Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

iMac Pro

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 209 posts

Re: iMac Pro

#141

Post by ksec »

1. For those who are criticizing upgradablity, there is a NEW Mac Pro design coming in 2018, modular and upgradable. I hope it will be a Cheese Grater like design but fits into a 3U Size Rack. I am pretty sure there are "comparatively" huge demand for Mac on Rack, and OSX Server in General.

2. The iMac Pro are really geared towards large segments of 3D Gfx, Photos and Videos Pros. So Professional Programmers may not be its target audience.

3. I dont believe the Cooling system is anything new. It is well engineered, but not new innovation. Which really pisses me off is because they could have done this a lot sooner, and they decide it is for iMac Pro and 27" only. I wish the normal 21 and 27 iMac gets more powerful CPU and GPU as well with the same cooling system.

4. There is nothing new on this page, why is it posted?

Re: iMac Pro

#142

Post by to3m »

fhood wrote: post #93
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a programmer and so buy middle of the line macbook pros with mid range CPUs, mid range RAM, and integrated GPUS. Ironically, my wife, a designer, always chastises me for getting such slow hardware: turns out what works for a programmer doesn't work for soemone who has to use a lot of Adobe CSS :). I assume this iMac pro would be for her, not for me.

I'm a programmer and I tend to buy the thing with the largest numbers. I justify it by admitting to myself that I am only buying it because it has the largest numbers, and that it will last me longer, thus causing less pollution. But really it is just because of the numbers.

I do this too. You'll never have buyers' remorse if you buy the one with the largest numbers, nor will you ever run out of disk space.

Re: iMac Pro

#143

Post by ozaark »

xutopia wrote: post #92
seba_dos1 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's up to personal taste. I have every day contact with macOS and can't stand it.

Could you describe what you don't like about it? For all we know it could be that you don't like the color choices they made.

Here's a good rundown of where quality is declining with the OS: http://www.nicholaswindsorhoward.com/blog-directory/2016/7/2...

Re: iMac Pro

#144

Post by cjsuk »

dman wrote: post #97
cjsuk wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm going to be honest: I never had any PC problems really until Windows 10 came around. Occasionally windows update would get bonked or I'd hose the machine myself but it was pretty reliable. That's going back to Windows NT 3.51 for me. Since Windows 10, screw it. QA is gone. So many little papercuts it's not worth it any more. I use my two Macs and rarely touch the PC, an HP z620 which has just been a total pile of…

Have you considered the possibility that you just had a bad machine?

I have clearly had three bad machines. I've got an X201 and a T440 as well. The Z620 was especially bad, but the X201 and T440 are perfect hardware-wise and existed before the whole windows 10 thing. The software is the main problem.

Re: iMac Pro

#145

Post by bomanbot »

KGIII wrote: post #98
danielvf wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you meant 128Gb ram, instead of 18gb.

I haven't read the article and I balked when they exclaimed the bit about 18 GB of RAM. That'd be an unusual number but, more importantly, is well below what I'd expect for a minimal amount of RAM in a designated 'professional' system. These days, I'd want 64 GB as a minimum but I suppose 32 would suit for some tasks. I still muck about with some modeling that hasn't been shunted off to the GPU, so I'd even find a us…

That is Video RAM for the GPU, though not the main RAM for the system. The minimum RAM amount you can buy the iMac Pro with is 32 GB, 64 GB and 128 GB configs are also available

Also, 18 GB was certainly a typo, if you look now, they are saying 16 GB now.

Re: iMac Pro

#146

Post by snuxoll »

jamesgeck0 wrote: post #134
snuxoll wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is where macOS' new support for eGPU enclosures comes into play.

Current eGPU enclosure technology is for powering up a machine with integrated graphics, not keeping up with top of the line cards. Thunderbolt 3 just isn't fast enough for that to be feasible. The bottleneck is such that there's already no point in putting a high end card like the GTX 1080 Ti in an eGPU enclosure (Source: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/laptop-external-grap... ).

If you're worried about raw graphics throughput, sure. For most GPGPU use cases you've still got enough bandwidth.

Re: iMac Pro

#147

Post by incongruity »

ballenf wrote: post #69
stefco_ wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friend in film production tells me that his shop does a ton of editing on iMacs despite the premium on hardware. He is an enthusiast and has built his own editing PC, but he tells me the iMacs are rock-solid and never give them any trouble, despite the specs being worse on paper than some other editing machines. I think that the consistency, quality, and software integration are worth a lot to businesses, especial…

Buying a Mac for business is simply outsourcing IT support to a different vendor (Apple vs. local support options) and paying for some of the support upfront vs. on demand. Getting good support from a vendor or hiring in house implicates a lot of overhead. The choice to go with Apple is very understandable to me, based on my experience with how much time it takes to find and supervise IT support personnel/vendors. Th…

It's also pre-paying to avoid downtime and less efficient work. Given that I can't predict when hardware will have issues, I think this case gets stronger as well.

Re: iMac Pro

#148

Post by flamtap »

fhood wrote: post #93
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a programmer and so buy middle of the line macbook pros with mid range CPUs, mid range RAM, and integrated GPUS. Ironically, my wife, a designer, always chastises me for getting such slow hardware: turns out what works for a programmer doesn't work for soemone who has to use a lot of Adobe CSS :). I assume this iMac pro would be for her, not for me.

I'm a programmer and I tend to buy the thing with the largest numbers. I justify it by admitting to myself that I am only buying it because it has the largest numbers, and that it will last me longer, thus causing less pollution. But really it is just because of the numbers.

When nVidia's model numbers rolled over, I had a true moment of panic. Didn't know what to do with myself anymore.

Re: iMac Pro

#149

Post by seanmcdirmid »

jmull wrote: post #121
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a programmer and so buy middle of the line macbook pros with mid range CPUs, mid range RAM, and integrated GPUS. Ironically, my wife, a designer, always chastises me for getting such slow hardware: turns out what works for a programmer doesn't work for soemone who has to use a lot of Adobe CSS :). I assume this iMac pro would be for her, not for me.

That makes sense to me... I do some side work which involves media assets and that’s where my current machine is slow. I only “slice and dice” the completed assets in order to add them to the app so it’s not really a problem. But if I were working with that stuff all day, I’d want as much power as I could get. But as a programmer, my biggest and by far most frequent bottleneck is when my computer is idle and I’m sitt…

I'm researching how to get more of that thinking augmented by the computer, since with the programming tools that we have today, much of what we do still happens in our heads. If our programming experience were much richer, we'd probably start clamoring for more advanced hardware to go with it.
Post reply on HN