, regardless of what the rest of the industry is doing.

[turtle]

Since Apple just upgraded the iPads with a PR I wonder if there will be an event for Macs soon. Unless they are just "boring" incremental upgrades it would be a surprise for just a PR.

[PB PM]

Or Apple is just done with Mac upgrades for the year. Unless something comes in the next week or so, it seems unlikely. The last time Apple updated a Mac later than October was the late 2018 Mac Mini, IIRC.

[kscherer]

I suspect a silent update or nothing at all.

[Frank777]

The Mac update everyone wants to see (but not necessarily buy) is the new Mac Pro.

I'm pretty sure Apple has released the Mac Pro in November/December before. Realistically, with all the chip stuff and inflation-worries, I've always thought a November Mac announcement might be necessary.

Anyway, 2022 is it's own thing. We have a hot war going on in Europe, we just declared an economic war on China's microprocessor industry, the U.S. midterms are going to be epic, and there's a World Cup being held in a desert the week before Christmas.

If the Mac event for the year is a couple of weeks later than usual, no-one will care.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 I'm pretty sure Apple has released the Mac Pro in November/December before.

Yes, but both the 2013 and 2019 were first previewed at WWDC half a year earlier.

They could always still do a small event this year, and just release it right there. But I think that ship has sailed, which raises the question whether they won't go straight to M3.

[Frank777]

Originally Posted by chucker Yes, but both the 2013 and 2019 were first previewed at WWDC half a year earlier. They could always still do a small event this year, and just release it right there. But I think that ship has sailed, which raises the question whether they won't go straight to M3.

Or they could preview it in late November and release it in Spring with the M3.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Or they could preview it in late November and release it in Spring with the M3.

But to what end? Previewing at WWDC makes sense because you already have a high-end audience watching. An event just to preview a product? Nah.

[Frank777]

An event would serve as a roadmap for content creators planning new setups over the coming year.

You don't want people who might buy a $7,500 Mac Pro to buy a $3,000 Mac Studio because they didn't know it was coming.

Or maybe, they would show the machine but push back the delivery date because they are waiting on something.

[PB PM]

Tim Cook basically made it clear that no new Macs are coming for the rest of the year in the most recent investment call.

During a recent call with investors last week, Cook began a sentence with "as we approach the holiday season, with our product lineup set," suggesting that there will be no new hardware announcements from Apple in 2022.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022...2023-not-2022/

[kscherer]

Yeah, we're not expecting anything. However, we're still holding off on stocking up until at least the middle of November. Apple is notorious for redirecting interest.

[Frank777]

The way this unfolded is extremely weird.

This isn't the Mac rumour sites getting ahead of themselves. Apple itself raised expectations for a 2022 Mac Pro.

We've got a small iMac that's over a year old, a two-year-old Mac Mini, no large iMac, no Mac Pro at all and a really pricey Mac Studio.

The desktop lineup is uncompelling, to put it mildly, for the Christmas season.

[Bryson]

TBF, Pro-level desktops are not really "Christmas Present" fodder. They're more the type of thing people buy for work, with work budgets.

[chucker]

If you think the Studio is pricey, boy, are you in for a ride with the Mac Pro.

And yeah, the holidays are only relevant for consumer products.

[Frank777]

True, the Mac Pro will be in a different price class than everything else.
I still want to see it atop the lineup, before I commit to the Studio.

Regarding my 'Christmas season' comment, I understand that the consumer lineup is the primary draw for gift-giving.

But when I worked in corporate, end-of-year budget spends were also nothing to be casually dismissed. I don't know if this is still the case. But if there was money available, someone in the office was getting a new Mac.

[dglow]

Originally Posted by chucker The Mac Pro is still a big question mark. As for RAM, I dunno. I still think a heterogenous approach is a possibility — you get built-in fast RAM, and then you get expandable, but slower RAM. You need to decide at app launch which one you want.

^ This, but automatic and managed by the kernel.

(though the notion of manually choosing an app's memory config, at launch, is so very Classic!)

If the new Mac Pro adds socketed, 'slow' RAM to Apple Silicon it will be yet another storage tier. Apple already has several. The MX SoCs have very large pools of on-die memory, known as 'System-Level Cache', which is much faster than the on-package RAM. Movement between RAM and SLC is entirely managed by the system; it follows that any new storage tiers would be handled similarly.

Apple might flex by choosing to manage 'slow' RAM as a kind of virtual memory, thus providing multiple tiers for swap. (SSD < Socketed RAM < On-Package RAM). But some apps, like very large databases or HPC datasets, need full control and Apple will want to accommodate them. I suspect any default, 'automatic' policy would be opt-out for the apps that demand, and explicitly code for, full control.

No inside knowledge here, just educated speculation. Cheers.

[Frank777]

Sounds interesting. Whether we get RAM and HD expansion in the Pro is the million-dollar question.
Otherwise, what's the point? The Studio Ultra is already faster than the current Pro.

I'm actually surprised that someone hasn't yet come up with a 'tower' expansion pedestal that the Studio can sit atop.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Sounds interesting. Whether we get RAM and HD expansion in the Pro is the million-dollar question. Otherwise, what's the point? The Studio Ultra is already faster than the current Pro.

Exactly. The reason I think they'll do something special with the RAM, the GPU, or something is that I don't think "like the Studio, but twice the cores" or "like the Studio, but internal PCIe expansion" is worth it.

Originally Posted by Frank777 I'm actually surprised that someone hasn't yet come up with a 'tower' expansion pedestal that the Studio can sit atop.

Wouldn't one of those mini expansion things fit?

Originally Posted by dglow ^ This, but automatic and managed by the kernel. (though the notion of manually choosing an app's memory config, at launch, is so very Classic!)

Indeed it is.

I don't know that automatic is feasible, but I suppose it would work a bit like Fusion Drive.

[dglow]

Originally Posted by Frank777 Sounds interesting. Whether we get RAM and HD expansion in the Pro is the million-dollar question. Otherwise, what's the point? The Studio Ultra is already faster than the current Pro.

Agreed. Definitionally a Mac Pro must offer memory and internal PCIe expansion.

I'm actually surprised that someone hasn't yet come up with a 'tower' expansion pedestal that the Studio can sit atop.

Sonnet sells the rack mount equivalent.

Originally Posted by chucker Exactly. The reason I think they'll do something special with the RAM, the GPU, or something is that I don't think "like the Studio, but twice the cores" or "like the Studio, but internal PCIe expansion" is worth it.

Until Apple Silicon there hasn’t been a Studio to compare against – the closest we’ve gotten was the G4 Cube. One could say the Studio is just the Mac Pro without internal PCIe and RAM expansion. Is the Studio worth it? Sure, for some users. And similar for the Mac Pro.

GPU is the real wildcard IMO, both structurally and strategically for Apple. If they can outperform AMD chips there’s not much to reason support 3rd-party cards. Some pros might want NVidia cards for CUDA compute, but Apple said no to that market long ago. That leaves Apple GPUs exclusively for Apple machines. Whether Apple does its own GPU-only expansion module is the $M question.

[chucker]

Originally Posted by dglow Until Apple Silicon there hasn’t been a Studio to compare against – the closest we’ve gotten was the G4 Cube. One could say the Studio is just the Mac Pro without internal PCIe and RAM expansion.

Or an iMac Pro without a screen.

[dglow]

Originally Posted by chucker Or an iMac Pro without a screen.

Or three Mac minis stacked atop each other?

iMac Pro was designed for a world in which the 2019 Mac Pro didn’t happen.

Either way, a headless desktop is the compare. xMac 4eva.