iMac or Macpro
Hi,
I am a PC user who visits on occasion to see if Apple has possibly decided to add a mid-priced tower to their line up. I have enjoyed adding various components and upgrades to my 7 year old Dell and like the idea of being able to do that. I think the idea of an iMac AIO computer isn't for me. To add drives or TV capability, etc. requires all external boxes (and clutter), which seems to defeat the whole AIO "clean" concept. Not to mention the issue of the monitor being tied to the computer.
Now that the MacPro has a choice of a single quad core (which brings the price down to around that of an iMac 24"), I am wondering if that might be a solution for me. Yes, I know I'd have to purchase a separate monitor. The problem is that I don't know enough about current hardware to know how the 2.8GHz Quad Xenon processor compares to the standard 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme, or if it really matters. Obviously, I also wouldn't know how other "stock" hardware compares between the iMac and the bottom-tier Pro. Also, is there even an internal TV tuner option for the Pro?
I am a PC user who visits on occasion to see if Apple has possibly decided to add a mid-priced tower to their line up. I have enjoyed adding various components and upgrades to my 7 year old Dell and like the idea of being able to do that. I think the idea of an iMac AIO computer isn't for me. To add drives or TV capability, etc. requires all external boxes (and clutter), which seems to defeat the whole AIO "clean" concept. Not to mention the issue of the monitor being tied to the computer.
Now that the MacPro has a choice of a single quad core (which brings the price down to around that of an iMac 24"), I am wondering if that might be a solution for me. Yes, I know I'd have to purchase a separate monitor. The problem is that I don't know enough about current hardware to know how the 2.8GHz Quad Xenon processor compares to the standard 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme, or if it really matters. Obviously, I also wouldn't know how other "stock" hardware compares between the iMac and the bottom-tier Pro. Also, is there even an internal TV tuner option for the Pro?
Comments
C) Displays don't get one from Apple. Not only is the price high, but the panels are a couple generations out of date. Dells 20" with the webcam is said to work perfectly with iSight drivers
D) The Mac Pro doesn't have an internal TV tuner option. Jobs considers TV both a waste of time and a threat to iTunes movies and Steve's biases are unfortunately Apple's biases. Elgato's EyeTV is a very good piece of software and they also make a very good TV tuner called the EyeTV Hybrid. Amd also has a Mac version of their TV wonder 650 USB.
E) expect the zealots to come and say that apple knows what you do and what you want better than you do.
A) The current xeon is essentially a desktop core 2 modified to run SMP for the server market. it should be pretty close in performance to its much less expensive desktop cousin.
C) Displays don't get one from Apple. Not only is the price high, but the panels are a couple generations out of date. Dells 20" with the webcam is said to work perfectly with iSight drivers
D) The Mac Pro doesn't have an internal TV tuner option. Jobs considers TV both a waste of time and a threat to iTunes movies and Steve's biases are unfortunately Apple's biases. Elgato's EyeTV is a very good piece of software and they also make a very good TV tuner called the EyeTV Hybrid. Amd also has a Mac version of their TV wonder 650 USB.
E) expect the zealots to come and say that apple knows what you do and what you want better than you do.
Thanks!
E) Funny, I always thought Bill Gates was vilified for being an arrogant company head who thought His way was the best way for everyone. Seems like Steve is more the Ogre.
One last thing...does Leopard have support for Firefox?
That being said, Apple without consulting anyone decided that things like iSight and front row support weren't required for people would buy a Mac Pro.
I run an iSight and Front Row on my Mac Pro.
Thanks!
E) Funny, I always thought Bill Gates was vilified for being an arrogant company head who thought His way was the best way for everyone. Seems like Steve is more the Ogre.
One last thing...does Leopard have support for Firefox?
Officially you cannot use non-Apple webcams on the Mac. Unofficially, the internal isight is just a UVC compliant webcam so they don't have to deal with specific drivers if they want to go with more than one supplier. Other UVC cams have shown to work. Since several sources have the Dell working in OSX, I would guess its a UVC class as well. As for the iMac screens, they are of the newest type.
It's the remote. Front row is the Mac's equivalent to the media center interface. It makes it easier to watch movies, listen to music, or view pictures. using the remote All the iLife (the multimedia suite) apps work perfectly on the Mac Pro.
For Gates its more like devoid of ethics. He got everything he got by taking other peoples ideas and either copying them or just taking the next step. I don't think Microsoft has ever come up with something from scratch. That being said, he's an excellent salesman. He understands that its a lot easier to take the idea to the people than expect the people come to you. Jobs I would liken more to the Robespierre of computers than an ogre. A lot of good ideas but no patience or tolerence for anything outside his head.
For Gates its more like devoid of ethics. He got everything he got by taking other peoples ideas and either copying them or just taking the next step. I don't think Microsoft has ever come up with something from scratch. That being said, he's an excellent salesman. He understands that its a lot easier to take the idea to the people than expect the people come to you. Jobs I would liken more to the Robespierre of computers than an ogre. A lot of good ideas but no patience or tolerence for anything outside his head.
You said it better than I. Ogre was a bit of an overstatement. It's just such a "Steve's way or the highway" mentality that gets under my skin. He does have some great ideas and great products, but when he has a blind spot (mid-priced tower, for example), lots of folks are left on the outside.
Front Row works fine on a Pro (in fact, it's part of the Leopard OS installation), but there's no remote (or IR sensor) shipped with the Pro's.
Thanks King. That's kind of what I figured but good to hear for sure. I still don't know if I want to go the Mac route yet, but this keeps my options a little more open. For the last year I've been debating the switch (from Windows), as well as getting a first computer for my Mom. To her, either OS (Mac or Windows) will be foreign, so it won't matter. I just thought Macs are supposed to easier to learn for first-timers. The problem, is that I don't know squat about them and I was hoping to be there for her for in-home help. At the moment I don't have a lot of free time to get up to speed on OSX myself to be of help to her.
I am a PC user who visits on occasion to see if Apple has possibly decided to add a mid-priced tower to their line up.
It sucks doesn't it. We get so many people asking for these it's just insane - the market for this product is just huge.
Now that the MacPro has a choice of a single quad core (which brings the price down to around that of an iMac 24"), I am wondering if that might be a solution for me.
I think it's quite a good solution to the problem. I configured a Miniature PC a few months ago with a Geforce 8800 card and a Core 2 Quad 2.4GHz, 4GB Ram and it came to about £1100-1200. At that time, a quad 2.0GHz Xeon with 2GB Ram, Geforce 7300 was £1700.
Currently, a quad 2.8GHz with 8800GT and 2GB Ram is £1500 or so and that seems like pretty good value for money and you don't even have to go for the 8800. It's still bigger than the Mini PC I configured but if Apple aren't technically skilled enough to build one then I guess you just have to go with what they have.
The problem is that I don't know enough about current hardware to know how the 2.8GHz Quad Xenon processor compares to the standard 2.8GHz Core 2 Extreme, or if it really matters.
Xeons are server chips so they are supposed to have better data throughput. The system bus on the Mac Pro is much faster than the iMac. Plus you are getting 4 processors vs just 2 in the iMac. The 8800GT is a lot faster than the card in the iMac.
The only advantage of the iMac is the included display but it's glossy. The form factor is better but it's all sealed up. Given that the 24" is so close to the lowest Mac Pro, I think the choice is easy. The iMac is a waste of money.
Obviously a choice of some lower spec in the Mac Pro would be nice but there are limited processors they could use and a Core 2 Duo wouldn't look much better than a Mini - they'd be as well putting a better GPU in the Mini.
I think the lowest Mac Pro is an ideal choice finally for a PC owner looking to move to a Mac. It's disappointing that it's taken this long for Apple to make an Intel machine suitable for the mass market and it's not even completely suitable. A quad 2GHz with 7300 or higher for £1000 would have been perfect for people who need a mid-range priced desktop.
I'll probably get one of those Mac Pros down the line myself as I need a big step up from my Mini at home. If not that then I'd go for the MBP as it at least has a good GPU.