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

New Mac Pro

apple.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 731 posts

Re: New Mac Pro

#441

Post by philjohn »

leoc wrote: post #371
TomVDB wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know nothing about SAN, but I'm still surprised that it would be faster than a PCIe connected local SSD?

I'm just speculating here, but I assume that online storage isn't faster, but it may be bigger, online, easier for IT to manage, and fast enough. It also seems likely that some employers are worried about engineers or creatives just walking out with commercially sensitive data.

This. Have a look at the various Linus Tech Tips videos on their ingestion and editing workflow. There's a reason they upgraded their network to 10Gige and it wasn't for fun.

Re: New Mac Pro

#442

Post by jrs95 »

rhinoceraptor wrote: post #282
jrs95 wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah the pricing for the base model is insane. You can get a more powerful PC with 4x the storage for half the price. And you're right about Nvidia. I also stream on Twitch, was hoping I might be able to get one of these to replace my current PC. Without Nvidia there's no way.

If you spec something with similar workstation grade hardware, you'll be in the same ballpark. Gaming PC hardware isn't comparable.

How many people actually need an 8 core Xeon vs an i9? Almost none. And that's without taking into account how much extra you're paying just for the hardware you're getting on the base model. I was willing to compromise and pay for workstation hardware just to have macOS, but not at a 2x markup.

Re: New Mac Pro

#443

Post by liquidify »

strmpnk wrote: post #183
threeseed wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget that Apple can see AMD and Intel's future roadmaps. AMD definitely has a superior offering with Threadripper 3 but we haven't seen what Intel is going to offer in comparison. And switching CPU manufacturers is never trial.

I'm not sure why they'd consider Threadripper for the Mac Pro. This machine fits into Epic's target cases and could possibly live up to the asking price of the whole package at that point. Given how the rest of the mac ecosystem is going, I'd only expect the most stubborn of professional communities pick this up (film editing folks seems to still buy the Apple hype).

Film editing kinda makes sense because there is probably a lot of lock in on the software for people who don't like the Adobe monthly charge BS.

Re: New Mac Pro

#444

Post by chaostheory »

saagarjha wrote: post #246
altmind wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$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.

You can get iCloud on Windows now https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT204301

It's not a great solution, but I'm not paying over $6000 for a Mac Pro.

Re: New Mac Pro

#445

Post by madengr »

jrockway wrote: post #373
ken wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been on the internet. I know people lie. The OKCupid blog found that "There are consistently 4x the number of people making $100K a year than there should be" [1]. They also lie about their height, and what they look like. What reason should I have for trusting anonymous self-reported data in a category where people are known to exaggerate? [1]: https://theblog.okcupid.com/the-big-lies-people-tell-in-onli...

Yeah, so... plenty of software engineers are making $500k a year. That is total compensation; you should expect half of that to come from non-salary things like stock options and bonuses. Maybe some people are lying, but that seems about right to me for actual senior people (leading projects, maybe managing people). My last year at Google, my W2 income was in the area of $300,000. I was a "level 5" with good performa…

There is also much software that is complete garbage. If the ones with $500k TC are writing decent software, then those making $100k may be writing the garbage.

Re: New Mac Pro

#446

Post by whywhywhywhy »

After the iTunes calendar joke I actually thought when the launch video started it was another joke about the old cheesegrater design and was going to show an actual cheesegrater, until it cut and made it clear it was a real video.

Re: New Mac Pro

#447

Post by liquidify »

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…

I disagree. Having more cores is becoming more and more relevant to software engineers these days. The power wall is forcing application scaling to happen through core count, so a lot of the software development in the world is focused on that. Having a beefy multicore machine is becoming more and more relevant to devs.

Re: New Mac Pro

#448

Post by beenBoutIT »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #50
vbezhenar wrote: post #2

That price is just absurd. I waited for Mac Pro announcement to decide whether I'll stay with Windows or jump to macOS. Macbooks are not for me, but I hoped for a remotely reasonable priced computer, something like $2000 with another $1000 to expand with more memory, etc. But $6000 for 8-core CPU, 256 GB SSD, GPU that is less powerful than my old $200 NVidia 1060? It's just laughable. Otherwise seems like a good mach…

The new Mac Pro, like Mac Pros always have been, is for music/TV studios and design agencies that bill their time starting at $500/hour. It's really not for individuals, and that's ok. Apple made a computer "just for the pros", like HN begs for in every butterfly keyboard thread. I'm thrilled about it even though I know I'll never touch one. It's for people who don't know what a CPU core is but know how to produce a…

You make a great point, why is Apple avoiding a higher price point? They could easily charge mainframe level prices to music producers.

Re: New Mac Pro

#449

Post by jlarocco »

TomVDB wrote: post #345
wayoutthere wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You would if you had a storage appliance on a SAN, as the SAN is almost certainly faster than a single SSD. This is an extremely common setup for video production, so it’s not out of the target market at all.

I know nothing about SAN, but I'm still surprised that it would be faster than a PCIe connected local SSD?

Latency will be higher, but throughput can be nearly the same with a fast enough network.

Re: New Mac Pro

#450

Post by JKCalhoun »

PascLeRasc wrote: post #50
vbezhenar wrote: post #2

That price is just absurd. I waited for Mac Pro announcement to decide whether I'll stay with Windows or jump to macOS. Macbooks are not for me, but I hoped for a remotely reasonable priced computer, something like $2000 with another $1000 to expand with more memory, etc. But $6000 for 8-core CPU, 256 GB SSD, GPU that is less powerful than my old $200 NVidia 1060? It's just laughable. Otherwise seems like a good mach…

The new Mac Pro, like Mac Pros always have been, is for music/TV studios and design agencies that bill their time starting at $500/hour. It's really not for individuals, and that's ok. Apple made a computer "just for the pros", like HN begs for in every butterfly keyboard thread. I'm thrilled about it even though I know I'll never touch one. It's for people who don't know what a CPU core is but know how to produce a…

That was basically my takeaway as well. Writing/compiling code just isn't "pro" anymore — doesn't require pro hardware. The new Mac Pro is meant for professional studios.

And to think music studios need so much horsepower when "Sgt. Pepper's" was recorded on 4 tracks…

Post reply on HN