or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Official WWDC '12 Predictions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Official WWDC '12 Predictions Thread - Page 2

post #41 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanbrowne View Post
When you suggested "Because it's physically impossible to put the dual chip platform in the iMac case and no new chips suited for this purpose are slated to be created… ever?"

 

I'll finish that sentence: "…I was not talking about the Xeon, but rather a mythical chip that could somehow provide the power of a Xeon in the case of an iMac". Intel, as far as I know, isn't planning to create workstation chips that fit in all-in-one desktops.

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #42 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanbrowne View Post

When you suggested "Because it's physically impossible to put the dual chip platform in the iMac case and no new chips suited for this purpose are slated to be created… ever?"

 

Originally Posted by Tallest Skil

I'll finish that sentence: "…I was not talking about the Xeon, but rather a mythical chip that could somehow provide the power of a Xeon in the case of an iMac". Intel, as far as I know, isn't planning to create workstation chips that fit in all-in-one desktops.

Wow. You're so wrong. IMO, you know very little.

 

1- Intel has just released the Xeon E3-1200v2 series (Ivy Bridge), which are workstation chips that fit in all-in-one desktops (and smaller designs, from 17W to 87W), the fact is most are very similar to the desktop Core i5/i7 series that Apple used (will probably use again) in the iMacs. IMO, those are even better suited to the iMac than the desktop Core i5/i7 series since many SKUs don't have integrated graphics (who needs that when you have a better dedicated gpu), so the TDP is slightly lower (allows even hotter dedicated gpus), and most of them have HT, and more cache, for a very similar price. Those E3-1200v2 SKUs that have integrated graphics have a better igpu than desktop Core i5/i7 series cpus. HP's Z1 workstation uses some of the Xeon E3-1200v1 series (Sandy Bridge).

 

2- You could physically put a dual chip system in the 27" iMac that currently uses a 95W TDP cpu and a mobile dedicated gpu, just use low-power chips like the 40W Xeon L5630 than can be used in pairs. If I remember well Eurocom released notebooks with high-end Xeon cpus as well as a dual-cpu model.

 

Eurocom Panther 4.0 Notebook Gets Xeon E5-2690 8-Core CPU

Eurocom Intros Dual-CPU Packing Notebook Computer

I don't see why it would be physically impossible in a much bigger enclosure (27" iMac). Apple could use any Xeon under 95W in a 27" iMac, and probably any Xeon under 70W in a 21.5" iMac. Does it make commercial sense? Probably not much in case of a E5 series cpu, but it's far from being physically impossible.

 

Historically Intel has always released low-power Xeons along side the big, hot, expensive models, those are less known to the general public, but that doesn't mean they don't exist or that Intel doesn't care about that market.
post #43 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

 

I'll finish that sentence: "…I was not talking about the Xeon, but rather a mythical chip that could somehow provide the power of a Xeon in the case of an iMac". Intel, as far as I know, isn't planning to create workstation chips that fit in all-in-one desktops.

Well, it looks like the MPro survives (per recent solid rumours) - we'll get the full deal next week.

 

But I still don't see why workstation chips can't fit into an iMac (albeit deeper) enclosure.  Put another way, the iMac "as is" is a far cry from the first iMax shape.

 

I guess the point I'm making is that for a lot of work one no longer needs a big clunky box.  An iMac makes a nice workstation and I suspect the newest iMacs will be more powerful albeit single CPU.  More powerful than any but the most recent MacPros.  But that's not a limit that needs to stand.

post #44 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanbrowne View Post

Well, it looks like the MPro survives (per recent solid rumours) - we'll get the full deal next week.

 

But I still don't see why workstation chips can't fit into an iMac (albeit deeper) enclosure.  Put another way, the iMac "as is" is a far cry from the first iMax shape.

 

I guess the point I'm making is that for a lot of work one no longer needs a big clunky box.  An iMac makes a nice workstation and I suspect the newest iMacs will be more powerful albeit single CPU.  More powerful than any but the most recent MacPros.  But that's not a limit that needs to stand.

As I've said, the bloggers were all trolling us. They would talk about Apple questioning its future. Do you really think they had a source among Apple's upper management where such discussions might take place? They were either fabricated or  they decided to run with the story from very little real information.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjteix View Post

I don't see why it would be physically impossible in a much bigger enclosure (27" iMac). Apple could use any Xeon under 95W in a 27" iMac, and probably any Xeon under 70W in a 21.5" iMac. Does it make commercial sense? Probably not much in case of a E5 series cpu, but it's far from being physically impossible.

 

Historically Intel has always released low-power Xeons along side the big, hot, expensive models, those are less known to the general public, but that doesn't mean they don't exist or that Intel doesn't care about that market.

The E3-1200 cpus are single package only. The others that you mentioned in that notebook would make for a very expensive system, yet they wouldn't be a replacement for a mac pro anyway. They aren't as powerful. You'd still be lacking things like PCI slots and had drive bays, and you're stuck with the display that Apple dictates. This wouldn't be making the mac pro better. It would be making the imac worse. Overall the imac has enough problems as it is. If they're going to improve it, you can find many threads indicating where they should start on the Apple discussion boards.

post #45 of 50

I'm all for something with a small form factor that packs more power than an iMac.  I used to have an Mac Pro till it died a painful death last summer; replaced it with an iMac with SSD and am pretty happy.  However, for peak work deadlines, I picked up a second iMac to help out; don't need the display, though, and would prefer something that can fit on a bookshelf.  The Mac mini doesn't cut it (have one).

 

Two drives internal:  SSD and HD.  8GB RAM.  External Thunderbolt is fine.   No PCI slots and a single optical drive will do fine.  I work now in BluRay (by customer request) and have to have an external drive anyways.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #46 of 50

What does the QuickTime web overlay look like in Windows?

Because I just tried to watch a trailer on Apple.com and it had a completely different control panel for the QuickTime popup than normal. It was just a bar along the bottom, volume, play/pause, and the timeline. I wish I'd gotten a screenshot, but the trailer wasn't loading, so I refreshed and now it's back to normal… 

 

Could QuickTime be getting some design changes?

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply

Originally Posted by Marvin

The only thing more insecure than Android’s OS is its userbase.
Reply
post #47 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bergermeister View Post

I'm all for something with a small form factor that packs more power than an iMac.  I used to have an Mac Pro till it died a painful death last summer; replaced it with an iMac with SSD and am pretty happy.  However, for peak work deadlines, I picked up a second iMac to help out; don't need the display, though, and would prefer something that can fit on a bookshelf.  The Mac mini doesn't cut it (have one).

 

Two drives internal:  SSD and HD.  8GB RAM.  External Thunderbolt is fine.   No PCI slots and a single optical drive will do fine.  I work now in BluRay (by customer request) and have to have an external drive anyways.

It would be cool to have a Mac Midi to put in the closet for heavy processing like video but use an iMac as the "terminal" (separate OS X session).  It could also provide server and other utility duties.

post #48 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

As I've said, the bloggers were all trolling us. They would talk about Apple questioning its future. Do you really think they had a source among Apple's upper management where such discussions might take place? They were either fabricated or  they decided to run with the story from very little real information.

The E3-1200 cpus are single package only. The others that you mentioned in that notebook would make for a very expensive system, yet they wouldn't be a replacement for a mac pro anyway. They aren't as powerful. You'd still be lacking things like PCI slots and had drive bays, and you're stuck with the display that Apple dictates. This wouldn't be making the mac pro better. It would be making the imac worse. Overall the imac has enough problems as it is. If they're going to improve it, you can find many threads indicating where they should start on the Apple discussion boards.

 

There are many ways to make a system worse, but a powerful workstation doesn't have to be a big expensive box like the Mac Pro and nor does an iMac have to be as slim as it is now.

I'd even go for an external computer for the iMac such as a Mac Midi to offload processing to (Handbrake comes to mind though my 2.8 GHz dual core, 667 MHz eventually finishes the job...).  GCD can be a means to accomplish this.

 

Many have complained about the gulf between the highest end iMac and the Mac Pro.  That's what I'd like to see filled somewhere in the middle.

post #49 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by alanbrowne View Post

It would be cool to have a Mac Midi to put in the closet for heavy processing like video but use an iMac as the "terminal" (separate OS X session).  It could also provide server and other utility duties.

That's what I'm talking about.

 

BTW, I work the 2nd iMac with Remote Desktop.

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply

 

Your = the possessive of you, as in, "Your name is Tom, right?" or "What is your name?"

 

You're = a contraction of YOU + ARE as in, "You are right" --> "You're right."

 

 

Reply
post #50 of 50

WWDC keynote over: Is that all there is???

 

What a disappointment!

 

There are people waiting for the new iMacs, if nothing else. Perhaps someone will get a look inside Mountain Lion to see if there appears to be support for the Mac Pro.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › Official WWDC '12 Predictions Thread