or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The Mac Pro is Dead
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Mac Pro is Dead - Page 7

post #241 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fus View Post

is good news?

No chips...

...means they can't exist. You have to wait until Q3 2011 at the earliest.
post #242 of 308
The Z68 chips for iMacs didn't exist either until they were found in the latest edition of the indomitable iMac...
but are they perhaps all thats needed? is twin Zeon outdated? could StrongArm A15 multinode processing as was Archimedes be the "RiscOS" future or will 3D Ivy be enough to bridge the gap next year? Intel are betting each way on production but does Apple know they are to change platforms yet again?

No one's mentioned the natural link so far but Apple have broken the use of nVidea GPUs recently affiliated with Intel and adopted what was ATI GPU's in the iMacs now owned by AMD surely it would follow to also use future AMD CPU's to avoid compatibility issues as AMD will also eventually adopt such 3D technology halving current/thermal problems in both CPU and GPU and combined single chip solutions.

At the end of the day Apple are a software driven company providing suitable hardware designs to run their OS'es and applications on, and will only provide a macpro if there is a suitable market to benefit from, the question is will Apple be bothered?
the answer may be if the Macpro only gets a facelift then perhaps no, if it gets a redesign then definitely yes.
post #243 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by AllanMc View Post

The Z68 chips for iMacs didn't exist either until they were found in the latest edition of the indomitable iMac...

The difference here is that the Z96 board is being released the 11th of May.

Sandy Bridge Xeons for the Mac Pro are six months away.
post #244 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The difference here is that the Z96 board is being released the 11th of May.

Sandy Bridge Xeons for the Mac Pro are six months away.

So...you think/know that an updated Mac Pro is six months (+/-) away?
post #245 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

So...you think/know that an updated Mac Pro is six months (+/-) away?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge

LGA 1356. Q4 2011. Yeah, I'd say so.
post #246 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

So...you think/know that an updated Mac Pro is six months (+/-) away?

Who really cares!
post #247 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Who really cares!

I care. I'm going to buy a Mac Pro, as an upgrade from my late 2009 iMac. Since I'm spending this type of money, I'd like to have the latest model.

While I do need the upgrade, I have time to be patient, as well. Any one have a reason to just buy now?
post #248 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I care. I'm going to buy a Mac Pro, as an upgrade from my late 2009 iMac. Since I'm spending this type of money, I'd like to have the latest model.

While I do need the upgrade, I have time to be patient, as well. Any one have a reason to just buy now?

I'd suggest doing what I did... get the 6 core Westmere machine @ 3.3GHz. The only reason I see to go to the machines with dual CPUs (12 physical cores) is if that box is going to spend more than a few hours a day doing some kind of video processing... otherwise the better clock speed will generally make more difference.

As for beyond that, I'd pass on a Sandy Bridge based one, but Ivy Bridge DOES look very interesting. Of course, there is NO guarentee we'll be seeing any of these... it's all up to Cupertino. While we users may debate the point, there is an awful lot of, dare I say it, sound business reasons for them to stick to iMacs on the desktop and the whole mobile thing... keep in mind this is the company whose latest iMacs HAVE to be HDD upgraded by buying their 3 times price over market hard drives!
post #249 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by ClassicGuy View Post

...latest iMacs HAVE to be HDD upgraded by buying their 3 times price over market hard drives!

Quit spreading this FUD. It gets enough press without forum users believing it.
post #250 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by marvfox View Post

Who really cares!

Not nice
Please say your sorry


We must always try to treat each other with kindness and respect .

Thank you

brucep
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #251 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I care. I'm going to buy a Mac Pro, as an upgrade from my late 2009 iMac. Since I'm spending this type of money, I'd like to have the latest model.

While I do need the upgrade, I have time to be patient, as well. Any one have a reason to just buy now?

I would wait until they put out a new full upgrade .
Late 09 seems like very new ???
Why change so fast ?
What happens to your old machine ??
Have you considered the high end IMACS ??


peace

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #252 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Quit spreading this FUD. It gets enough press without forum users believing it.

What's the truth then? I haven't seen any article in my feeds that correct this supposed misinformation.
post #253 of 308
There's a few threads on Macrumors were users report successfully replacing 2011 iMacs' HDD's.

ChargedPC has a how-to.

looks like OWC dropped the ball on this one.
post #254 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by zeph View Post

There's a few threads on Macrumors were users report successfully replacing 2011 iMacs' HDD's.

ChargedPC has a how-to.

looks like OWC dropped the ball on this one.

I don't know, HardMac is suggesting short-circuiting the pins on the connector:

http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/05/...-the-2011-imac

That doesn't sound like a good solution. Using a splitter cable suggested on this forum seems ok but not entirely straightforward and means ordering the right part.
post #255 of 308
Well, if I wanted to tinker with the hardware I would not buy an iMac in the first place, but the Hardmac article also says that it is not that different from replacing the HDD in a 2010 iMac.

I reckon if you're inclined to open a brand-new iMac and muck about with parts, shorting a few pins isn't gonna faze you.
post #256 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by brucep View Post

I would wait until they put out a new full upgrade .
Late 09 seems like very new ???
Why change so fast ?
What happens to your old machine ??
Have you considered the high end IMACS ??


peace

9

I'm a music composition student (college). My sample library, and studio set-up, is growing rapidly. In fact, I have more than my current CPU can handle efficiently, if at all. Beyond the obvious processing speed increases, I really need that option of easy upgradability.

I need to upgrade to a rig that allows me to create with the most efficiency possible. It's a cliche, but it's true. I understand what people are saying when they say that they'd prefer an iMac (I've owned two, so far)... but, a Mac Pro is what I need for my career/passion, even in it's infant stage.
post #257 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I understand what people are saying when they say that they'd prefer an iMac (I've owned two, so far)... but, a Mac Pro is what I need for my career/passion, even in its infant stage.

I understand completely. If I were you, I'd wait until the coming upgrade, whenever that may be—and then I'd buy a Mac Pro. The strengths of the update—Thunderbolt and SATA III (with the option of 6Gb/s SSDs)—are very much worth the wait. To the extent that any current technology is "future-proof," that is the way to go.
post #258 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I'm a music composition student (college). My sample library, and studio set-up, is growing rapidly. In fact, I have more than my current CPU can handle efficiently, if at all. Beyond the obvious processing speed increases, I really need that option of easy upgradability.

I need to upgrade to a rig that allows me to create with the most efficiency possible. It's a cliche, but it's true. I understand what people are saying when they say that they'd prefer an iMac (I've owned two, so far)... but, a Mac Pro is what I need for my career/passion, even in it's infant stage.

WOW
So I would suggest you go to an apple store and see for real if a mac pro is what you need
Also many Companies and or schools may have just last yr bought fully stock top end MAC PRO SYSTEMS

If apple bring's an up grade this yr To MAC PRO many companies may dump great systems cheap on the market just to grab the latest tech from apple .

So you also could try that road . Getting a high end system slightly used by geek types for a great price .

anyway good luck !!!


bruce

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #259 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Wilkie View Post

Those who do upgrades on their home computer outside of RAM represent a minority class of hobbyists who like to tinker. And if you're the tinkering type then the Mac platform is probably not for you. Build a PC and install Ubuntu.

I fall into this particular class myself. Having bought a Mac Pro a little over 3 years ago I'm very happy with the machine, but it is getting long in the tooth and I'm now wondering about going back to building a custom machine myself. Of course there is the problem of not having OSX on a custom built machine. I'm sure I could go the Hackintosh route, but though I like to tinker I really don't have time to deal with what I'm afraid would rapidly become a headache trying to keep with with things on a Hackintosh.

Right now my biggest growing pain with my current Mac Pro is the GeForce 8800 GT. Though this was a great video card back in it's day, that day was about 4 years ago. I'm now debating whether to wait and see what graphics options are available with the next Mac Pro refresh or just dropping the money on the ATI 5770.
post #260 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post

See right here I have to start to disagree. Large businesses are very reluctant to upgrade a PC. Believe me I've had arguements about this. This may be different in a small business or professional firm where the user has more control, but in a corporate environment where you have zero control over IT upgrades don't happen.

Again I disagree completely. Even in the Apple world disk drive expansion happens but often through external drives. Can you honestly deny the extensive use of external disks in the Mac world? Further RAM expansion was extremely common for years mostly due to Apples high cost of RAM.

I'd really like to know what your definition of average is because honestly what you describe is well below the norm.

As to Apple I'm actually surprised that they have been successful so long with reliance on external drives for expansion in most of their machines. It is realky a stupid way to solve the average users space problems.

Sorry to hear that. Maybe they keep such activity quite so as to avoid rants from other family members. Or maybe they don't know better and simply buy new hardware when they run out of disk space (seen lots of that). Or maybe they are below average users that don't leverage their machines the way many do. In any event you have a hard time convincing me that the family is average.

If you are not sure then you really don't know at all. Face there are multiple companies that exist simply to supply the Mac upgrade market. On top of that other companies service the market as part of their over all business. If the volume of upgrades was as low as you suggest then these offerings would be very expensive, they aren't thus the implication of reasonable volumes.

A scratched record can repeat the same thing over and over for ever too. That doesnt make it useful. What I don't like about your statement is the implication that the average Joe is so stupid he can't plug in a disk drive, internal or external. If that is your view of people than I feel sorry for you. The average Joe is reasonably capable.

OK let me make this clear: you are simply wrong to be using such a broad statement. In fact you really don't know what you are talking about.


Whatever. You see what you want to see. Honestly you must have seen at keast one or two external drives, as to internal upgrades how would you even know without either looking or asking.? Same thing goes for RAM.

Mind you I'm not saying everybody upgrades their machine before replacement, what I'm totally rejecting is this "not common in the slightest" point which is pure BS. That is an extreme statement to make.

I'm not going to pick apart individual aspects of this response, but I'm going to generally disagree here. Having built a couple dozen PCs for family, friends, and myself over the years I'm quite familiar with that particular route. Being a tinkerer, and very much an above average user I have upgraded my own PCs regularly. However, I very rarely upgraded any of the other PCs that I built for people.

One example of this is my brother-in-law who I build an AutoCAD PC for several years ago. We went to Fry's and I selected all of the components and built the thing from the ground up. He had problems with a failed motherboard a year or so later, so I replaced that. The next time he had a problem, a failed hard drive if I remember correctly, he opted to go with a 27" iMac. We never upgraded the PC, and we have never upgraded the iMac. Beyond this, I have converted his mom to an iMac and my parents from a PC to a Mac Mini. I would same the brother-in-law is a good example of the average Joe user where my parents and mother-in-law are below average, but generally speaking I would have to argue that people who upgrade their computers is probably significantly below 20%. Further, I would argue that those who upgrade beyond RAM or storage is probably more likely in the 5% range. All that said, with the vast number of computers out there it still makes a lot of since to cater to that community.
post #261 of 308
Does anyone know if Apple will discuss (or even mention) the possible upgrade future of the Mac Pro at WWDC 2011? I know that it's supposed to focus mostly (if not only) on software. I'm certainly expecting for them to devote any significant time towards it, or the remaining modules that are due for the upgrade.

Any thoughts, gang?
post #262 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

Does anyone know if Apple will discuss (or even mention) the possible upgrade future of the Mac Pro at WWDC 2011? I know that it's supposed to focus mostly (if not only) on software. I'm certainly expecting for them to devote any significant time towards it, or the remaining modules that are due for the upgrade.

Any thoughts, gang?

Again, NO. CHIPS. Means that they CAN'T. EXIST. I said this at the top of the page.

Look at Wikipedia for Intel's release date for these chips. Q3 2011. Can't happen at WWDC.

Apple doesn't talk about products before they're ready to launch them unless they don't already sell a product that the new one will be replacing.
post #263 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemon Bon Bon. View Post

Yeah. The Pro's/tower's relative importance to Apple along with Adobe and MS's has greatly diminished.

Remember the days when MS or Adobe purportedly held an 'axe' over Apple's head?

Heh. Payback is a bitch.

It's still a handsome machine. But the entry spec, the gpu...the COUGH(!) price? No mortal is going to pay that.

The iMac now occupies the Pro's historical ground in the mid range. I can see the iMac encroaching even further on the Mac Pro's territory in performance and value over time.

There will be a market for the (probably, forthcoming) dual 8 core Mac Pro. It's not a mainstream one, obviously.

Lemon Bon Bon.

I really can't argue much with this logic. Having been one of the insane to buy the entry level Mac Pro back in 2008, I'm really leaning towards the 27" iMac next time. Right now I'm looking towards upgrading the GeForce 8800 GT to the AMD 5770, and this has always been a big reluctance for me on the iMac. If however as some of the suspicion/hopes here suggest and we could somehow get a TB plugin graphics card to allow for upgrading the iMac graphics that would pretty much seal the deal for me. I recently saw some Mac Mini under desk mounts, and I could see grabbing up one or two of these to mount ext TB drives in and avoid the increased footprint that some keep mentioning.

I guess my iMac setup would be something like the 256GB SSD + 1TB HDD option on the top in iMac. Then I would plan on attaching a 2TB TB drive for Time Machine, and another 256GB SSD TB drive for Win 7. Both of these drives would go under the back of the desk so that are completely out of sight. This would be a pretty sweet setup, and in a couple years when the AMD 6970 is beginning to show it's age I could simply attach a new AMD 7 or 8 series GPU on TB. Yeah, this would really be awesome. I could give up the expandability and flexibility of the Mac Pro for this.
post #264 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnb2 View Post

Yes, exactly - something like this was done for the previous generation of minis, with external hard drive cases that had the same footprint as the mini, and also served as USB and FireWire hubs. Of course, given the connection options at the time, this was only useful for storage, but with two bi-directional 10Gbps channels on each Thunderbolt port, other possibilities are opened up.

I had this same thought too. It would also be cool if Apple standardized/integrated the TB connection into the stacking. This would mean that you could add-on without any cables. You could still have cable connection ports on the back so that if you got really crazy on the add-ons you could start a second stack.
post #265 of 308
Could you guys/gals clarify something for me...

Whenever the Mac Pro (or any system, really) receives the upgrade to Sandy Bridge processors, will the new architecture be able to support an upgrade to the eventual Ivy Bridge processors? Would I have to purchase a whole new system to take advantage or what? Ive read conflicting statements about all of this.

Any help would be appreciated.
post #266 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

Could you guys/gals clarify something for me...

Whenever the Mac Pro (or any system, really) receives the upgrade to Sandy Bridge processors, will the new architecture be able to support an upgrade to the eventual Ivy Bridge processors? Would I have to purchase a whole new system to take advantage or what? Ive read conflicting statements about all of this.

Any help would be appreciated.

Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge should be chipset compatible, I think.

The 0.000000001% of Mac Pro users that even do this will be happy about it.
post #267 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

The 0.000000001% of Mac Pro users that even do this will be happy about it.

Why do you think that they'll be mostly unhappy? Or, were you just implying, or reinforcing, the title of this thread... The Mac Pro is Dead, lol.
post #268 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

Why do you think that they'll be mostly unhappy?

Not what I was saying.

Quote:
Or, were you just implying, or reinforcing, the title of this thread... The Mac Pro is Dead, lol.

Neither.

I'm saying that it's far more trouble than all but maybe fifteen Mac Pro users would go to to upgrade their machines. Everyone else will just buy the new model as a whole.
post #269 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Not what I was saying.



Neither.

I'm saying that it's far more trouble than all but maybe fifteen Mac Pro users would go to to upgrade their machines. Everyone else will just buy the new model as a whole.


I just read that the new "Bridge" chips were backwards compatible. Why, then, would it be such a big deal to change them, making a person want to buy a whole new machine instead?
post #270 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I just read that the new "Bridge" chips were backwards compatible. Why, then, would it be such a big deal to change them, making a person want to buy a whole new machine instead?

Because you have to swap out the daughterboards, meaning RAM will change as well. Physically, it's about as easy as an upgrade can possibly get. Financially, swapping the boards costs virtually as much as buying a new machine without any of the benefits of actually being a new machine (like better/more ports, SATA III connections, etc.).
post #271 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by compos24 View Post

I'm a music composition student (college). My sample library, and studio set-up, is growing rapidly. In fact, I have more than my current CPU can handle efficiently, if at all. Beyond the obvious processing speed increases, I really need that option of easy upgradability.

I need to upgrade to a rig that allows me to create with the most efficiency possible. It's a cliche, but it's true. I understand what people are saying when they say that they'd prefer an iMac (I've owned two, so far)... but, a Mac Pro is what I need for my career/passion, even in it's infant stage.

WELL you need to upgrade with a real time scalability as time goes on .So you want the mac pro desk top which should be out soon .




KEEP US in the loop i wanna now how you decide .

peace dude and good luck with your music


9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #272 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Because you have to swap out the daughterboards, meaning RAM will change as well. Physically, it's about as easy as an upgrade can possibly get. Financially, swapping the boards costs virtually as much as buying a new machine without any of the benefits of actually being a new machine (like better/more ports, SATA III connections, etc.).

I'm not sure if it was clear that I was suggesting an upgrade on the upcoming Sandy Bridge models. If I had the refreshed model, would it be a big deal to upgrade to Ivy Bridge, excluding and physical changes to the design during that time?
post #273 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

Because you have to swap out the daughterboards, meaning RAM will change as well. Physically, it's about as easy as an upgrade can possibly get. Financially, swapping the boards costs virtually as much as buying a new machine without any of the benefits of actually being a new machine (like better/more ports, SATA III connections, etc.).

seems like a major hassle swapping out . why not just wait 6 months or so ..



peace

9
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
whats in a name ? 
beatles
Reply
post #274 of 308
I think the whole premise of this thread is flawed. Professionals who edit video and modern digital media aren't going to use an iMac, nor a Macbook Pro most of the time. They need real power and speed. That is why the Mac Pro exists.

Many are calling it dead for two reasons: 1) Their perspective is that of a consumer or prosumer and 2) The type of computers these people use has shifted over the years. 5+ years ago, a lot of power users and upper end consumers went the pro route. iMacs were not powerful enough, yet a lot of people feel they "needed" a desktop. Times have changed. A Macbook Pro (or even a Macbook) can do what all but maybe 5-10% of users need. Ditto on the iMac for those that prefer a desktop solution. But, the Mac Pro is alive and well in professional video and audio production, as well as other industries. A laptop or iMac is just not going to cut it there.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #275 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I think the whole premise of this thread is flawed.

Many are calling it dead for two reasons: 1) Their perspective is that of a consumer or prosumer and 2) The type of computers these people use has shifted over the years. 5+ years ago, a lot of power users and upper end consumers went the pro route. iMacs were not powerful enough, yet a lot of people feel they "needed" a desktop. Times have changed. A Macbook Pro (or even a Macbook) can do what all but maybe 5-10% of users need. Ditto on the iMac for those that prefer a desktop solution. But, the Mac Pro is alive and well in professional video and audio production, as well as other industries. A laptop or iMac is just not going to cut it there.

Personally I hope the Mac Pro survives. Even though I have no need for that much computer only the Mac Pro seems to be built with any sensibility to ease of use. Only the Mac Pro has some jacks on the front where they are easy to reach. Only the Mac Pro has enough room in it so you aren't going to be worried about heat. (I'm not saying the Mini and iMac run too hot, just that plenty of Mini and iMac owners worry about heat) and only the Mac Pro has a case that is easy to open without having to depend on the use of tools that are odd for working on electronics (putty knife and suction cups, those are things you find in an auto body shop).

If I had the money I'd buy a Mac Pro because it is the only Apple computer that is designed for function over form. What I really wish for is a 2/3rds size version.
post #276 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacTac View Post

Personally I hope the Mac Pro survives. Even though I have no need for that much computer only the Mac Pro seems to be built with any sensibility to ease of use. Only the Mac Pro has some jacks on the front where they are easy to reach. Only the Mac Pro has enough room in it so you aren't going to be worried about heat. (I'm not saying the Mini and iMac run too hot, just that plenty of Mini and iMac owners worry about heat) and only the Mac Pro has a case that is easy to open without having to depend on the use of tools that are odd for working on electronics (putty knife and suction cups, those are things you find in an auto body shop).

If I had the money I'd buy a Mac Pro because it is the only Apple computer that is designed for function over form. What I really wish for is a 2/3rds size version.

I have to wonder if Apple is looking to do something creative here with the Mac Pro form factor. Has anyone really innovated tower PC case design recently? The Mac Pro isn't the only computer with easy access and room for drives etc. Some of the HP workstations are nice. I'm just thinking this is an area where Apple could innovate to move the tower well forward from where it sits today. Maybe something more modular. Maybe something that takes advantage of Thunderbolt to allow smaller size with even more capabilities. Maybe Apple doesn't really care about this segment any longer, but who knows really? Just a few months ago some people were saying that Apple was going to sell off the Pro Apps division and thus dump Final Cut. That didn't happen.
post #277 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Professionals who edit video and modern digital media aren't going to use an iMac, nor a Macbook Pro most of the time. They need real power and speed. That is why the Mac Pro exists.

The quad i7 Macbook Pro is faster than the current entry Mac Pro though. Plus you can have a slow drive in a Mac Pro and an SSD in a MBP and the MBP will run rings round the Pro editing 1080p.

Video editors can do rough cuts remotely on a laptop and musicians can take laptops straight to the recording sessions or work on the same content at home as in the office without syncing.

I would say that if you work on very demanding visual effects, money is no object and you work with a big screen then the Mac Pro makes the most sense but the advantages the Mac Pro offers in real-world scenarios are getting fewer the more that time goes on.

If a Macbook Pro or iMac lets you perform the tasks you need to do then you don't need to spend more money on a workstation.

I think they'll redesign it first but over time, it will become unnecessary. It has become an elephant in the room - just a big, grey object shoved under a desk.

post #278 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

.
I think they'll redesign it first but over time, it will become unnecessary. It has become an elephant in the room - just a big, grey object shoved under a desk.

I shove mine right here:
post #279 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by WelshDog View Post

I shove mine right here:

What is immediately obvious from that picture is how massive the Mac Pro is compared to the XServe just to the left of it and they had the same processors. The design also looks very old in comparison. If they bring the Mac Pro down to use MXM GPUs just like the iMac, there shouldn't be any problem making it very thin and serve a dual-purpose. It wouldn't even need screws, it could have a plate that slides into a groove on the side for it to sit vertically and be held in with a couple of magnets. Just pull it forward off the plate and you have an XServe that can sit horizontally. They can have rotating feet of course but a slide-on plate would probably be more robust.
post #280 of 308
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post

What is immediately obvious from that picture is how massive the Mac Pro is compared to the XServe just to the left of it and they had the same processors. The design also looks very old in comparison. If they bring the Mac Pro down to use MXM GPUs just like the iMac, there shouldn't be any problem making it very thin and serve a dual-purpose. It wouldn't even need screws, it could have a plate that slides into a groove on the side for it to sit vertically and be held in with a couple of magnets. Just pull it forward off the plate and you have an XServe that can sit horizontally. They can have rotating feet of course but a slide-on plate would probably be more robust.

You forget that an XServe sounds like a plane taking off, due to its tiny fans spinning at warp speed. Small size does bring some compromises.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › The Mac Pro is Dead