Idea for future Mac Pro- feature activation
I think it's time for Apple to differentiate the Mac Pro from its competitors and here's a trick that I think they should offer.
In many high end networking, server and storage devices there exist functionality that can be licensed on a per use basis or outright purchased. The vendor simply ships the product "loaded" with features (presumably enjoying economies of scale for the item) and offers a mechanism to upgrade the license.
Now imagine if Apple shipped a Mac Pro with a subset of forward technologies that could be licensed for block segments of use and/or purchased and enabled immediately.
Imagine if you will that the Mac Pro of the near future comes with 8 or 16-cores depending on single or dual socket.
Imagine that you have extra processing options like a Toshiba SpursEngine for handling tough video translation and other tasks.
You would buy a Mac Pro and have the ability to turn on the second processor in SMP Mac Pro or enable the local accelerator on a "as needed" basis or outright purchase the feature.
It may allow Apple to save money by delivering a system that doesn't require as many BTO configurations and allows for a stream of temporary license revenue.
For the consumer is would allow a lower cost of entry and the ability to turbocharge your computer for certain jobs.
Perhaps it's time to bring this high end method of utilizing computer resources to the masses.
In many high end networking, server and storage devices there exist functionality that can be licensed on a per use basis or outright purchased. The vendor simply ships the product "loaded" with features (presumably enjoying economies of scale for the item) and offers a mechanism to upgrade the license.
Now imagine if Apple shipped a Mac Pro with a subset of forward technologies that could be licensed for block segments of use and/or purchased and enabled immediately.
Imagine if you will that the Mac Pro of the near future comes with 8 or 16-cores depending on single or dual socket.
Imagine that you have extra processing options like a Toshiba SpursEngine for handling tough video translation and other tasks.
You would buy a Mac Pro and have the ability to turn on the second processor in SMP Mac Pro or enable the local accelerator on a "as needed" basis or outright purchase the feature.
It may allow Apple to save money by delivering a system that doesn't require as many BTO configurations and allows for a stream of temporary license revenue.
For the consumer is would allow a lower cost of entry and the ability to turbocharge your computer for certain jobs.
Perhaps it's time to bring this high end method of utilizing computer resources to the masses.
Comments
Also, why would Apple (or anyone for that matter) include hardware in a machine that someone might never pay for?
Additionally, once the hardware is in my possession I can use all my resources to crack the security they're using to limit me to 8 CPUs when there are 16 in the box.
I don't ever see anything like this happening
Vista has this ability and Apple ripped MS for it when they introduced Leopard.
Also, why would Apple (or anyone for that matter) include hardware in a machine that someone might never pay for?
Additionally, once the hardware is in my possession I can use all my resources to crack the security they're using to limit me to 8 CPUs when there are 16 in the box.
I don't ever see anything like this happening
Granted it's a high end service but it has its benefits. The though is that rather than buying some upgrades in smaller allotments you can negotiate better volume pricing and apply instant upgrades. Plus is allows for temporal upgrades which could be highly profitable.
http://searchdatacenter.techtarget.c...550352,00.html
Capacity on Demand
With COD, a vendor might provide a company with a fully-configured 24-processor computer server but only charge the company for the number of processors they actually use. The vendor provides the additional capacity hoping that when the company expands and needs more capacity, they will not look around elsewhere but will simply take advantage of the extra capacity the vendor had already provided. In this scenario, the company would contact the vendor to have the extra processors activated, and the vendor would bill them accordingly.
Critics of COD compare the service with that of a hotel mini-bar, pointing out that the convenience of "instant gratification" can lead to poor capacity planning and ultimately, higher costs. The Meta Group has estimated that 80% of the world's 2,000 largest companies will provide customers with some kind of COD model by 2006. Leading COD vendors include IBM, Sun Microsystems, and Hewlett-Packard. Storage is currently the leading COD commodity.
I think upselling people on unlocking extra features already present (but diasbled) is wrong.
Don't forget that Apple is about Simplicity. They would not include hardware in a unit unless you paid for it. They would rather rip out the module and use the extra space for case design/cooling.
I think upselling people on unlocking extra features already present (but diasbled) is wrong.
Well it depends on how dynamic the environment is. What would you rather do
1. BTO a configuration
2. Install your apps and connect it to the network and SAN
3. Realize you need more capacity or features
4. Rip out computer and start again.
Versus.
1. BTO a configuration with COD
2. Install your apps and connect to LAN/SAN
3. Realize you' need more capacity or features and license them on the spot
4. Leave your workstation/server in place yet reap more compute resources.
For some environments it makes sense. I'm not sure a high end Mac Pro is that environment but it's worth pondering.
.... What would you rather do
...
The verdict has been in on your scenario for years. The vast majority of people buy what they want at the time of purchase. There are users who need or want to upgrade their machines. Even on the Wintel platform, they are a minority--a vocal minority--but a minority, nevertheless.
vandil and bbwi are absolutely correct. Your scheme would have Apple installing hardware that would never be purchased. vandil makes an even better point in that this is not the Apple way. The closest thing that I have ever seen to this scheme was a bunch of Gateways that my firm bought. They featured USB ports that were unusable out of the box. However, the ports were activated by installing free USB drivers downloaded from Microsoft's website. Gateway may ship deactivated hardware, but I have never seen Apple do it. No one wants Apple to trade places with Gateway.
Also, why would Apple (or anyone for that matter) include hardware in a machine that someone might never pay for?
No one in their right mind ever would. It would be hacked immediately.
No one in their right mind ever would. It would be hacked immediately.
Well I can understand the expense the incorrect market but I seriously doubt that it could be hacked easily. HP has been selling Capacity on Demand in Integrity servers for a while and these are managed by guys and gals that know Unix fairly well.
Well I can understand the expense the incorrect market but I seriously doubt that it could be hacked easily. HP has been selling Capacity on Demand in Integrity servers for a while and these are managed by guys and gals that know Unix fairly well.
They don't hack servers because businesses have legal departments that worry about being sued, and support contracts that cost a fortune. Individuals, on the other hand, have absolutely nothing to lose by modding personal computers and electronics.
I don't know how easy or difficult it would be, but I know that if Apple were to do what you describe, a large number of very smart people would dedicate their lives to breaking it. Just to say they did.
They don't hack servers because businesses have legal departments that worry about being sued, and support contracts that cost a fortune. Individuals, on the other hand, have absolutely nothing to lose by modding personal computers and electronics.
I don't know how easy or difficult it would be, but I know that if Apple were to do what you describe, a large number of very smart people would dedicate their lives to breaking it. Just to say they did.
http://www.freshpatents.com/Capacity...0080183712.php
Abstract: A security module manages authorization of additional computing resources, either additional processing power in a server, or additional servers in a server enclosure responsive to an authorized message. The authorized message may be generated at a management node and may include a provisioning license for use by the security module to set a duration for use of the additional computing resources. A baseboard management controller may be house the security module or each controllable resource may house an associated security module. The baseboard management controller may store the authorized message when the security module is not active and forward the message after the security module has been activated.
(end of abstract)
There's a prevailing myth out there that hackers can crack anything which is false. There are plenty of encryptions that hackers cannot hack and if they can they can make more money working for the Government.
Consider the following:
1.
People are oriented today to buying the processing power they need today. This due to the reality that tomorrows hardware will always be faster and more capable. There is little sense in buying processing power for future needs that are always in flux when processor / computer performance is increaseing at more than 20% every two years. In effect you end up paying for outdated hardware when you go to use it.
2.
The cost of shipping all that "free" hardware is extreme. Especially when you consider that a processor or GPU makes up a good portion of the devices unit cost. Just how would you expect Apple to make money on these sorts of transactions? If there was a profit model here, that also benefits the systems owner, we would see this model in the marketplace. We don't for general purpose compute hardware because the economics don't add up positively.
3.
Effectively configuring a system to handle the hardware partitioning, in a secure manner, requires that non standard chipsets or other hardware be employed. This means engineering delays, additional complexity and slower systems. Basically you would need to throw out the economy setup around mass produced chipsets.
4.
If I have a Mac Pro today what is stopping me from throwing in an accelerator card today? I mean really if you have dome bleeding edge code that needs to run faster what is to stop a person from buying a GPU or CELL based accelerator when they need it? Nothing really and it is economical as the processing horse power is added when needed.
5.
Finally your idea is not very "green" as a lot of power would go to unused hardware. Second the machines base power supply would end up being bigger than needed thus lowering efficiency. Not to mention is all the energy wasted on the production of hardware that does nothing.
Well those are a few reasons, if I put more thought into it I might find a few more good reasons. In any event as the industry digests what is the optimal feature set I think we will see much more highly integrated machines so that the entry level to high performance computing goes lower and lower. In fact thinking so isn't really the case as Intel has pretty much already layer out where it is going and Apples latest Mac Books clearly are the result of continued integration.
Of course with Apple we don't always see the savings passed on to the user. In the case of the Mac Books that savings went into the case which has to be relatively expensive. In Apples case higher integration means that they have a chance to add value else where.
Dave
Well it depends on how dynamic the environment is. What would you rather do
1. BTO a configuration
2. Install your apps and connect it to the network and SAN
3. Realize you need more capacity or features
4. Rip out computer and start again.
5. Realize you need to fire whoever underestimated your tech needs. i.e. don't let the IT Purchasing Manager buy the computer when the Sysadmin should be doing it.
6. Your second Apple computer purchase makes Apple more money and you learned from your mistake.
Anyone in the market for a $3000 Mac Pro would preface Step #1 with:
Step #0: Determine minimum hardware needs, add a little on top of that configuration for growth.