Live data from Hacker News

New Mac Pro

apple.com

241–250 of 731 posts

Re: New Mac Pro

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I work in Hollywood. The complaints are here too. But people are more concerned with upgrades and repairs. Loss of a machine for a few days/weeks for a repair is far more costly than anything else. That said a lot of the industry is moving to the cloud anyway and doesn't require workstations. Some shops are entirely on Linux. Audio post/recording and editing are the last bastions of mac pro dominance, imo.

Isn’t there something to be said about a local powerful workstation though or has offloading things to the cloud gotten that good?

There is, but it's changing. Disclaimer, I'm on the audio side of things and my knowledge of video post is much more limited. Dedicated processors are bigger for us than cloud solutions.

Audio post/recording shops use Protools HDX systems [1] which are rackmount units holding a handful of DSPs connected to the PC with proprietary PCIe cards. The industry is moving towards ASPs as a whole, through products like Waves Soundgrid [2] and Universal Audio's UAD [3]. Of these, PT HDX has an API for developing 3rd party code to run on their hardware (it's proprietary however) and the SOUL [4] project is aimed at these kinds of solutions.

Dedicated audio processing units are about where GPUs were 25-30 years ago. Almost all proprietary, no shader languages, but CPU time is coming at a premium so we'll have to figure something out.

[1] https://www.avid.com/products/pro-tools-hdx [2] https://www.waves.com/soundgrid-systems [3] https://www.uaudio.com/uad-accelerators.html [4] https://github.com/soul-lang/SOUL

Now that's not to say that having a fast machine isn't important, it certainly is since a large chunk of DSP is not running on dedicated hardware (and that hardware is freaking pricy). But in most situations your audio processing is dominated by single threaded performance, which is why some people are irritated by the iMac Pro advertised as a pro workstation when it will thermal throttle on you under moderate load, and this new Mac Pro that hopefully has better cooling and a better processor will be a huge relief for users and developers who want more CPU cycles for our code.

With respect to cloud, some applications just simply can't use workstations. VFX stuff is mostly on distributed Linux systems these days because you can't put the power you need into a single box, or at least it's more effective to have people edit over 10Gbit connections through a terminal.

The rest of the cloud stuff is more about workflow than power, at least in the stuff I've seen most cloud applications are about synchronizing projects in the highly parallelized production pipelines used in Hollywood studios. NAB is littered with cloud workflow solutions every year.

Re: New Mac Pro

#242
post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The new Mac Minis are really powerful. What doesn't it have that you're hoping for?

- The new Mac Mini has soldered storage. This precludes upgrading storage, replacing internal storage (which is important for preserving data due to a motherboard failure), and adding additional internal storage. - Apple finally made the RAM on the new Mac Mini upgradeable, but it is not user-serviceable; you have to get the RAM installed by an Apple-authorized repair center in order for the warranty to stay valid on…

> - Apple finally made the RAM on the new Mac Mini upgradeable, but it is not user-serviceable; you have to get the RAM installed by an Apple-authorized repair center in order for the warranty to stay valid on the Mac Mini. The same holds true for the iMac Pro.

I'm pretty confident this isn't legal in the US. Under a law from the 70's the FTC released a letter reiterating this fact last year. Apple and other companies have made this purposefully vague as well as fighting right to repair laws.

> There are no user-serviceable, expandable Macs that cost under...

This has been a gripe against Apple for at least 20 years.

Re: New Mac Pro

#243
post #46

Lack of NVIDIA support is a deal-breaker. The AMD ecosystem is just so far behind when it comes to frameworks like CUDA, OptiX, cuDNN, etc.. Why can't Apple open up kernel-level support by cooperating more with NVIDIA? This state of things seems completely bizarre to me.

Maybe it's NVIDIA blocking the way? If Linus is correct, then they are not a nice company to work with.

To hear Nvidia tell it, it's Apple fault. Weird how everybody who works with Nvidia has issues, though.

Re: New Mac Pro

#244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is video editing external storage more likely to be shared 10GbE NAS or direct attached Thunderbolt 3 with software RAID?

NAS in any reasonably sized shop.

Is there a prevalent vendor/stack, e.g. Netapp, QNAP, FreeNAS, Unraid?

Re: New Mac Pro

#245
Anecdotally, this page takes a very long time to load in Chrome, whereas it loads immediately in Safari. I wonder if they're artificially slowing the response for non-Safari clients? Seems a bit hard to explain otherwise.

Re: New Mac Pro

#246

I know being expandable is important here but I am stunned by the fact that an iMac Pro actually comes with better SSD and Video Card for less money and you get a screen to boot! 256g SSD is shameful, I don't care what they were thinking. No Nvidia support mentioned so I know a few that just wrote it off for that oversight alone. They will probably hold out just to be sure but that was the hope for them and others. W…

$5000 for imac pro(+applecare)? that is bonkers. $6000 is even more crazy. You can get more storage, better gpu, more options for network for much less. And you wont need to deal with apple geniuses to fix the issues.

Those alternatives don’t run macOS.

Re: New Mac Pro

#247
post #218
post #140

Those of us who are slightly older may still remember how much real workstations (as in a Sun SparcStation or an SGI Indigo) cost back in the day, and are less shocked by the pricing :-) Computing has really been democratized over the last 25 years.

Those workstations were substantially different (and faster) than commodity x86 hardware at the time. Today you can buy a latest-gen 8-core CPU for $300 or so.

The sad truth is they really weren't that much faster. Sun workstations were using the same 68k processors that Macs were using. There is a reason the Unix Workstation market didn't survive.

That said, this Mac is not as overpriced as it appears on the surface. A server class motherboard with ECC RAM support and an 8 core Xeon aren't cheap components. I'm guessing they aren't using the bottom of the barrel SSDs either. 32GB of ECC memory aren't exactly free either. I wouldn't be surprised if the BoM on this was over $3k.

Re: New Mac Pro

#248
post #116

The price saddens me. The $6K base is twice the base of the 2013 Mac Pro when it was released. Some quick spec-ing for a somewhat-equivalent DIY build gives somewhere around $3K. The build I was already spec-ing for my next workstation has 2x RAM, 16x SSD, SFP+ NIC and is under $5K. I hope at least that the SSDs are standard M.2, but looking at the pictures I’m not sure they are.

Where did you find the price?

Presumably from store.apple.com?

Re: New Mac Pro

#249

Aesthetically, that's really quite loud. I'm surprised to see them ship something that doesn't fit their signature minimal & reserved look.

It's what people asked for – a work horse, designed to be fast, reliable and reasonably quiet. They've tried the "beauty first" approach on the 2013 version and it was a disaster.

They can accomplish all that, just without the tasteless design.

The stainless steel frame contrasts with the shell, and not in a good way. The ventilation holes are really weirdly proportioned and still manage to look cramped with that inner baffle. And finally, that apple logo on the side stands out a bit too much, on the old cheesegrater it was a darker gray and a bit smaller.

The old G5 chassis was an understated and refined look, each of its elements seamlessly blended into each other well. This thing is just sharp to look at, my eyes do not know where to rest on it.

Re: New Mac Pro

#250
post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

2x 10GBE actually. Plus four 40Gbps Thunderbolt ports.

I find that link aggregation is pretty much useless and/or unstable. Not sure what good two 10gbe ports do. But seeing 10gbe becoming part of the standard spec is a really welcomed improvement. Not the least because it will drive prices down.

Would be second interface be for a storage network?
Post reply on HN