Customers report long delays when customizing Apple's Mac Pro

124»

Comments

  • syqwestsyqwest Posts: 2member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


    Mainly because ARM sucks for the type of workloads Apple users commonly deal with.



    The only indications that Apple is leaving the Pro computer market comes from a bunch of worry warts that have no knowledge of what Apple is doing or for that matter grasp Intels role in this long drawn out story.



    Apple will have a Pro desktop solution, I just don't expect it to look like a Mac Pro.



    I agree, but they have really kept a lid on the R&D, which probably means they have something coming that will really Wow us.



    Hoping they announce something soon, my Mac Pro account is on the decline, no thanks to the new iPad
  • tipootipoo Posts: 579member
    There were no new Xeons available before now, there could not have been a "new" Mac Pro before this. The Sandy Bridge Xeons are just becoming available. The Mac Pros may not be a high volume market, but alienating the professional content creation market would not be a good idea. The iMac or other models may work well for some projects, but ECC memory and Xeons and workstation graphics cards are required for some workloads.





    I'm curious how Thunderbolt will be implemented, afaik there are no graphics cards with it, and it would have to leech PCI-E bandwidth away from the card, but they can't do it on the motherboard either because they need video output FROM the card.
  • evil edisonevil edison Posts: 2member
    Anyone who thinks Apple isn't willing to abandon "power users" need only look at recent history to see otherwise. They basically alienated an entire industry (video post production) when they introduced Final Cut Pro X.



    That said, the NAB convention is happening in Las Vegas this week (an event that draws professionals from TV, film, radio, music--basically everyone who might be interested in a Mac Pro). Autodesk introduced an exciting new version of Smoke, a very high end editing package with a huge price cut. Previously, it needed a Mac Pro to run. Autodesk was very excited to report that it will now run on an iMac or MacBook Pro. Think about it... if you were Apple and had any interest in the Mac Pro, is this not the perfect time to introduce the new model to the salivating masses? Not a peep. Meanwhile, HP has been flaunting their new 810 workstation for weeks and is already taking orders.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,861member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Evil Edison View Post


    They basically alienated an entire industry (video post production) when they introduced Final Cut Pro X.



    No. Give it a rest.
  • rob55rob55 Posts: 1,204member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mstone View Post


    I think one thing we can be sure of is that Apple will not release a version of FCP X that doesn't run satisfactorily on a MBP.



    In my opinion, it doesn't. I've got an early '11 quad-core i7 MBP with 8GB RAM and though FCP-X does "technically" run and is stable, I don't find it terribly usable for anything other than small jobs. The instant it starts rendering in the background, my MBP goes to turbofan mode, gets hotter than blazes and slows dramatically. Perhaps my definition of satisfactorily is different than theirs.



    BTW, I realize I'm trying to edit video on a laptop and that it will stress my machine. That is why I want/need a MacPro.
  • evil edisonevil edison Posts: 2member
    It will never happen, but Apple would make it easier for everyone if they would just let a decent third party company make Mac Pro "clones". They wouldn't waste their iPad resources and they would make the "power users" happy. Sell the OS for a jacked up price even. Professional users will pay it if it means they can keep their high powered systems.
  • palegolaspalegolas Posts: 1,154member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by DoctorGonzo View Post


    Good luck getting a Kona card to work that way, and having it share bandwidth with a 12TB RAID.



    The "put everything on Thunderbolt sitting in a pile next to the machine" crowd doesn't seem to understand the realities of a professional production environment. Nor do they want to.



    1. With future versions of the protocol, and with multiple Thunderbolt busses, I think it'll work.

    2. The stuff is all all mounted in the server room anyway.
  • charlitunacharlituna Posts: 7,083member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jragosta View Post


    That's why this article is useless.



    ONE customer saw a delay. Without knowing what their configuration was, it's impossible to guess what the cause of the delay was. Maybe he ordered a high end video card which is temporarily unavailable.



    Indeed.



    Not to mention since when did we start using inventory at a 3rd party retailer as a definite sign of anything. Shouldn't we be looking at Apple's website, which comes from the source. Run some zips and see what the instore pickup says etc.





    Quote:
    Originally Posted by MacBook Pro View Post


    Sadly, I believe Apple could have saved the XServe.



    Apple could offer activation and management server via OS X Lion Server that iPads, iPhones and iPod Touches such that could be managed within the business enterprise. Such a service could include encrypted and compressed email, messaging and web browsing. While this wouldn't sell millions, I believe (considering the continued strong interest in Research in Motion solutions) this could be a popular solutions for government and companies where security is a primary concern (defense, finance and healthcare). I believe this would create a halo effect within the enterprise for additional enterprise products.



    And what about any of that makes the Xserve a requirement. What can the Xserve do that can't be done some other way like with a Mac Pro or even a Mac Mini running server and connected to an external Raid bay on a thunderbolt connection.
  • middlemanmiddleman Posts: 17member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by charlituna View Post


    And what percent of Apple users actually need that much computer.



    Actually a LOT of people....



    People in the broadcasting/movie industries, in the digital content creation industry, in the server/media industries. People who are retouchers, graphic designers, animators etc. who want the stability and strength of a Mac platform. Macs are one of the few platforms for example, that can output and process very large images with Photoshop without running out of memory or crashing. Wonder why professional photographers always likes to use Macs? Its because Windows is just not really good enough for all this (despite all that has been said).



    Also a Mac Pro is needed because iMacs and Mac Minis DO NOT do the job of retouching properly. I know because I have both. For small jobs yes, for bigger and time-intensive jobs no. iMacs don't support powerful PCIe RAID cards/systems like Areca and the mobile 'M' chips of the current Mac Minis for example, are simply not powerful enough to process big jobs. The same goes for the MacBook Pro - we can't always be retouching on a MBP screen, or have it attached to a dock. Professionals who work with large images on a daily basis need a system that is fast, stable, upgradeable and can use a dedicated and accurate colour calibrated screen.



    That's why the Mac Pro is needed.....but it's seriously lagging behind now, it really needs updating. Hopefully the new range will come out with Thunderbolt....
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 40,861member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Middleman View Post


    Also a Mac Pro is needed because iMacs and Mac Minis DO NOT do the job of retouching properly.



    You? lost some credibility when you said this.



    "iMacs can't retouch photos properly?" Really?
Sign In or Register to comment.