New Mac Pro • Hacker News Board

Re: New Mac Pro

#301

Post by imagetic » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:30 PM UTC

llampx wrote: post #186

duskwuff wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first step up from 256GB is 2x512GB, and there's configurations up to 2x2TB. My guess is that the 256GB configuration is meant for users that work primarily with data that's kept on network storage.

There's no professional that would buy a machine with 256GB of storage. Let's call it what it is - a throwaway configuration meant to hit a price point.

Every machine I've worked on, bought or built has had 256 or 500gb. We only run the OS/apps on the main drive. Then a second drive for scratch disk and then SAN/NAS storage for the media. It's VERY normal.

Re: New Mac Pro

#302

Post by zerkten » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:30 PM UTC

smnrchrds wrote: post #239

haditab wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> aerospace I was under the impression that most engineering software for mechanical and aerospace engineers are only supported on Windows.

I am not sure about aerospace, but for mechanical engineering, SolidWorks is a must, and it is only available on Windows. Many other important pieces of software, for example ANSYS, ABAQUS, and Fluent are not available for Mac. In fact, the only mechanical engineering software I know is available for Mac is AutoCAD.

I think Apple are trying to make the point that they have invested again in this space, so they hope that software developers will also invest. The expectation might not be for an immediate switch from software developers, but laying the groundwork for something longer term. We'll see how it pans out, but Apple are experiencing pressures they didn't experience a few years ago.

Re: New Mac Pro

#303

Post by altmind » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:31 PM UTC

walterbell wrote: post #244

smogcutter wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NAS in any reasonably sized shop.

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

No prevalent stack AFAIK, but add Synology and WD Nas to the list.

Re: New Mac Pro

#304

Post by wuliwong » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:32 PM UTC

jrochkind1 wrote: post #210

aczerepinski wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that it’s always been this way. I bought a G4 tower when I was in college and it sure as heck wasn’t $6,000 back then. This is the only traditional desktop computer that Apple sells, so it’s disappointing that everybody outside of movie studio employees has to fall back to an iMac or a Windows/Linux machine.

Just as I'm curious what prices really were. don't know exactly what Gr tower line you are talking about, but according to https://www.macstories.net/mac/the-power-mac-g4-line/ , the first reasonable powermac G4 was summer 2000, and > Prices ranged from $1,599 to $3,499, According to one online inflation calculator, $1599 in 2000 dollars is $2,372.95 in 2019 dollars. and $3499 is $5,192.58. So, I guess, yeah.I do rec…

It's unclear to me if you were agreeing or disagreeing but the upcoming mac pro entry model is going to be more than double the price of the entry level G4 towers after adjusting for inflation. So the original commenter seems to be correct, they used to be more affordable.

Re: New Mac Pro

#305

Post by StillBored » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:32 PM UTC

goda90 wrote: post #11

swah wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But your build doesn't run macOS.... that's all that matters for so many folks. (I aggree - I feel like maybe I will never be able to afford or justify a Mac-based system in my 3rd world country...)

Strides have been made in virtualizing macOS, so that might not be holding people back much anymore.

Legally, when not run on apple hardware?

Its not like people haven't been able to run it illegally in a vm for at least a decade. That was one of the preferred ways of running it if your machine didn't have the exact correct hardware requirements back when I paid attention to such things.

Re: New Mac Pro

#306

Post by boopk » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:32 PM UTC

MagicPropmaker wrote: post #114

PascLeRasc wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It runs macOS and those consumer grade computers don't. If the best colorist in the area is working on your film, you give them the tools they ask for.

The color graders here run 10-bit/color HDR monitors that have a wide gamut. Apple doesn't have monitors that support this. (The new one _might_ do the trick; we'll see.) Everyone here doing professional color work is on PCs supplied by Thinkmate. This is standard in Hollywood, too.

The new ones aren't great you need a broadcast monitor that will show how things look for broadcast and not a computer.

Re: New Mac Pro

#307

Post by duskwuff » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:33 PM UTC

jimbokun wrote: post #214

duskwuff wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The first step up from 256GB is 2x512GB, and there's configurations up to 2x2TB. My guess is that the 256GB configuration is meant for users that work primarily with data that's kept on network storage.

Or is this meant to be the "I just want to buy my own disks separately model", with 256GB drive just there to allow OS to be pre-installed? EDIT: I see now there are only two internal drive bays, so that would mean tossing the 256GB that comes with it if you wanted to max out the internal storage.

You can't buy drives separately. Storage is almost certainly raw flash, exposed as NVMe through the Apple T2 controller.

Re: New Mac Pro

#308

Post by threeseed » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:33 PM UTC

shoo_pl wrote: post #257

threeseed wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

256GB SSD and base video card is fine. I would definitely look at a Mac Pro for software development (every minute counts) and if you're in that group there is simply no need for more storage or decent graphics.

That's silly to be honest. I am a developer myself and I can tell you Mac Pro or iMac Pro is a waste of money in every way imaginable. Look up barefeats benchmarks. Unless you have very specialised needs (like video editing) there is visible penalty when you increase the number of your cores. For every day usage 6-8 cores is what you should be aiming at, and preferably with highest clock speed possible. The more core…

It depends on your needs. With Scala/Hydra I routinely run my 8-core i9 MacBook Pro to 100% for quite a few minutes.

So I could definitely see more cores improving build times.

Re: New Mac Pro

#309

Post by Rebelgecko » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:34 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #150

Rebelgecko wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will they be able to release drivers with the new kext situation? They still don't even have drivers to use their newer cards in Mojave

For me it's win-win situation for Apple. They help Nvidia with drivers, more people buy Mac Pro to use Nvidia GPU. I have no idea why Apple don't want to work with Nvidia. They are not selling desktop GPU after all. May be they have some hidden agreements with AMD.

The unsubstantiated scuttlebutt is that Apple is pissed at NVidia because when MBP's used Nvidia GPUs there were quality issues

Re: New Mac Pro

#310

Post by ultrarunner » Mon, Jun 03, 2019, 9:35 PM UTC

fwip wrote: post #121

ultrarunner wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting pro tip: psychological anchoring works on spouses (and even oneself) as well.

Pro tip: psychological manipulation is not a great strategy for a successful marriage. Just talk to each other like normal adults.

It's also no strategy for a healthy personal life. Neither is being so uptight about everything. Comment was made toungue-in-cheek to include the name of the phenomenon for posterity and those who would like to research it further :)