[Chongo]

Oops, missed this and started a Mac Studio thread.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

New stuff today?

$8K maxed out

[andi*pandi]

Well that's another machine my work won't be buying.

We were about to get new cheap 4k monitors. So, is there a new cheaper mac monitor?

I see. $1600 is almost twice the price of the LG my work was begrudgingly ordering but still less than $5k. At least it comes with a stand. Tilt even. But $400 more for a height adjustable stand? I think I have a few old MacOSX bibles lying around I can use as a stand.

No word on my precious imac pro?

[Thorzdad]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

No word on my precious imac pro?

Cook said there was only one more Mac to make the jump to Apple silicon, the MacPro. And, Apple’s removed the 27” iMac from their website. I have a feeling “iMacPro” is now “Mac Studio + the nifty new monitor”.

[andi*pandi]

That makes unfortunate sense. However a 24" imac is too small. I was hoping for a bigger one, in blue... for not this price. Ah well.

You can update a 2013 imac to 10.15, right? Right?

imac 24" in blue, $1300?
a mini $699 + new monitor $1600... $2300?

or refurb 3yo 2019 imac for $1500...
https://www.apple.com/shop/product/F...0b8b43b2ee03e0

[subego]

My overpriced solution to the 27” iMac problem has been kit-bashing an M1 Mini with the LG 5K 27”

[OreoCookie]

I noticed a few tidbits during the presentation. E. g. Apple said during the presentation that this is the last iteration of the M1. And that they are working on a Mac Pro. So unless you can put 4 M1Max dies together, this means the Mac Pro should sport a newer chip.

The specs of the Ultra are insane. The new Zen 3-based Threadripper Pro has a memory bandwidth of 200 GB/s — the same as the M1 Pro. The Ultra has 4x that. The biggest problem is that the internals seemingly don't need that much bandwidth. That's a nice problem to have.

Another amazing thing is the performance floor: the iPad Air comes with the same power as a MacBook Air, and is thus faster than most x86 notebooks in CPU performance. The iPhone SE is likewise a phone with little compromise.

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Thorzdad 

Cook said there was only one more Mac to make the jump to Apple silicon, the MacPro. And, Apple’s removed the 27” iMac from their website. I have a feeling “iMacPro” is now “Mac Studio + the nifty new monitor”.

I have no problem with that, and this is an absolutely HUGE win.

I bought a 24" iMac with a 7600GT in 2005/6? It was a great machine, but.... honestly the hardware was pretty good for the time, but Apple stopped supporting it with modern OS's fairly quickly, which then made it almost useless. I had it in my garage a few years ago, and even browswing the web was kind of annoying on it because none of the browsers supported whatever ancient version of OSX it was locked to. So frustrating knowing that the speed of the display, graphics card, processor, memory, and hard drive were all perfectly what I wanted/needed to browse information in the garage, but I couldn't use it.

The MOST annoying part was I couldn't even use it as a screen! The hardware became outdated, fine, at least let me keep using this screen, but nope, I had to recycle the whole thing.

How many years has it been, gents? A "headless imac" or "mini mac pro", or a machine aimed at prosumers, not necessarily professional studios, but something that gave us the power we needed?

This is basically an iMac Pro ish level machine, without a screen, for 2k. DEAL. This will be my next machine when I retire my 2010 Mac Pro... if... ever. lol.

[andi*pandi]

This imac I'm typing on (2013) is supposedly able to be a screen. So at least they've improved that.

[ort888]

I also think this is fantastic. The 27" iMac was such a wasteful machine. A nice machine, yes, but wasteful.

This solution is so much better. I wish the monitor was a bit cheaper, but as modern apple stuff goes, it almost feels reasonable. During the event I was expecting them to announce a price of $2,500 bucks or something stupid like that, so $1,600 seems reasonable in contrast.

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by ort888 

I also think this is fantastic. The 27" iMac was such a wasteful machine. A nice machine, yes, but wasteful.

This solution is so much better. I wish the monitor was a bit cheaper, but as modern apple stuff goes, it almost feels reasonable. During the event I was expecting them to announce a price of $2,500 bucks or something stupid like that, so $1,600 seems reasonable in contrast.

Yeah.... it's amazing. I'm honestly not even sure how to feel right now. This is basically what we have been asking for, for DECADES (to be faiirrrrr, I think the official ask was a mac pro, but tiny, with one slot for a GPU).

With today's external video card boxes..... I mean.... this is as close as we're getting.

[ort888]

I feel like it mattered a lot more in the past. I used to need a Mac Pro to do my job, but these days even the lowest end Mac can do everything I need it to and more.

Like, these new Macs are amazing in theory, and yes, this is what I've been asking for decades... but now that we're here, computing power has caught up to my needs and then some and I can now do my job just fine on a laptop and a $2,000 Mac Studio would just be overkill.

[MacNNFamous]

Yeah, that is true, def a law of diminishing returns these days.... that said tho, for editing video it sounds like this thing is going to be pretty future proof, and energy efficient.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Like, these new Macs are amazing in theory, and yes, this is what I've been asking for decades... but now that we're here, computing power has caught up to my needs and then some and I can now do my job just fine on a laptop and a $2,000 Mac Studio would just be overkill.

The nice thing is that the 27” screen is so much more flexible as a product: a lot of notebook users (I’m raising my hand virtually) want an external screen with their Mac laptops. If a Mac Studio is overkill, get a Mac mini, which is still a decent machine — after all, many people just want a large screen, but don’t need the firepower. And most importantly, good screens tend to last 1.5–2 computers in my experience. So that’s a win, too.

[Brien]

I mean, with a cheaper non-Apple screen this thing is a steal.

My work ain't buying them either.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Brien 

I mean, with a cheaper non-Apple screen this thing is a steal.

Yeah, the thing is there are no good high-dpi screens on the market. Even if you remove good, you have two LG screens and two Apple screens as far as I am aware. I think the Dell screen you could get instead has been discontinued.

I have an LG 5k on my desk and it is nowhere near as good as the Apple Cinema display it replaced. A lot of it is wonky (e. g. automatic dimming, the webcam and especially the stand).

[subego]

I had an LG 27MD5KL side-by-side with my 27” iMac, and I preferred the LG.

It was brand new though, while my iMac is a 2015. Also, I don’t webcam.

The stand’s kinda floppy, but at least it has height adjustment.

I’m enthusiastic about the new screen because it looks to be 10-bit. I do everything in 16-bit, but only have 8-bit monitors.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

With today's external video card boxes..... I mean.... this is as close as we're getting.

M1 doesn't do external GPUs.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie 

A lot of it is wonky (e. g. automatic dimming, the webcam and especially the stand).

My MIL has a ThinkPad that my kid uses when he's over there. He wanted to show me something he was working on and I was absolutely baffled by how the screen was constantly flickering and adjusting brightness up and down and up and down in discrete steps. I immediately found and turned off the auto brightness control, but how can you make a product like that, test it, and go, "Yeah, that's good, that's what we want it to do"?

[subego]

I feel the same way about default settings on TVs.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

FaceID doesn’t work with masks. I’ve spent the last 18 months wearing a mask while in public settings. Really super annoying I must say.

If you have an Apple Watch (at least the 6 or higher), you can set the phone to open with the watch. In practice, I find that sort of inconsistent - sometimes my phone will unlock with my watch because I turned it “a little bit face up”, while other times it’ll balk at unlocking because I have a mask on just a bit differently from the last time it opened without a problem.

It’s a problem on a par with trying to open a produce bag in the grocery store while wearing a mask…you really shouldn’t lick your fingers to get a grip. I fix this by opening those bags while standing by the cooler that “mists” the vegetables. Not ideal, but workable.

Note: I replied to this before I read all three (at the moment) pages of the thread, so if I’m duplicating another post, “oops.”

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

M1 doesn't do external GPUs.

What?! That's stupid. What is the point of bringing a feature like that to market if you don't continue it on your newest products?!

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by subego 

I feel the same way about default settings on TVs.

That reminds me of more MIL shenanigans. Back in that weird window when people started getting widescreen HDTVs but most content was still 4:3, her TV or satellite box had a feature that would keep the center of the screen in the correct ratio but take the outer...like...1/5 of the left and right side and then streeeeeeetch them to cover what would otherwise be letterboxing. I can't remember if I turned that off or not.

Later they got a new TV that did that horrid motion interpolation garbage where every show looked simultaneously jerky but also like a soccer broadcast where the cameraman is whipping the camera down the field. I definitely went in and turned that off.

[subego]

I fixed that immediately on my dad’s TV since I set it up, but I get invited to my best friend’s girlfriend’s for holiday events, and when I go I have to suffer through it. Along with being forced to watch Family Feud.

As an aside, Steve Harvey is a prick, but I have to say his brand of comedy is perfect for that show.

[Laminar]

I just picked up an iPhone 13 Pro today. The camera bulge is absolutely atrocious. I can't get a case on this junk soon enough.

I reeeally wanted the Mini for pocketability but the camera difference did it for me. Wife's 12 Pro is so much better than my X it's not even close, and they nerfed the Mini's camera so Pro it is.

[subego]

I’ve gotten used to the bulge.

What I have not gotten used to is accidentally hitting return an order of magnitude more than I did on the 10 through 12.


And even in that example, he’s being a prick, but his slack-jaw side-eye to the camera is hilarious.

[Waragainstsleep]

So the Mac Studio is interesting. Been thinking about it and it seems like if you're a video pro its a dream come true. 18 simultaneous streams of 8K video and what, 5 displays? Given how amazingly the base Mac Mini was able to handle something bonkers like 1000 tracks on Logic Pro I'm guessing even the most hardcore producer is going to struggle to hammer a Mac Studio. So the Studio very likely serves almost all video and audio pros. Who then does that leave for the target market for a new Mac Pro?

I've been assuming it would use the same chassis as the current Intel model partly because its quiet but also because its big and can fit many GPUs but do many people need many GPUs when they aren't using CUDA? (Which Mac users aren't).
So what advantages does a big Mac Pro have over other Macs now that it doesn't need to cater to video or audio guys? Lots of RAM seems like the biggest advantage. The potential for EEC RAM too maybe. Obviously it has room for PCI-E cards but what cards are in enough demand to warrant an entire Mac Model? Since we've seen the last version of the M1 family CPU I'm also expecting the Pro to have a completely different CPU. Probably not just an M2 as it will need PCI-E5 and plenty of it. Not to mention the external RAM interface.
So what market is big enough to justify not just a custom Mac Model but a custom SoC? Code compilers? Scientists? I'm wondering if they might bring back the Xserve (MacServe) as a proper rack mount Mac server but the advantage to that would be the low power requirement of the M1 series chips. I can't see what they are planning here.
I do wonder if they might be planning to build something they can use themselves. My understanding is they use HP servers in their data centres at the moment but unless they have some serious out of the blue disruptive server software in the pipeline, I can't really imagine that either. It would make sense though as Apple is big into services these days and they have been gradually expanding their offerings doing customer domains on iCloud mail now and bringing iCloud backups to Apple Business Manager with Apple Business Essentials.

[subego]

After Effects will gobble any amount of CPU and RAM you throw at it, so I’m theoretically the market for a new Pro. I don’t need any expansion though.

[andi*pandi]

My 2019 macbook pro is slow AF; my 2013 imac chugs along happily; I recall being annoyed by the imac when it replaced a mac pro tower because it was also too slow comparitively. Does studio solve that with a return to tower power?

if my work wants to replace the macbook I'm giving the sideeye to another one. I doubt they will go for a studio though, even if I could unplug it put it in my pocket and take it back and forth from work to home.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by subego 

After Effects will gobble any amount of CPU and RAM you throw at it, so I’m theoretically the market for a new Pro. I don’t need any expansion though.

You think it would choke the 128GB on the top end Mac Studio? What about the 1.5TB on a the 2019 Mac Pro?
I'm guessing the 2022 Mac Pro will have to have a RAM ceiling at least 1.5TB, probably more.

[Laminar]

I set up a new Memoji on the phone and it's now my login avatar on the Mac. I typed in the wrong password and my Memoji fucking shook its head at me in disgust. How long has this been a thing?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I set up a new Memoji on the phone and it's now my login avatar on the Mac. I typed in the wrong password and my Memoji fucking shook its head at me in disgust. How long has this been a thing?

Oh that’s been a thing for years now! I want to use it because it’s so cool but I don’t see a way to only have it appear on the login window and not throughout the entire system.

OAW

[subego]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

You think it would choke the 128GB on the top end Mac Studio? What about the 1.5TB on a the 2019 Mac Pro?
I'm guessing the 2022 Mac Pro will have to have a RAM ceiling at least 1.5TB, probably more.

Playback in After Effects is from RAM, so there’s a one-to-one relationship between how much RAM I have and how much playback I get. 20 layers of uncompressed 16-bit 4K adds up fast.

With 128, there would be times I’d want more. To do that with 1.5TB, I’d have to jump to 8K, which will happen at some point.

[MacNNFamous]

So big question for Mac Studio.... you guys think it's VR capable? I don't game much anymore, but VR is pretty much the only thing I'd be wanting for a heavy GPU usage, and with the lack of external GPUs that work with this, that is a bummer.

[subego]

My instincts tell me the hardware is up to it, but there won’t be drivers.

[Waragainstsleep]

Haven't heard much in the way of rumours about Apple's VR offerings lately. I bet the Studio is more than capable though.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by MacNNFamous 

So big question for Mac Studio.... you guys think it's VR capable? I don't game much anymore, but VR is pretty much the only thing I'd be wanting for a heavy GPU usage, and with the lack of external GPUs that work with this, that is a bummer.

Honest question: what would you be using VR for?

Beyond gaming, I’m really struggling to see the market everybody seems to be hyping up.

[Thorzdad]

VR could be a useful teaching/training tool in areas like surgery or other medical studies where one needs to dig into a body over and over to learn techniques, etc. VR could reduce/eliminate the need for cadavers or specialized artificial cadavers.

Once remote robotics become more developed, the idea of someone donning a VR headset and gloves to perform surgical/mechanical tasks remotely is a definite thing.

I see AR as being far more important and wide-ranging than VR, though.

[subego]

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

Honest question: what would you be using VR for?

Beyond gaming, I’m really struggling to see the market everybody seems to be hyping up.

I'm a product designer. Right now we spend... $20-60,000 per appearance model, and we have to be in person to review them. VR would be cheaper and allow group reviews from any location, and we could also scale the model, change materials, lighting, check clearances, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u4ztS-4Eyfk

[subego]

I’m sure there are a bunch of benefits to be had there, but don’t you still need an in-person review?

[MacNNFamous]

I don't see the value in it. An appearance model is nice and all, but it's generally either billet aluminum or cut from REN foam and then finished with automotive techniques/paints, and it gets close to our intention, but both the materials, finishes, and methods used to create that model will entirely different than the production model.

I'd rather do it digitally and just review the first parts/shots from tooling when we get them in. Just my opinion but the appearance model is an old school way of thinking and isn't needed anymore.

[subego]

I figure it would boil down to whether the method catches fuckups or not.

If the digital solutions mean no new insight is gained from the appearance model, then yeah, it totally should be ditched.

[ghporter]

Considering how recently automotive designers were MAJOR consumers of sculpting clay, I’ll bet that any extension between the CAD model to visualizing the final model would help both the designer and the model makers.

The model makers can only go from the data. What happens when the digital model has a glitch the designer didn’t catch? VR might be both a helpful “final check” on a CAD model, and a method for the studio building the model to illustrate where “we have a question about your model.”

That’s just an “off the top of my head” idea related to the above discussion.

[MacNNFamous]

I didn't say prototypes. I'd rather have 50 prototypes and no appearance model and VR than 5 prototypes and a $60k paperweight that doesn't do anything.

Clay sculpting is neat, but it's almost digital as well these days since it's milled out then hand finished. It's ultimately old school, and a nice hting to look at for a bunch of executives to go see in person.... but times are a changing. Instead log them into VR and see it any color they want, right now, instantly, in any setting, point with virtual laser pointers, show different textures on different parts, even show design variations, all in any scale/material/texture/angle you want. Big 3 started bringing VR into their workflow years ago... imho the only reason appearance models are still a thing is for trade shows and to get approval from the board...which again, could be done in VR.

[subego]

VR trade shows would ironically more and less rapey at the same time.

[Waragainstsleep]

I'm guessing VR versions of Teams & Zoom will be heavily pushed before too long.

I saw a TV programme about how Land Rover uses clay to sculpt its new models (in this case the Range Rover Evoque). The main reason seemed to be so they could paint it and see it in real, natural light under different weather conditions.

[Brien]

Oh please no Teams VR. Eww

[MacNNFamous]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm guessing VR versions of Teams & Zoom will be heavily pushed before too long.

I saw a TV programme about how Land Rover uses clay to sculpt its new models (in this case the Range Rover Evoque). The main reason seemed to be so they could paint it and see it in real, natural light under different weather conditions.

It's just an old school way of doing it. Clay modeling has been around forever, so they keep doing it, and the executives don't want to strap on VR googles. You can see a nurbs model in any light/weather conditions in VR and it will likely look better than what you can achieve in real life.

[subego]

Look “better” or “more accurate”?