Marco Pro no
I'd say the author is hardly a pro. If you really need the performance to render video on 16 cores or do medical research, you're not going to care how nice the casing of the computer is or how cool the OS. Secondly, he admits himself that the current Mac Pro is years ahead of any of Apple's products, so why worry? Would he prefer it got updated every year like the iPhone?
So he's a developer, work that doesn't require the power of a workstation.
I fear you don't understand the requirements of developing iOS apps. The faster the machine the better the dev process. Speedier builds, quicker iteration. All helps.
Of course, but you cannot compare it with the load required to render video. Would you honestly say an iOS developer genuinely needs more power than the current Mac Pros offer?
Does an iOS dev NEED more power than someone who renders video, probably not. But it doesn't mean that they don't need a workstation though. Many factors at play. Max memory. GPU. Fan noise etc.
Does an iOS dev NEED more power than someone who renders video, probably not. Nuff said. How likely it would be that a dev would attach pro video equipment for 4k editing like AJA Kona cards, raid cards, Fiber optics NIC, etc. all of which Pros is equipment that Pros have already bought by using their hard earned money! I doubt devs would need the same power than those who render video or create special effects. But if they did want to have that power... what would be so unbearable in sticking with the already beautiful Mac Pro workstation form factor and look? Those machines are jewels! Been almost perfectly engineered (have some flaws but what can't be improved?) and they look waaaaay more cool than a shiny trashcan that to be expanded will need to have attached a bundle of spagetti cabling on its back and is not even on the back low area... but back middle... What's the point in designing something that supposed to be sleek and minimalistic when then the look is immediately killed with the first cable one would attach to the trashcan?
Why do so many people care so much about the looks of the machine they work on? Seriously, why? Does that help you in ANY way being more productive or 'professional'?
Sure, I'd prefer a good looking machine over an ugly one when the specs are the same, but it's definitely not a priority when I'm trying to find the best machine for work. Same goes for a display, mouse or anything else related to my workstation.
Because we are designers and we are much more hyper aware of visual cues.
While that's true for some is much less true for pros. You probably ad never to work with pro video hardware. Some equipment has the ugliest look but is very functionals and gets the job done. In the end when you have deadlines, with a work to produce and deliver, the top priority is to get things done an possibly do so on schedule and with the least road bumps. The look of the equipment used is a nice to have, but most definitely not a must. What's most important to some is to be able to work on the same machine without having to jump on a PC workstation to work on post and go back to a mac to work on the soundtrack for instance. With the new trashcan form factor, Apple de-facto abandoned the pro market and gave a massive middle finger to all who trusted Apple and heavily invested in their platform and compatible equipment. If Apple wanted to show they were still able to innovate (one of the things boasted by Phil Schiller), could've done an anniversary edition as a collector's build with limited run. If they gave half a flying about pro customers would have stayed away from the shiny trashcan and continue improve and innovate the great design they already had in their line of professional workstations. Pros could care less about the claims of packing so much power in such a small space, pro studios have plenty space dedicated to work and don't need to fit a workstation on the compact ikea desk next to the sofa bed in the 50 square feet room in the shared apartment. Pro does not belong in the name of this model no matter how much power its claimed to have... plus it has seen no further improvements since its launch back in 2013. If that's not lame I don't know what would be.
Well... why is hackintosh not good enough? If you love mac OS but want 12 cores, then hacktintosh is a really good bet.
But if you really care about performance and budget, then building a computer yourself is the only way. Interesting read, but not well informed. And like christian said, real pro's don't care about OS that much. My only gripe with apple's choices is that I don't want a windows for video editing and a mac for design. I want 1 machine.
EDIT: And no hackintosh isn't perfect, a lot of people have bugs.
I tried Hackintosh and it's pretty buggy and performance is poor. I have supported hardwares.
I had problems (crashes) with Yosemite, but since I upgraded to Capitan (almost a year ago) I had no more problems and everything runs smooth as butter.
I have used hackintosh many times with 0 issues, but others like yourself have bugs and crashing issues. So no, its not perfect. But if you need a high power computer and the mac pro isn't handling your needs, its the only option. :(
Couldn't agree more. Not to mention that no respectable pro would chose to rely on an hackintosh for mission critical production as such machines could be "time bombs" which might fail you right when you need them the most, like in the middle of delivering a project! And missing a deadline might cost you money, reputation and possibly future jobs. So no hackintosh might be interesting and viable for personal non-critical use, most definitely not a viable choice for serious professionals.
A Hack Pro is a great way to get a ton of performance for a low price, but I would rather pay more and run officially endorsed and supported hardware. I don’t need the case to be extruded aluminium — a beige box would be fine. But, I do want latest gen CPUs and GPUs, and lots of expansion abilities. It’s a shame Apple seems to be marching steadily away from that.
And like christian said, real pro's don't care about OS that much.
People need the tools they need. Some tools are only available on macOS (and some are only available on Windows and Linux).
Right now, I would struggle on other platforms. Some of the stuff I use exists on Windows and even less of it exists on Linux. Switching platforms would mean switching lots of tools. Not necessarily a bad thing, but it definitely should be factored into the conversation.
Agreed, tools I need are generally mac OS only. Except video editing, which is cross platform for me (adobe)
So, I agree that apple needs to make a better pro computer, but In my experience, hackintosh works really really well. But I understand the need for endorsements and apple care and... honestly support if something goes wrong, hackintosh is kind of hit and miss.
It’s a shame Apple seems to be marching steadily away from that.
How else are they going to make money if they don't lock you in their hardware system? They're certainly not producing anything else to make much money these days. It's their survival tactic to keep business profit high for the last 5 years and the foreseeable future.
Arguing about specs and questioning whether or not someone “really” needs the hardware is kinda beside the point; it’s about feeling supported. I definitely don't need a Mac Pro, yet I feel better knowing that the folks who do can find what they need in the same ecosystem I work in.
That's idiotic. You can't have a 16-core PC with a strong GPU? Who wrote that shit? Mac is overrated and overpriced as hell.
He doesn't say that, I'm sure he's well aware of that seen as he used to be into building PCs before he got a Mac.
We don’t want to leave the Mac. We came here, built here, and stayed here all of this time because Macs are truly awesome computers, and macOS is the best operating system in the world.
It's not just the performance, he wants performance with the same experience you get with a Mac.
Interesting thoughts on the negative effects, if Apple discontinued the Mac Pro.
After the 2016 MBP update... I am considering my first Mac desktop in nearly a decade and wondering if a 5K iMac would be enough, if it was my only Mac option.
I'd wait a bit... I wouldn't want to give Apple too much credit, but given the slow sales and the mixed reception (not to say bad) for the new model, maybe they'll eventually re-introduce the mac pro workstation, revamping the current old workstation look. After all they would have little to "innovate" in the iDevices (including the iMac), mac mini are now basically KVM-less macbooks, so would only be natural they'd return to pay attention to the neglected Pro line (if they still have half a brain and give half a flying about workstation-grade computing). After all there is much money to be made there still... have you seen how little value old mac pro 5,1 have lost? They still sell strong on eBay even if they're 5+ years old! PS: by the way I writing these replies from a 2,1 Dual 3GHz Xeon, 8-core, 16GB RAM 500GB SSD, 512MB ATI HD4870 running El Capitan! Might not score as fast as the latest Mac pro, but for the work I do (including video editing) still works like a champ! (Kudos and thanks to Piker Alpha for the modded boot rom!)
Might be worth looking into a Hackintosh setup if your workflow depends so heavily on Mac Pros.
What's so wrong with the new macbook pro?
Mac Pro... not Macbook Pro, you misread the topic probably.