Apple’s updated Mac Pro is coming to Canada [Update]

Comments

  • Pingback: Apple’s updated Mac Pro is coming to Canada | Daily Update()

  • Shogun

    I don’t think I know of anyone who has ever bought these Mac Pro’s and when you consider the cost doesn’t include a monitor, it really borders on the ridiculous the asking prices. The new Surface Pro desktop is your better bet at this price level if you’re looking for a true workhorse.

    I also believe Apple needs to revisit the pricing on many of their iMacs because seriously these are unjustifiable as well.

    • ciderrules

      Surface Studio? The one with the gimped CPU and GPU yet driving a high-resolution screen? Is that the POS you’re talking about?

    • Shogun

      Coming from an Apple fanboy I think we’d all take your BS comments with a grain of salt. Anyone paying out $3000 or $4000 for a waste basket like this without any peripherals is a total fool who is lucky to get together with his money in the first place.

    • ciderrules

      Ah, did I upset the troll?

      I see you completely avoided the points I made. Please tell me how you can call a device with a mobile laptop GPU a “true workhorse”. I’ll be anxiously awaiting your reply (which will never come).

    • Brad Fortin

      The biggest cost in the iMacs is the display, especially the 5K iMac. A standalone 5K, DCI-P3 display is only a couple hundred dollars less than a 5K iMac.

    • fred

      It’s because there is no market for 5k. 4k monitors are much cheaper. No reason why 5k monitors are so expensive, except that there is no market for them, just like weird ratio monitors are more expensive.

      Also most people who buy an iMac couldn’t tell the difference if you switched the display by a $150 one. They get the iMac because the Mac mini is too weak and the Mac Pro is too expensive.

    • Brad Fortin

      The market for 5K monitors is people editing 4K video, as it allows them to view full-size 4K video while still having room for their editing tools. Given the prevalence of 4K video editing, the market is reasonably large.

      That’s like saying people can’t tell the difference between VHS and Blu-Ray. People can absolutely tell the difference.

      You don’t seem to know very much about this, and seem to be relying on many, many false assumptions.

    • fred

      Most people editing 4k video do not do it on an iMac. Most people buying iMacs do not edit videos, at any resolution. You are the one with clearly wrong assumptions.

      You seem to think the iMac is some special professional tool. It isn’t. It’s an overpriced mid range PC for the general public, albeit on the rich side as any Apple product.

      And no, your VHS/Blu-Ray comparison doesn’t stand. To see the difference between a 1080p and a 4k video on a 21.5″ screen, you must be very close and pay attention. For text it makes a much bigger difference, but again the average joe wouldn’t notice and they are the ones buying iMacs.

      The difference between VHS and Blu-Ray is obvious even on a small TV at the end of the room.

    • Brad Fortin

      What numbers are you basing your assumptions on?

      I’m basing mine on numbers given directly from Apple a few days ago: Only about 20% of its Mac sales are desktop sales. Display-free Macs like the Mac Pro only make up a single-digit percentage of Mac sales. That means most of their desktop sales are iMacs. ~30% of Mac users use at least 1 “pro” app frequently, like Final Cut or Logic.

      So: Only 30% of Mac users are in what Apple considers the “pro” market. Most of those use MacBook Pros (or other MacBooks). Most of those who use desktops use iMacs.

      Based on those numbers I’d say a significant portion of “pro” iMac users edit video, especially 4K video as they’re professionals and not amateurs.

      Again, what numbers are you basing your assumptions on?

    • fred

      You extrapolate way too far on those numbers. But I doubt the 30% is true anyways, it makes no sense at all. But even if true, it’s still probable than less than 10% of iMac users edit 4k videos.

    • Brad Fortin

      lol, so you’re willing to dismiss the real numbers for the made-up numbers you imagine are true in your head? Okay, good luck with that.

    • fred

      I already figured out that you would never question any numbers given by Apple given your fanboyism, no need to confirm it.

      Anyways did Apple say how many people are editing 4k videos with their iMacs? No? Then you don’t have numbers, stop acting as if you did.

    • Mr Dog

      Ummm two VERY different computers.

      Base configuration for the surface pro is an i5.

      The i7 SUrface Pro with 2GB GPU is $3500.
      The i7 Surface Pro with 4GB GPU is $4200

      The Xeon 6-Core Mac PRO with 2x3GB GPU is $3500
      The Xeon 8-Core Mac PRO with 2x6GB GPU is $4700

      2 VERY DIFFERENT SYSTEMS. For VERY different people. If anything the Surface Studio is a ridiculous asking price. Half the processing power and all you get is a big touch screen?

      Surface Studio $4200 CPU Benchmark = 9079
      Mac Pro $3500 CPU Benchmark = 16000 (Probably more with the new update)

  • p_lindsay

    Apple clearly just doesn’t even care about computers anymore. I just bought an XPS 15 for about $1200 CAD less than a less powerful MBP. I don’t know how anybody can justify buying any of their computers right now.

    • Mr Dog

      I agree Apple is more expensive. But that $1200 laptop is likely not comparable to the MBP.
      Your XPS 15 likely has a i5

    • p_lindsay

      I didn’t say it was a $1200 laptop, I said it was $1200 cheaper than the Mac. And actually when you include tax its more than $1200 cheaper. I’m talking about the i7, 16gb, 512 gb SSD, 4k touch, 1050 gtx 4gb ($2299 CAD) vs. the comparable MBP (3499 CAD)

      But you are correct, they aren’t comparable. The Dell is such a better deal for a better product it would be absurd to compare them.

    • Do Do

      True, the hardware on the XPS considering cost is a superior deal, but not as superior as macOS still is to Windows.

    • p_lindsay

      LOL. You wanna pay an extra $1200 for Mac OS be my guest.

    • Do Do

      LOL, is that what I wrote? but since you bring it up, if one doesn’t bat an eye at an extra $1200 for a properly working OS then ya, I would. Also, if you can afford an XPS, you can afford a MAC. Windows has simply become a marketing/advertising platform for MS. Like I said earlier, if Apple would license their OS, the wouldn’t sell any more computers as they seem to strictly focused on iphones and tablets.

    • Supa_Fly

      And when the OS upgrades for 5 major iterations is fully supported beyond what shipped and STILL performs very decently no major lags then hell why not.

      Grab a windows machine that shipped with Windows XP and then try putting Windows 8.1 or 10 on it and see how it performs lol – especially a laptop!
      Now do the same with a MacBook Al Unibody that debuted in 2008 with OSX 10.6 and put 10.10 on it or the non-official workaround for 10.13 Sierra and you’ll see leaps and bounds the difference.

      Warranty and support maintenance over the same timeframe even IBM attests publicly that Mac’s have better lifetime use/value than ANY other PC.

      It’s not jsut about specs, or the OS … it’s optimization

    • p_lindsay

      Let’s not get carried away here, Apple definitely has excellent QC and their computers definitely last, but most of their OSX updates are so minor it’s barely worth even calling it an update. Even they realized that when they stopped charging money for the updates. And again, if you wanna spend $1200 extra for OSX be my guest. I however think that is insane.

    • Joseph

      Ya last year when I was looking at getting a new laptop I had the choice of the XPS 15 or a mac and for price the mac had a lot less power for the same price so I ended up with an XPS which the new line tears last years models to shreds but meh that’s what happens with tech.

  • Liferescripted

    Edit suggestion: Sub USD for CAD 3rd last paragraph
    “The tech giant has cut the price of its 6-core Intel Xeon processor, dual AMD FirePro D500 GFX rig down to $2,999 (about $4,030 USD)”

  • ciderrules

    So the 8 core with D700’s has dropped in price by about $2,000 CDN from the old price.

  • Do Do

    As I’ve said, if Apple would license macOS, they’d never sell another computer.

    • Supa_Fly

      Apple has done this before under John Scully … almost tore the company apart – but their hardware was no more compelling than that NEC or Motorola produced with license daughter cards (that hold CPU and ROM to boot macos7-9 back then).

  • Alex

    imo, macs were probably the best laptops to get, for general needs, and productivity, until Dell came out with the XPS lines. The infinity near-bezeless designs are pretty awesome to look at, and in general, the build quality is up to par. Theres no doubt that purchasing a new laptop, you’ll probably look at the 2 laptops, and most people will pick the XPS for cost savings for relatively similar hardware. I would too. But if you need MacOS, sucks for you. Sucks that i like my mac… but probably will keep my MBPr for the next many years…

    • p_lindsay

      I agree they were the best, hence my last several computers were Macs, but at this point they’re just ridiculous. The air is still $1200+ and hasn’t been updated in 2 years. Almost every single windows oem offers a better product for that money, not just Dell.