Live data from Hacker News

Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

9to5mac.com

371–380 of 672 posts

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#371

I bet there’s gonna be a banger of a Mac Studio announced in June. Apple really stumbled into making the perfect hardware for home inference machines. Does any hardware company come close to Apple in terms of unified memory and single machines for high throughput inference workloads? Or even any DIY build? When it comes to the previous “pro workloads,” like video rendering or software compilation, you’ve always been…

The interesting question is whether they'll lean into it intentionally (better tooling, more ML-focused APIs) or just keep treating it as a side effect of their silicon design

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#372
post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is the proof what is left is a workaround, just like pilling minis on racks because Apple left the server space. Also why Swift nowadays has to have good Linux support, if app developers want to share code with the server.

A workaround that works is better than an official solution that's barely adequate. Which is often the case.

Or just maybe, to use a Steve Jobs quote, one is holding it wrong and should look elsewhere.

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#373

I never understood the point of the Mac Pro for the last decade or so - especially after the Mac Studio was released, Apple should have worked out what professionals actually want - basically a Mac Studio but with three or four PCIe slots and a few SSD slots. That’s literally all it should be! The Mac Pro was at the same time bizarrely over the top while also weirdly limited in some ways - while also being way to exp…

[dead]

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#374
post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The detail you are missing is that one has to buy an additional enclosure and the set of PCI cards is actually limited, hardly workstation class. This is a workstation, https://www.dell.com/en-us/shop/desktop-computers/precision-...

Interesting that all the memory options are "no longer available" .

That is an AI bros problem that will affect most of the industry, not only workstations.

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#375

As someone who came from the SGI O2/Octane era when high-end workstations were compact, distinctive, and sexy, I’ve never really understood the allure of the Mac Pro, with the exception of the 2013 Mac Pro tube, which I owned (small footprint, quiet, and powerful). For me, aesthetics and size are important. That workstation on your desk should justify its presence, not just exist as some hulking box. When Apple relea…

But I think the Mac Pro was never really trying to be on your desk in the first place. For a lot of its target users, it lived under the desk or in a rack, and the size wasn't about aesthetics so much as airflow, expansion, and serviceability

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#376
post #26

I think that's an expected thing. G5 was the thing. And companies were buying G5 and other macs like that all the time, because you were able to actually extend it with video cards and some special equipment. But now we have M chips. You don't need video for M chips. You kinda do, but truthfully, it's cheaper to buy a beefier Mac than to install a video card. Pro was a great thing for designers and video editors, tho…

I’m at peace with the memory and PCIe basically flows over thundebolt. At one point external gpus were a thing. I think what I’d really love would be a couple or few m.2 slots in my studio for storage expansion.

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#377
post #304

The latest Mac Pro really didn't make much use of its size, as there were too few useful things to put into. Especially as the GPU is now part of the package anyway. Also, the Mac Studio is the perfect workstation for the desk. Still, there are a few things which could be improved relative to the current Studio. First, the ability to easily clean the internals from dust. You should be able to just lift the lid and cl…

Studio for desks, something rackable for scale

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#378

I never understood the point of the Mac Pro for the last decade or so - especially after the Mac Studio was released, Apple should have worked out what professionals actually want - basically a Mac Studio but with three or four PCIe slots and a few SSD slots. That’s literally all it should be! The Mac Pro was at the same time bizarrely over the top while also weirdly limited in some ways - while also being way to exp…

Isn't that... exactly what the Mac Pro was? PCIe support was the primary point

What I’m trying to say is that with 7 slots and being more than double the size that it needed to be, it was way more machine than 95% of the market who might actually want it would buy, with a price that was correspondingly way too expensive…

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#379

I bet there’s gonna be a banger of a Mac Studio announced in June. Apple really stumbled into making the perfect hardware for home inference machines. Does any hardware company come close to Apple in terms of unified memory and single machines for high throughput inference workloads? Or even any DIY build? When it comes to the previous “pro workloads,” like video rendering or software compilation, you’ve always been…

> home inference machines.

The market for this use case is tiny

Re: Apple discontinues the Mac Pro

#380
post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just about everybody who isn't Nvidia dropped the ball, bigtime. Intel should have shipped their GPUs with much more VRAM from day one. If they had done this, they'd have carved out a massive niche and much more market share, and it would have been trivially simple to do. AMD should have improved their tools and software, etc. Apple should have done as you say. Google had nigh on a decade to boost TPU production, and…

Why should Apple have done this? It doesn’t fit their business in anyway shape or form. Where does data centre hardware sit relative to electronics / humanities cross roads that is foundational for Apple?

> Why should Apple have done this?

For money, probably.

Apple is presumably leaving a lot of money on the table by not trying to sell Apple Silicon for AI inference and training. They're the only ones who can attach reasonably large GPUs (M3 Ultra) to very large amounts of cheaper memory (512GB SO-DIMM per GPU). Apple could e.g. sell server SKUs of Mac Studios, heck they can sell M3 Ultra chips on PCIe cards. And they could further develop Apple Silicon in that direction. Presumably they would be seen as a very legit competitor to Nvidia that way, perhaps moreso than Intel and AMD. I'd assume that in the current climate this would be extremely lucrative.

Now, actually doing this would disrupt Apple's own supply chain as well as force it to spend significant internal resources and cultural change for this kind of product line. There's a good argument to be made it would disproportionally negatively affect its Mac business, so this would be a very risky move.

But given that AI hardware is likely much higher margin than the Mac business an argument could probably (sadly) be made that it'd be lucrative for them to try it. I personally don't think Apple is inclined to take this kind of risk to jeopardize the Mac, but I'm sure some people at Apple have considered this.

Post reply on HN