or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › What's left for the Macintosh in a Post-PC iOS World?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's left for the Macintosh in a Post-PC iOS World? - Page 4

post #121 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone 
Same, poor ergonomics. Also I find pro desktop apps such as photoshop and video editing use very compact layouts and controls, many nodes no larger than the tip of the cursor arrow which are sometimes difficult to grab with the mouse let alone a big fat finger.

The ergonomic issue is true of vertical screens but is obvious nonsense when it comes to horizontal screens. Working on a horizontal surface is how we worked for hundreds thousands of years before the advent of computers.

The other problem is solved by better UI design.

However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #122 of 253

The majority of consumers never needed a PC or Mac, there just wasn't any alternative.    The vast majority of people use a computer to accomplish the same things that a pad or smartphone can already do pretty well:   surf the web, read/write a small amount of email, use Facebook, Tweet, watch YouTube, listen to music, manage photographs, read an ebook or play games.    Only a minority of users need the ability to edit video or photos in a sophisticated way, be able to create large spreadsheets and sophisticated document files efficiently, use CAD/CAM software, be able to view multiple applications at the same time, use development tools, enterprise applications, etc.

 

But there's always going to be heavy users, both consumers and professionals, who need that power (I happen to be one of them) and who need a quality physical keyboard and a large display.    That's going to be, almost by definition, a minority of the market.    Apple could give up that market because over time, it will be a smaller percentage of overall revenue, but I think it would be a huge mistake.   You really want to keep everyone in the Apple eco-system.   If I were to move from a Mac to a PC (ugh!), I think I'd see far less of a reason to stick with an iPhone or buy an iPad as compared with the alternatives.   

 

A vertically-oriented touchscreen is a not very good UI.  Try holding your arm up above the keyboard for 20 minutes.    It's not comfortable.   The nature of the interaction is far different when using a Pad or phone as compared to using a computer.    Therefore, the OS's are not going to merge, although I'm sure they'll borrow from each other.     

 

IMO, another reason why PC and Mac sales are down is because even for people who need to use a computer, machines from five years ago still have all the power they need.    I'm using a late-2008 MacBook Pro and it's absolutely fine.     And in business, most people spend their day using Office apps and searching the web.   No need for more power there either.    But as higher and higher resolution video becomes the norm, as video games get ever more technically sophisticated and as the economy improves, there will eventually be another upgrade cycle, especially if Apple or the PC manufacturers come through with a major breakthrough that necessitates more computing power.    I would suggest that breakthrough would involve more sophisticated AI.  The other thing Apple needs to do is to move Siri to the Mac.    

 

For the most part, Apple and the PC manufacturers haven't given consumers a reason to upgrade.    A little bit faster, a little bit thinner doesn't cut it and the average person probably can't tell the difference between a retina and non-retina display.     But even if they can, Apple has taken away the DVD drive, given us more expensive and lower capacity (but faster) storage and in most machines, made it impossible to upgrade storage or memory.   So maybe people are reluctant to upgrade because they see it as a partial downgrade.   Apple has to realize that "thinness" is not the absolute most desirable aspect of a computer.   

post #123 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post


Using many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation. However, I grant you many of the things done in those same applications would be great done with gestures. I've thought for the last few years that a large screen that lay down on the desk at a shallow, comfortable angle, with OS X and also gesture control would be cool. Graphic design, video editing in the likes of , FCPro, After Effects, PS or Music Applications like LPX and so on, all with the ability to use touch or a mouse whenever and wherever you wished. The on screen contextual key boards and ability to work like 'The Minority Report' (although not on a vertical screen for day to day work for me) whilst still being able to grab a mouse if required would seem a perfect and highly adaptable, creative solution to me.

 

Accuracy and speed are interaction task dependent. While for "many applications the precision of a mouse currently is faster and more accurate than anything else for fine detail and manipulation", it is not the case for all tasks. For instance, for experienced users, a keyboard is faster for entering commands than a mouse via menu selections. Often cursor control keys are faster than a mouse at sequential interaction tasks requiring the keyboard.

 

The speed and accuracy of cursor positioning are also dependent upon the movement scaling algorithm used to control the ratio between hand and cursor movement; a large ratio for accuracy and a small ratio for speed. The ratio isn't constant but is adjusted adaptively in response to the input device control speed.

 

As for drawing and writing tasks, a tablet pen stylus is more accurate than a mouse, and a direct input device such as Wacom's Cintiq is more accurate than an indirect input device where the cursor is controlled from input off screen. This is due to the need to adapt and train eye-hand coordination to the requirements of the device-display interaction. Of course, any perceptible latency will affect accuracy as drawing and writing involves both fluid curvilinear movement and rapid adjustments in direction. 

 

It is interesting to note that Engelbart and his engineers at SRI referred to the on-screen "tracking mark", what we call the screen cursor, as a "bug". This might be a more accurate description for those times when we struggle with cursor accuracy. ;-)

 

As for the iPad, while its capacitive touch-screen interface design might be ideal for direct touch manipulation and multi-touch interaction, where accuracy is concerned, it leaves something to be desired. Although it uses a coordinate system to determine the size, shape, location, and vector of each touch, mathematical algorithms are required to translate the raw data. The system works well, but the finger is too blunt an instrument to provide precise location information; by necessity it is an approximation. What the iPad is great at is providing an intimate and natural gesture experience scaled to the neurophysiological and mechanical capabilities of the human hand.


Edited by AweWyld - 9/29/13 at 5:08pm
post #124 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone View Post
 

However thousands of years ago humans were building things with tools that fit in their hands like hammers and chisels. With the advent of software, miniaturization of the tools became possible. Making a UI that reverts back to tools that are large enough to be manipulated by hand is definitely dumbing down technology. Nano-technology is the future. Making everyone use hand sized tools is like telling surgeons they should revert to making large incisions because a scalpel fits in the hand instead of using miniaturized laparoscopic devices. Sorry, I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.

 

I agree. The future is neural prosthetics. An important evolutionary waypoint as it relates to tool use and cognitive aptitude.

post #125 of 253
Apple should have done an iPad/Mac hybrid years ago, now even if they plan, they're late because in near feature the majority of ultrabooks will be convertible hybrids running Windows and the ones that are sold in the market are quite pretty and cool (XPS, Taichi, Yoga, Vaio duo).

Apple should hope that Windows store won't have more and more apps. Because even if W8 will have half number of apps that Apple has, that'll be enough for RTs to deal with iPads and Haswell powered hybrids will handle the rest may even kill MacBooks. It's not that easy to beat Windows. They managed to develope their store in a short time and some of the newer generation of hybrids are %20 thinner, lighter, more powerful and serves %40 longer with Haswells and this is an improvement in just one year. Customers want all-in-one devices. Instead of carrying along a tablet and a notebook, they will just have a hybrid, an ultrabook, tablet, included keyboard, digitiser, stand, all inside.

The big change is about the come,
post #126 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by s.metcalf View Post

I think most of us can agree that Apple's biggest threat is complacency at this point. As soon as they start to feel invinceable and try to milk the consumer with mediocre upgrades too often that's when they might have a really rude awakening come to them.

I'm concerned that they're already becoming more complacent about consumers continuing to support every minor upgrade and that the pace and drive to innovate has slowed. Sure they've just released iOS 7 and announced a new Mac Pro but both of these only came after sustained and intense criticism for years that the previous offerings were dated and in need of a major overhaul and upgrade. The case was so severe with the Mac Pro that many thought Apple had abandoned or wanted to kill its professional-class desktop, forcing Apple to announce a new model up to 6 months before shipping in an attempt to quash a mass exodus.

That's a nice fiction. Apple doesn't knee jerk respond to whatever the market thinks it should do, but I wouldn't confuse that for "complacency". The company is aware of what the competitors are doing, they understand the market, they have heard what people think they should do, and they are very very deliberate and SELECTIVE about the things they say "yes" to. But don't mistake that for complacency.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #127 of 253
I
Quote:
Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

That's a nice fiction. Apple doesn't knee jerk respond to whatever the market thinks it should do, but I wouldn't confuse that for "complacency". The company is aware of what the competitors are doing, they understand the market, they have heard what people think they should do, and they are very very deliberate and SELECTIVE about the things they say "yes" to. But don't mistake that for complacency.
I don't think people really grasp the idea that Apple does know what they are doing and understands the market in the large. Many people confuse their version of reality as a majority opinion when in fact it is a tiny minority view.

This does invalidate some opinions but special needs is not Apples forte. For example artist often express the need for a stylus on a tablet, that is fine for them. It Is not however a primary market for Apple.
post #128 of 253
iOS has a long long way to go. Every time I see some one tries to compare it with Mac OS X or iPad vs Macs, it just makes me mad.

I can not think about living without my Macs, however, my iPads are sitting on shelve and only got charged a few times since I bought them. I hardly can do anything on my iPad. iPad is good for reading a book or some casual browsing/chatting for an hour or two. Other than that, it has no use for me at least. These days my kids play games on it. I can think of iPad being just one remote control for all my electronic devices (Kuros, receivers, projector, BDPs, etc though 1smile.gif but nothing more than that, at least for another 5 years safely for sure.

I recently bought maxed out new MBA 11 inch, and can't be happier. I have never enjoyed working on iPad to be honest, its feels to me like I am in jail. The way/pace industry is moving on, towards tablets, maybe in a decade or two, I can see doing something on them though, if i am still alive by then.
Edited by Aegean - 9/29/13 at 6:14pm
post #129 of 253
I would not buy the trash can. There is no PCIe buss slots and were required to again add that to a third party purchase to hook up to ThunderBolt. The current Steve Jobs aluminum case macs should have at least added Thunder and kept going along with the trash can. I'm so disappointed I'm thinking PC again for audio production. My workstation software now supports PC fortunately. I still dislike Windoze with a passion though. I will run my '09 machine until it fails I guess although the 12 core in the special deals portion of Apples site looks pretty cool right now for a final purchase of their machines.
post #130 of 253

Look at the Mac Pro's competition:

 

HP z820

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations/z820.html

 

24 cores

512 GB RAM

15 TB internal HDD

Thunderbolt

Dual NVIDIA Quadro K6000 or Dual FirePro cards.

 

Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!

 

Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.

post #131 of 253

Yeah sure, If only Apple would make it easier for hackintoshers to install OS X on generic PC hardware, What's wrong with them?  /s

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply

Life is too short to drink bad coffee.

Reply
post #132 of 253
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post
512 GB RAM

 

I’m sure making your computer cost as much as the GDP of New Brunswick is real enticing. :lol: 

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #133 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by bdkennedy1 View Post

You can't create an iOS app on an iOS device. You need a Mac to do that. Artists, videographers, designers all need large screens and Macs.

Apple will simply scale-down the Mac business accordingly.
Or they will kill that requirement

Apple obviously at some point will release a bigger tablet to kill the MacBooks, just wondering if it will be the last to run Mac OS,

Apple could strike a between $500-1000 market now or hit a $1000+ later (or both), who knows we might see a IOS tablet one day $2000+ (obviously with extra software) with a 20~inch screen.
post #134 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gary Brandt View Post

I would not buy the trash can. There is no PCIe buss slots and were required to again add that to a third party purchase to hook up to ThunderBolt.
If that is your concern you have a terrible attitude. Think abOut it how many professional audio systems from the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's are still in use. More so how much has the technology of interconnecting those apparatus changed over the years. To shy away from the new Mac Pro as a professional audio workstation is just foolish, your PCI Express hardware would need to be changed out anyways.
Quote:
The current Steve Jobs aluminum case macs should have at least added Thunder and kept going along with the trash can.
In some cases that would make sense.
Quote:
I'm so disappointed I'm thinking PC again for audio production.
In your case you are making no sense at all. If you started out with a computer using the AT bus would you have refused to update to all the new hardware and standards that have cropped up over the years? From a professional standpoint these new TB based audio hardware interfaces make a lot of sense, the same box you use in the studio can just as easily be used in the field with a Mac Book Pro.
Quote:
My workstation software now supports PC fortunately. I still dislike Windoze with a passion though. I will run my '09 machine until it fails I guess although the 12 core in the special deals portion of Apples site looks pretty cool right now for a final purchase of their machines.

Lots of luck with the negative thinking!! I really hope you don't express such nonsense around clients as they generally don't respond well to people with an cloud of negativity around them.
post #135 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curtis Hannah View Post

Or they will kill that requirement

Apple obviously at some point will release a bigger tablet to kill the MacBooks, just wondering if it will be the last to run Mac OS,
I don't see tablets killing Notebooks anytime soon. They are used in entirely different ways. It is certainly true that tablets can replace notebooks for many, but those are people that really don't need a tablet in the first place.
Quote:
Apple could strike a between $500-1000 market now or hit a $1000+ later (or both), who knows we might see a IOS tablet one day $2000+ (obviously with extra software) with a 20~inch screen.

I don't see iOS tablets getting much bigger that 13", if that. I do see more iOS based hardware coming including a more advanced AppleTV. Obviously Apple TV drives a bigger screen, but these aren't direct touch devices.
post #136 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post
 

Look at the Mac Pro's competition:

 

HP z820

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations/z820.html

 

24 cores

512 GB RAM

15 TB internal HDD

Thunderbolt

Dual NVIDIA Quadro K6000 or Dual FirePro cards.

 

Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!

 

Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.

First of all, that's not base configuration. That's all 'up to' specification. Anyways, before posting such irrelevant comparison, you should probably realize that OS X alone is worth about $2000. Plus, the way OS X handles hardware and software renders all those 1,360 cores with 4 trillion GB RAM useless. And ask yourself, are you really willing to pay $6000 for a computer that has malware in the counts of millions, hangs and lags all the time, restarts unexpectedly, and uses the same old core system structure (extremely buggy) as an OS that came out 15 years ago? I know I don't.

 

On the second topic, you cannot generalize your perception. If you don't like the new Mac Pro, it doesn't mean that it's a "spaghetti monster". I love the old Mac Pro very much - it is beastly and gorgeous at the same time. But once you get your head around the concept of the new design, you can appreciate it. It was desinged 'to accomodate hardware around a single unified thermal core'. So, it doesn't make much noise, remains cool, and reduces the overall volume. This makes it much more mature than ever before. Besides, the new design is also typically Apple - absolutely thoughtful and beautiful.

"We're surrounded by anonymous, poorly made objects. It's tempting to think it's because the people who use them don't care -- just like the people who make them." - Jony Ive, 2014
Reply
"We're surrounded by anonymous, poorly made objects. It's tempting to think it's because the people who use them don't care -- just like the people who make them." - Jony Ive, 2014
Reply
post #137 of 253
DED... Drugs are bad, y'know?

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

Reply
post #138 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by dacloo View Post

To me the future is convergence done well. A desktop OS requires a different GUI metaphor than a mobile one. Apple is doing this right (exceptions like the dreadful scrollbar inversion and stupid Launchpad left aside).

What I see is that the iPhone 7 or so will be able to transform into a desktop OS by hooking it up to your monitor. You essentially get an evolved version of OSX. When you disconnect, it just uses the iOS portion.

Content and settings are shared through the local and remote filesystem. Let's hope iCloud makes sense by then.

 

Coming out of lurkdom for a second time to highlight this. This is what I think-- yes, the junk right now that hints at convergence is just that-- junk. It's clumsy, not well thought out, and a pain to use. But that's not how Apple makes things. I think there is a future for convergence, and if Apple does it, it will be a breath of fresh air compared to what is happening now. All the talk about the 64-bit ARM chip in 5s-- I think this may be the other side to it. That's some serious processing power. The way I see it happening, as quoted above, is that turns into a desktop OS when hooking up to a monitor, and back to iOS when it's not.

post #139 of 253
Gwmac, I am going to go all out and say that the base price of the MacPro $1500.

Corrections, I did actually, which surprised me since I am in a small town in the middle of Australia, about as far away from the target market for a MacPro. The movie was kick ass 2.
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
you only have freedom in choice when you know you have no choice
Reply
post #140 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by crysisftw View Post

First of all, that's not base configuration. That's all 'up to' specification. Anyways, before posting such irrelevant comparison, you should probably realize that OS X alone is worth about $2000. Plus, the way OS X handles hardware and software renders all those 1,360 cores with 4 trillion GB RAM useless. And ask yourself, are you really willing to pay $6000 for a computer that has malware in the counts of millions, hangs and lags all the time, restarts unexpectedly, and uses the same old core system structure (extremely buggy) as an OS that came out 15 years ago? I know I don't.

I know that's not base, but the fact that you can configure it to those specs is great! OS X is better then Windows that's a given. I'm talking about hardware performance and expandability. For example with the new Mac Pro it looks like you are stuck with AMD/ATI Firepros meaning if you are using any software that requires NVIDIA CUDA (like the majority of pro 3D, video, and compositing software) you are screwed. At least with the current Mac Pro you can add an NVIDIA Quadro K5000 and you get the full PCIX speed (thunderbolt chassis looses 20-30% throughput).

Pro Mac users who rely on the Mac Pro did NOT want a different case. All apple had to do was add new processors (24 physical cores, I've seen 64), better video card options (Quad SLI/Crossfire/Tesla), make SSD drives standard internally and add thunderbolt 2 PCI expansion card options for those who need it (not that many devices out there BTW) and dual redundant power supplies with lights out management for those who need servers (xserve is missed)

If Apple really did want to change the case the should have just gone bigger with more expansion slots, not smaller and definitely not a can!
Quote:
Originally Posted by crysisftw View Post

On the second topic, you cannot generalize your perception. If you don't like the new Mac Pro, it doesn't mean that it's a "spaghetti monster". I love the old Mac Pro very much - it is beastly and gorgeous at the same time.

Wait for it.... Spaghetti Monster!



Quote:
Originally Posted by crysisftw View Post

But once you get your head around the concept of the new design, you can appreciate it. It was desinged 'to accomodate hardware around a single unified thermal core'. So, it doesn't make much noise, remains cool, and reduces the overall volume. This makes it much more mature than ever before. Besides, the new design is also typically Apple - absolutely thoughtful and beautiful.

It's a can! The rest is marketing BS! The "thermal core" is a none factor. HP can cool 24 cores without one just fine. The thermal core makes it impractical to add internal expansion like the Z820 or the previous Mac Pro.. If Apple wanted better cooling they would have gone with the Sandia cooler http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JWQZNXEKkaU

Jony is just obsessed with G4 cube which was a major failure. It didn't take off just like the new Mac Pro won't. There is a total disconnect between what Pro's need and want to what Apple thinks they need and want.
Edited by z3r0 - 9/30/13 at 5:48am
post #141 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacodb View Post

Microsoft's main income is from office. To really go after Microsoft Apple should release a Windows version of iWork. Many Windows users already use iWork on the iPad and would love the same suite of apps on Windows.

What's to be achieved by going after Microsoft and Office?  There's increasingly little to be gained precisely because it's based on Windows which is a generally declining market.  Beside, Google's already going after Office.  If you're going after a market held by a competitor, go after an expanding market... not contracting.

post #142 of 253
Please. This is AppleInsider....I'd much rather read a story about a fuzzy photo of some part of the iPhone 6 from some factory in China.
post #143 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Everyone knows why: it starts with i and ends with pad, 

 

Anyone who has ever tried to do serious work on an iPad is back to a Mac in no time. My real work is all done on a MacBook Pro and the iPad is used for reading and checking in on emails on the go. But millions of very casual users abandon PCs and Macs for tablets and that obviously hurts Mac/PC sales. 

post #144 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by cy_starkman View Post

Gwmac, I am going to go all out and say that the base price of the MacPro $1500.
 

Unlikely, unless they make a single graphics card model with an i7 processor, which is pretty much what a lot of people have been wanting for years.

 

From looking at the prices on newegg, I see no reason the base model should cost any more than the current $2500 price point.  The entry level models of the firepro card are very affordable, and the low end Xeons are not that much more than the i7.  

post #145 of 253
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post
Pro Mac users who rely on the Mac Pro did NOT want a different case.

 

Then why’d we hear them screaming for a different case? 

 

It may not have needed one, but then again we really didn’t “need” internal combustion engines, did we.

 
…dual redundant power supplies…

 

It’s not a server. It’s a workstation.

 
If Apple really did want to change the case the should have just gone bigger with more expansion slots, not smaller and definitely not a can!

 

That’s funny. So you think you can tell Apple what it wanted to do? So you think you can tell Apple that what it did do, based on what it wanted to do, was “wrong”? Great way to start a day, that. Thanks.

 
It's a can! The rest is marketing BS! 

 

Or maybe you’re just not that smart.

 
The "thermal core" is a none factor. HP can cool 24 cores without one just fine.

 

REALLY. HUH. I didn’t know that HP made a case of the same volume as the new Mac Pro that is capable of cooling said cores without being of the Mac Pro’s design. Could you link us to said case, as it’s probably more revolutionary than the Mac Pro’s, even; thanks, you’re a peach, doll.

 
If Apple wanted better cooling they would have gone with the Sandia cooler 

 

Yes, I’m sure that the most successful company in the history of computing doesn’t know better than you when they make their own cooling solution from scratch instead of buying of the shelf.

 
Jony is just obsessed with G4 cube which was a major failure.


Funny. I see a cylinder, not a cube. I also see something that wasn’t a failure due on any part to its hardware or software. 

 

Steve liked cubes. Jony’s impassive thereabout.

 
It didn't take off just like the new Mac Pro won't.

 

Thanks for telling Apple that you know the future.

 
There is a total disconnect between what Pro's need and want to what Apple thinks they need and want.

 

Magical. Couldn’t you have led with this? Then I could have just quoted it, alone, ignoring the rest of your post, and giving you this link? Because that’s exactly what they said here, and it was physically impossible for them to be more wrong.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #146 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

 

 

It may not have needed one, but then again we really didn’t “need” internal combustion engines, did we.

 

It’s not a server. It’s a workstation.

 

That’s funny. So you think you can tell Apple what it wanted to do? So you think you can tell Apple that what it did do, based on what it wanted to do, was “wrong”? Great way to start a day, that. Thanks.

 

Or maybe you’re just not that smart.

 

REALLY. HUH. I didn’t know that HP made a case of the same volume as the new Mac Pro that is capable of cooling said cores without being of the Mac Pro’s design. Could you link us to said case, as it’s probably more revolutionary than the Mac Pro’s, even; thanks, you’re a peach, doll.

 

Yes, I’m sure that the most successful company in the history of computing doesn’t know better than you when they make their own cooling solution from scratch instead of buying of the shelf.


Funny. I see a cylinder, not a cube. I also see something that wasn’t a failure due on any part to its hardware or software. 

 

Steve liked cubes. Jony’s impassive thereabout.

 

Thanks for telling Apple that you know the future.

 

Magical. Couldn’t you have led with this? Then I could have just quoted it, alone, ignoring the rest of your post, and giving you this link? Because that’s exactly what they said here, and it was physically impossible for them to be more wrong.

 

Wow talk about blind. Everything Apple does is golden. What a joke... 

 

Apple products are great but that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. The new version of the Mac Pro is a mistake plain and simple. Yes its a cylinder, but its basically a design iteration of the G4 cube if you can't see that then you really aren't as bright as you think you are.

 

The new Mac Pro doesn't fit the mold of a workstation its too small. If it were the size of a workstation it wouldn't need the "thermal core". Pro's didn't ask for a smaller case. Bigger yes with a lot more cores. Obviously you can't squeeze 24+ cores into a can of that size, nor should you and thats the point. Wrong form factor for a workstation. There are other form factors and more effective methods to cool CPUs that don't require the added cost of a "thermal core".

 

As far as buying the Sandia cooler off the shelf, its not on the shelf yet (watch the video). Apple can and should license it, just like it licenses liquid metal, ARM, etc... Apple doesn't have to invent everything.

 

Regarding FCPX, if it was such a bright idea/success then Apple wouldn't have needed to prep a campaign to win back video editors: http://appleinsider.com/articles/13/03/28/apple-prepping-final-cut-pro-x-campaign-to-win-back-video-editors

 

I'll tell you what the new Mac Pro is aside from a Can of Spaghettis.

 

 

 

 

Its a consumer product, not a Pro product now.

 

The writing is on the wall for Pro users on the Mac. Apple just doesn't care nor want to listen to its most passionate customers in the pro sector.

 

P.S. Pro's currently use and want to continue to use Mac servers. So dual redundant power and lights out management should not be out of the question. Having both would allow the Mac Pro to be used as proper server being that the xserve is not an option, and it would increase sales. Apple also used to sell Mac Pro's pre-installed with OS X server so its not just a workstation.

 

I also don't claim to see the future, but I can tell you where the puck's been with the G4 cube. Which is enough to tell you where the new can of spaghetti is headed.

post #147 of 253

Quote:

Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post


If that is your concern you have a terrible attitude. Think abOut it how many professional audio systems from the 1970's, 1980's, 1990's, 2000's are still in use. More so how much has the technology of interconnecting those apparatus changed over the years. To shy away from the new Mac Pro as a professional audio workstation is just foolish, your PCI Express hardware would need to

Some of those markets update hardware very slowly due to interdependence and sometimes the need to wait for smaller vendors to catch up. I wouldn't say they're all shortsighted if they don't purchase new machines right away. What I find a little silly is the can description. I don't care about the aesthetics of a tool. To comment on such things only because they dislike other aspects is simply disingenuous.

Quote:
Originally Posted by poke View Post


The ergonomic issue is true of vertical screens but is obvious nonsense when it comes to horizontal screens. Working on a horizontal surface is how we worked for hundreds of years before the advent of computers. If it was a very large surface you'd need to be able to rest your hands on it and move your work area around, it would also likely be at a comfortable angle rather than completely horizontal, but those issues are easily solved. There's nothing to stop you having two or more displays regardless: one horizontal touch display and one or more vertical displays. A keyboard is already a horizontal touch surface and one of the least ergonomic devices - the one commonly responsible for repetitive strain problems - is actually the mouse! All those small, repetitive movements can cause serious damage to the hand. The other problem is solved by better UI design.

I wouldn't just go by what people did in the past. Some of wacom's tablets are designed to be used in an angled manner, much like a drafting table. Notebooks are some of the worst offenders, as you have to deal with something front facing that is typically positioned below an ergonomic viewing position and above an ergonomic typing position. I really hate that. If phones were powerful enough there would be some potential for slim clients driven by your phone.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post
 

Look at the Mac Pro's competition:

 

HP z820

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/campaigns/workstations/z820.html

 

24 cores

512 GB RAM

15 TB internal HDD

Thunderbolt

Dual NVIDIA Quadro K6000 or Dual FirePro cards.

 

Not even a contest hardware wise and its not a spaghetti monster on your desk!

 

Love to get an old Mac Pro case and build one with these specs.

It has always been possible to outspec a mac pro with one of the other PC oem offerings. Anyone who required a similar alignment of specs wouldn't have purchased the older mac pro design, just as they won't purchase the new one. OEMs like configurations like the one you listed as the margins are insane, yet the number of customers who buy those is tiny. Generally machines configured like that are configured for very specific use, and the actual configuration involves more than just selecting the most expensive option on each line. If you do that, good luck getting a purchase order approved.

post #148 of 253
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post

Wow talk about blind. Everything Apple does is golden. What a joke... 


If you’d like to quote me where I said that, feel free. I never did. Since I didn’t, don’t put words in my mouth.

 
The new version of the Mac Pro is a mistake plain and simple.

 

Which you know, having seen one, held one, used one, owned one, implemented one in a professional setting…

 

Oh, right, you’ve done none of those things.

 

The new Mac Pro doesn't fit the mold of a workstation its too small.

 

Seems like it would fit the mold even better and with room to spare. Six of them fit where one old Mac Pro does.

 
If it were the size of a workstation it wouldn't need the "thermal core".

 

Yeah, I’m sure. Uh huh. Are you listening to yourself? 

 
Pro's didn't ask for a smaller case.

 

[Insert Henry Ford quote that every intelligent person already knows here]

 
There are other form factors and more effective methods to cool CPUs that don't require the added cost of a "thermal core".

 

Which you know, because you’ve… … What, exactly?

 
Apple can and should license it, just like it licenses liquid metal, ARM, etc... Apple doesn't have to invent everything.

 

1. Apple owns LiquidMetal.

2. Didn’t you imagine that the point of the reply was to intimate to you that Apple HAD to build something new here?

 

But then again, you were the lead hardware designer on the Mac Pro project, so you probably know better than… oh, wait, you don’t know at all, do you? I get those confused sometimes.

 
Regarding FCPX, if it was such a bright idea/success then Apple wouldn't have needed to prep a campaign to win back video editors:

 

Nice logic. When you have some actual logic, feel free to post it.

 

Its a consumer product, not a Pro product now.

 

Please go away. You’ve successfully presented your lack of knowledge and should stop wasting everyone’s time now.

 
P.S. Pro's currently use and want to continue to use Mac servers. 

 

I said nothing to the negative of that. 

 
 So dual redundant power and lights out management should not be out of the question.

 

They should. Because it’s a workstation. Not a server. If they want to bring a new Xserve to market, I’m all for that. People didn’t buy them, though.

 
I also don't claim to see the future, but I can tell you where the puck's been with the G4 cube.

 

Thanks, once again, for proving you don’t have the first clue–much less the last–about what you’re saying.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #149 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corrections View Post

The article was written in TextEdit

Use UTF-8 text encoding, not the default.

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply

"Apple should pull the plug on the iPhone."

John C. Dvorak, 2007
Reply
post #150 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post

I know that's not base, but the fact that you can configure it to those specs is great!
For whom? How many real people would put such a configuration on their desktop?
Quote:
OS X is better then Windows that's a given. I'm talking about hardware performance and expandability.
Expandability is important, but the Mac Pro both wins and looses with respect to that quality. You really can't knock it that much though because the markets the Pro sells into don't care a whole hell of a lot about expandability.
Quote:
For example with the new Mac Pro it looks like you are stuck with AMD/ATI Firepros meaning if you are using any software that requires NVIDIA CUDA (like the majority of pro 3D, video, and compositing software) you are screwed. At least with the current Mac Pro you can add an NVIDIA Quadro K5000 and you get the full PCIX speed (thunderbolt chassis looses 20-30% throughput).
First of nobody in their right mind is going to hook up a GPU card via TB. It isn't even a valid argument. Second AMD has been doing much better with OpenCL than NVidia. Buying software reliant upon sole source software like CUDA is just stupid.
Quote:

Pro Mac users who rely on the Mac Pro did NOT want a different case.
Well you didn't obviously! However anybody familiar with technology would have realized where the industry is going. The new Mac Pr reflects that and the technologically literate acknowledge that.
Quote:
All apple had to do was add new processors (24 physical cores, I've seen 64), better video card options (Quad SLI/Crossfire/Tesla), make SSD drives standard internally and add thunderbolt 2 PCI expansion card options for those who need it (not that many devices out there BTW) and dual redundant power supplies with lights out management for those who need servers (xserve is missed)
If you want to argue that Apple should build a server then I'm with you! Sometimes you need a product that isn't mass production to fill real niches.
Quote:
If Apple really did want to change the case the should have just gone bigger with more expansion slots, not smaller and definitely not a can!
Wait for it.... Spaghetti Monster!
That would result in a machine with even less sales than the current model.

As for your derisive labeling of the new Pro as a spaghetti monster you leave out all of those break out boxes required to support reasonable amounts of I/O. Further you don't seem to realize that there is value in putting the conversion hardware near the source materials.
Quote:

It's a can! The rest is marketing BS! The "thermal core" is a none factor.
On the contrary it is a big factor as it puts a lot of performance into a small volume. That is huge.
Quote:
HP can cool 24 cores without one just fine.
You can say that but have you really looked into what is required to keep a server room cool?
Quote:
The thermal core makes it impractical to add internal expansion like the Z820 or the previous Mac Pro.. If Apple wanted better cooling they would have gone with the Sandia cooler
Apple wanted a better design overall, better cooling helped them get there. You can nitpick all you want but the reality is; they are innovating in a stale industry here.
Quote:

Jony is just obsessed with G4 cube which was a major failure. It didn't take off just like the new Mac Pro won't. There is a total disconnect between what Pro's need and want to what Apple thinks they need and want.

Consider this, you as a so called Pro are a very tiny minority in the overall pool of Pros. I'd be willing to say right now that the Mac Pro will be a huge hit if (this is a big if) Apple prices it right. Frankly I suspect that the while point of the design is to allow Apple to be a bit aggressive in pricing.

By the way the G4 cube failed for one simple reason, it was priced grossly out of range compared to what the hardware was capable of. Frankly that was a similar problem with the old Mac Pro, which wasn't competitive at all unless you where buying a high end machine. You seem to think the old Mac Pro was a huge winner for Apple but yet everything indicates that it was in rapid decline with few serious nibbles. Frankly the old Mac Pro is a T-Rex of a machine that users, real pros in this case, lost interest in.
Edited by wizard69 - 9/30/13 at 11:04am
post #151 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 


If you’d like to quote me where I said that, feel free. I never did. Since I didn’t, don’t put words in my mouth.

 

Ok, what don't you like about the new Mac Pro? Being that you are so unbiased.

 

Which you know, having seen one, held one, used one, owned one, implemented one in a professional setting…

Oh, right, you’ve done none of those things.

 

NDA

 

 

Seems like it would fit the mold even better and with room to spare. Six of them fit where one old Mac Pro does.

 

Sure, buy six you can play telephone.

 

Yeah, I’m sure. Uh huh. Are you listening to yourself? 

 

The HP Z820 is a workstation form factor. It can hold 24 cores without a "thermal core"

 

[Insert Henry Ford quote that every intelligent person already knows here]

 

Keep driving FORDs and you'll be Found On Road Dead

 

Which you know, because you’ve… … What, exactly?

1. Apple owns LiquidMetal.

 

They don't. They are a subsidiary

 

Nice logic. When you have some actual logic, feel free to post it.

 

So you are saying that Apple loosing market share in the video sector was not a result of FCPX's lack of Pro features out the gate?

 

Please go away. You’ve successfully presented your lack of knowledge and should stop wasting everyone’s time now.

 

Just because its labeled Pro doesn't mean its really Pro.

 

Thanks, once again, for proving you don’t have the first clue–much less the last–about what you’re saying.

 

Keep making assumptions and tooting your own horn. It won't get you far.


Edited by z3r0 - 9/30/13 at 10:15am
post #152 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Conrail View Post

Unlikely, unless they make a single graphics card model with an i7 processor, which is pretty much what a lot of people have been wanting for years.
It boggles the mind that Apple can't grasp the need here. While not exactly what I had in mind as an XMac it certainly would come close enough to effectively be what one wants out of a desktop.
Quote:
From looking at the prices on newegg, I see no reason the base model should cost any more than the current $2500 price point.  The entry level models of the firepro card are very affordable, and the low end Xeons are not that much more than the i7.  
I could see the base model being sold at a very aggressive price. Mainly because the dedicated cards aren't being marketed as Pro expansion card options for a standard bus interface. In otherwords the non standard PCI - Express form factor means that the cards don't compete with AMDs higher priced Pro cards. This should give Apple the ability to price them very competitively possibly in line with similar consumer chips.

Everybody keeps thinking that the Mac Pro will be oh so expensive but I see a lot of potential for the base model to beat the old price and maybe even beat $2000. They can do that and keep Apple margins too.
post #153 of 253
Something ought to be canned alright!
“A PC is no bargain when it doesn’t do what you want.” - Apple 2009
Reply
“A PC is no bargain when it doesn’t do what you want.” - Apple 2009
Reply
post #154 of 253
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post

Ok, what don't you like about the new Mac Pro? Being that you are so unbiased.

 

Answer my question first, please. You don’t get to ask another until then.

 
 NDA

 

Never Done Anything; yes, we know you have no experience in this regard.

 
 Sure, buy six you can play telephone.

 

When you feel like making sense again, feel free.

 
 The HP Z820 is a workstation form factor. It can hold 24 cores without a "thermal core"

 

Great. So maybe answer the question I asked you.

 
 Keep driving FORDs and you'll be Found ORoad Dead

 

Your entire argument is logical fallacies. Why are you afraid to answer the questions we are asking you? It’s really embarrassing.

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply

Originally Posted by asdasd

This is Appleinsider. It's all there for you but we can't do it for you.
Reply
post #155 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post

Jony is just obsessed with G4 cube which was a major failure. It didn't take off just like the new Mac Pro won't. There is a total disconnect between what Pro's need and want to what Apple thinks they need and want.

 

A commercial failure maybe. But a technical wonder and one of the best Macs ever. Easily the most upgradeable since the Color Classic.

post #156 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 View Post

Wow talk about blind. Everything Apple does is golden. What a joke... 
Nobody has said that, what is being pointed out is that either you don't know what you are talking about or you are an idiot. Those are the only two explanations I can come up with for your postings.
Quote:
Apple products are great but that doesn't mean they don't make mistakes. The new version of the Mac Pro is a mistake plain and simple. Yes its a cylinder, but its basically a design iteration of the G4 cube if you can't see that then you really aren't as bright as you think you are.
Right off the bat you spit out bull crap, the new Pro has exactly nothing in common with the G4 Cube. To offer up this comment just shows a complete lack of depth when it comes to technology. In other words you don't know what you are talking about.
Quote:
The new Mac Pro doesn't fit the mold of a workstation its too small.
Size has nothing to do with it. The Mac Pro has to deliver the performance its target audience demands, it does that very well.
Quote:
If it were the size of a workstation it wouldn't need the "thermal core". Pro's didn't ask for a smaller case. Bigger yes with a lot more cores.
Actually I've heard just the opposite.
Quote:
Obviously you can't squeeze 24+ cores into a can of that size, nor should you and thats the point.
Actually the machine has a lot more than 24 cores if you count everything sitting on the GPU cards. In any event your whining here is garbage, to get more i86 cores all you really need is a process shrink. Maybe you aren't aware of what a process shrink is, if so read a little before posting.
Quote:
Wrong form factor for a workstation. There are other form factors and more effective methods to cool CPUs that don't require the added cost of a "thermal core".
The thermal core should lower Apples cost significantly. They have to buy one heat sink for three hot devices and only one fan. If it works as intended it should give Apple a significant marketing / cost advantage. The thermal core is a significant advantage for Apple.
Quote:
As far as buying the Sandia cooler off the shelf, its not on the shelf yet (watch the video). Apple can and should license it, just like it licenses liquid metal, ARM, etc... Apple doesn't have to invent everything.
Who cares?
Quote:
Regarding FCPX, if it was such a bright idea/success then Apple wouldn't have needed to prep a campaign to win back video editors: 
Many of those editors have come to realize that FCPX wasn't the mess it was made out to be by the collective knee jerk reaction. A knee jerk reaction that you are apparently going through right now.
Quote:

I'll tell you what the new Mac Pro is aside from a Can of Spaghettis.
Cute but it adds nothing to your stream of idiotic comments.
Quote:


Its a consumer product, not a Pro product now.
For you maybe, for real pros I can see it selling like hotcakes.
Quote:
The writing is on the wall for Pro users on the Mac. Apple just doesn't care nor want to listen to its most passionate customers in the pro sector.
If they didn't care they wouldn't be putting all the engineering effort in to pull off something like this new Mac Pro. Think about it a bit, this machine is all new mechanically and electrically.

As to being passionate, that is a valuable quality but when coupled with ignorance it can lead people down fruitless paths.
Quote:
P.S. Pro's currently use and want to continue to use Mac servers. So dual redundant power and lights out management should not be out of the question. Having both would allow the Mac Pro to be used as proper server being that the xserve is not an option, and it would increase sales. Apple also used to sell Mac Pro's pre-installed with OS X server so its not just a workstation.
Like I said before Apple needs a better server product. Even the old Pro came up short in that regard. Honestly though I'd rather see them solve this problem with a sound disk array solution that can plug into a network or a TB port. In other words one box that can be direct attached to network attached.
Quote:
I also don't claim to see the future, but I can tell you where the puck's been with the G4 cube. Which is enough to tell you where the new can of spaghetti is headed.
Actually you obviously can't see the future, however you can keep yourself informed with respect to technology. Right now you are grossly ill informed. Your comparison to the Cube highlights this starkly as the two have absolutely nothing in common. Further the allusions to a can of Spaghetti is asinine, in some applications you would actually end up with far fewer cables coming out of the box and in the majority of cases you might have one extra. Spend a few minutes thinking about this and you will realize just how ridiculous you are being here.
post #157 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by murman View Post

MBA is not as powerful as the iMac, neither are MBPs that are in the same price bracket as the iMacs. You trade size and computing power for portability basically, it just depends on personal needs. I think a desktop line is important for Apple to maintain, as an option, as an entry point, as a part of a person's computing toolset, for OSX being a healthy platform. If the iMacs aren't growing, then the Mac Pro is growing even less, but why is there new Mac Pro refresh then?

These models are still needed today because there is still sufficient demand, it is just weakening. The Mac Pro has changed to adapt to this. The new design isn't a sign of any major revival, otherwise they wouldn't have moved the manufacturing to the US. It's been discontinued in Europe for over 6 months now and it's not that big of a deal. The new design unifies it with the rest of the lineup so that its only distinguishing feature is more power. As time goes on, CPU/GPUs will become another 5-10x faster, there will be more moves into heterogenous computing, SSD will become as inexpensive as HDD today and more and more people will migrate to the more affordable machines.

Like I say, if desktop share levels out and maintains that, they can keep making them for as long as they like. If customers stop buying in significant enough numbers like with the XServe and 17" MBP, they drop them. Apple is a business and it won't sell things that people don't buy in large enough quantities.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone 
Extended use of an non-ergonomic computer screen / keyboard position is very unhealthy. Programming is one of those disciplines that requires prolonged concentration. With your neck bent downward for that length of time is not good.

You don't have to use a laptop like a laptop. You can connect it to a large external display with a separate keyboard and mouse like the people who work at Apple do:



They have laptop stands next to 27" displays and connect their keyboard and mouse. When they need to go to a meeting or work in a group, they can just unhook it and take it with them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mstone 
I'm not buying this notion that in the future all computing will be done with fingers touching the screen. So far I don't think anyone has come up with a better input technique than keyboard and mouse, and possibly a stylus such as Wacom.

Interaction can still use touch and fingers without touching the screen directly. The good thing with physical objects is 1:1 mapping but there should be a way to make a more flexible input method. I'd quite like a small touch strip that showed a set of keys on the display and as you moved your fingers, it would show which key you were about to press and a tap would confirm. That would reduce mistakes and keep your eyes focused where they need to be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 
if you are using any software that requires NVIDIA CUDA (like the majority of pro 3D, video, and compositing software) you are screwed. At least with the current Mac Pro you can add an NVIDIA Quadro K5000 and you get the full PCIX speed (thunderbolt chassis looses 20-30% throughput).

NVidia cards have been shown to work just fine over Thunderbolt. The chassis that have been tested are Thunderbolt 1. Enough software supports OpenCL that missing out on CUDA isn't the end of the world. Developers need to stop using CUDA and move to OpenCL so that the code runs on the CPU too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by z3r0 
The "thermal core" is a none factor. HP can cool 24 cores without one just fine.

HP doesn't list the 12-core CPUs in the order page yet but these configurations are very expensive (the CPUs in the dual 12-core will likely be ~$7k for the CPUs alone) so they don't affect that many people. HP's workstation revenue in 2012 was $2b. That's equivalent to 210,000 $10k machines or 420,000 $5k machines or about 1 million $2k machines. That's for the entire year for the biggest workstation vendor in the world. Not only this, their average selling price was listed somewhere as ~$1600 so the volume of sales just isn't in the $5k+ price point. For the audience buying up to that price, Apple is using the same components as anyone else so will stay competitive. People who need a $10k-20k machine for CPU processing can buy multiple machines.

The number of people who rely on hardware IO over PCIe is very small and all the popular peripherals have been tested and work just fine over Thunderbolt.
post #158 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marvin View Post


NVidia cards have been shown to work just fine over Thunderbolt. The chassis that have been tested are Thunderbolt 1. Enough software supports OpenCL that missing out on CUDA isn't the end of the world. Developers need to stop using CUDA and move to OpenCL so that the code runs on the CPU too.

That may not be as likely as you think. NVidia has held the majority of the professional graphics market for many years. Part of it is that developers often implement NVidia's research projects rather than their own. As long as that is the case, do not look forward to things that run well on AMD hardware.

post #159 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post
 

 

Answer my question first, please. You don’t get to ask another until then.

 

Simple. You made remarks belittling my intelligence because I wrote something negative about the new Mac Pro. So you can detect a bit of bias.

 

 

Never Done Anything; yes, we know you have no experience in this regard.

 

You do love assumptions, but I'll bite; Non-disclosure agreement.

 

When you feel like making sense again, feel free.

 

You really didn't pick up on the telephone analogy did you?

 

Great. So maybe answer the question I asked you.

 

Its really not that hard. The bigger the box, the more space there is for air to travel and cool a system down.

 

Your entire argument is logical fallacies. Why are you afraid to answer the questions we are asking you? It’s really embarrassing.

 

We? Who's we? Since when do you speak for Pro users?

post #160 of 253
Quote:
Originally Posted by hmm View Post

Quote:
Some of those markets update hardware very slowly due to interdependence and sometimes the need to wait for smaller vendors to catch up. I wouldn't say they're all shortsighted if they don't purchase new machines right away. What I find a little silly is the can description. I don't care about the aesthetics of a tool. To comment on such things only because they dislike other aspects is simply disingenuous.
I guess my problem here is either the lack of honesty or simply the denial of history. The audio recording world has changed dramatically over the years and will continue to change in the future. The thought that the industry will thus stay with PCI Express cards forever is faulty even if TB never catches on. TB however is a great way to interface I/O devices for this market, especially with the availability of optical cable solutions.
Quote:

I wouldn't just go by what people did in the past. Some of wacom's tablets are designed to be used in an angled manner, much like a drafting table. Notebooks are some of the worst offenders, as you have to deal with something front facing that is typically positioned below an ergonomic viewing position and above an ergonomic typing position. I really hate that. If phones were powerful enough there would be some potential for slim clients driven by your phone.

It has always been possible to outspec a mac pro with one of the other PC oem offerings. Anyone who required a similar alignment of specs wouldn't have purchased the older mac pro design, just as they won't purchase the new one. OEMs like configurations like the one you listed as the margins are insane, yet the number of customers who buy those is tiny. Generally machines configured like that are configured for very specific use, and the actual configuration involves more than just selecting the most expensive option on each line. If you do that, good luck getting a purchase order approved.
There is also the issue of comparing what Apple wants to be a mass production machine with a niche machine. Hell we could put a Mac Pro up against a Cray and declare it a failure but it doesn't make sense to do that. The interesting thing here though is that I'm willing to bet more than a few cray users are salivating over the new Mac Pro and its potential for post processing and visualizing data. It always amazes me when the A/V professionals come on this site with the attitude that they are the only pro customers Apple sells to. Sorry guys and gals but the "pro" market is far bigger than that.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Future Apple Hardware
AppleInsider › Forums › Mac Hardware › Future Apple Hardware › What's left for the Macintosh in a Post-PC iOS World?